========================================================================
  WRITINGS OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA
  by Eusebius of Caesarea
========================================================================

Writings of Eusebius of Caesarea (c. AD 339). Eusebius of Caesarea was an early
church father whose writings have been preserved for the edification of the
church.

  Chapters: 61

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    0. Writings of Eusebius of Caesarea
    1. Against Hierocles - English Translation
    2. Against Hierocles - Preface
    3. Chronicon - Book 1 translated from Armenian
    4. Chronicon - Book 1 translated from Latin
    5. Commentary on the Psalms - On Psalm 51
    6. Concerning the Place Names in Sacred Scripture - Introduction
    7. Concerning the Place Names in Sacred Scripture - Notes
    8. Concerning the Place Names in Sacred Scripture - Translation
    9. Encomium on the Martyrs
   10. On the celebration of Easter
   11. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 1
   12. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 10
   13. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 2
   14. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 3
   15. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 4
   16. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 5
   17. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 6
   18. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 7
   19. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 8
   20. THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - Book 9
   21. The History of the Martyrs in Palestine
   22. The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine - Book 1
   23. The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine - Book 2
   24. The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine - Book 3
   25. The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine - Book 4
   26. The Oration in Praise of the Emperor Constantine
   27. The Oration of the Emperor Constantine
   28. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 1
   29. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 10
   30. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 11
   31. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 12
   32. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 13
   33. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 14
   34. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 15
   35. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 2
   36. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 5
   37. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 6
   38. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 7
   39. The Preparation of the Gospel - BOOK 9
   40. The Preparation of the Gospel - Introduction
   41. The Preparation of the Gospel - Preface to the online edition
   42. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 1
   43. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 10
   44. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 2
   45. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 3
   46. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 4
   47. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 5
   48. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 6
   49. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 7
   50. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 8
   51. The Proof of the Gospel - Book 9
   52. The Proof of the Gospel - INTRODUCTION
   53. The Proof of the Gospel - Preface to the online edition
   54. The Proof of the Gospel - Preface, contents, abbreviations
   55. Theophania - Book 1
   56. Theophania - Book 2
   57. Theophania - Book 3
   58. Theophania - Book 4
   59. Theophania - Book 5
   60. Theophania - Preface

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 0: WRITINGS OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA
========================================================================


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: AGAINST HIEROCLES - ENGLISH TRANSLATION
========================================================================

THE TREATISE OF EUSEBIUS, THE SON OF PAMPHILUS, AGAINST THE LIFE OF APOLLONIUS
OF TYANA WRITTEN BY PHILOSTRATUS, OCCASIONED BY THE PARALLEL DRAWN BY HIEROCLES
BETWEEN HIM AND CHRIST.

Translated by F.C. Conybeare (1912). Transcribed from the Loeb Philostratus,
vol. 2, pp. 484-605

I So then, my dear friend, you find worthy of no little admiration the parallel
which, embellished with many marvels, this author has drawn between the man of
Tyana and our own Saviour and teacher. For already against the rest of the
contents of the "Lover of Truth " (Philalethes), for so he has thought fit to
entitle his work against us, it would be useless to take my stand at present;
because they are not his own, but have been pilfered in the most shameless
manner, not only I may say in respect of their ideas, but even of their words
and syllables, from other authorities. Not but what these parts also of his
treatise call for their refutation in due season; but to all intents and
purposes they have, even in advance of any special work that might be written in
answer to them, been upset and exposed beforehand in a work which in as many as
eight books Origen composed against the book which Celsus wrote and--even more
boastfully than the " Lover of Truth,"--entitled " True Reason." The work of
Celsus is there subjected to an examination in an exhaustive manner and on the
scale above mentioned by the author in question, who in his comprehensive survey
of all that anyone has said or will ever say on the same topic., has forestalled
any solution of your difficulties which I could offer. To this work of Origen I
must refer those who in good faith and with genuine "love of truth " desire
accurately to understand my own position. I will therefore ask you for the
present to confine your attention to the comparison of Jesus Christ with
Apollonius which is found in this treatise called the " Lover of Truth," without
insisting on the necessity of our meeting the rest of his arguments, for these
are pilfered from other people. We may reasonably confine our attention for the
present to the history of Apollonius, because Hierocles, of all the writers who
have ever attacked us, stands alone in selecting Apollonius, as he has recently
done, for the purposes of comparison and contrast with our Saviour.

II

I NEED not say with what admiring approval he attributes his thaumaturgic feats
not to the tricks of wizardry, but to a divine and mysterious wisdom; and he
believes they were truly what he supposes them to have been, though he advances
no proof of this contention. Listen then to his very words: " In their anxiety
to exalt Jesus, they run up and down prating of how he made the blind to see and
worked certain other miracles of the kind." Then after an interval he adds as
follows: "Let us note however how much better and more sensible is the view
which we take of such matters, and explain the conception which we entertain of
men gifted with remarkable powers." And thereupon after passing heedlessly by
Aristeas of Proconnesus and Pythagoras as somewhat too old, he continues thus:
"But in the time of our own ancestors, during the reign of Nero, there
flourished Apollonius of Tyana, who from mere boyhood when he became the priest
in Aegae of Cilicia of Asclepius, the lover of mankind, worked any number of
miracles, of which I will omit the greater number, and only mention a few." Then
he begins at the beginning and enumerates the" wonders worked by Apollonius,
after which he continues in the following words: " What then is my reason for
mentioning these facts? It was in order that you may be able to contrast our own
accurate and well-established judgment on each point, with the easy credulity of
the Christians. For whereas we reckon him who wrought such feats not a god, but
only a man pleasing to the gods, they on the strength of a few miracles proclaim
their Jesus a god." To this he adds after a little more the following remark: "
And this point is also worth noticing, that whereas the tales of Jesus have been
vamped up by Peter and Paul and a few others of the kind,--men who were liars
and devoid of education and wizards, --the history of Apollonius was written by
Maximus of Aegae, and by Damis the philosopher who lived constantly with him.
and by Philostratus of Athens, men of the highest education, who out of respect
for the truth and their love of mankind determined to give the publicity they
deserved to the actions of a man at once noble and a friend of the gods." These
are the very words used by Hierocles in his treatise against us which he has
entitled " Lover of Truth."

III

Now Damis who spent -so much of his time with Apollonius was a native of
Assyria, where for the first time, on his own soil, he came into contact with of
him; and he wrote an account of his intercourse with the person in question from
that time onwards. Maximus however wrote quite a short account of a portion only
of his career. Philostratus, however, the Athenian, tells us that he collected
all the accounts that he found in circulation, using both the book of Maximus
and that of Damis himself and of other authors; so he compiled the most complete
history of any of this person's life, beginning with his birth and ending with
his death.

IV

IF then we may be permitted to contrast the reckless and easy credulity which he
goes out of his way to accuse us of, with the accurate and well-founded judgment
on particular points of the Lover of Truth, let us ask at once, not which of
them was the more divine nor in what capacity one worked more wondrous and
numerous miracles than the other; nor let us lay stress on the point that our
Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ was the only man of whom it was prophesied, thanks
to their divine inspiration, by Hebrew sages who lived far back thousands of
years ago, that he should once come among mankind; nor on the fact that he
converted to his own scheme of divine teaching so many people; nor that he
formed a group of genuine and really sincere disciples, of whom almost without
exaggeration it can be said that they were prepared to lay down their lives for
his teaching at a moment's call; nor that he alone established a school of sober
and chaste living which has survived him all along; nor that by his peculiar
divinity and virtue he saved the whole inhabited world, and still rallies to his
divine teaching races from all sides by tens of thousands; nor that he is the
only example of a teacher who, after being treated as an enemy for so many
years, I might almost say, by all men, subjects and rulers alike, has at last
triumphed and shown himself far mightier, thanks to his divine and mysterious
power, than the infidels who persecuted him so bitterly, those who in their time
rebelled against his divine teaching being now easily won over by him, while the
divine doctrine which he firmly laid down and handed on has come to prevail for
ages without end all over the inhabited world; nor that even now he displays the
virtue of his godlike might in the expulsion, by the mere invocation of his
mysterious name, of sundry troublesome and evil demons which beset men's bodies
and souls, as from our own experience we know to be the case. To look for such
results in the case of Apollonius, or even to ask about them, is absurd. So we
will merely examine the work of Philostratus, and by close scrutiny of it show
that Apollonius was not fit to be classed, I will not say, among philosophers,
but even among men of integrity and good sense, much less to be compared with
our Saviour Christ, so far as we can depend on the work of a writer who, though
according to the " Lover of Truth," he was highly educated, was in any case no
respecter of truth. For such is his description of Philostratus the Athenian
among others. In this way we shall easily appreciate the value of the rest of
the authorities, who though, according to him, they were most highly educated,
yet never by actual sifting of the facts, established them with any accuracy in
the case of Apollonius. For when we have thoroughly examined these facts, we
shall no doubt obtain a clear demonstration of the solidity and, as he imagines
to himself, of the accuracy in detail of the condemnation which the " Lover of
Truth," who has at the same time taken possession of the supreme courts all over
the province, passes on Christians, and at the same time of what they are
pleased to call our reckless and facile credulity, for we are accounted by them
to be mere foolish and deluded mortals.

V

ANOTHER controversialist, by way of beginning the affray, would without demur
abuse and malign the man against whom he directed his arguments, on the ground
that he was his enemy and adversary; I, however, my friend, used to regard the
man of Tyana as having been, humanly speaking, a kind of sage, and I am still
freely disposed to adhere to this opinion; and I would like to set before you,
if you ask it, my own personal opinion of him. If anyone wishes to class him
with any philosopher you like, and to forget all the legends about him and not
bore me with them, I am quite agreeable. Not so if anyone ventures, whether he
be Damis the Assyrian, or Philostratus, or any other compiler or chronicler, to
overleap the bounds of humanity and transcend philosophy, and while repelling
the charge of wizardry in word, yet to bind it in act rather than in name upon
the man, using the mask of Pythagorean discipline to disguise what he really
was. For in that case his reputation for us as a philosopher will be gone, and
we shall have an ass instead concealed in a lion's skin; and we shall detect in
him a sophist in the truest sense, cadging for alms among the cities, and a
wizard, if there ever was one, instead of a philosopher.

VI Do you ask me what I mean and what are my reasons for speaking thus? I will
tell you. There are bounds of nature which prescribe and circumscribe the
existence of the universe in respect of its beginnings and of its continuance
and of its end, being limits and rules imposed on everything. By these this
entire mechanism and edifice of the whole universe is constantly being brought
to perfection; and they are arranged by unbreakable laws and indissoluble bonds,
and they guard and observe the all-wise will of a Providence which dispenses and
disposes all things. Now no one can change or alter the place and order of
anything that has been once arranged; and if anyone is so venturesome as to wish
to transcend his limits, he is restrained from transgressing divine law by the
rule and decree of nature. So it is that the fish that lives in the waters is
unable in defiance of nature to change on to dry land and live there; and on the
other hand the creature bred on dry land will not plunge into the waters, and
embrace there any permanent repose or abode; nor by any huge leap can any tenant
of earth raise himself aloft into the air, from a desire to soar about with the
eagles; and in turn, although of course the latter can alight upon the earth, by
depressing and lowering their faculty of flight, and by relaxing the working of
their wings, and renouncing the privilege of nature,--for this too is determined
by the divine laws, namely that beings able to soar aloft are able to descend
from on high,--yet the converse is not possible, so that the lowly habitant of
earth should ever raise himself into the welkin. In this way then the mortal
race of men, while provided with soul and body, is yet circumscribed by divine
bounds. Consequently he can never traverse the air with his body, however much
he scorns to linger upon the paths of earth, without instantly paying the
penalty of his folly; nor by spiritual exaltation can he in his thinking attain
to the unattainable, without falling back into the disease of melancholy.

It is wisest then for him, on the one hand to transport his body along the
ground with the feet given him for the purpose, and on the other hand to sustain
his soul with education and philosophy. But he may well pray that some one may
come to help him from aloft from the paths of heaven, and reveal himself to him
as a teacher of the salvation that is there. For the following is a valid
example to use as it is right for the physician to visit the sick, and for the
teacher to accommodate himself to the, pupil who is entering upon his studies,
and for a superior to quit his heights and condescend to the lowly, yet the
converse is not right or possible. It follows then that there is no reason to
prevent a divine nature, being beneficent and inclined to save and take
providential care of things to come, from associating itself with men, for this
is allowed also by the rule of divine providence; for according to Plato God was
good, and no good being can ever feel any jealousy of any thing. It follows that
the controller of this universe, being good, will not care for our bodies alone,
but much more for our souls, upon which he has conferred the privilege of
immortality and free-will. On these then, as lord of the entire economy and of
gifts of grace his bestowal of which will benefit our nature, he will, they
being able to appreciate his bounty, bestow plenteously an illumination as it
were of the light which streams from him, and will despatch the most intimate of
his own messengers from time to time, for the salvation and succour of men here
below. Of these messengers anyone so favoured by fortune, having cleansed his
understanding and dissipated the mist of mortality, may well be described as
truly divine, and as carrying in his soul the image of some great god. Surely so
great a personality will stir up the entire human race, and illuminate the world
of mankind more brightly than the sun, and will leave the effects of his eternal
divinity for the contemplation of future ages, in no less a degree affording an
example of the divine and inspired nature than creations of artists made of
lifeless matter. To this extent then human nature can participate in the
super-human; but otherwise it cannot lawfully transcend its bounds, nor with its
wingless body emulate the bird, nor being a man must one meddle with what
appertains to demons.

VII IN what light then, this being so, do you envisage for us Apollonius, my
good compiler? If as a divine being and superior to a philosopher, in a word as
one superhuman in his nature, I would ask you to keep to this point of view
throughout your history, and to point me out effects wrought by his divinity
enduring to this day. For surely it is an absurdity that the works of carpenters
and builders should last on ever so long after the craftsmen are dead, and raise
as it were an immortal monument to the memory of their constructive ability; and
yet that a human character claimed to be divine should, after shedding its glory
upon mankind, finish in darkness its shortlived career, instead of displaying
for ever its power and excellence. Instead of being so niggardly liberal to some
one individual like Damis and to a few other short-lived men, it should surely
make its coming among us the occasion of blessings, conferred on myriads not
only of his contemporaries, but also of his posterity. This I ween is how the
sages of old raised up earnest bands of disciples, who continued their tradition
of moral excellence, sowing in men's hearts a spirit truly immortal of progress
and reform. If on the other hand you attribute to this man a mortal nature, take
care lest by endowing him with gifts which transcend mortality, you convict
yourself of fallacy and miscalculation.

VIII BUT enough of this. His hero is introduced to us as a divine man, who
assumes from birth the guise and personality of a demon of the sea. For he says
that to his mother when she was about to bear her child, there appeared the
figure of a demon of the sea, namely Proteus, who in the story of Homer ever
changes his form. But she, in no way frightened, asked him what she would bring
to birth; and he replied: " Myself." Then she asked: " And who are you? " "
Proteus," he replied, " of Egypt." And then he writes about a certain meadow and
about swans, that assisted the lady to bear her child, though without telling us
whence he derived this particular; for assuredly he does not attribute this
story to Damis the Assyrian writer. But a little further on in the same history
he represents Apollonius as using, in token of his being of a divine nature
these very words to Damis himself: " I myself, my companion, understand all
languages though I have learned none." And again he says to him: " Do not be
surprised, for I know what men are thinking about, even when they are silent."
And again in the temple of Asclepius he was much honoured by the god, and is
said to have possessed a certain natural gift of prescience, which he did not
acquire by learning, from very childhood. We learn, in a word, that he was born
superior to mankind in general, and so he is described from the first moment of
his birth throughout his history. Anyhow on one occasion after he had loosed
himself from his bonds, his historian adds the remark: " Then Damis declares he
for the first time clearly understood the nature of Apollonius, that it was
divine and superior to humanity. For without offering any sacrifice,--for how
could he offer one in the prison?--and without offering any prayer, without a
single word, he just laughed at his fetters." And at the end of the book we
learn that his grave was nowhere to be found on earth; but thai he went to
heaven in his physical body accompanied by hymns and dances. Naturally if he was
so great as he is described in the above, he may be said "to have wooed
philosophy in a more divine manner than Pythagoras, or Empedocles, or Plato."
For these reasons we must surely class the man among the gods.

IX

WELL, we will not grudge him his natural and self-taught gift of understanding
all languages. But if he possessed it, why was he taken to a school-master, and
if he had never learnt any language whatever, why does his historian malign him
and declare that, not by nature, but by dint of close study and application, he
acquired the Attic dialect? For he tells us outright " that as he advanced in
youth he displayed a knowledge of letters and great power of memory, and force
of application, and that he spoke the Attic dialect." We also learn that "when
he reached his fourteenth year his father took him to Tarsus, to Euthydemus of
Phoenicia, who was a good rhetor, and gave him his education, while. Apollonius
clung to his teacher." We further learn that " he had as fellow-students members
of the school of Plato and of Chrysippus and members of the Peripatetic set.
That he also diligently listened to the doctrines of Epicurus, because he did
not despise even them, though he grasped the teachings of Pythagoras with a
certain indescribable wisdom." So varied was the education of one who had never
learnt any language, and who by his divine power anticipated " the thoughts of
men even when they are silent."

X AND after an interval our author again expresses his admiration at the ease
with which Apollonius understood the language of animals, and he goes on to tell
us the following: " And moreover he acquired of an understanding of the language
of animals; and he learnt this, too, in the course of his travels through
Arabia, where the inhabitants best know this language and practise it. For the
Arabians have a way of understanding without difficulty swans and other birds
when they presage the future in the same way as oracles. And they get to
understand the dumb animals by eating, so they say, some of them the heart and
others the liver of dragons." In this instance, then, it seems anyhow to have
been the case that the Pythagorean who abstained from animal food and could not
even bring himself to sacrifice to the gods, devoured the heart and liver of
dragons, in order to participate in a form of wisdom that was in vogue among the
Arabs. After learning under such masters, how could he attain to their
accomplishments otherwise than by imitating their example? We must therefore add
to the teachers whom we have already enumerated the sages of Arabia who taught
him his knowledge of augury; and this no doubt inspired him subsequently to
foretell what the sparrow meant when he called his fellows to a meal, and so to
impress the bystanders with the idea that he had worked a mighty miracle. Arid
in the same way when he saw the freshly-slain lioness with her eight whelps by
the side of the road which led into Assyria, he immediately conjectured from
what he saw the length of their future stay in Persia, and made a prophecy
thereof.

XI AND in just keeping with his visits to the Arabians were the studies he
undertook among the Persians also, according to the account given by the same
author. For after forbidding Damis, so we are told, to go to the magi, though
Damis was his only pupil and companion, he went alone to school with them at
midday and about midnight; alone in order not to have as his companion in the
study of magic one who was clearly without a taste for such things. And again
when he came to converse with Vardan the Babylonian king, it is related that he
addressed him as follows: "My system of wisdom is that of Pythagoras, a man of
Samos, who taught me to worship the gods in this way and to recognize them,
whether they are seen or unseen, and to be regular in converse with the gods."
Who can possibly allow this to be true of him, seeing that Pythagoras himself
has left no scripture of the kind, nor any secret writings, such that we can
even suspect him to have had such resources at his disposal? As for his teacher
of the Pythagorean philosophy, it is testified that he was in no way better than
the Epicureans by Philostratus himself, who speaks of him as follows: "He had as
a teacher of the system of Pythagoras not a very good man, nor one who put his
philosophy into practice; for he was the slave of his belly and his desires and
modelled his life on that of Epicurus. And this man was Euxenus of Heraclea in
Pontus. But he had a good acquaintance with the tenets of Pythagoras, just as
birds have of what they learn to say from men." What ridiculous nonsense to
pretend that Apollonius can have derived from this man, his gift of conversing
with the gods. But let us for the moment admit that there were other expounders
of the system from whom he may have learned, although the author anyhow gives no
hint of any such thing. Still we must ask: was there then ever any one of these
teachers that professed either to know himself, by having learnt from Pythagoras
personally, or to teach others., how to recognize and frequent in their
conversations gods, whether seen or unseen? Why, even the famous Plato, although
more than anyone else he shared in the philosophy of Pythagoras, and Archytas
too, and Philolaus the one man who has handed down to us in writing the
conversations of Pythagoras, and any others who were disciples of the
philosopher and have handed down to his posterity his opinions and tenets in
writing, -- none of these ever boasted of any such form of wisdom. It follows
then that he learnt these things not from Pythagoras, but from other sources;
and with a wilful affectation of solemnity he only labels himself with the
philosopher's name But admitting, though it is against all probability, that he
is not lying, but telling the truth, we are still at a loss to know, how he can
pretend to have acquired this lore from the Samian himself above mentioned,
inasmuch as the latter deceased some thousand years before him. Therefore we
must reckon among the Arabians this teacher also who communicated to him a
knowledge of the gods of so mysterious character as he imagines this to be. If
then he was of a divine nature, it follows that the story of his teachers is a
pure fiction. On the other hand if the story was true, then the legend was
false, and the allegation in the book that he was divine is devoid of all truth.

XII

I HAVE no wish to enquire curiously about the ghost of Proteus, or to ask for
confirmation of it, nor to demand proof of his ridiculous story that swans
surrounded his mother and assisted her to bring him into the world; equally
little do I ask him to produce evidence of his fairy-tale about the thunderbolt;
for as I said before he cannot anyhow claim the authority of Damis for these
particulars, inasmuch as the latter joined him much later on in the city of
Nineveh of Assyria. I am however quite ready to accept all that is probable and
has an air of truth about it, even though such details may be somewhat
exaggerated and highly-coloured out of compliment to a good man; for I could
still bring myself to accept them, as long as they are not bewilderingly
wonderful and full of nonsense. I do not therefore mind the author telling us
that Apollonius was of an ancient family and lineally descended from the first
settlers, and was rich, if it were so, beyond all other people of that region:
and that when he was young he not only had the distinguished teachers mentioned,
but, if he likes, I will allow that he became himself their teacher and master
in learning. I grant too, in addition, that he was skilful in ordinary matters,
and so was able by giving the best of advice to rid of his malady one who had
come to the temple of Asclepius in order to be healed.' For we read that he
suggested to a man afflicted with dropsy a regime of abstinence well suited to
cure his disease, and in that way restored him to health: and so far we must
needs commend the youthful Apollonius for his good sense. On another occasion he
very properly excluded from the temple a man who was notorious for his
wickedness, although he was prepared to offer the most expensive sacrifices, for
he represents the man in question as the richest and most distinguished of all
the people of his region. Nor would anyone object to his being classed among the
temperate, inasmuch as he repelled with insults a lover who designed to corrupt
his youth, and also, as the narrative informs us, kept himself throughout pure
of intercourse with women.

We can also believe the story of his keeping silence for five years in the
spirit of Pythagoras; and the way moreover in which he accomplished this vow of
silence was praiseworthy. All this and the like is merely human, and in no way
incongruous with philosophy or with truth, and I can therefore accept it,
because I set a very high value upon candour and love of truth. Nevertheless to
suppose that he was a being of superhuman nature, and then to contradict this
supposition at a moment's warning, and to forget it almost as soon as it is
made--this I regard as reprehensible and calculated to fasten a suspicion not
only on the author, but yet more on the subject of his memoir.

XIII

THESE particulars we have taken from the first book of Philostratus; and let us
now go on to consider the contents of the second. The story takes him on his
travels and brings him from Persia to India. He next shows a want of good taste
by relating, as if it were a miracle, how Apollonius and his companions saw some
sort of demon, to which he gives the name of Empusa, along the road, and of how
they drove it away by dint of abuse and bad words. And we learn that when some
animals were offered them for food, he told Damis that he was quite willing to
allow him and his companions to eat the flesh, for as far as he could see their
abstinence from meat had in no way advanced their moral development, though in
his own case it was imposed by the philosophic profession he had made in
childhood. And yet is it not incredible to anyone that he should not have
hindered Damis, as his best friend., and as the only disciple and follower of
his life, that he had, and the only one whom he was trying to convert to his
philosophy, that he should not, I repeat, have tried to hinder him from
consuming the flesh of living animals, that being an unholy food according to
Pythagoras, and that instead of doing so, he should tell him for reasons
inexplicable to me that it will do no good to himself, and admit that he saw no
moral advantage in them produced by such abstinence?

XIV IN the next place I would have you notice what sort of samples of truth are
set before us by this Philostratus to whose truthfulness Hierocles the
self-styled Lover of Truth bears witness. For we are told that when Apollonius
was among the Indians, he employed an interpreter, and through him held the
conversation with Phraotes, for that was the name of the king of the Indians.
Thus he, who just before, according to Philostratus, had an understanding of all
languages, now on the contrary, according to the same witness, is in need of an
interpreter. And again, he who read the thoughts of men, and almost like their
god Apollo " Understood the dumb and heard him who spake not" has to ask, by
means of an interpreter, what was the king's way of life, and he asks him to
supply him with a guide on his journey to the Brahmans. And after an interval
the other, who is king of the Indians, and a barbarian to boot, gets rid of the
interpreter, and addresses Apollonius in Greek; and speaking in that language
details to him his education and his wealth of learning. But Apollonius none the
less neglected on this occasion to display, as he should have done, his own
perfect acquaintance with their tongue.

XV ON the contrary he is astonished to find the Indian talking Greek, as
Philostratus consistently, it would seem, with himself, tells us in his book.
For how could he be astonished thereat, unless he had regarded him as a
barbarian? And in spite of his having admired him for what he was, he could
never have expected him to talk Greek. In the sequel, as if he were astonished
at some exhibition of the miraculous and were still unable to explain it,
Apollonius says: " Tell me, O king, how you came to have such facility in the
Greek tongue? And where did you get hereabouts the philosophy you possess? For I
do not think that you can say you owe it to teachers anyhow, for it is not
likely that the Indians have any teachers of this." Such are the wonderful
utterances to which one, whose prescience included everything, gives vent; and
the king answers them by saying that he had had teachers, and he tells him who
they were, and relates all the particulars of his own history on his father's
side.

Next we are told that the Indian had to judge between certain parties about a
treasure which had been hunted up in a field, the question at issue being
whether this field ought to be assigned to the seller or buyer of the place. Our
supreme philosopher and darling of heaven is asked his opinion, and awards it to
the purchaser, assigning his reason in these words: "That the gods would never
have deprived the one of the land, if he had not been a bad man; nor would ever
have given the other riches under the soil, unless he had been better than the
seller." We must conclude then, if we are to believe him, that men who are
comfortably off and richer than their neighbours, are to be esteemed thrice
happy and beloved of the gods, even though they should be the most shameless and
abandoned of mankind; on the other hand only the poorest, say, even a Socrates,
or a Diogenes, or the famous Pythagoras himself, or any other of the most
temperate and fairest-minded of men, are to be esteemed ill-starred wretches.
For if one follows the reasoning here used, one must allow that on its showing
the gods would never have deprived the poor, that is to say, the very men who
excel others, if judged by the standard of philosophy, even of a bare living and
of the necessities of life, unless they had been utterly vile in character, and
at the same time they have endowed those who are abandoned in their character
with a plenty even of things that were not necessary to them, unless they proved
themselves better than the others just mentioned; from which the absurdity of
the conclusion is manifest to everyone.

XVI

AFTER setting before you these incidents out of the second book, let us pass on
to the third, and consider the stories told of the far-famed Brahmans. For here
we shall have to admit that the tales of Thule, and any other miraculous legends
ever invented by any story-tellers, turn out to be by comparison with these
quite reliable and perfectly true. It is anyhow worth our while to examine
these, because this self-styled lover of truth has not scrupled to fasten on
ourselves a charge of reckless credulity and levity of character, while claiming
for himself and for those like him an accurate judgment, well based on an
understanding of the fact. Note then the sort of miracles on which he prides
himself, when he prefers Philostratus to our own divine evangelists, on the
ground that he was not only a most highly educated man, but most attentive to
the truth.

XVII To begin with then, on the way to the Brahmans, Philostratus introduces us
to a lady who met Apollonius, and who, from her head down to her loins, was
wholly white in colour, while the rest of her person was black. The mountains
again, as they went forward on the road to the Brahmans, were planted with
pepper trees, and the apes cultivated the same; and then there were certain
dragons of extraordinary size, from whose heads were thrown off sparks of fire,
and if you slew one of them, he: says that you found marvellous stones upon the
head rivalling the gem of Gyges, as mentioned in Plato. And all this was before
they reached the hill on which the Brahmans lived. And when they reached this,
we read that they saw there a well of sandarac, full of wonderful water, and
hard by a crater of fire, from which there arose a lead-coloured flame; and
there were two jars there of black stone, the one of which contained rain, and
the other winds, from which the Brahmans supply such people of the country as
they are pleased to favour. Besides this they found among them images of Athene
Polias and of Apollo Pythius, and of Dionysus of the Lake and of certain other
Hellenic gods. And the master of them all was named Iarchas, and they saw him
sitting on a very lofty throne in a state of pomp that was far from philosophic,
but rather appropriate to a satrap. And this throne was made of black bronze and
was decorated with golden images, such as we might of course expect philosophers
to fabricate when they take to working like base mechanics at forge and steel,
even if they do not like conjurers make their handiwork to move by itself. But
the thrones upon which the rest of them, who were inferior teachers to him, were
sitting, were, he says, of bronze, but not incised and not so high. For I
suppose they could not help bestowing upon the teacher of so divine a philosophy
the privilege of having images and gold on his throne, just as if he were a
tyrant.

XVIII AND we are told that Iarchas, the moment he saw Apollonius, addressed him
by name in the Greek tongue, and asked him for the letter which he brought from
Phraotes, for he had already received this by dint of his foreknowledge; and by
way of parading the inspired character of his prescience, he told him before he
set eyes on the epistle, that it was one letter short, namely of a delta; and he
began at once in a vulgar manner in that very first interview, like a man who
has got wealth for the first time and does not know how to use it, to show off
his superiority as a seer, by running off the names of Apollonius' father and
mother, and telling him all about his family and upbringing and education, and
about his periodical voyages abroad, and about his journey thither to himself,
and about what he had done himself or said to his companions on the road. And
next this wonderful author tells us that the " Brahmans, after anointing
themselves together with Apollonius with an amber-like drug, took a bath, and
then standing round as if in chorus, struck the earth with their staves, and the
earth arched itself up and elevated them some two cubits into the air, so that
they stood there levitated up in the air itself for some considerable length of
time. And he relates that they drew down fire from the sun without any effort on
their part and whenever they chose. And the miracle-monger adds another marvel
to these, when he tells that there were four tripods like those of Pytho which
wheeled themselves forth, moving of their own accord; and he goes so far as to
compare these to the tripods in Homer, and he says that there were set upon them
cup-bearers to serve in the banquet, four in number and made of bronze. And in
addition he tells us that the earth too strewed grass beneath them of her own
accord and unasked. And of these tripods two, he says, ran with wine, and of the
other two, the one supplied hot water and the other cold. And the cup-bearers of
bronze drew for the guests in due mixture both the wine and the water, and
pushed round the cups in a circle, just as they are handed round in a symposium.

XIX

SUCH are the stories which Hierocles, who has been entrusted to administer the
supreme courts of justice all over the province, finds true and reliable after
due enquiry, at the same time that he condemns us for our excessive credulity
and frivolity; and after himself believing such things when he finds them in
Philostratus, he proceeds to brag about himself and says (I quote his very
words): " Let us anyhow observe how much better and more cautiously we accept
such things, and what opinion we hold of men gifted with such powers and
virtues."

XX

IT was after such a symposium, according to the same Philostratus, that a king
who was sojourning in India is introduced to drink with the philosophers; and we
hear that he took occasion to insult philosophy with drunken jests, and that he
got so tipsy in their presence as to hurl defiance at the Sun and brag about
himself. All this we learn, and that Apollonius once more, by means of an
interpreter, learned his history from him and conversed in turn with him,
Iarchas interpreting between them. Surely it may well excite our wonder that so
insolent a fellow and so great a buffoon was allowed to get drunk and show off
his tipsy wit among such great philosophers, when he was unworthy even to be
present at a meeting of philosophers, much less at the hearth of men who were
equal to gods? But what possesses me to call them the peers of gods and chaff
them about their dignity? Why, when Apollonius asked them whom they considered
themselves to be, " Gods," answered Iarchas; who, I suppose in his quality as
god, as little as could be in the style of philosopher, save the mark, nay,
surely betraying an equally scant respect for the dignity of the god whom he
professed himself to be, set the example of drinking to his fellow-banqueters by
stooping down over the bowl, which, as our author is careful to tell us,
supplied plenty of drink for all of them, and refreshed itself, as do holy and
mysterious wells for those who fill their pitchers from them.

XXI

AFTER this there was general conversation and some serious discussion among the
philosophers, in the course of which Iarchas explained that his own soul had
once been in the body of another man who was a king, and that in that state he
had performed this and that exploit; while Apollonius told them that he had once
been the pilot of a ship in Egypt, and had accomplished all sorts of exploits
which he enumerated to them. Then they put questions to each other, and received
answers, which in the name of wisdom have scant title to be recorded at all.
Thus we learn that Apollonius asked if they had any golden water among them.
What a clever and marvellous question! And he also asked about men who live
underground, and about others called pigmies, and shadow-footed men, and he
asked if they had among them a four-footed animal called a martichora, which has
a head like that of a man, but rivals a lion in size, while from its tail
projects hairs like thorns a cubit long, which it is accustomed to shoot out
like arrows at those who hunt it. Such then were the questions which Apollonius
put to the sages, and Iarchas instructed him about the pigmies, and told him
that they were indeed people dwelling underground, but spent their lives on the
other side of the river Ganges; but as to the other things which he asked about,
Iarchas said that they never had existed at all.

XXII

AFTER that Philostratus described a wool which the earth grew for them to supply
material for their dress, from which we must infer that these philosophers plied
the loom and occupied themselves with spinning wool in order to make their
raiment, for we do not hear of any woman being smuggled into their community;
but perhaps he means that by a miracle the wool grew of its own initiative into
their sacred garments. And we hear that each of them carried a staff and a ring
which was imbued with mysterious power. There follow a series of miraculous
performances on the part of the Brahman,--how for example he recalled to his
senses by means of a letter one who was possessed with a demon, how by stroking
a man who was lame he healed his dislocated hip, how he vouchsafed to restore a
man's hand that was withered, and to a blind man gave sight. Our blessings on an
author who saves us so much trouble. Can we doubt that these stories are true,
when his very insistence on the truth of his earlier tales, I refer to those of
lightning and wind kept in jars, and of tripods of stone walking about of their
own accord and of cupbearers of bronze passing round the cups in a circle, fully
betrays and exposes the mythical character of everything else which he has to
tell us. Philostratus moreover declares that Damis related how carefully
Apollonius excluded himself from being present at the philosophical sessions
which he held with larchas; and he says that Apollonius was given by the latter
seven rings which were called after the stars, and that he wore these one by one
upon the days respectively called by their names.

Though we learn this much on this occasion from a gentleman who is esteemed by
the Lover of Truth to have had a respect for facts, further on in his book, as
if by way of condemning the wizardry of the Brahmans, and as if he was anxious
to acquit Apollonius of the charge of having dabbled therein, he adds the
following remark, which I repeat textually: " But when he saw among the Indians
the tripods and the cup-bearers and the other figures which I have said entered
of their own accord, he did not either ask how they were contrived, or desire to
learn; but although he praised them, he disclaimed any wish to imitate them."
And how, my good fellow, did he disclaim any wish of the kind? Is this the man
who was careful to exclude Damis from the philosophical seances he held with
them, and who thought it his duty to conceal from his only companion all that he
had done in those seances? And how could he have disclaimed any wish to imitate
them when he accepted the seven rings named after the stars, and held it needful
to wear these all through the rest of his life upon the days severally named
after them, and that although, as you say yourself, they had a secret power in
them. Even if we grant that he did not aspire to imitate these inventions, it is
clear that his disclaimer was not due to their being uncanny. How then could he
praise things which he disdained to imitate? If he praised them, as being
divinely operated, why did he not imitate things so praiseworthy? To crown all,
on his return after he had stayed with them, we learn that he arrived with his
companions at the country of the Oritae, where he found the rocks and the sand
and the dust which the rivers bring down to the sea, all alike made of bronze.

XXIII

ALL this is contained in the third book of Philostratus, and let us now pass on
to those which follow. We learn that when he had returned from the country of
the Indians to the land of Hellas, the gods themselves proclaimed him to be the
companion of the gods, inasmuch as they sent on to him the sick to be healed.
And, indeed, as if his visit to the Arabs and to the Magi and to the Indians had
turned him into some miraculous and divine being, our author, now that he has
got him home again, plunges straight into a lengthy description of his miracles.
And yet one might fairly argue that if he had been of a diviner than merely
human nature, then he ought long before, and not only now, after entering into
relation with other teachers, to have begun his career of wonder-working; and it
was superfluous for him to take so much trouble to acquire the multifarious lore
of Arabs and of Magi and of Indians., if he was really what the initial
assumption made by Philostratus assumes him to have been. But anyhow, according
to this truth-loving author, we have now got him back again., ready to show off
the wisdom which he has acquired from so great masters; and as one fresh from
Arabia and equipped with the science of augury in vogue among the inhabitants of
that country, he begins by interpreting to the bystanders what the sparrow
wanted and intended when it summoned its fellows to their dinner. Next he has a
presentiment of the plague in Ephesus, and warns the citizens of what is coming.
And he himself sets before us in his Apology to Domitian the explanation of this
presentiment. For when the latter asked him what was his prediction, he
answered: " Because, my prince, I use a very light diet, I was the first to
scent the danger." And then he relates a third miracle of him, which was nothing
less than that of his averting the plague. Although the author has been careful
not to include this story in the final counts retained against Apollonius,
probably because it was impossible for him to rebut a charge founded upon it by
any defence which he could offer, we nevertheless will, if you will allow us,
publish the story and give it full publicity, because our doing so will render
needless any further criticism of it. For if anybody feels the shadow of doubt
about the matter, the very manner in which the story is told will convince him
that fraud and make-believe was in this case everything, and that if ever
anything reeked of wizardry this did. For he pretends that the plague was seen
in the form of an aged man, a beggar and dressed in rags; who, when Apollonius
ordered the mob to stone him, began by shooting fire from his eyes, but
afterwards, when he had been overwhelmed by the stones thrown at him, he
appeared as a dog all crushed and vomiting foam, as mad dogs do. And he writes
that Apollonius mentioned this episode also in the defence he addressed to the
autocrat Domitian, as follows: " For the form of the plague--and it resembled an
aged beggar--was both seen by me, and when I saw it I overcame it, not by
staying the course of the disease, but by utterly destroying it." Who, I would
ask, after reading this would not laugh heartily at the miracle-mongering of
this thaumaturge? For we learn that the nature of the plague was a living
creature and as such exposed at once to the eyes of the bystanders and to the
showers of stones they hurled at it, and that it was crushed by men, and vomited
foam, when all the time a plague is nothing in the world but a corruption and
vitiation of the atmosphere, the circumambient air being changed into a morbid
condition composed of noxious and evil exhalations, as medical theory teaches
us. And on other grounds, too, this story of the phantom plague can be exploded;
for the story tells us that it only afflicted the city of Ephesus, and did not
visit the neighbouring populations; and how could this not have been the case,
if the surrounding atmosphere had undergone vitiation? for the infection could
not have been confined to one spot, nor have beset the air of Ephesus alone.

XXIV THE fourth wonder which he relates is how the soul of Achilles appeared
close by his own sepulchre, dressed the first time in a tunic, and five cubits
high, and subsequently growing till it was twelve cubits in stature, and
accusing the Thessalians for not continuing according to custom to offer him the
due funeral rites, and furthermore still nursing wrath against the Trojans for
the wrongs which they had committed against him, and bidding Apollonius ask him
questions on five topics, such as he himself might desire to learn about, and
the Fates permit him to know of. We next learn that the omniscient one, who
boasted of his prescience of future events, was still ignorant of whether
Achilles had been buried, and of whether the Muses and Nereids had bestowed
their dirges upon him. And accordingly he asked Achilles about these matters,
and enquires most earnestly whether Polyxena had been slain over his tomb, and
whether Helen had really come to Troy, --questions surely of a most solemn kind,
and such as to stimulate others to lead the philosophical life of the hero,
besides being in themselves of much importance. Thereupon he falls to wondering
if there had ever been among the Hellenes so many heroes all at one time, and
whether Palamedes had ever reached Troy. Surely it was disgraceful in the
extreme that one who was the companion of gods, whether seen or unseen, should
know so little of such matters as to need to ask questions again and again about
them? Unless, indeed, because in this scene he is introduced as associating with
the dead, the author intentionally gives a frigid turn to his questions, in
order to avert the suspicion of his having irreligiously pryed into the secrets
of magic. For we may notice he represents him as arguing in his Apology that
there was no colour of necromancy in the manner in which the spectre appeared to
him, and says: " For without digging any trench like Odysseus, and without
tempting the souls of the dead with the blood of lambs, I managed to converse
with Achilles, merely by using the prayers which the Indians declare we ought to
make use of in addressing heroes." This is how Apollonius now brags to his
companion, although our author testifies that he had learned nothing from the
Indians nor felt attracted by their wisdom.

XXV

WHAT then is the reason, my good fellow, supposing that there was no devilish
curiosity here at work, why he would not allow Damis, whom you admit to have
been his sole and genuine companion, to share with him in this marvellous vision
and interview? And why, too, was he not able to do all this by daytime, instead
of doing it in the dead of night and alone? Why, too, did the mere cry of the
cocks drive away the soul of the hero? For he says, " It vanished with a mild
flash of lightning, for indeed the cocks were already beginning to crow." I
cannot but think that evil demons would have found such an hour seasonable and
appropriate for their devilish interviews, rather than the soul of a hero which,
having been freed from the crass matter of the body, must necessarily be good
and unsullied. In any case the demon conjured up on this occasion is represented
as of a malignant and envious disposition, both rancorous and mean in humour.
For how else can we characterise one who drove away Antisthenes, a poor youth so
serious that he was endeavouring to become a follower of the philosopher
Apollonius? For Achilles insists that he shall not initiate him in his
philosophy, and he adds the reason: " For," says he, " he is too much of a
descendant of Priam, and the praise of Hector is never out of his mouth." And
how could he be other than rancorous and mean; if he was wrath with the
Thessalians for not sacrificing to him, and still refused to be reconciled to
the Trojans, because thousands of years before they had sinned against him, and
that although the latter were continually sacrificing and pouring out libations
to him? The only exception is that he ordered Apollonius to restore the tomb of
Palamedes, which together with his statue had fallen into decay.

XXVI THE fifth and sixth miracles however in this book do not stand in need of
much argument and discussion, so thoroughly do they prove our writer's easy
credulity. For Apollonius, as they say, drives out one demon with the help of
another. The first of the demons is expelled from an incorrigible youth, while
the second disguises itself by assuming the form of a woman: and the latter our
clever author calls by no other names than those of Empusa and Lamia. As for the
damsel whom he is said subsequently to have brought back again to life in Rome
after she had died, the story clearly impressed Philostratus himself as being
extremely incredible, and we may safely reject it. Anyhow he hesitates and
doubts, whether after all a spark of life might have not lingered on in the girl
unnoticed by her attendants. For he says that according to report "it was
raining at the time, and a vapour exhaled from the face of the girl." Anyhow if
such a miracle had really been wrought in Rome itself, it could not have escaped
the notice first of the emperor and after him of his subordinate magistrates,
and least of all of the philosopher Euphrates who at the time was in the country
and was staying in Rome, who indeed, as we learn later on, is related to have
launched against Apollonius the accusation of being no other than a wizard. It
would certainly too, had it actually occurred, have been included by the accuser
among the other charges levelled against him. Well, just these and no more are
the more particular and special achievements of Apollonius, although there are a
myriad other cases in the book in which his sooth-sayings and prophecies are set
down to his gift of foreknowledge; and we learn that at Athens, when he desired
to be initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries, the priest there would not admit
him, and declared that he would never initiate a wizard nor throw open the
Eleusinian mysteries to a man who was addicted to impure rites. We also hear
about a lewd fellow who went begging about Rome, rehearsing the songs of Nero on
his lyre for pay; and we are told that this most philosophic of teachers out of
fear of Nero ordered his companions to bestow alms on him in recognition of his
clever accomplishments.

XXVII

SUCH are the contents of the fourth book, and in the fifth book of his history,
after a few remarks about his gift of prescience, our author is so lost in
admiration as to add the following remark, which I repeat textually. " That then
he was enabled to make such forecasts by some divine impulse, and that it is no
sound inference to suppose, as some people do, that Apollonius was a wizard, is
clear from what I have said. But let us consider the following facts: wizards,
whom for my part I reckon to be the most unfortunate of mankind, claim to alter
the course of destiny, either by tormenting the ghosts whom they encounter, or
by means of barbaric sacrifices, or by means of certain incantations or
anointings. But Apollonius himself submitted to the decrees of the Fates, and
foretold that they must needs come to pass; and his foreknowledge was not due to
wizardry, but derived from what the gods revealed to him. And when among the
Indians he beheld their tripods, and their dumb waiters and other automata which
I described as entering the room of their own accord, he neither asked how they
were contrived, nor wished to learn. He only praised them, but did not aspire to
imitate them." Such a passage as the above clearly exhibits in the light of
wizards the famous philosophers of India. For notice that when he is arguing
about wizards, he mentions them too and says that their marvels were cleverly
contrived indeed, but that his hero held himself carefully aloof from such their
contrivances, on the ground that they were not moral. If therefore we find
Apollonius calling these Indians gods, and enrolling himself as their disciple,
we have no alternative but to bring him also under the imputation under which
his teachers lay. And accordingly he is introduced as saying among the so-called
Naked sages of the Egyptians, the following,--I quote his very words: " It is
then not unreasonable on my part, I think, to have yielded myself to a
philosophy so highly elaborated, to a philosophy which, if I may use a metaphor
from the stage, the Indians mount, as it deserved to be mounted, upon a lofty
and divine mechanism before they wheel it out upon the stage. And that I was
right to admire them, and that I am right in considering them wise and blessed,
it is now time to learn." And after a little he says: " For they are not only
gods, but are adorned with all the gifts of the Pythian prophetess." And he is
introduced to Domitian with these words on his lips: " What war have you with
Iarchas or with Phraotes, both of them Indians, whom I consider to be the only
men that are really gods and that deserve this ... appellation? " And there are
other passages also in which this history of Philostratus recognises the persons
above mentioned as gods and teachers of the sage, and admits him to have
accepted rings from them, but now he forgets all about it, and does not see that
in maligning the teachers, he maligns the disciple.

XXVIII AND a little lower down in the book he brings a flute-player upon the
stage, and he relates at length how Apollonius delivered himself with great
gravity of long essays upon the different modes maker of playing the flute, as
if it were the most important and clever of the sciences. And he relates how the
Emperor Vespasian offered him prayers just as if he were a god, for we learn
that Vespasian said in a tone of prayer: "Do thou make me Emperor," whereupon
Apollonius answered: " I have made you so." What else can anyone do but loathe
this utterance for its boastfulness, so nearly does it approach downright
madness, for one who was the pilot of a ship in Egypt to boast of being himself
a god already and a maker of kings? For Apollonius himself has informed us a
little before in the course of his conversation with the Indian that his soul
had previously been that of a pilot.

XXIX AND to the same Emperor, when the latter asks him to notify to him those
whom he most approved of among philosophers as advisers and counsellors of his
policy, Apollonius replies in these words: " ' These gentlemen here are also
good advisers in such matters,' and he pointed to Dion and to Euphrates, because
he had not yet quarrelled with the latter." And again, he said, " My sovereign,
Euphrates and Dion have long been known to you and they are at your door, and
are much concerned for your welfare. Summon them also therefore to your
conference, for they are both of them wise." Whereupon Vespasian answered: " I
throw my doors open wide to wise men." What can we think of the prescience of
our hero? On this occasion Euphrates is both good and wise, because he has not
yet quarrelled with him; but when he has,--and before long he is going to,--then
see how the same person writes to the Emperor Domitian: " And yet if you want to
know how much a philosopher may attain by flattery of the mighty you have only
to look at the case of Euphrates. For in his case why do I speak of wealth from
that source? Why, he has perfect fountains of wealth, and already at the banks
he discusses prices as a merchant might or a huckster, or a tax-gatherer or a
low money-changer; for all these roles are his if there is anything to buy or
sell. And he clings like a limpet to the doors of the mighty, and you see him
standing at them more regularly than any doorkeeper would do; indeed he is often
caught by the doorkeepers, just as greedy dogs might be. But he never yet
bestowed a farthing on a philosopher, but he walls up all his wealth within his
house; only supporting this Egyptian out of other people's money, and sharpening
his tongue against me, when it ought to be cut out. However I will leave
Euphrates to yourself: for unless you approve of flatterers, you will find the
fellow worse than I represent him." Surely one who first bears witness to
Vespasian the father that Euphrates is a wise and good man, and then inveighs
against him in this style to his son, is openly convicted of praising and
blaming the same person. Was it then the case that this man, who was endowed
with knowledge of the future, did not know what the character of Euphrates was,
nor what it was going to be? For it is not now the first time, but already in
the case of Vespasian himself he is inclined to accuse him of being the worst of
characters. How then is it that he recommended such a person to the sovereign so
warmly, that in consequence of his recommendation the latter threw open wide the
doors of his palace to him? Why, is it not clear to a blind man, as they say,
that in the matter of foreknowledge the fellow is traduced by his own historian;
though on other ground he might be regarded as an honest man, if we could
suppose that originally, and before he learned by experience, he wished to gain
access to the palace as freely for his friends, Euphrates included, as for
himself, but was afterwards moved by his quarrel to use such language of him. I
have no wish in thus arguing to accuse Apollonius of having falsely blamed
Euphrates, who was the most distinguished philosopher of all the men of his age,
so much so that his praises are still on the lips of students of philosophy. Not
but what anyone who was minded to do so could take this as a palmary example of
slander and back-biting and use it against Apollonius. For if Euphrates be
really by their admission a leader in all philosophy, it is open to us to accuse
his rival of censoriousness, when he attacks him for his monstrous conduct; and
to suppose that the latter contracted his evil reputation because he was thus
attacked by him for pursuing,-- that was the accusation,--a life so little
satisfactory to a philosopher.

XXX IN the sixth book our story-teller resumes his tale of miracles; for he
brings his hero, together with his companions, on camel-back to see those whom
he the calls the Naked philosophers of Egypt. Here then at the bidding of one of
these sages an elm-tree, we are told, spoke to Apollonius in an articulate but
feminine voice, and this is the sort of thing which the Lover of Truth expects
us to believe. Then he has a story of pigmies who live on the other side of
their country and of man-eaters and of shadow-footed men and of a satyr whom
Apollonius made drunk. From these sages Apollonius is brought back again to
Hellas, where he renews his interviews and his prophesies to Titus. Then we hear
about a youth who was bitten by a mad dog. He is rescued from his distress by
Apollonius, who forthwith proceeds to divine whose soul it was that the dog had
inside him; and we learn that it was that of Amasis, a former king of Egypt, for
the sage's humanity extended to dogs.

XXXI

THESE then are the achievements which preceded his accusation, and it behoves us
to notice throughout the treatise that, even if we admit the author to tell the
truth in his stories of miracles, he yet clearly shows that they were severally
performed by Apollonius with the co-operation of a demon. For his presentiment
of the plague, though it might not seem to be magical and uncanny, if he owed
it, as he himself said, to the lightness and purity of his diet, yet might quite
as well have been a premonition imparted to him in intercourse with a demon. For
though the other stories of his having grasped and foretold the future by virtue
of his prescience can be refuted by a thousand arguments which Philostratus' own
text supplies, nevertheless, if we allow this particular story to be true, I
should certainly say that his apprehension of futurity was anyhow in some cases,
though it was not so in all, due to some uncanny contrivance of a demon that was
his familiar. This is clearly proved by the fact that he did not retain his gift
of foreknowledge uniformly and in all cases; but was at fault in most cases, and
had through ignorance to make enquiries, as he would not have needed to do, if
he had been endowed with divine power and virtue. And the very cessation of the
plague, according to the particular turn which was given to the drama, has
already been shown to have been a delusion and nothing more. Moreover, the soul
of Achilles should not have been lingering about his own monument, quitting the
Islands of the Blest and the places of repose, as people would probably say. In
this case too it was surely a demon that appeared to Apollonius and in whose
presence he found himself? Then again the licentious youth was clearly the
victim of an indwelling demon; and both it and the Empusa and the Lamia which is
said to have played off its mad pranks on Menippus, were probably driven out by
him with the help of a more important demon; the same is true also of the youth
who had been driven out of his mind by the mad dog; and the frenzied dog itself
was restored to its senses by the same method. You must then, as I said, regard
the whole series of miracles wrought by him, as having been accomplished through
a ministry of demons; for the resuscitation of the girl must be divested of any
miraculous character, if she was really alive all the time and still bore in
herself a vital spark, as the author says, and if a vapour rose over her face.
For it is impossible, as I said before, that such a miracle should have been
passed over in silence in Rome itself, if it happened when the sovereign was
close by.

XXXII

THERE are a thousand other examples then which we may select from the same books
where the narrative refutes itself by its very incongruities, so enabling us to
detect its mythical and miracle-mongering character. At the same time we need
not devote too much attention and study to the gentleman's career, seeing that
those of our contemporaries among whom his memory survives at all, are so far
from classing him among divine and extraordinary and wonderful beings, that they
do not even rank him among philosophers. This being so, let us be content with
the remarks we have made, and proceed to consider the seventh book of his
history.

XXXIII

HERE then we find him categorically accused of being a wizard. Next we find
Demetrius the philosopher trying to dissuade him from going on to Rome, and
Apollonius rejects his advice in words which are full of vulgar effrontery and
fulsome praise of himself. They are as follows: " But I know most human affairs,
seeing that I know everything; at the same time I reserve my knowledge partly
for good men, partly for the wise, partly for myself, partly for the gods." And
yet the man who in these words brags about his omniscience, before he goes much
further is accused by the text itself of an ignorance in certain matters. Next
Apollonius disguises Damis, for the latter conceals the fact of his being a
philosopher because he is afraid of death. Listen then to the words in which our
author apologises for him: " This was the reason then of Damis' putting off his
Pythagorean dress. For he says that it was not cowardice that led him to make
the change, nor regret at having worn it; but he did it because the device
recommended itself as suggested by the expedience of the moment."

XXXIV

After this Philostratus sets forth four counts of the indictment which he
imagines it will be easy for his hero to defend himself from, and he admits that
he has collected these out of a great many others. Of these the first was: What
induced him to wear a different robe from everybody else? and the second: Why
was it that men esteemed him to be a god? the third, How had he managed to
predict the plague to the Ephesians? and last of all: In whose behoof had he
gone to a certain field and cut up the Arcadian boy? To meet these then he
alleges Apollonius to have written an apology. But first of all he relates how
he was cast into prison, and the miracle which he wrought there. For we hear
that Damis was extremely downcast at the misfortunes which he imagined had
befallen his teacher; whereupon Apollonius showed him his leg released without
effort from the chain. Then having thus alleviated his follower's grief, he put
his foot back again into its former condition and habit. After that he was
brought to trial before the Emperor Domitian, and we read that he was acquitted
on the charges, and that after being so acquitted he, wiih curious
inopportuneness, as it seems to me, cried out in the court exactly as follows: "
Accord me too, if you will, an opportunity to speak; but if not, then send
someone to take my body, for my soul you cannot take. Nay you cannot even take
my body,' for thou shalt not slay me, since I tell thee I am not mortal.'" And
then after this famous utterance, we are told that he vanished from the court,
and this is the conclusion of the whole drama.

XXXV

Now in regard to the miracle in the prison, which  it seems was an illusion, imposed on the eyes
of Damis by the familiar demon, our author adds the following remark; " Damis says that it was then for  the first time that he truly understood the nature of Apollonius, to wit that it was divine and superhuman; for without offering any sacrifice,---and how indeed in prison could he have offered one?--and without a single prayer, without even a word, he quietly laughed at the fetters, and then inserting his leg in them afresh, he comported himself like any other prisoner." I should be the last to accuse his pupil of being a dull-witted man, because, after being with him all his life, and witnessing him work miracles by means of certain uncanny agencies, he failed to regard him as in any way superior to the rest of mortal men; but now after such a display of thaumaturgic energy as the above, he is still ignorant of his true character; and taking him to be a mere man he is full of anxiety (as in that case he might well be), and full of apprehension in his behalf, lest any affliction should come upon him against his own wish and will. But if indeed it was now for the first time, after having passed so long a time with him, that he realised that he was indeed divine, and superior to the rest of the human race, then it behoves us to scrutinize the reason which our author alleges for his doing so, in these words: " For without any sacrifice, and without a single prayer, and without uttering a single mysterious word " he saw that he had wrought this miracle. It follows that the fellow's earlier feats were accomplished by the help of some uncanny trick, and that is why, as he says, Damis was not astounded at these things, nor filled with wonder by them. Naturally, then he now for the first time experienced these feelings, because he felt that his master had accomplished
something which was quite unusual and contrary to  his habitual performances. In reference however to the phantom chains shown to Damis and to his departure from the law-courts, I will quote the words which Apollonius himself addresses to Domitian. For when the monarch ordered him to be thrown into chains, Apollonius, with perfect consistency, argued as follows: " If you think me a wizard, how will you bind me? And if you bind me, how can you say that I am a wizard." Surely one may invert this argument and use it against him somewhat as follows, keeping to his own premisses: If you are not a wizard, then how was your leg liberated from the chains? and if it was liberated, then how are you not a wizard? And if, because he submits to the chains, he is not a wizard, then if he does not submit to them, he is a wizard by his own admission. And again if, because he submitted to be brought to trial, he was not a wizard, he was yet clearly revealed as such when he ran off and eluded the court and retinue of the Emperor, I mean of course the bodyguard that stood round him. Now I believe that our author is aware of this, and endeavours to gloze over the fact, when he pretends that this miracle was exhibited without sacrifice or any sort of incantation by some ineffable and superhuman power.

XXXVI

MOREOVER we have not got to go far, before a fresh test of his character is
supplied to us; for presently a messenger presents himself and says: " O
Apollonius, the Emperor releases you from these chains, and permits you to
reside in the jail where prisoners are not bound "; whereupon Apollonius, who is
superior to mankind and has foreknowledge of what is coming, and according to
the poet " Hath understanding of the dumb and heareth him who speaks not" is so
overjoyed., as well he might be, at the news, that he suddenly drops out of his
gift of foreknowledge, and asks outright: " Who then will get me out of this
place? " and the messenger replied: " I myself, so follow me."

XXXVII

NEXT this most divine of men composes in the most careful of manners an harangue
in defence of himself, quite unaware that after all his composition would prove
a mere waste of effort. For he imagines that the Emperor will listen to his
defence of his case, and on that assumption he arranges his apology along
extremely plausible lines; but the latter, by refusing to wait, renders all his
trouble useless and unnecessary. I would ask you then to listen to the
following, for what he says is a refutation of himself: "But inasmuch as he had
composed an oration which he meant to deliver in defence of himself by the
clock, only the tyrant confined him to the questions which I have enumerated, I
have determined to publish this oration also." Note then how utterly at fault
this entirely divinest of beings was about the future, if he took so much
trouble and care to proportion the length of his apology to the time allowed him
by the water-clock.

XXXVIII BUT we must not omit to pass in review the defence which he so vainly
composed, for it contains among many examples of the arrogance with which he
addressed Domitian, the following utterance, to wit, when he says " as Vespasian
made you Emperor, so I made him." Heavens, what braggadocio! No ordinary person
anyhow, nor any real philosopher either, transcending the rest of mankind, could
indulge in such high-faluting bombast without exposing himself in the eyes of
sensible men to a charge of being mad. Next in trying to rid himself of the
suspicion which weighed upon him, he holds the following language concerning
magicians and wizards; " But I call wizards men of false wisdom, for with them
the unreal is made real, and the real becomes incredible." One may learn then
from the whole treatise and from the particular episodes set forth therein,
whether we ought to rank him among divine and philosophic men or among wizards.
We have only to observe what he himself has said about wizards and falsely wise
men together with what is published in his own history. For when oak trees and
elms talk in articulate and feminine tones, and tripods move of their own
accord, and waiters of copper serve at table, and jars are filled with showers
and with winds, and water of sandarac and all the other things of the kind are
introduced among those whom he accounted gods and also did not hesitate to
entitle his teachers, of whom else are all these things characteristic, except
of people who can exhibit "the unreal as real and the real as incredible "? In
himself calling the latter wizards, he shows that they are people whose wisdom
is false. Is it then on the strength of these things that this divine man,
endowed with all virtue and the darling of the gods, is to bind on his brow the
prize of wisdom, and to be accounted truly more divine than Pythagoras and his
successors, and to be considered far more blessed than he; is he not rather to
be found guilty of false wisdom and carry off the first prize for wretches?

XXXIX IN the same book we are told that he had reasoned in Ionia about the power
of the Fates, and had taught that the threads they spin are so immutable that,
if they decree a kingdom to another which already belongs to some one, then,
even if that other were slain by the possessor for fear lest he should ever have
it taken away by him, the latter would yet be raised from the dead and live
again in fulfilment of the decrees of the Fates; and he continues in these very
words: "He who is destined to become a carpenter, will become one, even though
his hands have been cut off; and he who has been predestined to carry off the
prize for running in the Olympic games, will never fail to win, even though he
break his leg; and the man to whom the Fates have decreed that he shall be an
eminent archer, will not miss the mark, even though he lose his eyesight." And
then by way of flattering the sovereign he adds the following: " And in drawing
my examples from royalty, I had reference, I admit, to the Acrisii and to the
house of Laius, and to Astyages, the Mede, and to many other monarchs who
thought that their power was well established, and of whom some were supposed to
have slain their own children and others their descendants, yet were deprived by
them of their thrones, when they grew up and issued forth against them out of
obscurity in accordance with destiny. Well, if I were inclined to flattery I
should have said that I had your own history in my mind, when you were blockaded
by Vitellius, and the temple of Jupiter was burnt on the brow of the hill,
overlooking the city. And Vitellius declared that his own fortune was assured,
so long as you did not escape him, although you were at the time quite a
stripling, and not the man you are now. And yet because the Fates had decreed
otherwise, he perished with all his counsels, while you are now in possession of
his throne. However, since I abhor the forced concords of flattery, for it seems
to me that they are everything that is out of time and out of tune, let me at
once cut this string out of my lyre, and request you to consider that on that
occasion I had not your fortunes in my mind." In this passage, a treatise
written ostensibly in the interest of truth draws a picture of a man who was at
once a flatterer and a liar, and anything rather than a philosopher; for after
inveighing so bitterly on the earlier occasion against Domitian, he now flatters
him, generous fellow that he is, and pretends that the doctrines he mooted in
Ionia about the Fates and Necessity, so far from being directed against him
rather told in his favour.

Take then your history, my author, and regaining your sobriety after, your fit
of drunkenness, read out loud and in a truth-loving tone the passages you wrote
on a former occasion, without concealing anything; read how when he was staying
in Ephesus he did his best "to alienate his friends from Domitian, and
encouraged them to espouse the cause of the safety of all, and as it occurred to
him that intercourse with them by letter was dangerous to them, he would take
now one and now another of the most discreet of his own companions aside and say
to them: ' I have a most important secret business to entrust to yourselves, so
you must betake yourself to Rome to such and such persons, and converse with
them !' " And of how " he delivered a discourse on the subject of the Fates and
Necessity. and argued that not even tyrants can overpower the decrees of the
Fates." And how "directing the attention of his audience to a brazen statue of
Domitian which stood close by that of the Meles, he said: ' Thou fool, how much
art thou mistaken in thy views of Necessity and of the Fates. For even if thou
shouldst slay the man who is fated to be despot after thyself, he shall come to
life again.' " The man then who, after holding such language as this, proceeds
to flatter the tyrant, and cynically pretends that none of this language was
directed against him, how can we judge him other than capable of all villainy
and meanness; unless indeed you assume that the authors who have handed down to
us these details of him were lying fellows who meant to accuse their hero and
not true historians? But in that case what becomes, to use the language of the
Lover of Truth, of those who " were historians at once most highly educated and
respectful of the truth, namely Damis the philosopher who even lived with the
man in question and Philostratus the Athenian?" For these are the authors who
lay these facts before us, and they are clearly convicted by the light of truth,
since they thus contradict themselves, of being vapouring braggarts and nothing
else, convicted by their inconsistencies of being downright liars, men devoid of
education and charlatans.

XL THE story proceeds to tell us that after all this, Apollonius, liberated from
the court, made up his mind to descend into the cave of Trophonius in Lebadea;
but the people there would not allow him to do so, because they too regarded him
as a wizard. Surely it is legitimate in us to be puzzled, when one compares what
one reads at the beginning of the book of Philostratus, I mean the passage where
he owns that he is puzzled at people having regarded his hero as a wizard, and
expresses his surprise at the circumstance, remarking withal, that "although
Empedocles and Pythagoras and Democritus had consorted with the same Magi
without ever stooping to the magic art, and Plato had derived much from the
priests and prophets in Egypt, and had mingled their ideas with his own
discourses, without ever being held by anyone to be a magician, yet men so far
had failed to recognise his hero as one inspired by the purest wisdom, but had
long since accounted him a magician and still did so, because he had consorted
with the Magi of Babylon and the Brahmans of India, and the Naked sages of
Egypt." What answer then can we make to him, except this?-- My good fellow, what
was your hero up to in this line, for him alone to have been regarded both long
ago and now as a wizard in contrast with these great men; who though, as you
admit, they had made trial of the same teachers as he, yet were eminent both in
the age in which they nourished, and also bequeathed to posterity in their
philosophy a gift of such excellence that its praises are still sung. Is such a
contrast possible, unless he was caught by men of good sense meddling with
things that were unlawful? There are still among our contemporaries those who
say that they have found superstitious devices dedicated in the name of this
man; though I admit I have no wish to pay attention to them. However as regards
his death, although Philostratus follows in his book the accounts of earlier
writers, he declares that he knows nothing of the truth; for he says that people
in Ephesus related that Apollonius died there, while others said that he died in
Lindus after entering the temple of Athene, and others in Crete; and after
shedding so much doubt on the manner of his end, he yet inclines to believe that
he went to heaven body and all. For he says that after he had run into the
temple, the gates were closed and a strange hymn of maidens was heard to issue
from the building, and the words of their song were: " Come, come, to heaven,
come." But he says that he had never come across any sepulchre or "cenotaph of
his hero, although he had visited the greater part of the whole earth; but what
he would like us to believe is that his hero never encountered death at all, for
on a former occasion when he is canvassing the manner in which he died, he adds
the proviso: " If he did die." But in a later passage he declares in so many
words that he went to heaven. This is why he avows, no less in the exordium of
his book than throughout it, that it was by reason of his being such as he was
that he wooed philosophy in a diviner manner than Pythagoras and Empedocles.

XLI

ALTHOUGH then the limits of our discourse are reached in the above, I would yet,
if you will allow me, raise a few points in connexion with the Fates and with
destiny, in order to ascertain what aim his work has in view, when throughout
its argument it sets itself to demolish our responsibility, and to substitute
for it necessity, and destiny and the Fates. For in this way we shall finally
and completely refute the tenets professed by the author and prove their
falsity. If then, according to the views of true philosophy, every soul is
immortal, for that which is perpetually moving is immortal, whereas that which
moves another, and is itself moved by others, in admitting a cessation of its
own movement, admits a cessation of life; and if responsibility depends on
personal choice, and God is not responsible, then what reason is there for
concluding that the nature, which is ever in movement, is actuated against its
will, and not rather in accordance with its own choice and ' decision; for
otherwise it would resemble a lifeless body in being moved by some outside
agency, and would be as it were a puppet pulled by strings hither and thither.
The nature which ever moves itself would, on such ail hypothesis, effect nothing
of its own initiative and movement, nor could it refer to itself the
responsibility of its actions." In such a case, when it reasoned of truth it
would surely not be worthy of praise; nor on the other hand be blameworthy,
because it was filled with vice and wickedness? Why then, I would ask you, my
good fellow, do you revile Euphrates and find fault with him, if it is not of
his own initiative, but by the force of destiny, that he devoted himself to
gain, as you pretend, and neglected the philosophical ideal? And why do you
insult wizards, by calling them false sophists, if they are dragged down by the
Fates, as you believe, to their miserable life? And why do you keep in your
vocabulary at all such a word as vice, when any evil man is unjustly condemned
by you, since it is by necessity that he fulfils his destined term? And again on
what principle do you solemnly enroll yourself a disciple of the wonderful
teacher Pythagoras, and insist on praising one who, instead of being a lover of
philosophy, was a mere toy in the hands of the Fates? And as for Phraotes and
Iarchas, the philosophers of the Indians, what have they done to win from you
the reputation of being gods, unless the glory they acquired by their culture
and virtue was their own? And in the same way with regard to Nero and Domitian,
why do you not saddle upon the Fates and on Necessity the responsibility for
their unbridled insolence, and acquit them of all responsibility and blame? But
if as you say a man who is destined to be a runner, or an archer or a carpenter,
cannot avoid being so, surely also if it has been destined that a man should be
a wizard, and that being his character, a magician or a murderer and a wicked
man and a reprobate, come what will, he must of necessity end by being such a
person. Why then do you go wandering about, preaching the virtues to those who
are incapable of reform? Why do you blame those who are the monsters they are,
not of their own choice, but by predestination? And why too, if it was decreed
by fate that you yourself being of a divine nature should transcend the glory of
kings, did you visit schools of teachers and philosophers, and trouble yourself
about Arabians and about the Magi of Babylon, and the wise men of India? For in
any case surely, even without your holding communications with them, the decrees
of the Fates were bound to be fulfilled in your case. And why do you vainly cast
before those whom you consider to be gods, your honey-cake and your
frankincense, and putting on the cloak of religion encourage your companions to
be diligent at their prayers? And what do you yourself in your prayers ask of
the gods, inasmuch as you admit that they too are subject to Destiny? Nay you
ought to make a clean sweep of all the other gods, and sacrifice to Necessity
alone and to the Fates, and pay your respects rather to Destiny than to Zeus
himself. In that case no doubt you would have no gods left; and rightly too,
seeing that they are not even able to help mankind. And again, if it were
decreed by fate that the citizens of Ephesus should be afflicted with
pestilence, why did you sanction the opposite and so try to thwart destiny? Nay,
why did you dare to transcend destiny, and as it were raise a trophy over her?
And again in the case of the maiden raised to life, the thread of Clotho had
reached its limit, and that being so why did you, when she was dead, bind a
fresh thread on the spindle, by coming forward yourself in the role of the
saviour of her life? But perhaps you will say the Fates drove you also on to
these courses. Yet you cannot say that they did so out of respect to your
merits; far from it, seeing that before you passed into this body of yours, you
were yourself, by your own account, a sea-faring man who spent his life upon the
waves, and that of necessity, for even this could not have been otherwise. There
is therefore nothing remarkable about your earliest birth, or your upbringing,
or your education in the circle of arts, or in your wise self-discipline in the
prime of your life, or of your training . in philosophy; for it was after all
some necessity of . the Fates that led you to Babylon, and you were as it were
driven on to associate with the sages of India; and it was not your own will and
choice, nor a love of philosophy either, but Fate that led you in her noose to
the Naked sages of the Egyptians, and to Gadeira and to the pillars of Hercules;
and it was she who forced you to wander about the eastern and western oceans,
and along with her spindles whirled you idly around. But if anyone admits, as
they must, that his endowment with wisdom was due to these causes, then it was
destiny that was responsible for them; and we must no longer reckon your hero
among those who are fond of learning, nor can we with any pretence of reason
admire a philosophy which was provided, not intentionally, but by necessity, for
him. And we shall have to class on one and the same level, according to him,
Pythagoras himself with any pretentious and abject slave, and Socrates himself,
who died in behalf of philosophy with those who accused him and clamoured for
his death. Diogenes, too, with the golden youth of Athens; and, to sum up, the
wisest man will not differ from the most imprudent, nor the unjustest from the
justest, nor the most abandoned from the most temperate, nor the worst of
cowards from the greatest of heroes; for they have all been demonstrated to be
playthings of destiny and of the Fates.

XLII

HOWEVER, the herald of truth will raise his voice against such arguments, and
say: O ye men, mortal and perishable race, whither are you drifting, after
drinking the unmixed cup of ignorance? Be done with it at last, wake up and be
sober; and, raising the eyes of your intelligence, gaze upon the august
countenance of truth. It is not lawful for truth to be in conflict and
contradiction with herself; nor that of two pronounced opposites there should
exist but one and the same ground and cause. The universe is ordered by the
divine laws of the providence of God that controls all things, and the peculiar
nature of man's soul renders him master of himself and judge, ruler and lord of
himself; and it teaches him through the laws of nature, and the tenets of
philosophy, that of things which exist some are within our own control, but
others not; and within our control is everything which comes into being in
accordance with our will and choice and action, and these are naturally free,
unhindered and unimpeded. But such things as are not in our control are weak and
servile, restrained and alien to ourselves; for example, our bodily processes
and external objects which are both lifeless and destitute of reason, and in
their manner of existence wholly foreign to the proper nature of a reasonable
living creature. As for things which are in our control, each one of us
possesses in the will itself alternative impulses of virtue and vice; and while
the principle which controls the universe and governs it executes its rounds in
direct accordance with nature, it is at the same time always accompanied by a
justice which punishes infractions of the divine law; but for the motives on
which we act the responsibility lies not with destiny nor fate, nor with
necessity. It lies with him who makes the choice, and God is not to be blamed.
If therefore anyone is so foolhardy as to controvert the fact of our
responsibility, let him be duly exposed; and let him openly proclaim that lie is
an atheist, seeing that he does not recognise either providence or God or
anything else except the Fates and necessity. And let him bare-headed enumerate
the consequences of these doctrines, let him cease to call anyone wise or
foolish, just or unjust, virtuous or vicious, or charlatan; let him deny that
anyone is divine in our humanity, that there is any philosophy, any education,
in a word any art of any kind, or science, let him not call anyone else by
nature good or evil, but admit that everything whatever is whirled round in an
eddy of necessity by the spindles of the Fates. Let such a person then be
registered as an atheist and impious man in the tribunal of the pious and of
philosophers. And if anyone under the cloak of other opinions undertakes to
entertain ideas of Providence and of the gods, yet , in addition to these
champions the cause of Destiny and Fate, so upholding conflicting and opposed
opinions, let him be classed among the senseless and condemned to pay the
penalty of his folly. This then is so. But if after this there still remain
those who are disposed to register this man's name in the schools of
philosophers, it shall be said that, even if they succeed in clearing him from
the filth thrown by others, nay in disentangling him from the pinchbeck
properties in which the author of this book has wheeled him in upon the stage,
we shall raise no objection to their doing so. At the same time if anyone
ventures to overpass the limits of truth and tries to deify him as no other
philosopher has been deified, he will at the best, though unawares, be rubbing
into him the accusation of wizardry; for this work of pretentious sophistry can
only serve, in my opinion, to convict him, and lay him open in the eyes of all
men of sense to this terrible accusation. This text was transcribed by Roger
Pearse, 4th January 2002. All material on this page is in the public domain -
copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: AGAINST HIEROCLES - PREFACE
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Against Hierocles - Preface to the Online Edition The text
online is the translation of F.C. Conybeare, from the Loeb edition of 1912. It
is to be found in volume 2 of Philostratus, Life of Apollonius of Tyana, as an
appendix, pp.404-605. The novel of Philostratus came into prominence in the
early years of the fourth century when Hierocles, governor of Alexandria and
then Bithynia, wrote a work 'to the Christians', as if to a friend, called
Philalethes (Lover of Truth - λογος φιλαληθης προς τους χριστιανους). In this he
proposed to set the semi-mythical Apollonius up as a superior rival to Christ; a
tactic drearily familiar from polemic of all kinds down the years since.
Hierocles then persuaded the emperor Diocletian to order the extermination of
the Christians, and himself carried out bestial cruelties against them (see
Lactantius, De Mort. Pers. 16, and Eusebius, Mart. Pal. 5).

Eusebius' response discusses the novel of Philostratus in detail. The work seems
to have been written between 311-313, or even earlier. However Eusebius nowhere
refers to it in his subsequent writings. The work is referred to by Photius in
his Bibliotheca in the 9th century as codex 39. The work is preserved the famous
'Arethas' codex, held at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, where it has the
shelfmark Codex Parisinus Graecus 451 (A). This manuscript was copied at the
request of Archbishop Arethas of Caesarea in 914, and was designed as a
collection of apologetic works from earliest times down to Eusebius. (See MSS of
Eusebius PE for details). It is often the only manuscript for many of the second
century apologists, although it does not contain Justin, Theophilus, the letter
to Diognetus or Hermias. Also present in Codex Marcianus Graecus 343 (s.XI), a
copy of the text in A.

Roger Pearse

19th July 2002. This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 19th July 2002. All
material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: CHRONICON - BOOK 1 TRANSLATED FROM ARMENIAN
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronicle, Book 1 (2008) [Translated by Robert Bedrosian]
Eusebius' Chronicle

[1] I have perused diverse histories of the past which the Chaldeans and
Assyrians have recorded, which the Egyptians [g1] have written in detail, and
which the Greeks have narrated as accurately as possible. [These works] contain
[information about] the times of kings and Olympiads (which translates
"athletes"), about the brave deeds which were performed by barbarians and
Greeks, by Aryans and non-Aryans [i.e., by peoples inside and outside the
Iranian cultural world], and about the marvelous accomplishments of their
generals, sages, braves, poets, storytellers, and philosophers. I thought it
would be appropriate to write down everything in brief, especially the
beneficial and important things, and further to put adjacent to [these accounts]
the history of the Hebrew patriarchs as revealed in the Bible. And thus we might
establish how long [g2] before the life-giving revelation [of Christ] Moses and
the Hebrew prophets who succeeded him lived and what they, filled with the
divine spirit, said before [the time of Christ]. In this fashion it might be
possible to recognize easily when the braves of each nation appeared [compared
with] when the celebrated Hebrew prophets lived and, one by one, who all their
leaders were [g3].

Permit me, right at the outset, to caution everyone against [believing that]
there can be complete accuracy with respect to chronology. Indeed, we would
benefit by contemplating what that wise Teacher told his acquaintances: "It is
not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own
authority" [Acts 1:7]. It seems to me that [Jesus], as God and Lord, delivered
this succinct verdict not solely regarding the end of the world but about all
times, in order to discourage those who would dare attempt such a futile
undertaking [g4].

Let us also, in our own words, confirm the accuracy of the Teacher's dictum, for
it is not possible to know unerringly the chronology of the entire world, not
from the Greeks, not from the barbarians, not from other [peoples], not even the
from the Hebrews. We would be pleased if just two points were taken from our
words. First, do not be deceived into believing, as others do, that chronology
[always] can be precisely determined. Second, despite this, to the extent that
it is possible, use clarity to recognize the nature of the investigation which
confronts you, and then proceed resolutely.

It should come as no surprise that the Greeks are absent [from recording
information about events in antiquity] for a long period, since [during that
time] they corrupted themselves with diverse forms of iniquities; moreover, for
a long period, until Cadmus' generation, they were entirely unlettered since,
they say, it was Cadmus who first brought them an alphabet from the land of the
Phoenicians. Quite justly did that Egyptian reproach Solon in Plato's book
[Timaeus 22b] when he remarked: "Oh, Solon, you Greeks are always [like]
children [g5]. Nothing resembling an old man may be found amongst you. [And
thus] it is impossible to study ancient history from you." On the other hand,
the Egyptians relate many fabulous accounts [about ancient times], as do the
Chaldeans, since they reckon their literacy embraces more than 400,000 years.
The Egyptians have written extensively about [false] gods and their offspring,
about ghosts and spirits of the dead, and of other [mortal] kings, in
fable-like, delirious ravings [g6].

[2] Why should I, who reveres truth above all, pore over this type of material
in such detail? [And why should I] who so loves the Hebrews point out, in the
appropriate places, where I have found inconsistencies [in their accounts]? [I
have done it] to reprove the boasting of vainglorious chronographers.

I shall approach the task before me with writings which have come down from the
past. First I shall present a chronology of the Chaldeans, then [I shall present
a list of] the kings of the Assyrians, then the Medes, then the Lydians,
followed by the Persians. In the next section [I shall present] the entire
chronology of the Hebrews in order. [This will be followed by] a third section
[describing] the period of the Egyptian dynasties [g7] including the Ptolemids
who reigned after Alexander of Macedon in Egypt and Alexandria. Next, one by
one, I will introduce the beginnings of other [nations], how the Greeks tell
their own history. First, [I will tell] about those ruling in Sicyon then in the
land of the Argives, then in the city of Athens itself, from first to last,
those in Lacadaemon, those in Corinth, and whoever else ruled over any other
part of the sea.

I shall add to this a description of the Olympiads, which the Greeks wrote. Once
all these [parts] have been set forth, I shall record, one by one, the first
kings of the Macedonians, and the Thessalonians, followed by the those of the
Assyrians and Asiatics who ruled after Alexander [g8]. Next, each topic in a
separate segment, I will describe those descendants of Aeneas who, after the
capture of Ilium, ruled over the Latins later called Romans; then the
descendants of Romulus who built the city of Rome; then the successors of Julius
Caesar and Augustus who became emperors and the consuls who ruled in the
intervening years.

I will convert all the material collected about all these folk into
chronological tables. Including, from the beginning, who from each nation ruled
as king and for how long, I will put these [facts] into separate [chronological
tables] together with the number of years involved. In this way, if we need to
know who ruled and for how long [that information] will be easily and quickly
accessible. Furthermore, the valiant deeds of each kingdom, which all nations
have transmitted, I will place in summary form within [my account] of [these]
kingdoms.

However, that [material] will be in the second part of this work. But at
present, in the next section, let us examine what the Chaldeans' ancestors have
related about [their own] chronology [g9].

[3] How the Chaldeans chronicled [their past], from Alexander Polyhistor; about
their writings and their first kingdom.

Here is what Berosus related in Book One, and in Book Two what he wrote about
the kings, one by one. He mentions the period when Nabonassarus was king, but
merely records the kings' names not saying anything precise about their deeds,
perhaps because he did not consider that they had done anything worth
recalling--beyond [g10] [providing] a list of their names. This is how he
begins. Apollodorus says that Alorus was the first Chaldean king to rule in
Babylon, reigning for 10 sars. A sar consists of 3,600 years, and this [figure
may be] broken down into [units called] ners and soses. He says that one ner is
600 years, while one sos is 60 years. This is how the [Chaldean] ancients
reckoned [periods of] years. Having stated this, he proceeds to enumerate the
kings of the Assyrians, one by one. There were 10 kings from the first king,
Alorus, to Xisuthrus. He says that during [the latter's] time the first great
flood occurred, which Moses also mentions. He states that the reign of those
kings consisted of a total of 120 sars, making a total [in our denomination] of
2043 [Arm. sxd] myriad years. He describes them one by one thusly [g11].

He says that on the death of Alorus, his son, Alaparus, [ruled for] 3 sars;
after Alaparus, the Chaldean Almelon, from the city of Pautibiblon [?
Bad-tibira], ruled for 13 sars; after Almelon, Ammenon, from the city of
Pautibiblon, ruled for 12 sars. Now in his day a creature called Idotion, having
the [composite] shape of a man and a fish, emerged from the Red Sea. After
[Ammenon], Amegalarus, from the city of Pautibiblon, ruled for 18 sars, and
after him, the shepherd Daonus, from the city of Pautibiblon, ruled for 10 sars
[g12]. In his day, once again there emerged from the Red Sea four hybrid beings
(Arm. yushkaparik) of the same man-fish type [as Idotion]. Then Edovanchus, from
the city of Pautibiblon, ruled for 18 sars. During his reign once again another
sort of man-fish being emerged from the Red Sea, called Odacon. He says that all
of them [g13] were from Oannes, [and] he concisely describes them, one by one.
Then the Chaldean Amenpsinus, from [the city of] Lanchara ruled. His reign
lasted for 10 sars. Then the Chaldean Otiartes from Lanchara ruled. His reign
lasted 8 sars. Upon the death of Otiartus, his son Xisuthrus ruled for 18 sars.
The great deluge occurred in his time. Altogether [this makes] 10 monarchs
[ruling for a total of] 100 and 20 sars. [This material] may be presented as
follows [g14]:

1

Alorus 10 sars

2

Alaparus 3 sars

3

Almelon 13 sars

4

Ammenon 12 sars

5 Amegalarus 18 sars

6

Daonus 10 sars

7 Edovanchus 18 sars

8 Amempsinus 10 sars

9

Otiartes 8 sars

10 Xisuthrus 18 sars This makes a total of 10 kings [ruling for] [g15] a total
of 120 sars. And they say that 120 sars equal 2043 myriad years, assuming that a
sar consists of 3,600 years.

Such are the figures related in Alexander Polyhistor's book. And if a person
regards this as accurate history, and accepts as valid [reigns lasting] for such
myriads of years, then [that person] would have to believe other incredible
material found in the same book. Howbeit, I will relate what that same Berosus
relates in the aforementioned historical romance, and will resume their previous
[thread] which [Alexander] Polyhistor has put in his own book. One after the
other he recounts these types of things [g16].

[4] More apocryphal Chaldean history [taken] from the same book of Alexander
Polyhistor about the Chaldeans. In the first of [his] Babylonian books, Berosus
claims that he lived in the time of Philip's [son] Alexander, and that he wrote
based on numerous books which were kept carefully in Babylon [describing a
period of] 215 [g17] myriad years, [such as] chronologies, historical accounts,
the Creator's making of Heaven and Earth and the Seas, and [information] about
kings and their deeds. First, he says, the country of the Babylonians was
established on the Tigris [River] and the Euphrates passed through it. The
country brings forth of its own accord wild wheat and barley, lentils, peas, and
sesame; and in the tranquil, swampy rivers a type of edible tuber is found which
they call gongk' (Arm. "turnip"), having the [same] virtue as barley bread. Also
found there are dates and apples as well as various other fruits. There are fish
and birds, wild fowl and marsh fowl. There are sections by the Arab areas devoid
of water and fruit, while opposite the Arabs' land are areas which are
mountainous and fruit-bearing. In Babylon dwell a multitude of foreign peoples
from the Chaldean land [g19], and they live wantonly like beasts and wild
animals.

Now it happened that in the first year, in the confines of Babylonia, there
emerged from the Red Sea an awesome creature which was named Oannes. As
Apollodorus relates in his book, [this being] had the complete body of a fish.
Yet by the fish's head was another appropriate [human] head, and by the tail
were [a pair of] human feet, and it could speak human language [g20]. A
picture/likeness of [Oannes] has been preserved to this day. He further states
that this creature kept company with humans during the day, completely
abstaining from any kind of food, instructing people in letters and the
techniques of different arts [including] city and temple [building], knowledge
of laws, the nature of weights and measures, how to collect seeds and fruits;
indeed, he taught humankind everything necessary for domestic life on earth.
From that time on no one [individual] has discovered more. Now when the sun went
down, the Oannes creature once again returned to the sea, remaining until
morning in the vast expanse of the waters. Thus it lived the life of an
amphibian [g21]. Subsequently other similar creatures came forth, as the book of
the kings makes clear. Furthermore it is said that Oannes wrote about deeds and
virtues, giving humankind words and wisdom.

[5] There was a time, he says, when all was dark and water. And there were other
sorts of creatures [on the earth]. Half of them could reproduce themselves
[asexually], while there were others which procreated and bore humans with two
wings, others with four wings and two faces, with one body and two heads, male
and female, and [others] having both male and female natures [combined]. Other
humans had the legs of goats, horns on their heads, others had horses' hooves.
Others had the rear half of a horse and the front half of a human. Some had the
hybrid [Arm. yushkaparik] appearance of a horse and a bull. Also born [g22] were
bulls with human heads, dogs with quadripartite bodies having the flippers of a
fish and a fish's tail sprouting from the hindquarters. [There were] horses with
dogs' heads as well as humans and other creatures with horses' heads and/or
human forms and the extremities of fish. In addition there were diverse sorts of
dragon-shaped creatures, hybrid fish, reptiles, snakes, and many types of
astonishing creatures of differing appearance. The pictures of each of them are
preserved at the temple of Belus. All of them were ruled over by a woman named
Markaye' who was called T'aghatt'ay in Chaldean. The Greek translation of
T'aladday is "sea" [g23]. Now while all of these mixed [creatures] were arising,
Belus attacked. He cut the woman [i.e. the sea] in two, making half the sky and
the other half the earth, and he killed the creatures in it. Thus [information]
about the natural world is expressed in the form of an allegorical fable which
means that initially there existed only water and moisture and the creatures in
it. Then that deity cut off its head and another deity took the blood which
dripped from it, mixed it with soil, and created humankind. Thus they became
wise and partook of the thoughts of the gods [g24]. As regards Belus, which
translates into Greek as Dios and into Armenian as Aramazd, he split the
darkness in two, separating heaven and earth from each other, and then smoothed
and fashioned the world. [Those] creatures which could not endure the strength
of the light perished. Then Belus looked at the world, [both] the desert [parts]
and the fruitful [parts], and gave an order to one of the gods to take [some of]
the blood which was dripping down from his own severed head and to mix it with
soil and to create humans, other animals, and beasts which could withstand this
air. Belus also established [g25] the sun, the moon, and the five wandering
stars. According to [Alexander] Polyhistor, this is what Berosus relates in his
first volume. In the second volume he provides [information] about the reigns of
the ten kings individually, which we have already treated. [This portion, from
Oannes to Belus,] extends [the account back] more than 40 myriads.

[6] Surely if anyone regards as veracious the Chaldean [account encompassing]
such a huge number of years, then that person will also accept [as true] other
parts of their fallacious history. [The Chaldean account] simply defies reason
and is apocryphal, no matter how it is interpreted. [Even] if someone should
accept [the account], then [g26] that [individual] should not accept [the
Chaldean] calculation of time without examination. If, according to their
chronology, there were [really] so many thousands of years amassed, and if the
successors of these [early] peoples [performed] their acts and deeds over a
similar extended period, and if only 10 kings could have lived for so many
myriads of years, who would believe that there might be any truth in such things
and fables? Now it is possible that the sars we cited [earlier] represented a
shorter interval of time than what others have assigned to them. For example,
the ancestors of the Egyptians spoke of a lunar cycle, that is, a month
contained 30 days [g27], which they referred to as a "year." Others referred to
three-month periods as "hours." I am saying that they styled seasons of the year
and three-month intervals as "years." Consequently it could be the same sort of
thing when the Chaldeans spoke of sars.

Accordingly, [the Chaldeans] considered that there were just 10 generations
[g28] from Alorus whom they considered their first king until Xisuthrus. They
relate that the great Flood occurred in the latter's day. Furthermore Moses, in
the Hebrew books, says that there were 10 generations before the Flood, and each
generation before the Flood is described, one by one. The Hebrew history reckons
2000 years for those 10 generations. Assyrian histories also detail the same
number of generations as the writings of Moses do, though not embracing the same
amount of time, since they reckon the 10 generations lasting for 120 sars,
equaling 2043 myriad years.

Now for those of you seeking the truth in this matter [g29] it is simple to
accept that Xisuthrus is the same [individual] as the man the Hebrews call Noah,
during whose lifetime the great [g30] Flood occurred. The book of [Alexander]
Polyhistor describes [the Flood] in the following manner.

[7] Alexander Polyhistor on the Flood, from the same book we just mentioned.

He says that upon the death of Otiartes, his son Xisuthrus ruled for 18 sars,
during which time the great Flood occurred. His text relates the details as
follows.

He says that Chronos--who is called the father of Aramazd [Jupiter] and, by
others, Time--came [to Xisuthrus] in his sleep and revealed to him that on the
15th [g31] of the month of Desios, which is the [Armenian] month of Marer
[December/January], humankind would perish in a flood. [Chronos] commanded that
the entire book [of Oannes?]--the beginning, middle, and ending--be taken and
buried [for safety] at Heliopolis ("the city of the sun"), in Sippar. [He also
commanded him] to fashion a ship and to go inside it with his family [g32] and
closest friends, and to put inside [the ship] provisions and drink, animals,
birds, and quadrupeds, and to be completely ready to set sail. Then [Xisuthrus]
inquired where he should sail the ship, and [Chronos] replied that he should
[just] pray to the gods [and] that all would be well for humanity. And so
[Xisuthrus] saw to building the ship which [measured] 15 stadia in length and
two stadia in width [g33].

After doing all that he was bidden, [Xisuthrus] entered the vessel with his
wife, children, and closest friends. Then the deluge came. As soon as it had
receded, Xisuthrus released some birds. However, when they were unable to find
anything to eat or any place to perch, he took them back on board. A few days
later he again released some birds, and they too returned to the ship, [but this
time] their claws were covered with mud. Finally he released them a third time,
and this time they did not return to the ship. By this Xisuthrus realized that
the ground had become visible. He opened a side of the ship's deck and observed
that the boat had landed on some mountain. He emerged with his wife, a daughter,
and the [g34] navigator, and worshipped ("kissed the ground"). He fashioned an
altar and made sacrifice to the gods. And thereafter he and those who descended
with him from the ship did not appear to anyone. Those [people] who had remained
on board and had not emerged with Xisuthrus subsequently descended and sought
for him, circulating around shouting out his name. But Xisuthrus never again
appeared to them. However [his] voice came to them from the air and commanded
[g35] that they should worship the gods, and that he, because of his worship of
the gods, had gone to dwell where the gods dwelled. His wife, daughter, and the
ship's pilot shared in this honor. He also ordered them to return to Babylon,
for so the gods had commanded, and to excavate and remove the manuscripts buried
at the city of Sippar and give them [back] to humanity. As for the place where
they emerged [from the ship], it was the land of the Armenians.

Now when [the people] heard all this, they offered sacrifices to the gods, and
then went to Babylon on foot. As for that ship which landed in Armenia, they say
that to the present a small portion of it [g36] remains in the Korduats'
Mountains [RB: south of Lake Van] in the land of the Armenians. Some [folk]
scrape off the naphtha which had been used as a sealant for the ship and make
amulets from it to treat pain. Now [those who disembarked] went and arrived at
Babylon, excavated in Sippar city and removed [manuscripts of] the book. Then
they constructed numerous cities, erected temples to the gods and renewed
Babylon once more. Along with this story, [Alexander] Polyhistor tells the
following story of the building of the tower [of Babel], similar to the account
[found] in the writings of Moses, [almost] to the syllable [g37].

[8] Alexander Polyhistor on the building of the Tower

Sibyl states that the people were united and commenced building the lofty [g38]
Tower, in order to ascend to the heavens. But Almighty God stirred up a wind
which destroyed the Tower, and [God] divided each [of the participants] with
distinct languages. It is for this reason that the city was called Babylon. It
was after the Flood that the Titan Prometheus lived, and stirred up a war with
Cronos. This is sufficient about the building of the Tower.

Polyhistor supplements this [topic] by adding that after the Flood [g39],
Evexius ruled over the Chaldeans for four ners. After him his son, Comosbelus,
held authority for four ners and five soses. Polyhistor counts a total of 86
monarchs from the time of Xisuthrus and the Flood until the Medes captured
Babylon, and he provides the name of each one from Berosus' book. The total for
all of them comes to three myriad, three thousand and ninety-one [33,091] years.
Now after these generations, one after the other, suddenly the Medes massed
troops against Babylon and took it, and set up tyrants of their own
[nationality] there.

Then he enumerates the names of the Median tyrants, 8 of them, ruling for 224
years. Then 11 kings for ...years; then Chaldeans again, 49 kings for 458 years;
then 9 Arab kings for 245 years. After this period he writes that Shamiram
[Semiramis] ruled the Assyrians. Then he briefly lists [g40] the names of 45
monarchs, giving them a total of 526 years. He says that after them, the
kingship of the Chaldeans was held by a man named Phulus [Tiglath-Pileser III],
also recalled in Hebrew history as Phulos. They say that he came against the
country of the Jews.

Polyhistor relates that following [Phulus] Sennacherib became king. He is
mentioned by the Hebrew books as ruling during the time of King Hezekiah and the
prophet Isaiah. Scripture mentions in order that "In the fourteenth year of King
Hezikiah, Sennacherib king of Assyria came up against all the fortified cities
of Judah and took them" [2 Kings 18:13]. After this entire narration he
continues with [the information that] [Sennacherib's] son Asordan [Esarhaddon]
ruled after him. Then he proceeds to relate that in that period Hezikiah became
sick. Continuing on, [g41] he states that the king of the Babylonians, Merodach
Baldan [Marduk II], sent messengers, letters, and gifts to Hezekiah. This is
what the Hebrew books say.

Now the historian of the Chaldeans mentions Sennacherib, his son Asordan,
Marodach Baghdan, and with them Nebuchadnezzar as our passage has done. Here is
his description.

[9] From the same Alexander [Polyhistor] on the deeds and valor of Sennecherib
and Nebuchadnezzar.

After Sennacherib's brother ruled, then Akises reigned over the Babylonians. He
barely held power for 30 days, before he was slain by Maradoch Baladanus [g42].
The latter forcibly ruled for six months until a certain Elibus killed him and
seized power. Now Sennacherib king of the Assyrians, in the third year of his
reign, massed an army, went against the Babylonians, fought them, and triumphed.
He arrested [Elibus] and his associates and had them taken to the country of the
Assyrians. So [Sennacherib] dominated the Babylonians. He then enthroned his son
Asordanios, and he himself returned to the country of the Assyrians.

Now soon thereafter he received word that the Greeks had come to the land of
Cilicia to wage war. [Sennacherib] went there and deployed his troops, brigade
by brigade. He triumphed over the enemy, despite the fact that many of his own
troops were killed. As a memorial to his conquest, he had a statue of himself
erected on the spot and ordered that an account of his bravery and power be
inscribed in the Chaldean language as a memorial for the future. [Polyhistor]
says that [Sennacherib] built the city of Tarsus in the likeness of Babylon, and
named it Tarsin. And he relates that after all his other accomplishments he went
on to rule for 19 years, until he died as a result of a plot hatched by his own
son, Ardamusanus. This is from Polyhistor. The account chronologically is in
harmony with what is [g43] written in Scripture. According to Polyhistor,
Sennacherib ruled during the period of Hezekiah for 18 years; his son succeeded
him for 8 years; Sammuges followed, for 21 years; followed by his brother, for
21 years. Then Nabupalasar ruled for 20 years, followed by Nebuchadnezzar, for
43 years. From Sennacherib up to Nebuchadnezzar the regnal years total 88.

If one examines Hebrew writings, nearly the same [information] will be found.
For following Hezekiah, his son Manasseh ruled over the remaining Hebrews for 55
years. Then Amos [ruled] for 12 years, followed by Josiah, followed by
Jehoiakim. At the beginning of the latter's reign, Nebuchadnezzar came and
besieged Jerusalem and took the Jews captive to Babylon. From Hezekiah to
Nebuchadnezzar there are 88 years, just as Polyhistor calculated from the
Chaldean sources.

After [describing] all this, Polyhistor again turns to the works and deeds of
Sennacherib. The Hebrew sources also refer to his son[s]. And he records them
one by one. They say that the philosopher Pythagoras lived in this period,
during their time. Now following Sammuges, Sardanapallus ruled the Chaldeans for
21 years. He sent an auxiliary army to the patriarch and lord of the Medes,
Azhdahak, [g44] to secure one of his daughters, Amuhean, as a wife for his son
Nebuchadnezzar. Then Nebuchadnezzar ruled for 43 years. He massed troops and
came and took captive the Jews, Phoenicians, and Assyrians. Since the Hebrew
sources are in harmony with Polyhistor here, there is no need to elaborate.

Following Nebuchadnezzar, his son Amilmarudochus ruled for 12 years. In Hebrew
history he is called Ilmaroduchus. After him, Polyhistor says, Neglisarus ruled
the Chaldeans for 4 years, followed by Nabodenus for 17 years. It was during his
reign that Cambyses' son, Cyrus, massed troops and came against the country of
the Babylonians. Nabodenus resisted, was defeated, and took to flight. Cyrus
ruled Babylon for 9 years. However, he died in another battle, in the plain of
Daas. Subsequently Cambyses [II] ruled for 8 years, followed by Darius for 36
years, followed by Xerxes and other Persian kings.

Berosus described the Chaldean kings briefly one by one, and so does Polyhistor.
Now it is quite clear that from the time when Nebuchadnezzar massed troops and
took the Jews captive until the time of Cyrus' rule over the Persians, 70 years
had transpired. Hebrew history also confirms this, considering that they had
been in captivity for 70 years, reckoning [that event] from the first year of
Nebuchadnezzar until the time of Cyrus, king of the Persians [g45].

Abydenus' Chaldean history confirms this. In agreement with Polyhistor, he
relates it as follows.

[10] Abydenus on the first Chaldean kings. So much for an account of Chaldean
wisdom. Now it is said that Alorus was the first to rule over the land of the
Chaldeans as king [g46]. He claimed that the most provident Lord had designated
him as shepherd of [his] people, and he ruled for 10 sars. A sar is 3,600 years,
a ner is 600 years, and a sos is 60 years. Alaparus ruled after him, followed by
Almelon from the city of Pautibiblon. During his reign the second Anidostus
emerged from the sea. [He was a being] like Oannes, who had the appearance of a
semi-divine hero. [Almelon] was followed by Ammenon, then by Amegazarus. Next
the shepherd was Daonus. During his reign, four amphibious beings came on land,
emerging from the sea: Iovdocos, E'newgamos, E'newboghos, and Amenentos [g47].
Anodap'os [, another sea-creature, appeared] during the reign of Edorescho who
ruled after [Daonus]. Other [kings] ruled after him, until Xisuthrus. These are
also recalled by Polyhistor. Now here is what [Abydenus] wrote about the Flood.

Abydenus on the Flood.

After him others ruled, including Xisuthrus. It was to him that Cronos gave
advance warning about a great deluge [g48] of rain [which would begin] on the
15th of the month of Desios, which is [the Armenian month of] Marer. [Cronos]
ordered that all books in the city of Heliopolis, in Sippar, be concealed [i.e.
protected]. Xisuthrus did all this, and wanted to set sail for Armenia, when
suddenly [the prophesy] of the god was realized on the sailors. On the third
day, after the rain had decreased, Xisuthrus released some of the birds to
determine whether land could be found in the midst of so much water. Now [the
birds] flew off [g49] over the limitless expanse of sea but, not finding any
perch, returned to Xisuthrus. [The latter] waited another three days and then
released [some birds] again. [This time] they returned with mud sticking to
their claws. Soon the gods removed [Xisuthrus] from the sight of humankind. The
ship continued on and stopped in the land of the Armenians. The inhabitants of
that land were rewarded with a useful medicine made from the wood [of the ship].

Now it seems to me that it should be evident to everyone that what Abydenus
writes about the Flood is confirmed by Hebrew history. Nor is it surprising if
Greek and Chaldean writers call Noah Xisuthrus or another name, or if they use
their customary "gods" instead of God, or if they are silent about the doves,
replacing them with "birds" [g50]. Such is Abydenus' account of the Flood [based
on] Chaldean history. He also presents the following account of the building of
the Tower, which supports the Mosaic narrative. It is said that people in early
times had become so enamoured of their own power and size, that they even mocked
the gods and wrought foolishness. They began [g51] to construct an enormous
tower in the place now called Babylon. When they neared the gods in heaven, the
winds aided the gods by blowing and causing that gigantic, artful structure to
collapse. The ruins were called Babylon. [If] until that time, [everyone] spoke
the same language, [afterwards] the gods introduced many different languages
among the multitudes [g52]. After this Cronos and the Titans engaged each other
in warfare. [Abydenus] also recalls Sennacherib in the following manner.

[11] Abydenus on Sennacherib. In this period Sennacherib became the 25th to rule
[over the Assyrians]. He conquered and subdued Babylon under his control,
defeated the Greek naval fleet off the coast of Cilicia, and constructed a
temple of the Athenians erecting [there] a bronze monument and inscribing on it
[an account] of his valor. In addition, [Sennecharib] built Tarsus in accordance
with the style and plan of Babylon, for the Cydnus River flows through Tarsus,
just as the Euphrates flows through Babylon.

After [Sennacherib] Nergilus became king, but he was slain by his son Adramelus.
The latter was slain by his brother Axerdis, who shared the same father but not
the same mother. He pursued troops to the city of Byzantium and entered it.
[Axerdis] was the first to muster mercenary troops, one of whom was [g53]
Pythagoras, who became a student of Chaldean wisdom. Axerdis conquered Egypt and
parts of inner Syria. He was succeeded by Sardanapallus.

Saracus was the next king of Assyria. Now when he learned that a motley force
had attacked by sea, he immediately sent [his] general Busalossorus to Babylon.
[This general], however, plotted rebellion and sought the marriage of Amuhean,
daughter of Azhdahak [Astyages], the patriarch of the Medes, to his son,
Nebuchadnezzar. Then he swiftly went against Ninea, that is, the city of
Nineveh. King Saracus was informed of all this and set fire to the palace
[killing himself and] whoever was inside it. Then Nebuchadnezzar took the reigns
of kingship, and surrounded Babylon with a secure wall.

After relating this [material], Abydenus provides an account of Nebuchadnezzar,
which coincides with [what is found in] Hebrew writings [g54].

Abydenus on Nebuchadnezzar.

Now when Nebuchadnezzar took power, he built a wall and triple ramparts around
Babylon in the space of about 15 days. He then conducted the Armakalen River
[away] from the Euphrates and dug a reservoir on the highland above the city of
Sippar which was 40 leagues (hrasax) around and 20 fathoms (girk) deep. And he
constructed gates which could open and always irrigate the plain. These gates
were called E'k'e'tognomonas, to promote [g55] support and enthusiasm for
himself. He also built a wall on the shore of the Red Sea [to protect it] from
the pounding waves. He built the city of Terendos at the entrance to the Arabs'
land. He also decorated the royal court by planting sapling trees, calling this
the Hanging Garden. [Abydenus] presents a detailed description of this so-called
Hanging Garden. The Greeks, he says, regarded [the Hanging Garden] as [one] of
the seven wonders of the world. In another place the same author has this to say
[g56]. In the beginning, he says, everything was water and it was called the
sea. Then Belus lowered [? the waters] and distributed the lands to each
[nation]. He fortified Babylon by surrounding it with walls, but after the
passage of a long time, [the walls] weakened. So Nebuchadnezzar rebuilt them,
and they endured until the time of the rule of the Macedonians, together with
their bronze gates.

Everything that Abydenus relates is confirmed by what Daniel says. [The book of
Daniel, 4:30] describes how Nebuchadnezzar boasted inordinately: "Is not this
great Babylon [g57], which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence
and for the glory of my majesty?" This is how Nebuchadnezzar spoke in [the book
of] the prophet Daniel, since he regarded his power as proof of his goodness.
Now listen to what Abydenus says [about Nebuchadnezzar] being stronger than
Heracles. Here is his account.

Megasthenes says that [g58] Nebuchadnezzar, who was stronger than Heracles,
levied troops and went to Libya and Iberia, which he conquered. He took and
settled some of them on the fore part of the Black Sea coast. He subsequently
relates from the Chaldeans' [accounts] that when he had returned to the royal
court, some deity took control of his mind and spoke [through him] in this
manner: "Oh brave Babylonians, I, Nebuchadnezzar, I predict that grief [g59]
will befall you." He continues on in this vein for a while and then the
historian [tells us] that after this eloquent speech he suddenly disappeared
from sight. Then [Nebuchadnezzar's] son, Amilmardochus, ruled. The latter was
slain by his son-in-law, Niglissarus. [Amilmardochus] left a son named
Labossoracus, who also met with a violent [g60] end. Then Nabonedochus was
invited to take the throne, although it was certainly not his [by right]. When
Cyrus captured Babylon, he granted [Nabonedochus] the marzpanate of the land of
Carmania. King Darius partly expelled him from that land. All this coincides
with Hebrew accounts. For Daniel, in his account of Nebuchadnezzar, relates how
he declined mentally. There is really nothing peculiar about the fact that the
Greeks or Chaldeans disguised his madness by saying that the gods or a demon
(Arm. dew) entered his body and took it over. It is their custom to claim that
such things are caused by gods whom they call demons. All this is [from]
Abydenus [g61].

Similarly Flavius Josephus, the Jewish author of Antiquities provides the
following confirmation of this [g61] [RB: the passage is in Against Apion Book
I, 19-21].

[12] From Josephus' Antiquities about Nebuchadnezzar

He says: I will now describe what is written and narrated about us in the
Chaldean histories one by one. These [accounts] have much in common with our own
[Hebrew] writings. Berosus will attest to these [remarks]. He was a Chaldean by
nationality and known to everyone interested in learning and wisdom, because he
put into the Greek language books on [g62] Chaldean astrology and learning.

Berosus in his book of early times is in agreement with Moses' account of the
flood and the extermination of humankind because of its corruption, and about
the ark in which Noah, the forefather of our people, was spared, and [about how
the ark] rested on the summit of the mountains in the land of the Armenians. One
by one [Berosus] describes these folk and their times, from Noah to
Nabopolassar, who was king of the Babylon and the Chaldeans. After describing
[the latter's] acts and brave deeds, [Berosus] relates how [Nabopolassar] sent
[g63] his son Nebuchadnezzar to the country of the Egyptians and to our land
with an enormous army, since he had been informed that the inhabitants of the
land had rebelled. [Nebuchadnezzar] arrived and subdued everyone, burned and
ruined the Temple in Jerusalem and deported all of our people, settling them in
the country of the Babylonians. Seventy years passed from this catastrophe--the
destruction of the city and the Temple--until the time of the Persian king Cyrus
the First. [Berosus] says that [Cyrus] ruled over the Babylonians, the land of
the Egyptians, the Syrians, Phoenicians, and Arabs surpassing in valor and
bravery all those who preceded him as kings of the Chaldeans and Babylonians.
Here is how Berosus described it.

Nebuchadnezzar's father Nabopolassar learned [g64] that the satrap whom he had
set over the lords of the land of the Egyptians, the regions of the Syrians and
the Phoenician districts had rebelled from him. Now because he himself was not
able to supress [the rebellion], he put part of the troops he had assembled
under the control of his son, Nebuchadnezzar, who had reached maturity [g65],
and dispatched them. Nebuchadnezzar went and defeated the rebel in battle, and
then subdued the land as before. Now it happened that his father Nabopolassar
had become ill in Babylon and had died, after a reign of 21 years.

[13] When, after a long while, Nebuchadnezzar was informed of his father's death
[g66], he settled and arranged affairs in the country of the Egyptians and in
other lands. He entrusted the captives, Jews, Phoenicians, Syrians, and
Egyptians, to some of his friends and ordered them to procede to Babylon with
the heavily-armed troops. Meanwhile he himself [quickly] reached [the city] and
found that his kingdom had been preserved by a certain one of the nobles. And
so, [Nebuchadnezzar] ruled over his entire patrimonial state. He ordered that
the captives be settled in goodly locales in the land of the Babylonians. Then
he took booty from the war and adorned the temples of Bel and the other gods
[g67] with great abundance. He increased [the flow of] water to the city proper
and to the suburbs and secured the place so that no besieger would be able to
divert the river into the city. He added three walls to the exterior of the
city, in addition to the three walls on the inside of the city building half of
baked brick and bitumen and half solely of brick. After enclosing the city with
magnificent walls and splendidly decorating its gates, he constructed yet
another palace near his father's palace [g68] whose size, beauty, and adornment
one can hardly describe. Suffice it to say that it was a splendidly rare
accomplishment, completely finished in fifteen days. The palace had a lofty
turreted portion at the summit, constructed in such a manner as to resemble
mountains and planted with a great variety of trees. This was named the Hanging
Garden and it was created to satisfy the longing of his wife for the airy
mountainous places where she was [g69] raised, in the high mountains of Media.
This is what [Berosus] says about the king. He says a great deal more in the
third book of his Chaldean History. There he lambasts Greek writers for vainly
believing that Babylon was built by [Queen] Semiramis (Shamiram) and for
attributing all the glorious wonders there to her.

One must accept this account from the Chaldean History as trustworthy. There is
additional confirmation from Phoenician archival material which details [events
from the reign of] this Babylonian king. For [Nebuchadnezzar] conquered Syria
and all Phoenicia. The History of Philostratus supports this also where it
describes the siege of Tyre. [Confirmation is also found] in the fourth volume
of Megasthenes' History of the Indians, where he wants to demonstrate that the
aforementioned king of the Babylonians surpassed [g70] Heracles in valor and
bravery, for he mentions that [Nebuchadnezzar] conquered the greater part of
Libya and Iberia. We mentioned earlier that the Temple in Jerusalem had been set
afire by the Babylonian troops sent against [the city]. When Cyrus took the
kingship of Asia, a start was made at rebuilding [the Temple]. Confirmation of
this is found in the writings of Berosus, for in the third book of [his History]
he writes as follows.

Nebuchadnezzar fell ill and died after beginning the construction of the
aforementioned wall. He had reigned for 43 years. His son Amel-Marduk took the
kingship, but he governed in a corrupt and impious manner [g71]. He was murdered
by his sister's husband, Neriglissar, after ruling for two years. Then that
Neriglissar, who had committed the murder, held power for four years. The
latter's son Labesorachus ruled as a child for nine months. However, he suffered
a violent death at the hands of relatives because of his wicked behavior. After
his murder, the conspirators assembled and by general agreement placed a certain
Babylonian named Nabonidus on the throne. He had been a participant in the
conspiracy.

[14] It was during [Nabonidus'] reign that the walls of Babylon by the river
were constructed of baked brick and bitumen. Now in the 17th year of his reign,
Cyrus [g72] came from Persia with an enormous army with which he conquered all
the other kingdoms. Then he turned upon Babylon. When Nabonidus was informed
about his invasion, he resisted him in battle with his troops. Defeated in
battle, [Nabonidus] took to flight and then fortified himself in the city of
Borsippa with a few of his followers.

After Cyrus had taken Babylon, he ordered that the city's outer wall be razed to
the ground because of its [effective] fortification and the trouble it had
presented [to him] in capturing the city. Then he went to besiege Nabonidus in
Borsippa. Nabonidus surrendered right away since he could not endure a siege.
Cyrus was merciful toward him and settled him in the land of Carmania [g73].
Thus Nabonidus was removed from Babylon and sent there, where he spent the
remainder of his life, and died. This is all true and in accord with our
literature, which states that in the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar our temple was
destroyed, and remained ruined for 50 years. In the second year of the kingship
of Cyrus the foundations were laid and in the sixth year of Darius' reign it was
completed.

I will now add to this the Phoenician records, for it will not be superfluous to
add further supporting proofs. The following [citations] are for chronology.
Nebuchadnezzar [g74] besieged Tyre for thirteen years in the days of Ithobal,
their king; after him reigned Baal, ten years; after him these judges were
appointed: Ecnibalus, the son of Baslacus, two months; Chelbes, the son of
Abdeus, ten months; Abbar, the high priest, three months; Sipunostus and
Gerastratus, the sons of Abdelemus, were judges six years; after whom Balatorus
reigned one year; after his death they sent and fetched Merbalus from Babylon,
who reigned four years; after his death they sent for his brother Hirom, who
reigned twenty years. Under his reign Cyrus the Persian flourished. So that the
whole interval is fifty-four years besides three months; for in the seventh year
of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar he began to besiege Tyre, and Cyrus the Persian
took the kingdom in the [g75] fourteenth year of Hirom. So that the records of
the Chaldeans and Tyrians agree with our writings about this temple. The above
is what Josephus has related.

Abydenus, after providing this account of the Chaldean kings, which is similar
to [Alexander] Polyhistor's [account] then separately describes the Assyrian
kings, one by one, as follows.

[15] Abydenus on the Assyrian Kingdom.

Here is the way the Chaldeans describe the kings of their land, from Alorus to
[g76] Alexander. There is no special attention given to Ninus or Semiramis. So
saying, [Abydenus] begins [g77] his account. He says that [the kings of the
Assyrians] were Ninus, son of Arbelus, son of Chaalus, son of Arbelus, son of
Anebus, son of Babus, son of the Assyrian king Belus [g78].

Then [Abydenus] describes [the rulers] one by one, from Ninus and Semiramis to
Sardanapallus, who was the last of them. From the latter until the first [g79]
Olympiad 67 years elapsed. Abydenus wrote about each of the Assyrian kings, one
by one [g80] in this fashion. He is not the sole [author to write about them].
Castor, too, in the summary of his first Chronology describes the Assyrian kings
in the same manner to the refuge of Solomon. From the Summary of Castor, on the
kingdom of the Assyrians.

[Castor] says: "Belus was the king of the Assyrians. During his reign [g81], the
Cyclopes, using thunder and lightning, fought on Zeus' side in the battle Zeus
(Aramazd) fought against the Titans. The kings of the Titans were known at this
time, one of them being Ogygus. [Castor], after some brief words about him,
states that the giants attacked the gods and were defeated after Heracles and
Dionysius--who were descended from the Titans--came to the aid of the gods.

Belus, about whom we spoke earlier, died and was regarded as a god. After him
Ninus ruled the Assyrians as king for 52 years. He married Semiramis. After
[Ninus], Semiramis was the monarch for 42 years. Then Zames, also called Ninyas,
ruled. Then [Castor continues] to mention each of the successive kings of the
Assyrians to Sardanapallus. Shortly we too will provide a list of the names and
regnal years of the monarchs. [Castor], in his Canons, also writes about who
succeeded them [i.e. the rulers after Sardanapallus].

[Castor states:] First we described the kings of the Assyrians starting with
Belus, but since the length of [g82] his reign has not been passed down with
certainty, we have merely recorded his name. We have begun the chronology with
Ninus and ended it with the other Ninus who held the kingship after
Sardanapallus. In this fashion the entire duration [of the kingdom] may be shown
clearly, as well as each individual king's [reign]. Thus it turns out that the
[total] duration [of the Assyrian kingdom] was 1,280 years. This is Castor's
[account]. Diodorus Siculus collected the same [material] in his Library. Here
is what he wrote.

[16] From Diodorus' work on the kingdom of the Assyrians. No testimony of the
first kings of the Asian world [g83] has survived--neither about their deeds nor
[even] their names. Ninus was the first king of the Assyrians found to be worthy
of historical remembrance. [Ninus]' deeds and valor were great, and we shall
endeavor to describe them briefly. And [Diodorus] informs after narrating other
things, that Ninus had a son Ninyas from Semiramis, and that after [Ninus]'
death, Semiramis buried Ninus' body in the palace [out of sight] and stopped
being queen [ruling instead as king]. Then after a bit [Diodorus] says that
Semiramis ruled over all the Asians except the Indians. She died as we
previously stated after living 62 years and [g84] reigning for 42 years.
Separately [Castor] says that after [Semiramis'] death, Ninyas, son of Ninus and
Semiramis assumed power. He maintained peace, not emulating his mother's martial
and industrious manner.

Again, further on, [Diodorus] says that in such a fashion royal power was handed
down from father to son, from generation to generation until [g85]
Sardanapallus. During his reign royal power passed from the Assyrians to the
Medes, after lasting more than 1,300 years as Ctesias of Cnidus observes in his
second book. But [these authors] did not bother to record the names of these
kings or the lengths of their reigns, since they accomplished nothing worthy of
recall. The only event meriting recording [during this interval] was the
[military] assistance sent to the Trojans by the Assyrians under general Memnon,
Tithonus' son [g86].

While Teutamus--the 26th king from Semiramis' son, Ninyas--was the reigning king
of the Asian world the Greeks, under Agamemnon, mustered troops and went to the
land of the Trojans to fight. By this time the Assyrians had ruled over Asia for
more than a thousand years. Priam, king of Troy, in difficulty because of the
war, beseechingly requested [g87] military aid from the Assyrian king. [Teutamus
acceded] and provided [Priam] with 10,000 [troops] from the land of the
Ethiopians, an equal number from the Nusians, and two hundred chariots, [all]
under [the command of] Tithonus' son Memnon. [Diodorus] further states that the
barbarians said that Memnon had performed such feats of bravery that they were
recorded in the royal books.

Sardanapallus, the 35th king from Ninus who [g88] organized the state, became
the final king of the Assyrians. He surpassed all his predecessors in luxurious
living and laziness. After a bit [Diodorus] informs that [Sardanapallus] was so
dissolute that not only did he ruin his own life, but he wreaked the entire
Assyrian state which had endured from time immemorial. Now it happened that
there was a certain Arbaces of Median nationality, a virtuous stout-hearted man
who was a general of the Medes who were sent each year to Ninus' city. In the
course of his military duties, he became friendly with the commander-in-chief of
the Median army, who beseeched him to overthrow the Assyrian government. This is
what Diodorus relates in book two of the Historical Library. Cephalion also
mentions Assyrian rule. Here is what he says [g89].

[17] The historian Cephalion on the Assyrian kingdom.

Let me begin by writing about what others too have written. First Hellanicus
[g90] of Lesbos and Ctesias of Cnidus, followed by Herodotus of Halicarnassus
[have written about the Assyrians]. The first of the Assyrians to rule over the
Asians was Belus' son, Ninus. During his reign many valorous deeds were done.
Then he continues to discuss the birth of Semiramis, Zoroaster the Mage, war
with the king of the Bactrians and the military defeat by Semiramis. Ninus'
reign lasted for 52 years, and then he died. After him [g91] Semiramis ruled. It
was she who built the walls around Babylon in the manner described by many
[writers such as] Ctesias, Zenon, Herodotus and others after him.

Then he describes how Semiramis mustered troops [and went] against India, her
defeat and flight; how she killed her own sons and then was killed by her son
Ninyas, after a reign of 42 years. Then Ninyas assumed power. Cephalion says
that he did nothing worthy of recall. Then he and others describe how for a
thousand years power passed from father to son with none of them [g92] ruling
for less than 20 years. Disliking warfare and strife they were effeminate,
carefully keeping themselves fortified indoors, doing nothing, and seeing no one
except their concubines or effeminate men. It seems to me that Ctesias records
the names of some 23 of these kings, should someone want to know about them in
more detail. But what pleasure or satisfaction would it bring to record the
barbaric names [g93] of despicable, weak savages who displayed neither valor nor
brave deeds?

[Cephalion] says next that 640 years later, Belimus ruled over the Assyrians.
Perseus, [son] of Danae arrived in his land with 100 ships. He was escaping from
Semele's son, Dionysius. After describing the defeat of Perseus by Dionysius,
[Cephalion] says that in later times, when Pannyas [g94] ruled over the
Assyrians, the fleet of the Argonauts sailed up the Phasis River to Mende' in
Colchis. Hercules had [previously] left the ship out of his desire and longing
for Hylas. As they say, he wandered about seeking [Hylas] in Cappadocia.
Furthermore [Cephalion] says that 1000 years had elapsed from Semiramis to King
Mitraeus. If one computes it, [the story of Medea and the period of King
Mitreus] join up. [It was then] that Medea left King Aegeus [?Aeetes] of Colchis
out of lust [for Jason]. Her son was Medus, whence Media, that is the [Armenian
term] Mark' ("Medes"). Moreover that land is called Media, [g95] which is
Marastan [in Armenian]. [Cephalion] says that Teutamus succeeded Mitraeus. The
former also lived according to the customs and laws of the Assyrians. Nothing
new occurred during his reign.

Agamemnon and Menelaeus, the Mycenaeans, mustered troops with the Argives and
went against the city of Ilium while Priam was general of Phrygia. He said: "The
Greek troops [g96] which have come against me have reached your own land. We
have engaged them in battle, sometimes winning, sometimes losing. But now,
behold, my own son Hector has died among many other brave sons. Send us
auxiliary troops under a courageous general." [Cephalion] then describes in
detail how Teutamus sent assistance to him under the generalship of Memnon,
Tithonus' son. However, the Thessalians (T'eghaghats'ik) treacherously killed
him. In another passage [Cephalion] says that Sardanapallus became king of the
Assyrians in the 1,013 th year; and then he describes his destruction. After the
death of Sardanapallus, (V)Arbaces the Mede, destroyed the power of the
Assyrians and transferred rule to the Medes. All this is related by Cephalion.

Here is a list of the Assyrian kings, based on the most trustworthy writings
[g97].

[18] Kings of the Assyrians.

1

Ninus 52 years

They say that he was the first king to reign over all the Asians, except the
Indians. Abraham, patriarch of the Hebrew people, lived during his time.

2 Semiramis 42 years

3 Zhames, also called Ninyas 38 years

4

Arius 30 years

5 Aralius, also called Amyrus 40 years

6 Xerxes, also called Balaeus 30 years

7 Armamithres 38 years

8 Belochus 35 years

9 Balaeas 12 years

10

Aladas 32 years

11 Mamithus 30 years

12 Machchalaeus 30 years

13 Sphaerus 22 years

14 Mamilus 30 years

15 Sparethus 40 years

16 Ascatades 40 years Moses, the law-giver of the Jews, lived during his reign.

17 Amintas 45 years

18 Belochus 45 years His daughter Tratre's, who was also [g98] called
Ak'urartist, ruled in her own stead for 17 years. Dionysius and Perseus lived in
this period.

19 Balatores 30 years

20 Lamprides 32 years

21 Sosmares 8 years

22 Lampares 30 years

23 Pannias 42 years During his reign the fleet of the Argonauts and Heracles
appeared.

24 Sosarmus 19 years

25 Mithraeus 27 years

26 Teutamus 32 years During his reign Ilium was captured.

27 Teutaeus 40 years

28 Theneus 30 years

29 Derusus 40 years

30 Eupalmes 38 years

During his reign David, the prominent king of the Hebrews, lived. It was his son
[g99] Solomon who built the temple in Jerusalem.

31 Laosthenes 45 years

32 Peritiades 30 years

33 Ophrataeus 21 years

34 Ophatanes 50 years

35 Acrazanes 42 years

36 Sardanapallus 20 years

During his reign Lycurgus made laws for the Lacedaemonians. The kings of the
Assyrians were the rulers until this period, when Thespieus, Ariphron's son, was
king of the Athenians.

According to reliable sources, the entire empire of the Assyrians lasted for
1,240 years. Others say that it lasted for 1,300 years. Thonnus Concolerus, who
is called Sardanapallus in Greek, was defeated by Arbaces and Belesius and
committed suicide by fire. From [Sardanapallus] until the first Olympiad, 40
years elapsed.

Once Arbaces had destroyed Assyrian rule, he designated Belesius as king of the
Babylonians. [Arbaces] himself transferred the authority of the Assyrians to the
Medes. Here is [a table of] their [kings'] reigns [g100].

[19] Kings of the Medes.

1 Arbaces (Varbak) 28 years

2 Maudaces 20 years

3 Sosarmus 30 years

4 Articas 30 years

5 Deioces 44 years

6 Phraortes 24 years

7 Ciaxares 32 years

8 Astyages (Azhdahak) 38 years

[g101]. During his reign Cyrus the Persian ruled as king. He deposed Astyages
and destroyed the rule of the Medes, which had lasted 298 years. Other books,
however, record the [list of] Median kings differently [g102].

[20] Kings of the Lydians.

1 Ardys, son of Alyattes 36 years

2 Alyattes 14 years

3

Meles 12 years

4 Candaules 17 years

5

Gyges 35 years

6

Ardys 37 years

7 Sadyattes 5 years

8 Odyartes 49 years

8 Croesus 15 years Cyrus killed Croesus and eliminated the Lydian empire [g103].

[21] Kings of the Persians.

1

Cyrus 31 years

2 Cambyses 8 years

3 Smerdis the Mage 7 months

4 Darius, son of Hystaspis 36 years During his reign the temple in Jerusalem was
rebuilt after the first [temple] was burned down by the Babylonians.

5 Xerxes, son of Darius 20 years

6 Artaxerxes, who was called Longimanus 41 years During his reign Ezra and
Nehemiah were recognized as leaders of the Hebrews [g104].

7

Darius 7 years

8 Artaxerxes 40 years

7

Ochus 26 years

8

Arses 4 years

8

Darius 7 years

[Darius] was slain by Alexander, son of Philip, who ruled over both Persian and
Assyrian states for 12 years. After [Alexander] , Macedonians ruled for 295
years until the death of a certain woman named Cleopatra, who ruled in the 187th
Olympiad [32-29 B.C.]. During her reign, Augustus ruled over the Romans.
[Augustus] was called Sebastos which translates "adorable" [g105]. [Cleopatra
died] in the 15th year of Augustus' reign. Fifty-two years elapsed from that
time until the 202nd Olympiad [29-32 A.D.], and the 15th year of Tiberius
Caesar. From then until the 20th anniversary of Constantine, there are 300
years. Thus far, this much. Let us now turn to the chronology of the Hebrews.

[22] How the Hebrews transmitted [their] chronology.

We shall set out the chronology of the Hebrews, taken from the writings of Moses
and later Hebrew authors, from The Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus
and the chronologies of Africanus.

How the Hebrews chronicled [their history]. In the preceding sections we have
recorded the events and kings of the Chaldeans, Assyrians, Medes and Persians
[g106]. The fact that the Hebrew people derived from the Chaldeans was clearly
demonstrated, since Abraham was Chaldean and his ancestors inhabited that land.
Moreover, the Mosaic writings confirm this [in the following passage [Genesis
11.31]]: "Terah took Abraham his son and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and
Sarah his daughter-in-law, his son Abraham's wife, and they went forth together
from the land of the Chaldeans."

Thus it is fitting that the history of Hebrew antiquities follow our exposition
of Chaldean history. The story they relate about the flood is quite different
from the Greek legendary tale which places the flood during the time of
Deucalion [g107], [an event which occurred] long before Ogyges and the great
flood which the Greeks say occurred in his time. The flood [recounted in
Genesis] took place some 1,200 years before Ogyges' flood, which in turn
preceded Deucalion's flood by 250 years.

There are not a few similarities between the Assyrian and Hebrew writings about
the flood. [For example] they [both] say that there were ten successive
generations before the flood.

After the flood, the human race throughout the entire world was fathered by
[only] three men. All Europe [g108], from Mt. Amanus to the western ocean,
descended from Japheth. [The people of] Egypt, the land of Libya, and all points
westward descended from Ham. The third brother, Shem, fathered [the inhabitants
of] Assyria and all points eastward.

Hebrew scriptures regard Nimrod as the first builder of Babylon, describing [the
matter] in this way [in Genesis 10.8-11]: "Cush became the father of Nimrod".
Cush was an Ethiopian who was considered the father of Nimrod, about whom
scripture says: "He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; therefore it is said,
'Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the Lord'. The beginning of his kingdom was
Babel, Erech, and Accad, all of them in the land of Shinar. From that land
[g109] he went into Assyria and built Nineveh." Nineveh, which is called Ninus
[in Greek], was the first royal city of the Assyrians. It was built by Asshur,
one of the sons of Shem, who, as we said held all the eastern areas.

They say that the sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Aram, and Lud. The
Elamites, the first nation of the Persians, descended from Elam, who also built
the city of Elymais. the Assyrians descended from Asshur who also built the
Assyrian city, Ninus, which was called Nineveh. The Arphaxadians descended from
Arphaxad also called Chaldeans. The Aramaeans, also called Syrians (Asorik'),
descended from Aram. The Lydians descended from Lud. Arphaxad was the father of
Shelah, who was the father of Eber, from whom the name and nation of the Hebrews
derives. Abraham, the patriarch of the Hebrew nation, was the sixth generation
descendant of Eber, in the tenth generation after the flood. This much should be
sufficient to demonstrate in summary fashion that the ancestry of the Chaldeans
and Assyrians is mixed with that of the Hebrews. Consequently it is appropriate
to begin their [Hebrew] chronology close to those others.

[23] Their chronology commences with an account of the fall from grace of our
human race. This occurred [g110] during the time of Adam, the first patriarch,
whose name is synonymous with human kind, since in the Hebrew language "Adam"
means, generally, "man." The period of his life after his expulsion from
Paradise has been recorded by Moses, through the agency of the Holy Spirit.
Moses then lists [Adam's] descendants and their ages through successive
generations [Genesis 5.1-32]. Because of this we can set down a chronology of
the Hebrews from him. But no one can determine when it was that [Adam] dwelled
in that Paradise described in the Bible. It seems to me that the marvelous Moses
alludes to a goodly, godly existence then in a world better than our own, a
place called Paradise where the first man dwelled. [Moses] refers to all of
humanity when he describes Adam's sweet and desirable existence in Paradise
[g111]. Our chronicle will not provide accounts about that existence [in
Paradise] nor about how the Almighty established heaven and earth. This is how
some [chroniclers] have thought [to begin]. Rather, we shall begin from the time
that our human race experienced mortality and from [the time of] our first
ancestor who set out on that path. [That ancestor] was the man named Adam, whose
dying, mortal span of years was calculated in Hebrew literature, for it was from
this point that Hebrew chronology began. Indeed, the Book of Moses [Genesis
3.23] describes it as follows:

"The Lord God sent him (that is, the first man) forth from the garden of Eden,
to till the ground from which he was taken. And he drove Adam out and made him
live outside the comforts of Paradise." Further on it says [Genesis 4.1]: "Now
Adam knew Eve [g112] his wife and she conceived and bore Cain." Our present
chronology will begin at this point. The history of earlier, unknowable times
will be set aside here, because it should be kept distinct from subsequent
[verifiable] history.

There is considerable disagreement among the Hebrews about their own chronology,
so it will be good to commence by examining their differing accounts. By
evaluating and comparing all of them, the truth will be arrived at. The five
books of Moses describe the creation of the world, life before the flood, the
history of the ancients after the flood, the generations of the Hebrews, and the
passing of Moses. The Jews [g113] and the Samaritans, who were foreigners who
came to live among the Jews, have differing versions of the books of the law.
The characters of the Hebrew alphabet used by the Jews differ from those used by
the Samaritans. The correct and original [alphabet] is not the one used by the
[contemporary] Jews, because their descendants corrupted it. Yet there was no
conflict between them [the Hebrews and the Samaritans] until the alteration of
the letters. Furthermore there are numerous disagreements between the two with
respect to chronology, as will become clear in the comparison below. The Greek
translation [of the Bible] also differs from the Hebrew, though not so much from
the Samaritan [version]. There is disagreement [in chronology in the versions]
up to the flood, but thereafter, until the time of Abraham, the versions are in
harmony. The text we use was translated collectively by seventy Hebrew men
[g114] from their language into Greek during the reign of Ptolemaeus
Philadelphus. [Their translation] was placed in the library in the city of
Alexandria, where it was carefully preserved. Now we shall set forth historical
information from each of the versions, one after the other, so that it will be
easy to distinguish the discrepancies. We shall begin with the translation of
the seventy men [the Greek Septuagint] [g115] and see how it treats the
chronology of the period from Adam to the birth of Abraham.

[24] The Septuagint 1. Adam, the first man, was 230 years of age when he
fathered Seth. He lived an additional 700 years, until the 135th year of
Mahalalel.

2. Seth fathered Enosh when he was 205 years of age. He lived an additional 707
years, until the 20th year of Enoch [g116].

3. Enosh fathered Kenan when he was 190 years of age. He lived an additional 715
years, until the 53rd year of Methuselah.

4. Kenan fathered Mahalalel when he was 170 years of age. He lived an additional
740 years, until the 81st year of Lamech.

5. Mahalalel fathered Jared when he was 165 years of age. He lived an additional
730 years, until the 48th year of Noah.

6. Jared fathered Enoch when he was 162 years of age. He lived an additional 800
years, until the 280th years of Noah.

7. Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was 165 years of age. He lived an
additional 200 years, until he was translated in the 33rd year of Lamech.

8. Methusaleh fathered Lamech [g117] when he was 167 years of age. He lived an
additional 802 years. Thus he would have survived the flood by 22 years.
However, [g118] in other versions he died before the flood having lived an
additional 782 years [after Lamech's birth] [g119].

9. Lamech fathered Noah when he was 188 years of age. He lived an additional 535
years. Lamech predeceased his father Methusaleh in the 535th year of Noah
[g120].

10. Noah fathered Shem, Ham, and Japheth when he was 500 years of age. This was
100 years before the flood, which occurred in the 600th year of Noah. He lived
an additional 350 years after the flood, until the 83rd year of Eber. [Thus]
according to the Septuagint, the full total is 2,242 years [for the period from
Adam to the death of Noah].

Now for the Hebrew version of the Jews.

[25] The Jewish [Hebrew Version] 1. Adam fathered Seth when he was 130 years of
age. He lived an additional 800 years, until the 56th year of Lamech [g121].

2. Seth fathered Enosh when he was 105 years of age. He lived an additional 807
years, until the 168th year of Lamech.

3. Enosh fathered Kenan when he was 90 years of age. He lived an additional 815
years, until the 84th year of Noah.

4. Kenan fathered Mahalalel when he was 70 years of age. He lived an additional
840 years, until the 179th year of Noah.

5. Mahalalel fathered Jared when he was 65 years of age. He lived an additional
830 years, until the 234th year of Noah.

6. Jared fathered Enoch when he was 162 years of age. He lived an additional 800
years, until the 366th year of Noah.

7. Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was 65 [g122] years of age. He lived an
additional 300 years until he was translated in the 113th year of Lamech.

8. Methusaleh fathered Lamech when he was 187 years of age. He lived an
additional 782 years, until the [time of the] flood.

9. Lamech fathered Noah when he was 182 years of age. He lived an additional 595
years, dying five years before the flood.

10. Noah fathered Shem, Ham and Japheth when he was 500 years of age, 100 years
before the flood. The flood occurred in the 600th year of Noah. He lived an
additional 350 years after the flood, until the 58th year of Abraham. The total
sum [for this version] is 1656 years.

There is a 586 year discrepancy between this version and the Septuagint. The
difference [g123] is in the number of years each man from Adam to Noah lived
before fathering children. [The versions agree] only for the times of Jared,
Methusaleh, and Lamech. This circumstance suggests to us that the text which we
use [i.e. the Septuagint] is the best. From the longer period assigned to Jared
and his descendants [in the Hebrew version] it is clear that the periods of
their predecessors, similarly, should be the same as in the Septuagint version.
By adding one hundred years the discrepancy observed between the later and more
recent generations in the Hebrew and the Septuagint versions is eliminated. [We
might suggest] the possibility that the descendants [g124] lived longer than
their ancestors. Yet for each man's life, the number of years before his son was
born, and the number of year that he lived afterwards, added together, produces
the same total in the Hebrew version and the Septuagint. It is only the number
of years before their sons were born which is shorter in the Jewish copies.
Therefore we suspect that this was something which the Jews did. They made bold
to shorten the time before the fathering of children to encourage early
marriages. For if these ancestors lived such long lives, marrying early and
fathering children early [g125] as their version clearly states, who would not
want to emulate them by marrying early? The Hebrew version of the Samaritans.

[26] The Samaritan [Hebrew Version] 1. Adam fathered Seth when he was 130 years
of age. He lived an additional 800 years, until the 223rd year of Noah.

2. Seth fathered Enosh when he was 105 years of age. He lived an additional 807
years, until the 335th year of Noah.

3. Enosh fathered Kenan when he was 90 years of age. He lived an additional 815
years, until the 433rd year of Noah.

4. Kenan fathered Mahalalel when he was 70 years of age. He lived an additional
840 years, until the 528th year of Noah [g126].

5. Mahalalel fathered Jared when he was 65 years of age. He lived an additional
830 years, until the 583rd year of Noah.

6. Jared fathered Enoch when he was 62 years of age. He lived an additional 785
years, until the time of the flood.

7. Enoch fathered Methusaleh when he was 65 years of age. He lived an additional
300 years until he was translated in the 180th year of Noah.

8. Methusaleh fathered Lamech when he was 67 years of age. He lived [g127] an
additional 653 years, until the time of the flood.

9. Lamech fathered Noah when he was 53 years of age. He lived an additional 600
years, until the time of the flood.

10. Noah fathered Shem when he was 500 years of age, 100 years prior to the
flood. The flood occurred in the 600th year of Noah. He lived an additional 350
years, until the 83rd year of Eber. The total [for this edition] is 1,307 years.

[The Samaritan Hebrew version] differs from the Jewish Hebrew [version] by 349
years, and from the Septuagint [g128] translation by 935 years. This much, then,
on [the period] before the flood.

Let us advance to the period following this. But first we should mention [again]
the similarity between the Hebrew and the Chaldean sources in describing the
flood and the ark built by Noah. We consider it superfluous to repeat this
account, since we already discussed it in the section on Chaldean history. As we
are writing this chronicle we have received confirmation that the flood rose
above the highest mountains--a contemporary eyewitness account of the veracity
of the account. In our day, [the fossils of] fish were discovered high up Mt.
Lebanon. It happened that while rocks [g129] were being quarried there for
construction in the valley, [the fossils of] various types of ocean fish were
uncovered, pressed into the mud. These [fossils] had been preserved to the
present, thus providing evidence that the old story [of the flood] is credible.
Those who hear this may believe it or not. But now we shall advance [g130].

[Beginning with the second year] after the flood, according to the Septuagint.

[27] The Septuagint 1. Noah's son Shem fathered Arphaxad [g131]. He lived an
additional 500 years, until the 101st year of Peleg [g132].

2. Arphaxad fathered Shelah when he was 135 years of age. He lived an additional
403 years, until the 9th year of Reu [g133].

3. Shelah fathered Eber when he was 130 years of age. He lived an additional
[g134] 406 years, until the 7th year of Serug [g135].

4. Eber fathered Peleg when he was 134 years of age. He lived an additional
[g136] 433 years, until the 38th year of Nahor.

5. Peleg fathered Reu when he was 130 years of age. He lived an additional 209
years, until the [g137] 75th year of Serug. In his time the world was divided
up, just as phaleg means "division" in Hebrew. [Serug] predeceased [g138] his
father. In his day, the tower [of Babel] was constructed, and many languages
sprang out of the one [which everyone had spoken], with each nation speaking a
different tongue. Holy Scripture recounts this [Genesis 11.5-9] as do secular
writings. [For example], Alexander Polyhistor in his writings on the Chaldeans
and Abydenus [in his writings], similarly, describe it. We too mentioned it in
our earlier narration of Chaldean history. Now after Peleg:

6. Reu fathered Serug when he was 135 [g139] years of age. He lived an
additional 207 years, until the 77th year of Nahor.

7. Serug fathered Nahor when he was 130 years of age. He lived an additional 200
years, until the 51th year of Abraham.

8. Nahor fathered Terah when he was 79 years of age. He lived an additional 119
years, until the 49th year of Serug.

Terah fathered Abraham when he was 70 years of age. He lived an additional 135
years, until the 35th year of Isaac [g140].

9. Year one of Abraham. He was the first patriarch of the Jewish people. During
his time Ninus and Semiramis ruled over Assyria and all of Asia.

[According to this version], 942 years transpired from the flood to the first
year of Abraham, 2,242 years transpired from Adam to the flood, for a total of
3,184 years.

Now for the Hebrew version of the Jews, starting with the second year after the
flood.

[28] The Jewish [Hebrew Version] 1. Noah's son Shem fathered Arphaxad and lived
an additional 500 years, until the 50th year of Jacob [g141].

2. Arphaxad fathered Shelah when he was 35 years of age. He lived an additional
403 years, until the 48th year of Isaac.

3. Shelah fathered Eber when he was 30 years of age. He lived an additional 403
years, until the 18th year of Jacob.

4. Eber fathered Peleg when he was 34 years of age. He lived an additional 430
years, until the 79th year of Jacob.

5. Peleg fathered Reu when he was 30 years of age. He lived an additional 209
years, until the 48th year of Jacob.

6. Reu fathered Serug when he was 32 years of age. He lived an additional 207
years, until the 78th year of Abraham.

7. Serug fathered Nahor when he was 30 years of age. He lived an additional 200
years, until the first year of Isaac [g142].

8. Nahor fathered Terah when he was 29 years of age. He lived an additional 119
years, until the 49th year of Abraham.

9. Terah fathered Abraham when he was 70 years of age. He lived an additional
135 years, until the 35th year of Isaac.

Year one of Abraham. From the flood to the first year of Abraham, 292 years
transpired. From Adam, a total of 1,948 years transpired. This [figure] differs
from the [total for the] Septuagint translation by 1,235 years [g143].

Now for the Hebrew version of the Samaritans, starting with the second year
after the flood.

[29] The Samaritan [Hebrew Version] 1. Noah's son Shem fathered Arphaxad.. He
lived an additional 500 years, until the 101th year of Peleg.

2. Arphaxad fathered Shelah when he was 135 years of age. He lived an additional
303 years, until the 39th year of Peleg.

3. Shelah fathered Eber when he was 130 years of age. He lived an additional 303
years, until the 39th year of Reu [g144].

4. Eber fathered Peleg when he was 134 years of age. He lived an additional 270
years, until the 140th year of Reu.

5. Peleg fathered Reu when he was 130 years of age. He lived an additional 109
years, until the 109th year of Reu.

6. Reu fathered Serug when he was 132 years of age. He lived an additional 207
years, until the 77th year of Nahor [g145].

7. Serug fathered Nahor when he was 130 years of age. He lived an additional 100
years, until the 21th year of Terah.

8. Nahor fathered Terah when he was 79 years of age. He lived an additional 69
years, until the 69th year of Terah.

9. Terah fathered Abraham when he was 70 years of age. He lived an additional 75
years, until the 75th year of Abraham.

10. Year one of Abraham. From the flood to the first year [g146] of Abraham
totals 942 years, the same figure that the Septuagint provides. Our [Septuagint]
text and this Samaritan Hebrew text are in harmony regarding the number of years
each man lived prior to fathering a son. They [both] diverge from the Jewish
Hebrew version by 650 years, because, according to the latter, 292 years
transpired from the flood until the first year of Abraham. The most ancient
Hebrew text, which has been preserved in the Samaritan version, agrees with the
Septuagint translation that these men from [the time of the] flood until [the
time of] Abraham fathered sons when they were at least a hundred years of age.
Then who would suggest that their descendants, who lived longer, had fathered
children any sooner than [g147] the period provided in the Septuagint?
Consequently, the rational conclusion is that the [figures provided in the]
Jewish version from Adam to Abraham are in error, except for the three
generations beginning with Jared, and that the Samaritan version is also in
error, but only from Adam to the flood, because from the flood to Abraham [the
Samaritan version] is in agreement with the Septuagint translation.

[30] Moreover it is obvious that the Hebrew Jewish version is incorrect from the
fact that by its calculations Adam and Noah were alive at the same
time--something [g148] which no other account proposes. If, according to the
Jewish scriptures, there were 292 years from the flood until Abraham, and Noah
lived an additional 350 years after the flood, it is clear that Noah was alive
until the 58th year of Abraham. Furthermore it is possible to show that the
Jewish version is unreliable in another way, because it says that the
generations before Abraham were about 30 years old when they fathered sons,
while it makes the generations after Abraham considerably older when they
fathered sons.

Thus it is patently clear that the Septuagint was translated from old and
accurate Hebrew copies [g149], and is the most appropriate text for us to use in
our present Chronicle, especially [g150] since the church of Christ, which has
spread throughout the world, supports only this version and since the apostles
and disciples of Christ used and transmitted this version. In the Septuagint
[version], 2,242 years transpired from Adam until the flood, and 942 years
transpired from the flood until the first year of Abraham, making a total of
3,184 years. In the Jewish Hebrew [version], 1,656 years transpired from Adam
until the flood, and 292 years transpired from the flood until the first year of
Abraham, making a total of 1,948 years. In the Samaritan Hebrew [version], 1,307
years transpired from Adam until the flood, and 942 years transpired from the
flood until the [g151] first year of Abraham, making a total of 2,249 years.

All versions agree that 505 years transpired from Abraham until Moses and the
exodus of the Jews from Egypt. It is calculated as follows. When Abraham was 75
years of age, God appeared to him and said that He would give the promised land
to his descendants. For it is written [in Genesis, 12.4-5]: "Abraham was
seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abraham took Sarah his
wife, and Lot his brother's son." In the same passage, further on [Genesis, 12.
7] it states: "Then the Lord appeared to Abraham and said: 'To your descendants
I will give this land.'" Thus [we calculate] 75 years [in the life] of Abraham
plus 430 years [from God's promise] until the exodus of the Jews from Egypt. The
Apostle Paul confirms this [in Galatians, 3.17-18]: "The law, which came [g152]
four hundred and thirty years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously
ratified by God, so as to make the promise void." Then he adds: "God gave it to
Abraham by a promise." When Abraham was 100 years of age his son Isaac was born,
25 years after God's promise. Four hundred and five years transpired from that
event until the exodus from Egypt. Consequently, from the promise [until the
exodus] 430 years elapsed.

Now God appeared to Abraham a second time and said [Genesis, 15.13]: "Know of a
surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs,
and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years."
The word descendants is used deliberately so that we not allocate [g153] the
entire period [solely] to Isaac. Moreover the period of 430 years is mentioned
again at the time of the exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt, [Exodus,
12.40-41]: "They and their forefathers dwelled in Egypt and the land of Canaan
for 430 years. And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, all the hosts of
the Lord went out from the land of Egypt at night." Since the period from God's
God's promise in the 75th year of Abraham is 430 years, it is clear that 505
years elapsed from the first year of Abraham to the time of Moses and the exodus
from Egypt. Some [authors] have presented [this material] in detail, [g154] as
follows: Abraham fathered Isaac at the age of 100. Isaac fathered Jacob at the
age of 60. Jacob fathered Levi at the age of 86. Levi fathered Kohath at the age
of 46. Kohath fathered Amran at the age of 63. Amran fathered Moses at the age
of 70. Moses led his people out of Egypt when he was 80 years old. Thus from the
first year of Abraham until the exodus from Egypt, a total of 505 years
transpired. According to the Septuagint, [g155] the total from Adam to the
exodus from Egypt is 3,689 years; according to the Jewish [Hebrew version],
2,453 years; and according to the Samaritan [Hebrew version], 2,753 years.

[31] [The chronology] from the death of Moses to the time of Solomon's
construction of the temple is described differently [by the available sources].
The book of Judges, as well as the blessed Apostle Paul in Acts of the Apostles
calculate it one way, while the book of Kings and Hebrew tradition calculate it
another way. It will be best to describe both and then select [the account]
which proves truest.

First, however, we must pause to criticize Africanus, who wrote a five-book
Chronology. It seems to me that he is greatly in error regarding the matter
before us. From the exodus of Moses to [the time of] Solomon and the building of
the temple [Africanus], through his own unique calculations assigns 744 years,
mostly without any citations, and not only contrary to what is recorded in
Scripture, but even audaciously [g156] adding an extra hundred years on his own.
[Africanus] inserts an additional 30 years after Joshua, for the elders. Then,
after Samson, he adds 40 years of anarchy and another 30 years of peace. By
adding these additional years without any proof, he [g157] creates an inflated
total of more than 740 years for the period between Moses and the reign of
Solomon. To see the fanciful nature of his calculations, we have to observe the
preceding generations and their lengths. From Abraham to David there were 14
generations, and the eleventh generation had already ended at the time of Moses,
when Nahshon the son of Aminadab was recognized as the prince of the nation of
Judah. Nahshon died in the desert after leaving Egypt, and he was present when
the people were first counted. It is clear that there were five generations from
Nahshon to David: David was the son of Jesse, who was the son of Obed, who was
the son of Boaz, who was the son of Salmon, who was the son of Nahshon. So on
what grounds can it be claimed that the five generations after Moses endured for
more than 700 years? If the years for men of each generation are evenly divided,
we find that each one lived for 140 years before fathering a son, something that
no rational person would accept as probable. For Moses himself died at 120 years
of age, and his successor, Joshua, died at 110 years of age. Before them Joseph
lived a total of 110 years, and earlier still Jacob, who was also called Israel,
the patriarch of all the Jews, lived [g158] for 147 years.

Consequently, how could anyone claim that in the period after Moses anyone could
have lived as long as we mentioned above? This is the error that Africanus made.
Clemens, however, calculated 574 years from Moses' successor Joshua until the
building of the temple, in his first book [Stromata 1.21]. The blessed Apostle
Paul in his speech to the Jews in the Acts of the Apostles [13.19-22] states:
"Joshua destroyed seven nations in the land of the Canaanites, and he gave them
their land as an inheritance. And after 450 years he gave them judges until the
time of Samuel the prophet. Then they asked for a king, and [God] gave them Saul
the son of Kish, of the tribe of Benjamin, who reigned for 40 years. Afterwards
[God] removed Saul and gave them David in his place.[g159]" That is what the
Apostle says. He calculated 534 years after Joshua in addition to the 450 years
for the judges until Samuel. Add to this 40 years for Saul, another 40 years for
David, and the four years of Solomon's reign before the building of the temple,
which makes a total of 534 years from Joshua the successor of Moses until
Solomon. According to the Apostle by adding the 40 years Moses spent in the
wilderness, and the 27 years of Joshua the son of Nun, the total for the entire
period will be 600 years. The book of Judges is in agreement with his account,
and calculates 450 years to the judges until Samuel, which are divided up as
follows:

[32] From the Book of Judges After Joshua, rule by foreigners, 8 years Othniel,
40 years [g160] foreigners, 18 years Ehud and Shamgar, 80 years foreigners, 20
years Barak and Deborah, 40 years foreigners, 7 years Gideon, 40 years
Abimelech, 3 years

Tola, 23 years

Jair, 22 years foreigners, 18 years Jephthah, 6 years

Ibzan, 7 years

Elon, 10 years

Abdon, 8 years foreigners, 40 years Samson, 20 years Eli, in whose time Samuel
[was born], 40 years The total for all the judges until Samuel is 450 years
[g161]. This is in agreement with what the blessed Apostle indicated, for it
excludes the figures for Moses, Joshua, Moses' successor, Samuel, or Saul.
Currently the dates for Samuel, Saul, and Joshua are not certain. But as the
Apostle indicates, the 40 years of Saul should be added to the 450 year period
of the judges. Moreover, if the 40 years of David and the 4 years of Solomon are
included, the total reaches 534 years--exactly what the Apostle indicated. Add
the 40 years that Moses spent in the wilderness, the 27 years of Nun's son
Joshua, according to the Hebrews, and we arrive at a grand total of 600 years.

Earlier we mentioned that there were five generations between Nahson and David.
Taking the total [of 600 years] and dividing it equally among the generations,
we find that the men lived for more than 115 years before becoming fathers, an
unbelievable proposition. Since Moses lived for a total of 120 years, how could
his descendants reach almost the same age before becoming fathers? There is
nothing left [to deduce from the book of Judges] on this point, so let us turn
to the book of Kings for [additional] evidence.

[33] The book of Kings confirms that from the exodus of the children of Israel
from Egypt until Solomon and the construction of the temple, 440 years elapsed.
According to the Hebrew version, it was 480 years [g162]. The third book of
Kings [1 Kings, 6.1] states: "It happened in the 440th year after the exodus
from Egypt, that Solomon began building the house of the Lord." The Hebrew
version says: "It happened in the 480th year." This is because the Jewish
doctors [of the faith] calculated that the total figure was 480 years, since
they did not count the years that the foreigners ruled over the people
separately. They just counted the time that the judges ruled them and included
the foreign domination in that figure. This must have been the case, for it is
the only way to arrive at a total of 480 years. It seems to me that when the
blessed Apostle stated the number of years as mentioned earlier, he was not
speaking as a chronographer, or someone trying to make a precise calculation. He
was delivering a sermon on salvation. It would have been inappropriate [g163] to
insert into it a treatise on chronological methodology, and so he followed the
popular interpretation of the book of Judges. The book of Kings clearly states
that [the period] from the exodus until [the time of] Solomon embraced 440 or
480 years. However, if we examine the years for each of the judges individually
and also tally the years of foreign rule separately--as mentioned in the book of
Judges--we find 600 years total between Moses and Solomon: Moses was in the
wilderness for 40 years. Joshua [g164], 27 years. Judges and foreigners, 450
years. This is what the Apostle states, according to the book of Judges. Samuel
and Saul, 40 years. David, 40 years. Solomon 4 years, until the building of the
temple. Accordingly, each of the men in the five generations just mentioned must
have lived 120 years before fathering a son, a wholly preposterous proposition.

If we follow the book of Kings, we get a total of 480 years, after subtracting
the 120 years of the Hebrews' servitude. The Hebrews themselves reckon it this
way, combining their years of servitude to foreigners with the years of their
freedom. We shall do the same in our Chronicle, incorporating the period of
foreign servitude with the number of years assigned to each [of the judges] in
the book of Kings. [This method] is especially [persuasive] concerning the five
generations [g165] from Nahshon to David. By subtracting from the total of 480
years the 40 years Moses spent in the wilderness and the four years of Solomon,
436 years remain to the death of David. Dividing these years equally among the
five generations, produces 87 years for each generation. Should people
investigate this, they will find a credible account beginning with the birth of
David. David was born when his father Jesse was an old man. David was the eighth
son born after his seven older brothers. Consequently we can assume that
something similar happened to his ancestors.

Thus, for our purposes, we will accept that 480 years elapsed from the exodus
from Egypt until Solomon and the construction of the temple. And we will include
the years of foreign rule within the reigns of each successive judge. Now it
happens that this decision is supported by a statement in the book of Judges
made by Jephthah, one of the judges of the people. When the Ammonites who lived
on the far side of the Jordan River started a war with him, [Jephthah] sent a
messenger [g166] to the enemy with this import [Judges 11.25-26]: "Now are you
any better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab? Did he ever strive
against Israel, or did he ever go to war with them? While Israel dwelt in
Heshbon and its villages, and in Aroer and its villages, and in all the cities
that are on the banks of the Jordan, three hundred years, why did you not
recover them within that time?" Thus [Jephthah] informed them that Moses and
Balak, son of Zippor, lived 300 years before their period. The 300 year total
can only be obtained by including the period of the rule by foreigners [g167]
within the reigns of the judges. Should someone tally the years of servitude to
foreigners separately, he will obtain a figure which far exceeds the 300 years.
Yet if only the years of the judges' rule are counted, then he will discover 300
years between Moses and Jephthah, exactly as Jephthah's message stated.
Consequently we will adopt the following chronology in this work:

[34] From Moses to Solomon

Moses, 40 years Joshua, 27 years [g168] foreigners and Othniel the judge, 40
years foreigners and Ehud the judge, 80 years foreigners and Deborah and Barak,
40 years foreigners and Gideon, 40 years Abimelech, 3 years

Tola, 23 years

Jair, 22 years foreigners and Jephthah the judge, 6 years

Ibzan, 7 years

Abdon, 8 years foreigners and Samson, 20 years. In his time, the Trojan war was
fought.

Eli, 40 years Samuel and Saul, 40 years

David, 40 years Solomon (until the building of the temple), 4 years [g169] From
Moses' exodus from Egypt until the building of the temple, a total of 480 years
elapsed.

Concerning Joshua, Moses' successor, the book which bears his name mentions only
that he died at the age of 110. The Hebrews consider that he was their leader
for 27 years, thus he was 43 years old when Moses left Egypt.

[35] As regards Samuel, since the book [which bears his name] says nothing about
his duration, I consider that what the blessed Apostle said concerning Saul
should be taken to include both Saul and Samuel. For it appears that Samuel was
the leader of the people for many years, while Saul ruled for but two years. The
first book of Kings [1 Samuel 13.1] describes it this way: "Saul was the son of
a year in his reign; and he ruled over Israel for two years more." Symmachus
clarifies [g170] this in his translation: "Saul resembled a one-year-old child
in his reigning," which means that at the beginning of his reign Saul was
sincere and good, and stayed that way for two years. But then he became
corrupted and was rejected by God and was strangled by a demon in punishment.
Thus the remaining years have been assigned to Samuel and 40 years is the
combined total for Samuel and Saul. It is clear that Saul ruled for this period
not solely based on the testimony of the Apostle, but through a careful reading
of Scripture.

It is written [in 2 Samuel 2.10] that following Saul's death, "Ish-bosheth,
Saul's son, was 40 years old when he began to reign over Israel, and he reigned
two years. But the house of Judah followed David." The Ish-bosheth mentioned
here must have been born [g171] after Saul became king, because when describing
events from the beginning of Saul's reign [1 Samuel 14.49], mention is made of
three sons of Saul, but not this one. Thus we believe that [Ish-bosheth] was
born late, and that the length of Saul's reign was approximately the same as the
age of his son following his death.

Thus, the third book of Kings [1 Kings 6.1] states that 480 years elapsed from
the exodus out of Egypt until Solomon and the building of the temple; 505 years
elapsed from Abraham until Moses and the exodus; 942 years elapsed from the
flood until the first year of Abraham; and 2,242 years elapsed from Adam until
the flood. Altogether 4,170 years elapsed from Adam until Solomon and the
building of the temple. The historian Josephus in the first book of his Jewish
Antiquities when describing the time of Solomon and the construction of the
temple includes the testimony of some Phoenician men. The evidence of these men
seems valuable to me. In that book [Against Apion 1.17], [Josephus] writes
[g172]:

[36] The evidence of the Phoenicians about the temple at Jerusalem, from
Josephus I will now, therefore, pass from these records, and come to those that
belong to the Phoenicians, and concern our nation, and shall produce
attestations to what I have said out of them. There are then records among the
Tyrians that take in the history of many years, and these are public writings,
and are kept with great exactness, and include accounts of the facts done among
them, and such as concern their transactions with other nations also, those I
mean which were worth remembering. Therein it was recorded that the temple was
built by king Solomon at Jerusalem, one hundred forty-three years and eight
months before the Tyrians built Carthage [g173]. In their annals the building of
our temple is related; for Hirom, the king of Tyre, was the friend of Solomon
our king, and had such friendship transmitted down to him from his forefathers.
He thereupon was ambitious to contribute to the splendor of this edifice of
Solomon, and made him a present of one hundred and twenty talents of gold. He
also cut down the most excellent timber out of that mountain which is called
Libanus, and sent it to him for adorning its roof. Solomon also not only made
him many other presents, by way of requital, but gave him a country in Galilee
also, that was called Chabulon. But there was another passion, a philosophic
inclination [g174] of theirs, which cemented the friendship that was betwixt
them; for they sent mutual problems to one another, with a desire to have them
unriddled by each other; wherein Solomon was superior to Hirom, as he was wiser
than him in other respects: and many of the epistles that passed between them
are still preserved among the Tyrians. Now, that this may not depend on my bare
word, I will produce for a witness Dius, one that is believed to have written
the Phoenician History after an accurate manner. This Dius, therefore, writes
thus, in his Histories of the Phoenicians:

Upon the death of Abibalus, his son Hirom took the kingdom. This king raised
banks at the eastern parts of the city, and enlarged it [g175]; he also joined
the temple of Jupiter Olympius (Aramazd), which stood before in an island by
itself, to the city, by raising a causeway between them, and adorned that temple
with donations of gold. He moreover went up to Libanus, and had timber cut down
for the building of temples. They say further, that Solomon, when he was king of
Jerusalem, sent problems to Hirom to be solved, and desired he would send others
back for him to solve, and that he who could not solve the problems proposed to
him should pay money to him that solved them. And when Hirom had agreed to the
proposals, but was not able to solve the problems, he was obliged to pay a great
deal of money, as a penalty for the same [g176]. As also they relate, that one
Abdemon, a man of Tyre, did solve the problems, and proposed others which
Solomon could not solve, upon which he was obliged to repay a great deal of
money to Hirom.

[37] These things are attested to by Dius, and confirm what we have said upon
the same subjects before. And now I shall add Menander the Ephesian, as an
additional witness. This Menander wrote the Acts that were done both by the
Greeks and Barbarians, under every one of the Tyrian kings, and had taken much
pains to learn their history out of their own records. Now when he was writing
about those kings that had reigned at Tyre, he came to Hirom, and says thus:

Upon the death of Abibalus, his son Hirom took the kingdom; he lived fifty-three
years [g177], and reigned thirty-four. He raised a bank on that called the Broad
Place, and dedicated that golden pillar which is in Jupiter's (Aramazd's)
temple; he also went and cut down timber from the mountain called Libanus, and
got timber of cedar for the roofs of the temples. He also pulled down the old
temples, and built new ones; besides this, he consecrated the temples of
Hercules and of Astarte. He first built Hercules's temple in the month Peritus,
and that of Astarte when he made his expedition against the Tityans, who would
not pay him their tribute; and when he had subdued them to himself [g178], he
returned home. Under this king there was a younger son of Abdemon, who mastered
the problems which Solomon, king of Jerusalem, had recommended to be solved. Now
the time from this king to the building of Carthage is thus calculated:

Upon the death of Hirom, Baleazarus his son took the kingdom; he lived
forty-three years, and reigned seven years: after him succeeded his son
Abdastartus; he lived twenty-nine years, and reigned nine years. Now four sons
of his nurse plotted against him and slew him, the eldest of whom reigned
[twelve years]: after them [g179] came Astartus, the son of Deleastartus; he
lived fifty-four years, and reigned twelve years: after him came his brother
Aserymus; he lived fifty-four years, and reigned nine years: he was slain by his
brother Pheles, who took the kingdom and reigned but eight months, though he
lived fifty years: he was slain by Ithobalus, the priest of Astarte, who reigned
thirty-two years, and lived sixty-eight years: he was succeeded by his son
Badezorus, who lived forty-five years, and reigned six years: he was succeeded
by Matgenus his son; he lived thirty-two years [g180], and reigned nine years:
Pygmalion succeeded him; he lived fifty-six years, and reigned forty-seven
years. Now in the seventh year of his reign, his sister fled away from him, and
built the city Carthage in Libya. So the whole time from the reign of Hirom,
till the building of Carthage, amounts to the sum of one hundred fifty-five
years and eight months. Since then the temple was built at Jerusalem in the
twelfth year of the reign of Hirom, there were from the building of the temple,
until the building of Carthage, one hundred forty-three years and eight months.

Wherefore, what occasion is there for alleging any more testimonies out of the
Phoenician histories [on the behalf of our nation], since what I have said is so
thoroughly confirmed already? and to be sure our ancestors came into this
country long before the building of the temple [g181]; for it was not till we
had gotten possession of the whole land by war that we built our temple. And
this is the point that I have clearly proved out of our sacred writings in my
Antiquities.

This is Josephus' account.

[38] For this Chronology, the following table shows [the rulers and their
reigns] from the building of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon to its
destruction by the Babylonians 432 years later. Here are the figures:

1. Solomon, 37 years, including the additional three years 2. Rehoboam, 16 years
3. Abijam, 3 years 4. Asa, 41 years 5. Jehoshaphat, 25 years 6. Jehoram, 8 years
7. Ahaziah, 1 year 8. Athaliah, his mother, 7 years 9. Jehoash, 40 years [g182]
10. Amaziah, 28 years 11. Uzziah, 52 years. In his reign the Greeks established
the first Olympic games [776 B.C.].

12. Jotham, 16 years 13. Ahaz, 16 years 14. Hezekiah, 29 years 15. Manasseh, 55
years 16. Amon, 2 years 17. Josiah, 31 years 18. Jehoahaz, 3 months 19.
Jehoiakim, 11 years 20. Jehoiachin, his son, also called Jekhoniah, 3 months 21.
Mattaniah, also called Zedekiah, 11 years This makes a total of 432 years.

After this, during [the next] 70 years, the Babylonian captivity of the Jews
occurred and the destruction of the [temple's] site. According to the Bible,
this ended in the second year of King Darius of Persia, which was during the
65th Olympiad [B.C. 520-517].

Clement agrees with us on this [point] in the first [book of his] Stromata
[1.21] where he notes [g183]:

The captivity lasted for seventy years, and ended in the second year of Darius
Hystaspes, who had become king of the Persians, Assyrians, and Egyptians. As I
said previously, it was during his reign that Haggai and Zechariah, of the
twelve, and Malachi [Angelus], whose name translates as "angel", prophesied. The
high priest at that time was Joshua the son of Josedech.

Such is the account of that credible man [Clement].

[39] Moreover, the prophet Zechariah as a contemporary also testifies that there
was a period of 70 years from the destruction of the temple until the second
year of Darius. For in the second year of Darius he wrote [Zechariah 1.12]: "God
Almighty, how long wilt thou have no mercy [g184] on Jerusalem and the cities of
Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these seventy years?" At this
point one might inquire: Why does it state in the beginning of the book of Ezra
[1.1]: "In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by
the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the Lord stirred up the spirit of
Cyrus king of Persia so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom
and also put it in writing." Furthermore, subsequent [passages] indicate that
freedom [was given] to the Jews [at that point] and that it was Cyrus who
ordered that the temple be rebuilt. From this one would assume that it was
during the time of Cyrus, rather than Darius, that the 70 years of captivity
came to an end. To this I reply that the prophecies refer to two [distinct]
70-year periods. The first began with the destruction of the temple and ended,
as Zechariah stated, in the second year of Darius [g185]. The second extends
from the enslavement of the Jews to the capture of Babylon and the destruction
of the Chaldean kingdom. This began in the time of the prophecy and ended with
Cyrus, as Jeremiah recorded. [Jeremiah] further predicted [Jeremiah 29.10]: "For
thus says the Lord: When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit
you, and I will fulfil to you my promise and bring you back to this place." And
he also prophesies [Jeremiah 25.11-12]: "This whole land shall become a ruin and
a waste, and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. Then,
after seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that
nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity, says the Lord, making the
land an everlasting waste. [g186]"

All this came to a head during the time of Cyrus. The period of the enslavement
[of the Jews] should not be reckoned from the [time of the] destruction of the
temple, but earlier--from the second year of [the reign of] Jehoiakim, king of
the Jews, when Nebuchadnezzar the king of the Babylonians enslaved them. [It
could be reckoned] even earlier, from the time when the prophet Jeremiah first
began to prophesy. From that time until the siege [of Jerusalem] and the burning
of the temple 40 years elapsed, and 70 years until the first year of Cyrus. From
the start of Jeremiah's prophesying until Cyrus' reign, the first 70 years
[period] elapsed. However, from the destruction of the temple until Cyrus, 30
years elapsed, while it was in the second year of Darius that [the other] 70
years was completed. [The temple] was restored in the eighth year of Darius
[g187].

[40] And from that time onward, the Jews remained without a king from their own
[line of] kings. Their chief-priests served as princes and leaders, and
throughout the entire period of the Persian kingdom they remained loyal to the
Persian kings. Subsequently they served the Macedonians who ruled after
Alexander, until the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. [The latter], ruling Syria,
harassed the Jews to adopt paganism. During his time Mattathias, a priest in
Jerusalem [g188], son of Asamonaeus, his son Judas, who was called Maccabaeus,
and their descendants re-established the principality of the Jews, and held it
until the time of Augustus. It was during his reign that Herod, at the order of
the Romans, became the first foreign king of the Jews. Our Savior Jesus Christ
was born during his reign. This was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Moses [in
Genesis, 49.10]: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff
from between his feet until he comes to whom it belongs; he is the hope of the
gentiles." And it happened in just such a manner.

Five hundred and two years elapsed from the time of Solomon and the building of
the first temple to the restoration of the temple in the second year of King
Darius. Four hundred and eighty years elapsed from the time of Moses and the
exodus from Egypt to Solomon and the building of the temple. Five hundred and
five years elapsed from the first year of Abraham to the exodus. Nine hundred
and forty-two years elapsed from the flood to the first year of Abraham. Two
thousand two hundred and forty-two years elapsed from Adam to the flood. Thus
the grand total, from Adam to the second year of Darius and the second building
of [the temple in] Jerusalem, is 4680 years [g189]. From the second year of
Darius which was the first year of the 65th Olympiad [520 B.C.] [until the time
of Christ], is 137 Olympiads and 548 years.

[41] This [material] can be shown in more detail [cross-referenced with the
kings of Persia] as follows:

Cambyses took the crown following Cyrus, who was the first Persian king.

Then came Darius, who ruled for 36 years. In the second year of his reign, the
temple in Jerusalem was restored. Darius ruled for an additional 34 years.

Darius' son, Xerxes, ruled next for 20 years. During his reign the story of
Esther took place.

Artaxerxes ruled for 41 years. During his time Ezra lived, who, it is said, knew
all the sacred Hebrew texts by heart including the entire Holy Bible, and
transmitted it to the Jews in the new Hebrew script, because the world was riven
by warfare. Indeed, it was during this time that Nehemiah, the chief cupbearer,
lived. By order of the king, he went to the country of the Jews and [re]built
Jerusalem, surrounding the city with a wall. For until then [g190] the city had
been in ruins, except for the temple which had been restored in Darius' time.
After Artaxerxes the following kings ruled Persia:

Darius, 19 years.

Artaxerxes Mnemon, 40 years.

Ochus, 26 years.

Arsaces, 4 years.

Darius, 6 years.

After these [monarchs], Alexander of Macedon eliminated the Persian kingdom and
ruled for 6 years. He ruled an additional 6 years after slaying [the last king]
Darius. From the second year of Darius [the First] to the death of
Alexander--which occurred in the first year of the 114th Olympiad [324
B.C.]--197 years elapsed.

After the death of Alexander, the following monarchs ruled in Egypt and in the
city of Alexandria:

1. Ptolemaeus, son of Lagus, 40 years.

2. Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, 28 years. During his reign the Hebrew sacred books
were translated into Greek and placed [g191] in the library at Alexandria.

3. Ptolemaeus Euergetes, 24 years.

4. Ptolemaeus Philopator, 21 years.

5. Ptolemaeus Epiphanes, 22 years.

6. Ptolemaeus Philometor, 34 years. During his reign, Antiochus Epiphanes ruled
in Syria. And it was during [Antiochus'] reign that the events described in the
book of Maccabees took place, including how [Antiochus] tried to force the
Jewish people into paganism, how he polluted the temple by placing idols in it,
and how he stole the temple's sacred vessels, in the 151st Olympiad [176-173
B.C.]. [To sum up,] 150 years elapsed from the death of Alexander of Macedon to
the first year of Antiochus Epiphanes. And 347 years elapsed from the second
year of Darius to Antiochus.

[42] It was during the reign of the aforementioned Antiochus that Mattathias,
the son of Asamonaeus, showed zeal for his patrimonial religion and became a
general of the people. After [Mattathias], his [g192] son Judas, called
Maccabaeus, [led the people]; he was followed by his brother Jonathan, who was
followed by his brother Simon. It is with him that the book of the Maccabees
ends. It covers a period of 40 years, to the end of the 161st Olympiad [136-133
B.C.]. Eighty-eight years elapsed from that date to the Roman emperor Augustus.

According to Africanus and Josephus, after Simon [ruled] as general of the Jews,
Jonathan, also called Hyrcanus, [succeeded him] for 26 years. After him,
Aristobulus [ruled] for one year. [Aristobulus] was the first to put the royal
crown on his head, simultaneously being king and high priest of the Jewish
people. This was 484 years after the Babylonian captivity. After him, Alexander,
also called Jannaeus, was king for 25 years. After him, his wife Alexandra, also
called Mesalina, [ruled] for 9 years. After her, Aristobulus [g193] and Hyrcanus
[ruled]. In their reign, Pompeius the Roman general put the Jews under Roman
taxation. He established Hyrcanus as their king, but bound Aristobulus and took
him to Rome. In his reign, in the 184th Olympiad [44 B.C.], Julius Caesar became
king of the Romans, ruling as an absolute monarch [emperor] for 4 years and 7
months. He was followed by Augustus, also called Sebastos, who ruled for 56
years and 6 months. It was in his reign that Herod, who was not fit [for the
position] became the first foreign king of the Jews, getting [the position]
through the Romans. [Herod's] people were from Ascalon. During his reign the
Annointed of God [Christ] was born [g194] in Bethlehem, Judaea. Following
Augustus, Tiberius ruled the Romans. In the 15th year of his reign, which was
the fourth year of the 201st Olympiad [28 A.D.], our Savior and Lord Jesus
Christ appeared among humankind.

Thus [the period] from Antiochus Epiphanes until the 15th year of Tiberius
contains 201 years. [The period] from Alexander of Macedon to the same [15th]
year of Tiberius contains 352 years. From the second year of Darius to [the 15th
year] of Tiberius is 548 years. From the 15th year of Tiberius to the very end
of the siege of Jerusalem--which occurred in the second year of Vespasian--is a
total of 42 years. From Adam until the second year of Darius, is 4680 years.
From the second year of Darius until the 15th year of Tiberius, is 548 years.
Thus from Adam until the 15th year of Tiberius, a total of 5228 years elapsed.
From the 15th year of Tiberius [g195] until the 20th anniversary of Constantinus
Victor Augustus, is 300 years. The grand total is: 5518 years according to the
Hebrews in the [Greek] Septuagint version; 1237 years less according to the
Hebrew version of the Jews; and 935 years less according to the Hebrew Samaritan
version. This is how [our] chronology [is constructed] according to the Hebrews'
[sources].

[43] How the Egyptians chronicled [their past], and how Egyptian chronology
includes that of the Ethiopians and [the chronology of] the Ptolemies' rule in
Egypt and Alexandria.

After discussing the chronologies of the Chaldeans, Assyrians, and Hebrews, it
is time to pass to the chronology of the Egyptians.

Diodorus in the first book of the Bibliotheca [1.44] wrote [g196]: Some of them
relate fabulous stories claiming that initially gods and heroes ruled Egypt for
a period of somewhat less than 16,000 years. The last god to rule there was
Horus, Isis' son. Then humans ruled that land as kings, they say, during the
time of Myris. And this has continued for somewhat less than 5,000 years,
through the 180th Olympiad [60-57 B.C.], when we visited Egypt. At that time,
Ptolemy, called the New Dionysus, was ruling [g197]. For most of this period,
[the Egyptians'] own kings ruled the land. However, for a small portion [of
time], Ethiopians, Persians, and Macedonians [ruled]. Only four Ethiopian
[kings] ruled, and not contiguously at that, rather, [they ruled] at separate
times, and for a total of slightly less than 36 years. Persian domination was
established by Cambyses who forcibly subdued [the Egyptians]. [Persian rule]
lasted for 135 years and was ended by the rebellion of the Egyptians when they
could no longer bear the harshness of [Persian] rule and the insults to their
country's gods. After this the Macedonians and their descendants ruled for 276
years. For all the rest of the time native kings ruled, [g198] 470 kings and 5
queens. The priests kept records ahout all of them in their temple archives,
which were transmitted continuously from ancient times from generation to
generation. They described each one's bravery and valor, personality and
triumphs, and whatever else they accomplished in their periods. However it is
unnecessary and even pointless for us to write down what each one wrought, since
some of them, even in their own day, were considered useless. This according to
Diodorus. It is fitting and proper to add to this Manetho's account of the
Egyptians, since his history seems quite reliable [g199].

[44] From the Egyptian records of Manetho, who wrote a three-volume work about
the gods, demi-gods, spirits, and the mortal kings who ruled over the Egyptians,
to the time of the Persian king Darius. The first being among the Egyptians was
Hephaestus, who discovered fire for them. He was succeeded by the Sun (Arm.
Aregakn), (who was succeeded by Agathodaemon, followed) by Cronos, followed by
Osiris. Then came Typhon, Osiris' brother, then Horus, who was the son of Osiris
and Isis. These [entities] were the first rulers of the Egyptians. After them,
one ruler succeeded the next until the time of Bidis, for a period of 13,900
years. This [was calculated] as lunar years of 30 days each, for what we now
call a month was called a year in those days.

After rule by the gods, a race descended from the gods ruled for 1,255 years.
Then other kings ruled for 1,817 years. After them 30 kings from Memphis ruled
for 1,790 years. Then 10 other kings, from Thinis, ruled for 350 years. Then,
for 5,813 years, the kings were spirits and demi-gods. This makes a total of
11,000 years--lunar years, that is, months. The Egyptians calculate a total of
[g200] 24,900 lunar years--2,206 solar years--to the [rule of the] gods,
demi-gods, and spirits. If you compare this [calculation] with [similar
calculations of] Hebrew chronology you will get almost the same figure. For
among the Hebrews Aegyptus is called Mizraim, and he lived a long time after the
flood. Because it was after the flood that Noah's son Ham became the father of
Aegyptus, or Mizraim; and at the time of the dispersal of the peoples, he went
to Egypt, as its first inhabitant. According to the Hebrews 2,242 years elapsed
from Adam to the flood. Be this as it may, the Egyptians still boast of their
great antiquity before the flood. They say that they had gods, demi-gods, and
spirits [as rulers in remote antiquity]. If we convert to months the years
calculated by the Hebrews, we get over 20,000 lunar years. So when we count the
"years" from the first man [Adam] until Mizraim, the Hebrew calculation is
approximately the same [as the Egyptian]. Mizraim was first among the Egyptians,
and the first dynasty is presumed to descend from him.

Despite this, if the number of years seems excessive, we must [g201] examine the
reasons for it. It is conceivable that there were many kings ruling in Egypt
simultaneously. For they say that [kings from] Thinis, Memphis, Sais, Ethiopia
and elsewhere ruled. It may be that these dynasties did not rule in succession
to each other, as is the norm, but in different places at the same time. As a
consequence of this, the total number [of kings] is very large. Let us leave
this issue, however, and move on to the details of Egyptian chronology.

After the [period of] spirits and demi-gods [g202], the First Dynasty appeared,
consisting of 8 kings. The first and most noble of them was Menes. Beginning
with him, we shall list the succession of kings from each generation [g203].

[45] 1st Dynasty Menes of Thinis and his seven descendants.

[Menes], whom Herodotus [in The Histories 2.4] calls Min, ruled for 30 (or 60?)
years. He took the army beyond the borders of his land seeking glory and renown.
A hippopotamus made off with him.

Athotis, his son, ruled for 27 years. He built a palace in the city of Memphis.
He was skilled in medicine, and wrote about how to conduct autopsies.

Chechenes, his son, [ruled for] 39 years.

Venephes, 42 years. In his reign a famine gripped [g204] the land. He built the
pyramids near Cocome.

Usaphais, 20 years.

Niebais, 26 years.

[Se]mempses, 18 years. During his reign numerous abominations and corruptions
occurred.

Vbienthis, 26 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 252 years.

2nd Dynasty 9 kings.

First was Bochus. During his reign an enormous fissure opened up in Bubastis and
many people perished.

Then Caechous, in whose reign Apis and Mnevis and [g205] the goat of Mendes were
honoured as gods.

Then Biophis, during whose reign women got the right to rule as monarchs.

After [Biophis], three other kings ruled, but nothing noteworthy was
accomplished during their reigns.

During the reign of the seventh king, it is fabulously related that for eleven
days the Nile ran with honey mixed with water.

Then Sesochris [ruled] for 48 years. He is said to have been 5 cubits and 3
palms tall.

During [g206] the reign of the ninth king, nothing noteworthy occurred.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 297 years.

[46] 3rd Dynasty 8 kings of Memphis.

Necherochis. In his reign the Libyans revolted from the Egyptians, but when the
moon unexpectedly grew in size, they were moved by fear and went back into
service [to the Egyptians].

Sesorthus. He was called Asclepius by the Egyptians because of his skill in
medicine. He discovered methods of building with hewn stone, and also was
interested in writing. The other six kings achieved nothing worthy of mention.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 197 years.

4th Dynasty 17 kings of Memphis, from another line.

Suphis was the third monarch. He built the largest pyramid, the one Herodotus
[in The Histories 2. 124] [g207] claims was built by Cheops. At one time
[Suphis] had been hostile toward the gods, but he subsequently regretted this
and wrote a sacred book which the Egyptians hold in great esteem.

Nothing noteworthy has been recorded about any of the other kings [of this
line].

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 448 years.

5th Dynasty 31 kings of Elephantine.

Othoes was the first king [of this group]. He was slain by his attendants.

Phiops, the fourth king, began his reign at the age of six and ruled until he
was one hundred.

[RB--From this point Eusebius (or Manetho) does not consistently provide dynasty
totals.] [47] 6th Dynasty A woman by the name of Nitocris ruled next. It is said
that she was braver than any man of her day and more beautiful [g208] than any
contemporary woman, fair haired and red cheeked. The third pyramid is said to
have been built by her.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 203 years.

7th Dynasty 5 kings from Memphis.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 75 years.

8th Dynasty 5 kings from Memphis.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 100 years.

9th Dynasty [g209] 4 kings from Heracleopolis, who ruled for 100 years.

Achthoes was the first [of this dynasty]. He was harsher than any of his
predecessors, and worked crimes throughout the entire country of Egypt.
Subsequently he became mad and was killed by a crocodile.

10th Dynasty 19 kings from Heracleopolis, who ruled for 185 years.

11th Dynasty 6 kings from Diospolis, who ruled for 43 years. After them
Ammenemes reigned for 16 years.

Manetho's first book concludes here. One hundred ninety-two kings [were
described], reigning for a total of 2,300 years [g210].

[48] From the Second Book of Manetho.

12th Dynasty 7 kings from Diospolis.

Sesonchosis the son of Ammenemes, 46 years.

Ammanemes, 38 years. He was killed by his own eunuchs.

Sesostris, 48 years. Supposedly he was 4 cubits, 3 palms and 2 digits tall. He
conquered all of Asia in nine years, as well as Europe as far as Thrace.
Everywhere he erected monuments to show his control over the nations; he
depicted men's genitals on the columns for brave nations, and women's genitals
for cowardly nations. Therefore the Egyptians [g211] evaluated him as coming
after Osiris.

Lamares, 8 years. He built the maze at Arsinoite for his own tomb. His
descendants ruled for 42 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 245 years.

13th Dynasty 60 kings of Diospolis, who ruled for 453 years.

14th Dynasty 76 kings of Xois, who ruled for 484 years.

15th Dynasty 15 kings of Diospolis, who ruled for 250 years.

[49] 16th Dynasty 5 kings of Thebes, who ruled for 190 years [g212].

17th Dynasty A dynasty of shepherds who were Phoenician brothers, foreign kings
who took Memphis.

Saites was first, 19 years. The district of Saite was named after him. Then they
established a city in the district of Sethroite from which they advanced and
conquered [g213] the Egyptians.

Bnon, second, 40 years.

Archles, years.

Apophis, 14 years, Altogether [these kings] reigned for 103 years. Joseph seems
to have appeared during the time of these kings.

[50] 18th Dynasty 14 kings from Diospolis.

Amosis, 25 years.

Chebron, 13 years.

Ammenophis, 21 years.

Misphres, 12 years.

Misphragmuthosis, 26 years.

Tuthmosis, 9 years.

Amenophis, 31 years. He [g214] is the one believed to be Memnon, the talking
statue.

Orus, 38 years.

Achencherses, 16 years. In his reign, Moses as general of the Jews, took them
out of Egypt.

Acherres, 8 years.

Cherres, 15 years.

Armais, also called Danaus, 5 years. Afterwards he was expelled from Egypt, and
fled from his brother Aegyptus to Greece. He captured Argos and became king of
the Argives.

Rhamesses, also called Aegyptus, 68 years.

Amenophis, 40 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 348 years [g215].

18th Dynasty 5 kings from Diospolis.

Sethos, 55 years Rhampses, 66 years Amenephthis, (?) 40 years Ammenemes, 26
years Thuoris, 7 years. Homer [Odyssey 4.126] calls him Polybus, the husband of
Alcandra. In his reign Troy was captured.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 194 years. In sum, the second book [g216]
of Manetho contains 92 kings who reigned for a total of 2,121 years.

[51] From the Third Book of Manetho.

20th Dynasty 12 kings from Diospolis, who ruled for 172 years.

21th Dynasty 7 kings from Tanis.

Smendis, 26 years.

Psusennes, 41 years.

Nephercheres, 4 years.

Amenophthis, 9 years.

Osochor, 6 years.

Psinaches, 9 years.

Psusennes, 35 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 130 years [g217].

22nd Dynasty 3 kings from Bubastis.

Sesonchosis, 21 years.

Osorthon, 15 years.

Tacelothis, 13 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 49 years.

23rd Dynasty 3 kings from Tanis.

Petubastis, 25 years.

Osorthon, whom the Egyptians called Heracles, 9 years.

Psammu-s, 10 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 44 years.

24th Dynasty Bocchoris from Sais, 44 years. In his reign, a lamb spoke..

[52] 25th Dynasty, Ethiopian 3 kings.

Sabacon, who captured Bocchoris and burnt him alive, ruled for 12 years.

Sebichos, his son, [g218] 12 years.

Taracus, 20 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 44 years.

26th Dynasty 9 kings from Sais.

Ammeres the Ethiopian, 12 years.

Stephinathis, 7 years.

Nechepsos, 6 years.

Nechao, 8 years.

Psammetichus, 44 years.

Nechao II, 6 years. He captured Jerusalem, and took king Jehoahaz back as a
prisoner to Egypt.

Psammuthes (Psammetichus) II, 17 years.

Vaphres, 25 years. The remaining Jews fled to him after Jerusalem had been
captured by the Assyrians.

Amosis, 42 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 167 years [g219].

27th Dynasty 8 kings from Persia.

Cambyses, in the 5th year of his reign, ruled the Egyptians for 3 years. the
magi, 7 months.

Darius, 36 years.

Xerxes, the son of Darius, 21 years.

Artaxerxes, 40 years.

Xerxes II, 2 months.

Sogdianus, 7 months.

Darius, the son of Xerxes, 19 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 120 years and 4 months.

[53] 28th Dynasty Amyrtaeus of Sais, 6 years..

29th Dynasty 4 kings of Mendes.

Nepheretes, 6 years.

Achoris, 13 years.

Psammuthes, 1 year.

Muthes, 1 year.

Nepherites, 4 months.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 21 years and 4 months [g220].

30th Dynasty 3 kings from Sebennytus.

Nectanebis, 10 years.

Teos, 2 years.

Nectanebus, 8 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 20 years.

31st Dynasty 3 kings from Persia.

Ochus in the 20th year of his reign ruled over Egypt, for 6 years.

Arses, the son of Ochus, 4 years.

Darius, who was killed by Alexander of Macedon, 6 years.

All this is from the third book of Manetho.

[54] From this point, the information comes from Greek authors, because the
kingdom of the Egyptians went into decline. Yet, since we still possess further
information from the books of Manetho contained in the writings of Flavius
Josephus, which he included when describing the ancestors of the Hebrews, I
think it will be good [g221] to include what he put down in his own words. The
following [passage] is from the first book of his Antiquities of the Jews. [RB:
it is from Josephus' Against Apion Book I.14-16. The translation below is from
the Whiston edition. The extant works of Flavius Josephus including Antiquities
of the Jews, Against Apion, and other writings are available on another page of
this website.]

I shall begin with the writings of the Egyptians; not indeed of those that have
written in the Egyptian language, which it is impossible for me to do. But
Manetho was a man who was by birth an Egyptian, yet had he made himself master
of the Greek learning, as is very evident; for he wrote the history of his own
country in the Greek tongue, by translating it, as he saith himself, out of
their sacred records [g222]; he also finds great fault with Herodotus for his
ignorance and false narrations of Egyptian affairs. Now this Manetho, in the
first book of his Egyptian History, writes concerning us in the following
manner.

I will set down his very words, as if I were to bring the very man himself into
a court for a witness: "[There was a king of ours whose name was Timaus. Under
him] it came to pass, I know not how, that God was averse to us, and there came,
after a surprising manner, men of ignoble birth out of the eastern parts, and
had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country [g223], and with ease
subdued it by force, yet without our hazarding a battle with them. So when they
had gotten those that governed us under their power, they afterwards burnt down
our cities, and demolished the temples of the gods, and used all the inhabitants
after a most barbarous manner; nay, some they slew, and led their children and
their wives into slavery. At length they made one of themselves king, whose name
was Salatis; he also lived at Memphis, and made both the upper and lower regions
pay tribute, and left garrisons in places that were the most proper for them. He
chiefly aimed to secure the eastern parts, as foreseeing that the Assyrians, who
had then the greatest power, would be desirous of that kingdom, and [g224]
invade them; and as he found in the Saite Nomos, [Sethroite,] a city very proper
for this purpose, and which lay upon the Bubastic channel, but with regard to a
certain theologic notion was called Avaris, this he rebuilt, and made very
strong by the walls he built about it, and by a most numerous garrison of two
hundred and forty thousand armed men whom he put into it to keep it. Thither
Salatis came in summer time, partly to [gather his corn, and] pay his soldiers
their wages, and partly to exercise his armed men, and thereby to terrify
foreigners. This man reigned for fifteen and then died.

[55] After him reigned another [g225], whose name was Beon, for forty-four
years; after him reigned rgbanother, called Apachnas, thirty-six years and seven
months; after him Apophis reigned sixty-one years, and then Janins fifty years
and one month; after all these reigned Assis forty-nine years and two months.
And these six were the first rulers among them, who were all along making war
with the Egyptians, and were very desirous gradually to destroy them to the very
roots. This whole nation was styled Hykos, that is, Shepherd-kings: for the
first syllable Hyk, according to the sacred dialect, denotes a king, as is sos a
shepherd; but this according to the ordinary dialect; and of these is compounded
Hyksos: but some say that these people were Arabians [g226]. " Now in another
copy it is said that this word does not denote Kings, but, on the contrary,
denotes Captive Shepherds, and this on account of the particle Hyk; for that
Hyk, with the aspiration, in the Egyptian tongue again denotes Shepherds, and
that expressly also; and this to me seems the more probable opinion, and more
agreeable to ancient history. [But Manetho goes on]: "These people, whom we have
before named kings, and called shepherds also, and their descendants," as he
says, "kept possession of Egypt five hundred and eleven years."

After these, he says, "That the kings of Thebais and the other parts of Egypt
made an insurrection against the shepherds, and that there a terrible and long
war was made between them." He says further, "That under a king, whose [g227]
name was Alisphragmuthosis, the shepherds were subdued by him, and were indeed
driven out of other parts of Egypt, but were shut up in a place that contained
ten thousand acres; this place was named Avaris."

[56] Manetho says, "That the shepherds built a wall round all this place, which
was a large and a strong wall, and this in order to keep all their possessions
and their prey within a place of strength, but that Thummosis the son of
Alisphragmuthosis made an attempt to take them by force and by siege, with four
hundred and eighty thousand men to lie rotund about them, but that, upon his
despair of taking the place by that siege, they came to a composition with them,
that they should leave Egypt [g228], and go, without any harm to be done to
them, whithersoever they would; and that, after this composition was made, they
went away with their whole families and effects, not fewer in number than two
hundred and forty thousand, and took their journey from Egypt, through the
wilderness, for Syria; but that as they were in fear of the Assyrians, who had
then the dominion over Asia, they built a city in that country which is now
called Judea, and that large enough to contain this great number of men, and
called it Jerusalem.

Now Manetho, in another book of his, says, "That this nation, thus called
Shepherds, were also called Captives, in their sacred books.[g229]" And this
account of his is the truth; for feeding of sheep was the employment of our
forefathers in the most ancient ages and as they led such a wandering life in
feeding sheep, they were called Shepherds. Nor was it without reason that they
were called Captives by the Egyptians, since one of our ancestors, Joseph, told
the king of Egypt that he was a captive, and afterward sent for his brethren
into Egypt by the king's permission. But as for these matters, I shall make a
more exact inquiry about them elsewhere. But now I shall produce the Egyptians
as witnesses to the antiquity of our nation. I shall therefore here bring in
Manetho again, and what he writes as to the order of the times in this case; and
thus he speaks: "When this people or shepherds were gone out of Egypt to
Jerusalem, Tethtmosis the king of Egypt, who drove them out, reigned afterward
[g230] twenty-five years and four months, and then died; after him his son
Chebron took the kingdom for thirteen years; after whom came Amenophis, for
twenty years and seven months; then came his sister Amesses, for twenty-one
years and nine months; after her came Mephres, his son, for twelve years and
nine months; after him was Mephramuthosis, for twenty-five years and ten months;
after him was Thmosis, for nine years and eight months; after him came
Amenophis, for thirty years and ten months; after him came Orus, for thirty-six
years and five months; then came his daughter Acenchres, for twelve years and
one month; then was her brother Rathotis, for nine years; then was Acencheres,
for twelve years and five months; then came another Acencheres, for twelve years
and three months; after him Armais, for four years and one month; after him was
Ramesses [g231], for one year and four months; after him came Armesses Miammoun,
for sixty-six years and two months; after him Amenophis, for nineteen years and
six months; after him came Sethosis, and Ramesses, who had an army of horse, and
a naval force. This king appointed his brother, Armais,, to be his deputy over
Egypt." He also gave him all the other authority of a king, but with these only
injunctions, that he should not wear the diadem, nor be injurious to the queen,
the mother of his children, and that he should not meddle with the other
concubines of the king; while he made an expedition against Cyprus, and
Phoenicia, and besides against the Assyrians and the Medes. He then subdued them
all, some by his arms, some without fighting, and some by the terror of his
great army; and being puffed up by the great successes he had had [g232], he
went on still the more boldly, and overthrew the cities and countries that lay
in the eastern parts. But after some considerable time, Armais, who was left in
Egypt, did all those very things, by way of opposition, which his brother had
forbid him to do, without fear; for he used violence to the queen, and continued
to make use of the rest of the concubines, without sparing any of them; nay, at
the persuasion of his friends he put on the diadem, and set up to oppose his
brother. But then he who was set over the priests of Egypt wrote letters to
Sethosis, and informed him of all that had happened, and how his brother had set
up to oppose him: he therefore returned back to Pelusium immediately, and
recovered [g233] his kingdom again. The country also was called from his name
Egypt; for Manetho says, that Sethosis was himself called Egyptus, as was his
brother Armais called Danaus."

[57] This is Manetho's account. And it is evident from the number of years set
down by him belonging to this interval, if they be summed up together, that
these shepherds, as they are here called, who were no other than our
forefathers, were delivered out of Egypt, and came thence, and inhabited this
country, three hundred and ninety-three years before Danaus came to Argos;
although the Argives look upon him as their most ancient king Manetho,
therefore, bears this testimony to two points of the greatest consequence to our
purpose, and those from the Egyptian records themselves. In the first place,
that we came out of another country into Egypt; and that withal our deliverance
out of it was so ancient in time as to have preceded the siege of Troy by almost
a thousand years; but then, as to those things which Manetho adds, not from the
Egyptian records, but, [g234] as he confesses himself, from some stories of an
uncertain origin, I will disprove them hereafter particularly, and shall
demonstrate that they are no better than incredible fables.

This is what Josephus relates in his book. One by one he names the kings of
Egypt and their chonologies starting at the beginning and continuing until the
period of the one named Nectanebus. I have already mentioned Nectanebus
previously in the list of kings. After Nectanebus, Ochus the king of the
Persians gained control of Egypt, and ruled for 6 years. Then Arses, Ochus' son,
ruled for 4 years. After him, Darius ruled for 6 years. Then Alexander of
Macedon killed Darius the Persian, and ruled over both the Asians and the
Egyptians. Alexander founded the city of Alexandria in Egypt in the sixth year
of his reign. After the death of Alexander, his empire was divided between many
different rulers, and the Ptolemies became kings of Egypt and Alexandria. The
dates of these kings are as follows [g235].

[58] Concerning those who ruled Egypt and the city of Alexandria after Alexander
of Macedon. From the writings of Porphyry.

Alexander of Macedon [died] in the 114th Olympiad [324 B.C.]. He was succeeded
by Aridaeus, also called Philippus, Alexander's brother by a different mother.
For [g236] he was the son of Philippus and Philinna of Larissa. This Aridaeus
ruled for 7 years. He was killed in Macedonia by Polysperchon the son of
Antipater. A year after Philippus took power, Ptolemy (Ptolemy) the son of
Arsinoe and Lagus was sent to be governor of Egypt. He was governor for 17
years, and then he was king for 23 years. Thus he ruled for 40 years, until his
death. However, while still alive he abdicated in favour of his son Ptolemy,
called Philadelphus, and he lived for a further two years after his son had
become king. Consequently the reign of this first Ptolemy, called Soter, we take
to be 38 rather than 40 years.

He was succeeded by his son Ptolemy, who as we said was called Philadelphus. The
son reigned for two years while his father was still alive [g237], and then for
an additional 36 years, so we consider his reign to have lasted 38 years, the
same as his father's.

He was succeeded by the third Ptolemy, called Euergetes, who reigned for 25
years.

He was succeeded by the fourth Ptolemy, called Philopator, who reigned for 17
years.

He was succeeded by the fifth Ptolemy, called Epiphanes, who reigned for 24
years. The latter was succeeded by his two sons. The elder was called Philometer
and the younger [g238], Euergetes the second. Their combined reigns totaled 61
years. We present their reigns as one due to the confusion of the period, since
they were perpetually at war with each, and one was always seizing the throne
from the other. First Philometor ruled for 11 years; but when Antiochus invaded
Egypt and removed him from the throne, the inhabitants of Alexandria put the
younger brother on the throne, forced Antiochus out of Egypt, and freed
Philometor. They called that the 12th year of Philometor, and the first year of
Euergetes. After that the two kings ruled jointly until the 17th year, but from
the 18th year onwards Philometor ruled on his own.

Then the elder brother, who had recently been deposed by the younger brother,
was restored [g239] by the Romans. So he ruled over Egypt, and gave the land of
Libya to his younger brother. [Philometor] ruled [Egypt] alone for 18 years. He
died in Syria, which was also under his rule. At that point Euergetes was called
back from Cyrene and named king. Euergetes counted his years from the time he
first became king, so he seems to have reigned for 25 years after his brother's
death, but officially he reigned for 54 years. The 36th year of Philometor
should have been called the first year of his reign, but instead he ordered it
to be written as the 25th year of his reign. So the combined length of both
their reigns is 64 years, 35 years [g240] under Philometor and the rest under
Euergetes. Dividing it up into separate reigns would lead to confusion.

[59] Euergetes II Ptolemid had two sons by Cleopatra, the elder called Ptolemy
Soter and the younger called Ptolemy Alexander. First the elder son was brought
to the throne by his mother [g241]. She thought he would obey her, so favoured
him for a time. But in the sixth year of his reign he murdered his parents'
friends. His mother removed him from power because of his cruelty, and he fled
to Cyprus. His mother summoned her younger son from the city of Pelusium, and
appointed him joint monarch with her. Thus the younger son and his mother ruled
together and the country was governed in both their names. This year was called
the 11th year of Cleopatra and the 8th year of Alexander Ptolemy, because
Alexander counted his years from the 4th [g242] year of his brother's reign,
which was when he started to rule over Cyprus. Thus matters continued until the
death of Cleopatra. After she died, Alexander ruled as the sole monarch,
reigning for a total of 18 years after he returned to Alexandria, though
officially he reigned for 26 years. In the 19th year, after a dispute with his
soldiers, he went away to collect an army to bring to Egypt against them.
However they pursued him, and under the leadership of Tyrrus, who was a relative
of the kings, they defeated him in a naval battle. Alexander escaped by a
hairsbreadth and took refuge with his wife and daughter in Myra, a city of
Lycia; from there, he crossed over to Cyprus, where he was defeated by the
admiral Chaereas, and died [g243].

After [Alexander's] flight, the Alexandrians sent an emissary to his elder
brother, Ptolemy Soter, once more giving the throne to him, when he would sail
back from Cyprus. He lived another 7 years and 6 months after his return. The
entire period after the death of the brothers' father was counted in his name,
which was a total of 35 years and 6 months. But if we divide the period
precisely , Ptolemy Soter ruled at two different times for a total of 17 years
and 6 months, and in between the younger brother, Ptolemy Alexander, ruled for
18 years. The inhabitants of Alexandria were unable to completely delete
Alexander's reign from the records, but as far as was in their power they erased
all mention of it. This was due to the fact that Alexander with the help of some
Jews had gone against them. So they did not count the years of his reign, but
instead attributed the entire 36 year period to the elder brother. Similarly,
they do not attribute the next 6 months after the death of the elder brother
[g244], which make up the complete 36 years, to Cleopatra, the daughter of the
elder brother and wife of the younger brother, who took over control of the
kingdom after the death of her father. Nor do they formally attribute to
Alexander the 19 days in which he jointly reigned with her.

[60] This Alexander, who was living in the city of Rome, was the homonymous son
of the younger Ptolemy Alexander and the stepson of Cleopatra. Since there was a
dearth of military men in Egypt at the time, he was summoned [home]. He arrived
at Alexandria, married the aforementioned Cleopatra, took the kingdom from her
against her will, and then murdered her 19 days later. But he himself [g245] was
killed for this loathsome deed by a group of soldiers during a military review.
This Alexander was succeeded by Ptolemy called the new Dionysius. He was the son
of Ptolemy Soter and the brother of the aforementioned Cleopatra. He reigned for
29 years. His daughter Cleopatra was the last of the Ptolemid dynasty. She
reigned for 22 years.

These reigns also were not continuous from beginning to end, as is found in
writings, but each had some interruptions in its course. In the reign of the new
Dionysus, his daughters Cleopatra Tryphaena and Berenice, had a three year
[g246] reign ascribed to them: one year as a joint reign and the following two
years, after the death of Cleopatra Tryphaena, as the reign of Berenice on her
own. Because Ptolemy had gone to Rome, and was spending a long time there, his
daughters took over the rule of the kingdom, as if he was not going to return,
and Berenice had some some of her male relatives as co-rulers. But when Ptolemy
returned from Rome, he forget all affection towards his daughter, and, full of
rage for what she had done, put her to death. In the first years of Cleopatra's
reign, she shared power with her elder brother Ptolemy and then with others, for
the following reasons. When the new [g247] Dionysus died, he left four children,
two sons called Ptolemy and daughters called Cleopatra and Arsinoe. He handed
over power to the two eldest children, Ptolemy and Cleopatra, who reigned
jointly for 4 years. This arrangement would have continued if Ptolemy had not
wanted to seize sole power for himself, defying his father's orders. However he
died shortly, after being defeated in a naval battle by Julius Caesar, who came
to the aid of Cleopatra.

After Ptolemy's death, Cleopatra's younger brother, who was also called Ptolemy,
became joint ruler with his sister, according to Caesar's wishes. The next year
was called the fifth year of Cleopatra and the first year of Ptolemy, and so it
continued [g248] for the following two years, until he died. He died in his 4th
year, which was Cleopatra's 8th year, due to Cleopatra's treachery. Thereafter
Cleopatra ruled on her own, untill her 15th year. However, her 16th year was
also called the first year, because after the death of Lysimachus the king of
Chalcis in Syria, the Roman general Marcus Antonius gave Chalcis and the
surrounding regions to Cleopatra. And thenceforth for the remaining years until
the 22nd year, which was the last of Cleopatra's reign, the years were counted
in the same way, so that the 22nd year was also called the 7th year.

Octavius Caesar, also called Augustus, conquered Egypt [g249] in the battle of
Actium, and succeeded Cleopatra as ruler of Egypt in the second year of the
184th Olympiad [43 B.C.]. From the first year of the 111th Olympiad [336 B.C.],
when Aridaeus Philippus became king, until the second year of the 184th Olympiad
[43 B.C.], is 73 Olympiads and one additional year. Thus the total duration of
the rule of all the kings of Alexandria, to the death of Cleopatra, is 293 years
[g250].

[61] The Ptolemids and the Lengths of Their Reigns.

Alexander of Macedon began his reign in the first year of the 111th Olympiad
[336 B.C.]. He founded the city of Alexandria in Egypt, and ruled for 12 years
and 7 months. After him, the kings of the city of Alexandria and all of Egypt
were:

Ptolemy the son of Lagus, 40 years.

Ptolemy Philadelphus, 38 years.

Ptolemy Euergetes, 24 years.

Ptolemy Philopator, 21 years.

Ptolemy Epiphanes, 24 years.

Ptolemy Philometor, 21 years [g251].

Ptolemy the second Euergetes, 29 years.

Ptolemy Physcon, or Soter, 17 years and 6 months.

Ptolemy Alexander, who was expelled by his mother's father, 3 years.

Ptolemy Philadelphus, returning from exile after the expulsion of Alexander, 8
years.

Ptolemy Dionysus, called Philadelphus, 30 years.

Cleopatra the daughter of Ptolemy, 22 years. In her reign, Gaius Julius Caesar
became the first Roman emperor. The next emperor, Octavius Caesar Augustus,
called Sebastos in Greek, killed [g252] Cleopatra and put an end to the dynasty
of the Ptolemids, who had ruled for 295 years [g253].

[62] How the Greeks Calculate Their Ancient History.

[We shall list:] The kings of the Athenians. The kings of the Argives. The kings
of the Sicyonians. The kings of the Lacedaemonians. The kings of the
Corinthians. Who ruled the sea, and for how long.

How the Greeks reckon each of the Olympiads. The first Macedonian kings. The
Thessalian, Syrian and Asian kings after Alexander of Macedon.

Greek Chronology. The Greeks regard the Sicyonians as the most ancient [Greeks].
Their kings [g253] resided at Sicyon. The first king to rule Sicyon was
Aegialeus, at the same time as Ninus and Belus, who are the first remembered
kings of the Assyrians and of Asia. The Peloponnese was originally called
Aegialeia, after this Aegialeus.

Inachus is said to have been the first king of the Argives, 235 years after the
start of the Sicyonian kingdom.

Cecrops, called Diphyes, was the first king of the Athenians, [ruling] about 300
years after the start of the Argive kingdom, and 533 years after the start of
the Sicyonian kingdom. This chronicle will start with the earliest rulers, and
will begin with a list of the kings of the Sicyonians [g254]. There is
considerable disagreement among the ancients who composed chronicles of Greek
history. As far as possible, we will select [material] on which there is
consensus. The chronographer Castor lists the dates of the Sicyonian kings in
his chronicle and then provides a summary of them, as follows:

"We will provide a list of the kings of Sicyon, starting with Aegialeus, the
first king, and ending with Zeuxippus. These kings reigned for a total of 959
years. After the kings, [g255] six priests of [Apollo] Carneius were appointed;
this priesthood lasted for 33 years. Then Charidemus was appointed priest; but
he could not bear the expense, and went into exile." This according to Castor.
Below we present the full list of the Sicyonian kings.

[63] The Kings of the Sicyonians.

1. Aegialeus, 52 years. The Peloponnese was originally called Aegialeia, after
this Aegialeus. He is said to have started to rule Sicyon in the 15th year of
Belus, the first king of the Assyrians. According to legend, [Belus] was the son
of Poseidon and Libya [g256].

2. Europs, 45 years. He reigned at the same time as Ninus, the son of Belus.

3. Telchin, 20 years. He reigned at the same time as Semiramis.

4. Apis, 25 years. The Peloponnese was then called Apia, after this Apis.

5. Thelxion, 52 years.

6. Aegydrus, 34 years.

7. Thurimachus, 45 years. During his reign, Inachus became the first king of the
Argives.

8. Leucippus, 53 years.

9. Messapus, 47 years. During his reign Egypt was ruled by Joseph, as the
Hebrews record [g257].

10. Eratus, 46 years.

11. Plemnaeus, 48 years.

12. Orthopolis, 63 years.

13. Marathonius, 30 years. During his reign, Cecrops Diphyes became the first
king of Attica.

14. Marathus, 20 years. During his reign, Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt, as
will be shown in due course.

15. Echyreus, 55 years. During his reign, Danaus became king of the Argives
[g258].

16. Corax, 30 years.

17. Epopeus, 35 years.

18. Laomedon, 40 years.

19. Sicyon, 45 years. During his reign, the kingdom of the Argives came to an
end, after lasting for 540 years.

20. Polybus, 40 years.

21. Inachus, 40 years.

22. Phaestus, 8 years.

23. Adrastus, 4 years.

24. Polypheides, 31 years. During his reign, Troy was captured [g259].

25. Pelasgus, 20 years. During his reign, Aeneias was king of the Latins.

26. Zeuxippus, 31 years.

There were a total of 26 kings of Sicyon, who reigned for 959 years. After
[Zeuxippus], there were no more kings. Instead the priests of [Apollo] Carneius
[ruled].

1. The first [of these] priest[s] was Archelaus [who ruled] one year.

2. Automedon, one year.

3. Theoclytus, four years.

4. Euneus, six years.

5. Theonomus, nine years [g260].

6. Amphigyes, twelve years.

7. Finally, Charidemus one year. He could not bear the expense, and went into
exile. He was priest 352 years before the first Olympiad [i.e. 1128 B.C.]. The
total for the Sicyonian kings and priests is 998 years.

Following this list of the Sicyonian rulers it is appropriate to list the kings
of the Argives as they are accurately recorded in ancient histories. Here is how
Castor desribed them [g261].

[64] Castor on the Kings of the Argives.

Now we will list the kings of the Argives, begining with Inachus and ending with
Sthenelus the son of Crotopus. These kings reigned for a total of 382 years,
until Sthenelus was expelled by Danaus, who seized control of Argos. The
descendants of Danaus ruled Argos, ending with Eurysthenes, the son of
Sthenelus, the son of Perseus. After Eurysthenes, the descendants of Pelops
ruled Argos. The duration of the reign of the kings of the Danaidae was 162
years. The duration of the reign of the Pelopidae was 105 years, starting with
Atreus, and ending with Penthilus, Tisamenus and Cometes the son of Orestes, in
whose time the invasion of the Heracleidae occurred.

The dates of each of the Argive kings are as follows. The Kings of the Argives.

1. Inachus, 50 years. The country was called Inachia, after this Inachus. He
began to rule [g262] the Argives at the time of Thurimachus, who was the seventh
king of the Sicyonians.

2. Phoroneus, 60 years. In his reign, Ogygus founded Eleusis.

3. Apis, 35 years. The country was then called Apia, after this Apis. During his
reign, Joseph governed the Egyptians, as recorded by the Hebrews.

4. Argus, the son of Zeus and Niobe, for 70 years. The name of the country was
changed to Argeia, after this Argus.

5. Criasus, 54 years.

6. Phorbas, 35 years. During his reign, Cecrops Diphyes became king of the
Athenians.

7. Triopas, 46 years. During his reign, Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt.

8. Crotopus, 21 years.

9. Sthenelus, 11 years.

Altogether these kings reigned for 382 years [g263].

Danaus expelled Sthenelus, and ruled Argos, as did his descendants. The
succession of kings, and their dates, are as follows.

10. Danaus, 50 years.

11. Lynceus, 41 years.

12. Abas, 23 years.

13. Proetus, 17 years.

14. Acrisius, 31 years.

Altogether they ruled Argos for 545 years, until the end of the Danaidae.

After Acrisius, rule of the Argives passed to Mycenaae, when the descendants of
Pelops took power, in the time of Eurysthenes the son of Sthenelus [g264].
Pelops was the first ruler of the Peloponnese, and he encouraged the Olympic
games.

After Acrisius, when the Argives were ruled from Mycenae:

Eurysthenes ruled as king for 45 years.

Then the Pelopidae, Atreus and Thyestes, 65 years.

Then Agamemnon, 30 years. In the 18th year of his reign, Troy was captured.

Aegisthus, 17 years.

Orestes, Tisamenus, Penthilus and Cometes 58 years, until the invasion of the
Heracleidae, who then conquered the Peloponnese. From the return of the
Heracleidae until the migration of the Ionians [g265], 60 years elapsed. From
the migration of the Ionians until the first Olympiad [776 B.C.], 267 years
elapsed.

It is appropriate to follow this with a list of the kings of the Athenians,
summarizing accurate accounts from ancient writers.

Ogygus is said to have been the first [king] of the Athenians. The Greeks relate
that their great ancient flood took place during his reign. Phoroneus the son of
Inachus, king of the Argives, is considered to have lived at this time. Plato
mentions this in the Timaeus [22], as follows: "When he wished to acquaint
[g266] them with ancient history, so they could discuss the antiquity of this
city, he began his account with the old stories about Phoroneus and Niobe, and
then what happened after the flood." Ogygus lived in the time of Messapus, the
ninth king of Sicyon, and Belochus, the eighth king of the Assyrians.

After Ogygus and until the time of Cecrops, it is said that there was no king in
Attica for 190 years, because of the great destruction caused by the flood. The
number of years is calculated from the kings of the Argives, who reigned before
Ogygus. From the end of the reign of Phoroneus, king of the Argives, in whose
time Ogygus' flood is said to have occurred, until Phorbas, in whose time
Cecrops became king of Attica, 190 years elapsed. From Cecrops until the first
Olympiad [g267], seventeen kings, and twelve archons for life are listed; in
this period too, the amazing fables of the Greeks are said to have unfolded. The
Greeks count the kings of Attica from [Cecrops], because they do not know for
certain the dates of any earlier kings. Castor explained this briefly in his
history, as follows.

[65] Castor on The Kings of the Athenians.

Now we will list the kings of the Athenians, beginning with Cecrops, called
Diphyes, and ending with Thymoetes. The total duration of the reigns of all
these kings, called Erechtheidae, was 450 years. After them, Melanthus of Pylus,
son of Andropompus, took over the kingdom, followed by his son Codrus. The total
duration of their two reigns was 52 (or 58) years. [lacuna]... [archons]
starting with Medon (?) son of Codrus, and ending with Alcmaeon son of
Aeschylus. The total duration of the rule of the archons for life was 209 years.
The next archons held power for 10 years each; there were seven such archons,
who ruled for 70 years [g268]. Then the archons started to hold power for one
year each, starting with Creon and ending with Theophemus, in whose time the
valorous deeds of our land ceased.

This is how Castor put it. Let us now provide a list of all these kings.

[66] The Kings of the Athenians.

1. Cecrops Diphyes, 50 years. In his reign Prometheus, Epimetheus and Atlas
lived. He began ruling the Athenians in the time of Triopas, the seventh king of
the Argives, and Marathonius, the thirteenth king of Sicyon. At this time, Moses
had become recognized amongst the Hebrews, as we will show in due course. Also
at this time, the flood of Deucalion is said to have occurred in Thessaly
[g269], and fire devastated the land of Ethiopia in the time of Phaethon.

2. Cranaus, a native, 9 years.

3. Amphictyon, the son of Deucalion and son-in-law of Cranaus, 10 years. The
deeds narrated about the Danaidae are said to have occurred in his reign.

4. Erichthonius, the son of Hephaestus, who is called Erechtheus by Homer, 50
years. The Idaean Dactyls lived in his reign.

5. Pandion, the son of Erichthonius, 40 years. The kidnaping of the girl
[Persephone], and what is narrated about Triptolemus, occurred in his reign.

6. Erechtheus the son of Pandion, 50 years. The deeds narrated about Perseus
occurred in his reign.

7. Cecrops, the brother of Erechtheus, 40 years. The deeds narrated about
Dionysus occurred in his reign [g270].

8. Pandion, the son of Erechtheus, 25 years. Afterwards Pandion went into exile,
and became king of Megara. The deeds narrated about Europa, Cadmus and the
Sparti occurred in his reign.

9. Aegeus, the son of Pandion, 48 years. The deeds narrated about the Argonauts
and the Centaurs occurred in his reign; and Heracles held the wrestling
competitions.

10. Theseus, the son of Aegeus, 30 years. In his reign, Minos became recognized
as a legislator.

11. Menestheus, the son of Peteus, son of Orneus son of Erechtheus, 23 years. In
his reign, Troy was captured.

12. Demophon, the son of Theseus, 33 years. The deeds narrated about Odysseus
and Orestes occurred in his reign; and Aeneias was king of Lavinium.

13. Oxyntes [g271], the son of Demophon, 12 years. In his reign, the Amazons
burned down the temple at Ephesus.

14. Apheidas, the son of Oxyntes, one year.

15. Thymoetes, the brother of Apheidas, 8 years.

16. Melanthus of Pylus, the son of Andropompus, 37 years. In his reign the
Heracleidae returned and occupied the Peloponnese.

17. Codrus, the son of Melanthus, 21 years. In his reign, the Ionians were
expelled from Achaea, and took refuge in Athens.

[67] The Athenian Princes [Archons] Who Ruled for Life.

18. Medon, the son of Codrus, 20 years.

19. Acastus, the son of Medon [g272], 36 years. In his reign occurred the
migration of the Ionians, including Homer, so they say. At the same time,
Solomon built the temple at Jerusalem, as we will show at the appropriate time.

20. Archippus, the son of Acastus, 19 years.

21. Thersippus, the son of Archippus, 41 years.

22. Phorbas, the son of Thersippus, 30 years.

23. Megacles, the son of Phorbas, 30 years.

24. Diognetus, the son of Megacles, 28 years. At this time, Lycurgus had become
prominent.

25. Pherecles, the son of Diognetus, 19 years.

26. Ariphron, the son of Pherecles, 20 years. At this time, the kingdom of the
Assyrians came to an end, and Sardanapalus was killed [g273].

27. Thespieus, the son of Ariphron, 27 years. At this time, Lycurgus created
laws for the Spartans.

28. Agamestor, the son of Thespieus, 17 years.

29. Aeschylus, the son of Agamestor, 23 years. In his twelfth year, the first
Olympiad was held, in which Coroebus won the stadion contest.

Adding together the reigns of all the Athenian kings, from the time of Cecrops
to the first Olympiad [776 B.C.] the total is 780 years. And 970 years elapsed
from Ogygus until the first Olympiad.

Henceforth it is appropriate to provide dating according to the Olympiads
[g274].

After Aeschylus, Alcmaeon ruled the Athenians, for 2 years.

After him it was decided to appoint archons for ten years each:

Charops, for ten years.

Aesimides, for ten years.

Cleidicus, for ten years.

Hippomenes, for ten years.

Leocrates, for ten years.

Apsander, for ten years.

Eryxias, for ten years.

During [Eryxias' reign], it was decided to appoint archons for one year each.
The first yearly archon was Creon, in the 24th Olympiad [684-681 B.C.].
Thereafter an archon was appointed each year. There is no need to list their
names.

We have provided the dates of the ancient rulers of the Athenians [g275], as
related by old and especially reliable historians. We have set down the dates
and events before the capture of Troy--which are not regarded as particularly
accurate--as well as we could from the many accounts. Similarly, events from the
capture of Troy until the first Olympiad are not accurately recorded. However
Porphyry, in the first book of his Philosophical History, gives the following
summary:

[68] Porphyry from the first book of his Philosophical History [g276].

Apollodorus says that there are 80 years from the capture of Troy [1183 B.C.]
until the Heracleidae invasion of the Peloponnese [1103 B.C.]; 60 years from the
return of the Heracleidae until the settling of Ionia [1043 B.C.]; 159 years
from that point until Lycurgus [884 B.C.]; ... and there are 108 years from
Lycurgus until the first Olympiad [776 B.C.]. Altogether, 407 years elapsed from
the capture of Troy to the first Olympiad.

I believe that it would be appropriate next to discuss the Greek Olympiads
[g277].

[69] From the time of the first Olympiad, in which Coroebus of Elis won the
stadion race, Greek chronology appears to have been accurately [g277] recorded.
Before that time, however, the dates are provided according to the views of each
writer.

About the Institution of the Olympics, which are Athletic Competitions.

It is necessary to discuss briefly [the origins of] the Olympics. There are some
who place its beginning in remote antiquity, before the time of Heracles. [This
group attributes the founding of the Olympics] to one of the Idaean Dactyls.
Subsequently Aethlius [used the concept] as a means of challenging his sons. And
it was from his name that the adversaries are called athletes. After [Aethlius]
his sons Epeius and then Endymion, Alexinus and Oenomaus were each in charge of
the sacrifices [connected with the] festival. Next Pelops [conducted an athletic
competition] in honor of [g278] his father, Zeus (Aramazd). And then Heracles,
son of Alcmene and Zeus (Aramazd) [held an athlethic competition].

Now it was 10 generations--though some say only 3--from the time of Heracles to
the time of Iphitus. [Iphitus] was from Elis and was the steward for the entire
Peloponnesus. He wanted to reduce the fighting among the cities. To this end he
had sent men throughout the Peloponnesus to observe [conditions and] to learn
how to lessen the military irritants. Then the gods gave the following commands
to the Peloponnesians: Enter the temples and make sacrifice, And obey what the
soothsayers command. This additional prophesy was given to the Eleians [g279]:
Eleians, hold firm to the laws of your forefathers And preserve your land, And
put an end to warfare.

Stay in complete friendship with the [other] Greeks Until the arrival of a
joyous celebration. As a consequence of this, Iphitus ordered that they stop
fighting, and that each [party ]begin to experience peace under confederation.
He implemented Heracles' command that they not attack one another. And he
initiated the [Olympic] games with Lycurgus the Lacedaemonian, who like himself
was a descendant of Heracles [g280]. At this time the stadion race was the sole
competition; however, subsequently, one by one, other contests were added [to
the games].

Aristodemus of Elis relates that in the 27th Olympiad after Iphitus the names of
the winners in the athletic contests began to be recorded. Before then the
athletes' names were not recorded. In the twenty[-eighth] Olympiad, Coroebus of
Elis won the stadion race, and he was the first [winner] to be recorded. Thus
were the Olympiads initiated, by which the Greeks reckon their chronology.

Polybius supports Aristodemus' information; but Callimachus says that thirteen
Olympiads passed after Iphitus without victors being recorded, and that Coroebus
was the victor in the 14th Olympiad. Many [g281] writers state that 459 years
elapsed between the institution of the games by Heracles the son of Alcmene and
what is [commonly] regarded as the first Olympiad. The Eleians hold the games
every fifth year, with a four year interval separating them.

[70] The Greek Olympiads [A list] from the first Olympiad to the 247th, when
Antoninus the son of Severus was emperor of the Romans.

1st [776 B.C.] Coroebus of Elis was the victor in the stadion race [g282]. The
stadion race was the sole contest until the thirteen Olympiad.

2nd [772 B.C.] Antimachus of Elis, stadion race. Romulus and Remus [the
legendary founders of Rome] were born.

3rd [768 B.C.] Androclus of Messenia, stadion race.

4th [764 B.C.] Polychares of Messenia, stadion race.

5th [760 B.C.] Aeschines of Elis, stadion race.

6th [756 B.C.] Oebotas of Dyme, stadion race.

7th [752 B.C.] Diocles of Messenia, stadion race. Romulus built Rome.

8th [748 B.C.] Anticles of Messenia, stadion race.

9th [744 B.C.] Xenocles of Messenia, stadion race.

10th [740 B.C.] Dotades of Messenia, stadion race.

11th [736 B.C.] Leochares of Messenia, stadion race.

12th [732 B.C.] Oxythemis of Coroneia, stadion race.

13th [728 B.C.] Diocles of Corinth, stadion race.

14th [724 B.C.] Desmon of Corinth, stadion race [g283]. A double race was added,
which was won by Hypenus of Elis.

[71] 15th [720 B.C.] Orsippus of Megara, stadion race. A long race was added,
and the runners were naked; the winner was Acanthus of Laconia.

16th [716 B.C.] Pythagoras of Laconia, stadion race.

17th [712 B.C.] Polus of Epidaurus, stadion race.

18th [708 B.C.] Tellis of Sicyon, stadion race. A wrestling contest was added,
and the winner was Eurybatus of Laconia. A pentathlon contest was also added,
and the winner was Lampis of Laconia.

19th [704 B.C.] Menus of Megara, stadion race.

20th [700 B.C.] Atheradas of Laconia, stadion race.

21st [696 B.C.] Pantacles of Athens, stadion race.

22nd [692 B.C.] Pantacles for a second time.

23rd [688 B.C.] Icarius of Hyperesia, stadion race [g284]. A boxing contest was
added, and the winner was Onomastus of Smyrna. It was Onomastus who established
the rules of boxing.

24th [684 B.C.] Cleoptolemus of Laconia, stadion race.

25th [680 B.C.] Thalpis of Laconia, stadion race. A race was added for chariots
drawn by four horses, and the winner was Pagon of Thebes.

26th [676 B.C.] Callisthenes of Laconia, stadion race. Philombrotus of Laconia
won the pentathlon at three Olympic games. The Carneia, a contest for
citharodes, was held for the first time.

27th [672 B.C.] Eurybus of Athens, stadion race.

28th [668 B.C.] Charmis of Laconia, stadion race. Charmis trained on a diet of
dried figs. These games were held [g285] by the inhabitants of Pisa, because
Elis was preoccupied by a war in the west.

29th [664 B.C.] Chionis of Laconia, stadion race. Chionis could leap a distance
of 22 feet.

30th [660 B.C.] Chionis for a second time. The inhabitants of Pisa rebelled from
Elis, and [so the Pisans] supervised these and the following 22 games.

[72] 31st [656 B.C.] Chionis of Laconia for a third time, stadion race. [g286]

32nd [652 B.C.] Cratinus of Megara, stadion race. At these games, Comaeus was
the third of his brothers to win the boxing contest.

33rd [648 B.C.] Gygis of Laconia, stadion race. At these games, a pancratium
contest was added, and the winner was the enormous Lygdamis of Syracuse. He was
able to measure out the stadion with his feet, in only six hundred paces. A
horse race was added, and the winner was Craxilas of Thessaly.

34th [644 B.C.] Stomas of Athens, stadion race.

35th [640 B.C.] Sphaerus of Laconia, stadion race. The double race was won by
Cylon of [g287] Athens, who later attempted to set himself up as tyrant.

36th [636 B.C.] Phrynon of Athens, stadion race. On the island of Coo, Phrynon
was killed in single combat.

37th [632 B.C.] Eurycleidas of Laconia, stadion race. A stadion race for boys
was added, and the winner was Polynices of Elis. A wrestling contest for boys
was added, and the winner was Hipposthenes of Laconia, who won the men's
wrestling contest five times in a row, starting from the next-but-one Olympic
games.

38th [628 B.C.] Olyntheus of Laconia, stadion race. A pancratium contest for
boys was added, but only on this one occasion. The winner was Deutelidas of
Laconia.

39th [624 B.C.] Rhipsolaus of Laconia, stadion race [g288].

40th [620 B.C.] Olyntheus of Laconia for a second time, stadion race.

41st [616 B.C.] Cleondas of Thebes, stadion race. A boxing contest for boys was
added, and the winner was Philotas of Sybaris.

42nd [612 B.C.] Lycotas of Laconia, stadion race.

43rd [608 B.C.] Cleon of Epidaurus, stadion race.

44th [604 B.C.] Gelon of Laconia, stadion race.

45th [600 B.C.] Anticrates of Epidaurus, stadion race.

46th [596 B.C.] Chrysamaxus of Laconia, stadion race. The boys' stadion race was
won by Polymnestor of Miletus, who chased and caught a rabit while he was
shepherding.

[73] 47th [592 B.C.] Eurycles of Laconia, stadion race.

48th [588 B.C.] Glycon of Croton, stadion race [g289]. Pythagoras of Samos was
excluded from the boys' boxing contest and was mocked for being effeminate, but
he went on to the men's contest and defeated all his opponents.

49th [584 B.C.] Lycinus of Croton, stadion race.

50th [580 B.C.] Epitelidas of Laconia, stadion race. [During this Olympiad] the
seven wise men were named.

51st [576 B.C.] Eratosthenes of Croton, stadion race.

52nd [572 B.C.] Agis of Elis, stadion race.

53rd [568 B.C.] Hagnon of Peparethus, stadion race.

54th [564 B.C.] Hippostratus of Croton, stadion race. Arichion of Phigaleia died
after winning the pancratium contest for the third time. Though dead he was
crowned as victor, because his opponent had already conceded defeat, after his
leg was broken by Arichion.

55th [560 B.C.] Hippostratus for a second time. [During this Olympiad] Cyrus was
king of the Persians [g290].

56th [556 B.C.] Phaedrus of Pharsalus, stadion race.

57th [552 B.C.] Ladromus of Laconia, stadion race.

58th [548 B.C.] Diognetus of Croton, stadion race.

59th [544 B.C.] Archilochus of Corcyra, stadion race.

60th [540 B.C.] Apellaeus of Elis, stadion race.

61st [536 B.C.] - Agatharchus of Corcyra, stadion race.

62nd [532 B.C.] - Eryxias of Chalcis, stadion race. Milon of Croton won the
wrestling contest. He won six times at the Olympic games, six times at the
Pythian games, ten times at the Isthmian games, and nine times at the Nemean
games.

63rd [528 B.C.] - Parmenides of Camarina, stadion race.

64th [524 B.C.] - Menander of Thessaly, stadion race.

[74] 65th [520 B.C.] - Anochas of Tarentum, stadion race. A race as hoplites
(wearing armour) was added, and the winner was Damaretus of Heraea [g291].

66th [516 B.C.] - Ischyrus of Himera, stadion race.

67th [512 B.C.] - Phanas of Pellene, stadion race. Phanas was the first to win
all three races, the stadion race, the double race and the race wearing armour.

68th [508 B.C.] - Isomachus of Croton, stadion race.

69th [504 B.C.] - Isomachus for a second time.

70th [500 B.C.] - Nicasias of Opus, stadion race.

71st [496 B.C.] - Tisicrates of Croton, stadion race.

72nd [492 B.C.] - Tisicrates for a second time.

73rd [488 B.C.] - Astyalus of Croton, stadion race.

74th [484 B.C.] - Astyalus for a second time.

75th [480 B.C.] - Astyalus for a third time.

76th [476 B.C.] - Scamander of Mytilene, stadion race.

77th [472 B.C.] - Dandes of Argos, stadion race [g292].

78th [468 B.C.] - Parmenides of Poseidonia, stadion race.

79th [464 B.C.] - Xenophon of Corinth, stadion race.

80th [460 B.C.] - Torymmas of Thessaly, stadion race. The wrestling contest was
won by Amesinas of Barce, who trained by wrestling with a bull while he was
tending cattle. He even brought the bull to Pisa for his training.

81st [456 B.C.] - Polymnastus of Cyrene, stadion race.

82nd [452 B.C.] - Lycus of Larissa, stadion race.

83rd [448 B.C.] - Crisson of Himera, stadion race.

84th [444 B.C.] - Crisson for a second time.

85th [440 B.C.] - Crisson for a third time.

86th [436 B.C.] - Theopompus of Thessaly, stadion race.

87th [432 B.C.] - Sophron of Ambracia, stadion race. After this [Olympiad], the
Peloponnesian war began.

88th [428 B.C.] - Symmachus of Messenia, stadion race [g293].

89th [424 B.C.] - Symmachus for a second time.

90th [420 B.C.] - Hyperbius of Syracuse, stadion race.

[75] 91st [416 B.C.] - Exagentus of Acragas, stadion race.

92nd [412 B.C.] - Exagentus for a second time.

93rd [408 B.C.] - Eubatus of Cyrene, stadion race. The pancratium contest was
won by the enormous Polydamas of Scotussa, who killed lions and fought without
weapons against armed men, when he was with Ochus among the Persians. He was
able to bring chariots charging at full speed to a halt. A race was added for
chariots drawn by a pair of horses (Synoris), and the winner was Euagoras of
Elis.

94th [404 B.C.] - Crocinas of Larissa, stadion race.

95th [400 B.C.] - Minon of Athens, stadion race.

96th [396 B.C.] - Eupolemus of Elis, stadion race. A contest for trumpeters was
added, and the winner was Timaeus of Elis [g294]. A contest for heralds was
added, and the winner was Crates of Elis.

97th [392 B.C.] - Terinaeus [...], stadion race.

98th [388 B.C.] - Sosippus of Delphi, stadion race. The wrestling contest was
won by Aristodemus of Elis, whom no one could grasp round the middle.

99th [384 B.C.] - Dicon of Syracuse, stadion race. A race was added for chariots
drawn by four colts, and the winner was Eurybatus of Laconia.

100th [380 B.C.] - Dionysodorus of Tarentum, stadion race.

101st [376 B.C.] - Damon of Thurii, stadion race.

102nd [372 B.C.] - Damon for a second time [g295].

103rd [368 B.C.] - Pythostratus of Ephesus, stadion race.

104th [364 B.C.] - Phocides of Athens, stadion race. These games were held by
the Pisans.

105th [360 B.C.] - Porus of Cyrene, stadion race.

106th [356 B.C.] - Porus for a second time.

107th [352 B.C.] - Micrinas of Tarentum, stadion race.

108th [348 B.C.] - Polycles of Cyrene, stadion race.

109th [344 B.C.] - Aristolochus of Athens, stadion race.

110th [340 B.C.] - Anticles of Athens, stadion race.

111th [336 B.C.] - Cleomantis of Cleitor, stadion race.

112th [332 B.C.] - Eurylas of Chalcis, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Alexander captured Babylon, and killed Darius.

[76] 113th [328 B.C.] - Cliton of Macedonia, stadion race [g296]. Ageus of
Argos, won the long race. He returned to Argos and announced his own victory on
the same day.

114th [324 B.C.] - Micinas of Rhodes, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Alexander died, and his empire was split into many parts; Ptolemy became king of
Egypt and Alexandria.

115th [320 B.C.] - Damasias of Amphipolis, stadion race.

116th [316 B.C.] - Demosthenes of Laconia, stadion race.

117th [312 B.C.] - Parmenides of Mytilene, stadion race.

118th [308 B.C.] - Andromenes of Corinth, stadion race. Antenor of Athens or
Miletus, undisputed winner of the pancratium, was crowned in all the major
competitions, [g297] and was undefeated in each of three age groups.

119th [304 B.C.] - Andromenes of Corinth, stadion race.

120th [300 B.C.] - Pythagoras of Magnesia-on-Maeander, stadion race. Ceras of
Argos, [victor in] wrestling, tore the hooves off an ox.

121st [296 B.C.] - Pythagoras for a second time.

122nd [292 B.C.] - Antigonus of Macedonia, stadion race.

123rd [288 B.C.] - Antigonus for a second time.

124th [284 B.C.] - Philomelus of Pharsalus, stadion race.

125th [280 B.C.] - Ladas of Aegium, stadion race.

126th [276 B.C.] - Idaeus or Nicator of Cyrene, stadion race.

127th [272 B.C.] - Perigenes of Alexandria, stadion race.

128th [268 B.C.] - Seleucus of Macedonia, stadion race.

129th [264 B.C.] - Philinus of Cos, stadion race [g298]. A new race for two-colt
chariots was added, and the first winner was Philistiachus [son] of Macedonia.

130th [260 B.C.] - Philinus for a second time.

131st [256 B.C.] - Ammonius of Alexandria, stadion race. A one-colt race was
introduced, and the first winner was Hippocrates [son] of Thessaly.

132nd [252 B.C.] - Xenophanes of Amphissa in Aetolia, stadion race.

[77] 133rd [248 B.C.] - Simylus of Neapolis, stadion race. [During this
Olympiad] the Parthians revolted against the Macedonians. Arsaces was their
first king, whence the [dynastic] name Arsacid.

134th [244 B.C.] - Alcides of Laconia, stadion race.

135th [240 B.C.] - Eraton of Aetolia, stadion race. Cleoxenus of Alexandria,
winner in boxing, won without injury at all the major games.

136th [236 B.C.] - Pythocles of Sicyon, stadion race.

137th [232 B.C.] - Menestheus of [? son of] Barcyla, stadion race [g299].

138th [228 B.C.] - Demetrius of Alexandria, stadion race.

139th [224 B.C.] - Iolaidas of Argos, stadion race.

140th [220 B.C.] - Zopyrus of Syracuse, stadion race.

141st [216 B.C.] - Dorotheus of Rhodes, stadion race.

142nd [212 B.C.] - Crates of Alexandria, stadion race. Caprus of Elis won both
the wrestling and the pancratium competitions, like Heracles. Thus he was
recorded as "second after Heracles".

143rd [208 B.C.] - Heracleitus of Samos, stadion race.

144th [204 B.C.] - Heracleides of Salamis in Cyprus, stadion race.

145th [200 B.C.] - Pyrrhias of Aetolia, stadion race. Moschus of Colophon,
[victor in] boys' boxing, was the only boy to have won the boxing competition at
all the major games. A boys' pancratium competition was added, and the first
winner was Phaedimus of Alexandria [g300].

146th [196 B.C.] - Micion of Boeotia, stadion race.

147th [192 B.C.] - Agemachus of Cyzicus, stadion race. Cleitostratus of Rhodes,
[victor in] wrestling, defeated his opponents by grasping their necks.

148th [188 B.C.] - Arcesilaus of Megalopolis, stadion race.

149th [184 B.C.] - Hippostratus of Seleucia in Pieria, stadion race.

150th [180 B.C.] - Onesicritus of Salamis, stadion race.

[78] 151st [176 B.C.] - Thymilus of Aspendus, stadion race.

152nd [172 B.C.] - Democritus of Megara, stadion race.

153rd [168 B.C.] - Aristander of Antissa in Lesbos, stadion race.

154th [164 B.C.] - Leonidas of Rhodes, three times victor in the stadion race.

155th [160 B.C.] - Leonidas for a second time.

156th [156 B.C.] - Leonidas for a third time. Aristomenes of Rhodes [g301] was
the third after Heracles to win both the wrestling and the pancratium
competitions.

157th [152 B.C.] - Leonidas, victor in the stadion race for a fourth time, was
the first and only man to win 12 Olympic crowns over four Olympiads.

158th [148 B.C.] - Othon of Syracuse, stadion race.

159th [144 B.C.] - Alcimus of Cyzicus, stadion race.

160th [140 B.C.] - Agnodorus of Cyzicus, stadion race.

161st [136 B.C.] - Antipater of Epirus, stadion race.

162nd [132 B.C.] - Damon of Delphi, stadion race.

163rd [128 B.C.] - Timotheus of Tralles, stadion race.

164th [124 B.C.] - Boeotus of Sicyon, stadion race.

165th [120 B.C.] - Acusilaus of Cyrene, stadion race.

166th [116 B.C.] - Chrysogonus of Nicaea, stadion race.

167th [112 B.C.] - Chrysogonus for a second time [g302].

168th [108 B.C.] - Nicomachus of Philadelphia, stadion race.

169th [104 B.C.] - Nicodemus of Lacedaemon, stadion race.

170th [100 B.C.] - Simmias of Seleuceia-on-Tigris, stadion race.

171st [96 B.C.] - Parmeniscus of Corcyra, stadion race.

172nd [92 B.C.] - Eudamus of Cos, stadion race. Protophanes of
Magnesia-on-Maeander was the fourth after Heracles to win both the wrestling and
the pancratium competitions.

173rd [88 B.C.] - Parmeniscus of Corcyra again, stadion race.

174th [84 B.C.] - Demostratus of Larissa, stadion race.

175th [80 B.C.] - Epaenetus of Argos, boys' stadion race. There was no stadion
race for men this year, because Sulla had summoned all the athletes to Rome.

176th [76 B.C.] - Dion of Cyparissus, stadion race.

177th [72 B.C.] - Hecatomnos of Elis, stadion race [g303].

178th [68 B.C.] - Diocles [? son of] Hypopenus, stadion race. Stratonicus of
Alexandria, son of Corragus, was the fifth after Heracles to win both the
wrestling and the pancratium competitions. At the Nemean games, he won four
crowns on the same day in the boys' and youths' competitions, competing naked.
He attended without a horse. He won through the favour of his friends or the
kings, and therefore he was considered disqualified.

[79] 179th [64 B.C.] - Andreas of Lacedaemon, stadion race.

180th [60 B.C.] - Andromachus of Ambracia, stadion race.

181st [56 B.C.] - Lamachus of Tauromenium, stadion race.

182nd [52 B.C.] - Anthestion of Argos, stadion race. [g304] Marion of
Alexandria, son of Marion, was the sixth after Heracles to win both the
wrestling and the pancratium competitions.

183rd [48 B.C.] - Theodorus of Messene, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Julius Caesar was emperor of the Romans.

184th [44 B.C.] - Theodorus for a second time. [During this Olympiad] Augustus
became emperor of the Romans.

185th [40 B.C.] - Ariston of Thurii, stadion race.

186th [36 B.C.] - Scamander of Alexandria Troas, stadion race.

187th [32 B.C.] - Ariston of Thurii again, stadion race.

188th [28 B.C.] - Sopater of Argos, stadion race.

189th [24 B.C.] - Asclepiades of Sidon, stadion race.

190th [20 B.C.] - Auphidius of Patrae, stadion race [g305].

191st [16 B.C.] - Diodotus of Tyana, stadion race.

192nd [12 B.C.] - Diophanes of Aeolis, stadion race.

193rd [8 B.C.] - Artemidorus of Thyateira, stadion race.

194th [4 B.C.] - Demaratus of Ephesus, stadion race.

195th [1 A.D.] - Demaratus for a second time.

196th [5 A.D.] - Pammenes of Magnesia-on-Maeander, stadion race.

197th [9 A.D.] - Asiaticus of Halicarnassus, stadion race.

198th [13 A.D.] - Diophanes of Prusa [near] Mt. Olympus, stadion race. Aristeas
of Stratoniceia or Maeander was the seventh after Heracles to win both the
wrestling and the pancratium competitions. [During this Olympiad] Tiberius
became emperor of the Romans.

[80] 199th [17 A.D.] - Aeschines Glaucias of Miletus, stadion race. The
four-horse race was reinstated, and the winner was Tiberius Caesar.

200th [21 A.D.] - Polemon of Petra, stadion race.

201st [25 A.D.] - Damasias of Cydonia, stadion race [g306].

202nd [29 A.D.] - Hermogenes of Pergamum, stadion race.

203rd [33 A.D.] - Apollonius of Epidaurus, stadion race.

204th [37 A.D.] - Sarapion of Alexandria, stadion race. Neicostratus of Aegae
was the eighth and last after Heracles to win both the wrestling and the
pancratium competitions. Only eight men between Heracles and our times have
achieved this, because after these games the inhabitants of Elis would not award
the crown even to those who were capable of it. [During this Olympiad] Gaius
became emperor of the Romans.

205th [41 A.D.] - Eubulidas of Laodiceia, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Claudius became emperor of the Romans.

206th [45 A.D.] - Valerius of Mytilene, stadion race [g307].

207th [49 A.D.] - Athenodorus of Aegium, stadion race.

208th [53 A.D.] - Athenodorus for a second time. [During this Olympiad] Nero
became emperor of the Romans.

209th [57 A.D.] - Callicles of Sidon, stadion race.

210th [61 A.D.] - Athenodorus of Aegium, stadion race.

211th [65 A.D.] - These games were not held [at the usual time] because Nero
postponed them until his visit to Greece. They were held two years later, and
Tryphon of Philadelphia won the stadion race. Nero was awarded the crown in the
contests for heralds, performers of tragedy and citharodes; and also in the
races for chariots drawn by colts, mature horses and ten colts.

212th [69 A.D.] - Polites of Ceramus, stadion race [g308]. [During this
Olympiad] Vespasianus became emperor of the Romans.

213th [73 A.D.] - Rhodon of Cyme, or Theodotus, stadion race.

214th [77 A.D.] - Straton of Alexandria, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Titus became emperor of the Romans.

[81] 215th [81 A.D.] - Hermogenes of Xanthus, stadion race. [During this
Olympiad] Domitian became emperor of the Romans.

216th [85 A.D.] - Apollophanes Papis of Tarsus, stadion race.

217th [89 A.D.] - Hermogenes of Xanthus for a second time, stadion race.

218th [93 A.D.] - Apollonius of Alexandria, or Heliodorus, stadion race.

219th [97 A.D.] - Stephanus of Cappadocia, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Nerva became emperor of the Romans, followed by Trajan [g309].

220th [101 A.D.] - Achilleus of Alexandria, stadion race.

221st [105 A.D.] - Theonas Smaragdus of Alexandria, stadion race.

222nd [109 A.D.] - Callistus of Side, stadion race. Horse races were
reintroduced.

223rd [113 A.D.] - Eustolus of Side, stadion race.

224th [117 A.D.] - Isarion of Alexandria, stadion race. [During this Olympiad]
Hadrian became emperor of the Romans.

225th [121 A.D.] - Aristeas of Miletus, stadion race.

226th [125 A.D.] - Dionysius Sameumys of Alexandria, stadion race.

227th [129 A.D.] - Dionysius for a second time 228th [133 A.D.] - Lucas of
Alexandria, stadion race.

229th [137 A.D.] - Epidaurus Ammonius of Alexandria, stadion race. [During this
Olympiad] Antoninus Pius became emperor of the Romans.

230th [141 A.D.] - Didymus Clydeus of Alexandria, stadion race [g310].

231st [145 A.D.] - Cranaus of Sicyon, stadion race.

232nd [149 A.D.] - Atticus of Sardis, stadion race. [Socrates] entered both the
wrestling and the citharode competitions, but was rejected by the inhabitants of
Elis, in favour of Dionysius of Seleuceia.

233rd [153 A.D.] - Demetrius of Chios, stadion race.

234th [157 A.D.] - Eras of Chios, stadion race.

[82] 235th [161 A.D.] - Mnasibulus of Elateia, stadion race. [During this
Olympiad Marcus] Antoninus [Pius] and [Lucius] Verus became emperors of the
Romans.

236th [165 A.D.] - Aeithales of Alexandria, stadion race.

237th [169 A.D.] - Eudaemon of Alexandria, stadion race.

238th [173 A.D.] - Agathopus of Aegina, stadion race.

239th [177 A.D.] - Agathopus for a second time [g311]. [During this Olympiad]
Commodus became emperor of the Romans.

240th [181 A.D.] - Anubion Pheidus of Alexandria, stadion race.

241st [185 A.D.] - Heron of Alexandria, stadion race.

242nd [189 A.D.] - Magnus [Libycus] of Cyrene, stadion race.

243rd [193 A.D.] - Isidorus [Artemidorus] of Alexandria, stadion race. [During
this Olympiad] Pertinax, and then Severus, became emperors of the Romans.

244th [197 A.D.] - Isidorus for a second time 245th [201 A.D.] - Alexander of
Alexandria, stadion race.

246th [205 A.D.] - Epinicus, called Cynas, of Cyzicus, stadion race.

247th [209 A.D.] - Satornilus of Gortyn in Crete, stadion race. [During this
Olympiad] Antoninus, called Caracalla, became emperor of the Romans [g312].

248th [213 A.D.] - Heliodorus Trosidamas of Alexandria, stadion race.

249th [217 A.D.] - Heliodorus for a second time The record the Olympiads which
we have found goes [only] this far.

Now it will be appropriate to add lists of the kings of the Corinthians, kings
of the Spartans [g313], rulers of the sea and the early kings of the
Macedonians. I will list their names and dates, taking them from the Historical
Library of Diodorus, who gives the most accurate account of them.

[83] The Kings of the Corinthians from the Books of Diodorus.

After this investigaton, it remains to tell how Corinth and Sicyon were settled
by the Dorians. Almost all the peoples of the Peloponnese, except the Arcadians,
were devastated by the invasion of the Heracleidae. The Heracleidae [g314], when
dividing up the land, selected Corinth and the surrounding area as the best and
most choice. They sent for Aletes, and gave the territory to him to rule over.
Aletes was a venerable man who and increased the power of Corinth. He reigned as
king for 38 years.

Following his death, the firstborn son reigned as king [successively] until the
[time of the] tyrant Cypselus, some 447 after the invasion of the Heracleidae.
The first to reign [after Aletes] was Ixion, 38 years.

Then Agelas, 37 years.

Then Prymnis, 35 years.

Then Bacchis, also 35 years. Bacchis was more distinguished than the kings
preceding him. Consequently, the kings after him called themselves Bacchidae
instead of Heracleidae.

Then Agelas, [g315] 30 years.

Eudemus, 25 years.

Aristomedes, 35 years. When Aristomedes died, his son Telestes was still a
child; and so his uncle and guardian Agemon [ruled] for 16 years.

Then Alexander was king, 25 years.

Telestes, who had been deprived of power, killed Alexander, and ruled 12 years.

Automenes ruled for one year, after Telestes was killed by his relatives. The
Bacchidae, descendants of Heracles who were more than 200 in number, seized
power and jointly governed the city; each year they chose one of their number to
be leader, in place of the king. They governed the city for 90 years, until the
the tyranny of Cypselus, after which they died out [g316].

List of the Kings of the Corinthians.

1. Aletes, 35 years.

2. Ixion, 37 years.

3. Agelas, 37 years.

4. Prymnis, 35 years.

5. Bacchis, 35 years.

6. Agelas, 30 years.

7. Eudemus, 25 years.

8. Aristomedes, 35 years [g317].

9. Agemon, 16 years.

10. Alexander, 25 years.

11. Teletes, 12 years.

12. Automenes, one year.

After this there were annual leaders.

[84] The Kings of the Spartans from the Books of Diodorus.

It is difficult to establish the dates between the Trojan war and the first
Olympiad, because there were no [lists of] annual rulers at that time either in
Athens or in any other city. We will take the kings of the Spartans as an
example.

According to Apollodorus of Athens, 308 years elapsed from the destruction of
Troy [1183 B.C.] to the first [g318] Olympiad [776 B.C.]. Eighty of those years
passed before the invasion of the Heracleidae [1103 B.C.]; the rest are covered
by the reigns of the kings of the Spartans - Procles, Eurysthenes and their
descendants. We will now set down the order of each of the monarchs to the first
Olympiad.

Eurysthenes began his reign in the 80th year after the Trojan war, and he was
king for 42 years.

After him, Agis reigned for one year.

Echestratus, 31 years.

After him, Labotas, 37 years.

Dorystus, 29 years.

They were followed by Agesilaus, 44 years.

Archelaus, 60 years.

Teleclus, 40 years.

Alcamenes, 38 years. In the tenth year of his reign, the first Olympiad was
established, in which Coroebus of Elis won the stadion race.

Procles was the first king of the other house, 49 years.

After him, Prytanis, 49 years.

Eunomius, 45 years. And then Chariclus, 60 years.

Nicander, 38 years.

Theopompus, 47 years. The first Olympiad occurred in the tenth year of this
reign. In summary, there were 80 years from the capture of Troy until the
invasion of the Heracleidae [g319].

[85] Next [we list] the Kings of the Spartans.

1. Eurysthenes, 42 years 2. Agis, one year 3. Echestrates, 37 years 4. Labotas,
37 years 5. Dorystus, 29 years 6. Agesilaus, 44 years.

7. Archelaus, 60 years 8. Teleclus, 40 years 9. Alcamenes, 37 years. In his
tenth year, the first Olympiad was established. In total, 325 years [g320]. The
kings from the other house were:

1. Procles, 51 years 2. Prytanis, 49 years 3. Eunomius, 45 years 4. Charicles,
60 years 5. Nicander, 38 years 6. Theopompus, 47 years. In his tenth year, the
first Olympiad was established. In total, 290 years. A Summary from the Writings
of Diodorus Regarding the Sea Powers, the Thalassocracies, Who Ruled the Seas
after the Trojan War.

1. The Lydians and Maeones, 92 years 2. The Pelasgians, 85 years 3. The
Thracians, 79 years 4. The Rhodians, 23 years 5. The Phrygians, 25 years 6. The
Cypriots, 33 years 7. The Phoenicians, 45 years 8. The Egyptians, [..] years 9.
The Milesians, [..] years 10. [The Carians, .. years] 11. The Lesbians, [..]
years 12. The Phocaeans, 44 years 13. The Samians for [..] years 14. The
Spartans, 2 years 15. The Naxians, 10 years 16. The Eretrians, 15 years 17. The
Aeginetans, 10 years [The above ruled] until Alexander crossed over the sea.

It is appropriate following this to turn to the kingdom of the Macedonians
[g321].

[86] The Kings of the Macedonians.

Tthe Macedonian period followed the end of the Assyrian empire. This came after
the death of Sardanapallus the last king of the Assyrians.

Before the first Olympiad, Caranus assembled troops from the Argives and the
rest of the Peloponnese, and lead this army into the territory of the
Macedonians. At that time the king of the Orestae was warring with his
neighbours, the Eordaei, and he called on Caranus to help him, promising half of
his territory in return, if the Orestae were successful. The king kept his
promise, and Caranus took possession of the territory. He reigned there for 30
years, until he died in old age [g322]. He was succeeded by his son Coenus, who
was king for 28 years. After him, Tyrimias reigned for 43 years. Then Perdiccas
for 42 years. He wanted to expand his kingdom; so he sent [a mission] to Delphi.
A little further on, [Diodorus] says:

Perdiccas reigned for 48 years, and left his kingdom to Argaeus, who reigned for
31 years. The next king was Philippus, who reigned for 33 years.

Aeropus, 20 years.

Alcetas, 18 years.

Amyntas, 49 years.

He was followed by Alexander, who reigned 44 years.

Then Perdiccas was king, 22 years.

Archelaus, 17 years.

Aeropus, 6 years.

Then Pausanias was king, one year.

Ptolemy, 3 years.

Perdiccas, 5 years.

Philippus, 24 years.

Alexander, [who] fought against the Persians, for more than 12 years.

Thus the most reliable historians derive the Macedonian kings from [g323]
Heracles. From Caranus, who was the first to rule all the Macedonians, until
Alexander, who conquered Asia, 24 kings reigned for a total of 453 years.

[87] [Here is a List] of Each of these Kings.

1. Caranus reigned 30 years.

2. Coenus, 28 years.

3. Tyrimias, 43 years.

4. Perdiccas, 48 years.

5. Argaeus, 38 years.

6. Philippus, 33 years.

7. Aeropus, 20 years.

8. Alcetas, 18 years. In his time, Cyrus was king of the Persians.

9. Amyntas, 42 years.

10. Alexander, 44 years.

11. Perdiccas, 23 years.

12. Archelaus, 24 years.

13. Orestes, 3 years.

14. Archelaus, 4 years.

15. Amyntas, one year.

16. Pausanias, one year.

17. Amyntas, 6 years [g324].

18. Argaeus, 2 years.

19. Amyntas, 18 years.

20. Alexander, one year.

21. Ptolemy of Alorus, 3 years.

22. Perdiccas, 6 years.

23. Philippus, 27 years.

24. Alexander the son of Philippus, 12 years .

[88] From [the Writings of] Porphyry the Philosopher, Our Adversary.

After Alexander the son of Philippus, the following kings [g325] ruled Macedonia
and Greece until the Macedonian kingdom was taken over by the Romans.

After Alexander the Macedonians made Aridaeus king. He was the son of Philippus
and Philinna of Thessaly, king [and was appointed] because they liked Philippus'
family, despite the fact that Aridaeus was the son a courtesan and he was
weak-minded. He began to reign, as we said, in the second year of the 114th
Olympiad [323 B.C.]. He is considered to have reigned for 7 years, because he
lived until the fourth year of the 115th Olympiad [317 B.C.].

Now Alexander [the Great] left two sons, Heracles the son of Barsine the
daughter of Pharnabazus, and Alexander the son of Roxane the daughter of
Oxyartes the Bactrian; this Alexander was born about the time of his father's
death [g326], at the start of Philippus' reign. Olympias, Alexander's mother,
killed Aridaeus, but then Cassander the son of Antipater killed her and
Alexander's two sons. One he killed by himself and the other he eliminated by
ordering Polysperchon to do it. Cassander left Olympias' body where it fell, and
forcibly declared himself king of the Macedonians. From that time forth, all the
other lords ruled as kings. When the family of Alexander had been eliminated,
[Cassander] married Thessalonice the daughter of Philippus. He reigned as king
for another 19 years and then died of a wasting disease. His reign, including
the year in which Olympias ruled after the death of Aridaeus, lasted from the
first year of the 116th Olympiad [316 B.C.] until the third year of the 120th
Olympiad [298 B.C.].

[Cassander] was succeeded by his sons, Philippus and Alexander and Antipater,
who reigned for 3 years and 6 months [g327] after the death of their father.
Philippus, who died at Elateia, ruled first. Then Antipater murdered his mother
Thessalonice, who favoured her other son Alexander, and fled to Lysimachus. But
Lysimachus put him to death, even though he had married one of Lysimachus'
daughters.

Alexander married Lysandra, the daughter of Ptolemy. In a war against his
younger brother he sought aid from Demetrius the son of Antigonus, who was
called Poliorcetes. But Demetrius killed Alexander, and made himself the king of
the Macedonians. The sons of Cassander are considered to have reigned from the
fourth year of the 120th Olympiad [297 B.C.] until the third year of the 121st
Olympiad [294 B.C.] [g328].

Pyrrhus the king of Epirus--the 23rd in line from Achilleus the son of
Thetis--deposed [Demetrius] who had reigned for 6 years, from the [fourth year
of the] 121st Olympiad [293 B.C.] until the first year of the 123rd Olympiad
[288 B.C.]. Pyrrhus claimed the rule devolvded to him after the end of
Philippus' family, because Olympias the mother of Alexander, was also a
descendant of Pyrrhus the son of Neoptolemus. [Pyrrhus] ruled the Macedonians
for seven months in the second year of the 123rd Olympiad [287 B.C.]. In the
eighth month, he was replaced by Lysimachus the son of son of Agathocles, a
Thessalian from Crannon who had been an attendant of Alexander. However,
Lysimachus was king not only of Thrace and the Chersonese, for he now invaded
the neighbouring country of Macedonia and took it.

[89] Urged on by his wife Arsinoe, Lysimachus killed his own son. He ruled
Macedonia for 5 years and 6 months, from the second year of the 123rd [g329]
Olympiad [287 B.C.] until the third year of the 124th Olympiad [282 B.C.]. He
was defeated by Seleucus Nicator, the king of Asia, at the battle of Corupedium,
and lost his life in the battle. However immediately after this victory,
Seleucus was murdered by Ptolemy Ceraunus, the son of Lagus and Eurydice the
daughter of Antipater,despite the fact that Seleucus was his benefactor and had
received him [earlier ]when he was in flight. Now [Ptolemy] ruled over the
Macedonians, until he was killed in battle against the Galatians. He reigned for
one year and five months, which lasted from the fourth year of the 124th
Olympiad [281 B.C.] until the fifth month of the first year of the 125th
Olympiad [280 B.C.].

Ptolemy was succeeded by his brother Meleager. The Macedonians quickly deposed
Meleager after only two months [g330] however, considering him unworthy. Because
no one could be found from the royal line, they appointed as king Antipater, who
was the nephew of Cassander and the son of Philippus. After ruling for 45 days
he was put to flight by a certain Sosthenes, who did not consider him to be
enough of a general to face the invasion that Brennus the Galatian threatened.
The Macedonians gave Antipater the name Etesias, because the Etesian winds blow
for about as long a time as he was king. Sosthenes also drove off Brennus, and
died after ruling for two complete years. After Sosthenes, Macedonia was without
a ruler, because the followers of Antipater and Ptolemy and Aridaeus were
competing for control of the state, and no one was completely in charge. From
the time [g331] of Ptolemy to the end of the anarchy, that is from the fourth
year of the 124th Olympiad [281 B.C.] until the [first year of the] 126th
Olympiad [276 B.C.], Ptolemy Ceraunus reigned for one year and five months,
Meleager for two months, Antipater for 45 days, and Sosthenes for two years. The
remainder is considered a period without rulers.

While Antipater was plotting, Antigonus took power. He was the son of Demetrius
Poliorcetes and Phila the daughter of Antipater, and was called Gonatas because
he had been born and brought up at Gonni in Thessaly. Antigonus reigned in total
for 44 years. Prior to taking control of Macedonia, he had been king for a total
of 10 years. He was declared king in the second year [g332] of the 123rd
Olympiad [287 B.C.], and became king of the Macedonians in the first year of the
126th Olympiad [276 B.C.]. [Antigonus] conquered the Greek world with extreme
force; he lived for 83 years in all, and died in the first year of the 135th
Olympiad [240 B.C.].

[Antigonus] was succeeded by his son Demetrius, who conquered all of Libya and
Cyrene. He ruled over all of his father's holdings as sole ruler for 10 years.
He took to wife a captive whom he called Aureola/Chryseis, and by her he had a
son Philippus, who was the first of the kings to fight against the Romans,
causing the Macedonians much woe. After [Demetrius], Philippus succeeded under
the superintendecy of a member of the royal line [g333], named Phuscus. [The
Macedonians] subsequently made this Phuscus king when they saw that he honorably
served as guardian. And they gave him Chryseis as a wife. The sons she bore him
he did not raise [to the throne] because he was holding the kingdom in trust for
Philippus. And indeed he was succeeded by Philippus, when he died.

[90] Demetrius, called the Handsome, died in the second year of the 130th
Olympiad. Philippus then became king, with the aforementioned Antigonus as his
guardian. [Antigonus] died in the fourth year of the 139th Olympiad [221 B.C.];
he had been guardian for 12 years, and lived for 42 years in all. Philippus
began to rule without a guardian in the 140th Olympiad [220 B.C.][g334].He
reigned for 42 complete years, and died in the second year of the 150th Olympiad
[179 B.C.], aged 58 years.

Perseus the son of Philippus killed his brother Demetrius and ruled for 10 years
and 8 months, until the fourth years of the 152nd Olympiad [169 B.C.]. Then
Lucius Aemilius conquered the Macedonians at Pydna. Perseus fled to Samothrace,
but then voluntarily surrendered to the combattants. They transferred him to
Alba, where he was kept in custody. He died five years later, and with his death
the Macedonians' [independent] rule ended. At that time the Romans allowed the
Macedonians to keep their autonomy, [g335] out of respect for their glorious
reputation and their former greatness. But 19 years later, in the third year of
the 157th Olympiad [150 B.C.], a certain Andriscus falsely claimed to be the son
of Perseus, and styled himself Philippus. Thus he was known as the false
Philippus. With the help of the Thracians he conquered Macedonia. After ruling
for a year he was defeated and fled to the Thracians, who surrendered him, and
sent him bound to Rome.

Because the Macedonians had been ungrateful, and had aided the false Philippus,
the Romans made them tributary in the fourth year of the 157th Olympiad [149
B.C.]. Thus from [the time of] Alexander until [g336] the end, when they became
tributary to the Romans, that is from the second year of 114th Olympiad [323
B.C.] until the fourth year of the 157th Olympiad [149 B.C.], the kingdom of the
Macedonians endured 43 Olympiads plus two years, for a total of 174 years.

[91] Listing of the Macedonian Kings Following Alexander, Son of Philippus.

1. Aridaeus, also called Philippus, 7 years.

2. Cassander, 19 years.

3. The sons of Cassander, 3 years and 6 months.

4. Demetrius Poliorcetes, 6 years.

5. Pyrrhus, 7 months.

6. Lysimachus, 5 years and 5 months [g337].

7. Ptolemy Ceraunus, 1 year and 5 months.

8. Meleager, 2 months.

9. Antipater son of Lysimachus, 45 days.

10. Sosthenes, 2 years.

11. No Ruler/Anarchy, 2 years.

12. Antigonus Gonatas, 34 years.

13. Demetrius the Fair, 10 years.

14. Antigonus Phuscus, 12 years.

15. Philippus, 42 years.

16. Perseus, 10 years and 8 months.

17. Self Rule/Autonomy, 19 years.

18. The false Philippus, 1 year.

After this the Romans ruled them [g338]. The Kings of the Thessalians. The
Thessalians and Epirus had the same rulers as the Macedonians for a long period.
The Romans made them autonomous after the Roman general Titus defeated Phillipus
in Thessaly. But they too became tributary to the Romans, and for the same
reasons. They too were ruled by Aridaeus, also called Philippus, for seven years
after the death of Alexander. Then his successor Cassander ruled over Epirus and
the Thessalians for 19 years. After him, his son Philippus for 4 months. Then
his brothers Antipater and Alexander, for 2 years and 6 months. And then
Demetrius the son of [Antigonus] for 6 years and 6 months. After him, Pyrrhus
for 4 years and 4 months. Then Lysimachus the son of Agathocles for 6 years. And
Ptolemaeus, who was called Ceraunus, for one year and 5 months. Then Meleager
for 2 months. After him, Antipater the son of Lysimachus for 45 days. After him,
Sosthenes for one year. Then there was anarchy for 2 years and 2 months, after
which Antigonus the son of Demetrius [ruled] for 34 years and 2 months.

[92] During these years, Pyrrhus took over Antigonus' army and ruled a few
regions, but he lost control of them when he was defeated [g339] by Demetrius
the son of Antigonus in a battle at Derdia. Soon after this Antigonus died, and
his son Demetrius reigned for 10 years. After him, Antigonus, the son of
Demetrius who went off to Cyrene and of Olympias the daughter of Pauliclitus of
Larisa, [ruled] for 9 years. Antigonus came to the aid of the Achaeans, defeated
Cleomenes the king of the Spartans in battle, and liberated Sparta. Therefore
the Achaean people honoured him like a god.

After him, Philippus the son of Demetrius reigned for 23 years and 9 months,
until he was defeated in a battle in Thessaly by Titus the Roman general. Then
the Romans allowed the Thessalians to be autonomous, along with the rest of the
Greeks who had been subject to Philippus. For the first year there was anarchy
in Thessaly, but then they started to elect annual generals, chosen from the
masses. The first to be elected was Pausanias the son of Echecrates, from
Pherae. Then Amyntas the son of Crates, from Pieria; in his year, Titus returned
to Rome. Then Aeacides the son of Callas, from Metropolis. Then Epidromas the
son of Andromachus, from Larisa, for 8 months only; for the remaining 4 months
of the year, the leader was Eunomus the son of Polyclitus, from Larisa. Eunomus
was leader again for one year [g340]. Then Aeacides the son of Callas, from
Metropolis, for a second time. Then Pravilus the son of Phaxas, from Scotussa.
Then Eunomus the son of Polyclitus, from Larisa, for a second time. Then
Androsthenes the son of Italas, from Gortona. Then Thrasymachus the son of
Alexander, from Atrax. Then Laontomenes the son of Damothon, from Pherae. Then
Pausanias the son of Damothon. Then Theodorus the son of Alexander, from Argos.
Then Nicocrates the son of Paxinas, from Scotussa. Then Hippolochus the son of
Alexippus, from Larisa. Then Cleomachides the son of Aeneus, from Larisa. Then
Phyrinus the son of Aristomenes, from Gomphi. In his year, Philippus the king of
Macedonia died, and was succeeded by his son Perseus. As we said, Philippus
reigned over the Thessalians for 3 years and 9 months, but in all he reigned
over the Macedonians for 42 years and 9 months. From the start of the reign of
Philippus [Aridaeus] until the death of Philippus the son of Demetrius, that is
from the second year of the 114th Olympiad [323 B.C.] until the fifth month of
the second year of the 150th Olympiad [179 B.C.], is a total of 144 years and
five months.

[93] All the Thessalian Kings.

1. Aridaeus, also called Philippus, 7 years.

2. Cassander, 19 years [g341].

3. Philippus, 4 months.

4. Antigonus and Alexander, 2 years and 6 months.

5. Demetrius, 6 years and 6 months.

6. Pyrrhus, 3 years and 6 months.

7. Lysimachus, 6 years.

8. Ptolemaeus, also called Ceraunus, 1 year and 5 months.

9. Meleager, 2 months.

10. Antipater, 45 days.

11. Sosthenes, 1 year.

12. (Anarchy), 2 years and 2 months.

13. Antigonus, 33 years and 2 months.

14. Demetrius, 10 years.

15. Antigonus, 9 years.

16. Philippus, 23 years and 9 months. And then the following generals:

Pausanias, Amyntas, Aeacides, Epidromus, Eunomus, Aeacides again, Praviles,
Eunomus again, Androsthenes, Thrasymachus, Laontomenes, Pausanias, Theodorus,
Nicocrates, Hippolochus, Cleomachides, Phyrinus, and Philippus [g342].

[94][The Kings of Asia Minor after Alexander the Great's Death.] In the 6th year
of Philippus [son of] Aridaeus, which was the third year of the 115th Olympiad
[318 B.C.], Antigonus became the first king of Asia [Minor]. He reigned for 18
years, and lived in all for 86 years. He was the most formidable of the kings of
that period, and died in Phrygia. All the other rulers had attacked him out of
fear of him, in the fourth year of the 119th Olympiad [301 B.C.]. His son
Demetrius saved himself by escaping to Ephesus. However he lost control of all
of Asia. [Demetrius] was considered the most violent of kings.He was
particularly [skilled] in siege warfare, and so was nicknamed "the besieger"
[Poliorcetes]. Demetrius reigned for 17 years, and lived a total of [g343] 54
years. Starting from the first year of the 120th Olympiad [300 B.C.], he ruled
jointly with his father for 2 years, which were included in the 17 years of his
reign. In the fourth year of the [123rd] Olympiad [285 B.C.] he was captured by
Seleucus and sent to Cilicia, and was kept in custody by Seleucus in a manner
appropriate to a king. He died in the fourth year of the 124th Olympiad [281
B.C.]. Such were the reigns of Antigonus and Demetrius. At this time Lysimachus
was ruling in Lydia opposite Thrace, and Seleucus was ruling in the upper
(eastern) regions and Syria. Both of them started to reign in the first year of
the 114th Olympiad [324 B.C.]. We shall not describe Lysimachus' reign, but we
shall describe what took place during Seleucus' reign.

Now Ptolemy, the first [post-Alexandrian] king of the Egyptians, went to Old
Gaza and defeated Demetrius the son of Antigonus in battle. After this he
appointed Seleucus as king of Syria and the eastern regions. Seleucus went to
Babylonia and defeated the barbarians there; so he was given the name Nicanor,
which means "victor". He reigned for 32 years, from the first year of the 117th
Olympiad [312 B.C.] until the fourth year of the 124th Olympiad [281 B.C.], and
lived for a total of [g344] 75 years. Eventually, he was deceived and killed by
his friend Ptolemy, called Ceraunus.

[Seleucus] was succeeded by his son Antiochus, from Apame the Persian. Antiochus
was called Soter which means "Savior", and died in the [third] year of the 129th
Olympiad [262 B.C.] after he had lived for a total of 54 years and had reigned
for 19 years, from the first year of the 125th Olympiad [280 B.C.] until the
third year of the 129th Olympiad [262 B.C.].

[95]Antiochus Soter's children by Stratonice the daughter of Demetrius were a
son Antiochus, and two daughters Stratonice and Apame. Apame became the wife of
[?] while Stratonice was married to Demetrius the king of the Macedonians. When
he died, he was succeeded by Antiochus called Theos, in the fourth year of the
129th Olympiad [261 B.C.]. After 19 years, Antiochus Theos fell ill, and died at
Ephesus in the third year of the [133rd] Olympiad [246 B.C.], after living for a
total of 40 years. He had two sons, Seleucus called Callinicus and Antigonus,
and two daughters by Laodice the daughter of Achaeus, of whom one was married to
Mithridates and the other to Ariathes. The elder son [g345] Seleucus, who as we
said was called Callinicus, succeeded Antiochus and reigned for 21 years, from
the third year of the 133rd Olympiad [246 B.C.] until the second year of the
138th Olympiad [227 B.C.].

Later on when he died, Seleucus was succeeded by his son, Seleucus called
Ceraunus. However during his lifetime it happened that his younger brother
Antigonus refused to accept the state of affairs and tried to take power.
Antigonus had help and assistance from [Alexander], the brother of his mother
Laodice, who controlled the city of Sardis. He also was allied to the Galatians
in two battles. Seleucus won a battle in Lydia, but he was unable to capture
Sardis or Ephesus, which was held by Ptolemey. Then Seleucus fought a second
battle against Mithridates in Cappadocia, where 20,000 of his men were killed by
the barbarians, and he himself lost his life. Meanwhile Ptolemey called Tryphon
seized part of Syria, but his siege of Damascus and Orthosia was stopped in the
third year of the 134th Olympiad [242 B.C.], [g346] when Seleucus advanced to
that region. Antigonus the brother of Callinicus circulated around in greater
Phrygia and placed the inhabitants under taxation. Then he dispatched his
generals with an army against Seleucus. But he was betrayed by his own
volunteers to the barbarians. But he escaped with a few men and went to
Magnesia. The next day he fought again and won, with auxilliary military
assistance from Ptolemy. He then married the daughter of Zielas. However, in the
fourth year of the 137th Olympiad [229 B.C.] he fought twice in the country of
Lydia and was defeated, and he warred with Attalus in the region of Lake Coloe.
In the first year of the 138th Olympiad [228 B.C.], after a battle in Caria he
was forced by Attalus to flee to Thrace, where he died.

Now it happened that Seleucus Callinicus, the brother of Antigonus, died the
next year. He was succeeded by his son Alexander, who adopted the name Seleucus,
and was called Ceraunus by his troops. Seleucus had a brother called Antiochus.
After reigning for three years, Seleucus was treacherously attacked and killed
in Phrygia by a Galatian called Nicanor, in about the first year of the 139th
Olympiad [224 B.C.]. He was succeeded by his brother Antiochus, whom the army
recalled from Babylon. Antiochus was called [the Great] and reigned for 36
years, from the second year of the 139th Olympiad [223 B.C.] until the second
year of the 148th Olympiad [187 B.C.] when he [g347] made an expedition to Susa
and the eastern provinces, but was killed with all of his nobles in battle with
the Elymaeans. He was survived by two sons, Seleucus and Antiochus.

[96]Seleucus succeeded his father in the third year of the 148th Olympiad [186
B.C.], and reigned for 12 years, until the first year of the 151st Olympiad [176
B.C.]. He lived for a total of 60 years. When Seleucus died, he was succeeded by
his brother Antiochus called Epiphanes, who reigned for 11 years, from the third
year of the 151st Olympiad [174 B.C.] until the first year of the 154th Olympiad
[164 B.C.]. While Antiochus Epiphanes was still alive, his son Antiochus called
Eupator was made king, when he was only twelve years old, after which his father
lived for an additional one year and six months. Then Demetrius, who had been
given to the Romans by his father Seleucus as a hostage, escaped from Rome to
Phoenicia, and came to the city of Tripolis. Demetrius killed the young
Antiochus along with his guardian Lysias, and made himself king in the fourth
year of the 154th Olympiad [161 B.C.]; he was called Soter, and reigned for 12
years, until the fourth year of the 157th Olympiad [149 B.C.] when he was slain.
He was forced to fight for his kingdom against Alexander, who brought in
mercenaries from Ptolemy and other troops from Attalus. But he was killed in
battle.

Alexander gained control of Syria [g348] in the third year of the 157th Olympiad
[150 B.C.], and ruled for 5 years. He died in the fourth year of the 158th
Olympiad [145 B.C.], in a battle near the city of Antioch against Ptolemy, who
had come to the aid of Demetrius the son of Demetrius. Ptolemy also was wounded
and died in the same battle. The war was continued by the aforementioned
Demetrius, the son of Demetrius. Arriving from Seleuceia, he defeated Antiochus
the son of Alexander, who was based in Syria and the city of Antioch, and
started to reign in the first year of the 160th Olympiad [140 B.C.]. The next
year, he gathered troops and set off for Babylon and the eastern regions, to
fight against Arsaces. But the next year, which was the third year of the 160th
Olympiad [138 B.C.], he was captured by Arsaces, who sent him to be held
prisoner in Parthia; so he was called Nicanor, "victor", because he had defeated
Antiochus the son of Alexander. He was also called Seripides because he was kept
in prison in chains. When the younger brother of Demetrius--who was called
Antiochus Sidetes since he was brought up in the city of Side--heard that
Demetrius had been defeated and made a prisoner, he left Side and in the fourth
year [g349] of the 160th Olympiad [137 B.C.] gained control of Syria, which he
ruled for nine years. In the third year of the 162nd Olympiad [130 B.C.] he
conquered the Jews, after a siege [of Jerusalem] and put their most select
leaders to death.

Arsaces came with 120,000 troops the fourth year of the 162nd Olympiad [129
B.C.],and attacked. Moreover, he tried to make mischief by sending [Antiochus']
brother Demetrius, who had been kept as a prisoner, back to Syria. Now winter
was coming on and Antiochus attacked the barbarians in a narrow place. But as
the battle grew fiercer he was injured and killed at 35 years of age.
[Antiochus'] son Seleucus, who was a lad, had accompanied him. He was captured
and taken off by king Arsaces though kept in royal style.

[97]Antiochus the fifth had three sons and two daughters; the first two, the
daughters, were both called Laodice. The third, called Antiochus, fell ill and
died, like his sisters. The fourth was Seleucus, who was captured by Arsaces.
The fifth was another Antiochus, who was raised by Craterus the [g350] eunuch at
Cyzicus, where he had fled with Craterus and the rest of Antiochus' servants,
through fear of Demetrius. One [of the brothers] had already died, along with
his sister, so only Antiochus was left, the youngest of the brothers. He was
called Cyzicenus because he lived in Cyzicus. In the second year of the 163rd
Olympiad [127 B.C.], Demetrius returned [to Syria]. Thus began his second reign
after having been held captive for 10 years. As soon as he returned from
captivity, he turned his attention to Egypt. He marched as far as Pelusium, but
when Ptolemy Physcon opposed him Demetrius had to retreat, because his soldiers
challenged his command and loathed him.

Ptolemy was enraged by this [development] and set up Alexander, the so-called
son of Alexander, to be king of Asia. The Syrians called Alexander "Zabinas"
[g351] because they thought that he had been bought by Ptolemy to collaborate.
Demetrius was defeated in a battle at Damascus, and fled to Tyre, but was
refused entry into the city. While trying to escape by boat, he was seized and
killed, in the first year of the 164th Olympiad [124 B.C.]. Prior to his
captivity he had reigned for 3 years, and after his release he reigned an
additional 4 years.

Demetrius was succeeded by his son Seleucus, who died immediately afterwards as
a result of his mother's slander. His younger brother Antiochus took charge in
the second year of the 164th Olympiad [123 B.C.], and in the third year he
defeated Zabinas, who committed suicide with poison because he could not endure
the defeat. Antiochus reigned for 11 years, until the fourth year of the 166th
Olympiad [113 B.C.]; the one year of his brother Seleucus' reign is also
included in this total [g352]. He was called Grypus, which means "hook-nosed",
and Philometor. However, he ceded power to the aforementioned Antiochus
Cyzicenus--who was his half-brother by the same mother as well as his nephew on
his father's side--who attacked him. Thus Grypus gave up his kingdom and took
refuge in Aspendus. Thus he was called Aspendius, as well as Grypus and
Philometor.

Antiochus Cyzicenus began to rule in the first year of the 167th Olympiad [112
B.C.], after Antiochus [Grypus] fled to Aspendus. But in the second year of the
same Olympiad [111 B.C.], Antiochus returned from Aspendus, and seized Syria,
while Cyzicenus ruled in another part [Coele Syria]. After the kingdom had been
split between them in this way, Grypus remained as king until the fourth year of
the 170th Olympiad [97 B.C.] [g353]. He lived for an additional 15 years after
his return, so that his reign lasted for a total of 26 years: 11 years on his
own, and 15 years after the kingdom had been divided

Cyzicenus ruled from the first year of the 167th Olympiad [112 B.C.], and died
in the first year of the 171st Olympiad [96 B.C.], after reigning for 18 years
and living for a total of 50 years. Here is how he died. After Antiochus Grypus
died at the time which was stated above, his son Seleucus circulated around with
an army and seized many cities. Antiochus Cyzicenus brought an army from
Antioch, but was defeated in battle. Now his horse carried him into the midst of
the enemy. When they were about to capture him, he drew his sword and comitted
suicide. Thus Seleucus gained control of the entire kingdom, and captured
Antioch.

[98]But the surviving son of Cyzicenus began a war [against Seleucus] [g354].
When their armies clashed at the city called Mopsuestia in Cilicia, Antiochus
was the victor. Seleucus fled into the city, but when he realized that the
inhabitants had recognized him and were planning to burn him alive, he quickly
commited suicide. His two brothers Antiochus and Philippus who were called the
twins [Didymi], appeared with an army and captured the city by force. They then
destroyed the city to avenge their brother's death. But then the son of
Cyzicenus came and defeated them in a battle. While fleeing from the battle
Antiochus, Seleucus' brother, rode his horse carelessly and fell into the
Orontes River, where he was caught by the current and perished.

Then two others began dueling for the kingdom: Philippus, the brother of
Seleucus and son of Antiochus Grypus, and Antiochus, the son of Antiochus
Cyzicenus [g355]. Beginning in the third year of the 171st Olympiad [94 B.C.],
they fought against each other for control of Syria with select armies, each
controlling part of the country. Antiochus was defeated and fled to the
Parthians. Later he surrendered to Pompey, hoping to get Syria back. But Pompey,
who had received a gift of money from the inhabitants of Antioch, did nothing
for Antiochus and allowed to city to be autonomous.

Then the inhabitants of Alexandria sent Menelaus and Lampon and Callimander to
ask Antiochus to come and rule in Egypt together with the daughters of Ptolemy,
after Ptolemy Dionysus had been driven out of Alexandria. But Antiochus fell
ill, and died. Philippus whom we mentioned before, the son of Grypus and of
Tryphaena the daughter of Ptolemy VIII, was also deposed. He wanted to go to
Egypt, because he too had been invited [g356] by the inhabitants of Alexandria
to rule there, but Gabinius, an officer of Pompeius who was the Roman governor
of Syria, prevented this. Thus the royal dynasty in Syria came to an end with
Antiochus and Philippus.

[99]These are the Kings of Asia and Syria.

1. Antigonus was king of Asia, 18 years.

2. Demetrius Poliorcetes, king of Syria and the east, 17 years.

3. Seleucus Nicator [or "Nicanor"], 32 years.

4. Antiochus Soter, 19 years.

5. Antiochus Theos, 15 years.

6. Seleucus Callinicus, 21 years.

7. Seleucus Ceraunus, 3 years.

8. Antiochus the Great, 36 years.

9. Seleucus [Philopator], 12 years [g357].

10. Antiochus Epiphanes, 11 years.

11. Antiochus [Eupator] his son, 1 year and 6 months.

12. Demetrius Soter, 12 years.

13. Alexander, 15 years.

14. Demetrius the son of Demetrius, 3 years.

15. Antiochus Sidetes, 9 years.

16. Demetrius again, 4 years.

17. Antiochus Grypus, 26 years.

18. Antiochus Cyzicenus, 17 years.

19. Philippus the son of Grypus [2 years] [g358]. And with the latter the rule
of the kings of Syria ended.

[100] [We shall now present information about] the kings of the Romans,
beginning with Romulus [and about the Romans'] consuls and emperors from Julius
Caesar to our own time, based on all the historical sources which we have thus
far relied upon.

[These sources are:] Alexander Polyhistor, Abydenus, who wrote books about the
Assyrians and Medes, the three books of Manetho, about the history of Egypt,
Cephalion's nine books of the Muses, the forty books of Diodorus' [Historical]
Library, containing a summary of events to [the time of] Gaius Caesar, the
eighteen books of Cassius Longinus, containing a summary of 228 Olympiads, the
fourteen books of Phlegon, the freedman of [Hadrianus] Caesar, containing a
summary of 229 Olympiads, the six books of Castor, containing an account of
history from Ninus to the 181st Olympiad, the three books of Thallus, containing
an account of events from the capture of Troy until the 167th Olympiad [112
B.C.],

[the writings of] Porphyry, the philosopher who is our contemporary [containing
events] from the capture of Troy until the reign of Claudius [g359].

[101] The Chronology of the Romans.

Let us now present the chronology of the kings of the Romans. Their rulers first
took the title [of king] in the seventh Olympiad [752-749 B.C.], when Romulus
founded the city of the Romans, and gave his name to the city, and to all the
people who were ruled by its kings. Before this time they had been called
sometimes Latins, and sometimes Aborigines, having different names at different
times.

Aeneas the son of Anchises, and his successors ruled over [these folk] after the
fall of Troy and prior to the foundation of the city. The history of these kings
has been related by many different writers, not only native Romans but also
Greeks. It will be sufficient to quote just two of them, as reliable witnesses
to the events which we are considering. First I will quote Dionysius [of
Halicarnassus, d. ca. 7 B.C.], who provides a summary of the history of the
Romans. In addition to books, he wrote an Ancient History of the Romans. In the
first book, he gives an account of Aeneas and the kings after him following the
capture of Troy. I shall now summarize the relevant portions from Book One
[DionHal 1.9] [g360] which concern the matter at hand. The History of the Romans
from Book One of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. From this city, which the Romans
now inhabit, the whole earth and sea is ruled. Its earliest inhabitants, it is
said, were a native people, the barbarian Sicels. No one knows for sure what the
condition of the place was before [the Sicels], whether it was occupied by
others or uninhabited . But some time later the Aborigines gained possession of
it, after a long war with its inhabitants. These people had previously lived on
the mountains in unwalled villages scattered around here and there [g361].

They say that after them, the Pelasgians and some of the Greeks took the
country. At first they were called Aborigines; but under Latinus, their king,
who reigned at the time of the Trojan war, they began to be called Latins.
Sixteen generations later, Romulus founded the city, and expanded it, and
brought great prosperity to it.

Subsequently returning to the topic, Dionysius [DionHal.1.10] adds:

Some claim that the Aborigines, from whom the Romans are originally descended,
were natives of Italy, a people which came into being spontaneously (Italy I
designate as the entire peninsula which is bounded by the Ionian Gulf and the
Tyrrhenian Sea and by the region where the Latins live). The Aborigines were
called "clan heads" or "ancestors". Others claim that they were called [g362]
nomads/wanderers, coming together out of many places. Still others relate that
they were foreigners who came there from Libya. But some of the Roman historians
say that they were Greeks, who once inhabited Achaea, and that some of them
migrated there many generations before the Trojan war.

[Dionysius] adds:

[102] It is doubtful that this is accurate. In my opinion, the Aborigines belong
to the same people now called Arcadians. They were the first Greeks to cross the
Ionian Sea and to settle in Italy. They were led there by Lycaon's son Oenotrus
[g363], the fifth from Aezeius and Phoroneus, seventeen generations before the
Trojan war. Oenotrus settled in the mountains, and called the region Oenotria,
and its inhabitants Oenotrians. Later they were called Italians after king
Italus, who also gave the name of Italy to the whole country. Italus was
succeeded by Morges, from whose name they were called Morgetes. And at the same
time as Oenotrus, his brother Peucetius came as a colonist from Arcadia, and
settled by the Junian bay, and the people were called Peucetii after him.

All this is [Dionysius'] speculation. Then he writes:

The Pelasgians left Greece and came [g364] and settled in the Italian areas
among the Aborigines. The Pelasgians were also called Tyrrheni [Etruscans] and
the entire land was called Tyrrhenia, after one of their rulers, who was called
Tyrrhenus. Later, Euander arrived with a fleet from Greece, from the city of
Pallantium in Arcadia, and he settled in the region of Italy where the city of
Rome would later be built. [Dionysius] says that they brought the Greek alphabet
to Italy, along with the lyre, a musical instrument, and that they introduced
[their] laws. Subsequently Heracles arrived with another Greek fleet and settled
in the same area. At first, he was called Saturnius, and from his name the whole
region was called Saturnia. Heracles had a son named Latinus, and he too ruled
over the land of the Aborigines [g365]. [These people] were called Latins after
him. When Latinus died without any sons, Aeneas the son of Anchises succeeded
him as king.

Later [Dionysius] summarizes all of this as follows [DionHal 1.60]:

The Romans derived from the people who congregated there and mingled with the
native population of the land. They were: first, the Aborigines, who expelled
the Sicels from the area. [The Aborigines] were Greeks, originally from the
Peloponnese, who came as colonists with Oenotrus, from the region which is now
called Arcadia, I believe. The second [group of colonists], the Thessalians,
migrated there from the country which used to be called Haemonia, and is now
called Thessaly [g366]. The third [group], the Pelasgians, arrived with Euander
from the city of Pallantium in Arcadia. Then another group arrived, who were
part of the Peloponnesian army commanded by Heracles. Finally the Trojans who
escaped with Aeneas from Ilium, Dardanus and the other Trojan cities [came to
Italy].

[103] From the Same Book, Concerning when Aeneas Arrived in Italy.

[Dionysius, in 1.63] says: Ilium was captured at the end of the summer,
seventeen days before the winter solstice [g367], in the month of Elaphebolion,
according to the calendar of the Athenians. There still remained five days after
the solstice before the end of that year. I believe that the Achaeans spent the
thirty-seven days that followed the taking of the city regulating the affairs of
the city, receiving embassies from those who had withdrawn themselves, and
creating a treaty with them. The next year, the first after capturing the city,
the Trojans set sail after the autumnal equinox, [g368] crossed the Hellespont,
and landed in Thrace. They spent the winter there with others who had fled with
them, and prepared for their next voyage. When spring arrived, they took ship
and sailed from Thrace. They reached Sicily at the end of that year, and passed
the winter there living mixed in with the Elymians in their cities. Now as soon
as it was possible to sail, they left the island [of Sicily], crossed the
Tyrrhenian Sea, and arrived at Laurentum on the coast of the Aborigines [g369]
in the middle of the summer. After capturing the region, they founded Lavinium.
Thus ended the second year from the taking of Troy. I have explained these
matters as they seem to me.

Next, Aeneas ornamented many sites with temples and other structures which exist
to my own day. The following year, the third since the departure from Troy, he
ruled as king over Trojans only. However, in the fourth year, after Latinus
died, [Aeneas] took over his kingdom as well. This was due to family ties
through marriage and the inheritance through Lavinia, after Latinus' death. A
bit later [Dionysius] adds that in a fierce battle over these [?] matters
[g370], Latinus, Turnus, and many others had died. Nonetheless Aeneas those with
him triumphed. Aeneas took power due to his marriage ties. But after ruling as
king for three years after the death of Latinus he lost his life in battle, in
the fourth year.

Shortly after this [Dionysius] writes: Aeneas died some the seven years after
the taking of Troy. Euryleon, who had been renamed Ascanius during the escape
[from Troy], took over rule of the Latin state. Then [Dionysius] adds [DionHal
1.70]: After the death of the Ascanius in the thirty-eighth year of his reign,
his brother Silvius took over the kingship. He was had been born of Lavinia, the
daughter of Latinus, after Aeneas' death.

[104] Then [Dionysius] adds: Silvius, after holding the sovereignty twenty-nine
years, was succeeded by Aeneas, his son, who reigned one less than thirty years
[g371]. After him, Latinus reigned fifty-one, then Alba, thirty-nine; after
Alba, Capetus reigned twenty-six, then Capys twenty-eight, and after Capys,
Capetus held the rule for thirteen years. Then Tiberinus reigned for a period of
eight years. This king, it is said, perished in a battle that was fought by a
river. After being thrown by his horse into the stream, the river, which had
previously been called the Albula, came to be called after his name. Tiberinus'
successor, Agrippa, reigned forty-one years. After Agrippa the tyrant Amulius,
who was loathed by the gods, reigned nineteen years. Disrespecting divine
powers, he had created imitations of lightning and sounds resembling thunder
[g372], with which he hoped to terrify people into thinking that he was a god.
But rain and lightning descended upon his house. The house was next to a lake
which swelled to an unaccuctomed level, so that [Amulius] drowned with his
entire household. To the present, in fact, when that lake is clear in a certain
part, which happens whenever the level drops and the depths are undisturbed, the
ruins of porticoes and other traces of a house can be seen.

[Amulius] was succeeded by Aventius, after whom was named one of the seven hills
that are joined to make the city of Rome, and he reigned thirty-seven years. He
was followed by Procas for twenty-eight years. Then Numitor, [Amulius'] elder
brother, having been unjustly deprived of the kingdom by Amulius [g373], reigned
forty-two years. When Amulius had been slain by Romulus and Remus, the sons of a
noble maiden, as shall presently be related, Numitor, the maternal grandfather
of the youths, after his brother's death resumed the sovereignty which by law
belonged to him. In the next year of Numitor's reign, which was the three
hundred and thirty-second after the taking of Troy, the Albans sent out a
colony, under the leadership of Romulus and Remus, and founded Rome, in that
year, which was the seventh Olympiad, when Daicles of Messene was victor in the
foot race [752 B.C.], and at Athens Charops was in the first year of his
ten-year term as archon. The same writer adds yet more [information] when
relating the different accounts of the history of the city of Rome [DionHal
1.72] [g374].

[105] Regarding the Construction of the City of Rome.

There are many problems concerning the construction of the city, its time and
founders. In my opinion none of them [the previous accounts] is accurate. Thus,
because [the details] are not universally agreed on, we shall present a brief
review. Cephalon of Gergis, a very ancient writer, says that the city was built
in the second generation after the Trojan war by those who had escaped from Troy
[g375] with Aeneas. [Cephalon] names Romus as its founder. [Romus] had been
leader of the colony and one of Aeneas' sons. He says that Aeneas had four sons,
Ascanius, Euryleon, Romulus and Remus. Demagoras, Agathymus and many other
[authors] agree with [Cephalon] regarding both the time and the leader of the
colony. But the author of the history of the priestesses at Argos and of what
happened in the days of each of them says that Aeneas came into Italy from the
land of the Molossians with Odysseus and became the founder of the city, which
he named Rome--after one of the Trojan women. He says that this woman stirred up
the other citizens (or women) [g376] and together with them set fire to the
ships, since they had grown weary of wandering. Damastes of Sigeum and some
others agree with this [account]. But Aristotle, the philosopher, relates that
some of the Achaeans were overtaken by a violent storm while they were
navigating Cape Malea on their return from Troy. Since they were driven out of
their course by the winds, they wandered over many parts of the sea finally
arriving at this place in the land of the Opicans which is called Latium, by the
Tyrrhenian sea. Being pleased with the sight of land, they hauled up their
ships, and passed the winter there. They were preparing to sail at the beginning
of spring, but their ships [g377] were set ablaze one night. Thus they could not
depart and were, unwillingly, forced to live in the land where they had landed.
He says this was effected by the captive women they were carrying with them from
Troy. They burned the ships because they feared that the Achaeans in returning
home would make slaves out of them. Callias, who wrote about the deeds of
Agathocles, says that one of the Trojan women who came into Italy with the other
Trojans, [who was named] Rome, married Latinus, the king of the Aborigines. She
bore him two sons, Romus and Romulus, who built a city, and named it after their
mother.

Xenagoras, the historian [g378], wrote that Odysseus and Circe had three sons,
Romus, Antias and Ardeias, who built three cities and named them after
themselves. Dionysius of Chalcis names Romus as the founder of the city, but
says that according to some this man was the son of Ascanius, and according to
others the son of Emathion.

Now there are also other [writers] who claim that Rome was built by Romus, the
son of Italus and Leuce, the daughter of Latinus, while many other Greek
historians describe different founders for the city. But so that I will not be
considered wordy, let me come to the Roman historians. The Romans lack even one
historian or chronicler who can be considered ancient. But each of their [g379]
historians has taken something out of ancient accounts that are preserved on
tablets in their temples. Some of these say that Romulus and Remus, the founders
of Rome, were the sons of Aeneas. According to others they were the sons of a
daughter of Aeneas, without mentioning who their father was. Some say that they
were presented as hostages by Aeneas to Latinus, the king of the Aborigines,
when the treaty was made between the inhabitants and the immigrants. [According
to this version], Latinus gave them a friendly welcome and not only looked after
them carefully, but, upon dying without a male heir, willed part of his kingdom
to them.

[106] Others say that after the death of Aeneas Ascanius, having succeeded to
the entire kingdom of Latinus, divided both the country and the forces of the
Latins into three parts, two of which he gave to his brothers, Romulus and
Remus. He himself, they say, built Alba and some other towns [g380]. Remus built
cities which he named Capua, after Capys, his great-grandfather, Anchisa, after
his grandfather Anchises, Aeneia (which was afterwards called Janiculum), after
his father, and Rome, after himself. This city was for some time deserted (or
ruined), but upon the arrival of another colony, which the Albans sent out under
the leadership of Romulus and Remus, Rome again flourished. Thus there were two
settlements of Rome, one shortly after the Trojan war, and the other fifteen
generations after the first. And if anyone wants to look more carefully into the
distant past, even a third [g381] foundation of Rome will be found. This
[foundation] occurred before Aeneias and the Trojans came into Italy. This is
related by Antiochus of Syracuse, whom I have mentioned before, hardly a
commonplace historian. He says that when Morges reigned in the land of the
Latins--which then included all of Italy from Tarentum to the coast of
Poseidonia--a man came to him who had fled from Rome. His words are: "When
Italus was growing old, Morges reigned. In his reign there came a man from Rome
named Sicelus." Thus according to the Syracusan author, an ancient Rome existed
even before the Trojan war [g382]. However he left it unsaid whether [Rome] was
situated in the same region that the present city stands or whether some other
place happened to be called by this name. Consequently I, too, cannot say for
sure.

I believe that enough has been said about the ancient foundations [of the city
of Rome]. As regards the last settlement or founding of the city, or whatever it
should be styled, Timaeus of Sicily, based on some unknown calculation, places
it at the same time as the founding of Carthage, that is, in the thirty-eighth
year before the first Olympiad [814 B.C.]. Lucius Cincius, a member of the
senate, places it about the fourth year of the twelfth Olympiad [729 B.C.].
Quintus Fabius places it in the first year of the eighth Olympiad [748 B.C.].
Porcius Cato does not give the date according to Greek reckoning [g383], but
being as careful as any [historian] in gathering material about ancient history,
he places [Rome's] foundation four hundred and thirty-two years after the Trojan
war; and this date, when compared with the Chronicles of Eratosthenes,
corresponds to the first year of the seventh Olympiad [752 B.C.]. In another
work I have demonstrated the reliability of the canons of Eratosthenes. In that
same work I have also shown how to synchronize Roman and Greek chronology.

Dionysius, in the first book of his Ancient History of Rome, describes all the
events which transpired following the capture of Troy in this order: the escape
of Aeneias from Troy, and his arrival in Italy; his descendants and successors,
who were kings of the Latins, until the time of Romulus and the foundation of
Rome; the various accounts of the ancient [historians] about the foundation of
the city of Rome.

However, some say that Picus the son of Cronus [g384] was the first king in the
territory of Laurentium, where Rome is now situated, and that he reigned for 37
years. After him Faunus the son of Picus [ruled] for 44 years. In his reign,
Heracles traveled from Spain and erected an altar in the Forum Boarium, to
commemorate his killing of Cacus, Vulcanus' son. Then Latinus was king for 36
years. The Latins were named after him. Troy was captured in the 33rd year of
his reign. Then Aeneas fought against the Rutuli, and killed Turnus. He married
Lavinia, Latinus' daughter, and founded the city of Lavinium. After this he was
king for 3 years. This summarizes what we have found in the books of other
writers.

Let us continue with yet another author, namely Diodorus [Siculus], who produced
in one collection a complete repository of [historical] writing. [Diodorus]
recorded the history of the Romans in his seventh book, as follows [g385].

[107] On the Ancient History of the Romans, from the Seventh Book of Diodorus.

Some historians have incorrectly suggested that Romulus [and Remus], who founded
the city of Rome, were the sons of the daughter of Aeneas. But this is not the
case, for a lengthy period intervened between Aeneas and Romulus [filled with]
many kings. Rome was founded in the second year of the 7th Olympiad [751 B.C.],
which was [g386] 433 years after the Trojan War. Aeneas became king of the
Latins three years after the capture of Troy. He ruled for three years and then
vanished from sight, to be honoured [thereafter] as an immortal. He was
succeeded as king by his son Ascanius, who founded the city today called [Alba]
Longa. It was named after the river which was then called Alba, but is now
called Tiber. Now the historian Fabius, who wrote about things Roman, tells a
different tale about the name of this city. He says that it was foretold to
Aeneas, that a four-footed animal would lead him to the place where he would
must build a city. When he was preparing to sacrifice a pregnant white sow, the
sow escaped from his grasp and was chased up a hill, where she gave birth to
thirty piglets. Aeneas was astounded by this, and being desirous of fulfilling
the prophecy, he commenced building on that site [g387]. But he was warned in a
dream, that he should not found the city until thirty years had passed, the same
number as the piglets which were born to the sow. And so he abandoned his plan.

After the death of Aeneas, his son Ascanius became king and after thirty years
he founded a settlement on the hill, which he called Alba, after the colour of
the sow; for the Latin word for 'white' is alba. [Ascanius] also added another
name, Longa, which translates 'long', because the city was narrow in width and
of great length.

[Diodorus] adds that Ascanius made Alba the capital of his kingdom and conquered
no small number of the inhabitants round about. [Ascanius] became a noteworthy
man and died after a ruling for thirty-eight years.

After his death, there arose a division among the masses, since two men who were
contending with each other for the kingship. Julius claimed that since he was
Ascanius' son, his father's kingdom belonged to him. But Silvius, the brother of
Ascanius and, furthermore, a son of Aeneas by his first wife ,[g388] who was a
Trojan woman, maintained that the kingdom belonged to him. Now it happened that
after the death of Aeneas, Ascanius had plotted against the life of Silvius. It
was while the child [Silvius] was being reared by some herdsmen on a mountain,
to avoid this plot, that he came to be called Silvius, after the name of that
mountain, which the Latins call Silva. After a struggle between the two sides,
Silvius finally took the throne with the support of the people. Julius, though
he did not take power, was established as supreme priest (pontifex maximus)
thereby becoming like a second king. They say that the Julian family, which
survives in Rome even to this day, descends from him.

[108] During his reign, Silvius achieved nothing worthy record, and died after
ruling for 49 years. He was succeeded as king by his son Aeneas Silvius, who
ruled for more than 30 years. He was a strong ruler, in government and in war.
He subdued the neighbouring regions, and founded the eighteen cities known as
the oldest of the Latins. They are: Tibur, Praeneste, Gabii, Tusculum, Cora,
Cometia, Lanuvium, Labicum, Scaptia, Satricum, Aricia, Tellenae, Crustumerium,
Caenina, Fregellae, Cameria, Medullia, and Boilum. Some call this Bola. When
Latinus died, his son Albas Silvius was selected as king. He ruled for 38 years.
The next king was Epitus Silvius, for 26 years. When his death Capis succeeded
as king, ruling [g389] for 28 years. His son Calpetus was the next king, ruling
for 13 years. Then Tiberius Silvius ruling for 8 years. [Tiberius] went off to
fight against the Etruscans with an army, but while he was crossing the river
Alba he fell into a whirlpool and died. As a result, the name of the river was
changed to Tiber. After his death Agrippa became king of the Latins, for 41
years. The next king was Arramulius Silvius, who reigned for 19 years. The next
king was Arramulius Silvius, who reigned for 19 years. It is related that
Arramulius was arrogant throughout his life, and became so proud that he claimed
to rival the power of Aramazd (Zeus/Jupiter). When there was steady and severe
thunder during the heat [of autumn], he ordered all the men in his army at a
given command to strike their swords against their shields, supposing that by
this noise he could surpass even thunder. Consequently the gods exacted
vengeance and killed him with a bolt of lightning and submerged his house in the
Alban lake. The Romans who live near the lake today still point out some columns
which can be seen deep beneath the surface of the water, which are the remains
of the royal palace under the lake.

Aventius, who was chosen to be the next king, ruled for 37 years. During a
battle against the people who lived around the city, he was trapped in a narrow
space and killed near a hill, which was named the Aventine hill after him. After
he died, his son Procas Silvius was appointed to be the next king, and he ruled
[g390] for 23 years. After his death, his younger son Amulius forcibly seized
power, because his elder brother Numitor was in a foreign country. Amulius
reigned for a little over 43 years, and was killed by Remus and Romulus, who
founded the city of Rome.

[109] Here is a Listing of the Roman Kings.

Aeneias became king of the Latins, in the fourth year after the capture of Troy,
3 years.

Ascanius, 38 years.

Silvius, the son of Aeneias, 28 years.

Aeneias Silvius, 31 years.

Latinus Silvius, 50 years.

Albas Silvius, 39 years.

Epitus Silvius, 26 years.

Capis Silvius, 28 years.

Calpetus Silvas, 13 years.

Tiberius Silvius, 8 years.

Agrippa Silvius, 35 years.

[Arramulius Silvius, 19 years].

[Aventius, 37 years].

[p291] Procas Silvius, 23 years.

Amulius Silvius, 42 years [g391].

Romulus founded Rome and became king in the seventh Olympiad [752-749 B.C.].
From Aeneas up until Romulus, 427 years elapsed. From the capture of Troy [up
until Romulus], 431 years elapsed.

Kings Beginning with Romulus, Founder of Rome.

Romulus, 38 years.

Numa Pompilius, 41 years.

Tullus Hostilius, 33 years.

Ancius Marcus, 33 years.

Tarquinius, 37 years.

Servilius, 44 years.

Tarquinius Superbus, 24 years.

There were seven kings of the Romans, starting with Romulus, and [the kingship]
ceased after a period of 244 years. From the capture of Troy until Romulus, 431
years elapsed. Altogether 675 years elapsed.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus gives a brief account of the dates of these kings,
from Romulus to Tarquinius, around the time of the first Olympiad, as follows
[Dion Hal 1.75] [g392].

[110] Dionysius of Halicarnassus Regarding the Kings in Rome after Romulus.

From Romulus, first ruler of the city, to the time of the expulsion of the kings
two hundred and forty-four years elapsed. This is known both from the order of
the kings' succession and the number of years each of them ruled. Following
Romulus' death the city was kingless for one year. Then Numa Pompilius, who was
chosen by the army, reigned for forty-three years. After Numa, Tullus Hostilius
ruled for thirty-three years [g393]. Ancus Marcius, his successor, ruled for
twenty-four years. He was followed by Lucius Tarquinius, called Priscus, for
thirty-eight years. Servius Tullius succeeded him, reigning for forty-four
years. The murderer of Servius, the tyrant Lucius Tarquinius, extended his reign
to the twenty-fifth year. Because of his contempt of justice, he was called
Superbus. Romulus, the first ruler of the city, must have begun to rule in the
first year of the seventh Olympiad [752 B.C.], when Charops at Athens was in the
first year of his ten-year term as archon. [We calculate this] because the
reigns of the kings [g394] amount to two hundred and forty-four years or
sixty-one Olympiads. Thus the count of the [monarchs'] years requires this
[determination of the placing of Romulus' rule]; and the number of years that
each king reigned is known from writings. Such is the account given by those who
lived before me and adopted by me concerning the time of the settlement of the
city which now rules supreme.

This is Dionysius' account.

Now after the death of Tarquinius and the collapse of unified [royal] rule, the
Romans no longer had kings. Instead, they appointed consuls [starting with]
Brutus; then [they appointed] tribunes of the plebs; then dictators, who were
orators; and then consuls again. I think it would be superfluous to list the
magistrates of each year here, because there would be a huge mass of names.
Moreover, if I described their achievements in detail, my account would become
greatly enlarged and stray from its intended purpose. Consequently I think it is
appropriate [g395] to leave these magistrates, and everything connected with
them, to another chronicle: that is, the consuls who followed Tarquinius, the
tribunes of the plebs and the dictators who governed the city of Rome during the
years preceding the advent of Caesar. After these remarks, we will return to the
reign of the first emperor. From the death of Tarquinius until the time of
Julius Caesar, 115 Olympiads--the equivalent of 460 years--elapsed.

[111] Tarquinius died at the end of the 67th Olympiad [509 B.C.]. Caesar became
emperor at the start of the 183rd Olympiad [48 B.C.]. Between these [two
termini] an interval of 460 years exists. From the 7th Olympiad [752 B.C.], when
the city of Rome was founded, [until the death of Tarquinius] 244 years elapsed.
Thus, a total of 704 years--which is the equivalent of 176 Olympiads--elapsed
from the foundation of Rome until the time of Julius Caesar. This [schema] is
confirmed by the chronicler Castor who writes as follows in a passage
summarizing the [relevant] dates [g396]:

Castor on the Kingdom of the Romans.

We have listed the kings of the Romans one by one, beginning with Aeneas son of
Anchises, when he became king of the Latins, and concluding with Amulius
Silvius, who was killed by Romulus, the son of his niece Rhea. Now we will add
Romulus and the others who ruled Rome after him up until Tarquinius Superbus,
for a period of 244 years. After these kings, we will give a separate list of
the consuls, starting from Lucius Junius Brutus, and ending with Marcus Valerius
Messalla and Marcus Piso, who were consuls when Theophemus was archon at Athens
[61 B.C.]. Altogether [they ruled] for 460 years.

That is what Castor says. Now it is appropriate for us to append a list of the
emperors of the Romans, starting from Julius Caesar. We shall mention the
consuls for each year, equating [these dates] with the Olympiads.

[The Armenian manuscript of book 1 of Eusebius' Chronicle breaks off here] This
text was translated and placed online by Robert Bedrosian, and reformatted by
Roger Pearse, 2009. This file and all material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: CHRONICON - BOOK 1 TRANSLATED FROM LATIN
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronicon, Book 1 (2008) [Translated by Andrew Smith]

[p1] I have searched through the various books of ancient history; [I have read]
what the Chaldaeans and Assyrians have recorded, what the Egyptians have written
in detail, and what the Greek have related as accurately as possible. They
include the dates of their kings and the Olympiads, which are athletic contests,
and they contain the outstanding exploits of both the Greeks and the barbarians,
of both the brave and the decadent. They also mention the remarkable victories
of these nations, their generals, scholars, heroes, poets, historians and
philosophers.

I think it is fitting, or rather a useful and necessary task, to summarise all
this, and to write down the ancient history and chronology of the Hebrews, taken
from the Holy Scriptures, alongside the things which I have just mentioned. From
that we can tell how long Moses, and the prophets who came after him, lived
before the appearance on earth of our saviour, about which they prophesied
through the holy spirit; and we can easily recognise in which [reigns] of Greek
or barbarian [rulers] the famous men of each race were alive; and at what time,
from the beginning, the outstanding prophets existed amongst the Hebrews,
together with all their rulers, one after another.

I warn and advise everyone from the start, that no-one should ever pretend that
he can be completely certain about matters of chronology. It will help if first
we remember the advice of our true master, [p3] who told his companions [Acts,
1:7]: "It is not for you to know the hours and seasons whicih the Father has set
under his own authority." He, as our Lord and God, uttered this saying not only
about the end of the world, but also, in my opinion, about all dates, to
dissuade men from such pointless investigations.

Indeed, my own words here will confirm this saying of our master, [by showing]
that it is not possible to gain an accurate knowledge of the whole chronology of
the world from the Greeks, or from any others, not even from the Hebrews
themselves. But it is possible to hope for this only: that what is said by us in
this present treatise will help us to recognise two things. Firstly, no-one,
like some have done, should believe that he is calculating dates with full
accuracy, and be deceived in that way. But he should realise that this has been
brought up for discussion, only so that he can know the means and manner of the
proposed investigation, and so that he should not remain in doubt.

There is no reason to be surprised that the Greeks do not appear in the most
ancient times. They have fallen into various fatal errors, and for a long time
before the generation of Cadmus they were completely ignorant of writing. They
say that Cadmus was the first to bring them the alphabet, from the land of the
Phoenicians. And so the Egyptian in Plato's book [ Timaeus, 22'B ] rightly
despises Solon; "O Solon," he says, "you Greeks are always children. An old
Greek man is never to be found, and no-one can learn from you about ancient
times." But many improbable stories have been told by the Egyptians and
Chaldaeans. For instance, the Chaldaeans calculate that their recorded history
has lasted for more than 400,000 years. [p5] The Egyptians make up myths about
gods and demi-gods, and also about some shades; and they tell many crazy myths
about other mortal kings.

Yet what forces me to examine such matters in detail now, when I value the truth
above all else? Even amongst my beloved Hebrews one can find inconsistencies,
which I will mention at the appropriate time. But I have said this much in
reproach of those chroniclers who are eager for such hollow glory. In accordance
with these objectives, I will scrutinise the books of the ancient writers.

First I will put in writing the chronology of the Chaldaeans; and then the
chronology of the Assyrians; next the kings of the Medes; and then the kings of
the Lydians and Persians. Then I will go on to a different topic, and set out
all the chronology of the Hebrews in sequence. After the Hebrews, in the third
section [I will set out] the dates of the Egyptian dynasties. I will add to them
the dynasty of the Ptolemaei, who reigned after Alexander the Macedonian in
Egypt and Alexandria. Then I will start on another [topic], and describe one
after another what the Greeks have told about their history: first the rulers of
Sicyon, and then [the rulers] of the land of the Argives, and of the city of the
Athenians, from the first to the last; next, the kings of Lacedaemon and
Corinth; and lastly, those who in any region held control of the sea. To these I
will add a list of the Olympiads, which are recorded by the Greeks. After I have
set out all the Olympiads in sequence, I will write down the first kings of the
Macedonians and Thessalians, and then the leaders of the Syrians and Asians, who
came after Alexander, one by one. Next I will set out in their turn all the
individual rulers of the Latins, who were later called Romans, starting from
Aeneias after the capture of Troy. Then [I will set out] in sequence [the
kings], starting from Romulus, who founded the city of Rome; the succession of
emperors, starting from Julius Caesar and Augustus; and the consuls for each
year.

After collecting material from all these sources, I will move on to the
chronological canons of time. Resuming from the beginning with those who ruled
in each nation, I will divide their dates into separate series; [p7] and next to
them I will place in sequence the numbers of their [regnal] years, so that it
can easily and quickly be seen, at which time each of them lived. I will briefly
mention the outstanding events of each reign, as recorded by every nation, in
the context of that reign. But the second book is a task for the future. Now, in
the following section, let us investigate the chronology of the Chaldaeans, and
what they have recorded about their ancestors.

[THE CHALDAEANS]

How the Chaldaeans record their chronology, from [the writings of] Alexander
Polyhistor; about the books of the Chaldaeans, and their first kings That is
what Berossus relates in his first book, and in the second book he lists the
kings, one after another. He says that Nabonassar was king at that time. He
merely lists the names of the kings, and says very little about their
achievements; or perhaps he thinks that they are not worth mentioning, when he
has already stated the number of kings. He begins to write as follows:
"Apollodorus says that the first king was Alorus, who was a Chaldaean from
Babylon, and he reigned for 10 sars." He divides a sar into 3,600 years, and
adds two other [measures of time]: a ner and a soss. He says that a ner is 600
years, and a soss is 60 years. He counts the years in this way, following some
ancient form of calculation. After saying this, he proceeds to list ten kings of
the Assyrians, one after the other in [chronological] order; from Alorus, the
first king, until Xisuthrus, in whose reign the first great flood occurred, the
flood which Moses mentions.

He says that the total length of the reigns of the [ten] kings was 120 sars,
which is the equivalent of 432,000 years. He writes about the individual kings
as follows:

• [p9] When Alorus died, his son Alaparus became king for 3 sars.

• After Alaparus, Amelon, a Chaldaean from the city of Pautibiblon, became king
for 13 sars.

• After Amelon, Ammenon, a Chaldaean from (?) Parmibiblon, became king for 12
sars.

- In his reign, the monster Annedotus, whose form was a mixture between a man
and a fish, appeared out of the Red Sea.

• Megalarus, from the city of Pautibiblon, reigned for 18 sars.

• The shepherd Daonus, from the city of Pautibiblon, reigned for 10 sars.

- In this reign, again four monsters appeared out of the Red Sea, who [like
Annedotus] were a mixture between a man and a fish.

• Euedorachus, from the city of Pautibiblon, reigned for 18 sars.

- In this reign, another monster appeared out of the Red Sea, which also was a
mixture between a man and a fish, and its name was Odacon. All these [monsters]
explained in detail what Oannes had stated briefly.

• Amempsinus, a Chaldaean from Larancha, reigned for 10 sars.

• Otiartes, a Chaldaean from Larancha, reigned for 8 sars.

• When Otiartes died, his son Xisuthrus became king, for 18 sars.

- In his reign, the great flood occurred. The reigns of all these kings, added
together, make 120 sars. They are calculated in this way:

• Alorus, for 10 sars • Alaparus, for 3 sars • Amelon, for 13 sars • Ammenon,
for 12 sars • Megalarus, for 18 sars • Daonus, for 10 sars • Euedorachus, for 18
sars • Amempsinus, for 10 sars • Otiartes, for 8 sars • Xisuthrus, for 18 sars
In total, 10 kings and 120 sars. [p11] And they say that 120 sars are the
equivalent of 432,000 years, because one sar is the equivalent of 3,600 years.
That is what Alexander Polyhistor says in his book. But if anyone thinks that
what is contained in that book is a true history, and that [those kings] really
ruled for so many myriads of years, then he should also believe in all the other
similar things in that book, which are equally incredible. Now will tell what
Berossus wrote in the first book of his history, and first I will add another
quotation from the same book of Polyhistor, as follows.

Another unreliable account of Chaldaean history, from the same book of Alexander
Polyhistor about the Chaldaeans

Berossus, in the first book of his Babylonian History, says that he lived at the
time of Alexander the son of Philippus, and that he transcribed the writings of
many authors, which had been carefully preserved at Babylon, containing the
records of (?) over 150,000 years. These writings contain the history of heaven
and the sea, of creation, and of the kings and their deeds.

Firstly, he says that the land of Babylonia lies between the rivers Tigris and
Euphrates. Wild wheat, barley, lentils and sesame grow on the land; and the
marshes produce roots, called gonges, which are as nutritious as barley. There
are dates, apples, [p13] and other fruits and fish, as well as birds in the
woods and marshes. The parts lying towards Arabia are dry and barren, but the
parts on the opposite side from Arabia are mountainous and fertile. A large
number of foreigners dwell in Chaldaea; they live in Babylon in a disorderly
way, like wild animals. In the first year, a horrible beast appeared out of the
Red Sea in the region near Babylonia. Its name was Oannes, according to
Apollodorus. It had the complete body of a fish, but underneath its head there
grew another head, beneath the fish's head; and in the same way the feet of a
man grew of the tail of the fish. It had the voice of a man, and its likeness
has been preserved even down to the present day. He says that this beast spent
the day with men, taking no food, but instructing them about writing and science
and all kinds of crafts. It taught them about founding cities and establishing
temples, about introducing laws and about geometry. It showed them how to sow
seed and gather fruit; and in general it gave men all the skills they needed for
a civilised life. Since that time, nothing additional has been discovered. But
when the sun set, this beast called Oannes went back into the sea, and spent the
night in the water, because it was amphibious. Afterwards other similar beasts
appeared, which he says he will mention in the list of kings. But he says that
Oannes wrote about creation and about the government of states, and he passed on
this message on to mankind.

There was once a time, in which everything was darkness and water. [p15] In
those times, monstrous beasts were born, with strange appearances. There were
men with two wings, and some with four wings and two faces. They had one body,
but two heads, of a man and a woman, and two sets of genitals, male and female.
Other men had the legs and horns of a goat, or the hooves of a horse, or the
rear end of a horse and the front of a man, like centaurs. Other beasts were
born, such as bulls with human heads; dogs with four bodies and fish tails
protruding from their rear end; horses with dogs' heads; humans and other
animals with the head and body of a horse, but the tail of a fish; and other
beasts with the form of all kinds of wild animals. As well as these [beasts],
there were fish and reptiles and snakes and many other strange creatures, each
of which had a different appearance. Representations of them were set up in the
temple of Belus. A woman called Omorca ruled over all these [creatures]; she is
called Thalatth in the Chaldaean language, which is translated into Greek as
thalassa ("the sea"). When everything was joined together in this way, Belus
came along and split the woman in half. Half of her he made the heavens, and the
other half he made the earth; and he destroyed all the creatures on her. He says
that this story is an allegory about nature; for when everything was wet and
creatures were born in it, this god cut off his own head. The other gods took
the blood that flowed from him and by mixing it with earth they created men.
Therefore men are intelligent and have a share of divine reason.

[p17] Belus, which is translated as Zeus in Greek, cut the darkness in half. He
separated the earth and the heavens from each other, and he arranged the
universe. But because the creatures could not bear the power of the light, they
were destroyed. When Belus saw that the land was empty and fertile, he ordered
one of the gods to cut off his own head, and by mixing the blood which flowed
from him with earth, to create men and wild beasts who could endure the air.
Belus created the stars, the sun, the moon and the five planets.

That, according to Alexander Polyhistor, is what Berossus says in his first
book. In the second book he lists the kings, one after another, and he says that
the time of the ten kings, which we mentioned above, lasted for longer than
400,000 years. Anyone who believes that these writers are telling the truth
about such a huge number of years should believe all the other improbable
stories that they tell. Such a length of time is clearly supernatural, and is
not worthy of belief, even if it is explained in a different way. And even if
someone thinks that this number of years is possible, they still should not
accept the statement about the dates without some further questions. If the
number of rulers was sufficient to explain all these thousands of years, which
are produced by their chronology, or if the writers reported the events and
actions which would be expected to occur over such a length of time, then one
might perhaps agree that there is some likelihood of their account being true.
But as they claim that so many myriads of years were taken up by the rule of
only ten men, who can doubt that these stories are merely ravings and myths?

Perhaps these so-called sars were originally measured not in years, but in some
very small period of time. For instance, the ancient Egyptians talked about
lunar years, [p19] that is a month of days or years containing 30 days. Other
people consider the seasons to be periods of three months; in other words, they
reckon each changing period of three months as a single year, and count the
years in that way. Similarly, it is likely that the so-called sar of the
Chaldaeans indicated some such [period of time]. So they count only ten
generations from Alorus, who was the first to be called king [of the
Chaldaeans], up until Xisuthrus, in whose reign the great flood occurred. In the
Hebrew scriptures also, Moses declares that there were ten generations before
the flood; for the Hebrews mention that number of generations, one by one, from
the first man in their account up until the flood. But Hebrew history assigns
about 2,000 years to these ten generations. Assyrian [history] lists the same
number of generations as the book of Moses, but produces a very different total
of years. It says that the ten generations lasted for 120 sars, which is the
equivalent of (?) 430,000 years. The reader who is keen to know the truth can
easily understand, from what we have already said, that Xisuthrus is the same as
the man who is called Noah by the Hebrews, in whose time the great flood
occurred. The book of Polyhistor also mentions him, and writes about him as
follows. From the same book of Alexander Polyhistor, about the flood When
Otiartes died, his son Xisuthrus became king, for 18 sars. In his reign, the
great flood occurred. This is how the story is told.

Cronus (whom they call the father of Zeus, while others call him Chronus
["time"]) approached him in his sleep, and said that on the 15th day of the
month of Daesius the human race would be destroyed by a flood. [p21] Cronos
ordered him to bury the beginnings, the middles and the ends of all writings in
Heliopolis, the city of the Sippareni; to build a boat and embark on it with his
close friends; to load the boat with food and drink, and to put on board every
kind of bird and four-footed creature; and then, when all the preparations were
complete, to sail away. When he asked where he should sail, Cronus replied, "To
the gods, to pray that good things may happen to men." Xisuthrus did as he had
been told. He built a boat which was 15 stades long, and 2 stades wide. After
completing everything as instructed, he sent his wife, his children and his
close friends onto the boat. When the flood had come, and soon afterwards
stopped, Xisuthrus sent out some of the birds. But they could not find any food
or anywhere to rest, and so they returned to the boat. A few days later,
Xisuthrus sent out the birds again, and this time they returned to the boat with
mud on their feet. The third time that he sent out the birds, they no longer
returned to the boat. Xisuthrus realised that some land had appeared. He removed
part of the sides of the boat, and saw that it had come to rest on a mountain.
He disembarked with his wife and daughter and the helmsman, and kissed the
ground. After he had set up an altar and had sacrificed to the gods, he
disappeared from sight, along with the others who had left the boat with him.
When Xisuthrus and his companions did not return, the remainder of those who
were on the boat disembarked and searched for him, calling out his name. They
could not see Xisuthrus anywhere, but a voice came out of the sky telling them
that they should honour the gods, and that Xisuthrus had gone to live with the
gods, because of the honour he showed them; his wife, his daughter and the
helmsman had received the same reward. The voice told them to return to Babylon;
they were destined to dig up the writings which had been hidden in the city of
the Sippareni, [p23] and distribute them amongst men. They were told that they
were now in the land of Armenia. When they heard all of this, they sacrificed to
the gods and went by foot to Babylon. A small part of the boat, which came to
rest in Armenia, can still be found in the mountains of the Cordyaei in Armenia.
Some people scrape off the asphalt, which covers the boat, and use it to ward
off diseases, like an amulet. When they arrived back in Babylon, they dug up the
writings in the city of the Sippareni. They founded many cities, and re-founded
Babylon, constructing many temples.

Afterwards Polyhistor gives an account of the building of the tower, which
agrees with the books of Moses, in exactly these words.

[From the writings] of Alexander Polyhistor, about the building of the tower The
Sibyl says: "When men all spoke the same language, they built a very tall tower,
so that they could climb up to heaven. However god blew a wind at them and
overturned the tower. Then he gave each of them their own language, and so the
city was called Babylon. After the flood there came Titan and Prometheus, in
whose time Titan made war against Cronus." That is what Polyhistor says about
the building of the tower. He continues with the following details.

• After the flood, (?) Euechius ruled the land of the Chaldaeans, for 4 ners •
Then his son Chomasbelus became king, for 4 ners and 5 sosses From Xisuthrus and
the flood until the capture of Babylon by the Medes, [p25] Polyhistor lists 86
kings in all, and names each of them, copying their names from the book of
Berossus. These kings reigned in total for 33,091 years. But when the city had
become so firmly established, the Medes unexpectedly led their forces against
Babylon and captured it. Then they set up their own kings as rulers there.

• He names 8 kings of the Medes, who reigned for 224 years • Then again 11
kings, for [28] years • Then 49 kings of the Chaldaeans, for 458 years • Then 9
kings of the Arabs, for 245 years • After that time (he says) Semiramis was
ruler of the Assyrians • Then he lists individually the names of 45 kings, and
allocates 526 years to them • After them, Phulus became king of the Chaldaeans -
The Hebrew scriptures [2 Kings 15:19 ] call this king Pul, and say that he
invaded the land of the Hebrews.

• After him, Polyhistor says that Sennacherib became king The Hebrew scriptures
say that Sennacherib was king at the time of king Hezekiah and the prophet
Isaiah. To be exact, Holy Scripture says [2 Kings 18:13]: "It happened in the
fourteenth year of king Hezekiah that Sennacherib the king of the Assyrians
marched against the fortified cities of Judah, and captured them." And after
telling the whole story, it continues [2 Kings 19:37]: "And his son Esarhaddon
reigned in his place." Later on again, it adds [2 Kings 20:1]: "It happened at
that time that Hezekiah fell ill", and [2 Kings 20:12] " at that time Merodach
Baladan sent envoys with letters and gifts to Hezekiah.". That is what the
Hebrew scriptures say. But Sennacherib and his son Esarhaddon [Asordanus] and
Merodach Baladan, along with Nebuchadnezzar, are mentioned by the historian of
the Chaldaeans, who speaks about them as follows.

[p27] [From the writings] of the same Alexander, about Sennacherib and
Nebuchadnezzar, their exploits and their virtues

After the reign of the brother of Sennacherib, when Achises had been king for
less than thirty days, he was killed by Merodach Baladan. Merodach Baladan
seized the throne, but after ruling for six months he was killed by someone
called Elibus, who became king in his place. In the third year of his reign,
Sennacherib the king of the Assyrians led an army against the Babylonians and
defeated them in battle. He captured Elibus, and ordered him to be taken with
his friends to the land of the Assyrians. After bringing the Babylonians under
his control, he appointed his son Asordanus to be their king. Then he returned
to the land of the Assyrians. When Sennacherib heard that the Greeks had arrived
in Cilicia with the intention of fighting, he set out for Cilicia and met them
in battle. Although many men from his own army were killed, he defeated the
enemy, and as a monument of his victory he set up a statue of himself in that
place. He ordered it to be inscribed with Chaldaean letters, which recorded his
bravery and greatness for future generations. And he founded the city of Tarsus,
on the same model as Babylon, and gave it the name of Tharsis.

Then, after relating the other achievements of Sennacherib, he adds: "After
remaining [in power] for 18 years, he died as a result of a plot which was
formed against him by his son Ardumuzan." That is what Polyhistor says [about
Sennacherib].

These dates agree with what is said in Holy Scripture. For in the time of
Hezekiah, as Polyhistor states:

• Sennacherib was king, for 18 years • Then his son, for 8 years • Then
Sammuges, for 21 years • His brother, for 21 years • Then Nabopolassar for 20
years • Then Nebuchadnezzar for 43 years In total, from Sennacherib until
Nebuchadnezzar, there are 88 years. A careful investigation of the Hebrew
scriptures will come to a similar conclusion. [p29] After Hezekiah, the kings
who reigned over the remaining Jews were:

• Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah, for 55 years • Then Amon, for (?) 2 years •
Then Josiah, for 31 years • Then (?) Jehoiachin - At the beginning of his reign,
Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem and took Jewish captives back to Babylon. In
total, from Hezekiah until Nebuchadnezzar, there are 88 years, which is the same
number of years as was calculated by Polyhistor in his history of the
Chaldaeans.

After this, Polyhistor relates some other deeds and exploits of Sennacherib. He
speaks about his son in the same way as the Hebrew scriptures, and gives a
detailed account of all that happened. He says that the philosopher Pythagoras
lived at the same time as these kings. After Sammuges, Sardanapallus was king of
the Chaldaeans for 21 years.

Sardanapallus sent an army to the assistance of Astyages, the satrap of the
Medes, and accepted Amyïtis, the daughter of Astyages, as the bride of his son
Nebuchadnezzar. Then Nebuchadnezzar became king for 43 years. After gathering an
army, he attacked the Jews, Phoenicians and Syrians, whom he took away as
captives. I do not need to give a long explanation to prove that Polyhistor
agrees with the Hebrew scriptures in this matter also.

After Nebuchadnezzar, his son Amilmarudoch became king for 12 years. He is
called Evilmerodach in the Hebrew histories. Polyhistor says that after him,
Neglissar ruled the Chaldaeans for 4 years, and then Nabonidus for 17 years. In
his reign, Cyrus the son of Cambyses led an army against the land of the
Babylonians. Nabonidus met him [in battle], but was defeated and put to flight.

• Then Cyrus became king of Babylon, for 9 years • After Cyrus died in another
battle on the (?) plain of the Dahae, Cambyses became king, for 8 years • Then
Dareius, for 36 years • After Dareius came Xerxes and the other Persian kings

Just as Berossus gives a brief account of each of the Chaldaean kings, so
Polyhistor describes them in the same manner. From what he says, it is clear
that Nebuchadnezzar led an army against the Jews and conquered them. From
Nebuchadnezzar until Cyrus the king of the Persians, there is period of 70
years. [p31] The Hebrew histories agree with this, and state that the Jews were
in captivity for 70 years, calculating from the first year of the reign of
Nebuchadnezzar up until Cyrus the king of the Persians.

Abydenus, whose account is similar to Polyhistor (?) in most respects, writes as
follows in his History of the Chaldaeans.

[From the writings] of Abydenus, about the first kings of the Chaldaeans So much
about the wisdom of the Chaldaeans.

• The first king of the region, so they say, was Alorus.

- He spread a report about himself that he had been chosen by god to be the
shepherd of the people, and he reigned [over them] for ten sars (a sar is 3,600
years; a ner is 600 years; and a soss is 60 years).

• Next, Alaparus • Amillarus, from the city of Pautibiblon - In his reign, a
second Annedotus, a kind of demi-god, similar in appearance to Oannes, rose out
of the sea.

• Ammenon

• Magalanus • The shepherd Daōs

- In his reign, bi-formed creatures came out of the sea onto the land, and their
names were: Euedocus, Eneugamus, Eneubulus and Anementus.

• Euedoreschus - In his reign, Anodaphus [came out of the sea].

• After him, there were other rulers, and finally Sisuthrus After agreeing with
Polyhistor in such matters, this historian then writes about the flood in the
same way.

[From the writings] of Abydenus, about the flood

After him, there were other kings, including Sisuthrus, to whom Cronus foretold
that there would be a great torrent of rain on the fifteenth day of the month of
Daesius. Cronus ordered him to conceal all the books which were kept in
Heliopolis, the city of the Sippareni. Sisuthrus did as instructed, and then he
sailed away to Armenia. Immediately it began to happen as the god had foretold.
[p33] On the third day, when the rain eased, Sisuthrus sent out some birds, to
test if they could see any land rising up out of the sea. But they found nothing
except a gaping wide sea, and, having nowhere to rest, they flew back to
Sisuthrus. The same thing happened when [he sent] some other birds. But he
achieved success with the third set of birds, who came back with mud splattered
on the bottom of their feet, and then the gods removed him from the sight of
men. The inhabitants of Armenia made wooden amulets out of his ship, as a
protection against poisons.

I think that it will be obvious to everyone that what Abydenus says about the
flood is similar to the story of the Hebrews, and uses the same form of words.
That these historians, whether they are Greeks or Chaldaeans, give Noah a
different name, and call him Sisuthrus, is hardly surprising. Nor is it
surprising that, as is their custom, they refer to gods rather than God, and
talk about birds in general without mentioning a dove. That then is what
Abydenus says about the flood in this History of the Chaldaeans. He also writes
about the building of the tower, in a way which is similar to the account of
Moses, as follows.

[From the writings] of Abydenus, about the building of the tower

They say that the first men at that time were puffed up with pride because of
their strength and height, and in their arrogance they thought that they were
better than the gods. They built a huge tower where Babylon now is, and it was
already close up to heaven. But the winds came to the aid of the gods, and threw
down the structure around them. The remains of the tower were called Babylon. Up
to that time they had shared a common language but then they received a great
variety of different speech from the gods. Afterwards a war arose between Cronus
and Titan.

[p35] The same author writes about Sennacherib, as follows.

[From the writings] of Abydenus, about Sennacherib At this time, Sennacherib
became the 25th of the [Assyrian] kings. He conquered Babylon and brought it
under his control. He defeated a fleet of Greek ships in a naval battle off the
coast of Cilicia. He established a temple of the Athenians, and erected bronze
columns on which he inscribed in writing his mighty achievements. He built
Tarsus with a design which was similar to Babylon, so that the river Cydnus
flows through the middle of Tarsus, just as the Euphrates flows through the
middle of Babylon.

After him Nergilus became king, but he was killed by his son Adramelus. Then
Adramelus was killed by Axerdis, his half-brother (by the same father, but a
different mother). Axerdis gathered an army and sent it against the city of
Byzantium. He was the first king to seek help from mercenaries, and one of these
was Pythagoras, who became a student of Chaldaean wisdom. Axerdis conquered
Egypt and parts of lower Syria. Then Sardanapallus was [king].

Then Saracus became king of the Assyrians, [p37] and when he was informed that
an army like a swarm of locusts had invaded by sea, he immediately sent his
general Nabopolassar [Busalossorus] to Babylon. But this general started to plot
rebellion, and betrothed his son Nebuchadnezzar [Nabuchodonosor] to Amytis the
daughter of Astyages, the king of the Medes. And then he immediately set off to
attack the city of Nineveh. When king Saracus learned of the attack, he burnt
down the palace with himself inside it. Nebuchadnezzar took over power as king,
and put up a strong wall around Babylon.

After saying this, Abydenus gives an account of Nebuchadnezzar, which agrees
with the writings of the Hebrews, as follows.

[From the writings] of Abydenus, about Nebuchadnezzar When Nebuchadnezzar came
to power, he fortified Babylon with a three-fold circuit of walls in about
fifteen days. He made a channel for the river Narmalacis, a branch of the
Euphrates, [(?) and the Acracanus]. [p39] He dug a reservoir above the city of
the Sippareni, which was 40 parasangs in circumference, and 20 fathoms deep; and
he constructed gates, which could be opened to irrigate the whole plain. They
call these gates ochetognomones. He protected [the shore] against flooding by
the Red Sea, and he built the city of Teredon [to guard] against the raids of
the Arabs. He adorned the palace with new kinds of plants, and called it "The
Hanging Gardens".

Then he gives a detailed description of this Hanging Garden. He says that the
Greeks regard it as one of the so-called seven wonders of the world. And in
another place the same author writes as follows: "It is said that in the
beginning everything was water, which was called the sea. But Belus restrained
[the sea] and assigned a region to each person. He surrounded Babylon with a
wall, and at the appointed time he disappeared from sight. Later Nebuchadnezzar
gave Babylon new walls, with gates of bronze, which lasted until the time of the
Macedonians." The words of Daniel are in accordance with everything that
Abydenus says. In his book [Dan. 4:30] he relates how Nebuchadnezzar, becoming
arrogant and puffed up with pride, declared; "Is this not the great Babylon I
have built as the royal residence, by my mighty power and for the glory of my
majesty?" That Nebuchadnezzar regarded his power as proof of his good fortune,
is made clear the words of the prophet Daniel. And Abydenus declares that he was
"mightier than Heracles", when he writes as follows: [p41] "Megasthenes says
that Nebuchadnezzar, who was mightier than Heracles, let his armies as far as
Libya and Iberia. He conquered these countries, and settled some of their
inhabitants on the right-hand shore of the Euxine Sea. But the Chaldaeans say
that afterwards, when he went up to the palace, he was possessed by some god,
and uttered these words: 'O Babylonians, I Nebuchadnezzar predict that a great
disaster will befall you.' "

After adding some more details about this, the historian continues: "When he had
(?) uttered this prediction, he immediately vanished from sight, and his son
Amilmarudocus became king in his place. But Amilmarudocus was killed by his
kinsman Niglisares, leaving a son called Labassoarascus. When he too died a
violent death, they proclaimed Nabannidochus as king, although he had no right
to assume royal power. When Cyrus captured Babylon, he made Nabannidochus the
governor of Carmania; but king Dareius took some of the territory away from him.

All this is in accordance with what is said in the Hebrew scriptures. [p43] The
book of Daniel tells how and in what way Nebuchadnezzar was afflicted in his
mind. The Greek historians and the Chaldaeans turn his suffering to good
account, by calling the madness a god who entered into him, or some demon which
came to him. But this is not surprising, because it is their custom to attribute
all such occurrences to a god, and to call the demons gods. All this is related
by Abydenus.

Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, gives a similar account in the first
book of his Antiquities [ Ap_1'128-160 ], as follows: From the first book of the
Antiquities of Josephus, about Nebuchadnezzar

I will now relate what has been written about us in the Chaldaean histories,
which closely agree with our scriptures on various points. Berossus shall be
witness to what I say: he was by birth a Chaldaean, well known by the learned,
on account of his publication for Greek readers of books on Chaldaean astronomy
and philosophy. This Berossus, therefore, following the most ancient records of
that nation, describes in the same way as Moses the flood, and the destruction
of mankind which it caused. He also gives us an account of the ark in which
Noah, the forefather of our race, was preserved, when it was brought to the
highest part of the Armenian mountains. Then he gives us a list of the
descendants of Noah, with their dates; and at length comes down to Nabopolassar,
who was king of Babylon, and of the Chaldaeans. And in his narrative of the acts
of this king, he describes how he sent his son Nebuchadnezzar against Egypt, and
against our land, with a great army, when he was informed that they had revolted
from him. [p45] After he had subdued them all, and destroyed our temple at
Jerusalem by fire, he removed our people entirely out of their own country, and
transported them to Babylon. Then our city was deserted for a period of seventy
years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia. He adds that this Babylonian king
conquered Egypt, and Syria, and Phoenicia, and Arabia, and exceeded in his
exploits all the kings who had reigned before him in Babylon and Chaldaea.

I will set down Berossus' own words, which are as follows: "Nabopolassar, father
of Nebuchadnezzar, heard that the governor whom he had set over Egypt, and over
the regions of Coele Syria and Phoenicia, had revolted from him. Because he was
not able to bear the hardships of a campaign, he committed part of his army to
his son Nebuchadnezzar, who was then a young man, and sent him against the
rebel. Nebuchadnezzar joined battle with the rebel, and conquered him, and
forced the country to submit to him again. Meanwhile it happened that his father
Nabopolassar fell ill, and died in the city of Babylon, after he had reigned
twenty-one years. When Nebuchadnezzar heard, soon afterwards, that his father
Nabopolassar was dead, he set the affairs of Egypt and the other countries in
order. He committed the captives he had taken from the Jews, and Phoenicians,
and Syrians, and inhabitants of Egypt, [p47] to some of his friends, that they
might conduct them with his heavy-armed forces troops, and the rest of his
baggage, to Babylonia. He himself went in haste, having only a few companions
with him, over the desert to Babylon. When he arrived there, he found that the
public affairs were being managed by the Chaldaeans, and that the principal
person among them had preserved the kingdom for him. Accordingly, he then took
over complete control of his father's dominions.

"He ordered the captives to be placed in colonies in the most suitable places of
Babylonia; but as for himself, he adorned the temple of Belus, and the other
temples, in a magnificent manner, out of the spoils he had taken in this war. He
also rebuilt the old city, and added another to it on the outside. He restored
Babylon in such a way, that no-one who should besiege it afterwards might be
able to divert the course of river, in order to force an entrance into it. He
achieved this by building three walls about the inner city, and three about the
outer city. Some of these walls he built of burnt brick and bitumen, and some of
brick only. So when he had fortified the city on this grand scale, and had
adorned the gates magnificently, he added a new palace to the one which his
father had dwelt in. It was close by it, but was superior in its height, and
also in its great splendour. It would require too long a narration, to describe
it all in detail. However, as prodigiously large and magnificent as the palace
was, it was finished in only fifteen days. In this palace he erected very high
walks, supported by stone pillars, and by planting what was called a Hanging
Garden, and adorning it with all sorts of trees, he gave it the appearance of a
mountainous country. This he did to please his queen, because she had been
brought up in Media, and was fond of mountainous scenery." This is what Berossus
says about Nebuchadnezzar, and he relates many other things about him in the
third book of his Chaldaean History, in which he censures the Greek writers
because they suppose, without any foundation, that Babylon was built by
Semiramis, queen of Assyria, and they wrongly claim that those wonderful
buildings were created by her. [p49] On this subject, the account in the
Chaldaean History must surely be accepted. Moreover, we find confirmation of
what Berossus says in the archives of the Phoenicians, concerning this king
Nebuchadnezzar, that he conquered all of Syria and Phoenicia. Philostratus is in
agreement on these matters in his History, where he mentions the siege of Tyre;
as is Megasthenes, in the fourth book of his Indian History, in which he tries
to prove that this king of the Babylonians was superior to Heracles in strength
and the greatness of his exploits; for he says that he conquered most of Libya
and Iberia.

I have said before that the temple at Jerusalem was attacked by the Babylonians,
and burnt down by them, but it was restored after Cyrus had taken control of
Asia. This is proved by what Berossus adds on the subject; for in his third book
he says as follows: "Nebuchadnezzar, after he had begun to build the wall which
I mentioned, fell sick and died, when he had reigned forty-three years. His son
Evilmerodach became king, but he governed public affairs in an illegal and
dishonest manner, and after he had reigned for only two years, Neriglissar, his
sister's husband, plotted against him and killed him. After his death,
Neriglissar, the man who had plotted against him, succeeded him in the kingdom,
and reigned for four years; his son Laborosoarchod obtained the kingdom, though
he was but a child, and kept it for nine months; but because of the depraved
disposition which he showed, a plot was laid against him also, and he was beaten
to death by his friends.

After his death, the conspirators met together, and by common consent entrusted
the kingdom to Nabonidus [Nabonnedus], a Babylonian who had joined in the plot.
In his reign the walls of the city of Babylon were built magnificently with
burnt brick and bitumen; but when he had reached the seventeenth year of his
reign, Cyrus advanced from Persia with a great army; and having already
conquered all the rest of Asia, he marched against Babylonia. [p51] When
Nabonidus heard that Cyrus was coming to attack him, he met him with his forces,
but was defeated in battle. He fled away with a few of his troops, and was shut
up in the city of Borsippa. Cyrus captured Babylon, and gave orders that the
outer walls of the city should be demolished, because the city had proved very
formidable, and was difficult to capture. He then marched away to Borsippa, to
besiege Nabonidus, who immediately surrendered without waiting for a siege.
Nabonidus was at first kindly treated by Cyrus, who sent him away from Babylonia
and gave him Carmania, as a place to inhabit. Accordingly Nabonidus spent the
rest of his time in that country, and there he died." This account is true, and
agrees with our scriptures; for in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in
the eighteenth year of his reign, destroyed our temple, and so it lay in ruins
for fifty years; but in the second year of the reign of Cyrus its foundations
were laid, and it was completed again in the second year of Dareius. I will now
add the records of the Phoenicians, because I ought to give the reader abundant
proof on this occasion. These records list the lengths of the reigns of their
kings as follows:

• Ithobal - During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre for thirteen years.

• Baal, ten years • After him judges were appointed, and held office:

• Ecnibalus, the son of Baslechus, two months • Chelbes, the son of Abdaeus, ten
months • Abbar, the high priest, three months • Myttynus and Gerastratus, the
sons of Abdelimus, six years • After them, Balatorus was king for one year •
After his death they summoned Merbalus from Babylon, who reigned four years •
After his death they sent for his brother Hirom, [p53] who reigned twenty years
- In his reign Cyrus became king of Persia. So the whole period is fifty-four
years and three months; for Nebuchadnezzar began to besiege Tyre in the seventh
year of his reign , and Cyrus the Persian came to power in the fourteenth year
of Hirom. Therefore the records of the Chaldaeans and the Tyrians agree with our
writings about this temple. That is what Josephus says about these matters.
Later on, Abydenus includes another account of the kings of the Chaldaeans,
which is similar to Polyhistor. Then he lists the kings of the Assyrians in
[chronological] order, as follows.

[ THE ASSYRIANS ] [From the writings] of Abydenus, about the kingdom of the
Assyrians

"That is the account which the Chaldaeans give of the kings of their country,
but they do not mention Ninus or Semiramis." After saying this, he immediately
begins the history [of the Assyrians]: "Ninus was the son of Arbelus, the son of
Anebus, the son of Babus, the son of Belus, king of the Assyrians."

Then he lists [the kings of the Assyrians] from Ninus and Semiramis up until
Sardanapallus, who was the last of all the kings; and from Sardanapallus until
the first Olympiad, there are 67 years. That is the account which Abydenus gives
about each of the Assyrian kings. But he is not the only writer [to mention
them]: Castor, in the first book of the Summary of his Chronicle, speaks about
the kingdom of the Assyrians in the following words. From the Summary of Castor,
about the kingdom of the Assyrians

"Belus was the king of the Assyrians. During his reign, the Cyclopes brought
lightning and thunder to assist Zeus during his battle against the Titans. At
the same time, the kings of the Titans were in their prime - including king
Ogygus." And shortly afterwards he says: "The giants attacked the gods, [p55]
and were killed, after Heracles and Dionysus, who were descended from the
Titans, came to the aid of the gods. Belus, whom we mentioned before, came to
the end of his life, and was regarded as a god. After him, Ninus ruled the
Assyrians for 52 years. His wife was Semiramis. After Ninus, Semiramis ruled the
Assyrians for 42 years. Then Zames, who was also called Ninyas, [was king]."

Then he lists each of the subsequent kings of the Assyrians in order, up until
Sardanapallus. He mentions all of them by name; and we also will write down
their names, together with the length of each of their reigns, a little later
on.

Castor writes about the Assyrians again in his Canons, in these words: " First
we have listed the kings of the Assyrians, starting with Belus; but because the
length of his reign is not stated for certain, we have only mentioned his name.
We have started the list in this chronicle with Ninus, and ended with another
Ninus, who succeeded Sardanapallus as king. In this way, the total duration of
the kingdom can be clearly shown, as well as the length of each of the
individual reigns. And it shows that the kingdom lasted for 1,280 years." That
is what Castor says. And Diodorus Siculus, who wrote the [Historical] Library,
gives a similar account, in the following words. From the writings of Diodorus,
about the kingdom of the Assyrians

"No noteworthy deeds or even names have been recorded of the native kings who
ruled in Asia in the most ancient times. Ninus of Assyria is the first king who
is recorded in history. His achievements were great, and we will give a detailed
account of him." And then a little later he says: "[Ninus] had a son by
Semiramis, who was called Ninyas. But when Ninus died, Semiramis became queen,
and she buried Ninus in the palace." And again, a little later he says:
"[Semiramis] ruled over all of Asia, except for the Indians; [p57] and she died
in the manner which we have described, when she had lived for 62 years and had
reigned for 42 years." And he states separately that: "After she died, Ninyas
the son of Ninus and Semiramis became king, and he remained at peace. He did not
attempt to imitate the exploits of his mother, who had been eager for war and
struggle." And again, a little later he says: "And in a similar way the other
kings ruled for 35 generations, handing down the kingdom from father to son,
until the time of Sardanapallus. When he was king, the empire of the Assyrians
was destroyed by the Medes, after lasting for over 1,300 years, as Ctesias of
Cnidus says in his second book. There is no need to write down the names of
these kings, or the lengths of their reigns, because they achieved nothing
worthy of mention. The only event which is recorded is that the Trojans received
assistance from the Assyrians, led by Memnon the son of Tithonus. They say that
when the Greeks sailed with Agamemnon against Troy, Asia was ruled by Teutamus,
who was the twenty-sixth king from Ninyas the son of Semiramis; and the empire
of the Assyrians in Asia had already lasted for over a thousand years. Priamus
the king of the Trojans, worn out by the pressure of war, submitted to the king
of the Assyrians, and sent an embassy to ask the Assyrians to send aid and
reinforcements. The king of the Assyrians gave him ten thousand men from the
land of the Ethiopians, and a similar number of Susians, with two hundred
chariots; and he sent Memnon the son of Tithonus to be their leader." And again
he says: "The barbarians say that the splendid achievements of Memnon are
reported in the royal books."

"Sardanapallus was the 35th king from Ninus, who established their empire. He
was the last king of the Assyrians, and he outstripped all his predecessors in
luxury and indolence." And a little later he says: "He was so shameless, that he
not only ruined his own life by his perversions, but also destroyed the entire
empire of the Assyrians, which had lasted for longer than any other recorded
empire. [p59] Arbaces, one of the Medes who was renowned for his bravery and his
outstanding spirit, was the leader of the Medes who were sent every year to the
city of Ninus [Nineveh]. While leading his army, he became acquainted with the
general of the Babylonians, who urged him to overthrow the empire of the
Assyrians." This is what Diodorus says in the second book of his Historical
Library [chapters 1-24].

Cephalion is another writer who mentions the empire of the Assyrians, and this
is what he says.

[From the writings] of the historian Cephalion, about the kingdom of the
Assyrians

"I begin my account with what the other writers have mentioned: firstly
Hellanicus of Lesbos and Ctesias of Cnidus, and then Herodotus of Halicarnassus.
In ancient times, the Assyrians ruled over Asia, and Ninus the son of Belus was
their king. In his reign, many great events occurred." Then he writes about the
birth of Semiramis, Zoroaster the magus, the war with the king of the Bactrians
and the disaster [suffered] by Semiramis; and about the death of Ninus, after a
reign of 52 years. After Ninus, Semiramis became queen. She built the walls
around Babylon, in the manner which has been described by many writers, such as
Ctesias, Zenon [(?) or Dinon], Herodotus, and later authors. Then he tells of
her expedition into the land of the Indians, how she was defeated and fled; and
how she killed her own sons, but was herself put to death by Ninyas, another of
her sons, when she had reigned for 42 years. After her, Ninyas became king, but
Cephalion says that he achieved nothing worthy of mention. [p61] Then he passes
over all the other [kings]; "they ruled in total for a thousand years, handing
down the kingdom from father to son; and none of them reigned for less than
twenty years. Their unwarlike, unadventurous and effeminate character kept them
safe. Because they were inactive and remained indoors, no-one had access to them
except for their concubines and effeminate men. If anyone wishes to know, I
think that Ctesias lists the names of 23 of these kings. But what pleasure or
benefit would I provide, if I wrote down the names of barbarian kings, who
achieved nothing, but were cowardly, weak and degenerate?" And again he adds:
"After about 640 years had passed, Belimus was king of the Assyrians; and in his
reign, Perseus the son of Danaë, who was escaping from Dionysus the son of
Semele, arrived in the country with 100 ships." Then, after describing the
defeat of Perseus by Dionysus, he adds: "In a later generation, when Pannyas was
king of the Assyrians, the expedition of the Argonauts sailed to the river
Phasis, and to (?) Medeia of Colchis. They say that Heracles left the ship
because of his love for Hylas, and wandered amongst the Cappadocians." And again
he says; "A thousand years after Semiramis, when Mitraeus was king [of the
Assyrians], Medeia of Colchis left king Aegeus; her son was Medus, [p63] who
gave his name to the Medes and the country of Media."

Then he says: "Teutamus became king after Mitraeus, and he too lived according
to the customs and laws of the Assyrians. Nothing else happened in his reign,
but [at this time] Agamemnon and Menelaus the Mycenaeans sailed with the Argives
and other Achaeans against the city of Troy, when Priamus governed Phrygia.
[Priamus wrote to Teutamus:] 'The Greeks have invaded your territory and
attacked me; we have met them in battle, and sometimes we have been victorious,
but sometimes we have been defeated. Now even my son Hector has been killed,
along with many others of my brave children. Therefore send a force to come to
our relief, and appoint a valiant general to lead them.' " Then [Cephalion]
describes in detail, how Teutamus sent assistance to him, and appointed Memnon
the son of Tithonus to be the leader of the army; but the Thessalians killed
Memnon in an ambush.

Then in another place, he says: "In the 1,013th year, Sardanapallus became king
of the Assyrians." Later, he describes the downfall of Sardanapallus. "After the
death of Sardanapallus, Arbaces the Mede destroyed the kingdom of the Assyrians
and transferred their empire to the Medes." All this is what Cephalion says. The
kings of the Assyrians, as recorded by the most reliable of the writers, are as
follows. The kings of the Assyrians • Ninus, for 52 years.

They say that Ninus was the first to rule over all the inhabitants of Asia,
except for the Indians. It can be shown that Abraham, the patriarch of the
Hebrew nation, lived during his reign.

• Semiramis, for 42 years.

• Zames, also called Ninyas, for 38 years.

• Arius, for 30 years.

• Aralius, also called Amyrus, for 40 years.

• Xerxes, also called Balaeus, for 30 years.

• Armamithres, for 38 years.

• Belochus, for 35 years.

• Balaeas, for 12 years.

• Aladas, for 32 years.

• [p65] Mamythus, for 30 years.

• Machchalaeus, for 30 years.

• Spherus, for 22 years.

• Mamylus, for 30 years.

• Sparethus, for 40 years.

• Ascatades, for 40 years.

Moses, the law-giver of the Jews, lived during his reign.

• Amyntas, for 45 years.

• Belochus, for 45 years. His daughter Tratres, who was also called (?)
Achurard, ruled for 17 years. Dionysus and Perseus lived at this time.

• Balatores, for 30 years.

• Lamprides, for 32 years.

• Sosmares, for 8 years.

• Lampares, for 30 years.

• Pannias, for 42 years. The expedition of the Argonauts and Heracles happened
during his reign.

• Sosarmus, for 19 years.

• Mithraeus, for 27 years.

• Teutamus, for 32 years.

Troy was captured during his reign.

• Teutaeus, for 40 years.

• Theneus, for 30 years.

• Derusus, for 40 years.

• Eupalmes, for 38 years.

[David], the famous king of the Hebrews, lived during his reign. Solomon, the
son [of David], built the temple at Jerusalem.

• Laosthenes, for 45 years.

• Peritiades, for 30 years.

• Ophrataeus, for 21 years.

• Ophatanes, for 50 years.

• [p67] Acrazanes, for 42 years • Sardanapallus, for 20 years. In his reign,
Lycurgus established laws for the Lacedaemonians. The empire of the kings of the
Assyrians lasted until this time, when Thespieus the son of Ariphron was archon
of the Athenians. According to some writers, the whole empire of the Assyrians
lasted for 1,240 years; according to others, it lasted for 1,300 years. Thonnos
Konkoleros, who is called Sardanapallus in Greek, was defeated by Arbaces and
Belesius, and burnt himself to death. From Sardanapallus until the first
Olympiad, there are 40 years.

After destroying the empire of Sardanapallus and the Assyrians, Arbaces
appointed Belesius to be governor of Babylon. He transferred the empire of the
Assyrians to the Medes, and the duration of their empire was as follows. THE
MEDES The kings of the Medes • Arbaces, for 28 years.

• Maudaces, for 20 years.

• Sosarmus, for 30 years.

• Artycas, for 30 years.

• Deioces, for 54 years.

• Phraortes, for 24 years.

• Cyaxares, for 32 years.

• Ashdahak [Astyages], for 38 years. In his time, Cyrus was king of the
Persians. He deposed Ashdahak and destroyed the empire of the Medes, which had
lasted for 298 years. Others writers have given a different list of the kings of
the Medes. THE LYDIANS The kings of the Lydians • Ardys the son of Alyattes, for
36 years.

• Alyattes, for 14 years.

• [p69] Meles, for 12 years.

• Candaules, for 17 years.

• Gyges, for 35 years.

• Ardys, for 37 years.

• Sadyattes, for 5 years.

• Odyartes, for 49 years.

• Croesus, for 15 years.

Cyrus killed Croesus, and destroyed the empire of the Lydians. THE PERSIANS The
kings of the Persians • Cyrus, for 31 years.

• Cambyses, for 8 years.

• Smerdes the magus, for 7 months.

• Dareius the son of Hystaspes, for 36 years. In his reign, the temple at
Jerusalem was rebuilt, after the first [temple] had been burnt down by the
Babylonians.

• Xerxes the son of Dareius, for 20 years.

• Artaxerxes, who was called Longimanus [Macrocheir], for 41 years. In his
reign, Ezra and Nehemiah were the leaders of the Hebrews.

• Dareius, for 7 years.

• Artaxerxes, for 40 years.

• Ochus, for 26 years.

• Arses, for 4 years.

• Dareius, for 6 years.

Alexander the son of Philippus killed Dareius, and ruled over the empire of the
Persians and Assyrians for 12 years.

After Alexander, there were Macedonian kings for 295 years, until the death of
queen Cleopatra, who reigned in about the 187th Olympiad [32-29 B.C.]. In her
time, Augustus was emperor of the Romans, who was called Sebastos in Greek.
[p71] [Cleopatra died] in the 15th year of Augustus' reign. From then until the
202nd Olympiad [29-32 A.D.], and the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar, there are 52
years. And from then until the 20th anniversary of Constantinus, there are 300
years.

We will now proceed to the chronology of the Hebrews.

[p71] THE HEBREWS How the Hebrews have recorded their chronology

We will set down here the chronology of the Hebrews, taken from the writings of
Moses and later Hebrew writers; from the Jewish Antiquities of Flavius Josephus;
and from the chronicle of Africanus.

How the Hebrews describe the [most ancient] times The dates and kings of the
Chaldaeans and Assyrians, and of the Medes and Persians, have been described in
the previous section. And it is clearly shown that the ancestors of the Hebrew
race were Chaldaeans, because Abraham was a Chaldaean and his forefathers are
said to have lived in the land of the Chaldaeans, as Moses says in these words
[Genesis, 11:31]: "Terah took his son Abraham, his grandson Lot son of Haran,
and his daughter-in-law Sarah, the wife of his son Abraham, and he led them out
of the land of the Chaldaeans."

Therefore it is fitting, after our account of the Chaldaeans, next to relate the
history of the ancient Hebrews. The description of the flood, which is recorded
by the Hebrews, is very different from the stories of the Greeks, which they
tell about the flood at the time of Deucalion. [The Hebrew flood] happened a
long time before Ogyges and the equally large flood, which is said by the Greeks
to have happened in the time of Ogyges. In all, the flood which is described by
the Hebrews happened 1,200 years before the time of Ogyges, which in its turn
happened 250 years before Deucalion's flood. But three is considerable agreement
between the Hebrew scriptures and the accounts of the Assyrians, and the story
which is told by them about the flood. They relate that before the flood, there
were [p73] ten successive generations.

After the flood, the human race throughout the whole world was derived from
three men. Japheth was the ancestor of the inhabitants of Europe, from Mount
Amanus to the western ocean. Ham was [the ancestor of the inhabitants] of Egypt,
Libya and all the regions to the west in that direction. And Shem, who was the
eldest brother, [was the ancestor] of the Assyrians, and all the peoples of the
east. The Hebrew scriptures state that Nimrod was the first man to build the
city of Babylon. These are the words of the scriptures [Genesis, 10:8-11]: "Cush
was the father of Nimrod" (Cush was an Ethiopian, who they believe was the
father of Nimrod). Then Scripture says about Nimrod: "He grew to be a mighty
[warrior] on the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord, that is why it
is said, 'Like Nimrod, a mighty [hunter] before the Lord.' The first centres of
his kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. From
that land he went to [Assyria], where he built Nineveh." Nineveh is the city
which is called Ninus [by the Greeks]; it was the first royal city of the
Assyrians, which was founded by Asshur. Asshur was one of the sons of Shem, who,
as we said, took possession of all the regions of the east.

They say that the sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Aram and Lud. Elam
was the ancestor of the Elymaeans, the most ancient tribe of the Persians, who
founded the city of Elymais. Asshur was the ancestor of the Assyrians; he
founded the city of Nineveh, which was later restored by Ninus the king of the
Assyrians, who renamed it Ninus after his own name. Arphaxad was the ancestor of
the Arphaxaeans, who were also called Chaldaeans. Aram was the ancestor of the
Aramaeans, who were also called Syrians. Lud was the ancestor of the Lydians.
Arphaxad was the father of Shelah, and Shelah was the father of Eber, from whom
the name and nation of the Hebrews was derived. The sixth in succession from
Eber was Abraham, the patriarch of the Jewish nation, in the tenth generation
after the flood. That is sufficient to show in brief the close relationship
between the Hebrews and the Chaldaeans and Assyrians. [p75] Therefore it is
fitting after [the Assyrians] to start on the chronology of the Hebrews. At the
very start of their account of history, [the Hebrews] tell the ancient story of
the fall of the human race from their blissful state, and the first patriarch
Adam, who was the forefather of the whole human race (Adam in the Hebrew
language means all men in general). The rest of the life [of Adam] after he was
cast out of paradise is described by the Holy Spirit, through Moses. And then
[Genesis, 5:1-32] he lists the names of Adam's descendants and successors, and
the length of each of their lives, so that from this point onwards we can
calculate the chronology of the Hebrews, and write it down in order.

No-one could calculate the length of their stay in the so-called paradise of
God. The admirable Moses, inspired by the Holy Spirit, seems to be suggesting
another kind of era, greater than our own, a thrice-blessed and god-loving way
of life, which he calls paradise - the dwelling place of the first race of men.
When Moses describes the blissful life of Adam in paradise, he is referring to
the whole race [of men]. But this present chronicle will not include an account
of that stay [in paradise], nor [will it start] from the creation of heaven, the
earth and the universe, as some have done, but [it will start] from the
establishment of our human race, and our era, beginning with the forefather of
our race, called Adam, who was the one who fell from paradise and was case out
from the blissful life. Taking the information from the scriptures of the
Hebrews, as the book of Moses relates, I will set down the number of the years
of the doomed and mortal life [of Adam], [p77] and what follows; which is where
the historical accounts of the Hebrews begin. At this point, the book of Moses
says [Genesis 3:23]: "The Lord banished him" (that is, the first man) "from
paradise to work the ground from which he had been taken. And he drove Adam out,
and made him dwell outside the region of paradise." Then it adds [Genesis 4:1]:
"Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain." Our
present chronicle will start from this point; but it will not include the first
part of history, which cannot be calculated and must be left separate from the
subsequent times.

There is much disagreement amongst the Hebrews about the dates which they have
recorded. Therefore it is best to look at the different accounts which they have
given, and by comparing and considering them all, to decide where the truth
lies. The five books of Moses tell the story of the creation of the world, and
of life before the flood, and the history of the most ancient men after the
flood, and the successive generations after the flood, and Moses' departure from
this life. But the books of the law are written down differently by the Jews,
and by the Samaritans, who were foreigners who came to live among the Jews. The
characters, which are used by the Jews to represent the Hebrew letters, are
different from those used by the Samaritans; and even the descendants of the
Jews agree that the Samaritans use the original and true forms of the
characters. The two races had no disagreement [about the texts] until the
characters were changed. But now there is a great difference between them on
matters of chronology, which will become immediately obvious when we compare
them in the discussion which follows. The Greek translation also differs
significantly from the Jewish version in some respects, but it does not differ
much from the Hebrew version of the Samaritans. There are some differences in
the period up to the flood; but from then onwards until the time of Abraham, the
two versions are in agreement. The text which we use was translated by seventy
Hebrew men, out of their native language into Greek. [p79] They produced the
translation in complete harmony during the reign of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, and
placed it in the library at Alexandria.

Now we will down write each version of Scripture in turn, so that it will be
easy to spot the differences between them. First of all, we will see how the
Septuagint [the translation of the seventy men] records the chronology of the
period from Adam until the birth of Abraham. The Septuagint

• Adam, the first man, became the father of Seth when he was 230 years old, and
lived for another 700 years, until the 135th year of Mahalalel.

• Seth became the father of Enosh when he was 205 years old, and lived for
another 707 years, until the 20th year of Enoch.

• Enosh became the father of Kenan when he was 190 years old, and lived for
another 715 years, until the 53rd year of Methuselah.

• Kenan became the father of Mahalalel when he was 170 years old, and lived for
another 740 years, until the 81st year of Lamech.

• Mahalalel became the father of Jared when he was 165 years old, and lived for
another 730 years, until the 48th year of Noah.

• Jared became the father of Enoch when he was 162 years old, and lived for
another 800 years, until the 280th year of Noah.

• Enoch became the father of Methuselah when he was 165 years old, and lived for
another 200 years, until he was taken away in the 33rd year of Lamech.

• Methuselah became the father of Lamech when he was 167 years old, and lived
for another 802 years. The number of years assigned to Methuselah [by the
Septuagint] suggests that he survived for (?) 22 years after the time of the
flood; but we know that in some copies of the text, it is stated that he lived
for another 782 years [after the birth of Lamech], and died at the time of the
flood.

• [p81] Lamech became the father of Noah when he was 188 years old, and lived
for another 535 years. Lamech died before his father Methuselah, in the 535th
year of Noah.

• Noah became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth when he was 500 years old, 100
years before the time of the flood. The flood occurred in the 600th year of
Noah, and he lived for another 350 years after the flood, until the 83rd year of
Eber. In total, 2,242 years, according to the Septuagint version. The Hebrew
version, of the Jews

• Adam became the father of Seth when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 800 years, until the 56th year of Lamech.

• Seth became the father of Enosh when he was 105 years old, and lived for
another 807 years, until the 168th year of Lamech.

• Enosh became the father of Kenan when he was 90 years old, and lived for
another 815 years, until the 84th year of Noah.

• Kenan became the father of Mahalalel when he was 70 years old, and lived for
another 840 years, until the 179th year of Noah.

• Mahalalel became the father of Jared when he was 65 years old, and lived for
another 830 years, until the 234th year of Noah.

• Jared became the father of Enoch when he was 162 years old, and lived for
another 800 years, until the 366th year of Noah.

• Enoch became the father of Methuselah when he was 65 years old, and lived for
another 300 years, until he was taken away in the 113th year of Lamech.

• Methuselah became the father of Lamech when he was 187 years old, and lived
for another 782 years, up until the time of the flood.

• Lamech became the father of Noah when he was 182 years old, and lived for
another 595 years. He died five years before the flood.

• [p83] Noah became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth when he was 500 years
old, 100 years before the time of the flood. The flood occurred in the 600th
year of Noah, and he lived for another 350 years after the flood, until the 58th
year of Abraham. In total, 1,656 years. This version differs from the Septuagint
by a total of 586 years. This is the difference from the Septuagint in the
number of years for which each of them lived before their sons were born; apart
from Jared, Methuselah and Lamech, who are given the same number of years in
both versions. From the agreement with respect to these three, we can deduce
that the version which we use is more reliable, because the longer length of
years which is assigned to Jared and his descendants in the Hebrew version makes
it clear that the years of their predecessors should also be the same as in the
Septuagint version. If the later and more recent generations are found, with the
addition of the hundred years, to be assigned the same number of years in both
the Hebrew and the Septuagint versions, how much likely is it that the previous
generations, their forefathers, lived to be older than their descendants? For in
the summary of each man's life, the number of years before his son was born, and
the number of year that he lived afterwards, added together gives the same total
of years in the Hebrew version and the Septuagint translation. It is only the
numbers of years before their sons were born which are shorter in the account
preserved in the Jewish copies. Therefore we suspect that this was something
which the Jews did: that they ventured to compress and shorten the time before
these sons were born, in order to encourage early marriages. For if these most
ancient of men, who lived such long lives, came quite soon to marriage and
fatherhood, as their account declares, who would not want to imitate them and
marry early? The Hebrew version, of the Samaritans

• Adam, the first man, became the father of Seth when he was 130 years old, and
lived for another 800 years, until the 223rd year of Noah.

• [p85] Seth became the father of Enosh when he was 105 years old, and lived for
another 807 years, until the 335th year of Noah.

• Enosh became the father of Kenan when he was 90 years old, and lived for
another 815 years, until the 433rd year of Noah.

• Kenan became the father of Mahalalel when he was 70 years old, and lived for
another 840 years, until the 528th year of Noah.

• Mahalalel became the father of Jared when he was 65 years old, and lived for
another 830 years, until the 583rd year of Noah.

• Jared became the father of Enoch when he was 62 years old, and lived for
another 785 years, up until the time of the flood.

• Enoch became the father of Methuselah when he was 65 years old, and lived for
another 300 years, until he was taken away in the 180th year of Noah.

• Methuselah became the father of Lamech when he was 67 years old, and lived for
another 653 years, up until the time of the flood.

• Lamech became the father of Noah when he was 53 years old, and lived for
another 600 years, up until the time of the flood.

• Noah became the father of Shem when he was 500 years old, 100 years before the
time of the flood. The flood occurred in the 600th year of Noah, and he lived
for another 350 years after the flood, until the 83rd year of Eber. In total,
1,307 years.

[The Samaritan version] differs from the Jewish version by 349 years; and it
differs from the Septuagint translation by 935 years. That is the end of our
discussion of the period before the flood.

Let us now proceed to the times after the flood. First, let us note that the
books of the Chaldaeans contain a very similar account to what is told by the
Hebrews about the flood and about the ark which was built by Noah. But because I
have already written down the account which was recorded by the Chaldaeans in
the appropriate place, I think it is pointless to repeat the same words here.

[p87] Some proof that the flood rose above the highest mountains was given a
long time afterwards to us, as we wrote this [chronicle]. We observed that, in
our own times, fish had been found on top of the highest peaks of the Libanus
mountains. Some men, who had gone there to cut out stones from the mountains for
building, found various kinds of sea-fish, compacted into the mud in the hollows
of the mountains. The fish had survived until the present time, as if they had
been artificially preserved, and the sight of them provided evidence to us that
the ancient story was true. Let our readers believe this as they wish - but we
will now proceed to the following period of time.

After the flood, according to the Septuagint translation

• In the second year [after the flood], Shem the son of Noah became the father
of Arphaxad, and lived for another 500 years, until the 101st year of Peleg.

• Arphaxad became the father of Shelah when he was 135 years old, and lived for
another 403 years, until the 9th year of Reu.

• Shelah became the father of Eber when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 406 years, until the 7th year of Serug.

• Eber became the father of Peleg when he was 134 years old, and lived for
another 433 years, until the 38th year of Nahor.

• Peleg became the father of Reu when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 209 years, until the 75th year of Serug. In the days of Peleg, the land
was divided up, and therefore the name Peleg means "division" in the Hebrew
language. Peleg [was the second man who] died before his father. In his time,
the tower [of Babel] was built; men began to speak many different languages,
instead of the common language which they had used before; and each nation had
its own language, as the Holy Scriptures say [Genesis 11:5-9]. [p89] Gentile
writers also tell the same story; Alexander Polyhistor mentions it in his book
about the Chaldaeans, and Abydenus also gives a similar account. I have already
recorded what they say in my account of the Chaldaeans.

• After Peleg, Reu became the father of Serug when he was 135 years old, and
lived for another 207 years, until the 77th year of Nahor.

• Serug became the father of Nahor when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 200 years, until the 51st year of Abraham.

• Nahor became the father of Terah when he was 79 years old, and lived for
another 119 years, until the 49th year of Serug.

• Terah became the father of Abraham when he was 70 years old, and lived for
another 135 years, until the 35th year of Isaac.

• The first year of Abraham, who was the forefather of the Jewish nation. In his
time, Ninus and Semiramis ruled over Assyria and the whole of Asia. From the
flood up until the first year of Abraham, there are 942 years. From Adam up
until the flood, 2,242 years. In total, 3,184 years.

After the flood, according to the Hebrew version of the Jews

• In the second year after the flood, Shem the son of Noah became the father of
Arphaxad, and lived for another 500 years, until the 50th year of Jacob.

• Arphaxad became the father of Shelah when he was 35 years old, and lived for
another 403 years, until the 48th year of Isaac.

• Shelah became the father of Eber when he was 30 years old, and lived for
another 403 years, until the 18th year of Jacob.

• Eber became the father of Peleg when he was 34 years old, and lived for
another 430 years, until the 79th year of Jacob.

• Peleg became the father of Reu when he was 30 years old, and lived for another
209 years, until the 48th year of Jacob.

• Reu became the father of Serug when he was 32 years old, and lived for another
207 years, until the 78th year of Abraham.

• [p91] Serug became the father of Nahor when he was 30 years old, and lived for
another 200 years, until the first year of Isaac.

• Nahor became the father of Terah when he was 29 years old, and lived for
another 119 years, until the 49th year of Abraham.

• Terah became the father of Abraham when he was 70 years old, and lived for
another 135 years, until the 35th year of Isaac.

• The first year of Abraham. From the flood up until the first year of Abraham,
there are 292 years. In total, 1,948 years from Adam. This differs from the
Septuagint translation by 1,235 years.

After the flood, according to the Hebrew version of the Samaritans

• In the second year after the flood, Shem the son of Noah became the father of
Arphaxad, and lived for another 500 years, until the 101st year of Peleg.

• Arphaxad became the father of Shelah when he was 135 years old, and lived for
another 303 years, until the 39th year of Peleg.

• Shelah became the father of Eber when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 303 years, until the 39th year of Reu.

• Eber became the father of Peleg when he was 134 years old, and lived for
another 270 years, until the 140th year of Reu.

• Peleg became the father of Reu when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 109 years, until the 109th year of Reu.

• Reu became the father of Serug when he was 132 years old, and lived for
another 207 years, until the 77th year of Nahor.

• Serug became the father of Nahor when he was 130 years old, and lived for
another 100 years, until the 21st year of Terah.

• Nahor became the father of Terah when he was 79 years old, and lived for
another 69 years, until the 69th year of Terah.

• Terah became the father of Abraham when he was 70 years old, and lived for
another 75 years, until the 75th year of Abraham.

• [p93] The first year of Abraham, who was the forefather of the Jewish nation.
From the flood up until the first year of Abraham, there are 942 years. This is
the same total as in the Septuagint translation.

Therefore, the Hebrew version of the Samaritans agrees with our version in the
number of years which it assigns to each of these men, before his son was born;
but it differs from the Hebrew version of the Jews by 650 years. For according
to the Jewish version, there were 292 years from the flood up until the first
year of Abraham.

It is clear from the oldest version of the Hebrew scriptures, which is preserved
by the Samaritans, and which is in agreement with the Septuagint translation,
that these men, from the flood down to Abraham, did not have sons until they
were over a hundred years old. So who could suppose that their ancestors, who
lived for much longer, had fathered children more quickly, rather than after the
length of time which is recorded in the Septuagint [translation]? That is what
any rational study would suggest; and so we must agree that [the numbers of
years in] the Jewish version are incorrect for the whole period from Adam until
Abraham, except for the three generations starting with Jared; and the Samaritan
version is also incorrect, but only in the period from Adam until the flood,
because in the period from the flood until Abraham, it records the same numbers
of years as the Septuagint translation.

Indeed, it is absolutely clear that [the dates in] the Hebrew version of the
Jews are incorrect. It even suggests that Noah and Abraham were alive at the
same time - which is something that is not mentioned in any history. For if,
according to the Jewish scriptures, there were 292 years from the flood until
Abraham, and Noah lived for another 350 years after the flood, it is obvious
that Noah was alive until the 58th year of Abraham. And it is possible to show
that the Jewish version is untrustworthy in another way: because it says that
the generations before Abraham were about 30 years old when their sons were
born, but the generations after Abraham are said to have been much older when
they fathered their children.

[p95] Therefore, because it has been definitely established that the Septuagint
version was translated from the original, unadulterated Hebrew scriptures, it is
reasonable for us to use that version for this chronicle - especially since it
is the only version that is approved by the church of Christ, which has spread
throughout the whole world, and it is the version that was handed down to us
from the beginning by the apostles and disciples of Christ.

According to the Septuagint [version], from Adam until the flood, there are
2,242 years. From the flood until the first year of Abraham, 942 years. In
total, 3,184 years.

According to the Hebrew [version] of the Jews, from Adam until the flood, there
are 1,656 years. From the flood until the first year of Abraham, 292 years. In
total, 1,948 years.

According to the Hebrew [version] of the Samaritans, from Adam until the flood,
there are 1,307 years. From the flood until the first year of Abraham, 942
years. In total, 2,249 years.

All the versions agree that from Abraham up until Moses and the exodus of the
Jews from Egypt, there are 505 years, which are calculated in the following way.
In the 75th year of Abraham, God appeared to him and said that he would give the
promised land to his offspring. It is written [Genesis, 12:4-7]: "Abraham was
seventy-five years old when he set out from Haran. He took his wife Sarah, and
his nephew Lot." And a little later, Scripture adds: "The Lord appeared to
Abraham, and said, 'To your offspring I give this land.' " So from the first
year of Abraham [until this promise made by God], there are 75 years; and from
the 75th year of Abraham until the exodus of the Jews from Egypt, there are 430
years. The Apostle Paul bears witness to this, when he says [Galatians,
3:17-18]: "The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant
previously established by God and thus do away with the promise." And shortly
afterwards, he adds: "God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise."
Abraham's son Isaac was born in Abraham's 100th year, 25 years after the promise
which God made to him. From then until the exodus from Egypt there are 405
years, so that the total time from the promise until [the exodus] is 430 years.

[p97] But God, who had appeared to Abraham, appeared to him again and said
[Genesis 15:13]: "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a
country not their own, and they will be enslaved and ill-treated for four
hundred years." The word "descendants" is used deliberately; and to show that we
should not allocate the [whole] time to Isaac, the period of 430 years is
mentioned at the time of the exodus of the children of Israel from the land of
the Egyptians. Scripture says [Exodus 12:40-41]: "Now the length of time which
they and their forefathers lived in Egypt and the land of Canaan, was 430 years.
At the end of the 430 years, all the Lord's divisions left Egypt by night."
Because the length of time, from when the promise was made by God (in the 75th
year of Abraham), is 430 years, it is clear that from the first year of Abraham
until Moses and the exodus from Egypt, there are 505 years.

Some writers calculate the years in detail, as follows:

• Abraham became the father of Isaac, when he was 100 years old • Isaac became
the father of Jacob, when he was 60 years old • Jacob became the father of Levi,
when he was 86 years old • Levi became the father of Kohath, when he was 46
years old • Kohath became the father of Amram, when he was 63 years old • Amram
became the father of Moses, when he was 70 years old • Moses led the people out
of Egypt, when he was 80 years old So the total length of time, from the first
year of Abraham until the exodus from Egypt, is 505 years. In total, from Adam
until the exodus from Egypt, according to the Septuagint version, there are
3,689 years; according to the Jews, 2,453 years; according to the Samaritans,
2,753 years. The period from the death of Moses until Solomon and the building
of the temple is described in one way by the book of Judges, with which the holy
Apostle agrees in the Acts of the Apostles; but in a different way by the book
of Kings and the Hebrew tradition. It will be best to report both accounts, and
then to choose the one which is more truthful.

Firstly, it must be mentioned that Africanus, who compiled a Chronography in
five books, seems to me to have been greatly mistaken in these matters. [p99] By
his reckoning, there were 741 years from the exodus of Moses until Solomon and
the building of the temple at Jerusalem, but he provides no evidence for most of
this. He is wrong, not only because what he says is contrary to the account of
the Holy Scriptures, but also because he audaciously adds a total of 100 years
on his own authority. He assigns an additional 30 years to the elders after
Joshua; and then after Samson, he places 40 years of anarchy, and another 30
years of peace. By inserting these additional years without any proof, he
carelessly produces an inflated total of over 740 years in his calculation of
the time between Moses and king Solomon. By observing how many generations had
elapsed, we can see that his account is improbable. There were 14 generations
from Abraham until David, and the ninth generation had already come to an end at
the time of Moses, when Nahshon the son of Aminadab was leader of the tribe of
Judah. Nahshon died in the desert after leaving Egypt, and he was present when
the people were first numbered. It is clear that there were five generations
after Nahshon until David: David was the son of Jesse, who was the son of Obed,
who was the son of Boaz, who was the son of Salmon, who was the son of Nahshon.
So how can it be claimed that these five generations after Moses lasted for a
total of more than 700 years? If the years are evenly distributed between the
men in each generation, we will find that each of them lived for over 140 years
before his son was born; and no-one in their senses would consider that
possible. Moses himself died at the age of 120 years, and his successor Joshua
died at the age of 110 years. Before their time, Joseph lived in all for 110
years, and earlier still Jacob, who was also called Israel, the patriarch of all
the Jews, lived for 147 years.

[p101] So how can it be supposed that in later times, after Moses, anyone could
have lived for as long as we have said? Africanus is clearly wrong in this
matter. However, Clemens reckoned that there were 674 years from Joshua the
successor of Moses until the building of the temple, as can be found in the
first book of his Miscellany [ Stromata, 1'21 ]. The holy Apostle Paul, in his
speech to the Jews in the Acts of the Apostles, says as follows [Acts 13:19-22]:
"Joshua destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, and he divided the land
[amongst the Jews] for 450 years, and after that he gave them judges until the
time of Samuel the prophet. Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul
the son of Kish, of the tribe of Benjamin, who reigned for 40 years. After that,
God removed Saul and gave them David in his place." That is what the Apostle
says. According to him, there were 534 years after Joshua. As well as the 450
years, which he assigns to the judges until Samuel, there must be added 40 years
for Saul, another 40 years for David, and the four years of Solomon's reign
before the building of the temple, which makes a total of 534 years from Joshua
the successor of Moses until Solomon. If you add the 40 years of Moses in the
wilderness, and the 27 years of Joshua the son of Nun, then the total for the
whole period will be 600 years, according to the Apostle. The book of Judges is
in agreement with his account, and assigns 450 years to the judges until Samuel,
which are divided up as follows:

According to the book of Judges • After Joshua, rule by foreigners - 8 years •
Othniel - 40 years • foreigners - 18 years • Ehud and Shamgar - 80 years •
foreigners - 20 years • Barak and Deborah - 40 years • [p103] foreigners - 7
years • Gideon - 40 years • Abimelech - 3 years • Tola - 23 years • Jair - 22
years • foreigners - 18 years • Jephthah - 6 years • Ibzan - 7 years • Elon - 10
years • Abdon - 8 years • foreigners - 40 years • Samson - 20 years • Eli, in
whose time Samuel was born - 40 years The total for all the judges until Samuel
is 450 years. The total is consistent with the words of the holy Apostle, but it
does not include the years of Moses, or of Joshua the successor of Moses, or of
Samuel, or of Saul. The number of years for Samuel and Saul, and also for
Joshua, may be uncertain; but as the Apostle suggests, the 40 years of Saul
should be added to the 450 years of the judges, and if the 40 years of David and
the 4 years of Solomon are joined to this, they make a total of 534 years, the
same as in the account of the Apostle. If we also add the 40 years of Moses in
the wilderness, and the 27 years of Joshua the son of Nun, according to the
tradition of the Hebrews, the total for the whole period is 600 years.

If this total is compared with the five generations between Nahshon and David,
which were mentioned previously, and the years are divided equally between the
generations, it follows that the men in each generation lived for more than 115
years before their sons were born. It is scarcely credible that, when Moses
lived in all for 120 years, his descendants should reach almost the same age,
before their sons were born. Therefore there is nothing left but to move on at
this point to the account in the book of Kings. The book of Kings clearly states
that, from the exodus of the children of Israel until Solomon and the building
of the temple, there was a total of 440 years; according to the Hebrew version,
it was 480 years. [p105] The third book of Kings says as follows [1 Kings 6:1]:
"It happened in the 440th year after the exodus out of Egypt, that Solomon began
to build the house of the Lord." In the Hebrew version, it says "It happened in
the 480th year" because the Jewish teachers, by a careful calculation, decided
that the total came to 480 years. They did not count separately the years in
which the foreigners are said to have ruled over the people [of Israel], but
counted just the time that the judges ruled them, and included within this the
periods of foreign domination. And this must be how it is done, because it is
the only way that the total can be made to be 480 years. I believe that when the
holy Apostle stated the number of years, which was mentioned before, he was not
speaking in the manner of a chronographer, or of someone who was making an exact
calculation. It would have been superfluous to introduce a discussion of
chronology into his declaration of the message of salvation, and so he followed
the common interpretation of the book of Judges. The book of Kings expressly
states that there were 440 (or 480) years from the exodus until Solomon. But if
we look at the dates of each of the judges, and also count separately the times
of foreign rule which are mentioned in the book of Judges, there is a total of
600 years between Moses and Solomon. This total of 600 years is divided up as
follows:

• Moses in the wilderness - 40 years • Joshua - 27 years • Judges and foreigners
- 450 years (as the Apostle states, in accordance with the book of Judges) •
Samuel and Saul - 40 years • David - 40 years • Solomon (until the building of
the temple) - 4 years

Therefore the men in each of the five generations, which we mentioned
previously, must have lived for 120 years before their sons were born; which is
wholly incredible.

However, if we follow the account in the book of Kings, we will have a total of
480 years, because the 120 years, during which the Hebrews were ruled by
foreigners, have been removed. [p107] Instead, the years of their enslavement
will have been combined with the years of their freedom in a single total, which
is how the Hebrews themselves count it. That is how we will calculate the dates
here, by assuming that the times of foreign rule are included in the number of
years assigned to each of the judges. We have been particularly persuaded to use
this method of calculation, by considering how long is allowed for the five
generations from Nahshon to David. If we subtract the 40 years of Moses in the
wilderness and the four years of Solomon from the total of 480 years, there are
436 years left, up until the death of David. If these years are divided equally
between the five generations, there are 87 years for each generation. If anyone
investigates this, he will find that it is a plausible account, starting from
the birth of David. David was the eighth son of Jesse, and was born after his
seven elder brothers when his father was an old man; and so we can reckon that
something similar may have happened to his ancestors.

Therefore we will follow here the account in the book of Kings, that there were
480 years from the exodus out of Egypt until Solomon and the building of the
temple. We will include the periods of foreign rule in the number of years
assigned to each of the judges who ruled in succession. The book of Judges
supports this decision in another way, by the words of Jephthah, who was one of
the judges of the people. When the Ammonites, who lived on the other side of the
river Jordan, made war on Jephthah, he sent an embassy to the enemy, with this
message [Judges 11:25-26]: "Are you better than Balak son of Zippor, king of
Moab? Did he ever quarrel with Israel, or fight with them? For three hundred
years Israel occupied Heshbon, Aroer, the surrounding settlements and all the
towns along the Jordan. Why did he not retake them during that time?" His
message tells them that Moses and Balaam the son of Beor lived 300 years before
their own time. [p109] The only way to produce this total of 300 years is to
reckon that the periods when foreigners ruled [the people of Israel] are
included in the number of years assigned to the judges who ruled them. If anyone
counts the periods of the people's enslavement, when they were ruled by
foreigners, separately [from the judges], he will produce a total which far
exceeds the 300 years. But if he counts only the years which are assigned to the
judges who ruled the people, he will find that there are 300 years from Moses
until Jephthah, as Jepththah's message stated.

Therefore, the chronology which we use for this period will be as follows: From
Moses to Solomon • Moses - 40 years • Joshua - 27 years • foreigners and Othniel
the judge - 40 years • foreigners and Ehud the judge - 80 years • foreigners and
Deborah and Barak - 40 years • foreigners and Gideon - 40 years • Abimelech - 3
years • Tola - 23 years • Jair - 22 years • foreigners and Jephthah the judge -
6 years • Ibzan - 7 years • Abdon - 8 years • foreigners and Samson - 20 years
In his time, the Trojan war was fought.

• Eli - 40 years • Samuel and Saul - 40 years • David - 40 years • Solomon
(until the building of the temple) - 4 years In total, from Moses and the exodus
out of Egypt until the building of the temple, 480 years.

About Joshua, the book which bears his name tells us nothing more than that
[p111] he died at the age of 110 years. But the Hebrews say that he was leader
for 27 years; and so he was 43 years old when Moses went out of Egypt.

About Samuel, because Scripture does not explicitly assign a number of years to
him, I think that the length of Saul's reign which is mentioned by the holy
Apostle should belong jointly to Saul and to Samuel. It is clear that Samuel was
leader of the people for many years; but Scripture states that Saul reigned for
just two years. In the first book of Kings, it says [1 Samuel 13:1]: "Saul was
the son of a year in his reigning; and he ruled over Israel for two years".
Symmachus makes this clearer in his translation: "Saul was like a year-old child
in his reigning", meaning that Saul was pure and faultless at the beginning of
his reign. He kept that nature for two years, but when he turned to evil ways,
he was rejected by God and suffered divine punishment. Therefore the remaining
years have been assigned to Samuel, and 40 years is the joint total for Saul and
Samuel. It is clear that Saul [or Samuel] ruled for this length of time, not
only from the evidence of the Apostle, but also from a careful investigation of
Scripture, which says [2 Samuel, 2:10] that after the death of Saul,
"Ish-Bostheth son of Saul was 40 years old when he became king over Israel, and
he reigned two years. The house of Judah, however, followed David." Ish-Bostheth
must have been born after Saul became king, because Scripture [1 Samuel, 14:49],
when talking of the beginning of Saul's reign, mentions three sons of Saul, but
not this one. Therefore we think that Ish-Bosheth was born later, and the length
of Saul's reign was about the same as the age of his son after his death. In
summary, the third book of Kings [1 Kings, 6:1] says that there were 480 years
from the exodus out of Egypt until Solomon and the building of the temple; there
were 505 years from Abraham until Moses and the exodus; [p113] there were 942
years from the flood until the first year of Abraham; and there were 2,242 years
from Adam until the flood. Altogether there were 4,170 years from Adam until
Solomon and the building of the temple. The historian Josephus, in the first
book of his Jewish Antiquities, produced some Phoenicians as witnesses to the
date of Solomon and to his building of the temple, and the evidence of the men
whom he mentions seems useful to me. In that book, he writes as follows [Against
Apion, 1:106(17)]: The evidence of the Phoenicians about the temple at
Jerusalem, from Josephus

I will now, therefore, pass from these records, and come to those that belong to
the Phoenicians, and concern our nation, and shall produce proof of what I have
said out of them. There are then records among the Tyrians that take in the
history of many years, and these are public writings, and are kept with great
exactness, and include accounts of the facts done among them, and such as
concern their transactions with other nations also, those I mean which were
worth remembering. Therein it was recorded that the temple was built by king
Solomon at Jerusalem, one hundred forty-three years and eight months before the
Tyrians built Carthage. In their annals the building of our temple is related;
for Hirom, the king of Tyre, was the friend of Solomon our king, and had such
friendship transmitted down to him from his forefathers. He thereupon was
ambitious to contribute to the splendour of this edifice of Solomon, and made
him a present of one hundred and twenty talent talents of gold. [p115] He also
cut down the most excellent timber out of that mountain which is called Libanus,
and sent it to him for adorning its roof. Solomon also not only made him many
other presents, by way of requital, but gave him a country in Galilee also, that
was called Chabulon. But there was another passion, a philosophic inclination of
theirs, which cemented the friendship that was between them; for they sent
mutual problems to one another, with a desire to have them resolved by each
other; wherein Solomon was superior to Hirom, as he was wiser than he in other
respects: and many of the letters that passed between them are still preserved
among the Tyrians. Now, that this may not depend on my bare word, I will produce
for a witness Dius, one that is believed to have written the Phoenician History
after an accurate manner. This Dius, therefore, writes thus, in his Histories of
the Phoenicians:

"Upon the death of Abibalus, his son Hirom took the kingdom. This king raised
banks at the eastern parts of the city, and enlarged it; he also joined the
temple of Olympian Zeus, which stood before in an island by itself, to the city,
by raising a causeway between them, and adorned that temple with donations of
gold. He moreover went up to Libanus, and had timber cut down for the building
of temples. They say further, that Solomon, when he was king of Jerusalem, sent
problems to Hirom to be solved, and desired he would send others back for him to
solve, and that he who could not solve the problems proposed to him should pay
money to him that solved them. And when Hirom had agreed to the proposals, but
was not able to solve the problems, he was obliged to pay a great deal of money,
as a penalty for the same. As also they relate, that one Abdemon, a man of Tyre,
did solve the problems, and propose others which Solomon could not solve, upon
which he was obliged to repay a great deal of money to Hirom."

These things are attested to by Dius, and confirm what we have said upon the
same subjects before. [p117] And now I shall add Menander the Ephesian, as an
additional witness. This Menander wrote the Acts that were done both by the
Greeks and Barbarians, under every one of the Tyrian kings, and had taken much
pains to learn their history out of their own records. Now when he was writing
about those kings that had reigned at Tyre, he came to Hirom, and says thus:

"Upon the death of Abibalus, his son Hirom took the kingdom; he lived
fifty-three years, and reigned thirty-four. He raised a bank on that called the
Broad Place, and dedicated that golden pillar which is in Zeus' temple; he also
went and cut down timber from the mountain called Libanus, and got timber of
cedar for the roofs of the temples. He also pulled down the old temples, and
built new ones; besides this, he consecrated the temples of Heracles and of
Astarte. He first built Heracles' temple in the month Peritius, and that of
Astarte when he made his expedition against the Tityans [(?) inhabitants of
Utica], who would not pay him their tribute; and when he had brought them under
his control, he returned home. Under this king there was a younger son of
Abdemon, who mastered the problems which Solomon king of Jerusalem had
recommended to be solved." Now the time from this king to the building of
Carthage is thus calculated.

"Upon the death of Hirom, Baalbazerus his son took the kingdom; he lived
forty-three years, and reigned seventeen years: after him succeeded his son
Abdastartus; he lived thirty-nine years, and reigned nine years. Now four sons
of his nurse plotted against him and slew him, the eldest of whom reigned twelve
years: after them came Astartus, the son of Eleastartus; he lived fifty-four
years, and reigned twelve years: after him came his brother Astharymus; he lived
fifty-eight years, and reigned nine years: he was slain by his brother Phelles,
who took the kingdom and reigned but eight months, though he lived fifty years:
he was slain by Eithobalus, the (?) son of king Astartus, who reigned thirty-two
years, and lived forty-eight years: [p119] he was succeeded by his son
Balezorus, who lived forty-five years, and reigned eight years: he was succeeded
by Metenus his son; he lived thirty-two years, and reigned twenty-nine years:
Physmalion succeeded him; he lived fifty-eight years, and reigned forty-seven
years. Now in the seventh year of his reign, his sister fled away from him, and
built the city Carthage in Libya. So the whole time from the reign of Hirom,
till the building of Carthage, amounts to the sum of one hundred fifty-five
years and eight months."

Since then the temple was built at Jerusalem in the twelfth year of the reign of
Hirom, there were from the building of the temple, until the building of
Carthage, one hundred forty-three years and eight months. Therefore, what
occasion is there for quoting any more evidence out of the Phoenician histories
[on the behalf of our nation], since what I have said is so thoroughly confirmed
already? To be sure, our ancestors came into this country long before the
building of the temple; for it was not till we had gained possession of the
whole land by war that we built our temple. And this is the point that I have
clearly proved out of our sacred writings in my Antiquities. That is what
Josephus says. The list of times [of reigns] which is shown here covers 432
years, from the building of the temple, in the fourth year of Solomon, until the
destruction [of the temple] by the Babylonians. They are reckoned as follows:

• Solomon - for 37 years (The rest of his reign except for the first three
years) • Rehoboam - for 16 years • Abijah - for 3 years • Asaph - for 41 years •
Jehoshaphat - for 25 years • Jehoram - for 8 years • Ahaziah - for 1 year •
Athaliah his mother - for 7 years • Joash - for 40 years • [p121] Amaziah - for
28 years • Uzziah - for 52 years In his reign the Greeks established the first
Olympic games [776 B.C.].

• Jotham - for 16 years • Ahaz - for 16 years • Hezekiah - for 29 years •
Manasseh - for 55 years • Amon - for 2 years • Josiah - for 31 years • Jehoahaz
- for 3 months • Jehoiakim - for 11 years • Jehoiachin, also called Jekhoniah,
his son - for 3 months • Mattaniah, also called Zedekiah - for 11 years In
total, 432 years.

After this, the Babylonian captivity of the Jews and the abandonment of their
country lasted for 70 years, which came to an end in the 65th Olympiad [520-517
B.C.], in the second year of Dareius the king of the Persians, as the Holy
Scriptures say.

Clemens agrees with our account, when he writes in the first book of his
Miscellany as follows [ Stromata, 1'21 ]: "The captivity lasted for seventy
years, and ended in the second year of Darius Hystaspes, who had become king of
the Persians, Assyrians, and Egyptians; in whose reign, as I said above, Haggai
and Zechariah and the angel of the twelve [Malachi] prophesied. And the high
priest was Joshua the son of Josedec." That is what Clemens says.

More evidence that there was a period of 70 years from the destruction of the
temple until the second year of Dareius is provided by the prophet Zechariah,
who said in the second year of Dareius [Zechariah 1:12] : "Almighty Lord, how
long will you not pity Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, which you have
despised? This is the seventieth year." But the acute observer may say: "But why
is it said at the beginning of the book of Ezra [Ezra 1:1], that in the first
year of Cyrus the king of the Persians, to fulfil the word of God which was
spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, the Lord aroused the spirit of Cyrus the
king of the Persians, and he gave an order throughout his kingdom in a written
decree." And then, adding what follows in that book, [p123] he will show that it
refers to the release of the Jews, and how Cyrus ordered the temple to be
rebuilt. From this you would assume that the 70 years of the captivity came to
an end in the reign of Cyrus, and not in the reign of Dareius. To this I reply,
that the words of the prophets refer to two different periods of 70 years. The
one is reckoned from the destruction of the temple, and came to an end in the
second year of Dareius, as the statement of Zechariah makes clear. The second is
from the enslavement of the Jews, up until the capture of Babylon and the
destruction of the kingdom of the Chaldaeans. This is reckoned from the time of
the prophecy, and came to an end in the reign of Cyrus, and not in the reign of
the Dareius, in accordance with the word of Jeremiah, in which he foretells what
will happen [Jeremiah 29:10]: "Thus says the Lord. When the 70th year has been
completed, I will come to you, and I will fulfil my promise to you, that I will
lead you back to this place." And again, he prophesies as follows [Jeremiah
25:11-12]: "All this land will be deserted and ruined, and they will serve the
king of the Babylonians amongst the foreigners; and the Lord says about that
nation, and about the land of the Chaldaeans, that I will bring them to ruin."

All this was fulfilled in the reign of Cyrus, by counting the years, not from
the destruction of the temple, but earlier, from the second year of Jehoiakim,
king of the Jews, because it was in this year that Nebuchadnezzar the king of
the Babylonians first enslaved the Jews; or even earlier, from when the prophet
Jeremiah first began to prophesy. From that time, there were 40 years until the
siege of Jerusalem and the burning of the temple, and 70 years until the first
year of the reign of Cyrus. The one period of 70 years lasted from the beginning
of Jeremiah's prophecy until the reign of Cyrus; but there were 30 years from
the destruction of the temple until the reign of Cyrus, and [the other period
of] 70 years was completed in the second year of the reign of Dareius. The
temple was restored in the eighth year of Dareius. From that time onwards, the
Jews remained without their own kings. They had their own high priests as
leaders, but were subject first to the kings of the Assyrians, then to the kings
of the Persians, and after them to the Macedonians who ruled after Alexander, up
until the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, who as king of Syria forced the Jews to
adopt Greek customs. At that time, Mattathias the son of Asamonaeus, who was a
priest at Jerusalem, his son Judas, who [p125] was surnamed Maccabaeus, and
their successors re-established the Jewish state, and ruled it continuously
until the time of Augustus. In Augustus' time, Herodes was the first foreigner
to become king of the Jews, with the support of the Romans; during his reign,
our Saviour Jesus Christ was born. This was the fulfilment of the prophecy
spoken by Moses [Genesis 49:10]: "The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor
the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and
the obedience of the nations is his". These are the words of the prophecy. But
the total length of time, from Solomon and the first building of the temple
until the second year of Dareius and the rebuilding of the temple, is 502 years.
And from Moses and the exodus from Egypt until Solomon and the first building of
the temple, is 480 years. And from the first year of Abraham until the exodus,
is 505 years. And from the flood until the first year of Abraham, is 942 years.
And from Adam to the flood, is 2242 years. So the overall total, from Adam until
the second year of Dareius and the second building of [the temple in] Jerusalem,
is 4680 years. And from the second year of Dareius which was the first year of
the 65th Olympiad [520 B.C.] [until the ministry of Christ], is 137 Olympiads
and 548 years. To show this in more detail, the kings of the Persians are listed
here, along with the lengths of their reigns:

• Cyrus reigned for 30 years • Then Cambyses - for 6 years • Dareius reigned for
36 years In Dareius' second year, the temple in Jerusalem was restored. Dareius
reigned for a further 34 years.

• Then Xerxes the son of Dareius - for 20 years In his reign, the story of
Esther took place.

• Artabanus - for 6 months • Artaxerxes "Macrocheir" - for 41 years In his reign
lived Ezra, the sacred scribe of the Hebrews, who is said to have memorised the
whole of Holy Scripture, and who transmitted it to the Jews in the new Hebrew
script, because they were living in enemy lands. Nehemiah the head cupbearer
also lived at this time; with the approval of the king, he returned to Judaea
[p127] and rebuilt Jerusalem, and surrounded the city with a wall; for up until
then the city had been deserted, except for the temple which was rebuilt under
Dareius. After Artaxerxes there were the following kings of the Persians:

• Xerxes the second - for 2 months • Sogdianus - for 6 months • Dareius "Nothus"
- for 19 years • Artaxerxes "Mnemon" - for 40 years • Artaxerxes, also called
Ochus - for 26 years • Arses the son of Ochus - for 4 years • Dareius the son of
Arsames - for 6 years

• Alexander, the king of the Macedonians, killed Dareius and ruled over the
Persian empire for 6 years; he had ruled over the land for 6 years before
killing Dareius. The empire of the Persians lasted for 234 years. Beginning in
the 55th Olympiad [560-557 B.C.], it ended in the 113th Olympiad [328-325 B.C.].
And from the second year of Dareius until the death of Alexander, who died in
the first year of the 114th Olympiad [324 B.C.], is 197 years.

After the death of Alexander, there were the following kings of Egypt and
Alexandria:

• 1. Ptolemaeus the son of Lagus - for 40 years • 2. Ptolemaeus Philadelphus -
for 38 years • 3. Ptolemaeus Euergetes - for 24 years • 4. Ptolemaeus Philopator
- for 21 years • 5. Ptolemaeus Epiphanes - for 22 years • 6. Ptolemaeus
Philometor - for 34 years In his time, Antiochus Epiphanes was king of Syria;
and in Antiochus' reign occurred the events which [are related] in the books of
Maccabees. These books tell how Antiochus tried to convert the Jews to Greek
customs; he defiled the temple by putting up sacred images there, and carried
off the sacred vessels of the temple in the 151st Olympiad [176-173 B.C.]. So
from the death of Alexander of Macedonia to the first year of Antiochus
Epiphanes, is 150 years. And from the second year of Dareius until Antiochus, is
347 years. In the reign of Antiochus, Mattathias the son of Asamonaeus [p129]
showed great devotion to his country's religion, and became leader of the Jews.
After his death, his son Judas Maccabaeus [became leader]; and after him, his
brother Jonathan [was leader]; and after him, his brother Simon [was leader].
The account of the book of Maccabees ends in the reign of Simon; it covers a
period of 40 years, up until the end of the 161st Olympiad [136-133 B.C.]. And
from this time until Augustus the Roman emperor, is 88 years.

After Simon, according to Africanus and Josephus, Jonathan, also called
Hyrcanus, was leader of the Jews for 26 years. After him, Aristobulus [was
leader] for one year. Aristobulus was the first to wear the royal diadem, acting
as king and high priest of the Jewish race; this was 484 years after the
Babylonian captivity. After him, Alexander, also called Jannaeus, was king for
25 years. After him, his widow Alexandra, also called Sallina, [was queen] for 9
years. And after her, Aristobulus and Hyrcanus [were kings]. In their reign,
Pompeius the Roman general forced the Jews to pay tribute to the Romans. He set
up Hyrcanus as their king, but led off Aristobulus as a prisoner to Rome. In
Hyrcanus' reign, in the (?) 184th Olympiad [44 B.C.], Julius Caesar became
emperor of the Romans, for 4 years and 7 months. And after him, Augustus
(Sebastos in Greek) was emperor for 56 years and 6 months. In his reign, Herodes
was the first foreigner to be made king of the Jews by the Romans; his family
came from Ascalon, and he had no right to the throne. In Herodes' reign, Christ
the Son of God was born in Bethlehem of Judaea.

After Augustus, Tiberius became emperor. In his 15th year, the fourth year of
the 201st Olympiad [28 A.D.], our Saviour and Lord, Jesus Christ the Son of God,
appeared amongst men. So from Antiochus Epiphanes until the 15th year of
Tiberius, is 201 years. And from Alexander of Macedonia until the same year of
Tiberius, is 352 years. And from the second year of Dareius [until the same year
of Tiberius], is 548 years. [p131] And from the 15th year of Tiberius until the
final siege of Jerusalem in the second year of Vespasianus, is 42 years. From
Adam until the second year of Dareius, is 4680 years. And from the second year
of Dareius until the 15th year of Tiberius, is 548 years. So the total, from
Adam until the 15th year of Tiberius, is 5228 years. From the 15th year of
Tiberius until the 20th anniversary of Constantinus Victor Augustus, is 300
years. So the overall total, according to the Hebrews in the Septuagint version,
is (?) 5518 years. According to the Jews' Hebrew text, it is 1237 years less;
and according to the Samaritans' Hebrew text, it is 935 years less. This is the
way in which the numbers of years are calculated, according to the Hebrews.

[p131] THE EGYPTIANS

• How [the history of] the Ethiopians is included in the chronology of the
Egyptians, and [the times when] the Ptolemaei ruled over Egypt and Alexandria.

• How the Egyptians have kept records of their dates.

After the chronology of the Chaldaeans, the Assyrians and the Hebrews, it it
time to move on to the records of the Egyptians.

Diodorus, in the first book of his historical library [ 1.44 ], writes as
follows: "Some of them tell the story that the first rulers in Egypt were gods
and heroes, who ruled for slightly less than sixteen thousand years; the last of
the gods who ruled there was Horus the son of Isis. Then men became kings of the
country, in the time of Myris, and have continued for slightly less than five
thousand years, until the 180th Olympiad [60-57 B.C.], when I visited Egypt, in
the reign of Ptolemaeus, who was called the New Dionysus.

[p133] "For the great majority of that time, the country has been ruled by
native kings; but for short periods it was ruled by Ethiopians, by Persians and
by Macedonians. There were only four Ethiopian kings, and they did not rule in a
single sequence, but at separate times; in total, they ruled for slightly less
than 36 years. During the supremacy of the Persians, which was established when
Cambyses conquered the [Egyptian] people by force, and which lasted for 135
years, the Egyptians rose in revolt, because they could not endure the harsh
government and the impiety [of the Persians] towards the native gods. Then the
Macedonians and their descendants became kings, for 276 years. For the whole of
the rest of the time, [Egypt] was governed by native rulers, who consisted of
470 kings and 5 queens.

"Records about all of these rulers have been kept by the priests in their sacred
books, which have been continuously handed down from one [generation] to
another, since the most ancient times. These books tell about the character of
each king, their virtue and their bravery, their spirit and their nobility, as
well as the achievements of each of them in their reigns. However it is
unnecessary, and moreover worthless, for us to write down the deeds of each of
them; especially since many of them were judged to be insignificant even in
their own times." That is what Diodorus says. And now it is right and fitting
for us to add to this Manetho's account of the Egyptians, which seems to be a
reliable history. From the Egyptian records of Manetho, who composed in three
books commentaries about the gods, demi-gods, spirits, and the mortal kings who
ruled over the Egyptians, up until the time of Dareius the king of the Persians.
The first man amongst the Egyptians was Hephaestus, who discovered fire for
them; he was the father of Sol [the Sun]. After him came [(?)Agathodaemon; then]
Cronus; then Osiris; then Typhon the brother of Osiris; and then Horus the son
of Osiris and Isis. These were the first rulers of the Egyptians. [p135] After
them, one king succeeded another until the time of Bidis, for a total of 13,900
years - calculated by lunar years, which lasted for 30 days. That is the period
which we now call a month, but the men of that time called it a year.

After the gods, a race of demi-gods ruled for 1,255 years. After them, other
kings ruled [the country] for 1,817 years. After them, 30 kings from Memphis
[ruled] for 1,790 years; and then another ten kings from Thinis ruled for 350
years. And then the shades and demi-gods were kings, for 5,813 years. The total
for all of these is 11,000 years - which are lunar years, or months. The total
time, which the Egyptians assign to the gods and demi-gods and spirits is 24,900
lunar years - which is the equivalent of 2,206 solar years. If you compare this
figure with the chronology of the Hebrews, you will find almost the same number
of years. For Aegyptus is called Mizraim by the Hebrews; and he was born many
years after the time of the flood. It was after the time of the flood that Ham
the son of Noah became the father of Mizraim, who was also called Aegyptus; and
when the nations were scattered around the earth, Mizraim set off for Egypt to
live there. According to the Hebrews, there were 2,242 years in all from Adam
until the flood. So let the Egyptians boast of their antiquity, in the ancient
times which preceded the flood. They say that they had some gods, demi-gods and
shades. If the years which are recorded by the Hebrews are converted to months,
the total is over 20,000 lunar years, so that there are about the same number of
months as are contained in the years recorded by the Hebrews, when we count the
years from the first-born man up until Mizraim. Mizraim was the patriarch of the
Egyptians, and the first dynasty of the Egyptians was descended from him. But
if, even so, the number of years is found to be too large, then we must
investigate the reason for this. Perhaps it happened that there were many kings
in Egypt at the same time. They say that some of them were kings of Thinis, some
of Memphis, some of Sais, and some of Ethiopia; and there were yet others in
other places. [p137] And as it seems that these dynasties ruled each in its own
(?) nome, it is very unlikely that they ruled in succession to each other.
Rather, some of them ruled in one place, and others in another place. Therefore
the increase in the number of years can be explained in that way. But we will
leave this matter, and proceed to the details of the chronology of the
Egyptians.

After the demi-gods and spirits, they reckon that the first dynasty consisted of
8 kings. The first of these kings was Menes, who was an outstanding ruler.
Starting from him, we will list the rulers of each generation. The succession of
rulers was as follows.

1st Dynasty. Menes and his seven descendants:

• Menes of Thinis, whom Herodotus [ 2.4 ] calls Min, ruled for (?) 60 years.

- He led his armies beyond the borders of his kingdom, and he was held in high
esteem. He was seized by a hippopotamus.

• His son Athotis ruled for 27 years.

- He built a palace in the city of Memphis. He was skilled in medicine, and
wrote books about anatomy.

• His son Cenchenes, 39 years • Venephes, 42 years - In his reign there was a
severe famine. He built the pyramids near Cocome.

• Usaphais, 20 years • Niebais, 26 years • Semempses, 18 years - In his reign
there were many prodigies, and a great pestilence.

• Ubienthis, 26 years. In total: 252 years 2nd Dynasty. 9 kings:

• Firstly, Bochus, in whose reign a chasm appeared in the ground at Bubastis,
and many were killed.

• Then Caechōus, in whose reign Apis and Mnevis and the goat of Mendes were
honoured as gods.

• [p139] Biophis, in whose reign it was decided that women too could reign as
monarchs.

• After him, there were three other kings, but nothing significant happened in
their reigns.

• In the reign of the seventh king, there is a legend that the river Nile flowed
for eleven days with honey mixed in its water.

• Then Sesochris [ruled] for 48 years. He is said to have been 5 cubits and 3
palms tall.

• Nothing worthy of mention happened in the reign of the ninth king. In total:
297 years 3rd Dynasty. 8 kings of Memphis:

• Necherochis

- In his reign the Libyans revolted from the Egyptians, but when the moon
unexpectedly grew in size, they were moved by fear and surrendered again.

• Sesorthus

- He was called Asclepius by the Egyptians because of his skill in medicine. He
discovered how to make buildings out of hewn stone, and also gave some attention
to writing.

• The other six kings achieved nothing worthy of mention. In total: 197 years
4th Dynasty. 17 kings of Memphis, from another family:

• The third king was Suphis

- He built the largest pyramid, which Herodotus [ 2.124 ] says was built by
Cheops. He was disdainful towards the gods, but later he repented and wrote the
sacred book, which the Egyptians hold in the highest regard.

• Nothing worthy of mention is recorded about the other kings. In total: 448
years 5th Dynasty. 31 kings of Elephantine:

• The first king was Othoēs, who was assassinated by his bodyguards.

• The fourth king was Phiops, who became king at the age of six, and reigned
until 100 years [old].

[Eusebius does not give a total number of years for this dynasty]

6th Dynasty.

• Queen Nitocris, who was the noblest and most beautiful woman of her time, with
a fair complexion. She is said to have built the third pyramid. In total: [they
ruled for] 203 years [p141] 7th Dynasty. 5 kings of Memphis, who ruled for 75
(?) days.

8th Dynasty. 5 kings of Memphis, who ruled for 100 years.

9th Dynasty. 4 kings of Heracleopolis, who ruled for 100 years.

• The first king was Achthoēs, who was the most terrible of all the kings up to
his time. He cruelly maltreated the inhabitants throughout Egypt, but later he
fell into madness and was killed by a crocodile.

10th Dynasty. 19 kings of Heracleopolis, who ruled for 185 years.

11th Dynasty. 16 kings of Diospolis, who ruled for 43 years.

• After them, Ammenemes reigned for 16 years. At this point, Manetho finishes
his first book, which contains 192 kings who reigned in total for 2,300 years
[and 75 days]. From the second book of Manetho:

12th Dynasty. 7 kings of Diospolis:

• Firstly, Sesonchosis the son of Ammenemes, for 46 years • Ammanemes, for 38
years - He was killed by his own eunuchs.

• Sesostris, for 48 years

- He is said to have been 4 cubits, 3 palms and 2 digits tall. He conquered the
whole of Asia in nine years, as well as Europe as far as Thrace. Everywhere he
erected monuments to show his control over the nations; he depicted men's
genitals on the columns for brave nations, and women's genitals for cowardly
nations. Therefore the Egyptians gave him the first place of honour after
Osiris.

• Lamares, for 8 years - He built the labyrinth in the Arsinoite [nome], as his
own tomb.

• [p143] His successors ruled for 42 years. In total: they ruled for 245 years
13th Dynasty. 60 kings of Diospolis, who ruled for 453 years.

14th Dynasty. 76 kings of Xois, who ruled for 484 years.

15th Dynasty. [? 17] kings of Diospolis, who ruled for 250 years.

16th Dynasty. 5 kings of Thebes, who ruled for 190 years.

17th Dynasty. Shepherds. Phoenician brothers and foreign kings, who captured
Memphis:

• Firstly, Saites, for 19 years

- The Saite nome was named after him. They established a city in the Sethroite
nome, and from there they advanced and conquered the Egyptians.

• Secondly, Bnon, for 40 years • Archles, for 30 years • Apophis, for 14 years
In total: 103 years. Joseph seems to have (?) lived at the time of these kings.

18th Dynasty. 14 kings of Diospolis:

• Amosis, 25 years • Chebron, 13 years • Ammenophis, 21 years • Misphres, 12
years • Misphragmuthosis, 26 years • [p145] Tuthmosis, 9 years • Amenophis, 31
years - He is the one who is thought to be Memnon, the "singing" statue.

• Orus, 38 years • Achencherses, 16 years - In his reign, Moses led the exodus
of the Jews out of Egypt.

• Acherres, 8 years • Cherres, 15 years • Armaïs, who was also [called] Danaus,
5 years

- After 5 years he was expelled from Egypt, and fled from his brother Aegyptus
to Greece, where he captured Argos and became the king of the Argives.

• Rhamesses, who was also called Aegyptus, 68 years • Amenophis, 40 years In
total: 348 years 19th Dynasty. 5 kings of Diospolis:

• Sethos, 55 years • Rhampses, 66 years • Amenephthis, (?) 40 years • Ammenemes,
26 years • Thuōris, 7 years - Homer [ Od_4'126 ] calls him Polybus, the husband
of Alcandra, and in his reign Troy was captured. In total: 194 years This is
[the end] of the second book of Manetho, which contains (?) 92 kings who reigned
in total for 2,121 years. From the third book of Manetho:

20th Dynasty. 12 kings of Diospolis, who ruled for 172 years.

21st Dynasty. 7 kings of Tanis:

• Smendis, 26 years • Psusennes, 41 years • Nephercheres, 4 years • Amenophthis,
9 years • [p147] Osochor, 6 years • Psinaches, 9 years • Psusennes, 35 years In
total : 130 years 22nd Dynasty. 3 kings of Bubastis:

• Sesonchosis, 21 years • Osorthon, 15 years • Tacelothis, 13 years In total :
49 years 23rd Dynasty. 3 kings of Tanis:

• Petubastis, 25 years • Osorthon, whom the Egyptians called Heracles, 9 years •
Psammūs, 10 years In total : 44 years 24th Dynasty. Bocchoris of Sais, 44 years.
In his reign, a lamb spoke.

25th Dynasty. 3 Ethiopian kings:

• Sabacon, who captured Bocchoris and burnt him alive, ruled for 12 years •
Sebichos, his son, 12 years • Taracus, 20 years In total : 44 years 26th
Dynasty. 9 kings of Sais:

• Ammeres the Ethiopian, (?) 12 years • Stephinathis, 7 years • Nechepsos, 6
years • Nechao, 8 years • Psammetichus, 44 years • Nechao II, 6 years - He
captured Jerusalem, and took king Jehoahaz back as a prisoner to Egypt.

• Psammuthes (Psammetichus) II, 17 years • Vaphres, 25 years - The remaining
Jews fled to him after Jerusalem had been captured by the Assyrians.

• Amosis, 42 years In total : 167 years 27th Dynasty. 8 Persian kings:

• [p149] Cambyses, in the 5th year of his reign, ruled the Egyptians for 3 years
• the magi, 7 months • Dareius, 36 years • Xerxes, the son of Dareius, 21 years
• Artaxerxes, 40 years • Xerxes II, 2 months • Sogdianus, 7 months • Dareius,
the son of Xerxes, 19 years In total : 120 years and 4 months 28th Dynasty.
Amyrtaeus of Sais, 6 years.

29th Dynasty. 4 kings of Mendes:

• Nepheretes, 6 years • Achoris, 13 years • Psammuthes, 1 year • Muthes, 1 year
• Nepherites, 4 months In total : 21 years and 4 months 30th Dynasty. 3 kings of
Sebennytus:

• Nectanebis, 10 years

• Teōs, 2 years • Nectanebus, 8 years In total : 20 years 31st Dynasty. 3
Persian kings:

• Ochus, in the 20th year of his reign, ruled over Egypt for 6 years • Arses,
the son of Ochus, 4 years • Dareius, who was killed by Alexander the Macedonian,
6 years All of the above is contained in the third book of Manetho.

What follows will be taken from Greek writers, because the kingdom of the
Egyptians came to an end at this point. But as Flavius Josephus has produced
evidence from the books of Manetho, in his history of the ancestors of the
Hebrews, I think that it is right to record his words, which appear in the first
[book of] his Antiquity of the Jews, as follows.

[p151] Josephus, [quoting] from the books of Manetho

I shall begin with the writings of the Egyptians; not indeed of those that have
written in the Egyptian language, which it is impossible for me to do. But
Manetho, who was by birth an Egyptian, had some knowledge of Greek learning, as
is very evident; for he wrote the history of his own country in the Greek
language, by translating it, as he says himself, out of their sacred records; he
also finds great fault with Herodotus for his ignorance and inaccuracy about
Egyptian history. Now this Manetho, in the second book of his Egyptian History,
writes concerning us in the following manner. I will set down his very words, as
if I were to bring the very man himself into a court as a witness: "Tutimaeus.
In his reign it happened, I know not why, that God was angry with us, and there
came, unexpectedly, men of ignoble birth from the east, and they were bold
enough to make an expedition into our country, and easily subdued it by force,
because we did not even hazard a battle with them. So when they had overpowered
our rulers, they afterwards burnt down our cities, and demolished the temples of
the gods, and treated all the inhabitants in the most barbarous manner. Some of
them they slew, and led their children and their wives into slavery. At length
they made one of themselves king, whose name was Salitis; he also lived at
Memphis, and he made both the upper and lower regions pay tribute, and left
garrisons in places that were the most suitable for them. He chiefly aimed to
secure the eastern parts, because he foresaw that the Assyrians, who were the
most powerful people of that time, would want to seize his kingdom, and invade
it. He found in the Sethroite nome a city very suitable for this purpose, on the
east side of the Bubastic channel of the river, which for theological reasons
was called Avaris. He rebuilt it, and made it very strong by the walls he built
around it, and put in a very large garrison of two hundred and forty thousand
armed men, to guard it. [p153] Salitis came there in summer time, partly to
gather his corn, and pay his soldiers their wages, and partly to exercise his
armed men, and thereby to intimidate foreigners. After this man had reigned
nineteen years, another, whose name was Bnon, reigned for forty-four years;
after him reigned another, called Apachnas, thirty-six years and seven months;
after him Apophis reigned sixty-one years, and then Jannas fifty years and one
month; after all these, Assis reigned for forty-nine years and two months. And
these six were the first rulers among them, who were all along making war with
the Egyptians, and wanted gradually to eradicate them. This whole nation was
styled Hyksos, that is, 'shepherd-kings': for the first syllable hyk, according
to the sacred dialect, denotes 'a king', and sos is 'a shepherd', according to
the ordinary dialect; and of these is compounded Hyksos: but some say that these
people were Arabians." Now in another copy it is said that this word does not
denote 'kings', but, on the contrary, denotes that the shepherds were
'captives'. For hyk, as well as hak with an aspirate, in the Egyptian language
expressly denotes 'captives'; and this to me seems the more probable opinion,
and more in accordance with ancient history.

"These people, whom we have before named kings, and called shepherds also, and
their descendants," as he says, "kept control of Egypt for five hundred and
eleven years." After this, he says, "The kings of Thebais and the other parts of
Egypt rebelled against the shepherds, and a terrible and long war was fought
between them. A king, whose name was Misphragmuthosis, subdued the shepherds,
and after driving them out of the other parts of Egypt, he shut them up in a
place [p155] that contained ten thousand arourai; this place was named Avaris."
Manetho adds, "The shepherds built a large and strong wall round all this place,
in order to keep all their possessions and their prey within a place of
strength, but Thummosis the son of Misphragmuthosis made an attempt to take them
by force and by siege, surrounding them with an army of four hundred and eighty
thousand men. But, despairing of taking the place by siege, he came to an
agreement with them, that they should leave Egypt, and go, without suffering any
harm, wherever they chose; and, after this agreement was made, they went away
with all their families and possessions, not fewer in number than two hundred
and forty thousand, and travelled out of Egypt, through the wilderness, towards
Syria. But as they were in fear of the Assyrians, who were then the rulers of
Asia, they built a city in that country which is now called Judaea; the city was
large enough to contain this great number of men, and they called it Jerusalem."
Now Manetho, in another book of his, says that this nation, thus called
'shepherds', were also called 'captives', in the sacred books of his country.
And this account of his is true; for feeding of sheep was the employment of our
forefathers in the most ancient ages, and as they led such a wandering life in
feeding sheep, they were called 'shepherds'. Nor was it without reason that they
were called 'captives' by the Egyptians, since one of our ancestors, Joseph,
told the king of Egypt that he was a captive, and afterwards brought his
brothers into Egypt with the king's permission. But as for these matters, I
shall give a more detailed account of them elsewhere. But now I shall produce
the Egyptians as witnesses to the antiquity of our nation. I shall therefore
bring in Manetho again, and what he writes about the sequence of dates. He says:
"When this people or shepherds left Egypt and went to Jerusalem, Tethmosis the
king of Egypt, who drove them out, reigned for another twenty-five years and
four months, and then he died; [p157] after him his son Chebron took the kingdom
for thirteen years; after whom came Amenophis, for twenty years and seven
months; then came his sister Amesses, for twenty-one years and nine months; then
came her son Mephres, for twelve years and nine months; after him was
Mephramuthosis, for twenty-five years and ten months; after him was Thmosis, for
nine years and eight months; after him came Amenophis, for thirty years and ten
months; after him came Orus, for thirty-six years and five months; then came his
daughter Acenchres, for twelve years and one month; then was her brother
Rathotis, for nine years; then came his son Acencheres, for twelve years and
five months; then came another Acencheres, for twelve years and three months;
after him Armais, for four years and one month; after him was Ramesses, for one
year and four months; after him came Armesses Miamūn, for sixty-six years and
two months; after him Amenophis, for nineteen years and six months; after him
came Sethosis, also called Ramesses, who had an army of cavalry, and a strong
navy. This king appointed his brother, Armais, to be his deputy over Egypt. He
also gave him all the other authority of a king, except that he instructed him,
that he should not wear the diadem, nor do any harm to the queen, the mother of
his children, and that he should not meddle with the other concubines of the
king. Then he made an expedition against Cyprus, and Phoenicia, and besides
against the Assyrians and the Medes. He subdued them all, some by his arms, some
without fighting, and some by the terror of his great army; and being puffed up
by the great successes he had had, he went on still more boldly, and overthrew
the cities and countries that lay in the east. But after some considerable time,
Armais, who was left in Egypt, recklessly did all those very things, which his
brother had forbidden him to do. He used violence against the queen, and
continued to make use of the rest of the concubines, without sparing any of
them. At the persuasion of his friends he put on the diadem, and set up in
opposition to his brother. But then the chief of the priests in Egypt wrote
letters to Sethosis, and informed him of all that had happened, and how his
brother had set up in opposition to him. Sethosis therefore returned back to
Pelusium immediately, and recovered his kingdom again." The country was called
Egypt from his name; for Manetho says, that Sethosis was himself called
Aegyptus, [p159] and his brother Armais was called Danaus. This is Manetho's
account. And it is clear from the number of years allocated by him to this
interval, if they are all added together, that these shepherds, as they are here
called, were no other than our forefathers, who were delivered out of Egypt, and
came from there to inhabit this country, three hundred and ninety-three years
before Danaus came to Argos; although the Argives look upon Danaus as their most
ancient king. Manetho, therefore, provides evidence from the Egyptians records
for two points which are of the greatest consequence to our purpose. In the
first place, that we came out of another country into Egypt; and secondly, that
our departure from Egypt was so ancient in time as to have preceded the siege of
Troy by almost a thousand years. As to those things which Manetho adds, not from
the Egyptian records, but, as he confesses himself, from some stories of an
uncertain origin, I will disprove them later in detail, and shall demonstrate
that they are no better than incredible fables. That is what Josephus says in
the book which we referred to. He [? Manetho] describes the kings of the
Egyptians from the beginning until the end, up until one of the kings that they
appointed, called Nectanebus. I have already mentioned Nectanebus earlier on, at
the appropriate point in the list of kings. After Nectanebus, Ochus the king of
the Persians gained control of Egypt, and ruled over it for 6 years. After him,
his son Arses [was king] for 4 years. After him, Dareius [was king] for 6 years.
Then Alexander the Macedonian killed Dareius the Persian, and ruled over both
the Asians and the Egyptians. Alexander founded the city of Alexandria in Egypt
in the sixth year of his reign. After the death of Alexander, his empire was
divided between many different rulers, and the Ptolemaei became kings of Egypt
and Alexandria. The dates of these kings are as follows. The kings of Egypt and
the city of Alexandria after the death of Alexander of Macedonia, from the
writings of Porphyrius:

Alexander of Macedonia died in the 114th Olympiad [324 B.C.], after reigning for
a total of 12 years. He was succeeded by Aridaeus, also called Philippus, who
was a brother of Alexander, but by a different mother; for he was the son of
Philippus and Philinna of Larissa. Aridaeus ruled for 7 years, before he was
killed in Macedonia by Polysperchon the son of Antipater.

[p161] A year after Philippus became king, Ptolemaeus the son of Arsinoe and
Lagus was sent to be satrap of Egypt. He was satrap for 17 years, and then he
was king for 23 years; so altogether he ruled for 40 years, until his death.
However, while still alive he abdicated in favour of his son Ptolemaeus, called
Philadelphus, and he lived for a further two years after his son had taken over
as king; so we reckon the reign of this first Ptolemaeus, called Soter, to be 38
rather than 40 years long.

He was succeeded by his son Ptolemaeus, who as we said was called Philadelphus.
The son reigned for two years while his father was still alive, and then for a
further 36 years after his death, so that we reckon the length of his reign to
be 38 years, the same as for his father.

After him, the third Ptolemaeus, called Euergetes, reigned for 25 years.

After him, the fourth Ptolemaeus, called Philopator, reigned for 17 years.

After him, the fifth Ptolemaeus, called Epiphanes, reigned for 24 years. This
Ptolemaeus had two sons, the elder called Philometor and the younger called the
second Euergetes, who ruled after him for a combined total of 64 years. We have
counted their years together, because they were constantly fighting against each
other and alternately gained and lost control of the kingdom, which makes it
difficult to calculate their years separately.

Philometor first ruled on his own for 11 years; but when Antiochus invaded Egypt
and removed him from the throne, the inhabitants of Alexandria put the younger
brother in charge. Then they forced Antiochus out of Egypt, and freed
Philometor. They called that the 12th year of Philometor, and the first year of
Euergetes. After that the two kings ruled jointly until the 17th year, but from
the 18th year onwards Philometor ruled on his own. At that time the elder
brother, who had been deposed by the younger brother, was restored by the
Romans. [p163] So he ruled in Egypt, and made his brother ruler of Libya
instead, and after that Philometor ruled as sole king of Egypt for 18 years.
When he died in Syria, which was also under his control, Euergetes was called
back from Cyrene and proclaimed king. Euergetes counted his years from the time
when he first became king, so that he seems to have reigned for 25 [29?] years
after his brother's death, but officially he reigned for 54 years. The 36th year
of Philometor should have been called the first year of his reign, but instead
he ordered it to be written as the 25th year of his reign. So the combined
length of both their reigns is 64 years, 35 years under Philometor and the rest
under Euergetes; but to split it up into separate reigns would lead to
confusion.

Ptolemaeus the second Euergetes had two sons by Cleopatra, the elder called
Ptolemaeus Soter and the younger called Ptolemaeus Alexander. The elder son was
appointed by his mother to reign first; she thought he would obey her, so
favoured him for a time. But in the tenth year of his reign he murdered his
parents' friends, and was deposed by his mother because of his cruelty, and fled
to Cyprus. His mother summoned her younger son from Pelusium, and appointed him
to be king along with her. So the younger son ruled jointly with his mother, and
the country was governed in both their names; this year was called the 11th year
of Cleopatra and the 8th year of Alexander, because Alexander counted his years
from the 4th year of his brother's reign, which was when he started to rule over
Cyprus. This state of affairs continued until the death of Cleopatra; after she
died, Alexander ruled on his own, and he reigned for 18 years in all after he
returned to Alexandria, though officially he reigned for 26 years. In the 19th
year, after a dispute with his soldiers, he went away to collect an army to
bring to Egypt against them. However they followed him, and under the leadership
of a relative of the kings called Tyrrus, [p165] they defeated him in a naval
battle. Alexander was forced to take refuge with his wife and daughter in Myra,
a city of Lycia; from there, he crossed over to Cyprus, where he was defeated by
the admiral Chaereas, and died.

After his expulsion, the inhabitants of Alexandria sent envoys to the elder
brother, Ptolemaeus Soter, and established him as king again, when he had sailed
back from Cyprus. Soter lived for another 7 years and 6 months after his return,
and the whole period after the death of the brothers' father was counted in his
name, which was a total of 35 years and 6 months. But if we split the period up
according to the actual course of events, Ptolemaeus Soter ruled at two
different times for a total of 17 years and 6 months, and in between the younger
brother, Ptolemaeus Alexander, ruled for 18 years. The inhabitants of Alexandria
were unable to completely delete Alexander's reign from the records, but as far
as was in their power they erased all mention of it, because Alexander had
assaulted them with the help of some Jews. So they do not count the years of his
reign, but attribute the whole 36 years to the elder brother.

Similarly, they do not attribute the next 6 months after the death of the elder
brother, which make up the complete 36 years, to Cleopatra, the daughter of the
elder brother and wife of the younger brother, who took over control of the
kingdom after the death of her father. Nor do they formally attribute to
Alexander the 19 days in which he jointly reigned with her. This Alexander was
the son of the younger Ptolemaeus, who was also called Alexander, and the
stepson of Cleopatra. He was staying in Rome, when he was summoned back to
Alexandria because there were no men of the royal family left in Egypt. He
married the aforesaid Cleopatra, and when she had willingly handed over power to
him, after an interval of 19 days he murdered her. Then he himself was seized
and killed by the armed men in the gymnasium, because of the foul murder which
he had committed.

[p167] This Alexander was succeeded by Ptolemaeus, called the new Dionysus, who
was the son of Ptolemaeus Soter and the brother of the aforesaid Cleopatra. He
reigned for 29 years. His daughter Cleopatra was the last of the dynasty of the
Ptolemaei. She reigned for 22 years.

These reigns also did not follow an continuous sequence from start to finish, as
laid out in the records, but each of them had some interruptions in the middle
of it. In the reign of the new Dionysus, a three year period was ascribed to the
rule of his daughters Cleopatra Tryphaena and Berenice, one year as a joint
reign and the following two years, after the death of Cleopatra Tryphaena, as
the reign of Berenice on her own. Because Ptolemaeus had gone off to Rome, and
was spending a long time there, his daughters took over the rule of the kingdom,
as if he was not going to return, and Berenice took on some men of the royal
family as co-rulers. But when Ptolemaeus returned from Rome, he forget all
affection towards his daughter, and in his anger at what she had done, he put
her to death. In the first years of Cleopatra's reign, she shared power with her
elder brother Ptolemaeus and then with others, for the following reasons. When
the new Dionysus died, he left four children, two sons called Ptolemaeus and
daughters called Cleopatra and Arsinoe. He handed over power to the two eldest
children, Ptolemaeus and Cleopatra, who reigned jointly for 4 years. And this
state of affairs would have continued, if Ptolemaeus had not wanted to seize
sole power for himself, in contravention of his father's orders. However he was
fated to die soon afterwards, after being defeated in a naval battle by Julius
Caesar, who intervened on behalf of Cleopatra.

After Ptolemaeus' death, Cleopatra's younger brother, who was also called
Ptolemaeus, became joint ruler with his sister, as proposed by Caesar. The next
year was called the fifth year of Cleopatra and the first year of Ptolemaeus,
and so it continued for the following two years, [p169] until he died. He was
plotted against and killed by Cleopatra, in his 4th year, which was Cleopatra's
8th year. From then onwards Cleopatra ruled on her own, up until her 15th year.
However, her 16th year was also called the first year, because after the death
of Lysimachus the king of Chalcis in Syria, the Roman general Marcus Antonius
gave Chalcis and the surrounding regions to Cleopatra. And from then onwards for
the remaining years up until the 22nd year, which was the last of Cleopatra's
reign, the years were counted in the same way, so that the 22nd year was also
called the 7th year.

Octavius Caesar, also called Augustus, conquered Egypt in the battle of Actium,
and succeeded Cleopatra as ruler of Egypt in the second year of the 184th
Olympiad [43 B.C.]. From the first year of the 111th Olympiad [336 B.C.], when
Aridaeus Philippus became king, until the second year of the 184th Olympiad [43
B.C.], is 73 Olympiads and one additional year. So the total duration of the
rule of all the kings of Alexandria, down to the death of Cleopatra, is 293
years. So the reign-lengths of the Ptolemaei are as follows:

Alexander the Macedonian began his reign in the first year of the 111th Olympiad
[336 B.C.]. He founded the city of Alexandria in Egypt, and ruled for 12 years
and 7 months. After him, the kings of the city of Alexandria and the whole of
Egypt were:

• Ptolemaeus the son of Lagus - for 40 years • Ptolemaeus Philadelphus - for 38
years • Ptolemaeus Euergetes - for 24 years • Ptolemaeus Philopator - for 21
years • Ptolemaeus Epiphanes - for 24 years • Ptolemaeus Philometor - for 31
years • [p171] Ptolemaeus the second Euergetes - for 29 years • Ptolemaeus
Physcon, or Soter - for 17 years and 6 months • Ptolemaeus Alexander, after the
expulsion of [Soter], his predecessor - for [10] years • Ptolemaeus
Philadelphus, returning from exile after the expulsion of Alexander - for 8
years • Ptolemaeus Dionysus, called Philadelphus - for 30 years • Cleopatra the
daughter of Ptolemaeus - for 22 years In her reign, Gaius Julius Caesar became
the first Roman emperor. The next emperor, Octavius Caesar Augustus, called
Sebastos in Greek, killed Cleopatra and put an end to the dynasty of the
Ptolemaei, who had ruled for 295 years. THE GREEKS According to the historians
of their ancient times.

• The kings of the Athenians • The kings of the Argives • The kings of the
Sicyonians • The kings of the Lacedaemonians • The kings of the Corinthians •
Who ruled the sea, and for how long • The individual Olympiads of the Greeks •
The early kings of the Macedonians • The kings of the (?) Macedonians,
Thessalians, Syrians and Asians after Alexander Dates of the Greeks The
Sicyonians and their kings are said to be the most ancient of the Greeks. The
first king to rule Sicyon was Aegialeus, at the same time as Ninus and Belus,
who are the first recorded kings of the Assyrians and of Asia. The Peloponnese
was originally called Aegialeia, after this Aegialeus.

Inachus is said to have been the first king of the Argives, 235 years after the
start of the Sicyonian kingdom. [p173] Cecrops, called Diphyes ("two-formed")
was the first king of the Athenians, about 300 years after the start of the
Argive kingdom, and 533 years after the start of the Sicyonian kingdom. This
chronicle will start with the earliest rulers, and first it will give a full
list of the kings of the Sicyonians. There is considerable disagreement amongst
the older writers who composed chronicles of Greek history; but, as far as
possible, we will copy the accounts which are agreed by most writers. The
chronographer Castor lists the dates of the Sicyonian kings in his chronicle;
and then he provides a summary of them, as follows: "We will provide a list of
the kings of Sicyon, starting with Aegialeus, the first king, and ending with
Zeuxippus. These kings reigned for a total of 959 years. After the kings, six
priests of [Apollo] Carneius were appointed; this priesthood lasted for 33
years. Then Charidemus was appointed priest; but he could not bear the expense,
and went into exile." That is what Castor wrote. The exact succession of the
Sicyonian kings is reckoned as follows. The kings of the Sicyonians • Aegialeus,
for 52 years. The Peloponnese was originally called Aegialeia, after this
Aegialeus. He is said to have started to rule Sicyon in the 15th year of Belus,
the first king of the Assyrians. According to legend, [Belus] was the son of
Poseidon and Libya.

• Europs, for 45 years.

He reigned at the same time as Ninus, the son of Belus.

• Telchin, for 20 years.

He reigned at the same time as Semiramis.

• Apis, for 25 years. The Peloponnese was then called Apia, after this Apis.

• Thelxion, for 52 years.

• Aegydrus, for 34 years.

• Thurimachus, for 45 years.

During his reign, Inachus became the first king of the Argives.

• [p175] Leucippus, for 53 years.

• Messapus, for 47 years.

During his reign Egypt was ruled by Joseph, as the Hebrews record.

• Eratus, for 46 years.

• Plemnaeus, for 48 years.

• Orthopolis, for 63 years.

• Marathonius, for 30 years.

During his reign, Cecrops Diphyes became the first king of Attica.

• Marathus, for 20 years.

During his reign, Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt, as will be shown in due
course.

• Echyreus, for 55 years.

During his reign, Danaus became king of the Argives.

• Corax, for 30 years.

• Epopeus, for 35 years.

• Laomedon, for 40 years.

• Sicyon, for 45 years.

During his reign, the kingdom of the Argives came to an end, after lasting for
540 years.

• Polybus, for 40 years.

• Inachus, for 40 years.

• Phaestus, for 8 years.

• Adrastus, for 4 years.

• Polypheides, for 31 years.

During his reign, Troy was captured.

• Pelasgus, for 20 years.

During his reign, Aeneias was king of the Latins.

• Zeuxippus, for 31 years. In all, there were 26 kings of Sicyon, who reigned
for 959 years. After Zeuxippus, there were no more kings, and instead there were
priests of [Apollo] Carneius.

• The first priest was Archelaus, for one year.

• Automedon, for one year.

• Theoclytus, for four years.

• Euneus, for six years.

• Theonomus, for nine years.

• [p177] Amphigyes, for (?) twelve years.

• Lastly, Charidemus for one year. He could not bear the expense, and went into
exile. He was priest (?) 352 years before the first Olympiad [i.e. 1128 B.C.].
The total duration of the kings and priests of the Sicyonians was 998 years.

After the rulers of the Sicyonians, it will be fitting to give a summary of the
kings of the Argives, as far as can be established from the ancient histories.
Castor mentions them in these words.

Castor, about the kings of the Argives:

Next we will list the kings of the Argives, starting with Inachus and ending
with Sthenelus the son of Crotopus. These kings reigned for a total of 382
years, until Sthenelus was driven out by Danaus, who seized control of Argos.
The descendants of Danaus ruled Argos for 162 years, ending with Eurysthenes,
the son of Sthenelus, the son of Perseus. After Eurysthenes, the descendants of
Pelops ruled Argos for (?) 105 years, starting with Atreus, and ending with
Penthilus, Tisamenus and Cometes (?) the son of Orestes, in whose time occurred
the invasion of the Heracleidae. The dates of each of the Argive kings are as
follows. The kings of the Argives • Inachus, for 50 years. The country was
called Inachia, after this Inachus. He began to rule the Argives at the time of
Thurimachus, who was the seventh king of the Sicyonians.

• Phoroneus, for 60 years. In his reign, Ogygus founded Eleusis.

• Apis, for 35 years. The country was then called Apia, after this Apis. During
his reign, Joseph governed the Egyptians, as recorded by the Hebrews.

• Argus, the son of Zeus and Niobe, for 70 years. The name of the country was
changed to Argeia, after this Argus.

• Criasus, for 54 years.

• Phorbas, for 35 years.

During his reign, Cecrops Diphyes became king of the Athenians.

• [p179] Triopas, for 46 years.

During his reign, Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt.

• Crotopus, for 21 years.

• Sthenelus, for 11 years. In all, these kings reigned for 382 years.

Danaus drove out Sthenelus, and ruled Argos, as did his descendants after him.
The succession of kings, and their dates, are as follows.

• Danaus, for 50 years.

• Lynceus, for 41 years.

• Abas, for 23 years.

• Proetus, for 17 years.

• Acrisius, for 31 years. In all, there were rulers of Argos for a period of 544
years, until the end of Danaidae.

After Acrisius, the Argives began to be ruled from Mycenaae, when the
descendants of Pelops took over the kingdom, in the time of Eurysthenes the son
of Sthenelus. Pelops was the first ruler of the Peloponnese, and he organised
the Olympic games.

After Acrisius, when the Argives began to be ruled from Mycenae:

• Eurysthenes was king for 45 years.

• Then the sons of Pelops, Atreus and Thyestes, for 65 years.

• After them, Agamemnon, for 30 years. In the 18th year of his reign, Troy was
captured.

• Aegisthus, for 17 years.

• Orestes, Tisamenus, Penthilus and Cometes for 58 years, until the return of
the Heracleidae, when they conquered the Peloponnese. From the return of the
Heracleidae until the migration of the Ionians, there are (?) 60 years. From the
migration of the Ionians until the first Olympiad [776 B.C.], there are 267
years.

Next it will be fitting to provide a list of the kings of Athenians, by
summarising the accounts of some of the ancient historians.

Ogygus is said to have been the first [king] of the Athenians; [p181] the Greeks
relate that their great ancient flood happened in his reign. Phoroneus the son
of Inachus, king of the Argives, is said to have lived at the same time. Plato
mentions this in the Timaeus [ 22 ], as follows: "When he wished to introduce
them to ancient history, so that they could discuss the antiquity of this city,
he started his account with the old stories about Phoroneus and Niobe, and then
what happened after the flood." Ogygus lived in the time of Messapus, the ninth
king of Sicyon, and Belochus, the eighth king of the Assyrians.

After Ogygus, because of the great destruction caused by the flood, Attica
remained without a king for 190 years, until the time of Cecrops. The number of
years is reckoned from the kings of the Argives, who began before Ogygus. From
the end of the reign of Phoroneus, king of the Argives, in whose time Ogygus'
flood is said to have happened, until Phorbas, in whose time Cecrops became king
of Attica, is a period of 190 years. From Cecrops until the first Olympiad,
there are counted seventeen kings, and twelve archons for life; in this time,
the marvellous myths of the Greeks are said to have occurred. The Greeks count
the kings of Attica from [Cecrops], because they do not know for certain the
dates of any earlier kings. Castor explained this in the summary of this
history, as follows.

Castor, about the kings of the Athenians:

We will now list the kings of the Athenians, starting with Cecrops, called
Diphyes, and ending with Thymoetes. The total duration of the reigns of all
these kings, called Erechtheidae, was 450 years. After them, Melanthus of Pylus,
son of Andropompus, became king, [p183] followed by his son Codrus. The total
duration of their two reigns was (?) 58 years. [When the kings came to an end,
they were replaced by archons who ruled for life], starting with (?) Medon son
of Codrus, and ending with Alcmaeon son of Aeschylus. The total duration of the
rule of the archons for life was 209 years. The next archons held power for 10
years each; there were seven of these archons, and altogether they ruled for 70
years. Then the archons started to hold power for one year each, starting with
Creon and ending with Theophemus, in whose time the history and glorious
achievements of our country came to a complete end. That is what Castor wrote.
Now we will provide a list of each of the kings. The kings of the Athenians •
Cecrops Diphyes, for 50 years. In his reign lived Prometheus, Epimetheus and
Atlas. He started to rule the Athenians in the time of Triopas, the seventh king
of the Argives, and Marathonius, the thirteenth king of Sicyon. At this time,
Moses was prominent amongst the Hebrews, as we will show in due course.

Also in his reign, the flood of Deucalion is said to have engulfed Thessaly,
just as fire devastated the land of Ethiopia in the time of Phaethon.

• Cranaus, an aboriginal, for 9 years.

• Amphictyon, the son of Deucalion and son-in-law of Cranaus, for (?) 10 years.
The deeds of the Danaidae are said to have occurred in his reign.

• Erichthonius, the son of Hephaestus, who is called Erechtheus by Homerus, for
50 years. The Idaean Dactyls lived in his reign.

• Pandion, the son of Erichthonius, for 40 years. The rape of Core [Persephone],
and what is related about Triptolemus, occurred in his reign.

• [p185] Erechtheus the son of Pandion, for 50 years. The deeds of Perseus
occurred in his reign.

• Cecrops, the brother of Erechtheus, for 40 years. The deeds of Dionysus
occurred in his reign.

• Pandion, the son of Erechtheus, for 25 years.

Afterwards Pandion went into exile, and became king of Megara. The deeds of
Europa, Cadmus and the Sparti occurred in his reign.

• Aegeus, the son of Pandion, for 48 years. The deeds of the Argonauts and the
Centaurs occurred in his reign; and Heracles held the athletic games.

• Theseus, the son of Aegeus, for 30 years. In his reign, Minos established
laws.

• Menestheus, the son of Peteus, son of Orneus son of Erechtheus, for 23 years.
In his reign, Troy was captured.

• Demophon, the son of Theseus, for 33 years. The deeds of Odysseus and Orestes
occurred in his reign; and Aeneias was king of Lavinium.

• Oxyntes, the son of Demophon, for 12 years. In his reign, the Amazons burnt
down the temple at Ephesus.

• Apheidas, the son of Oxyntes, for one year.

• Thymoetes, the brother of Apheidas, for 8 years.

• Melanthus of Pylus, the son of Andropompus, for 37 years. In his reign the
Heracleidae returned and occupied the Peloponnese.

• Codrus, the son of Melanthus, for 21 years. In his reign, the Ionians were
driven out of Achaea, and took refuge in Athens.

Archons of the Athenians, who held power for life • Medon, the son of Codrus,
for 20 years.

• Acastus, the son of Medon, for 36 years. In his reign occurred the migration
of the Ionians, [p187] including Homerus, so they say. At the same time, Solomon
built the temple at Jerusalem, as will be shown in due course.

• Archippus, the son of Acastus, for 19 years.

• Thersippus, the son of Archippus, for 41 years.

• Phorbas, the son of Thersippus, for 30 years.

• Megacles, the son of Phorbas, for 30 years.

• Diognetus, the son of Megacles, for 28 years. At this time, Lycurgus was in
his prime.

• Pherecles, the son of Diognetus, for 19 years.

• Ariphron, the son of Pherecles, for 20 years. At this time, the kingdom of the
Assyrians came to an end, and Sardanapalus was killed.

• Thespieus, the son of Ariphron, for 27 years. At this time, Lycurgus
established laws for the Spartans.

• Agamestor, the son of Thespieus, for 17 years.

• Aeschylus, the son of Agamestor, for 23 years. In his twelfth year, the first
Olympiad was held, in which Coroebus won the stadion contest. The total duration
of the Athenian rulers, from Cecrops down to the first Olympiad [776 B.C.], was
780 years; from Ogygus to the first Olympiad, there were 970 years. From this
time onwards, it is convenient to calculate dates according to the Olympiads.

• After Aeschylus, Alcmaeon ruled the Athenians, for 2 years.

[p189] After Alcmaeon, the Athenians decided to appoint archons for ten years
each:

• Charops, for ten years.

• Aesimides, for ten years.

• Cleidicus, for ten years.

• Hippomenes, for ten years.

• Leocrates, for ten years.

• Apsander, for ten years.

• Eryxias, for ten years.

After this, they decided to appoint archons for one year each. The first annual
archon was Creon, in the 24th Olympiad [684-681 B.C.]. From that time onwards,
an archon was appointed for each year; but it is not necessary to list their
names. This concludes the summary of the dates of the ancient rulers of the
Athenians, as related by the older and more reliable historians. We have set
down the dates and events before the capture of Troy, which are not reliably
recorded, as well as we can from the different accounts. Nor are the events from
the capture of Troy until the first Olympiad accurately recorded. However
Porphyrius, in the first book of his Philosophical History, gives a summary in
the following words:

"Apollodorus says that there are 80 years from the capture of Troy [1183 B.C.]
until the expedition of the Heracleidae to the Peloponnese [1103 B.C.]; there
are 60 years from the return of the Heracleidae until the settling of Ionia
[1043 B.C.]; there are 159 years from then until Lycurgus [884 B.C.]; and there
are 108 years from Lycurgus until the first Olympiad [776 B.C.]. Altogether,
there are 407 years from the capture of Troy until the first Olympiad."

Next, it will be fitting to give an account of the Olympiads as they are
recorded by the Greeks.

[p191]Olympiads of the Greeks • First Olympiad: in which Coroebus of Elis won
the stadion race. From this time onwards, the dates of the Greeks seem to have
been accurately recorded; before then, the dates are supplied according to the
whim of each writer.

About the institution of the Olympic Games

It is necessary to say a little about the origin of the games. Some writers, who
trace back the institution of the games to the earliest times, say that they had
been held before Heracles, by one of the Idaean Dactyls; and then by Aethlius,
as a challenge for his sons (from his name, the competitors were called
athletes); and then by his son Epeius; and then Endymion, Alexinus and Oenomaus
were each in charge of the sacred festival. Then Pelops held the games in honour
of his father Zeus; and next, Heracles the son of Alcmene. There were ten
generations (or, according to some, only three complete festivals) from Heracles
until the time of Iphitus.

Iphitus was a citizen of Elis, who was concerned about the condition of Greece,
and wished to rid the cities of their wars. He sent envoys from the whole of the
Peloponnese to consult [the god] about release from the wars which gripped them.
The god gave this response to the Peloponnesians:

You who dwell in the Peloponnese, gather round the altar;

Make sacrifice, and obey the instructions of the prophets.

He added these words to the Eleians:

Eleian servants of the gods, who maintain your ancestral rites, Protect your
homeland, and desist from war.

Lead the Greeks in mutually just friendship, Until the gathering comes in the
year of good will.

[p193] As a result of this, Iphitus proclaimed the truce [which had been fixed
by Heracles at the summer solstice; they no longer fought against each other,]
and he organised the games together with Lycurgus, who happened to be his
relative because they were both descended from Heracles. On this occasion, the
only contest was the stadion race; later the other contests were added in their
turn.

Aristodemus of Elis relates that the victors in the athletic contests began to
be registered in the 27th Olympiad after Iphitus. Before then, no-one had
thought to record the athletes' names. In the 28th Olympiad Coroebus of Elis won
the stadion race, and he was the first victor to be registered. This was then
established as the first Olympiad, from which the Greeks calculate their dates.

Polybius says the same as Aristodemus; but Callimachus says that thirteen
Olympiads passed after Iphitus without victors being registered; and Coroebus
was the victor in the 14th Olympiad. Many writers state that the institution of
the games by Heracles the son of Alcmene occurred (?) 419 years before what is
counted as the first Olympiad. The Eleians hold the games every fifth year, with
a gap of four years in between them. The Greek Olympiads, from the first
Olympiad up until the 247th, when Antoninus the son of Severus was emperor of
the Romans:

• 1st Olympiad [776 B.C.] - Coroebus of Elis was the victor in the stadion race.
The stadion race was the only contest for the first thirteen Olympiads.

• 2nd [772 B.C.] - Antimachus of Elis, stadion race • 3rd [768 B.C.] - Androclus
of Messenia, stadion race [At this time] Romulus and Remus were born.

• [p195] 4th [764 B.C.] - Polychares of Messenia, stadion race • 5th [760 B.C.]
- Aeschines of Elis, stadion race • 6th [756 B.C.] - Oebotas of Dyme, stadion
race • 7th [752 B.C.] - Diocles of Messenia, stadion race • 8th [748 B.C.] -
Anticles of Messenia, stadion race • 9th [744 B.C.] - Xenocles of Messenia,
stadion race • 10th [740 B.C.] - Dotades of Messenia, stadion race • 11th [736
B.C.] - Leochares of Messenia, stadion race • 12th [732 B.C.] - Oxythemis of
Coroneia, stadion race • 13th [728 B.C.] - Diocles of Corinth, stadion race •
14th [724 B.C.] - Desmon of Corinth, stadion race A double race was added, which
was won by Hypenus of Elis.

• 15th [720 B.C.] - Orsippus of Megara, stadion race A long race was added, and
the runners were naked; the winner was Acanthus of Laconia.

• 16th [716 B.C.] - Pythagoras of Laconia, stadion race • 17th [712 B.C.] -
Polus of Epidaurus, stadion race • 18th [708 B.C.] - Tellis of Sicyon, stadion
race A wresting contest was added, and the winner was Eurybatus of Laconia. A
pentathlon contest was also added, and the winner was Lampis of Laconia.

• 19th [704 B.C.] - Menus of Megara, stadion race • 20th [700 B.C.] - Atheradas
of Laconia, stadion race • 21st [696 B.C.] - Pantacles of Athens, stadion race •
22nd [692 B.C.] - Pantacles for a second time • 23rd [688 B.C.] - Icarius of
Hyperesia, stadion race A boxing contest was added, and the winner was Onomastus
of Smyrna. It was Onomastus who established the rules of boxing.

• 24th [684 B.C.] - Cleoptolemus of Laconia, stadion race • 25th [680 B.C.] -
Thalpis of Laconia, stadion race A race was added for chariots drawn by four
horses, and the winner was Pagon of Thebes.

• [p197] 26th [676 B.C.] - Callisthenes of Laconia, stadion race Philombrotus of
Laconia won the pentathlon at three Olympic games. The Carneia, a contest for
citharodes, was held for the first time at Sparta.

• 27th [672 B.C.] - Eurybus of Athens, stadion race • 28th [668 B.C.] - Charmis
of Laconia, stadion race Charmis trained on a diet of dried figs.

These games were held by the inhabitants of Pisa, because Elis was preoccupied
by a war against Dyme.

• 29th [664 B.C.] - Chionis of Laconia, stadion race Chionis could leap a
distance of 22 feet.

• 30th [660 B.C.] - Chionis for a second time The inhabitants of Pisa defected
from Elis, and supervised these and the following 22 games.

• 31st [656 B.C.] - Chionis of Laconia for a third time, stadion race • 32nd
[652 B.C.] - Cratinus of Megara, stadion race At these games, Comaeus was the
third of his brothers to win the boxing contest.

• 33rd [648 B.C.] - Gylis of Laconia, stadion race At these games, a pancratium
contest was added, and the winner was Lygdamis of Syracuse. Lygdamis was
massive; he measured out the stadion with his feet, in only six hundred paces. A
horse race was added, and the winner was Craxilas of Thessaly.

• 34th [644 B.C.] - Stomas of Athens, stadion race • 35th [640 B.C.] - Sphaerus
of Laconia, stadion race The double race was won by Cylon of Athens, who later
attempted to set himself up as tyrant.

• [p199] 36th [636 B.C.] - Phrynon of Athens, stadion race Phrynon was killed in
single combat with Pittacus.

• 37th [632 B.C.] - Eurycleidas of Laconia, stadion race A stadion race for boys
was added, and the winner was Polynices of Elis. A wrestling contest for boys
was added, and the winner was Hipposthenes of Laconia, who won the men's
wrestling contest five times in a row, starting from the next-but-one Olympic
games.

• 38th [628 B.C.] - Olyntheus of Laconia, stadion race A pancratium contest for
boys was added, but only on this one occasion. The winner was Deutelidas of
Laconia.

• 39th [624 B.C.] - Rhipsolaus of Laconia, stadion race • 40th [620 B.C.] -
Olyntheus of Laconia for a second time, stadion race • 41st [616 B.C.] -
Cleondas of Thebes, stadion race A boxing contest for boys was added, and the
winner was Philotas of Sybaris.

• 42nd [612 B.C.] - Lycotas of Laconia, stadion race • 43rd [608 B.C.] - Cleon
of Epidaurus, stadion race • 44th [604 B.C.] - Gelon of Laconia, stadion race •
45th [600 B.C.] - Anticrates of Epidaurus, stadion race • 46th [596 B.C.] -
Chrysamaxus of Laconia, stadion race The boys' stadion race was won by
Polymnestor of Miletus, who chased and caught a hare while he was tending goats.

• 47th [592 B.C.] - Eurycles of Laconia, stadion race • 48th [588 B.C.] - Glycon
of Croton, stadion race

Pythagoras of Samos was excluded from the boys' boxing contest and was mocked
for being effeminate, but he went on to the men's contest and defeated all his
opponents.

• 49th [584 B.C.] - Lycinus of Croton, stadion race • [p201] 50th [580 B.C.] -
Epitelidas of Laconia, stadion race [At this time] the seven wise men were
identified.

• 51st [576 B.C.] - Eratosthenes of Croton, stadion race • 52nd [572 B.C.] -
Agis of Elis, stadion race • 53rd [568 B.C.] - Hagnon of Peparethus, stadion
race • 54th [564 B.C.] - Hippostratus of Croton, stadion race

Arichion of Phigaleia was (?) strangled and died, while winning the pancratium
contest for the third time, and though dead he was crowned as victor, because
his opponent had already conceded defeat, after his leg was broken by Arichion.

• 55th [560 B.C.] - Hippostratus for a second time [At this time] Cyrus became
king of the Persians.

• 56th [556 B.C.] - Phaedrus of Pharsalus, stadion race • 57th [552 B.C.] -
Ladromus of Laconia, stadion race • 58th [548 B.C.] - Diognetus of Croton,
stadion race • 59th [544 B.C.] - Archilochus of Corcyra, stadion race • 60th
[540 B.C.] - Apellaeus of Elis, stadion race • 61st [536 B.C.] - Agatharchus of
Corcyra, stadion race • 62nd [532 B.C.] - Eryxias of Chalcis, stadion race

Milon of Croton won the wrestling contest. He won six times at the Olympic
games, six times at the Pythian games, ten times at the Isthmian games, and nine
times at the Nemean games.

• 63rd [528 B.C.] - Parmenides of Camarina, stadion race • 64th [524 B.C.] -
Menander of Thessaly, stadion race • 65th [520 B.C.] - Anochas of Tarentum,
stadion race A race in full armour was added, and the winner was Damaretus of
Heraea.

• 66th [516 B.C.] - Ischyrus of Himera, stadion race • 67th [512 B.C.] - Phanas
of Pellene, stadion race Phanas was the first to win all three races, the
stadion race, the double race and the race in full armour.

• 68th [508 B.C.] - Isomachus of Croton, stadion race • 69th [504 B.C.] -
Isomachus for a second time • [p203] 70th [500 B.C.] - Nicasias of Opus, stadion
race • 71st [496 B.C.] - Tisicrates of Croton, stadion race • 72nd [492 B.C.] -
Tisicrates for a second time • 73rd [488 B.C.] - Astyalus of Croton, stadion
race • 74th [484 B.C.] - Astyalus for a second time • 75th [480 B.C.] - Astyalus
for a third time • 76th [476 B.C.] - Scamander of Mytilene, stadion race • 77th
[472 B.C.] - Dandes of Argos, stadion race • 78th [468 B.C.] - Parmenides of
Poseidonia, stadion race • 79th [464 B.C.] - Xenophon of Corinth, stadion race •
80th [460 B.C.] - Torymmas of Thessaly, stadion race The wrestling contest was
won by Amesinas of Barce, who trained by wrestling with a bull while he was
tending cattle. He even brought the bull to Pisa to help his training.

• 81st [456 B.C.] - Polymnastus of Cyrene, stadion race • 82nd [452 B.C.] -
Lycus of Larissa, stadion race • 83rd [448 B.C.] - Crisson of Himera, stadion
race • 84th [444 B.C.] - Crisson for a second time • 85th [440 B.C.] - Crisson
for a third time • 86th [436 B.C.] - Theopompus of Thessaly, stadion race • 87th
[432 B.C.] - Sophron of Ambracia, stadion race During this [Olympiad], the
Peloponnesian war began.

• 88th [428 B.C.] - Symmachus of Messenia, stadion race • 89th [424 B.C.] -
Symmachus for a second time • 90th [420 B.C.] - Hyperbius of Syracuse, stadion
race • 91st [416 B.C.] - Exagentus of Acragas, stadion race • 92nd [412 B.C.] -
Exagentus for a second time • 93rd [408 B.C.] - Eubatus of Cyrene, stadion race
The pancratium contest was won by Polydamas of Scotussa, a massive man who, when
he was with Ochus amongst the Persians, killed lions and fought without weapons
against armed men; he even brought chariots charging at full speed to a halt. A
race was added for chariots drawn by a pair of horses, and the winner was
Euagoras of Elis.

• 94th [404 B.C.] - Crocinas of Larissa, stadion race • 95th [400 B.C.] - Minon
of Athens, stadion race • 96th [396 B.C.] - Eupolemus of Elis, stadion race A
contest for trumpeters was added, and the winner was Timaeus of Elis.

[p205] A contest for heralds was added, and the winner was Crates of Elis.

• 97th [392 B.C.] - Terinaeus [of ...], stadion race • 98th [388 B.C.] -
Sosippus of Delphi, stadion race The wrestling contest was won by Aristodemus of
Elis, whom no-one could grasp round the middle.

• 99th [384 B.C.] - Dicon of Syracuse, stadion race A race was added for
chariots drawn by four foals, and the winner was Eurybatus of Laconia.

• 100th [380 B.C.] - Dionysodorus of Tarentum, stadion race • 101st [376 B.C.] -
Damon of Thurii, stadion race • 102nd [372 B.C.] - Damon for a second time •
103rd [368 B.C.] - Pythostratus of Ephesus, stadion race • 104th [364 B.C.] -
Phocides of Athens, wrestling These games were held by the inhabitants of Pisa.

• 105th [360 B.C.] - Porus of Cyrene, stadion race • 106th [356 B.C.] - Porus
for a second time • 107th [352 B.C.] - Micrinas of Tarentum, stadion race •
108th [348 B.C.] - Polycles of Cyrene, stadion race • 109th [344 B.C.] -
Aristolochus of Athens, stadion race • 110th [340 B.C.] - (?) Anticles of
Athens, stadion race • 111th [336 B.C.] - Cleomantis of Cleitor, stadion race •
112th [332 B.C.] - Eurylas of Chalcis, stadion race [At this time] Alexander
captured Babylon, and killed Dareius.

• 113th [328 B.C.] - Cliton of Macedonia, stadion race Ageus of Argos, [victor
in] the long race, returned to Argos and announced his own victory on the same
day.

• 114th [324 B.C.] - Micinas of Rhodes, stadion race

[At this time] Alexander died, and his empire was split between many rulers;
Ptolemaeus became king of Egypt and Alexandria.

• 115th [320 B.C.] - Damasias of Amphipolis, stadion race • 116th [316 B.C.] -
Demosthenes of Laconia, stadion race • 117th [312 B.C.] - Parmenides of
Mytilene, stadion race • 118th [308 B.C.] - Andromenes of Corinth, stadion race

Antenor of Athens or Miletus, undisputed [victor in] the pancratium, was victor
at all the major games, undefeated in each of three age [p207] groups.

• 119th [304 B.C.] - Andromenes of Corinth, stadion race • 120th [300 B.C.] -
Pythagoras of Magnesia-on-Maeander, stadion race Ceras of Argos, [victor in]
wrestling, tore the hooves off a cow.

• 121st [296 B.C.] - Pythagoras for a second time • 122nd [292 B.C.] - Antigonus
of Macedonia, stadion race • 123rd [288 B.C.] - Antigonus for a second time •
124th [284 B.C.] - Philomelus of Pharsalus, stadion race • 125th [280 B.C.] -
Ladas of Aegium, stadion race • 126th [276 B.C.] - Idaeus or Nicator of Cyrene,
stadion race • 127th [272 B.C.] - Perigenes of Alexandria, stadion race • 128th
[268 B.C.] - Seleucus of Macedonia, stadion race • 129th [264 B.C.] - Philinus
of Cos, stadion race A new race for two-foal chariots was introduced, and the
first winner was Philistiachus [Bilistiche of Macedonia].

• 130th [260 B.C.] - Philinus for a second time • 131st [256 B.C.] - Ammonius of
Alexandria, stadion race A one-foal race was introduced, and the first winner
was Hippocrates [of Thessaly].

• 132nd [252 B.C.] - Xenophanes of Amphissa in Aetolia, stadion race • 133rd
[248 B.C.] - Simylus of Neapolis, stadion race

[At this time] the Parthians revolted against the Macedonians; their first king
was Arsaces, from whom the kings are called the Arsacids.

• 134th [244 B.C.] - Alcides of Laconia, stadion race • 135th [240 B.C.] -
Eraton of Aetolia, stadion race Cleoxenus of Alexandria, [victor in] boxing, won
without injury at all the major games.

• 136th [236 B.C.] - Pythocles of Sicyon, stadion race • 137th [232 B.C.] -
Menestheus of [?] Barcyla, stadion race • 138th [228 B.C.] - Demetrius of
Alexandria, stadion race • 139th [224 B.C.] - Iolaidas of Argos, stadion race •
140th [220 B.C.] - Zopyrus of Syracuse, stadion race • 141st [216 B.C.] -
Dorotheus of Rhodes, stadion race • 142nd [212 B.C.] - Crates of Alexandria,
stadion race

[p209] Caprus of Elis won both the wrestling and the pancratium competitions,
like Heracles; so he was acclaimed as "second after Heracles".

• 143rd [208 B.C.] - Heracleitus of Samos, stadion race • 144th [204 B.C.] -
Heracleides of Salamis in Cyprus, stadion race • 145th [200 B.C.] - Pyrrhias of
Aetolia, stadion race

Moschus of Colophon, [victor in] boys' boxing, was the only boy to have won the
boxing competition at all the major games. A boys' pancratium competition was
introduced, and the first winner was Phaedimus of Alexandria.

• 146th [196 B.C.] - Micion of Boeotia, stadion race • 147th [192 B.C.] -
Agemachus of Cyzicus, stadion race Cleitostratus of Rhodes, [victor in]
wrestling, overcame his opponents by grasping their necks.

• 148th [188 B.C.] - Arcesilaus of Megalopolis, stadion race • 149th [184 B.C.]
- Hippostratus of Seleucia in Pieria, stadion race • 150th [180 B.C.] -
Onesicritus of Salamis, stadion race • 151st [176 B.C.] - Thymilus of Aspendus,
stadion race • 152nd [172 B.C.] - Democritus of Megara, stadion race • 153rd
[168 B.C.] - Aristander of Antissa in Lesbos, stadion race • 154th [164 B.C.] -
Leonidas of Rhodes, three times victor in the stadion race • 155th [160 B.C.] -
Leonidas for a second time • 156th [156 B.C.] - Leonidas for a third time
Aristomenes of Rhodes was the third after Heracles to win both the wrestling and
the pancratium competitions.

• 157th [152 B.C.] - Leonidas, victor in the stadion race for a fourth time, was
the first and only man to win 12 Olympic crowns over four Olympiads.

• 158th [148 B.C.] - Othon of Syracuse, stadion race • 159th [144 B.C.] -
Alcimus of Cyzicus, stadion race • 160th [140 B.C.] - Agnodorus of Cyzicus,
stadion race • 161st [136 B.C.] - Antipater of Epirus, stadion race • 162nd [132
B.C.] - Damon of Delphi, stadion race • 163rd [128 B.C.] - Timotheus of Tralles,
stadion race • 164th [124 B.C.] - Boeotus of Sicyon, stadion race • [p211] 165th
[120 B.C.] - Acusilaus of Cyrene, stadion race • 166th [116 B.C.] - Chrysogonus
of Nicaea, stadion race • 167th [112 B.C.] - Chrysogonus for a second time •
168th [108 B.C.] - Nicomachus of Philadelphia, stadion race • 169th [104 B.C.] -
Nicodemus of Lacedaemon, stadion race • 170th [100 B.C.] - Simmias of
Seleuceia-on-Tigris, stadion race • 171st [96 B.C.] - Parmeniscus of Corcyra,
stadion race • 172nd [92 B.C.] - Eudamus of Cos, stadion race

Protophanes of Magnesia-on-Maeander was the fourth after Heracles to win both
the wrestling and the pancratium competitions.

• 173rd [88 B.C.] - Parmeniscus of Corcyra again, stadion race • 174th [84 B.C.]
- Demostratus of Larissa, stadion race • 175th [80 B.C.] - Epaenetus of Argos,
boys' stadion race There was no stadion race for adults this year, because Sulla
had summoned all the athletes to Rome.

• 176th [76 B.C.] - Dion of Cyparissus, stadion race • 177th [72 B.C.] -
Hecatomnos of Elis, stadion race • 178th [68 B.C.] - Diocles [?] Hypopenus,
stadion race

Stratonicus of Alexandria, son of Corragus, was the fifth after Heracles to win
both the wrestling and the pancratium competitions; at the Nemean games, he won
four crowns on the same day in the boys' and youths' competitions, [though he
attended the competitions without a horse. He achieved this through the favour
of his friends or the kings, and therefore he was regarded as disqualified].

• 179th [64 B.C.] - Andreas of Lacedaemon, stadion race • 180th [60 B.C.] -
Andromachus of Ambracia, stadion race • 181st [56 B.C.] - Lamachus of
Tauromenium, stadion race • 182nd [52 B.C.] - Anthestion of Argos, stadion race

[p213] Marion of Alexandria, son of Marion, was the sixth after Heracles to win
both the wrestling and the pancratium competitions.

• 183rd [48 B.C.] - Theodorus of Messene, stadion race [At this time] Julius
Caesar was emperor of the Romans.

• 184th [44 B.C.] - Theodorus for a second time [At this time] Augustus became
emperor of the Romans.

• 185th [40 B.C.] - Ariston of Thurii, stadion race • 186th [36 B.C.] -
Scamander of Alexandria Troas, stadion race • 187th [32 B.C.] - Ariston of
Thurii again, stadion race • 188th [28 B.C.] - Sopater of Argos, stadion race •
189th [24 B.C.] - Asclepiades of Sidon, stadion race • 190th [20 B.C.] -
Auphidius of Patrae, stadion race • 191st [16 B.C.] - Diodotus of Tyana, stadion
race • 192nd [12 B.C.] - Diophanes of Aeolis, stadion race • 193rd [8 B.C.] -
Artemidorus of Thyateira, stadion race • 194th [4 B.C.] - Demaratus of Ephesus,
stadion race • 195th [1 A.D.] - Demaratus for a second time • 196th [5 A.D.] -
Pammenes of Magnesia-on-Maeander, stadion race • 197th [9 A.D.] - Asiaticus of
Halicarnassus, stadion race • 198th [13 A.D.] - Diophanes of Prusa [by Mt.
Olympus], stadion race

Aristeas of Stratoniceia or (?) Maeander was the seventh after Heracles to win
both the wrestling and the pancratium competitions.

[At this time] Tiberius became emperor of the Romans.

• 199th [17 A.D.] - Aeschines Glaucias of Miletus, stadion race The four-horse
race which had been stopped a long time ago was reinstated, and the winner was
Tiberius Caesar.

• 200th [21 A.D.] - Polemon of Petra, stadion race • 201st [25 A.D.] - Damasias
of Cydonia, stadion race • 202nd [29 A.D.] - Hermogenes of Pergamum, stadion
race • 203rd [33 A.D.] - Apollonius of Epidaurus, stadion race • 204th [37 A.D.]
- Sarapion of Alexandria, stadion race

Neicostratus of Aegae was the eighth and last after Heracles to win both the
wrestling and the pancratium competitions. [p215] Only eight men between
Heracles and our times have achieved this, because after these games the
inhabitants of Elis would not award the crown even to those who were capable of
it.

[At this time] Gaius became emperor of the Romans.

• 205th [41 A.D.] - Eubulidas of Laodiceia, stadion race [At this time] Claudius
became emperor of the Romans.

• 206th [45 A.D.] - Valerius of Mytilene, stadion race • 207th [49 A.D.] -
Athenodorus of Aegium, stadion race • 208th [53 A.D.] - Athenodorus for a second
time [At this time] Nero became emperor of the Romans.

• 209th [57 A.D.] - Callicles of Sidon, stadion race • 210th [61 A.D.] -
Athenodorus of Aegium [(?) for a third time], stadion race

• 211th [65 A.D.] - These games were not held [at the usual time] because Nero
postponed them until his visit to Greece. They were held two years later, and
Tryphon of Philadelphia won the stadion race. Nero was awarded the crown in the
contests for heralds, performers of tragedy and citharodes; and also in the
races for chariots drawn by foals, full-grown horses and ten foals.

• 212th [69 A.D.] - Polites of Ceramus, stadion race [At this time] Vespasianus
became emperor of the Romans.

• 213th [73 A.D.] - Rhodon of Cyme, or Theodotus, stadion race • 214th [77 A.D.]
- Straton of Alexandria, stadion race [At this time] Titus became emperor of the
Romans.

• 215th [81 A.D.] - Hermogenes of Xanthus, stadion race [At this time]
Domitianus became emperor of the Romans.

• 216th [85 A.D.] - Apollophanes Papis of Tarsus, stadion race • 217th [89 A.D.]
- Hermogenes of Xanthus for a second time, stadion race • 218th [93 A.D.] -
Apollonius of Alexandria, or Heliodorus, stadion race • 219th [97 A.D.] -
Stephanus of Cappadocia, stadion race [At this time] Nerva became emperor of the
Romans, and after him Trajanus [became emperor].

• 220th [101 A.D.] - Achilleus of Alexandria, stadion race • 221st [105 A.D.] -
Theonas Smaragdus of Alexandria, stadion race • 222nd [109 A.D.] - Callistus of
Side, stadion race The horse races were reintroduced.

• [p217] 223rd [113 A.D.] - Eustolus of Side, stadion race • 224th [117 A.D.] -
Isarion of Alexandria, stadion race [At this time] Hadrianus became emperor of
the Romans.

• 225th [121 A.D.] - Aristeas of Miletus, stadion race • 226th [125 A.D.] -
Dionysius Sameumys of Alexandria, stadion race • 227th [129 A.D.] - Dionysius
for a second time • 228th [133 A.D.] - Lucas of Alexandria, stadion race • 229th
[137 A.D.] - Epidaurus Ammonius of Alexandria, stadion race [At this time]
Antoninus Pius became emperor of the Romans.

• 230th [141 A.D.] - Didymus (?) Clydeus of Alexandria, stadion race • 231st
[145 A.D.] - Cranaus of Sicyon, stadion race • 232nd [149 A.D.] - Atticus of
Sardis, stadion race

Socrates entered both the wrestling and the citharode competitions, but he was
banned by the inhabitants of Elis, in favour of Dionysius of Seleuceia.

• 233rd [153 A.D.] - Demetrius of Chios, stadion race • 234th [157 A.D.] - Eras
of Chios, stadion race • 235th [161 A.D.] - Mnasibulus of Elateia, stadion race
[At this time] Marcus Antoninus Pius and Lucius Verus became emperors of the
Romans.

• 236th [165 A.D.] - Aeithales of Alexandria, stadion race • 237th [169 A.D.] -
Eudaemon of Alexandria, stadion race • 238th [173 A.D.] - Agathopus of Aegina,
stadion race • 239th [177 A.D.] - Agathopus for a second time [At this time]
Commodus became emperor of the Romans.

• 240th [181 A.D.] - Anubion Pheidus of Alexandria, stadion race • 241st [185
A.D.] - Heron of Alexandria, stadion race • 242nd [189 A.D.] - Magnus [Libycus]
of Cyrene, stadion race • 243rd [193 A.D.] - Isidorus [Artemidorus] of
Alexandria, stadion race [At this time] Pertinax, and then Severus, became
emperors of the Romans.

• 244th [197 A.D.] - Isidorus for a second time • 245th [201 A.D.] - Alexander
of Alexandria, stadion race • 246th [205 A.D.] - Epinicus Cynas of Cyzicus,
stadion race • [p219] 247th [209 A.D.] - Satornilus of Gortyn in Crete, stadion
race [At this time] Antoninus, called Caracalla, became emperor of the Romans.

• 248th [213 A.D.] - Heliodorus Trosidamas of Alexandria, stadion race • 249th
[217 A.D.] - Heliodorus for a second time The record of the Olympiads which we
have found ends at this point.1

It will be fitting to add here lists of the kings of the Corinthians, kings of
the Spartans, rulers of the sea and the early kings of the Macedonians. I will
set down in order their names and their dates, taking them from the Historical
Library of Diodorus, who gives a very accurate account of them. The kings of the
Corinthians - from the books of Diodorus

After thoroughly investigating that, it remains to tell how Corinth and Sicyon
were settled by the Dorians. Almost all the nations in the Peloponnese, except
the Arcadians, were uprooted by the return of the Heracleidae. In their division
of the land, the Heracleidae picked out Corinth and the surrounding area; they
sent for Aletes, and awarded the territory to him. Aletes became a distinguished
king and increased the power of Corinth; he reigned for 38 years.

After the death of Aletes, his descendants ruled the land, the eldest son
succeeding in every case, until the tyrant Cypselus, who [came to power] 447
years after the return of the Heracleidae. The first of them to become king was
Ixion, for 38 years.

[p221] Then Agelas was king for 37 years.

Then Prymnis, for 35 years.

Then Bacchis, also for 35 years. Bacchis was the most distinguished of the kings
up to his time; so that the kings after him called themselves Bacchidae instead
of Heracleidae.

Then Agelas, for 30 years.

Eudemus, for 25 years.

Aristomedes, for 35 years. When Aristomedes died, his son Telestes was still a
child; and so the direct succession was interrupted by his uncle and guardian
Agemon, for 16 years.

Then Alexander was king, for 25 years.

Telestes, who earlier had been deprived of his father's kingdom, killed
Alexander, and ruled for 12 years.

Automenes ruled for one year, after Telestes was killed by his relatives. The
Bacchidae, descendants of Heracles who were more than 200 in number, seized
power and jointly governed the city; each year they chose one of their number to
be president, in place of the king. They governed the city for 90 years, until
they were suppressed by the tyrant Cypselus. The kings of the Corinthians are as
follows:

• Aletes - for 35 years • Ixion - for 37 years • Agelas - for 37 years • Prymnis
- for 35 years • Bacchis - for 35 years • Agelas - for 30 years • Eudemus - for
25 years • Aristomedes - for 35 years • Agemon - for 16 years • Alexander - for
25 years • Teletes - for 12 years • Automenes - for one year After which there
were annual presidents. The kings of the Spartans - from the books of Diodorus

It happens that it is difficult to establish the dates between the Trojan war
and the first Olympiad, because at that time there were no annual magistrates
either at Athens or at any other city. Therefore we will take the kings of the
Spartans as an example.

According to Apollodorus of Athens, there were 308 years from the destruction of
Troy [1183 B.C.] until the first Olympiad [776 B.C.]. 80 of those years passed
before the expedition of the Heracleidae [1103 B.C.]; [p223] the rest are
covered by the reigns of the kings of the Spartans - Procles, Eurysthenes and
their descendants. We will set down the order of [the kings of] each family up
until the first Olympiad.

Eurysthenes began his reign in the 80th year after the Trojan war, and he was
king for 42 years.

After him, Agis reigned for one year.

Echestratus for 31 years.

After him, Labotas reigned for 37 years.

Dorystus for 29 years.

They were followed by Agesilaus, who reigned for 44 years.

Archelaus for 60 years.

Teleclus for 40 years.

Alcamenes for 38 years. In the tenth year of his reign, the first Olympiad was
established, in which Coroebus of Elis won the stadion race.

Procles was the first king of the other family, for (?) 49 years.

After him, Prytanis reigned for 49 years.

Eunomius for 45 years. And then Chariclus reigned for 60 years.

Nicander for 38 years.

Theopompus for 47 years. The first Olympiad occurred in the tenth year of this
reign. In summary, there were 80 years from the capture of Troy until the
expedition of the Heracleidae, and then these kings of the Spartans:

• Eurysthenes - for 42 years • Agis - for one year • Echestrates - for 37 years
• Labotas - for 37 years • Dorystus - for 29 years • [p225] Agesilaus - for 44
years.

• Archelaus - for 60 years • Teleclus - for 40 years • Alcamenes - for 37 years.
In his tenth year, the first Olympiad was established. In total, 325 years. The
kings from the other family were:

• Procles - for 51 years • Prytanis - for 49 years • Eunomius - for 45 years •
Charicles - for 60 years • Nicander - for 38 years • Theopompus - for 47 years.
In his tenth year, the first Olympiad was established. In total, 290 years. The
Thalassocracies, who ruled the sea - in brief, from the writings of Diodorus
After the Trojan war, the sea was controlled by:

• The Lydians and Maeones - for 92 years • The Pelasgians - for 85 years • The
Thracians - for 79 years • The Rhodians - for 23 years • The Phrygians - for 25
years • The Cypriots - for 33 years • The Phoenicians - for 45 years • The
Egyptians - for [..] years • The Milesians - for [..] years • [The Carians - for
.. years] • The Lesbians - for [..] years • The Phocaeans - for 44 years • The
Samians for [..] years • The Spartans - for 2 years • The Naxians - for 10 years
• The Eretrians - for 15 years • The Aeginetans - for 10 years Up until the time
when (?) Alexander crossed over the sea.

After this, it will be fitting to move on to the kingdom of the Macedonians.

[p227]The kings of the Macedonians The end of the Assyrian empire, after the
death of Sardanapallus the last king of the Assyrians, was followed by the
Macedonian age.

Before the first Olympiad, Caranus was moved by ambition to collect forces from
the Argives and from the rest of the Peloponnese, in order to lead an army into
the territory of the Macedonians. At that time the king of the Orestae was at
war with his neighbours, the Eordaei, and he called on Caranus to come to his
aid, promising to give him half of his territory in return, if the Orestae were
successful. The king kept his promise, and Caranus took possession of the
territory; he reigned there for 30 years, until he died in old age.

He was succeeded by his son Coenus, who was king for 28 years.

After him, Tyrimias reigned for 43 years.

Perdiccas for 42 years. He wanted to expand his kingdom; so he sent [a mission]
to Delphi. A little further on, [Diodorus] says:

Perdiccas reigned for 48 years, and left his kingdom to Argaeus, who reigned for
31 years. The next king was Philippus, who reigned for 33 years.

Aeropus for 20 years.

Alcetas for 18 years.

Amyntas for 49 years.

He was followed by Alexander, who reigned for 44 years.

Then Perdiccas was king for 22 years.

Archelaus for 17 years.

Aeropus for 6 years.

Then Pausanias was king for one year.

Ptolemaeus for 3 years.

Perdiccas for 5 years.

Philippus for 24 years.

Alexander, [who] fought against the Persians, for more than 12 years. In this
way the most reliable historians trace the ancestry of the Macedonian kings back
to Heracles. From Caranus, who was the first to rule all the Macedonians, until
Alexander, who conquered Asia, there were 24 kings who reigned for a total of
453 years.

[p229] The individual [kings] are as follows:

• Caranus reigned for 30 years • Coenus - for 28 years • Tyrimias - for 43 years
• Perdiccas - for 48 years • Argaeus - for 38 years • Philippus - for 33 years •
Aeropus - for 20 years • Alcetas - for 18 years. In his time, Cyrus was king of
the Persians.

• Amyntas - for 42 years • Alexander - for 44 years • Perdiccas - for 23 years •
Archelaus - for 24 years • Orestes - for 3 years • Archelaus - for 4 years •
Amyntas - for one year • Pausanias - for one year • Amyntas - for 6 years •
Argaeus - for 2 years • Amyntas - for 18 years • Alexander - for one year •
Ptolemaeus of Alorus - for 3 years • Perdiccas - for 6 years • Philippus - for
27 years • Alexander the son of Philippus - for 12 years The kings of the
Macedonians, from the writings of our enemy, the philosopher Porphyrius:

These were the kings of Macedonia and Greece after Alexander the son of
Philippus; and the Macedonian kingdom continued until its dissolution as
follows. The Macedonians appointed Aridaeus, the son of Philippus and Philinna
of Thessaly, to be king after Alexander because of their affection for the
family of Philippus, although they knew that Aridaeus was the son a courtesan
and he was feeble-minded. He began to reign, as we said, in the second year of
the 114th Olympiad [323 B.C.]. He is reckoned to have reigned for 7 years,
because he lived up until the fourth year of the 115th Olympiad [317 B.C.].

[p231] Alexander left two sons, Heracles the son of Barsine the daughter of
Pharnabazus, and Alexander the son of Roxane the daughter of Oxyartes the
Bactrian; this Alexander was born about the time of his father's death, at the
start of Philippus' reign. Olympias the mother of Alexander killed Aridaeus, but
then Cassander the son of Antipater executed her and both the sons of Alexander,
the one by himself and the other (the son of Barsine) by prompting Polysperchon.
Cassander cast away Olympias' body without a burial, and proclaimed himself
king; and from then onwards, all the other satraps acted as kings, because the
family of Alexander had been destroyed. Cassander married Thessalonice the
daughter of Philippus, and survived as king for another 19 years as king, until
he died of a wasting disease. His reign, including the year in which Olympias
ruled after the death of Aridaeus, lasted from the first year of the 116th
Olympiad [316 B.C.] until the third year of the 120th Olympiad [298 B.C.].

Cassander was succeeded by his sons, Philippus and Alexander and Antipater, who
reigned for 3 years and 6 months after the death of their father. The first to
rule was Philippus, who died at Elateia. Then Antipater murdered his mother
Thessalonice, who favoured her other son Alexander, and fled to Lysimachus. But
Lysimachus put him to death, even though he had married one of Lysimachus'
daughters.

Alexander married Lysandra, the daughter of Ptolemaeus, and in the war against
his younger brother called on the aid of Demetrius the son of Antigonus, who was
called Poliorcetes. But Demetrius killed Alexander, and made himself the king of
the Macedonians. The reign of the sons of Cassander is reckoned to last from the
fourth year [p233] of the 120th Olympiad [297 B.C.] until the third year of the
121st Olympiad [294 B.C.].

Demetrius reigned for 6 years, from the [fourth year of the] 121st Olympiad [293
B.C.]until the first year of the 123rd Olympiad [288 B.C.], when he was deposed
by Pyrrhus the king of Epirus, the 23rd in line from Achilleus the son of
Thetis. Pyrrhus claimed the kingdom belonged to him after the extinction of
Philippus' family, through his connection with Olympias the mother of Alexander,
who was also a descendant of Pyrrhus the son of Neoptolemus.

Pyrrhus ruled the Macedonians for seven months in the second year of the 123rd
Olympiad [287 B.C.]. In the eighth month, he was replaced by Lysimachus the son
of son of Agathocles, a Thessalian from Crannon who had been a bodyguard of
Alexander. Lysimachus was king of Thrace and the Chersonese, and now overran the
neighbouring country of Macedonia.

Lysimachus was persuaded by his wife Arsinoe to kill his own son. He ruled
Macedonia for 5 years and 6 months, from the second year of the 123rd Olympiad
[287 B.C.] until the third year of the 124th Olympiad [282 B.C.]. [p235] He was
defeated by Seleucus Nicator, the king of Asia, at the battle of Corupedium, and
lost his life in the battle. But straight after his victory, Seleucus was
murdered by Ptolemaeus Ceraunus, the son of Lagus and Eurydice the daughter of
Antipater, even though Seleucus was his benefactor and had received him when he
fled [from Lysimachus].

Then Ptolemaeus ruled over the Macedonians, until he was killed in battle
against the Galatians. He reigned for one year and five months, which lasted
from the fourth year of the 124th Olympiad [281 B.C.] until the fifth month of
the first year of the 125th Olympiad [280 B.C.].

Ptolemaeus was succeeded by his brother Meleager, but the Macedonians deposed
Meleager after only two months, because they considered him unfit to rule. In
his place, since no-one was left from the royal family, they appointed as king
Antipater, who was the nephew of Cassander and the son of Philippus. But he too
was deposed after ruling for 45 days by Sosthenes, a commoner who considered him
to be too poor a general to face the dangerous invasion of Brennus the Galatian.
The Macedonians gave Antipater the name Etesias, because the Etesian winds blow
at about the time when he was king. Sosthenes repelled Brennus, and died after
being in charge of the state for two complete years.

After Sosthenes, there was anarchy in Macedonia, because the followers of
Antipater and Ptolemaeus and Aridaeus were competing for control of the state,
but no-one was completely in charge. In the period from Ptolemaeus until the end
of the anarchy, that is from the fourth year of the 124th Olympiad [281 B.C.]
until the [first year of the] 126th Olympiad [276 B.C.], Ptolemaeus Ceraunus
reigned for one year and five months, [p237] Meleager for two months, Antipater
for 45 days, Sosthenes for two years, and the rest is reckoned to have been a
time of anarchy.

While Antipater was plotting to take over the state, Antigonus set himself up as
king; he was the son of Demetrius Poliorcetes and Phila the daughter of
Antipater, and was called Gonatas because he had been born and brought up at
Gonni in Thessaly. Antigonus reigned in total for 44 years; before he gained
control of Macedonia, he had already been king for 10 whole years. He was
proclaimed king in the second year of the 123rd Olympiad [287 B.C.], and became
king of the Macedonians in the first year of the 126th Olympiad [276 B.C.].
Antigonus subdued Greece by force; he lived for 83 years in all, and died in the
first year of the 135th Olympiad [240 B.C.].

Antigonus was succeeded by his son Demetrius, who conquered the whole of Libya
and captured Cyrene. Eventually he gained absolute control of all his father's
possessions, and ruled over them for 10 years. He married a captive girl whom he
called Chryseis, and by her he had a son Philippus, who was the first of the
kings to fight against the Romans and caused the Macedonians much woe. When
Demetrius died, Philippus was left as a [young] orphan, and a member of the
royal family, Antigonus called Phuscus, became his guardian. Seeing that Phuscus
acted honourably in his role of guardian, the Macedonians made him king, and
gave him Chryseis to be his wife. Chryeis bore him sons, but he did not bring
them up, because he was holding the kingdom in trust for Philippus. And indeed
he was succeeded by Philippus, when he died.

Demetrius, called the Fair, died in the second year of the [?] 130th Olympiad.
Philippus then became king, [p239] with the aforesaid Antigonus as his guardian.
Antigonus died in the fourth year of the 139th Olympiad [221 B.C.]; he had been
guardian for 12 years, and lived for 42 years in all. Philippus began to rule
without a guardian in the 140th Olympiad [220 B.C.]; he reigned for 42 complete
years, and died in the second year of the 150th Olympiad [179 B.C.], aged 58
years.

Perseus the son of Philippus caused the death of his brother Demetrius by making
accusations against him to his father. Perseus was king for 10 years and 8
months, until the fourth years of the 152nd Olympiad [169 B.C.], when Lucius
Aemilius defeated and conquered the Macedonians at Pydna. Perseus fled to
Samothrace, but then agreed to surrender to the enemy, who transferred him to
Alba, where he was imprisoned and died five years later. He was the last king of
the Macedonians. At that time the Romans allowed the Macedonians to remain
autonomous, out of respect for their glorious reputation and the greatness of
their [former] empire. But 19 years later, in the third year of the 157th
Olympiad [150 B.C.], a certain Andriscus falsely claimed to be the son of
Perseus, and took on the name of Philippus, from which he came to be called the
false Philippus. With the help of the Thracians he conquered Macedonia, but
after ruling for a year he was defeated and fled to the Thracians, who handed
him over, to be sent as a prisoner to Rome.

Because the Macedonians had been ungrateful, and had co-operated with the false
Philippus, the Romans made them tributary in the fourth year of the 157th
Olympiad [149 B.C.]. So from Alexander until the end, when they became tributary
to the Romans, that is from the second year of 114th Olympiad [323 B.C.] [p241]
until the fourth year of the 157th Olympiad [149 B.C.], the kingdom of the
Macedonians lasted for 43 Olympiads and two extra years, which is a total of 174
years.

These are the kings of the Macedonians after Alexander the son of Philippus:

• Aridaeus, also called Philippus - for 7 years • Cassander - for 19 years • The
sons of Cassander - for 3 years and 6 months • Demetrius Poliorcetes - for 6
years • Pyrrhus - for 7 months • Lysimachus - for 5 years and 5 months •
Ptolemaeus Ceraunus - for 1 year and 5 months • Meleager - for 2 months •
Antipater son of Lysimachus - for 45 days • Sosthenes - for 2 years • (Anarchy)
- for 2 years • Antigonus Gonatas - for 34 years • Demetrius the Fair - for 10
years • Antigonus Phuscus - for 12 years • Philippus - for 42 years • Perseus -
for 10 years and 8 months • (Autonomy) - for 19 years • The false Philippus -
for 1 year After that, they were subject to the Romans. The kings of the
Thessalians: For a long time, the Thessalians and Epirus had the same rulers as
the Macedonians. They were granted independence by the Romans after Philippus
was defeated by the Roman general Titus in Thessaly. But eventually, for the
same reason as the Macedonians, they were made tributary to the Romans.

Like the Macedonians, they were ruled by Aridaeus, also called Philippus, for
seven years after the death of Alexander. Then his successor Cassander ruled
over Epirus and the Thessalians for 19 years. After him, his son Philippus
[ruled] for 4 months. Then his brothers Antipater and Alexander [ruled] for 2
years and 6 months. And then Demetrius the son of [Antigonus ruled] for 6 years
and 6 months. After him, Pyrrhus [ruled] for 4 years and 4 months. Then
Lysimachus the son of Agathocles [ruled] for 6 years. [p243] And Ptolemaeus, who
was called Ceraunus, [ruled] for one year and 5 months. Then Meleager [ruled]
for 2 months. After him, Antipater the son of Lysimachus [ruled] for 45 days.
After him, Sosthenes [ruled] for one year. Then there was anarchy for 2 years
and 2 months, after which Antigonus the son of Demetrius [ruled] for 34 years
and 2 months.

During this time, Pyrrhus won over Antigonus' army and ruled over a few regions,
but he lost control of them when he was defeated by Demetrius the son of
Antigonus in a battle at Derdia. Shortly afterwards Antigonus died, and his son
Demetrius reigned for 10 years. After him, Antigonus, the son of Demetrius who
went off to Cyrene and of Olympias the daughter of Pauliclitus of Larisa,
[ruled] for 9 years. Antigonus came to the aid of the Achaeans, defeated
Cleomenes the king of the Spartans in battle, and liberated Sparta. Therefore
the Achaean people honoured him like a god.

After him, Philippus the son of Demetrius reigned for 23 years and 9 months,
until he was defeated in a battle in Thessaly by Titus the Roman general. Then
the Romans allowed the Thessalians to be autonomous, along with the rest of the
Ionians [? Greeks] who had been subject to Philippus. For the first year there
was anarchy in Thessaly, but then they started to elect annual leaders from
amongst the people. The first to be elected was Pausanias the son of Echecrates,
from Pherae. Then Amyntas the son of Crates, from [?] Pieria; in his year, Titus
returned to Rome. Then Aeacides the son of Callas, from Metropolis. Then
Epidromas the son of Andromachus, from Larisa, for 8 months only; for the
remaining 4 months of the year, the leader was Eunomus the son of Polyclitus,
from Larisa. Eunomus was leader again for the whole of the following year. Then
Aeacides the son of Callas, from Metropolis, for a second time. Then Pravilus
the son of Phaxas, from Scotussa. Then Eunomus [p245] the son of Polyclitus,
from Larisa, for a second time. Then Androsthenes the son of Italas, from
Gortona. Then Thrasymachus the son of Alexander, from [?] Atrax. Then
Laontomenes the son of Damothon, from Pherae. Then Pausanias the son of
Damothon. Then Theodorus the son of Alexander, from Argos. Then Nicocrates the
son of Paxinas, from [?] Scotussa. Then Hippolochus the son of Alexippus, from
Larisa. Then Cleomachides the son of Aeneus, from Larisa. Then Phyrinus the son
of Aristomenes, from Gomphi. In his year, Philippus the king of Macedonia died,
and was succeeded by his son Perseus. As we said, Philippus reigned over the
Thessalians for 3 years and 9 months, but in all he reigned over the Macedonians
for 42 years and 9 months. From the start of the reign of Philippus [Aridaeus]
until the death of Philippus the son of Demetrius, that is from the second year
of the 114th Olympiad [323 B.C.] until the fifth month of the second year of the
150th Olympiad [179 B.C.], is a total of 144 years and five months. A summary of
the kings of the Thessalians:

• Aridaeus, also called Philippus - for 7 years • Cassander - for 19 years •
Philippus - for 4 months • Antigonus and Alexander - for 2 years and 6 months •
Demetrius - for 6 years and 6 months • Pyrrhus - for 3 years and 6 months •
Lysimachus - for 6 years • Ptolemaeus, also called Ceraunus - for 1 year and 5
months • Meleager - for 2 months • Antipater - for 45 days • Sosthenes - for 1
year • (Anarchy) - for 2 years and 2 months • Antigonus - for 33 years and 2
months • [p247] Demetrius - for 10 years • Antigonus - for 9 years • Philippus -
for 23 years and 9 months And then the following [annual] leaders: Pausanias,
Amyntas, Aeacides, Epidromus, Eunomus, Aeacides again, Praviles, Eunomus again,
Androsthenes, Thrasymachus, Laontomenes, Pausanias, Theodorus, Nicocrates,
Hippolochus, Cleomachides, Phyrinus, and Philippus.

[p247] The kings of Asia and Syria after the death of Alexander the Great: In
the 6th year of Philippus Aridaeus, which was the third year of the 115th
Olympiad [318 B.C.], Antigonus became the first king of Asia. He reigned for 18
years, and lived in all for 86 years. He was the most formidable of the kings of
that period, and died in Phrygia after all the other rulers attacked him out of
fear of him, in the fourth year of the 119th Olympiad [301 B.C.]. His son
Demetrius escaped to Ephesus, and lost control of all of Asia; he was considered
to be the most resourceful of the kings in siege warfare, and so was given the
name Poliorcetes ["the besieger"]. Demetrius reigned for 17 years, and lived in
all for 54 years. Starting from the first year of the 120th Olympiad [300 B.C.],
he ruled jointly with his father for 2 years, which were included in the 17
years of his reign. In the fourth year of the [123rd] Olympiad [285 B.C.] he was
captured by Seleucus; after his capture, he was sent to Cilicia, and was kept in
royal style as a prisoner of Seleucus until he died, in the fourth year of the
124th Olympiad [281 B.C.]. The reigns of Antigonus and Demetrius passed in this
way.

Meanwhile, Lysimachus was ruling in Lydia opposite Thrace and Seleucus was
ruling in the eastern regions and Syria. [p249] Both of them started to reign in
the first year of the 114th Olympiad [324 B.C.]. No account will be given of
Lysimachus' reign, but the events of Seleucus' reign will be described here.

After Ptolemaeus, the first king of the Egyptians, had marched to Old Gaza and
had defeated Demetrius the son of Antigonus in battle, he set up Seleucus as
king of Syria and the eastern regions. Seleucus went up to Babylonia and
defeated the barbarians there; so he was given the name Nicanor ["victor"]. He
reigned for 32 years, from the first year of the 117th Olympiad [312 B.C.] until
the fourth year of the 124th Olympiad [281 B.C.], and lived in all for 75 years.
Eventually, he was ambushed and killed by his friend Ptolemaeus, called
Ceraunus.

Seleucus was succeeded by Antiochus, his son by Apame the Persian. Antiochus was
called Soter, and died in the [third] year of the 129th Olympiad [262 B.C.]
after he had lived in all for 54 years and had reigned for 19 years, from the
first year of the 125th Olympiad [280 B.C.] until the third year of the 129th
Olympiad [262 B.C.].

Antiochus Soter had [three] children by Stratonice the daughter of Demetrius; a
son Antiochus, and two daughters Stratonice and Apame, of whom the former was
married to Demetrius the king of the Macedonians, and the latter [to Magas?].
When he died, he was succeeded by Antiochus called Theos, in the fourth year of
the 129th Olympiad [261 B.C.]. After 19 years, Antiochus Theos fell ill, [p251]
and died at Ephesus in the third year of the [133rd] Olympiad [246 B.C.], after
living in all for 40 years. He had two sons, Seleucus called Callinicus and
Antigonus, and two daughters by Laodice the daughter of Achaeus, of whom one was
married to Mithridates and the other to Ariathes. The elder son Seleucus, who as
we said was called Callinicus, succeeded Antiochus and reigned for 21 years,
from the third year of the 133rd Olympiad [246 B.C.] until the second year of
the 138th Olympiad [227 B.C.]. When he died, Seleucus was succeeded by his son,
Seleucus called Ceraunus, but while he was still alive it happened that his
younger brother Antigonus refused to accept his position and sought power for
himself. Antigonus had help and assistance from [Alexander], the brother of his
mother Laodice, who was in charge of the city of Sardis; he also had the
Galatians as allies in two battles. Seleucus won a battle in Lydia, but he was
unable to capture Sardis or Ephesus, which was held by Ptolemaeus. Then Seleucus
fought a second battle against Mithridates in Cappadocia, where 20,000 of his
men were killed by the barbarians, and he himself lost his life. Meanwhile
Ptolemaeus called Tryphon seized part of Syria, but his siege of Damascus and
Orthosia was stopped in the third year of the 134th Olympiad [242 B.C.], when
Seleucus advanced to that region.

Antigonus the brother of Callinicus crossed greater Phrygia, forced the
inhabitants to pay tribute, and sent his generals with an army against Seleucus.
But he was handed over by his own followers to the barbarians, and after
escaping with a few men, set off for Magnesia. The next day he offered battle,
and with the assistance of soldiers sent by Ptolemaeus, amongst others, he won a
victory, and married the daughter of Zielas. [p253] However, in the fourth year
of the 137th Olympiad [229 B.C.] he fought twice in the country of Lydia and was
defeated, and he joined battle with Attalus in the region of Lake Coloe. In the
first year of the 138th Olympiad [228 B.C.], after a battle in Caria he was
forced by Attalus to flee to Thrace, where he died.

Seleucus Callinicus, the brother of Antigonus, died in the next year, and was
succeeded by his son Alexander, who adopted the name Seleucus, and was called
Ceraunus by his army. Seleucus had a brother called Antiochus. After reigning
for three years, Seleucus was treacherously attacked and killed by a Galatian
called Nicanor, in about the first year of the 139th Olympiad [224 B.C.]. He was
succeeded by his brother Antiochus, whom the army summoned from Babylon.
Antiochus was called [the Great] and reigned for 36 years, from the second year
of the 139th Olympiad [223 B.C.] until the second year of the 148th Olympiad
[187 B.C.]. In the latter year, he made an expedition to Susa and the eastern
provinces, but was killed with all [his men] in battle with the Elymaeans; he
left behind two sons, Seleucus and Antiochus.

Seleucus succeeded his father in the third year of the 148th Olympiad [186
B.C.], and reigned for 12 years, until the [?] first year of the 151st Olympiad
[176 B.C.]; he lived in all for 60 years. When Seleucus died, he was succeeded
by his brother Antiochus called Epiphanes, who reigned for 11 years, from the
third year of the 151st Olympiad [174 B.C.] until the first year of the 154th
Olympiad [164 B.C.]. While Antiochus Epiphanes was still alive, his son
Antiochus called Eupator was made king, when he was only twelve years old, after
which his father lived for a further one year and six months. Then Demetrius,
who had been given to the Romans by his father Seleucus as a hostage, escaped
from Rome to Phoenicia, and came to the city of Tripolis. Demetrius killed the
young Antiochus along with his guardian Lysias, and made himself king in the
fourth year of the 154th Olympiad [161 B.C.]; [p255] he was called Soter, and
reigned for 12 years, until the [?] fourth year of the 157th Olympiad [149
B.C.]. He was forced to fight for his kingdom against Alexander, who brought an
army from outside with the assistance of Ptolemaeus and Attalus, and he was
killed in a battle.

Alexander gained control of Syria in the [?] third year of the 157th Olympiad
[150 B.C.], and ruled for 5 years. He died in the fourth year of the 158th
Olympiad [145 B.C.], in a battle near the city of Antioch against Ptolemaeus,
who had come to the aid of Demetrius the son of Demetrius. Ptolemaeus also was
wounded and died in the same battle. The war was carried on by this Demetrius,
the son of Demetrius. Setting out from Seleuceia, he defeated Antiochus the son
of Alexander, who was based in Syria and the city of Antioch, and started to
reign in the first year of the 160th Olympiad [140 B.C.]. In his second year, he
collected an army and set off for Babylon and the eastern regions, to fight
against Arsaces. In the next year, which was the third year of the 160th
Olympiad [138 B.C.], he was captured by Arsaces, who sent him to be held
prisoner in Parthia; so he was called Nicanor ["victor"] because he had defeated
Antiochus the son of Alexander, and also [?] Seripides because he was kept as a
prisoner in chains. The younger brother of Demetrius, called Antiochus, was
brought up in the city of Side, from which he was given the name Sidetes. When
he heard that Demetrius had been defeated and made a prisoner, he left Side and
in the fourth year of the 160th Olympiad [137 B.C.] gained control of Syria,
which he ruled for nine years. In the third year of the 162nd Olympiad [130
B.C.] he conquered the Jews, pulled down the walls of [Jerusalem] after a siege,
and put their leaders to death. In the fourth year of the 162nd Olympiad [129
B.C.], Arsaces attacked him with an army of 120,000 men, and schemed against him
by sending his brother Demetrius, who had been kept as a prisoner, back to
Syria. But at the onset of winter Antiochus met the barbarians in a confined
space; bravely attacking them, he was injured and killed, in the 35th year of
his life. [p257] His young son Seleucus, who had accompanied him, was captured
by king Arsaces and was kept in royal style as a prisoner.

Antiochus the fifth had three sons and two daughters; the first two, the
daughters, were both called Laodice. The third, called Antiochus, fell ill and
died, like his sisters. The fourth was Seleucus, who was captured by Arsaces.
The fifth was another Antiochus, who was brought up by Craterus the eunuch at
Cyzicus, where he had fled with Craterus and the rest of the household of
Antiochus, through fear of Demetrius. One of the brothers had already died,
along with his sister, so only Antiochus was left, the youngest of the brothers,
and because of his residence at Cyzicus he was called Cyzicenus.

Demetrius returned [to Syria] and started his second reign in the second year of
the (?) 163rd Olympiad [127 B.C.], after having been held captive for the
intervening 10 years. As soon as he returned from captivity, he turned his
attention to Egypt; he advanced as far as Pelusium, but when Ptolemaeus Physcon
confronted him Demetrius had to retreat, because his soldiers hated him and
refused to obey his orders.

Angered by this, Ptolemaeus set up Alexander, a pretended son of Alexander, to
be king of Asia; Alexander was called Zabinas by the Syrians, because he was
thought to have been bought by Ptolemaeus to take on this role.

Demetrius was defeated in a battle at Damascus, and fled to Tyre, but was
refused entry into the city. While trying to escape by boat, he was seized and
killed, in the first year of the 164th Olympiad [124 B.C.]; he had reigned for 3
years before his captivity, and for another 4 years after his return.

Demetrius was succeeded by his son Seleucus, who died soon afterwards as a
result of his mother's accusations. His younger brother Antiochus came to power
in the second year of the 164th Olympiad [123 B.C.], and in the third year he
defeated Zabinas, who killed himself with poison because he could not endure the
defeat. Antiochus reigned for 11 years, until the fourth year of the 166th
Olympiad [113 B.C.]; the one year of his brother Seleucus' reign is also
included in this total. [p259] He was given the names Grypus ["hook-nose"] and
Philometor. But when faced with an attack by Antiochus Cyzicenus whom we
mentioned earlier, who was his half-brother by the same mother as well as his
nephew on his father's side, Grypus gave up his kingdom and retired to Aspendus;
from which he was given the name Aspendius, as well as Grypus and Philometor.

Antiochus Cyzicenus started to reign in the first year of the 167th Olympiad
[112 B.C.], after Antiochus [Grypus] retired to Aspendus. But in the second year
of the same Olympiad [111 B.C.], Antiochus returned from Aspendus, and took
control of Syria, while Cyzicenus remained in control of Coele [Syria]. After
the kingdom had been split between them in this way, Grypus remained as king
until the fourth year of the 170th Olympiad [97 B.C.]. He lived for another 15
years after his return, so that his reign lasted in all for 26 years: 11 years
on his own, and 15 years after the kingdom had been split in two.

Cyzicenus ruled from the first year of the 167th Olympiad [112 B.C.], and died
in the first year of the 171st Olympiad [96 B.C.], after reigning for 18 years
and living in all for 50 years. The manner of his death was as follows. After
Antiochus Grypus died at the time which was stated above, his son Seleucus came
with an army and captured many cities. Antiochus Cyzicenus brought an army from
Antioch, but was defeated in a battle; his horse carried him off towards the
enemy, and when they were about to capture him, he drew his sword and killed
himself. So Seleucus gained control of the whole kingdom, and captured Antioch.
But the surviving son of Cyzicenus began a war against Seleucus. When their
armies met at the city called Mopsuestia in Cilicia, the victory went to
Antiochus. Seleucus fled to the city, but when he learnt that the inhabitants
intended to burn him alive, [p261] he hastened to commit suicide. His two
brothers Antiochus and Philippus who were called the Didymi ["twins"], appeared
with an army and captured the city by force; then they avenged their brother's
death by destroying the city. However they were confronted by the son of
Cyzicenus, and defeated in a battle; while escaping from the battle, Antiochus
the brother of Seleucus rode his horse recklessly and fell headlong into the
river Orontes, where he was caught by the current and died. And then two others
began to fight over the kingdom: Philippus, the brother of Seleucus and son of
Antiochus Grypus, and Antiochus, the son of Antiochus Cyzicenus. Starting from
the (?) third year of the 171st Olympiad [94 B.C.], they fought against each
other for possession of Syria with substantial armies, each controlling part of
the country. Antiochus was defeated and fled to the Parthians. Later he
surrendered to Pompeius, in the hope of being restored to Syria. But Pompeius,
who had received a gift of money from the inhabitants of Antioch, ignored
Antiochus and allowed to city to be autonomous.

Then the inhabitants of Alexandria sent Menelaus and Lampon and Callimander to
ask Antiochus to come and rule in Egypt together with the daughters of
Ptolemaeus, when Ptolemaeus Dionysus had been driven out of Alexandria. But
Antiochus fell ill, and died.

Philippus whom we mentioned before, the son of Grypus and of Tryphaena the
daughter of Ptolemaeus VIII, was also deposed. He wanted to go to Egypt, because
he too had been invited by the inhabitants of Alexandria to rule there, but
Gabinius, an officer of Pompeius who was the Roman governor of Syria, stopped
him from going. And so the royal dynasty in Syria came to an end with Antiochus
and Philippus. So the kings of Asia and Syria are as follows:

• Antigonus was king of Asia - for 18 years • Demetrius Poliorcetes, king of
Syria and the east - for 17 years • [p263] Seleucus Nicator [or "Nicanor"] - for
32 years • Antiochus Soter - for 19 years • Antiochus Theos - for 15 years •
Seleucus Callinicus - for 21 years • Seleucus Ceraunus - for 3 years • Antiochus
the Great - for 36 years • Seleucus Philopator - for 12 years • Antiochus
Epiphanes - for 11 years • Antiochus Eupator - for 1 year and 6 months •
Demetrius Soter - for 12 years • Alexander - for 15 years • Demetrius the son of
Demetrius - for 3 years • Antiochus Sidetes - for 9 years • Demetrius again -
for 4 years • Antiochus Grypus - for 26 years • Antiochus Cyzicenus - for 17
years • Philippus the son of Grypus, with whom the kings of Syria came to an end
[ - for 2 years ]

[The total duration of the Macedonian rule in Syria, starting from Antigonus,
was 274 years; or, starting from Seleucus Nicator, 239 years.] THE ROMANS • The
kings of the Romans, starting with Romulus • The emperors of the Romans, from
Augustus to our time • The consuls of the Romans, from Julius Caesar to our time
Taken from all the previous historians, as listed here:

• from Alexander Polyhistor • from Abydenus, who wrote books about the Assyrians
and Medes • from the three books of Manetho, about the monuments of Egypt • from
Cephalion's nine books of the Muses • from the forty books of Diodorus'
[Historical] Library, containing a brief history of events up until Gaius Caesar
• from the eighteen books of Cassius Longinus, containing a summary of 228
Olympiads • [p265] from the fourteen books of Phlegon, the freedman of
[Hadrianus] Caesar, containing a summary of 229 Olympiads • from the six books
of Castor, containing an account of history from Ninus up until the 181st
Olympiad

• from the three books of (?) Thallus, containing an account of events from the
capture of Troy up until the (?) 167th Olympiad [112 B.C.]

• from [the books of] Porphyrius, the philosopher who lived in our time,
[containing events] from the capture of Troy up until the reign of Claudius [The
kings] of the Romans, and their dates

It is now time to list the dates of the kings of the Romans. They first acquired
this title in the seventh Olympiad [752-749 B.C.], when Romulus founded the city
of the Romans, and gave his name to the city, and to all the people who were
ruled by the kings [of the city]. Before this time they had been called
sometimes Latins, and sometimes Aborigines, having different names at different
times.

After the capture of Troy, they submitted to Aeneias the son of Anchises, and
his successors ruled over the people until the foundation of the city. The
history of these kings has been related by many different writers, not only
native Romans but also Greeks. It will be sufficient to quote just two of them,
as reliable witnesses to the events which we are considering. Firstly, I will
quote Dionysius, who provides a brief description of the history of the Romans;
as well as other books, he wrote an Ancient History of the Romans. In the first
book, he gives an account of Aeneias and the kings after him, (?) up until the
capture of Troy. From this book I will summarise what is essential, and what is
related to the matters which we are considering here, as follows [ DionHal_1.9
]. From the first book of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, about the history of the
Romans

"This city, mistress of the whole earth and sea, which the Romans now inhabit,
is said to have had as its earliest occupants the barbarian Sicels, a native
race. As to the condition of the place before their time, whether it was
occupied by others or uninhabited, none can certainly say. [p267] But some time
later the Aborigines gained possession of it, having taken it from the occupants
after a long war. These people had previously lived on the mountains in unwalled
villages and scattered groups. They say that after them, the Pelasgians and some
of the Greeks conquered that region. At first they were called Aborigines; but
under Latinus, their king, who reigned at the time of the Trojan war, they began
to be called Latins. Sixteen generations later, Romulus founded the city, and
expanded it, and raised its affairs to greater prosperity." And then Dionysius
continues his narrative, in these very words [ DionHal_1.10 ]: "There are some
who affirm that the Aborigines, from whom the Romans are originally descended,
were natives of Italy, a stock which came into being spontaneously (I call Italy
all that peninsula which is bounded by the Ionian Gulf and the Tyrrhenian Sea
and, thirdly, by the region where the Latins live). The Aborigines were called
"founders of families" or "ancestors"; but others claim that they were called
"vagabonds", coming together out of many places. Still others have a story to
the effect that they were foreigners who came there from Libya. But some of the
Roman historians say that they were Greeks, part of those who once dwelt in
Achaea, and that they migrated to there many generations before the Trojan war."

Then he adds: "It is uncertain, therefore, what the truth of the matter is. But
in my opinion, the Aborigines can be a colony of no other people but of those
who are now called Arcadians; for these were the first of all the Greeks to
cross the Ionian Gulf, under the leadership of Oenotrus, the son of Lycaon, and
to settle in Italy; this Oenotrus was the fifth from (?) Aezeius and Phoroneus,
seventeen generations before the Trojan war. Oenotrus settled in the mountains,
and called the region Oenotria, and its inhabitants Oenotrians. Later they were
called Italians, from king Italus, who also gave the name of Italy to the whole
country. [p269] Italus was succeeded by Morges, from whose name they were called
Morgetes. And at the same time as Oenotrus, his brother Peucetius came as a
colonist from Arcadia, and settled by the Junian bay, and from his name the
people were called Peucetii."

After giving his own opinion about all of this, he then says that the Pelasgian
colonists migrated from Greece, and settled in the country of the Italians among
the Aborigines. The Pelasgians were also called Tyrrheni [Etruscans] and the
whole region was called Tyrrhenia, from the name of one of their leaders, who
was called Tyrrhenus. Later, Euander arrived with a fleet from Greece, from the
city of Pallantium in Arcadia, and he settled in the region of Italy around the
site of the future city of Rome. [Dionysius] says that the Arcadians brought the
Greek alphabet to Italy, along with the musical instruments called nablia, or
lyres, and a set of laws. After them, Heracles arrived with a Greek fleet and
settled in the same region. At first, he was called Saturnius, and from his name
the whole region was called Saturnia. Heracles had a son called Latinus, and he
too ruled over the land of the Aborigines; from his name, they were called
Latins. When Latinus died without any sons, Aeneias the son of Anchises
succeeded him as king.

He summarises all this again in the following words [ DionHal_1.60 ]: "The
people who came together there, and mingled with the native population of the
land, from whom the Roman race was sprung, before the present inhabitants of the
city, were as follows. Firstly, the Aborigines, who drove the Sicels out of this
region; they were Greeks, originally from the Peloponnese, who came as colonists
with Oenotrus, from the region which is now called Arcadia, in my opinion.
Secondly, the Thessalians migrated there, from the country which used to be
called Haemonia, and is now called Thessaly. Thirdly, the Pelasgians, who
arrived with Euander from the city of Pallantium in Arcadia. Then another group
arrived, who were part of the Peloponnesian army commanded by Heracles. Lastly,
the Trojans who escaped with Aeneias from Ilium, Dardanus and the other Trojan
towns."

[p271] From the same book, about the date of Aeneias' arrival in Italy

He says [ DionHal_1.63 ]: "Ilium was taken at the end of the summer, seventeen
days before the winter solstice, and in the month of Elaphebolion, according to
the calendar of the Athenians; and there still remained five days after the
solstice to complete that year. During the thirty-seven days that followed the
taking of the city I imagine the Achaeans were employed in regulating the
affairs of the city, in receiving embassies from those who had withdrawn
themselves, and in concluding a treaty with them. In the following year, which
was the first after the taking of the city, the Trojans set sail after the
autumnal equinox, crossed the Hellespont, and landing in Thrace, passed the
winter season there, during which they received the fugitives who kept flocking
to them and made the necessary preparations for their voyage. And leaving Thrace
at the beginning of spring, they sailed as far as Sicily; when they had landed
there that year came to an end, and they passed the second winter dwelling with
the Elymians in their cities in Sicily. But as soon as conditions were
favourable for navigation they set sail from the island, and crossing the
Tyrrhenian sea, arrived at last at Laurentum on the coast of the Aborigines in
the middle of the summer. And having taken possession of the region, they
founded Lavinium, thus bringing to an end the second year from the taking of
Troy. With regard to these matters, then, I have thus shown my opinion.

"But when Aeneias had sufficiently adorned the city with temples and other
public buildings, of which the greatest part remained even to my day, in the
next year, which was the third after his departure from Troy, he reigned over
the Trojans only. But in the fourth year, Latinus having died, he succeeded to
his kingdom also, because of his relationship to him by marriage, Lavinia being
the heiress after the death of Latinus." A little later he adds: "War arose out
of these complaints and in a sharp battle that ensued Latinus, Turnus and many
others were slain; nevertheless, Aeneias and his people gained the victory.
Thereupon Aeneias succeeded to the kingdom because of his connection by
marriage; [p273] but when he had reigned three years after the death of Latinus,
in the fourth he lost his life in battle." A little later he says: "Aeneias
having departed this life about the seventh year after the taking of Troy,
Euryleon, who in the flight had been renamed Ascanius, succeeded to the rule
over the Latins."

Then he adds [ DionHal_1.70 ]: "Upon the death of the Ascanius in the
thirty-eighth year of his reign, Silvius, his brother, succeeded to the rule. He
was born of Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus, after the death of Aeneias."

Then he adds: "Silvius, after holding the sovereignty twenty-nine years, was
succeeded by Aeneias, his son, who reigned one less than thirty years. After
him, Latinus reigned fifty-one, then Alba, thirty-nine; after Alba, Capetus
reigned twenty-six, then Capys twenty-eight, and after Capys, Capetus held the
rule for thirteen years. Then Tiberinus reigned for a period of eight years.
This king, it is said, was slain in a battle that was fought near a river, and
being thrown by his horse into the stream, gave his name to the river, which had
previously been called the Albula. Tiberinus' successor, Agrippa, reigned
forty-one years. After Agrippa, Amulius, a tyrannical creature and odious to the
gods, reigned nineteen years. Contemptuous of the divine powers, he had
contrived imitations of lightning and sounds resembling thunder-claps, with
which he proposed to terrify people as if he were a god. But rain and lightning
descended upon his house, and the lake beside which it stood rose to an unusual
height, so that he was overwhelmed and destroyed with his whole household. And
even now when the lake is clear in a certain part, which happens whenever the
flow of water subsides and the depths are undisturbed, the ruins of porticoes
and other traces of a dwelling appear. Aventius, after whom was named one of the
seven hills that are joined to make the city of Rome, succeeded him in the
sovereignty and reigned thirty-seven years, [p275] and after him Procas
twenty-eight years. Then Amulius, having unjustly possessed himself of the
kingdom which belonged to Numitor, his elder brother, reigned forty-two years.
But when Amulius had been slain by Romulus and Remus, the sons of a noble
maiden, as shall presently be related, Numitor, the maternal grandfather of the
youths, after his brother's death resumed the sovereignty which by law belonged
to him. In the next year of Numitor's reign, which was the three hundred and
thirty-second after the taking of Troy, the Albans sent out a colony, under the
leadership of Romulus and Remus, and founded Rome, in that year, which was the
seventh Olympiad, when Daïcles of Messene was victor in the foot race [752
B.C.], and at Athens Charops was in the first year of his ten-year term as
archon." The same writer adds the following words, in which he relates the
various accounts of the historians about [the foundation of] the city of Rome [
DionHal_1.72 ].

About the foundation of the city of Rome

"But as there is great dispute concerning both the time of the building of the
city and the founders of it, and as in my opinion none [of the previous writers]
has given a convincing account of them, [it is not possible] to give merely a
cursory account of these things, as if they were universally agreed on. For
Cephalon of Gergis, a very ancient writer, says that the city was built in the
second generation after the Trojan war by those who had escaped from Troy with
Aeneias, and he names as the founder of it Romus, who was the leader of the
colony and one of Aeneias' sons; he adds that Aeneias had four sons, Ascanius,
Euryleon, Romulus and Remus. And Demagoras, Agathymus and many others agree with
him as regards both the time and the leader of the colony. But the author of the
history of the priestesses at Argos and of what happened in the days of each of
them says that Aeneias came into Italy from the land of the Molossians with
Odysseus and became the founder of the city, which he named after Romē, one of
the Trojan women. He says that this woman, growing weary with wandering, [p277]
stirred up the other Trojan women and together with them set fire to the ships.
And Damastes of Sigeum and some others agree with him.

"But Aristotle, the philosopher, relates that some of the Achaeans, while they
were doubling Cape Malea on their return from Troy, were overtaken by a violent
storm, and being for some time driven out of their course by the winds, wandered
over many parts of the sea, till at last they came to this place in the land of
the Opicans which is called Latium, lying on the Tyrrhenian sea. And being
pleased with the sight of land, they hauled up their ships, stayed there the
winter season, and were preparing to sail at the beginning of spring; but when
their ships were set on fire in the night and they were unable to sail away,
they were compelled against their will to fix their abode in the place where
they had landed. This fate, he says, was brought upon them by the captive women
they were carrying with them from Troy, who burned the ships, fearing that the
Achaeans in returning home would carry them into slavery. Callias, who wrote
about the deeds of Agathocles, says that Romē, one of the Trojan women who came
into Italy with the other Trojans, married Latinus, the king of the Aborigines.
By Latinus she had two sons, Romus and Romulus and Telegonus, who built a city,
gave it the name of their mother. Xenagoras, the historian, writes that Odysseus
and Circe had three sons, Romus, Antias and Ardeias, who built three cities and
called them after their own names. Dionysius of Chalcis names Romus as the
founder of the city, [p279] but says that according to some this man was the son
of Ascanius, and according to others the son of Emathion. There are others who
declare that Rome was built by Romus, the son of Italus and Leucē, the daughter
of Latinus.

"I could cite many other Greek historians who assign different founders to the
city, but, not to appear prolix, I shall come to the Roman historians. The
Romans, to be sure, have not so much as one single historian or chronicler who
is ancient; however, each of their historians has taken something out of ancient
accounts that are preserved on tablets in their temples. Some of these say that
Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome, were the sons of Aeneias, others say
that they were the sons of a daughter of Aeneias, without going on to determine
who was their father; that they were delivered as hostages by Aeneias to
Latinus, the king of the Aborigines, when the treaty was made between the
inhabitants and the new-comers, and that Latinus, after giving them a kindly
welcome, not only looked after them carefully, but, upon dying without male
issue, left them his successors to some part of his kingdom. Others say that
after the death of Aeneias Ascanius, having succeeded to the entire kingdom of
Latinus, divided both the country and the forces of the Latins into three parts,
two of which he gave to his brothers, Romulus and Remus. He himself, they say,
built Alba and some other towns; Remus built cities which he named Capua, after
Capys, his great-grandfather, Anchisa, after his grandfather Anchises, Aeneia
(which was afterwards called Janiculum), after his father, and Rome, after
himself. This last city was for some time deserted, but upon the arrival of
another colony, which the Albans sent out under the leadership of Romulus and
Remus, it regained its original status. So that, according to this account,
there were two settlements of Rome, one a little after the Trojan war, and the
other fifteen generations after the first. And if anyone desires to look more
carefully into the remote past, [p281] even a third foundation of Rome will be
found, more ancient than these, one that happened before Aeneias and the Trojans
came into Italy. This is related by no ordinary historian, but by Antiochus of
Syracuse, whom I have mentioned before. He says that when Morges reigned in
Latium (which at that time comprehended all of Italy from Tarentum to the coast
of Poseidonia), a man came to him who had been banished from Rome. His words are
these: 'When Italus was growing old, Morges reigned. In his reign there came a
man who had been banished from Rome; his name was Sicelus.' According to the
Syracusan historian, therefore, an ancient Rome is found even earlier than the
Trojan war. However, as he has left it doubtful whether it was situated in the
same region where the present city stands or whether some other place happened
to be called by this name, I, too, cannot say for certain. But as regards the
ancient settlements of Rome, I think that what has already been said is
sufficient.

"As to the last settlement or founding of the city, or whatever we ought to call
it, Timaeus of Sicily, following what reckoning I do not know, places it at the
same time as the founding of Carthage, that is, in the thirty-eighth year before
the first Olympiad [814 B.C.]; Lucius Cincius, a member of the senate, places it
about the fourth year of the twelfth Olympiad [729 B.C.], and Quintus Fabius in
the first year of the eighth Olympiad [748 B.C.]. Porcius Cato does not give the
time according to Greek reckoning, but being as careful as any writer in
gathering the date of ancient history, he places its founding four hundred and
thirty-two years after the Trojan war; and this time, being compared with the
Chronicles of Eratosthenes, corresponds to the first year of the seventh
Olympiad [752 B.C.]. That the canons of Eratosthenes are sound I have shown in
another treatise, where I have also shown how the Roman chronology is to be
synchronized with that of the Greeks." That is what Dionysius says in the first
book of his Ancient History of Rome, in which he describes in sequence all the
things which happened in the times following the capture of Troy:

• the escape of Aeneias from Troy, and his arrival in Italy • his descendants
and successors, who were kings of the Latins, up until Romulus and the
foundation of Rome • the various accounts of the ancient [p283] [historians]
about the foundation of the city of Rome.

Some writers say that Picus the son of Cronus was the first king in the
territory of Laurentium, where Rome is now situated, and that he reigned for 37
years. After him Faunus the son of Picus [was king] for 44 years. In his reign,
Heracles arrived from Spain and set up an altar in the Forum Boarium, because he
had killed Cacus the son of Vulcanus. Then Latinus was king for 36 years; the
Latins derived their name from him. Troy was captured in the 33rd year of his
reign. Then Aeneias fought against the Rutuli, and killed Turnus. After he
married Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus, and founded the city of Lavinium, he
was king for 3 years. That is a summary of what we have found in the books of
other writers. But now let us proceed to another narrator of these events -
namely Diodorus, who combined and summarised [the contents of] all libraries in
one collection; he records the history of the Romans in his seventh book, as
follows. From the seventh book of Diodorus, about the ancient origins of the
Romans

Some historians have mistakenly supposed that Romulus [and Remus], who founded
the city of Rome, were the sons of the daughter of Aeneias. But this is not
true, because there were many kings in the period between Aeneias and Romulus.
The foundation of Rome happened in the second year of the 7th Olympiad [751
B.C.], which was 433 years after the Trojan War. Aeneias became king of the
Latins three years after the capture of Troy; and after ruling for three years,
he disappeared from the sight of men, and was honoured as an immortal. He was
succeeded as king by his son Ascanius, who founded the city of Alba Longa; this
city was named [p285] after the river that flowed beside it, which was then
called Alba, but is now called Tiber. The Roman historian Fabius tells a
different story about the name of this city. He says that it was foretold to
Aeneias, that a four-footed animal would lead him to the site of the city. When
he was preparing to sacrifice a pregnant white sow, the sow escaped from his
grasp and was chased up a hill, where she gave birth to thirty piglets. Aeneias
was amazed by this omen, and in accordance with the prophecy, he attempted to
build on the site. But he was warned in a dream, that he should not found the
city until thirty years had passed, the same number as the piglets which were
born to the sow; and so he gave up the attempt.

After the death of Aeneias, his son Ascanius became king and after thirty years
he founded a settlement on the hill, which he called Alba, after the colour of
the sow; for the Latin word for 'white' is alba. Ascanius also added another
name, Longa, which translated means 'long', because the city was narrow in width
and stretched for a long way. And [Diodorus] goes on to say that that Ascanius
made Alba the capital of his kingdom and subdued no small number of the
inhabitants round about; he became a famous man and died after a reign of
thirty-eight years. At the end of this period, there arose a division among the
people, on account of two men who were contending with each other for the
throne. For Julius, since he was the son of Ascanius, maintained that his
father's kingdom belonged to him. But Silvius, the brother of Ascanius and,
furthermore, a son of Aeneias by Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus (whereas
Ascanius was a son of Aeneias by his first wife, who was a Trojan woman),
maintained that the kingdom belonged to him. Indeed, after the death of Aeneias,
Ascanius had plotted against the life of Silvius; and it was while the latter as
a child was being reared by some herdsmen on a mountain, to avoid this plot,
that he came to be called Silvius, after the name of the (?) mountain, which the
Latins call Silva. In the struggle between the two groups, Silvius finally
received the support of the people and gained the throne. However Julius,
although he did not acquire the supreme power, was made pontifex maximus and
became a kind of second king; [p287] he was the ancestor, so we are told, of the
Julian family, which survives in Rome even to this day.

Silvius achieved nothing worthy of mention in his reign, and died after ruling
for 49 years. He was succeeded as king by his son Aeneias Silvius, who ruled for
more than 30 years. He was a strong ruler, in government and in war. He subdued
the neighbouring regions, and founded the eighteen ancient cities of the Latins,
which were: Tibur, Praeneste, Gabii, Tusculum, Cora, Cometia, Lanuvium, Labicum,
Scaptia, Satricum, Aricia, Tellenae, Crustumerium, Caenina, Fregellae, Cameria,
Medullia, and Boilum (which some writers call Bola).

• When Latinus died, his son Alba Silvius was chosen to be king, and he ruled
for 38 years.

• The next king was Epitus (?) Silvius, for 26 years.

• When he died, Capis was appointed king, and he ruled for 28 years.

• His son Calpetus was the next king, and ruled for 13 years.

• Then Tiberius Silvius ruled for 8 years. When this king was crossing the river
Alba with an army, to fight against the Etruscans, he fell into a whirlpool and
died. As a result, the name of the river was changed to Tiber.

• After the death [of Tiberius], Agrippa became king of the Latins, for 41
years. The next king was Arramulius Silvius, who reigned for 19 years. They say
that Arramulius was arrogant throughout his life, and became so proud that he
claimed to rival the power of Jupiter. When there were continual heavy
thunderstorms during autumn time, he ordered all the men in his army [p289] at a
given command to strike their swords against their shields, supposing that by
this noise he could surpass even thunder. Therefore he was killed by a bolt of
lightning, and paid the penalty for his arrogance towards the gods. His whole
house was swallowed up by the Alban lake. The Romans who live near the lake
today still point out the remains of the royal palace under the lake: some
columns which can be seen deep beneath the surface of the water.

Aventius was chosen to be the next king, and he ruled for 37 years. During a
battle against the people who lived around the city, he was trapped in a
confined space and killed near a hill, which from his name was called the
Aventine hill. After he died, his son Procas Silvius was appointed to be the
next king, and ruled for 23 years. After his death, his younger son Amulius
seized the throne by force, while his elder brother Numitor was away in a
distant country. Amulius reigned for a little over 43 years, and was killed by
Remus and Romulus, who founded the city of Rome. The individual kings of the
Romans are as follows:

• Aeneias became king of the Latins, in the fourth year after the capture of
Troy - for 3 years • Ascanius - for 38 years • Silvius, the son of Aeneias - for
28 years • Aeneias Silvius - for 31 years • Latinus Silvius - for 50 years •
Alba Silvius - for 39 years • Epitus Silvius - for 26 years • Capis Silvius -
for 28 years • Calpetus Silvas - for 13 years • Tiberius Silvius - for 8 years •
Agrippa Silvius - for 35 years • [Arramulius Silvius - for 19 years] • [Aventius
- for 37 years] • [p291] Procas Silvius - for 23 years • Amulius Silvius - for
42 years

Romulus founded Rome, and became its king in the seventh Olympiad [752-749
B.C.]. From Aeneias up until Romulus, there were (?) 427 years. From the capture
of Troy [up until Romulus], there were 431 years. The kings, after Romulus who
founded Rome, are listed as follows:

• Romulus - for 38 years • Numa Pompilius - for 41 years • Tullus Hostilius -
for 33 years • Ancius Marcus - for 33 years • Tarquinius - for 37 years •
Servilius - for 44 years • Tarquinius Superbus - for 24 years

There were seven kings of the Romans, starting with Romulus, and they ceased
after a period of 244 years. From the capture of Troy up until Romulus, there
were were (?) 431 years. Altogether, [up until the end of the kings] there were
675 years. Dionysius of Halicarnassus gives a brief account of the dates of
these kings, from Romulus to Tarquinius, around the time of the first Olympiad,
as follows [ DionHal_1.75 ].

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, about the kings of Rome after Romulus

If from the expulsion of the kings the time is reckoned back to Romulus, the
first ruler of the city, it amounts to two hundred and forty-four years. This is
known from the order in which the kings succeeded one another and the number of
years each of them ruled.

• After the death of Romulus the city was a year without a king.

• Then Numa Pompilius, who was chosen by the army, reigned for forty-three
years;

• after Numa, Tullus Hostilius thirty-three years;

• [p293] and his successor, Ancus Marcius, twenty-four years;

• after Marcius, Lucius Tarquinius, called Priscus, thirty-eight years;

• Servius Tullius, who succeeded him, forty-four years.

• And the slayer of Servius, Lucius Tarquinius, the tyrannical prince who, from
his contempt of justice, was called Superbus, extended his reign to the
twenty-fifth year. As the reigns, therefore, of the kings amount to two hundred
and forty-four years or sixty-one Olympiads, it follows necessarily that
Romulus, the first ruler of the city, began his reign in the first year of the
seventh Olympiad [752 B.C.], when Charops at Athens was in the first year of his
ten-year term as archon. For the count of the years requires this; and the
number of years that each king reigned is shown in (?) that book. This,
therefore, is the account given by those who lived before me and adopted by me
concerning the time of the settlement of the city which now rules supreme. That
is what Dionysius says.

However, after the death of Tarquinius the Romans no longer had kings to rule
them. Instead of kings, first they appointed Brutus [and Collatinus] to be
consuls; then [they appointed] tribunes of the plebs; then dictators, who were
generals; and then consuls again. I think it would be superfluous to list the
magistrates of each year here, because it would be an enormous number of names.
And if I described their achievements in detail, my account would stretch to a
great length. Such detail is unnecessary for my current purpose; and so I think
it is appropriate to leave these magistrates, and everything connected with
them, to another chronicle: that is, the consuls who came after Tarquinius, the
tribunes of the plebs [p295] and the dictators who governed the city of Rome,
during the years up until the time of Caesar. After these remarks, we will
return to the reign of the first emperor. From the death of Tarquinius up until
the time of Julius Caesar, there was an intervening period of 115 Olympiads,
which is the equivalent of 460 years.

[This period is calculated as follows.] Tarquinius died at the end of the 67th
Olympiad [509 B.C.]. Caesar became emperor at the start of the 183rd Olympiad
[48 B.C.]. In between them, there was an interval of 460 years. From the 7th
Olympiad [752 B.C.], when the city of Rome was founded, [until the death of
Tarquinius] there was a period of 244 years. Therefore, from the foundation of
Rome until the time of Julius Caesar, there was a total of 704 years, which is
the equivalent of 176 Olympiads.

These totals are confirmed by the account in the chronicle of Castor, where he
gives a summary of the dates, and writes as follows.

[From the writings] of Castor, about the kings of Rome

We have named the kings of the Romans one by one, starting from Aeneias son of
Anchises, when he became king of the Latins, and finishing with Amulius Silvius,
who was killed by Romulus, the son of his niece Rhea. To them we will add
Romulus and the others, who ruled Rome after him up until Tarquinius Superbus,
for a period of 244 years. After these kings, we will give a separate list of
the consuls, starting from Lucius Junius Brutus, and finishing with Marcus
Valerius Messalla and Marcus Piso, who were consuls when Theophemus was archon
at Athens [61 B.C.]. Altogether, [these consuls governed] for 460 years. That is
what Castor says. Next it is appropriate to add a list of the emperors of the
Romans, starting from Julius Caesar; and to mention the consuls for each year,
attaching to them the numbers of the Olympiads.... [The Armenian manuscript
breaks off at this point]

Notes The page numbers are those of Petermann, from which the text has been
translated.

1. We know from elsewhere that the victor in the stadion race at the next
Olympic games, the 250th Olympiad, was Publius Aelius Alcandridas of Sparta, who
also won at the 251st games. So, thanks to Eusebius, we have a complete list of
the victors in this race for a period of a thousand years, from 776 B.C. to 225
A.D. This text was translated by Andrew Smith, 2008. This file and all material
on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 5: COMMENTARY ON THE PSALMS - ON PSALM 51
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, Commentary on the Psalms: Ps. 51 (52) (2010) [Translated
by Andrew Eastbourne] [Migne PG 23, cols. 441-452]

[col. 441]

(1) To the end. Of understanding. Of David. 51.[1] (2) When Doeg the Idumaean
came and reported to Saul and said to him, "David came to the house of
Ahimelech."

The 33rd Psalm was spoken by David when he "changed his countenance before
Abimelech, and he sent him away, and he left."[2] The current Psalm would be the
one following that Psalm in historical sequence. For the Scripture says in
Kingdoms, "And one of the servants of Saul was there that day."[3] And this
indicates the time at which David came into the house of Abimelech[4] and ate
the "loaves of offering," receiving them from the high priest. For at the very
same point in time, Doeg the Syrian, the tender of Saul's mules, came to Saul
and said, "I have seen the son of Jesse having come to Nob, to Abimelech the son
of Ahitub, the priest, and all the sons of his father; and [col. 444] he
inquired on his behalf through God, and he gave him provisions. And the king
sent someone to call Abimelech the priest, and all the sons of his father, the
priests of the Lord in Nob, and they all came before the king,"[5] at which
point, on Saul's order, this same Doeg put to death the priests of the Lord—"305
men who bore the ephod, and he smote the city of Nob with the edge of the sword,
including men and women, infants and babies, and calves and donkeys and
sheep."[6] So when David learned that this had been done in this way, he uttered
the words before us, which contain neither an ode, nor a hymn, nor anything else
of that sort. For how, in the face of the disaster that happened to so many
priests, could he have sung odes of theirs and psalms? Hence, nothing of the
kind is written as epigraph, but it was only said "to the end" and "of
understanding": ["To the end,"] since the final elements of his words recount
the good things, when he says, "But I am like a fruitful olive tree," etc.;[7]
and ["of understanding," since discerning] the meaning of the words put forth
here requires the understanding that comes from God. Now then, when he was with
Abimelech and tasted the priestly nourishment, he changed his "taste"—or his
"ways," according to the interpretation of the others—and raised blessings and
thanksgivings to God, saying: "I will bless the Lord at all times; the praise of
him is always in my mouth," etc.[8] But now, when he had learned of the actions
of Doeg the slanderer[9]—how he had destroyed so many priests, doing a
diabolical[10] deed—he marshalled the words of the present passage as though
against him, saying:

(3) Why do you boast in wickedness,[11] O powerful one? Lawlessness all day
long, (4) and injustice, your tongue devised.[12]

The material we have before us was spoken much earlier in time than the history
pertaining to the 50th Psalm. For [the history of Doeg] took place, and [the
words] were spoken, while Saul was still alive, and before David's kingship.
Many long years later, after the death of Saul, and at the end of his own
kingship, David made the confession contained in the 50th Psalm, which he placed
before [the 51st] because of its connection to the 49th Psalm, as I have already
shown. Those Psalms, 20 in number, from 51 to 70, with epigraphs "of David,"
took their subject-matter from a different point of origin: indeed, they appear
to have been spoken while Saul was still alive, before David reigned. For the
one before us now was spoken while Saul was still alive, "when Doeg the Idumaean
came and reported to Saul...'David came to the house of Abimelech.'" But the
53rd Psalm too was spoken "when the Ziphites came and told Saul, 'Look--is not
David hidden with us?'"[13] Also, the 55th Psalm has this epigraph: "When the
Philistines seized him in Gath"[14]—and this period too precedes David's
kingship, while Saul still survived alive. And the 56th Psalm gives the
epigraph: "Of David, when he was running away from Saul into the cave."[15] In
the same way also, the 58th Psalm says [in the epigraph], "When Saul sent, and
guarded his house, in order to kill him."[16] The 59th Psalm, however, even
though it was spoken after the death of Saul, [col. 445], when David was now
king, still preceded the actions relating to Uriah. This is indicated by the
heading, which shows the time period involved by saying, "When he set on fire
Mesopotamia of Syria, and Syria Soba, and Joab returned and smote the Ravine of
Salt—twelve thousand."[17] And this chronologically precedes the confession
expressed in the 50th Psalm. Furthermore, the 62nd Psalm was spoken by David
"when he was in the desert of Idumaea,"[18] while Saul was still living.
Consider how more or less the majority of the second part of the book of the
Psalms of David (apart from the 50th) include those which were spoken by him
before the period of his actions pertaining to Uriah. The first part of the same
book, however, from the first Psalm to the 40th, [seemed to] contradict that
order; for that part included those dating after the confession of the 50th
Psalm. The third Psalm, then, was spoken by David "when he was running away from
Absalom his son."[19] And he was fleeing from his son after the events connected
to Uriah. But also in the sixth Psalm, he was mourning for the same actions,
saying, "I grew tired in my groaning; I shall wash my bed every night—with my
tears I shall moisten my mattress."[20] And the seventh Psalm, spoken "for the
words of Cush the son of Iamin," would belong to the same time period. Moreover,
also the 17th Psalm has been proved to have been spoken at the end of David's
life. But also the 37th Psalm, with the epigraph "for remembrance," having the
same train of thought as the sixth, begins with the same words, saying, "Lord,
do not rebuke me in your anger, and do not correct me in your wrath."[21] And
going forward, he makes the same confession as that in the 50th Psalm, besides
other passages, also when he says, "For my transgressions have gone over[22] my
head...My wounds stank and decayed before my foolishness."[23] And if you bring
together [these indications] for yourself, you will discover that the majority
of the Psalms in the first part were spoken after the time period of the history
relating to Uriah, whereas those following the 50th Psalm precede [David's]
actions regarding Uriah chronologically. Why in the world, then, were the first
ones in chronological sequence not put in first place—and instead, those which
were spoken first,[24] while Saul was still living, are in the second part of
the Psalms—and those which are chronologically last are in the first part? I
think they have this arrangement so that the discourse would not move from the
better to the worse; for the phrase, "to the end, lest you be destroyed,"
appears to have been observed also in the case of the Psalms' arrangement. For
this reason, the gloomier material was placed first, so that the nicer / more
useful material would be kept for second, the worse things being hidden and made
to disappear by the appearance of the better ones in second place. And it is
likely that David wished to draw a veil over his fault afterwards by means of
his prior good deeds. And someone might say that [col. 448] he arranged his
confessions first in accordance with tremendous piety, because "the righteous
one is his own accuser in the opening prosecution"[25] But since so many things
about the arrangement apparent [in the book of Psalms] have been laid bare for
you, it is now time to pass on also to the words of Psalm 51 that are before us.

Well then, he writes the words in question after learning what Doeg the Syrian
had brought about by means of his slanders[26] against David. Therefore he
speaks as though addressing him: "Why do you boast in wickedness, you powerful
one?"—or as though addressing the devil,[27] who was at work in him. For he was
not unaware of the one who was opposing him at all times and always fighting
against him, at one time through Saul, in the current instance through Doeg, and
at other times in different ways through different people. So then, the one who
is powerless and weak and slight in wickedness, when the better character
prevails in him, since he is feebler in wickedness, will hide himself as he sins
and is pricked by his conscience, and will repent, and devise for himself a
remedy for his own wickedness using confession and true repentance. The one who
is powerful in wickedness, however, goes crazy and boasts over it, as though he
were making himself more majestic by a great good deed. And the passage before
us appears to me to be describing the character that is the opposite of the one
that made the prior confession in the 50th Psalm. For in that Psalm, after
slipping once into wickedness, he repented in the end and wore himself out with
confession, and lamentation over his own evil deeds. But the other one, being
present in wickedness,[28] says:

(7)...And he will scrape you away from the tent, and will uproot you from the
land of the living forever

—so that the righteous, when they see it, will be afraid and will mock him,
saying,[29]

(9) "Look! a man who did not set God before himself as his strength, but trusted
in the abundance of his wealth, and empowered himself in his own disaster!"

And this was said as though to Doeg, who was a Syrian by descent, but lived in
the midst of Israel—and, I suppose, perhaps even entered the tabernacle of God
along with the multitude, pretending to be pious. But it was also said to
everyone who is powerful in wickedness, who uses his tongue instead of a sword
for the destruction of souls: the "farmer of souls" would pluck him out just
like some bitter and destructive root, even if he seems for some brief time to
have been planted in the tabernacle of God and in his Church. Such a person,
after being plucked out and cast away far from the tabernacle of the holy,[30]
will lie as a pitiable spectacle for the benefit and chastening of those who see
him—they will take in with their eyes the severe judgment of God against such a
person and will make every effort and guard themselves against falling into a
similar situation. Later, when they recall with their memory the former boasting
of the one who was powerful in wickedness, his grandeur and arrogance, but also
see the humiliation and destruction that pursued him after that, they will
consider him a laughing-stock, considering how he has fallen so low from such a
height. And they will accept the judgment of God, confessing that it is
righteous. Then, they will also go through the reasons why the impious one has
suffered these things [col. 449] and justify God's judgment. For he ought not to
have been haughty-minded over riches, nor to have been exalted over the vanity
of the present life, but to have made God alone his hope and help, and not to
have wavered in this hope. But he abandoned the good anchor of his own soul, and
by hanging his hopes on vain wealth he made himself a joke, incurring nothing
more than laughter for his vain and thoughtless boastfulness.

(10) But I am like a fruitful olive tree in the house of God. I have put my
hope[31] in the mercy of God forever, even forever and ever.

From what I have said already, we have learned what sort of end the one who is
powerful in wickedness will obtain. But as for me, says David, since I have been
taught this by the Holy Spirit, I would never be exalted over abundance of
wealth, nor over the vanity of mortal life. For "vanity of vanities, all is
vanity."[32] But also, as I flee from the path of the one who is powerful in
wickedness, I would not sharpen my tongue and my words for the destruction of
others, but rather for the benefit of souls and the service of the words of
salvation. And in my other actions too, I would become so flourishing and
fruitful that my soul would be compared with an ever-flourishing and richly
fruitful plant that has been planted in the house of God. For this reason, I
say: "But I am like a fruitful olive tree in the house of God"—or, according to
Symmachus' translation: "But I am like a flourishing olive tree in the house of
God." For I did not turn away at all from the house of God; rather, after being
planted inside it, as it were in God's own garden,[33] and while enjoying the
streams of the spring in the house of God, I became richly fruitful and
ever-flourishing, in accordance with the pattern of the planted olive tree that
has been received among the ever-flourishing [plants]. But observe that when
David said this, he was not in Jerusalem, which the Jewish people[34] considered
to be the house of God—for it had not yet been built; and neither was he in the
tabernacle built by Moses, which did still exist at that time among the Jews.
For when he was fleeing from Saul, he passed his time among others—and yet he
did indeed know that he had been planted in the house of God, since he
understood the "house of God" to be the pious way of life.[35] And because he
was fruitful—not bearing bitter fruits but sweet fruits full of compassion,[36]
he was rightly compared to a fruitful olive tree: the pattern signifying mercy
towards one's neighbors and compassion toward all. Therefore, since he was
overflowing with this sort of good things, he logically added, "I have put my
hope in the mercy of God forever, even forever and ever."

Now, he
pointed out that the end of the one who is powerful in wickedness is uprooting
and destruction.  For it was necessary for the root that bears bitter fruit to
be †------ off†[37]
by the wise farmer of the universe.[38]
But David, like a fruitful olive tree in the house of God, put his hope in the
mercy of God for ever, even forever and ever, procuring for himself immortality
and eternal life on the basis of his good hope, from which he will never fall
away.  For according to the Apostle, "hope does not put us to shame."[39]
Then, having sketched out good hopes for himself as it were on the basis of
good fruits, [col. 452] he
attributes the responsibility [for all this] to the provider of all good
things, saying:  "I shall praise you
forever, because you did [this]."[40]
For (he says) I did not make myself like a fruitful olive tree, but rather, you
did.  For grace[41]
comes from you.  And so I will never cease from the knowledge of your grace,
and from praising you; having once put my hope in the mercy of God, "I shall patiently await his name."[42]
For once the foundation of good hope has been established, we need patience.
Therefore, he says, "I shall patiently
await your name, because it is beneficial[43] before your holy ones"—or, according
to Symmachus' translation:  "...because
your name is good in front of your holy ones."[44]  Knowing, therefore, that it is good, and
productive of good—not for those who are powerful in wickedness nor for those
who are to be cast out from among the living, but to the holy ones, he quite rightly said, "I
shall patiently await your name," being hopeful that I will never fall out
of your mercy.  In this way, I have put my hope in him forever, even for ever
and ever.

[1] Eusebius normally includes the Psalm number at the end of the superscription
/ epigraph.

[2] Ps. 33[34].1; cf. 1 Kgdms [1 Sam.] 21.13[14].

[3] 1 Kgdms [1 Sam.] 21.6[7].

[4] Heb. Ahimelech.

[5] 1 Kgdms 22.9-11.

[6] 1 Kgdms 22.18-19.

[7] Ps. 51[52].10[8].

[8] Ps. 33[34].2[1].

[9] Gk. διάβολος.

[10] Gk. διαβολικός.

[11] NETS: "malice."

[12] NETS: "...of lawlessness all day long? Injustice your tongue devised."
Eusebius' Greek text here, unlike standard LXX, has the word καὶ ("and") at the
beginning of vs. 4; this changes the likely grammatical construal (to make
"lawlessness" and "injustice" both the objects of the verb "devised").

[13] Ps. 53[54].2[1].

[14] Ps. 55[56].1.

[15] Ps. 56[57].1.

[16] Ps. 58[59].1.

[17] Ps. 59[60].2[1].

[18] "Judah" MT, LXX.

[19] Ps. 3.1.

[20] Ps. 6.7[6].

[21] Ps. 37[38].2[1]; cf. Ps. 6.2[1].

[22]ὑπερῆραν. Migne has the misprint ὑπερῆσαν.

[23] Ps. 37[38].5-6[4-5]. NETS: "...because my acts of lawlessness went over my
head...My wounds stank and festered from before my foolishness."

[24]οἱ τὴν πρῶτοι λελεγμένοι Migne. τὴν is unintelligible; the Latin tr. ignores
it: Quid igitur causae est, quod non secundum temporum seriem, qui primi tempore
sunt, primi positi sint, sed qui primi, superstite Saule dicti sunt, in secunda
psalmorum parte sint constituti...?

[25] Prov. 18.17.

[26] Gk. διαβολαί.

[27] Gk. διάβολος.

[28] The text seems corrupt. Gk. ὁ δὲ παρὼν ἐν κακίᾳ ὥς φησι. The Latin in Migne
translates as though the text is ὁ δὲ παρὼν τῷ ἐν κακίᾳ (ὄντι / μένοντι) ὥς
φησί: At ei de quo nunc sermo, in malitia degenti dicitur.

[29] Ps. 51[52].8, paraphrased.

[30] The Gk. implies either "holy things" (i.e., the apparatus of worship in the
tabernacle) or "holy people."

[31] NETS: "I hoped."

[32] Eccles. 1.2.

[33] Gk γεώργιον.

[34] Gk. Ἰουδαίωνπαῖδες (lit., "children of the Jews / Judaeans").

[35] Gk. τὸ θεοσεβὲς πολίτευμα.

[36] Gk. φιλανθρωπία (lit., "love of human beings"). The same Greek word appears
at the next instance of "compassion" in the translation as well.

[37] Migne's Greek text reads ἀποκταλῆναι; ἀποκταθῆναι ("to be killed") is
suggested in a footnote. The translation reads eradicari.

[38]Gk. ὁ τῶν ὅλων σοφός γεωργός.

[39] Rom. 5.5.

[40] Ps. 51[52].11[9]. NETS: "I will acknowledge you forever, because of what
you did." The Gk. verb ἐποίησας can mean "you did," or "you made"—Eusebius picks
up the idea of "making" in the following sentence.

[41] Gk. χάρις; alternatively, "beauty" or "kindness"—both relevant connotations
in this context.

[42] Ps. 51[52].11[9]. NETS: "I will wait for your name," with a different
pronoun ("your" rather than "his") in the Greek. But Eusebius' subsequent
citation of the same phrase has "your," so perhaps this should be corrected to
conform with it. On the other hand, as Eusebius slips from paraphrase to
citation and back again, he equally seems to slip between 1st, 2nd and 3rd
person references with disconcerting freedom.

[43] Gk. χρηστός, which by Eusebius' time would have sounded identical to
Χριστός.

[44] Ps. 51[52].11[9]. NETS: "your devout" rather than "your holy ones." This
text was commissioned by Roger Pearse, 2010. This file and all material on this
page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 6: CONCERNING THE PLACE NAMES IN SACRED SCRIPTURE - INTRODUCTION
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, Onomasticon (1971) Introduction. pp. i-xl. THE ONOMASTICON
OF EUSEBIUS PAMPHILI COMPARED WITH THE VERSION OF JEROME AND ANNOTATED BY

C. Umhau Wolf

(1914 - 2004)

1971

Digitised 2006.

ONOMASTICON OF EUSEBIUS

CONTENTS

Foreword. viii Translator's Preface. ix Digitizer's Note. x Bibliographical
Sketch of Author. xii EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA AND THE ONOMASTICON. xvi
Introduction. xvi Life of Eusebius. xvii

Caesarea. xviii The Onomasticon. xix Method and Sources. xxi Manuscripts,
Editions and Translations. xxiv

Pilgrims. xxvi The Madaba Map. xxvii Critical Study of the Onomasticon. xxviii
The Onomasticon and Biblical Topography. xxxii

Summary. xxxvii Introduction - Footnotes. xxxix CONCERNING THE PLACE NAMES IN
SACRED SCRIPTURE. 1

Latin Preface by Jerome. 1

SECTION A.. 2

GENESIS. 2

EXODUS. 3 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 4

JOSHUE. 6

JUDGES. 12

KINGS. 13 THE GOSPELS. 16

SECTION B.. 16

GENESIS. 16

EXODUS. 17 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 17

JOSUE. 18

JUDGES. 21

KINGS. 22 THE GOSPELS. 23

SECTION G.. 23

GENESIS. 23 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 24

JOSUE. 25

KINGS. 28 THE GOSPELS. 29

SECTION D.. 29

GENESIS. 29 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 30

JOSUE. 30

JUDGES. 31

KINGS. 31 THE GOSPELS. 32

SECTION E. 32

GENESIS. 32

EXODUS. 33 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 33 JOSUE (of Naue) 34

KINGS. 36 THE GOSPELS. 36

SECTION Z. 37

GENESIS. 37

JOSUE. 37

KINGS. 37

SECTION E. 38

GENESIS. 38

JOSUE. 38

JUDGES. 38

KINGS. 39

SECTION TH.. 39

GENESIS. 39 DEUTERONOMY.. 39

JOSUE. 39

JUDGES. 40

KINGS. 41

SECTION I..42

GENESIS. 42 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 42

JOSUE. 43

KINGS. 45 THE GOSPELS. 45

SECTION K.. 46

GENESIS. 46

JOSUE. 47

JUDGES. 48

KINGS. 48

SECTION L. 49

GENESIS. 49 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 49

JOSUE. 49

JUDGES. 50

KINGS. 50

SECTION M.. 51

GENESIS. 51

EXODUS. 51 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 52

JOSUE. 52

JUDGES. 54

KINGS. 54

SECTION N.. 56

GENESIS. 56

JOSUE. 56

JUDGES. 57

KINGS. 57 THE GOSPELS. 57

SECTION X.. 58

JOSHUE. 58

SECTION O.. 58

GENESIS. 58

EXODUS. 58

JOSUE. 58

SECTION P. 59 THE PENTATEUCH.. 59

SECTION R.. 59 THE PENTATEUCH.. 59

JOSUE. 60

KINGS. 60

SECTION S. 61

GENESIS. 62

EXODUS. 63 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 63

JOSUE. 64

JUDGES. 66

KINGS. 66

SECTION T. 68

GENESIS. 68

JOSUE. 69

JUDGES. 69 THE GOSPELS. 69

SECTION PH.. 69

GENESIS. 69

EXODUS. 70 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 70

JUDGES. 71

KINGS. 71

SECTION X.. 72

GENESIS. 72 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 72

JOSUE. 72

KINGS. 73

SECTION O.. 74 THE PENTATEUCH.. 74 JOSUE and KINGS. 74

NOTES. 76

Latin Preface By Jerome. 76

SECTION A.. 76

GENESIS. 76

EXODUS. 81 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 81 JOSHUA (of Naue)90

JUDGES. 107

KINGS. 109 THE GOSPELS. 117

SECTION B.. 118

GENESIS. 118

EXODUS. 121 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 121

JOSUE. 124

JUDGES. 132

KINGS. 134 THE GOSPELS. 137

SECTION G.. 139

GENESIS. 139 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 141

JOSUE. 144

KINGS. 150 THE GOSPELS. 153

SECTION D.. 154

GENESIS. 154 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 156

JOSUE. 156

JUDGES. 158

KINGS. 158 THE GOSPELS. 159

SECTION E. 159

GENESIS. 160

EXODUS. 161 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 161 JOSUE (of Naue)162

KINGS. 166 THE GOSPELS. 168

SECTION Z. 168

GENESIS. 168 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 168

JOSUE. 169

KINGS. 170

SECTION E. 170

GENESIS. 170

JOSUE. 171

JUDGES. 172

KINGS. 172 SECTION TH.. 172

GENESIS. 173 DEUTERONOMY.. 173

JOSUE. 174

JUDGES. 176

KINGS. 176

SECTION I..178

GENESIS. 178 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 179

JOSUE. 180

KINGS. 187 THE GOSPELS. 188

SECTION K.. 188

GENESIS. 188

JOSUE. 190

JUDGES. 192

KINGS. 193

SECTION L. 195

GENESIS. 195 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 196

JUDGES. 198

KINGS. 198

SECTION M.. 199

GENESIS. 199

EXODUS. 200 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 201

JOSUE. 202

JUDGES. 206

KINGS. 207

SECTION N.. 210

GENESIS. 210

JOSUE. 212

JUDGES. 213 THE GOSPELS. 215

SECTION X.. 215

GENESIS. 216

EXODUS. 216

JOSUE. 217

SECTION P. 217 THE PENTATEUCH.. 217

SECTION R.. 217 THE PENTATEUCH.. 218

JOSUE. 219

KINGS. 221

SECTION S. 224

GENESIS. 224

EXODUS. 227 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 227

JOSUE. 229

JUDGES. 234

KINGS. 235

SECTION T. 239

GENESIS. 240

JOSUE. 240

JUDGES. 240 THE GOSPELS. 241 SECTION PH.. 241

GENESIS. 241

TH.. 241

PH.. 242

EXODUS. 243 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 243

JUDGES. 245

KINGS. 245

SECTION X.. 246

GENESIS. 246 NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY.. 247

JOSUE. 248

KINGS. 249

APPENDIX I - Lists of Latin Variants and Special Terms. 253 APPENDIX II - Idols,
Jewish & Christian Towns, Greek polichne & Jerusalem Sites. 254 APPENDIX III -
Biblical Lists and Sources. 255 APPENDIX IV - Tribal Allotment and Continued
Habitation. 256 APPENDIX V - Methods for Localization of Sites. 257 APPENDIX VI
- Summary of Data in Appendix. 265 APPENDIX VII - Significant Reference Points
for Location. 266 APPENDIX VIII - Regions of Onomasticon. 267 APPENDIX IX -
Latin Equivalents of Some Greek Words. 277

INDEX.. 280

|viii

Foreword The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of many scholars,
living and dead, and friends, not all of whom can be mentioned. First he is
indebted to Moses Bailey and Alexander Sperber who introduced him to the
labyrinth of the Onomastica of the Bible before World War II. Thanks to Ernest
Wright who in his concern for the non-classically trained seminarians and
neophyte archaeologists suggested this English translation of the Onomasticon
reputed to be Eusebius' as a sabbatical project. Thanks to Edward Campbell for
his insistence on an article for the Biblical Archaeologist (Sept. 1964, xxvii,
3) which forms the basis for the introductory critical remarks in this edition
and are used by permission of the American Schools of Oriental Research whose
Jerusalem building was the seat for much of the research.

Thanks to the trustees of Harvard University for permission to quote from the
Thackeray translation of Josephus' Antiquities in the Loeb Classical Library. A
special thanks to the host of geographers who have labored over the Onomasticon
including among many Conder, Buhl, Thomsen, Abel, Albright, Avi-Yonah, Glueck,
O'Callaghan, Kallai, Melamed, and Mittmann. The basic text of Klostermann,
published in 1904, with reference to Lagarde, has been used in this translation.

C. Umhau Wolf, December 24, 1971

|ix Translator's Preface This English edition of the Onomasticon is the first in
the Western languages. It is a fairly literal translation of the Greek text and
is not intended for the classics scholar but for those who are not versed in
Greek, Latin and Hebrew, but are interested in the geography and archaeology of
the Holy Land. It is not intended for textual critics of the Bible or of the
Onomasticon although some of the notes and appendices include variants and
textual materials. To avoid a double translation, the Greek and Latin have been
conflated except for the final editor's Introduction which varies greatly in the
two languages. Parentheses ( ) are used to indicate minor variations in the
Latin from the presumed earlier Greek text. Brackets [ ] are used to indicate
either a lacuna in the Greek text which has been emended from the Latin or an
addition of significance made by the Latin editors. The notes on individual
entries also indicate which of these occur in any given section. The notes that
follow the translation are not an attempt at a biblical geography for which the
reader has access to many good volumes. They do not attempt an archaeological
survey of the Holy Land. The notes emphasize late Roman and Byzantine sites and
sources especially when the Onomasticon's text makes some attempt to locate and
identify a place or where the text is confused. Not all Old Testament or New
Testament sites are mentioned in the Onomasticon and many of those which are
have not been located in the Greek and Latin texts so are not located or
identified in these notes. Again reference to a biblical atlas or geography is
to be had for this detailed study.

New theories of identification and new archaeological discoveries are appearing
with great frequency. Some updating of the Onomasticon locations is to be
continuously in the works. The most recent studies are by Avi-Yonah, Melamed and
Mittmann with single studies appearing in Israeli journals (Israel Exploration
Journal, Eretz-Israel, and Tarbiz) and others (Biblical Archaeologist, Revue
Biblique, Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly, Zeitschrift des Deutschen
Palästina-Vereins, Deutsche Palästina-Verein, etc.).

|x Digitizer's Note

I decided to proof and edit this manuscript soon after my father's death. My
father, Dr. C(arl). Umhau Wolf, had spent more than four years of research,
translation, and writing on this Onomasticon project.

Originally the Catholic University of America Press had requested the
translation but when the draft of the manuscript was sent to the press they
decided that the translation was too scholarly for their planned use in their
Fathers of the Church series.

Even though he referred to the Onomasticon's translation as "just a laundry
list," I wanted the translation to be more accessible than just gathering dust
in a file drawer. The aged manuscript has faded making some entries difficult to
read and this has caused difficulty with the output from the optical scanner. I
have spent almost a year correcting the scanned manuscript and hope that the
final version has few errors. The manuscript should be considered a draft
manuscript and not a final draft for publication.

I did very few editorial changes since my background in electronics and library
science leaves me quite ignorant of this subject. I have added the Onomasticon's
translation's Sections to the End notes. I have used diacritical marks only
where indicated in the original manuscript since there are some places that the
name differs only due to a diacritical mark. This causes a double entry in the
index for those places and names that have been used with and without the
diacritical marks. The endnote numbers were abandoned shortly after the
beginning of the translation for reasons unknown to me. I have completed the
endnote numbers to the translation. I have not changed the text where there is a
question mark (?) indicating that the text required additional research. The
Klostermann citations were handwritten in the margins. I have included the
Klostermann citations in all end notes and have substituted the complete Lagarde
citation for the Lagarde section numbers located also as handwritten additions
in the margins. Each end note consists of the following elements: the end note
number; the place or name; the biblical chapter and verse from the Greek text;
the Klostermann text page and line number of the Greek text; and the Legarde
text page number and line number of the Greek text. After end note number one,
the citations are abbreviated using "K" for Klostermann and "L" for Legarde.
Where a place or name is not found in the Legarde text, I have indicated "n/a;
Lacuna in Greek Text." The index includes Greek variants of places and names
found in the end notes. Also included are the Arabic places and names that were
italicized in the body, but I have decided for ease of sorting alphabetically to
eliminate the italics throughout the index. I did not use the Latin textual
variants for places and names in the index.

Abbreviations of books are expanded to full titles only when the full title is
known to the digitizer. I took the liberty of changing the journals listed at
the end of the Translator's Preface from initials to complete titles. In 1964,
my father spent his sabbatical leave in the Middle East. He, my stepmother, and
my youngest sister were residents at the American School of Oriental Research
(ASOR) most of that year while he did research for the translation of the
Onomasticon. During this time, I was |xi stationed at Asmara, Ethiopia with the
U. S. Army's Signal Corps. I was able to travel to Jordan to visit my family and
I had the pleasure of a short stay at the ASOR.

I would like to thank Roger Pearse, for his encouragement to digitize the
manuscript, his suggestion to add a biography of the author, his word processing
editing, and for placing the final digitized manuscript on his web site's pages
about Eusebius of Caesarea, https://www.tertullian.org/fathers. I thank David J.
McGonagle, Director, The Catholic University of America Press, Washington,
District of Columbia (D.C.), for assuring me that I had the most recent draft
copy of the Onomasticon's translation's manuscript. Thanks to Mike Robinson,
Reference Librarian, Bryan Wildenthal Memorial Library, Sul Ross State
University, Alpine, Texas, for obtaining, through interlibrary loans, the many
books that I requested during the digitization process.

I realize that there are many excellent translations of the Onomasticon in print
today. I hope this translation may be a minor supplement to these available
translations.

Noel C. WOLF, November 18, 2005

|xii Dr. Carl Umhau Wolf

1914 - 2004 Bibliographical Sketch of Author

Dr. Wolf was born, in Baltimore, Maryland, a third generation German-American on
both sides of his father and mother. His paternal grandfather came to the United
States from Alsace in 1871. His father was a Lutheran minister with a Ph.D. in
Classical Archaeology. He had to be known by his second name, Umhau (his
mother's maiden name) because his father was named Carl also. His knowledge of
languages began with four years of Latin, two years of French, and two years of
German in high school followed by Biblical Hebrew in Seminary and continued with
Arabic, Aramaic, Greek, Medieval Hebrew, Syriac, and Yiddish in graduate school.

He received a B.A. from John Hopkins University (1934), a B.D. from Capital
University (1938), an M.S.D. from Capital University, an M.A. from Ohio State
University (1936), and a Ph.D. from Hartford Seminary (1942), dissertation
title, The pre-Masoretic Pronunciation of Hebrew According to the Septuagint. He
was ordained as a Lutheran minister at his father's church, Grace Lutheran,
Baltimore, Maryland (1937).

After ordination and marrying Dorothy Rising, Dr. Wolf was called to be the
pastor at a dual Lutheran parish Zion, Jelloway, Knox County, Ohio and St. John,
Kaylor Ridge, Holmes County, Ohio. It wasn't until 1990, while doing research
for his grandfather's biography, that he discovered that his grandfather's first
congregation, also as a newly married, was close by at Fryburg, Holmes County,
Ohio. He remained here until he was awarded the Jacobus Fellowship at Hartford
Seminary, Hartford, Connecticut to complete his doctoral thesis at the seminary.

Dr. Wolf was called up to active service in May 1941and was commissioned a First
Lieutenant Infantry Chaplain assigned to the First Infantry Division (The Big
Red One), 16th Regiment. He completed, in absentia, his Ph.D. while stationed
with the U. S. Army at Camp Blanding, Gainsville, Florida. The oral exam was
waved and substituted with a written exam. The First Infantry Division
participated in the invasion of Africa from Morocco to Algeria. Chaplain Wolf
wrote and had mimeographed a short "salaam" note in Arabic to be scattered over
the landing zone by aircraft and handed out by soldiers. He spent the rest of
his war service in the Allies' African campaign directed against Field Marshal
Rommel's German troops. He wrote a memoir of his army experience, African
Asides, which had to be submitted to the U. S. Army Censors before publication.
When it was returned to him, the censors had one entire chapter crossed out and
each page stamped "Unauthorized for publication." Other chapters had entire
pages and many paragraphs crossed out. The uncensored bound typescript was
donated, along with other items, to the newly dedicated Chaplain's Archival
Museum and Library, Fort Jackson, South Carolina. |xiii

Dr. Wolf was the Executive Secretary of the Johns Hopkins Student YMCA after the
war. He became a special student, postdoctoral courtesy, under Dr. W. F.
Albright at the Near Eastern Seminary. In 1947, he accepted the Old Testament
professor position at the Chicago Lutheran Divinity School, Maywood, Illinois.
Most of his first students were World War II veterans. He was later promoted to
the Dean of Graduate Studies of the school. During his years at the Divinity
School, he founded the Biblical Colloquium and was secretary of the venerable
Chicago Society of Biblical Research. He became a member of the local branch of
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and later
became Vice President of the branch. He published a children's book on race
relations called Freddie. In 1948, Dr. Wolf spent the summer at an
archaeological site in South Dakota doing what is known as salvage archaeology.
Salvage archaeology is a dig required by law to check out possible ancient
Native American sites before a bridge, large dam, or other new construction
projects can get authorization to begin construction. This dig was where a new
dam was to be constructed on the Missouri River just north of the state capital,
Jefferson City. Native American remains and minor artifacts were uncovered by
the team and were turned over to the South Dakota State Museum. One time during
a storm the team had to take refuge in a large stone horse trough as a tornado
came through the dig site.

Dr. Wolf was awarded the Thayer Fellowship at the American School of Oriental
Research (ASOR) (now The W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research
(AIAR)) to study in Jerusalem (1950). He traveled alone to Jerusalem. His wife
arrived a few months later. She had the misfortune of being mugged in Cairo,
Egypt while in transit to Jerusalem. John Badeau, President, American University
of Cairo, took her in and assisted her in obtaining a replacement ticket to
travel to Jerusalem, as well as clothes and luggage.

During his year at the ASOR he participated in the excavation of Herod's Jericho
Palace and assisted with the Library of Congress cataloging of various
monasteries' collections. The Wolf's were specifically assigned to the Syrian
Monastery. My father was one of Dr. W. F. Albright's "men" until he was forced
to turn down a Fulbright Research Grant to compare Iron Age pottery in Egypt due
to his wife, my mother, having been diagnosed with a fatal brain cancer in 1952.
Dr. Albright never understood why my father had to turn down the scholarship.
After that, Dr. Albright never spoke to him. In 1952 with Dr. Albright no longer
a sponsor or a friend, Dr. Wolf had little hope of archaeological professional
advancement. He accepted the position of head pastor of the congregation at St.
Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church, Northwestern Ohio of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church of America, Toledo, Ohio. His wife died during the first year of
the family's arrival at Toledo.

Dr. Wolf remarried in 1954 to Betty Hartman, a third generation member of St.
Paul and a well-accepted radio and television personality. He served as head
pastor from 1953-1965. |xiv Some highlights of this Toledo period are the
establishment of an ecumenical project, the Annual Lecture at St. Paul,
featuring leading Catholic and Protestant scholars; a speaker at the dedication
of the National Islamic Center (now the Islamic Mosque and Cultural Center),
Washington, District of Columbia (D.C.); and active involvement with the small
Muslim congregation in Toledo which later became the Islamic Center of Greater
Toledo. In 1962 he was granted a sabbatical year.

Dr. Wolf took his sabbatical leave in 1964. He, his wife, and his youngest
daughter traveled in their Volkswagen bus from Hamburg, Germany to Jerusalem.
They were residents at the American School of Oriental Research (ASOR),
Jerusalem, most of that year. My father used this time to verify Eusebius'
Onomasticon's places' locations as well as assist with an archeological
excavation just outside of Jerusalem. He and his wife traveled throughout the
Middle East for several months. One trip through Iraq and Iran included time in
jail in Kurdistan while the Kurdistan officials decided whether they were spies.
My stepmother wrote a well-received book, Journey Through the Holy Land,
Doubleday Press, 1967, reprinted in 1968, about living and traveling in the
Middle East. She also reassembled pottery items using the shards from the
excavation site. In 1965 Dr. Wolf accepted an invitation to become the Director
of the Lutheran Institute for Religious Studies (LIFRS), a new continuing
education program for clergy and laity at Texas Lutheran College (now Texas
Lutheran University), Seguin, Texas. The program covered the area of three
Lutheran synods which served Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico. Many of
the programs were ecumenical seminars and weekend conferences for opening
dialogues between the many racial, ethnic, and social groups of the four states.
Some of these meetings became very confrontational. He was a member of the Board
of the Hispanic American Institute. From 1972-1974 Dr. Wolf was active in the
Texas Conference of Churches on Aging.

Dr. Wolf returned to Toledo, Ohio in 1975 as pastor at Hope Lutheran church. In
1977 he and his wife published a text and leader's guide on retirement, Ten to
Get Ready, and the accompanying guide, Leader's Guide. In 1980, Dr. Wolf retired
from Hope Lutheran Church. For the next twenty years, whenever he was in Toledo,
he served as interim pastor of Washington Congregation of the United Church, a
"Transdenominational" church.

During retirement Dr. Wolf and his wife spent the cooler months in Austin, Texas
and the warmer months in Toledo. In 1990 he completed a biography of his
grandfather, George Wolf, who was an ordained minister who had served in Ohio,
Indiana, North Dakota, and California. Dr. Wolf was active in aging and
retirement issues. He taught many ten-week courses in the Austin and Toledo
senior centers as well as the Austin Lifelong Learning Institute. He also was
active in the Gray Panthers and participated in picketing the United States
President Reagan's White House Conference on Aging at Washington, D.C. In 1999
they sold the Austin house and began permanent residence in Toledo. He and his
wife became the only non-black members of Ascension Lutheran church where they
worshiped the remainder of their lives. His wife died in 2001 and Dr. Wolf died
in 2004. |xv

Dr. Wolf enjoyed research, writing, and publishing. His publications including
articles, book reviews, and sermons have appeared in many Lutheran papers and
journals. He published articles (popular and learned) in many non-Lutheran and
sectarian journals. These include, but are not limited to: The Moslem World (now
Muslim World), The Jewish Quarterly Review, The Journal of Biblical Literature,
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, The Journal of the Chicago Society of Biblical
Research, Biblical Archaeology, Interpretation, Adult Leadership, American
Sociological Review, Christian Century, and The Christian Advocate. He also
contributed articles in the books The Interpreter's Dictionary to the Bible,
Supplement to the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Studies, and The
Making of Ministers.

Dr. Wolf's books include a three-volume series, Nineteenth Century Lutherans in
Northwest Ohio and Southeast Michigan; Biography of Rev. George Wolf, H.P.;
Biography of Nathaniel Carter: First Joint Synod Negro Pastor; Biography of
Marmaduke Carter, the son of Nathaniel Carter who was also a Lutheran Pastor;
Freddie, a children's book; and The Onomasticon of Eusebius Pamphili: Compared
with the Version of Jerome and Annotated. |xvi EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA AND THE
ONOMASTICON 1

Introduction

Eusebius Pamphili, better known as Eusebius of Caesarea, had the encyclopedic
interests of ancient scholars. Although popularly known as "The Father of Church
History" because of his ten volumes on the history of the Christian Church from
New Testament times to just before the Council of Nicea, Eusebius was an omnibus
writer. "His erudition would be remarkable in any age; the versatility of his
studies is amazing and posterity owes him a heavy debt." 2 His works are used by
students in many disciplines. At least twenty-nine or thirty works are known by
name, of which about twenty are extant or preserved almost fully in some
translation.

Even the classification of these works is difficult. Foakes-Jackson calls
Eusebius a chronologer, a theologian, a biblical student, a topographer of
Palestine, an historian, and an apologist. The editor of the newest translation
of the Church History, Deferrari has six classifications: historical,
exegetical, apologetic, doctrinal, letters, and homilies. Lake gives no
classification except a possible chronological division of four periods in
Eusebius' life: early period, 303-313, 313-325, and after Nicea. Of the early
period only Adversus Hieroclem is extent, but other apologeti, and historical
works belonged to this period. Of the second, the same two types of writings
dominate. The Chronicon or World History survives in an Armenian and a Latin
translation. The Preparatio Evangelica is fully extant, while the Demonstratio
Evangelica is about half complete in our present texts. During the last great
period of persecution of the Christians by Rome there must have been a
devastating burning of Christian books, and the library of Caesarea would have
been a principal target although no literary reference to this tragedy remains.
The renowned Church History or Ecclesiastical History (Historia Ecclesiastica),
originally with only eight books, belongs to the period between the Edict of
Milan and the Council of Nicea. The study of Palestinian Martyrs also comes from
this period of improved church-state relations. After Nicea there are many
writings on Emperor Constantine, Eusebius' commentaries on Old and New
Testament, his geographical works and some theological and apologetic works.
Except for the first three parts of his geographical writings, at least
fragments of all the works from this last period survive, attesting the more
favorable circumstances of the Church. As an historian Eusebius bridges the gap
in our history from the Book of Acts to the Council of Nicea. Foakes-Jackson
compares his importance to that of Josephus who does the same for the
inter-testamental history of the Jews.3 Both were wide readers and often used
their sources uncritically. As scholars, favored with patronage from Roman
rulers, they had access to books and other political and military sources not
open to all. Although called "historians" both wrote their histories as
apologies for their faith. Neither is as complete as modern scholarship would
desire, but despite the many faults and lacunae they remain our only written
sources for the history of their respective periods. The historical writings of
both are not only similar in origin, nature and purpose, but are approximately
equal in length. |xvii

Neither Josephus nor Eusebius was a fanatic defender of the faith. They can
hardly be claimed by one sect or party, yet their influence on their respective
rulers and on their co-religionists can not be ignored or minimized. Josephus
was considered a traitor or "Quisling," while Eusebius was called "heretic." He
was involved in the Arian struggle. He was sympathetic to Arius and some of his
best friends were Arians even if he himself were not theologically an Arian. In
an attempt to mediate the difficulties and to hold to a middle of the road
theology himself, he lost his opportunity for sainthood. His contemporaries
could not agree on his orthodoxy. The controversy over his theological position
continued after his death among other church historians and theologians, even
though he signed the Nicene Creed and the anathema decreed upon Arius.4 At the
Council of Tyre in 335 he was accused not merely of heresy but of apostasy since
he apparently had escaped the persecutions of the first decade of the fourth
century unscathed. His later writings seem to be orthodox, but the Arians still
used him. He suffered even a greater loss of reputation when the Iconoclasts
quoted him at the second Council of Nicea and forced the more orthodox to attack
him severely. His reputation in the East never recovered after the Photius
schism, but St. Jerome in the West admired him and is greatly responsible for
the survival of his writings. Details of the controversy as well as summaries of
his many writings are not pertinent in this Introduction, but the classic
Smith's Dictionary of Christian a Biography is still a good survey.

Life of Eusebius The name Eusebius is a common one. At least forty
contemporaries are called by this name. Another famous church father is Eusebius
of Nicomedia. St. Jerome also occasionally used the name Eusebii. Therefore, the
author of the Onomasticon is distinguished from the others by three epithets.

Because he was the bishop of Caesarea in Palestine for a number of years he is
often called Eusebius of Caesarea. Some authors call him Eusebius "the
Palestinian" which may refer to this same fact of his bishopric or perhaps hint
of his origin and birth. He himself chose and preferred the name Eusebius
Pamphili after his teacher and friend, Pamphilius, the martyr. No biography of
Eusebius of Caesarea exists from contemporary times. It is believed that his
successor Acacius, bishop of Caesarea, wrote one, but it is no longer extant.
The place and the year of his birth are unknown. Earlier scholars suggested his
birth was between 275 and 280. More careful recent scholarship places the date
earlier, between 259 and 265.5 There is no evidence that he was not a
Palestinian and perhaps even a native of Caesarea itself. His parents were not
Jewish, but again all proof that they were Christian is lacking. Arius called
him "brother" to Eusebius of Nicomedia but this probably reflects Christian
usage or theological kinship rather than blood relationship.

Little is known of his youth and early training. But he soon became a student in
the theological school of Caesarea founded by Origen. He studied under
Pamphilius. Their relationship became more than that of student to teacher. They
were friends and co-workers. Both were lovers of books and admirers of Origen.
They probably added new books to the illustrious library gathered together at
Caesarea by Origen during the last twenty years of his life. The theological,
biblical |xviii and exegetical tradition of Origen was most influential on
Eusebius. Apparently about 296 when still in Palestine as a student, Eusebius
had his first glimpse of Constantine. The action of Eusebius during the great
persecution is a matter of debate and much speculation. There is no doubt that
during part of the time he was absent from Caesarea. But he visited the
imprisoned Pamphilius sometime during the period 307-310. There is a suggestion
that he was arrested and held briefly himself in 309. He also reports that he
witnessed the deaths of other martyrs in Tyre and elsewhere. After the death of
Pamphilius in February 310, he fled to Egypt. It is suggested that he may have
been arrested a second time (or for the first time). He was released when peace
was restored in 313 and he returned to Caesarea. As noted above he was accused
at the Council of Tyre in 335 of betraying the faith and of making the pagan
sacrifice in order to survive. He did not suffer injury in the persecution it is
true, but no evidence was produced in 335 or since to prove his supposed
apostasy.

Shortly after 313 he became bishop of Caesarea. When he was ordained a deacon or
priest is unknown. Some suggest he was not ordained at all until elected bishop.
In 314 a brief persecution flared up under Licinius but it did not affect
Palestine and Egypt. In 315 Eusebius is known as one who has been bishop for
some time already. About 318 the Arian troubles began to come to a head. He was
chairman of the Council of Nicea (the term president is deliberately avoided
here) in 325. He and Constantine seem to have agreed on policy for the most
part. As a moderate he felt the church could have room for both the followers of
Arius and of Athanasius. He usually voted, however, with the majority. But after
Nicea he spent much effort to prevent the complete alienation of the Arians from
the mainstream of the Church. There is no record of his stand on the Easter
controversy. Eusebius described some of the pomp of the Council in De Vita
Constantini. He played a large role in all the proceedings and sat at
Constantine's right even though Rome, Alexandria and Antioch outranked Caesarea.

Eusebius was bishop of Caesarea for almost twenty-five years. In 330 he turned
down the opportunity to become bishop of Antioch. He attended the Council of
Antioch in 331 and the Council of Tyre in 335. Similarly he was active in the
Synods of Jerusalem and Constantinople in the same year. He was the chief orator
for the 30th anniversary of Constantine's reign. This panegyric was later
attached to his Life of Constantine. Eusebius remained high in the regard of
Constantine and was a close advisor to him at least from 325 on, if not as early
as 313. Constantine died in 337 and Eusebius shortly after in 339 or 340 at
about eighty years of age. His successor as bishop of Caesarea was present at
the Synod of Antioch in 341.

Caesarea

Caesarea Palestine was located on the coast of Palestine in the Sharon plain.
Its ruins at Qeisariyeh are eight miles south of Dor and about thirty miles
north of Jaffa. It had been the capital of Judea and the seat of Roman
procurators after the time of Herod until 66 A.D. It was the metropolis of
Christian and Byzantine Palestine and seemed to have served after 70 A.D. as the
ecclesiastical capital.6 |xix

Herod the Great began to build a new Hellenistic city on the site of Strato's
Tower in 22 B.C. Strato's Tower was a relatively insignificant town with its
beginning perhaps in the Persian period. It is mentioned by Zenon in the middle
of the 3rd century B.C. Caesarea Sebaste was at least twelve years in the
building and was consecrated to Augustus in 13 B.C. Josephus gives us details of
the glory and grandeur of Herod's Caesarea in his Antiquities XV, 9, 6 and Wars
I 21, 5-8. The public buildings were in the magnificent Hellenistic-Roman style.
The whole area was well irrigated by aqueducts and drainage canals, and remained
a garden spot for years, until neglect and economic reverses gave it back to the
sand. At the time of Jesus' birth Caesarea was at its zenith. In 1961 an
inscription with the name of Pontius Pilate was found in the theatre
excavations.7 The Jews of Caesarea were among the first victims of the First
Revolt's suppression. Vespasian was acclaimed emperor at Caesarea in 69 A.D. and
in 70 A.D. Titus brought the temple spoils to Caesarea. The city was expanded
further in the 2nd Century A.D. New aqueducts, new roads and monuments were
erected and the city became a colonial capital and shortly thereafter a
metropolis with the privilege of coining its own money. By the end of that
century there was a Christian bishop in Caesarea along with a famous rabbinic
school. In the third century a colony of Samaritans was established. In the
Byzantine period, fourth to sixth centuries, Caesarea reached new heights
rivaling that of Herod. In 639 Arabs conquered the city and brought an end to
Roman rule. For some 460 years the Moslems controlled the city and used its port
for commercial and military expansion. The Crusaders and the Moslems battled
over Caesarea many times and in 1291 its destruction was complete. Thereafter it
was only a site for temporary habitation by squatters as the dust, sand and
malaria took over. In the nineteenth century Moslems from Bosnia were resettled
by the Turks near the ruins of the Crusader city. Between 1937 and 1940 the
Jewish colony Kibbutz Sedot Yam was established near the Roman ruins. The glory
of ancient Caesarea intrigued the colonists and since that time many
archaeological efforts have been exerted toward the recovery of Herodian,
Byzantine and Crusader remains.

Already in 1932 a synagogue was reported near the sea. In 1945 and later it was
excavated. It has a history from the Roman period to the Arab conquest. Italian
archaeologists began digging in the Herodian area about 1959, with special
attention to the theatre. In 1960 the Link expedition to the port was carried
out. The large scale Israeli Department of Antiquities excavation began in 1960
in the Crusader area. Excavation continues apace. The history of the city is
being refined by these continuing archaeological endeavors. Perhaps the grand
temple of Augustus has been found along with many other Herodian foundations.
One large Byzantine establishment may even turn out to be Origen's library. The
Crusader fortress and cathedral have been cleared and it has been recognized
that much of Byzantine Caesarea was obliterated by the rebuilding of the
Crusaders. |xx The Onomasticon

It was in the flourishing Roman-Byzantine city of Caesarea that bishop Eusebius
wrote or compiled his four part geographical work, of which only the last, the
Onomasticon, survived the exigencies of time. According to the preface, the
three lost works were in some way preparatory for the Onomasticon if not fully
incorporated into it. Wallace-Hadrill gives these high sounding titles to the
first three works: 1) Interpretation of Ethnological Terms in the Hebrew
Scriptures, 2) Chorography of Ancient Judea with the Inheritance of the Tribes,
3) Plan of Jerusalem and of the Temple with Memories relating to the Various
Localities.8 The first was a translation or transliteration of Hebrew proper
names into Greek. This does not seem to have been much more than a skeletal
outline of proper names based on the Hexapla. Whether it included an etymology
of the place-names (and perhaps some personal names) as in the more technical
sense of an onomastical list cannot now be determined.9 Such a list is Jerome's
Interpretation of Hebrew Names which is based on Philo and Origen. Undoubtedly
Eusebius had their lists and those of others, both Jewish and Christian. The
second was a list or description of ancient Judea arranged by tribes. This was
of course based on the tribal lists of Numbers and Joshua. It is reasonable to
suspect that almost all of this has been incorporated bodily into the final work
since one of the things the Onomasticon treats most thoroughly is the tribal
designation of each place based on the Greek text of the tribal divisions. There
is some inconclusive discussion as to whether this description accompanied a map
or was only a map. There is a map attached to the 12th century Latin manuscript
of Jerome's Onomasticon in the British Museum which could be derived from
Eusebius' map, if such a map existed.10 The third was a descriptive plan of
Jerusalem and the Temple area. In the Onomasticon many proper names of areas in
and around Jerusalem are separately identified and described, especially some
with New Testament significance. Probably this information was closely related
to the original plan for the complete work. The rediscovery of the HolyCity by
Constantine and St Helena was responsible for this renewed interest. The fourth
part is the Onomasticon itself, which was completed about 330 A.D. or shortly
before. Several facts pertain to the problem of settling the date. It is
dedicated, as is the Church History, to Paulinus, who retired as bishop of Tyre
before the Council of Nicea (325), and died in 330. That gives the latest
possible date. On the other hand, the Greek text notes none of the Constantinian
churches, of which Eusebius knew and about which he wrote in other works (so
that architects and archaeologists use his works as primary sources for the
Constantinian foundation). Jerome, however, places the Onomasticon late in
Eusebius' career. Taken together, these facts suggest that Eusebius dedicated it
to Paulinus after his retirement as bishop of Tyre. In the Greek Vatican
Manuscript the Onomasticon is entitled "Concerning the Place-names in Sacred
Scripture." The Latin does not contain such a precise title. In general, the
book is a geographical bible dictionary within certain stated limitations.
(These were breached by later editorial additions and marginal glosses.) With a
few exceptions the text confines itself to the Holy Land as proposed in the
preface. This of course counters the plan to give all place-names of |xxi Holy
Scripture, since among others the cities which Paul visited are missing. The
preface also proposes that cities and villages are to be noted, but the present
Greek and Latin texts include also wadies, deserts, mountains, districts and
even an occasional personal and idol name. Almost 1000 items, largely from the
Old Testament and from the first 6 books, are recorded, of which about 400 are
sufficiently described to warrant an attempt at localization.11 Already in the
time of the Survey of Western Palestine, Conder claimed to have identified
300.12 The arrangement of the book is according to the Greek alphabet from Alpha
to Omega. Since the Greek letters do not follow the Semitic alphabet there are
some doublets as well as some transcriptional errors, some of which were from
the Septuagint LXX (hereafter LXX). Jerome in the Latin had to indicate some of
the places where the three alphabets diverge. In the present text - A - takes up
almost one quarter of the entire length of the book. Judah is the primary area
detailed, especially in sections -A- and -B-.

Within each alphabetic division, the place-names are arranged according to the
order of the biblical books in the Septuagint, beginning with Genesis. Numbers
and Deuteronomy are often linked together as one subdivision. In smaller
alphabetic sections the Pentateuch is made the first heading. The book of
Leviticus is not referred to (see Appendix III). The other major divisions are
Joshua, Judges, Kings and the Gospels. I Chronicles, Job, Maccabees and the
Prophets are usually subsumed under Kings.

II Chronicles is rare and some of the place-names of I Chronicles are omitted,
but most of these were paralleled in earlier lists. Esther and Daniel are not
involved, probably because the majority of place-names in them are outside of
the proposed territorial scope of the column. The greatest geographic lacuna
seems to be Ezra-Nehemiah. In addition, Rabbakkuk, Haggai, Malachi, Ruth,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Lamentations are omitted although none of these has a
strong topographical orientation. There are only one or two, sometimes
questionable, items from Psalms, Job, Song of Solomon, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah,
Nahum, Zephaniah and the Acts. The New Testament Epistles and the Book of
Revelation are almost completely ignored. Except for Maccabees none of the
apocrypha or pseudepigrapha appears (see Appendix III).

Method and Sources The treatment of each place name almost seems whimsical,
varying from one or two words to a whole page. The simplest entries are "tribe
of..." or "lot of..." and "station (camp) in the desert." Other simple notations
are the listing of the variant readings from one of the columns of the Hexapla.
Significantly for textual criticism (see below) the two longest entries are both
out of the supposed geographical limits, namely Ararat and Babel. Both are
padded with direct quotations from Josephus' Antiquities. The longest legitimate
entry is Beersheba.

Seven or eight items appear with more or less regularity in the Onomasticon
usually in the same artificial order. This arrangement is not at all conducive
to great literary style and the translation does not attempt to smooth things
out. Eusebius is not noted for style even in his Church History. In the present
work, as we seem to have it, it is the work of an archivist who accumulated
|xxii miscellaneous facts. There may be also in these items material for
literary criticism. The items that occur are as follows:

1. A word for word quotation of the biblical text of the Hexapla with some
allusion to variant readings.

2. A generalized location of the place in tribal or provincial area which may or
may not be contemporary to the editor.

3. A summary of the events or event associated with the place, with any Gospel
allusion usually coming at the end as an addendum.

4. A quotation of or reference to other authorities such as Josephus.

5. A specific location in reference to the fourth (?) century towns and roads,
with or without indication of distance and direction.

6. A modern name of the place and whether still inhabited or in ruins along with
reference to present memorials or tombs.

7. Notations about the present inhabitants (pagan, Christian, Jewish, Samaritan)
and some of their activities.

8. Reference to similarly sounding names in "other" regions.

9. Reference to Roman garrisons and forts.

There can be little doubt that Eusebius based his work on the text of the
Hexapla,13 that great compilation in six columns of the current variant Greek
texts which brought them into conformity with the Hebrew (which appears as
column 1). Caesarea was the place in which Origen produced the Hexapla. The text
of the Onomasticon uses the transcriptions of the Hebrew into Greek letters
(Col. 2) more often than any other Greek forms. Reference to Aquila (Col. 3),
Symmachus (Col. 4), Theodotion (Col. 6), and Origen (Col. 5) in the text may
also be wholly from the Hexapla, although Col. 5 would represent other Greek
manuscripts of the Old Testament. A few of the Hexaplaric annotations are
marginal glosses later than the 4th century.

If Eusebius knew Hebrew he did not utilize the Masoretic text, and unlike
Jerome, was dependent upon the Hexapla. Some think there is use of simple Hebrew
by Eusebius in the Demonstratio Evangelica but this Hebrew could also be derived
from Philo and Origen. The few references in the Greek version of the
Onomasticon to "in Hebrew" could all be references to Col. 1 or 2 of the Hexapla
and require no great knowledge of either Hebrew language or texts. As noted
above they could be glosses or a later editorial addition. The occasional
etymological notations and the frequent quotations of the interpretations of
Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion could also be accounted for in the same ways.
Some of the etymologies found in the Masoretic text in Hebrew are not utilized
by the Onomasticon.

Additional information based on the Bible includes the lists of Levitical cities
and the cities of refuge, as well as the stations of the desert. Occasionally
there is added reference to the capture of the place by Joshua and the
subsequent killing of its king, or the fact that the tribe to whom the place was
allotted was unable to dispossess the original inhabitants and so take
possession of their territory. Three times the Samaritan founding of a city by
those transported by the Babylonians is noted. |xxiii

Often the generalized location of the place is solely the biblical location. The
tribal allotments are fairly completely recorded. Of course, Eusebius is
confused as much as modern scholars about the real status of border towns or
other towns listed in different tribal territories according to diverse texts.
For much of this localization Eusebius must have had first hand and personal
knowledge of the country, although certainly not as thorough as that of Jerome.
The Greek text is more detailed and accurate in the location of sites in the
central hill country than elsewhere. Perhaps this was because Eusebius, as
bishop of Caesarea, frequently traveled to Jerusalem and also because his
earlier sources were produced there in Jewish circles.

Topographic references are found in his other works. So we find in Demonstratio
Evangelica Bethlehem (I, 1; vii, 2), Mt. of Olives (iv, 18); in De Vita
Constantini Bethlehem (iii, 41f), Mt. of Olives (iii, 41), Jerusalem (iii,
25-40), Mamrē (iii, 51); in De Laudibus Constantini Bethlehem (ix, 17), Mt. of
Olives (ix, 17), and in Theophania Jerusalem (iv, 18). These are but a small
sample. In his Church History allusions to topography and geography are
especially frequent in the first two books. Brief topographical notes are
recorded also in some of his commentaries. The famous library at Caesarea and
the library of Bishop Alexander in Jerusalem were treasure houses of source
materials for Eusebius, especially in his Church History and Demonstratio
Evangelica.14 Anonymous sources seem to be referred to with "it is said" or
"they affirm" but whether these were written records or local oral traditions
cannot be determined. Josephus is quoted twelve times. The commentaries of
Origen and the writings of Paulinus were also referred to. Roman administrative
lists, maps, charts and military documents have also influenced the final
recension of the text, but at what date is unclear. The two early fourth century
itineraries, the Antoninus and the Bordeaux, are very close to Onomasticon and
all three may depend on a common source. Paula and Jerome, of course, used the
Onomasticon as one of several sources for their travels. The Roman road system
was well organized and charted.15 Many of the milestones of the first three
centuries must have survived into the fourth even though it was the custom of
each emperor to install new markers as a kind of memorial to his reign. For the
most part distances seem to be according to mileposts. The slight divergence
between Jerome and Eusebius, which is often only one mile, can be largely
accounted for by the fact that a site is seldom so small as to be only at one
milestone and also that in seventy-five (or more) years the roads and starting
points normally would change slightly. The Tabula Peutinger, a kind of road map
of the Roman Empire, is perhaps contemporary with Eusebius (possibly a little
earlier) even though all our extant manuscripts are medieval. A check of some of
the roads suggests that it or its forerunner was a source for the Onomasticon.
For example, on the coastal road, Eusebius notes every point from Sidon to
Ostracine except Apollonia. From Damascus to Petra on the "King's Highway" he
has all except three non-biblical stops, but adds the three biblical towns
Madaba, Dibon and Heshbon. From Caesarea to Jerusalem nothing is missing. There
is no doubt that the twenty-eight places located by means of two fixed points
and a milestone, as affirmed by Martin Noth, are on the Roman roads.16 The
formula is either "in the border of city a x miles from city y" or "going from
city z toward city b |xxiv at sign x." Sometimes a compass direction is added.
Occasionally the distance is not in terms of miles, but of the number of days
needed for the journey (see Appendix V).

Another method of localization is from a fixed point, with a distance and
sometimes a direction but with no definite road outlined. The city is usually
the datum point for location both by distance and by region. There are 226
common distances of which 190 are based on a city and only thirty-six on some
other locality. Similarly ninety-three directions appear of which seventy-four
are oriented on a city and only nineteen on some other fixed point.17 The four
major cities of reference are Eleutheropolis, Jerusalem, Legeon, and Hesbon.18
In addition there are ten city regions in which villages are located, the more
important being Eleutheropolis, Jerusalem, Diospolis, Diocaesarea, Sebaste 19
and Neapolis (see Appendix VIII). In addition to the use of the Roman road
system and the city regions, localization is also made by the use of the
expressions "near," "around," "not far from," "extending up to," "between x and
y," "along side," "midway between a and y" (see Appendix IX). Distance is also
variously recorded as "separated from," "distant from," "going up to," "going
into," "going down," "along the road between" (see Appendix V). There is a
possibility that different sources were used and so reflect themselves in the
various methods of localization. It is quite possible that each editor had his
own style for locating a contemporary site or tradition. When the Onomasticon
has been programmed through a computer it may be possible to isolate clearly
these editorial additions. This would also be true of Latin translation of
various Greek terms (see Appendices I and IX).

It must be remembered that Eusebius was writing for his contemporaries and some
knowledge of the country and its oral traditions of the time could be assumed
even though modern scholars might wish for more specific information. The
different editors may have utilized other oral traditions and travelers'
information as well as their own personal experiences and additional written
sources. Priests and bishops from other areas of the Holy Land would naturally
exchange road information in the 4th century just as tourists and pilgrims do
today.

Most important is the data indicating the fourth century status of the site.
(This assumes Eusebius is the major redactor, but the variety of terms used may
reflect different traditions and strata.) Several Greek words are used for
"exists," "remains," "is still," as well as several synonyms for "called," or
"named," and "pointed out" or "shown." There is also the reference to present
inhabitants and importance which can be checked out in other literature and by
archaeological excavation. At least two hundred items have a notation of fourth
century existence of which three quarters are fairly well localized and
identified. A few sites are indicated as abandoned or in ruins. It is possible
that at times topos as well as eremos represents a ruined site (cp. Galgala 66:4
where both words are used together).

Among the incidental facts given is the religious constituency of a town. Anaia
(26:9, 14), a double village, is a Jewish village which has a companion
Christian settlement. There are eleven wholly Jewish villages; three Christian,
one Samaritan and one Ebionite recorded in the text (see Appendix II). Heathen
shrines are reported in at least three places. Idols are mentioned at least ten
times. A special interest is shown in tombs and memorials without any critical
analysis of contradictory items such as the various traditions for the location
of the tomb of Habakkuk |xxv (70:22, 88:26, and 114:15). Tombs of the Maccabees,
Mary, Abraham, Haran, Rachel, Joseph, Joshua, Jesse, and David are mentioned.
Again these traditions may be from several editors' hands. Jerome remarks on
five churches built in the 4th century (see Appendix I).20

Usually the last item to be noted is the presence of a fort or Roman garrison.
There is a very close parallel to much of the material gathered in the Notitia
Dignitatum which dates from slightly later than Jerome's translation of the
Onomasticon. The Notitia Dignitatum or a similar work must have been used for
the final recension.

Manuscripts, Editions and Translations The basic manuscript for the Onomasticon
is Codex Vaticanus, Gr. 1456 which dates from the 11th or 12th century. For the
most part the hand is clear but there are still many errors, corruptions and
lacunae. According to a notation it once was in the Library at Sinai. It seems
to be in a direct line from the original Greek. Lagarde and Klostermann used
this as their textus receptus.

I was privileged to check this manuscript in the Vatican Library. It is
contained in a volume of onomastica and is on pages 2 - 53. The ink is dark and
clear except for two faded pages 9 and 18. All the pages are single columned
except for the recto and verso of 19 which is a palimpsest and has the text in
two columns. The scribal hand seems to be the same throughout, although some of
the alphabetic divisions and biblical sections have been added later by
different hand and different ink. Alphabetic and biblical headings are usually
on the same line. Occasionally they are in red ink. The point is regularly used
after the place name and usually at the end of the phrase or sentence entry.
Prepositions and articles are usually not separated from the following word.

Dependent upon this manuscript is Codex Parisinus Gr 464 which dates from the
16th century. These two manuscripts were edited and published by Lagarde in
1870. The second, Codex 464, was the sole source used by Bonfrere in 1631 and
1659 for his edition of the Onomasticon of Eusebius. The translation of Jerome
was made about 390 A.D. He recognized errors in Eusebius and used his knowledge
of Hebrew to correct the transliterations and some of the etymology. He also
corrected some of the place descriptions and locations. Already in 389 Jerome
has used some of this material in his Hebrew Questions, which we have utilized
from time to time in the notes. The reference to this volume in the Latin was
probably not original with Jerome but cross reference by a scribe in the 5th
century or later. Jerome has more etymologies than Eusebius' Greek text, but
this information was ready at hand from his Interpretation of Hebrew Names,
which is incorporated in the notes of this present volume. As noted above Jerome
was familiar with the Constantinian and post-Constantinian church foundations.
By various counts between forty-five and fifty-five additional names appear in
Latin even when allowing for obvious scribal lacunae of Vaticanus 1456. |xxvi

It was through Jerome's Latin version that European scholars and pilgrims became
acquainted with the Onomasticon. According to the Latin preface there had
already been at least one earlier translation into Latin. Several 8th and 9th
century Latin manuscripts have survived which were used rather freely by
Klostermann to emend Vaticanus. These are the Monacensis Lat. 6228, Codex
Sangallensis 133 and 130, and Bambergensis B iv 19. The Latin is really not an
exact translation and Klostermann was a bit overly optimistic with his
emendations of the Greek. Latin editions of the Onomasticon have been prepared
by Martinainay in 1699 and by Vallarsi in 1735 and 1767.

Syriac translations of Eusebius' works were made very early and often Syriac
writers added new important information to the text. One early geographic work
called, "The Book of the Figure of the World" included the Onomasticon as its
fourth part. Unfortunately this is lost and known only by literary sources, but
could it possibly be the four geographic works of Eusebius noted in the Greek
preface? A manuscript of the 14th century was discovered and partially edited in
the early 1920's.21 This is a rather slavishly literal work following the Greek
word order and rendering every article, and will be valuable for textual
criticism if and when a new Greek edition is published.

Procopius of Gaza in his Commentary on the Octateuch frequently quotes the
Onomasticon's Greek text. These quotations often confirm or correct the
Vaticanus text. Already in 1716 Reland had recognized the usefulness of
Procopius in the study of the ancient monuments of Palestine. Thomsen and
Klostermann rely heavily on an eleventh century Procopius manuscript. The Madaba
Map is sometimes appealed to for emending transcriptions but this is a dubious
procedure. The earliest critical edition of the Onomasticon was that of 1862 by
Larsow and Parthey, followed in 1870 by Lagarde (second edition 1887).
Klostermann's text appeared in 1904. So far the Onomasticon has not appeared in
the Migne series of Greek Church fathers although much of Eusebius has been
published there. It is about time for a new critical edition of the Greek and
Latin texts to appear. In 1931-1933 Melamed published his important critical
study of the Onomasticon in a Hebrew journal Tarbiz. He also translated the
Onomasticon into Hebrew. The present volume is the first modern translation of
the Onomasticon into a western European language, the first ever in English.

Pilgrims

Already before Constantine, interest in the places of the prophets and the sites
of the Savior's deeds had been aroused (Historia Ecclesiastica iv, 26, 14). Both
Clement of Alexandria and Origen showed scholarly interest in the Holy Land and
they as much as Constantine and St. Helena are responsible for the knowledge of
Palestine in the 4th and 5th centuries. Other pilgrims in the third century
followed Origen (Historia Ecclesiastica vi, 11, 2). Constantine's mother and
mother-in-law began the series of Christian pilgrimages to the Holy Land which
have never ceased even in time of hostilities. |xxvii Of first rank is the
Pilgrim of Bordeaux (ca. 332-333). This is so nearly contemporaneous with the
Onomasticon that one hesitates to posit any dependent relationship, but there
are many parallels. Both had the Bible as a common source and both probably
utilized an earlier Roman itinerary and perhaps some lists. It is quite possible
that the earlier "map" of Eusebius was known by the Pilgrim. Later scribes
probably corrected reciprocally these two works.

Paula (ca. 382) and Silvia (ca. 385) came in the time of Jerome and could easily
have known and used the Greek Onomasticon. From their time on there is no
reasonable doubt that the pilgrims were dependent upon the Onomasticon. There is
real evidence of such dependence by Aetheria, who may be the same as Silvia, on
the Onomasticon for places as well as forms of names.22 Even allowing for the
Bible as a common source, the Greek text was primary also. The earlier Latin
translation noted in Jerome's preface and that of Jerome could also have been in
the hands of this pilgrim.

After the turn of the 5th century, the rise of monasticism, the end of the
Christological controversies, together with the peace and security of the realm,
brought many pilgrims to the Holy Land. Some followed the example of Jerome and
remained, while others returned to their homelands. But a high percentage of
them valued highly the Onomasticon in one of its several versions. Next to the
Bible, it was their basic guide and companion. It "remained the vade-mecum of
the pilgrims to the time of the crusaders."23 The Madaba Map The Madaba Map has
been adequately studied by Avi-Yonah and by O'Callaghan.24 Their general
conclusions do not disagree with those of the first students of this mosaic map
of sixth century biblical lands found east of the Jordan. There is a very close
relationship of the Map legends to the Onomasticon. The map also parallels the
so-called Jerome map of medieval times which may have been derived from an
earlier Eusebius map or plan. The area of the map and of the Onomasticon is
approximately the same. Byblos is the most NW site for both. On the East the
line is Damascus and Bozrah. The Egyptian cities such as On and Memphis form the
SW limit. A very high proportion of the sites on the map are directly from the
text of the Greek Onomasticon, according to some estimates two thirds. This is
even more significant a figure than at first appears since the mosaic is a
Christian map depicting Gospel sites. Less than one fourth of the Old Testament
sites in the area appear on the Madaba Map. The division of tribal territory and
the boundaries of the Philistines also agree with the Greek text. In a few
instances the map even seems to follow the errors of the Greek text: for
Akrabbim, Anob, Thamna, Gedour, Bethaun, Adiathim, etc. In still fewer the
mosaicist follows an independent tradition: Emmaus, Geba, Ainon, Bethabara, and
Dalah. He also has a more detailed knowledge of post-Constantinian Jerusalem and
Palestina Secunda than the Onomasticon could be expected to reveal. Yet the
absence of monasteries indicates that the source of the map was prior in time to
the fantastic monastic tide.25 |xxviii For Garisim and Gebal the map apparently
records both traditions: the Jewish near Jericho and the Samaritan near Nablus,
which later the Greek Onomasticon emphatically denies as correct. In the few
instances where transcription only, not location, disagrees with the Greek of
the Onomasticon, it may be that the map reflects not a separate tradition but a
Semitic designer who did not always understand his Greek source. In addition to
the Onomasticon and its "map" (?) the mosaicists probably had access to one or
more pilgrim itineraries and to diocesan lists. This would be one explanation
for the non-biblical names appearing on the map, some of which are not entries
in our text, but serve as reference points only. The Madaba Map, as the
Onomasticon, has varied types of entries. Avi-Yonah notes four classes, three of
which probably derive directly from the Greek Onomasticon: 1) A simple place
name with no additions but properly located in tribal boundaries, 2) the sixth
century name and the biblical name, which parallels "there is now" or "it is a
village now called," 3) reference to churches and other monuments, 4) eleven
texts which refer to scriptural events. In groups 2 and 4 the correlation with
the Greek Onomasticon is almost 90%.

All the large walled cities with towers behind on the Madaba Map are called
"city," "large city," "famous city," "metropolis" by Eusebius. For the smaller
cities with only a front wall and four or five towers and for the larger
villages with three or four towers connected by a wall, there is no consistent
correlation with the Onomasticon's terminology. (Nor is there any consistency in
the various strata of the Onomasticon that can be checked out in the present
state of textual criticism and archaeological research.) Both Beersheba and
Ekron are called "large town" but are different as depicted on the map. Does
this imply Ekron had declined in the intervening centuries? Bethzur and Bethel
are both simply villages in Eusebius, but Bethzur is a large town on the map
while Bethel is small, having only two towers and the connecting wall. Does this
accurately record the changed fortunes?

Critical Study of the Onomasticon

Textual criticism of the Onomasticon began with Jerome. In his Hebrew Questions
he corrected not only the text but the facts of Eusebius. In the Latin version,
Jerome not only improved on the earlier anonymous Latin translation, but also
reviewed Eusebius and his own former conclusions. In correspondence and
commentaries over a twenty-year period Jerome corrected Eusebius as well as
checked the Greek text. Modern students must use these works of Jerome: Latin
versions of the Onomasticon, Hebrew Questions, Epistles 46 and 108 and
miscellaneous commentaries. The notes in this present volume include most of the
relevant materials from these texts. The Interpretation of Hebrew Names is
sometimes useful for checking transcriptions and/or transliterations and the
occasional etymology of the Greek text. The texts of many items from this are
also included in the notes to follow.

Whether Procopius of Gaza consciously emends and corrects the Greek text of the
Onomasticon or not, cannot be determined. But from the very beginning of modern
scholarship, his quotations of Eusebius have been used, e.g., by Roland,
Lagarde, Thomsen, and Klostermann. As noted above, the Madaba Map is not to be
considered a critical source. |xxix On the other hand, literary or source
criticism has seldom appeared regarding the Onomasticon. In antiquity the
authorship even of such a prosaic agglomeration of materials was taken for
granted. The witness of Procopius and Jerome, as well as that of others less
directly concerned, and the notations on ancient manuscripts were considered
sufficient proof of authorship. Not until Thomsen and Kubitschek in 1905 and
1906 began their argument over the streets and road network behind the
Onomasticon was any higher criticism applied, suggesting additions, glosses
etc.26 Kubitschek made much of the inconsistencies in distance, the apparent
placing of two different sites at the same milestone, assuming a roadway. He is
agnostic about Eusebius' use of itineraries, pilgrim reports (oral or written)
and suggests, although not directly, that these inconsistencies may reflect an
unscholarly card file system of recording all available information,
contradictory, reduplicative or not. In the reply Thomsen for the first time
admits possible glosses. He suggests that some of the Greek Onomasticon may have
been personal marginal notes on Eusebius' own manuscript (of onomastical lists,
his Onomasticon, Greek Bible manuscript and/or Hexapla) and never intended any
separate publication of the final redaction. According to this theory, as they
became unwieldy he arranged them in an alphabetic order (if an onomastical list,
this order may have been already established) and according to the books of the
Bible (or this arrangement could have been primary as in the Hexapla or some
onomastical lists and the alphabetic order thus secondary). After Eusebius'
death all such notes would be treasured by his students and although revered as
from his hand, nevertheless recognize as incomplete. One or more of his admirers
would try to complete it, correct it and make it worthy of the bishop of
Caesarea. The preface could be added in those days with no thought of
intellectual dishonesty. This revolutionary explanation for the contradictions,
doublets and inequities of treatment, as well as stylistic inconsistencies, was
forgotten for years and even the German school ignored it for a generation. As
late as 1943 Noth speaks as if one author and one date is to be accepted and
that Eusebius is the genuine author, not merely one of the last redactors. The
detailed and precise work of criticism by the Jewish scholar Melamed 27 in the
early 1930's has been neglected, probably because it was written and published
in Modern Hebrew long before Israel had become a state and modern Hebrew a
necessary language for biblical scholars. Published separately as an offprint it
made no new impact. The recent monumental biblical encyclopaedia published in
Israel has Melamed's own summary concerning the Onomasticon, but this too is in
Modern Hebrew. In the first part of his criticism Melamed notes that the Torah
and the Prophets are the source for the basic text rather than all the books of
the Bible as proposed in the preface. In the New Testament only the Four Gospels
are primary. He concludes that all other references to places cited in other
books, i.e., the writings and Acts are from a second hand, as probably also the
rare annotations from Maccabees. He notes some could well be omitted because in
Hebrew there is little typographical material in such books. But the absence of
reference to Ezra-Nehemiah, Leviticus (except Levitical cities) Daniel's sites
are probably considered outside the Holy Land as delimited in the preface (see
Appendix III). In the second part Melamed treats of doublets, of improper
entries (e.g., personal names, idols, etc.), of confusions and lacunae and notes
that not even all the place-names of Torah, Prophets |xxx and Gospels are
recorded. He emphasizes the obvious confusion of traditions, the conflation of
transliterations. Part three concerns the use of the Hexapla and the fifth
column of Origen. Curiously the annotations from the Former Prophets have many
references to Aquila. In the fourth part his criticism begins to take form.
Noting that not all the alphabetic sections are divided by the same biblical
divisions, he lists certain Old Testament texts which have been given exhaustive
treatment, e.g., Joshua 21, Numbers 33, I Kings 9:15, and Isaiah 60. He
concludes that originally only cities and villages were listed with some
biblical information but without any contemporary geographical details. All
mountains, which are not announced in the Greek preface, appear in the Greek
Onomasticon out of their proper biblical order. So also all stones and rocks are
not in their proper place. The Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee appear to be
appendages at the end of their respective sections. The idol Chemosh is out of
place. Further, when two similar entries appear with the second usually having
"another" after the name, the first is almost always where it should be in the
biblical order, while the second or "another" is properly entered only six
times. This suggests editorial additions. In the commentary on places which
include among other things, etymology, history, topographical identification
(both biblical and contemporary), allusion to versions, distances, roads and
other names, Melamed notes many variants and inconsistencies. Sometimes more
than one historical event is recorded in a single entry. Occasionally a
reference is given to Josephus but no event of history is recorded. There is a
stereotyped formula for many events in Joshua, such as "and killed its king" or
"did not drive out the former inhabitants (foreigners)." The notation "whence
David fled" appears almost as an afterthought. The lot of Benjamin is much
confused. Not all the cities of refuge are called such and they are variously
labeled. There is also no single formula by which fourth century [sic] existence
is indicated. As noted before the same distance from the same fixed point is
given for more than one place. (This could be accounted for by the quadrant use
of directions, but not if on the same road between the same two reference
points.) On the other hand, there are double entries for the same place giving
divergent localizations. Etymologies are rare, and as noted above, the obvious
ones in the Masoretic text, such as Bethlehem, Melchizedek, etc. are ignored. In
the Onomasticon only one place is from Mark and it appears also in Matthew.
There is only one extensive New Testament quotation, that from John. In all of
the Gospel entries some history is recorded. But many of the Old Testament names
with Gospel associations do not have any reference to the later history. When
they do it seems to be from a secondary hand. In twenty out of twenty-three New
Testament references there is still a clear tradition of the site at the time of
the editor's addition (or final redaction?). Therefore, only once is direction
given. Usually distance is also lacking. This of course could indicate that the
tradition of the Gospel sites was still too much alive to require more precise
localization and identification. The use of the formula "our Lord and God Jesus
Christ" and other Christological formulations reflects the fourth and fifth
century Christology. The name Jesus does not occur alone. In his conclusion,
Melamed sees the Onomasticon as basically a Jewish work from several Jewish
hands. In all he notes four stages of editorial work. In Tarbiz 28 he was
agnostic as to which was Eusebius' own contribution, suggesting perhaps he was
merely the final redactor who |xxxi Christianized an originally Jewish book by
adding Gospel details. A generation later in the Encyclopaedia 29 he allows more
to Eusebius as author and editor, at least giving him credit for more
topographical details, which of course were derived from itineraries, maps and
administrative lists, and all re-edited by his pupils and Jerome.

Above we have noted nine items that occur with more or less regularity and in
approximately that same order in many entries. Some lines seem obviously not
original, such as the extensive quotations of Josephus on Ararat and Babel. At
best such references would have been noted "Josephus affirms" or "of which we
read in Josephus." These quotations are infrequent and lengthy quotations rare.
It is therefore not too radical to assume these quotations are secondary
editorial and scribal additions. The infrequent references to Gospel events in
Old Testament entries are usually tacked on as if an afterthought. This suggests
that they are also secondary, but at this point we cannot prejudge Eusebian
authorship. Similarly the notation about Roman garrisons most frequently occurs
at the end of an entry and could readily be considered an editorial addition if
not a marginal gloss. As for the rest, there is the same dilemma faced by
biblical scholars. There is the same problem of authorship and sources. Is a
man, even bishop and scholar, who annotated and re-edits an older book, or who
conflates, even poorly, two or more sources, an author? Is he still the author
even if he is re-edited by his pupils? Both Amos and I Isaiah have been worked
over by their disciples, but nevertheless are usually considered to be the
authors of the major portion of their books. Is only the final redactor of the
Pentateuch ultimately the inspired author or is the author to be considered the
composer of the primary and longer source? Is the source Q or any other behind
the Synoptics the real author even though tradition calls Matthew, Mark and Luke
Gospel writers? Because there is no real literary style to the Onomasticon and
even his Church History is no masterpiece, it would be vain to attempt a
Wellhausenist literary analysis of sentences or paragraphs. It remains for a
programmed computer to read out traditional, conventional, phrased or words that
may be utilized to indicate separate hands. No doubt the basic schema or
framework of the Onomasticon was originally a Jewish compilation of place-names
in the Torah (and possibly also the Prophets). This probably was centered in
Jerusalem area. It may have been mediated to Eusebius through Origen and his
school with added textual information from the Hexapla. Whether the biblical
information on Old Testament places was in such a pre-Eusebian source or not
cannot be determined as yet. It is quite possible that Eusebius himself added
the Gospel items at the end of each alphabetic section of his source. A student
or later editors may have added the Gospel notes to the Old Testament
place-names in order to complete the Christianization of the book. Since the
topographical details seem to agree well with fourth century records and
archaeology, and since Christian tradition regards Eusebius as the father of
Palestinian geography, it seems reasonable to assume that he is responsible for
the topographical and historical statements in the majority of entries even
though he used, almost slavishly, certain Roman itineraries. The interest in
shrines and tombs could be from an earlier Jewish hand or from an earlier
distinct source available to our "author"-"editor." |xxxii

One must agree with Melamed that items out of their proper biblical order are
secondary. But at this point Thomsen may be more nearly correct than Melamed.
These could be marginal glosses, even from the hand of Eusebius, which pupils or
disciples incorporated, perhaps a bit carelessly into their copies in such a
manner as marginal glosses were included in New Testament manuscripts by
medieval scribed. Eusebius' study notes, questionings, etc. could thus have
gained validation which he would not have given them. Obviously by the time the
Greek copy and the early Latin version reached Jerome, the Onomasticon had been
to all intents and purposes complete as found in the Greek Vatican Manuscript
1456. Jerome corrected it on the basis of new sources and his personal knowledge
of Hebrew and of the land, and brought it up to date regarding fourth century
Christian churches. The Onomasticon as we now have it has a history of
development covering several centuries. It began as an onomastical list (perhaps
first only Levitical cities, cities of refuge and tribal allotments) as early as
Philo of Alexandria. In still Jewish hands it was expanded to include major
sites of the Torah and then of the Major Prophets. It is further enlarged by the
school of Origen with major additions of text, interpretations and variant
transliterations from what is now called the Hexapla. This is made into a
pilgrim's guide book to the Holy Land in the early fourth century by the friend
of Constantine and bishop of Caesarea. Eusebius' pupils incorporate minor
additions and are responsible for some of the doublets, perhaps from Eusebius'
own marginal notes. Jerome brought it up to date for the last quarter of the
fourth century A.D. Medieval copyists and scribes occasionally incorporated
other marginal notes, more Hexaplaric date and fleshed out the Josephus
quotations. The Onomasticon and Biblical Topography The average reader of the
Bible assumes that a place referred to in the Old or New Testaments still exists
somewhere in one of the countries of the Near or Middle East under the same name
and in approximately the same location. In his fancies, he is sure he could go
there promptly and find the precise place. One of the biggest disappointments of
the modern tourist-pilgrim is the conflicting opinions, the indeterminable and
even lost sites in Palestine. The scholar is likewise frustrated in his search.
The scientific student of biblical geography and topography is forced to face up
to many problems, to choose among many possibilities and claimants, and at times
to be honestly agnostic. Thus at least two or three sites are championed by
different persons for the authentic Emmaus. Many are the problems, sites and
arguments for (and even excavations of) Gilgal. Scholars are hard pressed to
determine if the seven references to Aphek represent six or seven different
sites with the same name or only one. In the most simple topographical name, the
historical geographer can have at least ten variant traditions about its
location, each with sub variants.

1. There is the biblical site as it was during biblical times. This may sound
simple enough to define, but the biblical texts may refer the same name to more
than one location. Likewise even within biblical times the settlement as well as
the name could wander from the original location. An explicit of this is
Bethnimra. The Early Bronze age city was at Tell Mustah. Across the road and
beyond the wadi to the north is the Iron Age Israelite site, Tell Bleibel. Down
the valley |xxxiii a short distance to the West is Tell Nimrin, the Byzantine
and medieval Arab site which retains the name. The present town of Shunat Nimrin
is adjacent to this tell toward the Jordan. In modern Israel this movement of
names is happening allover again. New settlements and kibbutzim are taking
biblical names, sometimes from a nearby tell, sometimes on the basis of a
biblical atlas or geography of the 30's, 50's or later, and other times
sentimentally chosen, but most frequently not exactly on the original site. The
exiles returning from Babylon confused the topographers in a similar manner.

2. The biblical site as Jewish tradition reported it is also multiple. Even the
rabbis quoted in the Talmud do not always agree.30 The Targum, Philo and
Josephus complicate the tradition enough, let along what happens to it in
medieval Jewish scholarship.

3. The first known Christian topographer, Eusebius, sought to identify the
biblical site as it was in biblical times. But it is already obvious that his
text is not always clear and that there are contradictory localizations for the
same place. The roads are not always clear, directions may involve the entire
quadrant of the compass, and spellings are confused. On top of that, the
tradition reported by Eusebius reflects at best a post-Old Testament, perhaps
even post-biblical, and therefore late decision.

4. The site as Jerome found it in the Jewish tradition is usually cited under
"The Hebrews affirm." This would be a fourth stream which might have been
utilized by Eusebius and still other early Christian topographers. This is not
always the same as the fifth.

5. This is the site as Jerome interpreted the text of the Scripture and the text
and traditions of the Onomasticon.

6. Both 4 and 5 may be quite distinct from the site as Jerome determined it by
his own personal experience and study. But even this sixth stream is complicated
since Jerome does not always agree with himself (or at least various Latin
editors did not agree). As even a good scholar in the 20th century should,
Jerome reserved the right to change his mind. His commentaries, Epistles 48 and
108, as well as Hebrew Questions do not always agree with the Latin
Onomasticon's text.

7. Because of our problems with the third through sixth possibilities there is
then a seventh to be accounted for. This is the site as Jewish (later Israeli)
and German (rarely French, English and American) scholars in the last two
centuries interpreted the data in Eusebius and Jerome. The ZDPV is full of
debates on this subject.31

8. After Eusebius came the full surge of pious pilgrims. Their reports of
shrines, tombs, churches, pagan remnants, and sites in general are often in
conflict with one another. Because of the exigencies of the times, names and
even whole districts were shifted (cf. Onomasticon on Garizin and Gaibel).

9. The crusaders developed a whole new Palestinian topography which is a study
in itself. For the most part they tended to concentrate all the important sites
within the small territory held by |xxxiv the Latins and so compressed one
tradition into another for the convenience of the pious as well as for their
safety.

10. Finally, the site in Moslem tradition and among Arab geographers marks the
first revival of scholarly study after the 4th century. Saarisalo 32 and others
suggest that Arab tradition of Old Testament sites is more reliable than
Christian tradition of New Testament sites. The site then as the first western
and European scholars determined it could be any of the preceding ten, depending
on the weight and worth given to each respective tradition by the investigators.
Unfortunately it is also fairly certain that they added new traditions as they
were misled by over helpful but ignorant guides who answered happily, but
erroneously, misleading questions in "pidgin-Arabic." This is perhaps an
eleventh claim with which we must reckon. The Onomasticon concerns primarily the
third through the seventh levels above. It is only a secondary source for the
first two, but still valuable. It is the first scientific work on biblical
topography extant, accumulating perhaps four to five centuries of tradition,
oral and written, into one complex, confusing and exasperating manuscript.
Despite its errors, lacunae and obscurities it must be used and has been used by
scholars since the time of Reland.

One reason for valuing this secondary source is simply chronology. Conder stated
it plainly: it is "a witness to survival of Hebrew nomenclature of the country
in the fourth century, even more perfectly preserved than now." 33 This same
argument is presently used for the textual value of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the
ones from other nearby caves. Yet, even Conder recognized that in the
Onomasticon "we see tradition not made but in the process of making." 34
Actually it is both. Eusebius has preserved for us Jewish traditions that may go
back beyond New Testament times, but he also has added his own fourth century
fact and fiction (plus later additions of editors and scribes) to the corpus of
topographical tradition which in not always reconcilable to the Bible. The
Onomasticon is more exact than the Bible itself, since the Scriptures do not
pretend to be geographical documents and do not attempt to make any specific
localizations on the basis of directions (the only exceptions being the tribal
boundary lists and such vague terms as "east of," "opposite" etc.).

It is most probable that the Onomasticon can be taken as a primary source for
the fourth century, although with further literary criticism and archaeological
comparison it may become a primary source for earlier centuries. "The
Onomasticon in any case seems to be an introduction to the knowledge of the
occupation of the land in the fourth Christian century. For his own time, and
only for this has the Onomasticon the value of an original important source for
us, since the situation made it possible for him to be exact on the places of
his own time" 35 The Deutschen Palestina Vereins has therefore taken Eusebius
seriously and for his own sake.36 Avi-Yonah based much of his study of the Roman
Map of Palestine (ca. 300) on the information in the Onomasticon and more
recently used it to develop the economic history of the Byzantine period.37
Those interested in New Testament sites and early Christian churches also have
utilized the Greek and Latin texts of the Onomasticon.38 |xxxv

Since according to Lapp, less than 2% of the ancient sites in Palestine are
excavated and none of these completely,39 surface sherding is requisite. Glueck
pioneered this work in Transjordan and the Negev. Others in Israel have
intensively surveyed smaller areas. Mittmann has outlined in his thesis the East
Jordan territory to the North. Besides the DPV others schools such as the École
Biblique, the ASOR (now the Albright Institute), the Franciscans and the
Department of Antiquity of Jordan and Israel have conducted sherding trips.
However, only ZDPV consistently publishes the results and no school, museum or
other agency coordinates or files the reports of the others, so much is lost and
not available to this study. The work of Glueck, Avi-Yonah, Mittmann and others
indicates that the late Roman and Byzantine periods were most prosperous.
Unfortunately Glueck aid not include a Byzantine map similar to that of Early
Bronze and Iron sites in Transjordan, but the count is almost astronomical for
sites that should be on such a map for Transjordan alone as a reading of
Glueck's volumes and the narrow territory of Mittmann's thesis indicate. These
surveys and others personally made or heard about by the author corroborate the
high number of sites reported in the Onomasticon as still inhabited in the 4th
century even if density of population figures are still not scientifically
precise. The area of Eusebius' competence seems to end at a line east and west
through the Northern tip of the Dead Sea and then going north along the ridge of
the Ammonite plateau. In south Judea, Moab and Edam he is less knowledgeable
even in his own topographical information of contemporary towns and garrisons.
He knows the hill country around Jerusalem best. The coastal plain and the
Jordan valley are adequately reported. Samaria and Galilee are fairly well
described. The area encompassed by the Onomasticon (even as outlined in the
Greek preface) is basically the Old Testament idealized boundary "from Don to
Beersheba." When Eusebius uses the term "Palestine" it is frequently
non-historical. It may even be anachronistic, as it has been since 1948 with the
establishment of the new state of Israel. The terms Samaria, Perea (called by
Jerome Transjordan after the biblical phrase), Galilee and Idumea all have
indefinable limits. Palestine Prima, Secunda, Tertia may at times be referred to
and if so will be noted in the separate entry's notes to follow. Part of the
confusion is the conglomeration of sources from various dates. As noted above
the city and its district are the basis for topography and these are more
important than the provincial descriptions. Melamed finds six Transjordanian
areas centered around cities: Susita, Pella, Amman, Heshbon, Kerak and Petra. In
the west there are twelve such centers according to him: Sepphoris, Tabor,
Bethshan, Acco, Caesarea, Sebaste, Diospolis, Jericho, Jerusalem,
Eleutheropolis, Hebron and Beersheba. Not all of these are important to the
Onomasticon as Appendices V, VI and VIII indicate.

Villages are well located by Eusebius in these city-districts. If our finding
them today is difficult, it is not so much the fault of the ancient writers as
of other factors. As in the 20th century, so in the 4th, a village was not a
single tell and a city was not a narrow spot at a milestone as some scholars
seem to assume. Tell Deir 'Alla, Franken points out, is only a small section of
the total location of Deir 'Alla as known to the natives today. To limit Livias
(Julius) to Tell er-Rameh |xxxvi even if it fits Eusebius closely is to be
unrealistic. Similarly Gadara is not merely the tell of Umm Qeis still inhabited
and bordered north and south by Roman theatres. Even though names may have
shifted they may often remain within the general district. Many of the towns are
listed on the border, not only in biblical tribal allotments but also in the
municipalities of the Onomasticon. Avi-Yonah in his map of Roman Palestine notes
the region of a city or town properly on the basis of; first, all the inhabited
places mentioned as belonging to it, second, all places whose localization is
determined by measurement from it, and third all territory watered by the
aqueduct (see Appendix V).40

Another difficulty in studying Eusebian topography has been the false assumption
that distance always indicates a town on a Roman road. However, important
villages and tells today are often indicated by mileage but are not on the main
road. There is no necessity to limit Eusebius' site to known Roman roads. Even
when he is measuring from and along a Roman road, the site may be indicated by
noting the point at which one takes off over the hills with or without benefit
of track or path to find that village (e.g., Bethel). Although the debate about
roads and Eusebius continues we must remember he was not writing a book about
Roman highways but at best utilizing a Roman map or garrison list to help him
locate biblical sites as best he could.

Text and archaeology will soon be able to check one another. Most of Eusebius'
fixed points of reference were important cities in the 4th century according to
other written sources and archaeology. But it is still not possible to check his
terminology or classification of towns and villages archaeologically. The use of
nouns and adjectives in Greek or Latin may reflect just as much an editor's
style or propensity as a change in fortune. After all, size is relative without
area and population measurements. Jerome is not at all consistent in the
translation of the Greek (any more than he is or should be in the Vulgate - see
Appendix IX). If Jerome were trying to indicate a change in significance by a
change in terminology, we may soon be able to check the facts archaeologically.
The corpus of Palestinian pottery is gradually being extended into the 4th
century through Caesarea, Araq al Emir and other pottery now that the Byzantine
levels are not considered dump to be bulldozed away to get down to Israelite
levels. But as far as possible the existence of fourth century settlements has
been checked in the present study. Details of the results will be in the notes
on individual entries to follow. |xxxvii

Summary

It is obvious that the author, whoever that may be, did not fulfill completely
the purpose as stated in the preface. The Onomasticon is not a complete
topography of Palestine of the Old and New Testaments (see Appendix III). It is
not an historical geography to the Holy Land since not all the biblical or
post-biblical facts have been summarized despite the numerous editorial
additions layer on layer. The Onomasticon does provide us an extant list of
Greek transliterations of Hebrew place-names based largely on the no longer
extant Hexapla. Incidentally that makes it a valuable source for textual study
of the Hexapla. The quotations of the Greek Bible and the references to the six
columns of Origen are important critical resources. The Onomasticon in its
present form has provided an almost complete tribal division for the allotments
in Joshua. Judah is most complete. Unfortunately not all the sites were located
or identified in the 4th century. There is no evidence that all this information
was in the lost description of Judea, part two of Eusebius' geographical opus,
but that may have been incorporated into this work and could account for the
Jerusalem-Eleutheropolis-Chebron triangle being so well done. If, however, the
Onomasticon was accompanied by a map the location of minor border towns could
have been left to the map alone and the curt notation "tribe of..." which is
valueless for our purposes would have been sufficient for the ancient reader.
The Onomasticon provides us with a contemporary knowledge of fourth century
Palestine and Transjordan. Some two hundred sites were positively inhabited in
that time and as such Eusebius' work is a primary source for geography of the
holy Land as seen in the 4th century. The stated purpose of the fourth and final
geographical work attributed to Eusebius was to identify biblical place-names
and to associate them with known places in the fourth century. "The special work
of Eusebius is the positive identification of biblical places with those which
were known in the country in his day and herein lies the immeasurable value of
his work all." 41 This was done on the basis of many sources as noted above:
Jewish, Roman, Christian, as well as oral tradition. The methodology has been
followed by many scholars of the last two centuries when they based many
identifications on real or imagined survivals of the name in similarly sounding
names. Of course, this principle is open to attack especially when applied by
persons with little linguistic or philological knowledge and left unchecked by
archaeological research.

Adapting the conclusions of both Reland and Conder 42 we may sum up the value of
the Onomasticon. Its worth is highest where Greek and Latin texts agree. The
orthography of biblical names, especially in the Hexapla, can be restored by the
use of the Onomasticon. The similar sounding names reflect a source and a
survival fifteen hundred years older than any today, and record some which are
otherwise lost today. The defects are largely matters of precision and lacunae.
The principal cities are not defined as to their relative position and there is
no sure, fixed point from which the mileage is known to have been taken. The
description of locations are too often vague and even when compass directions
are given they are limited to the four cardinal points and so are ambiguous, at
least a quadrant being involved, and at times contradictory between Greek and
Latin texts. The text as preserved to us in final redaction is often a
heterogeneous agglomerate of unrelated materials assembled by many hands over
several centuries. The principle of similar sounding names is tenuous at best.
|xxxviii

Nevertheless, even though Abel has been criticized for too much reliance on the
similarity of sounds, his judgment of the Onomasticon stands: "The Onomasticon
despite its errors and its faults is of great help for knowledge of Palestine of
biblical times and of the Byzantine period." 43 It is hoped that this volume
will make some small contribution to biblical and Byzantine topography (limited
to Onomasticon's localizations and identifications) as well as permit English
speaking students and Bible readers to reassess Eusebius as a geographer. |xxxix
Introduction - Footnotes

1. The substance of this Introduction was published in the Biblical
Archaeologist, Vol. XXVII (Sept. 1964), p.3 and is used by permission of the
editor Edward F. Campbell and the American Schools of Oriental Research.

2. Foakes-Jackson, F. J. Eusebius Pamphili (1933), p. xiv.

3. Ibid., p. xii.

4. On Eusebius' theology, see Berkhof, L. Die Theology des Eusebius von Caesarea
(1939) and Deferrari, E. J. Church History in the Fathers of the Church Series,
Vol. I. Introduction.

5. For additional material on his life, see Lake, K. in the introductory volume
to Ecclesiastical History (1953 Loeb Classics); Wallace-Hadrill, D. S. Eusebius
of Caesarea (1960); Altaner, B. Patrologie (1958), pp. 206ff., and the various
dictionaries and encyclopedias.

6. For the history of Caesarea see Reifenbera, A. Israel Exploration Journal, I
(1951), p. 20ff, Kadman, L. The Coins of Caesarea Maritima (1957), p. 16ff.
popular summary in Illustrated London News, Oct.26, 1963, pp. 684ff. cf. Negav,
Avraham. Caesarea (1967).

7. For archaeological study of the first campaign report Caesarea Maritima
(1959), Fritsch, C.T. and Ben-Dor, I. Biblical Archaeologist XXIV (1961), Barag,
D. Bulletin of Israel Exploration Society (in Hebrew), XXV, (1961), p. 231ff,
Avi-Yonah, M. Rabinovitz Synagogue Fund Bulletin, I (Dec. 1949), p. 17f; II
(June 1951), p. 28, III (Summer 1956, p. 44f. Negev, Avraham. Op. cit. (1967).
Also see notes and reports in Revue Biblique, Israel Exploration Journal,
Bulletin of Israel Exploration Society, Biblica, and Newsletter ASOR July 1971.

8. Wallace-Hadrill. Op. cit., p. 203.

9. Cp. Wutz, F. Onomastica Sacrums, 2 Vols. 1914-1915.

10. Avi-Yonah. M. The Madaba Map, (1954), p. 30. O'Callaghan, R. "Madaba (Carte
de)" Supplement to Dictionnaire de la Bible. V (1957), Col. 636 cp. Fischer, H.
Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palestina-Vereins, (hereafter ZDPV), XII (1939), p.
169ff.

11. Avi-Yonah, M. Madaba Map, p. 28 counts 983. Melamed. E. Z. Tarbiz, IV
(1933), p. 248, counts 990.

12. Conder, C.R. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly (1896), p. 244. Cp.
Thomsen, Peter. Loca Sancta, Vol. I (1907) passim.

13. Klostermann, E. Das Onomasticon der biblischen Ortsnamen (1904) = Eusebius
Werke, Vol. III, Part I, p. xvi f. cf. Melamed, E. Z., op. cit., III (1932), p.
409, and Encyclopaedia Biblica, I (1950), p. 151f. Also cp. Klostermann, E.
Texte und Untersuchungen, VIII 2 (1902), p. 9f.

14. In his lost Life of Pamphilius, Eusebius had listed the contents of the
library in Caesarea; cf. Church History, VI 32:2.

15. Avi-Yonah, M. Map of Roman Palestine (1940, 1962); Miller, Konrad.
Itineraria Romana (1916).

16. Noth, M. ZDPV, LXVI (1943), p. 34f; cf. Thomsen, P. ZDPV, XXVI (1903), p.
169ff.

17. Beyer, C. ZDPV, LTV (1931), p. 215, note 2.

18. Kubitschek, W. Jahrhefte des Osterreichischen Archaeologischen Institut in
Wien, VIII (1905), p. 124.

19. Cf. Beyer, C. Op. cit., p. 213 note 1. Noth, M. Op. cit., p. 32 and Tarbiz,
IV (1933), p. 260.

20. Armstrong, G. T. Imperial Church Building in the Holy Land in the Fourth
Century, p. 90ff, cf. Armstrong in Gesta VI (1967), p. 1ff. Avi-Yonah, M. Studi
di Antichita Cristiana, XXII (1957), p. 117ff. Kopp, C. The Holy Places of the
Gospels (1963), and Baldi, P.D. Enchiridion Locorum Sanctorum (1935). |xl 21.
Rahmani. Tisserant, Devreese, and Power. Revue de l'Orient Chrétienne, 3rd
series, III - XXIII (1922-23), p. 225ff.

22. Ziegler. J. Biblica, XII (1931), p. 70ff. for other pilgrim texts see
Palestine Pilgrims' Text Society volumes, especially Vol. I (1896) and Geyer, P.
Itinera Heirosolymitana, Vol. XXXIX (1898) in Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum
Latinorum.

23. Lemaire, P, and Baldi, D. Atlante Storico Della Bibbia (1955), p. 2.

24. Cf. Note 10 above and popular summary by Gold, V. R., Biblical Archaeologist
, XXI (1958), p. 50ff.

25. Avi-Yonah, M. Madaba Map, p. 32.

26. Cf. Notes 12 and 18 above. Also Thomsen, P. ZDPV, XXIX (1906), p. 130f.

27. Melamed, E. Z. Tarbiz, III (1932), pp. 314-27, 393-409; IV (1933), pp.
78-96, 249-84 (in Hebrew).

28. Ibid., IV (1933), p. 269f.

29. Encyclopaedia Biblica, I (1950), cols. 152f. (in Hebrew).

30. Neubauer, A. La Geographie du Talmud (1868), cp. Romanoff, Pail. Onomasticon
ofPalestine (1937). Avi-Yonah, M. The Holy Land (1965).

31. The annual Holy Land trips are reported regularly. More specifically
Mittmann, S. articles regularly since Volume 79 (1963).

32. Saarisalo, A. Studia Orientalia, XVII (1952), p. 3.

33. Conder, C. R. Op. cit., p. 245.

34. Conder, C.R. Survey of Western Palestine, IV (1881), p. 234.

35. Noth, M. ZDPV, LXVI (1943), p. 32.

36. Mittmann, S. Beiträge zur Siedlungs und Territorialgeschichte des nördlichen
Ostjordanlandes(1970) and notes 10, 16, 17, 26, 31, and 35 above.

37. Avi-Yonah, M. Map of Roman Palestine (1940, 1962) cf. Israel Exploration
Journal, VIII (1958), p. 39f.

38. See Note 20 above and various geographies, atlases beginning with Bernard,
J. H., "The Churches of Constantine at Jerusalem," Palestine Pilgrims' Text
Society, I.

39. Lapp, P. Biblical Archaeologist, XXVI (1963), p. 122f.

40. Avi-Yonah, M. Map of Roman Palestine, p. 3.

41. Thomsen, P. ZDPV, XXVI (1903), p. 141.

42. Conder, C. R. Survey of Western Palestine, IV (1881), p. 247f.

43. Abel, F.M. Geographie de la Palestine, I (1933), p. XV. This text was
transcribed by Noel Wolf, 2005. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 7: CONCERNING THE PLACE NAMES IN SACRED SCRIPTURE - NOTES
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, Onomasticon (1971) Notes. pp. 76-252. Ed. C. Umhau Wolf.

NOTES Latin Preface By Jerome

SECTION A

GENESIS

1. Ararat, Armenia. Genesis 8:4; Klostermann. Das Onomasticon der biblischen
Ortsnamen(1904) (hereafter K.) 2:23 (page#:line#), cf. 38:11; Legarde.
Onomastica Sacra (1966) (hereafter L.) 232:25 (page#:line#).

Ararat is suspect as an entry in the original manuscript since it is a mountain
and is out of the region of Palestine as well. The inclusion of the long
quotation from Josephus' Antiquities, (I, iii, p. 5ff.) is repeated in the text
of Procopius 285A & B. Eusebius refers to Ararat also in his Preparatio
Evangelica, (viii, p. 10f.) and Jerome, in his Commentary on Isaiah 37:36ff.).
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names (60) Jerome translates "mountain of taunting."
The referents in Josephus are largely third century B.C., e.g. Berosus, Musseas.
However, Nicolas was a contemporary of Josephus and a biographer of Herod the
Great. The location has persisted in tradition as in the present Kurdistan
areas, between Armenia and Parthia in ancient times.

Leaetai is used by Eusebius fairly consistently for written sources, most
frequently the Bible. Cp. Genesis 8:4, II Kings 19:37, Jeremia 51:27. On the
other hand, phasin (dicuntur) reflects an anonymous oral tradition. The text of
Eusebius and Jerome vary only slightly in the quotation of Josephus. The
translation of the quotation is that of Thackeray from the Loeb Classic Library
(used with permission). The textual variants are all minor.

2. Achad. Genesis 10:10; K. 4:26; L. 233:54.

Textual variants: Achab (Greek); and Archath, Achar, and Acath (Latin).

Achad as the above Ararat also is not in the region of Palestine. Its size is
recognized by the use of polis (Greek) and both urbs and civitas (Latin). Jerome
in Hebrew Questions notes "it is now called Nisibis." In another entry he notes
it is in Edessa. The date referred to by Latin was 363 A.D.

3. Aggai (Ai). Genesis 12:8; K. 4:27; L. 233:55. The location of Ai is still a
complex archaeological puzzle. Judith Krause-Marquet and Pere Abel felt that
Eusebius must have had et-Tell in mind because of the words topos eremos used
also for Ainan (K. 8:13) and Galgala (K. 66:4). Procopius 320A records Eusebius:
"Aggai now is a deserted place not far west of Bethel" (cp. Joshua 7:2, 8:1).
This would be on the road to Bethel which leaves the main road at the 12th
milestone (cf. K. 40:20). Bethel is often used as a referent in the Bible and is
so used in the text (see Appendices).

Jerome also notes a church had been built at Bethel (Commentary on Genesis
28:19) probably by Constantine (Epistle 108:12). For other churches added in
Jerome's account see Mambre (K. 7:20), Bethany (K. 59:18), Gethsemane (K.
75:19), and Sychar (K. 165:3-4).

Ailia (Aelia) is Jerusalem. Neapolis is 36 miles from Jerusalem according to the
Deut. Table but other texts have 30 miles (Itin. Ant. 200:1). On the Madaba Map
it is a large walled city with a basilica. In Eusebius it is a point of
reference and according to K. 150:2 distinct from Shechem. Shechem was destroyed
in pre-Christian times and Neapolis built there by Vespasian. This Neapolis is
present day Nablus near Mt. Garizin. A bishop was present at the Council of
Nicea. A basilica was erected there by Justinian according to Procopius
(Buildings, V, viii, 1) after time of our text. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names (61) Jerome translates "inquiry or gaiety."

4. Astarōth Karnaein. Genesis 14:5; K. 6:4; L. 233:61.

Textual variant: Asarōth (Greek).

There are many attarah in the region of Palestine. The names and spelling in
both the Masoretic Text (hereafter MT) and Onomasticon are confusing. In this
entry no positive location is given. Only a general area. Procopius 332C wrote,
"It is now the city of the blessed Job in the Batanaia. Two villages between
Adaron and the city Bibles, nine miles distant from each other, are so-called"
(cf. K. 112:3 and K. 142:3 for "home of Job").

Abela (K. 32:15) Is the present Tell abil. Adra (K. 84:7) in Syriac Manuscript
is indicated as dari 'at or der'at the present Syrian border town with Jordan.
The Batanaia is also called Batalona (K. 12:12). All was part of the land of
Bashan (K. 44:9). The two villages are best located at Tell 'ashtarah and Sheih
Sa 'ad. The former is a large tell suitable for the Old Testament Ashtaroth (cf.
K. 12:11). Perhaps the latter succeeded as chief administrative city of the
district of Karnaeim (cf. K. 112:3). However in the Bible, Astaroth is merely
identifying the site of a battle which took place near the city. If so, then
Karnaeim added to the name gives the district in which the battle took place
(cf. Biblical Archaeologist Dec. 1962, p.109). Eusebius seems to look for two
sites. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome has four entries on Astaroth
with several interpretation repeats: sheepfold, manger, blackened hall, or make
an investigation (61, 85, 90, and 98).

5. Arbō. Arboc. Genesis 23:2; K. 6:8 and 7:11; L. 233:65.

Textual variants include: Arboch (Greek), Arbee (Latin), Arboq. Another variant
seems to identify Arbō Chebrōn and the terebinth. The entire entry has been
inserted out of biblical order by a late editor. The terebinth is located at six
stadia from Chebrōn by Josephus (Wars, iv, 553). In (K. 76:1) Mamrē also locates
the terebinth in the vicinity of Chebrōn (cp. K. 170:25). In K. 26:16 it is
located two miles from Bethanin (cp. K. 68:21, 94:21 and Eusebius' De Vita
Constantini, iii, 51f., Demonstratio Evangelica V 9). Also see Kariatharbō K.
112:18 where Genesis 23:2 makes the equation. The location in general is present
day Hebron, el kalil, and this is the spot Eusebius locates clearly. It was
never a strong Christian city. Ancient site is probably at Jebel er-Rumeide
where Roman and Byzantine remains are also found. Jerome notes a church has been
built there (cf. K. 7:3 and note for other churches). It is difficult to tell if
Jerome refers to the Church of Mamrē (Ramet el Khalil) or the church of the
graves of the patriarchs.

Jerome in Hebrew Questions writes "For Arbee the LXX has 'field' with Chebron
located on the mountain. The city is also called Mambra is named after the
friends of Abraham" (44), cf. Genesis 18:1, I Chronicles 2:42, Joshua 14:13f,
20:7, 21:11, II Samuel 2:1 etc. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome
translated "Arbee, four or fourth" (61) after the four great men: Abraham,
Isaac, Jacob and Adam (cf. Hebrews Questions, p. 28, Epistle 108:11, 46:3,
Commentary on Jeremiah 31:15, Zacharia 11:4, Matthew 27:33, and Ephesians 5:14.

6. Ailam (Ailath). Genesis 14:1; K.6:17; L. 234:75. In the Vulgate we find
Ailath, Elath, and Aila for this same site.

Palestine is the southern part of Syria. This word is missing in the Vatican
Manuscript. Technically the southern limits of the Onomasticon should be Ailam
(Ailath). The ruins are inland about one mile from Aqabah but not as far inland
as Tell el Kbeleifah which is probably the older Ezion Geber (K. 36:l, cf. K.
34:23, 62:13, Josephus Antiquities, IX, 12, 1).

It was the end of the road going north to Damascus and the terminus of the
overland road west to the Mediterranean. In Jerome's time it was a very busy
port (Vita Hilariaris, 18, and cf. Commentary on Ezekiel 47:18). Eusebius does
not indicate its size but it may be inferred that it was a polis. A bishop was
present at Nicea.

Eusebius uses some army source and the text is useful for noting the deployment
of the Roman legion. The Tenth is located here. The Notitia Dignitatum (73:18f.)
verifies this entry. The Tabula Peutinger, 820 has a Haila 83 miles from Petra
and 150 miles southeast of Gaza which fits this site at el 'aqaba. The city in
II Samuel 10:16 is in northeast Transjordan. The Syriac text notes it is a city
of the Philistines. The Greek allophulos usually means Philistines but once or
twice we cannot be positive, so in this present translation the general term
"foreigners" has been preferred, especially when Jerome does not have Filistine.
He has Filistine in K. 7:15, K. 21:2, K. 3:25, K. 119:3 but more often uses
transliteration allofylorum (see Appendix I).

7. Adama. Genesis 14:2; K. 8:4; L. 234:82. The Sodomite Pentapolis is not
clearly located by Eusebius. He generally locates them beside the Dead Sea (cf.
Sodoma K. 150:10,) K. 153:16 suggests a tradition did exist for Segor but it is
also not precisely recorded. The most exacting attempt is for Bala in K. 42:1f.
In Hebrew Questions Jerome translates "dirt, ground or earthen"(61).

8. Asasan Thamar (Asasonthamar). Genesis 14:7; K. 8:6; L. 234:84. On the Madaba
Map there is a Thamara located as suggested by Eusebius here. Tabula Peutinger
has a Thamaro 52 or 53 miles from Jerusalem while Ptolemy's list (V, 15, 5f) has
a Thamaro about 55 miles distant. The Notitia Dignitatum (74:40) has a Tarba and
(74:46) a Thamarra both of which have a garrison.

Alt found a fort at Qasr el Juheiniye and he is followed by many locating the
fort there and the village at 'ain el 'Arus. Aharoni more recently (TEJ, 1963,
p.30ff) suggests 'Ain Husb which is about a day's walk (32 km) from Kurnub which
is generally identified with Mapsis (cf. also Avi-Yonah) and has a large Roman
fort as well as Nabatean and Iron II sherds. The Madaba Map using Jerome's
spelling has located properly Mampsis. Many Nabatean, Roman-Byzantine levels
excavated at Kuroub. It shows a revival in the fourth century A.D. as also does
Oboda (Avdat, 'Abda, and K. 176:9).This may be indicated by "village" in Greek
and "oppidum" in Latin (cf. K. 10:25).

II Chronicles 20:2 identified Thamar with En Gedi or at least locates it in the
district of En Gedi (86:16). Jerome in Hebrew Questions says, "his city which we
now call Engaddi, is rich in balsam and palms since Asason Thamar translated
into our language is city of the palms'" (18) (cf. Judges 1: 16, Ezekiel 47:
29).

9. Aloua (Allus). Genesis 36:40; K. 8:10; L. 234:89.

Textual variants: Alloyd (Greek), Gōla (LXX), and Alloys (Syriac). Hebrew has
'Alvah or 'Aliah.

Petra (cf. K. 142:7) is often called the capital of ancient Nabatean or the
capital of the ancient Arabs. It has been suggested that Udrub, 14 km east of
Petra may retain the tradition of this site since it is the Arabic synonym for
the Hebrew. The relation of Idumaea and Edōm to Gebalēnē is uncertain. They are
connected here as well as in K. 62:8 and K. 102:23, etc. In his Commentary on
Obadiah 1 Jerome has Gebalēnē on the border of Eleutheropolis and apparently
includes part of the Daroma (K. 26:10) but generally it is lying east of the
Dead Sea (K. 100:4).

10. Ainan (Aenam). Genesis 38:14; K. 8:12; L. 234:91.

Textual variants: Aenam (Greek), Aeinam (Greek), and Enan (Greek).

Ainan is one of three deserted places in the Onomasticon (Aggai K. 4:27 and
Galgala K. 66:4). This phrase may indicate ruins noted by Eusebius or an editor.
The location "near" (cf. Appendix V) is quite vague and could be adjacent or as
far as 15 miles. It probably indicates it is within the region of a city at the
editor's time. Geographers are uncertain about the Old Testament site. It is
difficult to determine a location from Eusebius but Noth suggests kefr 'en.
Procopius 463C has an accurate Latin translation of this entry.

Several times the Greek quotes only the biblical location as here "on the way to
Thamna" (cf. K. 8:17, K. 10:15, K. 90:3). Thamna is on the Madaba Map (cf. K.
96:24) and near to Diospolis at Kh Tibne.

Eusebius has "large village" for 32 existing towns. There are others called
"large city." Thamna is probably off the main Roman road from Jerusalem to
Diospolis. Many road into Diospolis and it is frequently a reference point for
the text (cf. K. 20:16, K. 24:24, K. 28:10, K. 48:23, K. 68:6 etc). Tabula
Peutinger has Luddis 12 miles from Azotus and Emmaus. It is on the Madaba Map
with a church near modern Lydda and perhaps is Old Testament Lod (I Chronicles
8:12). Acts 10:22 shows its Christian character. Its new name was given by
Hadrian c. 136 A.D. In about 200 Septimus Severus gave it municipal status. The
identity is made by St. Paula "Lydda which was changed into Diospolis near
Arimethea" (PPT I p.4 cf. Jeremiah Epistle 108:8). It suffered heavily under the
Diocletian persecutions of 303 (cf. Eusebius Martyrs of Palestine). There was a
bishop in the 4th century.

Here we have evidence of the flourishing of the pagan cults in the 4th century
in spite of Constantine's efforts. Avi-Yonah suggests a temple and spring at the
source of Wadi Ri'a may be the Aena of Jerome.

11. Ailōn Atad (Areaatad). Genesis 50:10; K. 8:17; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek text.

Textual variants: 'Ainan Atad, 'Alona Atad (Greek) and Areaatat, Areaatath
(Latin). This entry is not in the Greek Vatican Manuscript and so Lagarde does
not print it. Klostermann here and elsewhere emends the Greek on basis of
Procopius and Jerome. In a few places, Eusebius gives mileage from two points
(cf. K. 12:13, K. 14:1, K. 24:16) without clearly indicating a road. Both the
scriptures and the Onomasticon seem confused about Atad or Abel-mizraim. It
seems preferable to locate in the southwest of Palestine rather than across the
Jordan or in the Jericho region.

Eusebius and Jerome only have a "place" not a village. The Madaba Map uses both
Alōn Atad and Bethegla with the mosaic of a church there near the Wadi Qilt.
Procopius 512B accurately reproduces the text. Apparently a secondary Christian
tradition transferred the site from across the Jordan to the location southeast
of Jericho. It probably is the present 'ain and deir hajla (cf. K. 48:19, K.
52:8).

Jerome in Interpretation of Hebrew Names translates "Atad, evidence or twig"
(62) and Bethagla as "his house of jollity" (91).

EXODUS 12. Ailim (Aelim). Exodus 15:27; K. 8:22; L. 234.97.

After this entry in the Vatican Manuscript 1456 there is a different hand which
may be an attempt to locate the site in relation to a monastery. Lagarde and
Klostermann both omit the entry in a new hand, probably because it is rather
unclear. Also inserted are division "Numbers and Deuteronomy" in a different
hand.

These stations are for the most part not within the provenance of the
Onomasticon. It is probable that a later editor inserted these into Eusebius'
text. This of course would account in part for the manuscript confusion at this
point.

13. Ailous (Aelim). Numbers 33:13; K. 10:1; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek text. This
entry also is not in the Greek Vatican Manuscript and is inserted from the Latin
by Klostermann. As above, the list of stations in the desert is suspect.

Jerome in Interpretation of Hebrew Names has "fermented or mixed, as the Greeks
say phurason, mixed" (79).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 14. Aserōth. Numbers 12:1; K. 10:4; L. 234:100.

Summary of biblical information (Numbers 12:1, Deuteronomy 2:23).

Jerome has two entries on Aseroth in Interpretation of Hebrew Names: "majestic
or beautiful house" (78) and "Aseroth is house or entrance court, if it is
written with a heth and tzade. But if correctly written with alef and sin it
means beautiful" (86). For Gaza see K. 62:22 below.

15. Asemōna. Numbers 33:29; K. 10:7; L. 234:3.

Textual variant: Asemōnas (Greek). Out of order and a station list added later.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome translates "his bone, from bone, not
from mouth" (79).

16. Aētharim. Numbers 21:1; K. 10:9; L. 235:5. The textual variants from Aquila
and Symmachus are frequently recorded. Since the Hexapla was compiled by Origen
in Caesarea, Eusebius must have had easy access to it. One medieval text
confuses AK as an added syllable to the place name. One manuscript also has
synodos for odos which does not make sense. In Hebrew Names, Jerome translates
Atharim "spies" (78).

17. Aiē or Achelgai. Numbers 21:11; K. 10:12; L. 235:8.

Eusebius and the LXX have trouble with Hebrew double names, so we find
Achelgaei, Nachal Gaei. The location is vague and uncertain in both the Bible
and Onomasticon. Areopolis was an autonomous city in the Roman Province of
Arabia. According to Procopius' Buildings V, viii, 1, under Constantine this
became Palestina Tertia. It is probably Ar Moab, the present Rabba (cf. below
and K. 124:15)." Ptolemaus has it 65 miles from Philadelphia (16:15). This
identity goes back at least to the third century A.D. The Madaba Map has an Aia
at that location. In K. 36:24 it is identified with Ariel and is a pagan shrine
(cf. Jeremiah 49:3; LXX 30:3).

There are a number of texts where the Greek has alternate names. The most
familiar is Ashdod Azōtos (K. 20:18, K. 22:11). But also K. 36:7,24; K. 48:11;
K. 25:27; K. 58:3; K. 64:6; K. 90:10; K. 132:8; K. 160:19; cf. K. 40:7 Babel.

18. Arnōn. Numbers 21:13; K. 10:15; L. 235:11. This entry is not an original. It
is a river or wadi, not a city. It is called a topos, and locus, "place." It has
been considered the southern border of Transjordan. Jerome's Commentary on
Isaiah 16:2 notes, "it is the border between Amorites and Moabites." Procopius
857A paraphrases the Onomasticon: "formerly the land of the Amorites. The Arnon
is said to be the border separating it from the Moabites" (cf. Numbers 21:23ff).

Areopolis is called a city of Arabia or Moab (cf. above and K. 124:15). Arabia
is the name of the Roman province established in 106 A.D. whose southern border
was the Dead Sea and the Arnon. Other Nabatean towns given autonomy in
Provenance Arabia were Esbus, Medeba, Charachmoab and Petra. In 200 A.D.
Septimus Severus gave it municipal status. According to the Tabula Peutinger it
is 62 miles from Philadelphia. There was a Roman garrison at Areopolis according
to Notitia Dignitatum (81:17) and other posts around the wadi (Notitia
Dignitatum 81:34, 82:35). A polis such as Areopolis may by its very name include
a general region with all its dependent villages. The name Arnon has obviously
survived to the fourth century. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome
translates "heap of gloom or praise"(78).

19. Ar. Numbers 21:15; K. 10:25; L. 235:21.

Textual variant Êr (Greek as in LXX) This place is related to the previous two
entries. If it, as well as "deserted place" could mean "ruin," then perhaps
there was a rebuilding by the time of Jerome. The word oppidum usually is not an
indication of size of city or village but, if Pliny is to be believed it is a
Roman settlement around a shrine or sanctuary, or it is a heavily fortified town
(see Appendix I).

Jerome in Hebrew Names translated, "he stirred up or wakefulness" (78).

20. Aēsimōn. Numbers 21:20; K. 10:27; L. 235:23.

Textual variants: Aisimōn and Asēnōn (Greek). The third in a series of four
"places" at this point in Eusebius.

21. Abelsattein (Abelsattim). Numbers 33:49; K. 10:28; L. 235:24.

LXX has Abetsatteim and Setim.

Eusebius does not locate this "place" very well. Many feel it is the Byzantine
Abile at Kh Kefraim but Eusebius does not make this identity. Jerome in his
Commentary on Joel 3:18 suggests it is near Livias (K. 48:15) 6 miles from Dead
Sea. In Hebrew Names he translates mourning of the bank or of the shore" (79).
The difference in direction may not be as great as it seems. Eusebius has west
and Jerome south, but most directions refer to a quadrant, so southwest could
fit into either quadrant. Possibly out of order or suspect.

22. Azōr (or Iazer). Numbers 21:24; K. 12:1; L. 235:25.

Textual variant for contemporary sites, Zazer (Latin). A confused text is
probably responsible for this entry. The relation of this with Iazēr (K. 4:13)
is unclear. For biblical Hazor see 20:1, a different site.

Probably Ptolemy's (V, 15,6) list of a Gazōros is the same town as K. 12:3 and
K. 104:13. Josephus Antiquities. XII, 8, 1 has Jazōros or Jazorōs. A village
eight miles west of Philadelphia is Kh sar (note 10 miles in K. 104: 13). On
Amman or Philadelphia see K. 16:15 below. In Hebrew Names, Jerome has 5 entries
which could pertain, based on "hearing" or "helping" (82, 94, 125, 127, and
134).

23. Aroēr. Deuteronomy 3:12, 4:48; K. 12:5; L. 235:29. This polis is located on
the brow of the Arnon (K. 10:15) and probably still exists with its traditional
name at 'Ara 'ir. Archaeological excavation shows it was weak in 4th Century
A.D. The biblical information from Numbers 21:26, Deuteronomy 2:9 and Joshua
13:25 is summarized by Eusebius, with real additions.

There are three or four biblical places with this same name. Jerome has three
entries in Hebrew Names: "lightening or emptying of the watch or shell" (79),
"cover of the guard or spread out the watch"(88) or "covered"(125). In this
entry polis in Eusebius becomes one of the few instances where it is translated
by oppidum in Latin (cf. 10:25 and Appendix I). This and next entry are out of
order and suspect as late additions.

24. Astarōth. Deuteronomy 1:4; K. 12:11; L. 235:35.

Astarōth occurs often in the Onomasticon (K. 6:4, K. 12:27, K. 112:3). Here the
references in scripture are summarized (Joshua 12:4, 13:31). The Old Testament
site is perhaps Tell 'ashtarah which is too far from Dera to fit the
Onomasticon. But nine miles closer could be Tell el Yaduda or el Muzeirib. The
"another" above refers to K. 6:4 and with no location is without any
identification (cf. also K. 112:3).

Astaroth and Edrai were the major cities of Bashan. Adraa is at der'at located
by the

Tabula Peutinger as 24 miles from Bostra (cf. K. 84:9) but 25 miles here.
Valerian made Adraa a city in status. For Bostra see also K. 46:10. There was a
bishop in Adra in the 4th and 5th centuries.

Batanaia is the all-inclusive name for the territory which includes Trachonitis
(K. 166:1) as well as the Gaulon (K. 64:6). Perhaps also it is to be identified
with part of Itouraia (K. 110:26). The relationship of these with the several
regions of Arabia is unclear. In Herod's time Dera was the east border of
Batanaia, but it was in Nabatean or Syrian control in the 4th century. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "sheepfold or the spies act" (61).

25. Agrou skopia. Numbers 23:14; K. 12:16; L. 235:40. In one text the Latin adds
"is" a mountain. This is not an original entry. Apparently Onomasticon
identifies it with Phasgo (16:24), Phasga (168:28) and Pogor (168:25 cf.
170:13). The location is not readily fixed. The Hebrew and the Confraternity
Translation suggest "hill of cursing" for the Greek "peak of the hewn."

26. Arabōth Mōab. Numbers 26:3; K. 12:20; L. 236:44.

Textual variants: Iebous (Greek) and Esbon (Latin). The synonym used by Aquila
and Symmachus are repeated in Procopius 992A. They are probably correct and so
no confusion of this "place" arises with Ar Moab (K. 10:25). See below on Iordan
(K. 104:20), Iericho (K. 104:25), Libias (K. 44:17 and K. 48:15), and Esbous (K.
84:1). For Phogor (cp. 168:25), this is probably a late addition to the text.

27. Araba. Deuteronomy 1:1; K. 12:25; L. 236:49.

See below K. 16:12 and K. 90:11.

Hexaplatic information in this entry. Out of order and doubly suspect. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome has "west or evening" (86) and "fine"
(89).

28. Astarōth (Ataroth). Numbers 32:34; K. 12:27; L. 236:51.

Textual variants: Atarōth (Greek) and Astaroth (Latin).

Probably this is not the same as K. 12:11 above. It is of Gad and not Manassē.
Reference to Solomon is in I Chronicles 2:54. Only a generalized biblical
location. The Peraia is always translated by Jerome as Transjordan. In Byzantine
times Peraia was continuous with the region of Philadelphia (K. 104:14). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "crowns" (79), "crown" (89).

29. Astarōth Sōphar (Ataroth Sofan). Numbers 32:35; K. 12:30; L. 236:54.

Textual variant: Atroth (Latin).

Possible two cities of Gad combined in this entry. So far appears three times in
Interpretation of Hebrew Names: "his spy or trumpet" (72), ''war trumpet" (85),
"scattering of the lookouts or scattering of the spies or I will see the spies"
(134).

30. Arad. Numbers 33:40, 34:4; K. 14:1; L. 236:55.

Textual variants: Arama (Greek) and Arath, Arat (Latin). The Greek has confused
Arad with the Addar of Hebrew. But Joshua 15:21 suggests this possibility in the
LXX. One of rare entries with mileage given to two reference points. The double
location (repeated by Procopius 1045C) identifies this with Tell el 'Arad about
20 miles south of Chebrōn but no Byzantine village there. Madaba Map location
agrees with Eusebius: "Arad from which come the Aradites." The Bronze Age city
is being excavated. A Judean temple and administrative center is there. Arad has
Chaleolithic, Early Bronze, Iron, Persian and Hellenistic remains with a very
slight Nabatean/Roman fortress. Eusebius' Arad is not this tell since it has an
archaeological gap of 1st through 7th A.D.

Malaatha is used for a reference by Eusebius (cf. 88:4, 108:3). It is in Idumea
according to Josephus Antiquities, XVIII, 6, 2. It probably is the Moleatha of
the Notitia Dignitatum (74:45) where there was a garrison. The name may persist
in the tradition at Kh or Tell Milh (Malhata) where there is a Roman fort as
well as some Middle Bronze, Iron and Hellenistic sherds. Perhaps the Byzantine
village is to be found at el quseife which is 6 kilometers from Arad. Perhaps it
is to be related to Molada (130:6). On "oppidum" cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix I.

Jerome in Interpretation of Hebrew Names has "descending" (62 and 78).

31. Asemōna. Numbers 34:4; K 14:4; L. 236:58. The Madaba Map quotes Eusebius for
the southern limit of Palestine (Ioudaia) cf. Joshua 15:4, Ezekiel 47:134. It is
probably Israeli Atzmon at 'Ain el Quseimeb (cp. K. 10:7).

32. Akrabbein (Acrabbi). Numbers 34:4; K. 14:7; L. 236:61.

Eusebius has confused the southern border of Judah (Numbers 34:4) with a
northern site. The Madaba Map follows Eusebius and locates it at a northern
village site. Procopius 1048B records the first part of the Onomasticon
referring to an eastern border. Biblical data is from Joshua 15:3 and Judges
1:36.

Perhaps Eusebius is influenced by Josephus' Wars II, 20,4 and III, 3,5 and sees
this as one of the Toparchies of Juda, perhaps Akrabattinē (cf. K. 86:25, K.
108:20, K. 156;30, K. 160:14). This northern site is 'aqrabeh, just nine miles
southeast of Nablus. But the southern border must be southwest of the Dead Sea,
a boundary with Edom rather than with the Amorites. This may be the Ascent at
Nagb-es-safi (cf. I Maccabees 5:3).

Jerome in Interpretation of Hebrew Names has "of scorpions or fitting" (79) and
"of scorpions" (89 and 98).

33. Asadadda (Asadada). Numbers 34:8; K. 14:13; L. 236:67.

Textual variants: Asaradda (Greek) and Sadada (Latin, cf. K. 155:17).

Simple border of Judah as in Ezekiel 47:13; cf. K. 154:19. Out of order and
suspect.

34. Arad. Numbers 34:4; K. 14:14; L. 236:68.

Textual variants: Arath and Arat (Latin).

Part of this entry is missing in Vatican Manuscript. See above K. 14:1.

35. Asarēnan (Asarenam). Numbers 34:9; K. 14:16; L. 236:70.

Textual variants: Asarēnan, Asaerēnan and Asserēnan (Greek).

Simple border listing. Same as next entry.

36. Aserna (Asernai). Numbers 34:10; K. 14:17; L. 236:71.

Textual variant: Asernaei (Greek).

Probably the same as the previous entry (cf. Ezekiel 47:13). Simple border
listing.

37. Arbēla. Numbers 34:11; K. 14:18; L. 236:72.

Textual variant see K. 46:6.

Two sites: One in Transjordan and Decapolis (K. 80:16) region and the near the
great plain of Megiddo.

Pella is an important reference point in the Onomasticon (K. 22:25, K. 32:6, K.
80:17, K. 110:13). In 66-67 A.D. it was a refuge for Christians fleeing from
Jerusalem (cf. Historia Ecclesiastica, iii, 5, 3). At this time it is a polis in
Palestine. Formerly it was one of the independent Decapolis, probably at Kh
Fahil, and later it was included with Syria.

Arbela is a dependent village of Pella. It may be tell Abil or tabaqat fahl.
Jerome has perhaps confused it with Ribla which may be at Irbid (cp. Betharbel,
Hosea 10:14). The great plain southwest of the Sea of Galilee is called after
the important city (oppidum) Legeōn. On oppidum cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix I.
This is the plain of Jesreel (Josephus' Antiquities, V, 1, 22 and IV, 6, 1).
From the time of Hadrian on Legeōn controlled the area from Galilee to Samaria.
It was called Maximianopolis in the early 4th century but Eusebius never uses
that name. It had Roman camps around it. Now called Lejjūn. There is also an
Irbid southwest of Galilee with a synagogue and Roman-Byzantine sherds, but the
distance does not fit Onomasticon. Quite possibly Arbela is 'Affule in
Roman-Byzantine times.

Arebla in Interpretation of Hebrew Names is "a trap" (79).

38. Aulōn. Deuteronomy 1:1; K. 14:22; L. 236:75.

Textual variant: Tiberias is missing in the Vatican Manuscript. Dubious entry.

Aulon in Roman times came to be identified with the Jordan valley as reflected
here in both Eusebius and Jerome. The description here, together with that of
Jordan (K. 104:20) is fairly complete. The valley begins in Libanon (K. 122:27)
and reaches south to Pharan (K. 166:12).

Skythopolis is an important city, one of the cities of the Decapolis (K. 80:15),
used frequently in the Onomasticon. The listing of all the others is confused
but surely included Hippus, Gadara, Abila, Pella, Gerasa and Philadelphia.
Skythopolis is identified with Bethshan at Tell al Husn (K. 54.8). It was the
capital of Palestina Secunda in Byzantine times.

Lake of Tiberias was in Hellenistic times the sea of Gennesaris and and in the
New Testament Gennesaith (K. 58:12 and K. 120:2). Today it is the Sea of Galilee
(K. 72:20). For Ierichō see K. 104:25.

Paneas is used as a referent often in the Onomasticon. A bishop came to Nicea
from here. Baniyas today, at the source of the Jordan was also the site of
Caesarea Phillippi, also listed as one of the Decapolis (Historia Ecclesiastica,
vii, 17). In Tabula Peutinger it is 32 miles from Tyre. On the Dead Sea see K.
100:4. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome says, "Elan, oak or aulon of
which we wrote more fully in the Book of Places" (83) and "Ailon which we spoke
of under Aulon above (88)."

39. Amalēkitis (Amalecitis). Deuteronomy ?; K. 16:5; L. 237:84. This is probably
the wilderness of Zin in the Old Testament (K. 152:18, cf. Numbers 13:29, 14:25;
Josephus Antiquities III, 2, 1) includes the inhabitants of Petra and Gobolitis
as the Amalakites. Not an original entry, but a gloss. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "licking people" (61) "dull people or licking people" (74,161).

40. Araba. K. 16:1; Deuteronomy 1:7; L. 237:91.

Textual variant: Safforinea (Latin). In Deuteronomy 1:7 it really refers to the
plain as in K. 12:25.

Eusebius reports on two villages by this same name. Ona is three miles west of
Skythopolis or Bethshan (K. 16:2 and K. 54:8). Some suggest 'Arabūne but the
distance is not great enough. Probably marks the place of the turn off from the
main road. The second is a village dependent upon Diokaisareia which is
Sepphōris (Saffuriya) in Josephus (Wars, II, 21, 7) and frequently used as a
referent in the Onomasticon. Many Jews fled there in 71 and 135 A.D. Vespasion
made Sepphōris into a municipality. A Roman garrison was there according to
Notitia Dignitatum (73:28). Constantine built a church there (Epiphanes Ad Haer,
I, 30, 11). The village may be located at 'arabet el battōf. It is distinct from
K. 86:9 although the Vatican Manuscript has a gloss at that place which wrongly
seems to equate them.

41. Amman. Deuteronomy 2:19; K. 16:15; L. 237:94. No doubt of this continuing
identity (Deuteronomy 2:20). Jerome in Commentary on Nahum 3:8 writes, "Ammona
which is now called Philadelphia." It also is one of the cities of the Decapolis
(K. 80:16) and a bishop was present at the Council of Nicea. It is in the
province of Arabia located by the Tabula Peutinger as 62 miles from Aeropolis
(Rabbath Moab cf. K. 10:17). It is used as a referent in the Onomasticon. It is
probably the same as Rabba Ammon. To Eusebius it was a most important city. He
uses polis episēmos for only seven towns of his own time: Abela (K. 32:16), Adra
(K. 84:8), Gaza (K. 62:26), Gerasa (K. 64:3), Damaskos (K. 76:4), Philadelphia
and Askalon (K. 22:15). Amman/Philadelphia is also used to describe the region.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Amon, son of my people or people of my wall"
(61, 78, and 90).

42. Argob. Deuteronomy 3:4; K. 16:18; L. 237:97.

Og of Bashan (K. 44:9) had many cities according to Scripture. In I Kings 4:13
Argob is in the 6th district of Solomon. The Erga of Eusebius is not the same as
that Argob. Fifteen miles West of Gerasa is er-rudjib, which may be Erga. Others
more correctly suggest Arjan in the Wadi Yabis (cf. K. 94:26).

Bashan is also Trachonitis (K. 166:1) in the Province of Arabia. Gerasa is one
of the famous cities of Byzantine times (K. 64:3). See entry above. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "height of cursing" (86 and109), "lofty cursing"
(115).

43. Asēdōth. Deuteronomy 3:17; K. 16:22; L. 237:2. This is one of eleven entries
in the Onomasticon which include an etymological notation not specified as from
the Hexapla (cp. K. 12:17, K.18:21, etc.).

44. Abareim (Abarim). Deuteronomy 32:49; K. 16:24; L. 237:4.

Textual variants: Easgan and Esbum (Latin). As a "mountain" it is probably a
late addition to the Greek list of place names. The relation of Phasgō to the
Moab plain is more clearly indicated here. Eusebius was fascinated with Phasgō,
Peor, Phogor, etc. (K. 12:17, K. 16:22, K. 168:28, etc.). It is probably present
day Mt.Nebo or ras sijagla where a Byzantine church has been partially restored.
The identity of the two made here by Eusebius is contested by scholars who would
put Phasgō farther south (cf. Deuteronomy 34:1 and 32:49). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Abarim, is passing over, which in Greek is indicated by peran"
(179).

45. Auōth Iaeir (Avothiair). Deuteronomy 3:14; K. 18:4; L. 237:10.

Textual variant: Golam (Latin). The etymology "shoulder of Iaeir" is not in the
Vatican Manuscript. Out of order and suspect. Gōnias is mentioned only here and
in K. 136:3 but Gauiōn and Gōlan are in K. 64:7f. and seem to be in the same
area (cf. Basan 44:9 and Galaad 44:10; cp. Numbers 32:39, Deuteronomy 4:43;
Joshua 13:30). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "gloria of the light or life of
light" (86).

JOSHUA (of Naue) 46. Antilibanos (Antilibanus). Joshua 1:4; K. 18:8; L. 237:14.
This area is Eusebius' interpretation, perhaps from a faulty Greek text. The New
Testament and most LXX texts have Libanon here. In I Chronicles 5:23 Mt. Hermon
(K. 20:9) is in the lot of Manasseh. The placement of the tribal indication last
suggests it is a later editor's addition.

47. Azēka (Azeca). Joshua 10:10; K. 18:10; L. 238:16.

Azeka is important Old Testament city in Jouda (cf. Joshua 15:35). It is
mentioned in the Lachich letters. The Old Testament site is fairly certain at
Tell es-Zakariyeh. This village may be on the Maddba Map west of Sōebō. In the
vicinity is the Byzantine town, perhaps at Kh el 'Alami. The Greek location
literally means "halfway" to Jerusalem, but this is not precisely intended.

Eleutheropolis is frequently used as a referent by Eusebius. In about 200 A.D.
Septimus Severus gave it municipal status. It was a city on which a great many
villages were dependent. It was one of the largest regions in Palestina Prima.
In Tabula Peutinger and Ptolemy it is called Betogabri and is located 32 miles
from Jerusalem. It suffered greatly under Diocletion about 303 A.D. A bisbop
attended the Council of Nicea. It is the present Beit jibrin. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Azeca, strength or crafty" (88).

48. Ailōm (Aialon). Joshua 10:12; K. 18:13; L. 238:19.

Textual variant: aialun (Latin).

Eusebius, followed by the Madaba Map, seems to be confused with Ailmōn (K. 28:l;
cf. Joshua 21:18). This could be 'Almit, east of Tell el Ful or Kh Haiyan both
near Rama (K. 144:14) and Gabaa (K. 70:10, 22). The location in reference to
Bethel points to Kh el 'alja (cf. I Samuel 10:26, Judges 19:13) to the
southeast. The Hebrew tradition by which Jerome corrects Eusebius is much more
reasonable. It fits the biblical materials and is repeated by Jerome in
Commentary on Ezekiel 42:22 and Ezekiel 42:22 and Epistle 108:3 (cf. Paula vi,
PPT, I,51) This Alous was known by Eusebius (K. 30:27) as in the Nicopolis
region. It must then be Jalo, east of 'Amwas on the road to Jerusalem.

Ailōn in Interpretation of Hebrew Names is referred to the previous Aulonem (88)
or, for Aialon "fields or valleys" (90).

49. Achōr. Joshua 7:24, 26; K. 18:17; L. 238:23.

Note the error in the Greek where the name of Achan is turned into Achōr and the
valley named after him (Hosea 2:15). Procopius and K. 84:18 have an entry under
Emekachōr, i.e., "valley of Achōr." Procopius 1017 A writes, "Emekachōr is
interpreted by Thedotion and Symmachos, valley of Achōr. Located north of
Ierichō it is even now called this by those in the vicinity. Achōr means
"perverted." Jerome's Epistle 108:13 and Paula VI, PPT 1, 12) writes "It would
be quite lengthy if I would discuss the valley of Achor, i.e. commotion or
uproar, where theft and greed were condemned." This is not a city, out of order,
so suspect.

It seems obvious that the name of the "place" was known in the fourth century,
possibly near Gilgal (K. 84:21). The Wadi Nue 'ime fits Eusebius. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "commotion or uproar" (89), "commotion or uproar
or perverted" (120).

50. Asēdōth. Joshua 10:40; K. 18:21; L. 238:27.

Cf. K. 16:22 above. This is one of six entries where "another" or "a second" is
used for occurrences of the same name, probably indicating editing of several
sources.

51. Asōr. Joshua 11:1; K. 20:1; L. 238:29.

Ancient Hazor has been well excavated and the location attested at Tell el
Qedah, but Eusebius does not locate it. Procopius 1048D reports, "it alone
Iēsous burned while besieging the other kings since it was the chief of the
foreigners" (Joshua 11:10 also Joshua 90:9; cf. K. 30:22. The second Asōr (cf.
Esōr K. 84:26) from Joshua 15:25 is near Askolon and probably dependent upon it.
It may be present day jasur east of Asbdod (K. 20:18).

Interpretation of Hebrew Names has "arrow of light" (88 and102) and "entrance
hall" (109).

52. Aermōn. Joshua 11:3, 17; K. 20:6; L. 238:34.

LXX also uses the term Baalermon. Vatican manuscript has Ailerthmōn.

Again a mountain gives its name to a region which was the frontier of Og and of
the tribes. It is part of the Anti-libanas (K. 18:8) range. Also called Sanir
(K. 20:10) or Sanior, and Sirjon (see below K. 20:9, cf. Judges 3:3). The snows
of Hermon were famous for delicacies of ice in the course of history. The
inhabitants of Beirut still bring snow, even snowmen on radiators of cars, down
from the mountains in the summer. Even now it is at times called jebel el teld
or "mount of snow," but mostly jebel esh sheikh.

Tyrus (K. 162:15) is also called Sor.

Interpretation of Hebrew Names "banned wall" (88).

53. Alak (Aalac). Joshua 11:17; K. 20:7; L. 238:35.

Textual variant: Ahalac (Latin). It is not in the New Testament. This entry is
textually corrupt. In the Vatican Manuscript a new hand is recognized and
several words have been added. Perhaps an attempt is made to use LXX and add
Symmachus. As noted previously, mountains, three of which are here in successive
entries together, are suspect as not fitting the original purpose and
limitations of the Onomasticon to place names.

Interpretation of Hebrew Names "my portion or slippery" (88).

54. Aermōn. Joshua 11:17; K. 20:9; L. 238:37.

Textual variant: For Saniōr the Vatican Manuscript has Aniōr. This mountain (cf.
K. 20:6 and K. 18:8) is given several names. The Phoenicians called it Sirjon.
In Ugaritic it is ah-r-j-n and in Hittite Sarijana and perhaps indicates the
Anti-libanos range. The Amorites called it Senir and the Assyrians Sanian. In
LXX we find both Sanir and Saneir. Eusebius records some of these traditions
(Deuteronomy 3:9; Joshua 12:1).

Paganism was not extinct in the fourth century. Ruins of a temple at Banyas have
been found. The information Eusebius records of this pagan cult is dependent
upon an anonymous source, quite possibly only hearsay. This seems to be the
purport of phasin, "they say" or "it is reported" (cf. the Latin dicitur).
Paneas became an autonomous city at the death of Agrippa II and was called
briefly Caesarea Philippi.

55. Anōb. Joshua 11:21; K. 20:15; L. 238:44.

Textual variants: Bētoannab (Greek) and Bethoannaba (Latin).

Eusebius' reference here is to Bētoannaba which is as confusing as his reference
to Anea (K. 26:8). Jerome attempts to correct Eusebius at Beit Nuba near
Nikopolis but the Madaba Map follows Eusebius and identifies Anob with
Bētoannaba to the East of Diospolis (K. 8:14). In the Roman post service, the
horses were changed every four miles and the two authors have two locations.
Eusebius probably identifies 'innaba as his Bētoannaba. Four miles is distance
to turn off from the main road. Jerome seems to intend Beit nūba for his
Bēthannaba. Both sites have Roman-Byzantine ruins. The proper Old Testament site
is Kh 'Anab. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "my submissiveness" (88).

56. Asdōd. Joshua 11:22; K. 20:18; L. 238:47.

Cf. below K. 22:11. Note "oppidum" in Latin (cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix II).

57. Ader. Joshua 12:14; K. 20:21; L. 238:50.

Possibly confused with K. 62:5 and K. 68:11. The letter G is noted as missing in
the by Hebrew by Jerome (K. 63:4, cf. also K. 43:22).

Interpretation of Hebrew Names "flock" (88).

58. Aphek (Afec). Joshua 12:18; K. 22:1; L. 238:52.

Textual variant: Aphak (Greek).

Eusebius has several references to Aphek (K. 22:19, K. 30:16, K. 34:11, cf. K.
26:15). No location is indicated in this entry. The three items listed together
seem to be copied from a list of cities conquered by Iēsous. Probably for eight
different towns in the Old Testament.

Interpretation of Hebrew Names "surrounded or border" (89) "new madness or
bounded" (102), "he surrounds or reaches to" (114).

59. Aksaph (Acsaf). Joshua 12:20; K. 22:3; L. 239:54.

Textual variants: Achaselōth and Exalous (Greek) and Asapb, Asapat and Ascaph
(Latin).

Aksaph is wrongly connected with Chasalous and its real biblical location is in
debate: et Tell, Tell Far, Tell Harbaj, Tell Keisan, Kh el musheirefeh are all
preferred by some scholars to the homonymy KhIksa. However Kh Iksa may be
Eusebius' Chasalous. It has Byzantine remains. (But see K.28:23).

Thabōr is a city on the mountain which is used by Eusebius as a referent.
Located at jebel at-Tor (cf. K. 98:23). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"limping or made, i.e. poiēsis (creation)" (89).

60. Akkarōn (Accaron). Joshua 13:3; K. 22:6; L. 239:57.

Akkarōn is the Greek form of the name given to one of the five cities of the
Philistines, Ekron (see next entry cf. K. 32:11, K. 62:22, K. 68.4). The Madaba
Map puts Akkarōn near Iamnia (K. 106:20) on the road to Azōtus (K. 22:11). The
map has the name repeated possibly for ancient and modern site with identical
names in Greek. The Old Testament site seems to be at Kh Muqenna' a very large
site with proper sherds. The name is reflected in 'Aqir which is a Byzantine to
modern site and perhaps was the one which Eusebius had in mind. Jerome reports
an obviously erroneous tradition which would locate it at Caesarea. This is one
of eleven towns reported to be inhabited by Jews in Eusebius' day (K. 26:9, K.
26:12, K. 86:18, K. 88:17, K. 98:26, K. 108:8, K. 78:6, K. 86:21, K. 92:21, K.
136:24 plus perhaps Nineveh (K. 136:2) cf. Appendix II.

Interpretation of Hebrew Names "teaching of gloom or barrenness" (89) "flocks
grazing or is pasture as the Greek has en poimniotrophiois (sheep feeders)"
(123).

61. Azōtos (Azotus). Joshua 13:3; K. 22:11; L. 239:63.

Textual variant: Askadōd (Greek). Note Latin transliteration Allefylous (cp. K.
68:24 and Azotes is the Greek of I Maccabees 4:15 etc. for this Philistine city,
cf. the more general entry in K. 20:18 (Joshua 15:47, Judges 1:18). The
continued use of the name probably accounts for the lack of any location being
given here. After all it is one of the famous cities of his time as also is
Askalōn (K. 22:15) and Gaza (K. 62:26). In K. 20:19 Eusebius uses polichnē but
in K. 22:11 polis. He uses polichnē for only four other cities of his time:
Iamneia (K. 106:20), Sebastē (K. 154:22), Gaza (K. 130:8) and Gabe (K. 70:8).
The Madaba Map has the two cities, one coastal and one inland. Reflecting the
Greek of Eusebius it may be suggesting that in the 4th to 6th centuries the
inland Ashdod was less important. The Tabula Peutinger locates Asdōd ten miles
from Iamnia (K. 106:20) and twelve miles from Askalōn. Procopius 1024B retains
the double names Asdōd and Azōtos. Josephus also reported on the double Azōtos.
Jerome in Commentary on Isaiah 20:1 writes "Azotus," which is called Esdod by
the Hebrews, is the most powerful of the five cities of Palestine." It was made
a municipality by Vespasian. The other Philistine cities are in K. 22:6, K.
22:15, K. 62:22 and K. 68:4. The ancient Philistine site at 'eshdud is being
excavated. The Roman-Byzantine settlement is strong and prosperous on the old
site. The ancient sea port was at Tell Mor, but the Roman-Byzantine port is at
Minet el caāa and it was of increasing importance in Eusebius' time. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Azotii, i.e. Asdodi, fire of my uncle or
burning"(89) "Azotus is called by the Hebrews Esdod and they have the same
etymology, fire of the uncle" (143) "Ashdod destruction or violent movement or
burning"(88).

62. Askalōn (Ascalon). Joshua 13:3; K. 22:15; L. 239:67.

Askalōn is one of the "famous cities" in the Onomasticon and another of the five
Philistine cities (see previous entry). According to Josephus Wars I,21, 11
Herod the Great rebuilt it. Jews were there from the first century on and a
synagogue has been excavated from late Roman times. For a brief period a city
Diocletianopolis was in the vicinity named after the Emperor. It may be the same
town, but the Onomasticon makes no mention of it. A bishop from Askalōn was at
the Council of Nicea. There is a large walled city on the Madaba Hap south of
Azōtus (cf. Joshua 15:25, Judges 1:18) As a city it is used as a referent by the
Onomasticon. The Tabula Peutinger locates it 12 miles from Azōtus (K. 22:11) and
15 miles from Gaza (K. 62:22). Tell 'Ashalon is the site for all periods with
the Roman and Byzantine city expanding off and around the mound. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "weight or disreputable fire" (89) "disreputable
fire or ignoble fire" (143).

63. Apheka (Afeca). Joshua 13:4; K. 22:19; L. 239:71. A number of Apheks are in
the Onomasticon (cf. K. 22:1). This Apheka is one of three contemporary villages
called "great" in the text (cf. Thamna 96:25 and Magdiel 130:21) but others are
episēmos "famous" or "notable," megistai (splendid) rather than megalē (large).
The location "near" or "in the vicinity of" is very inexact in the terms of our
text. Sometimes it is made more exact by a second location which gives mileage.

Hippos is a city of the Decapolis and is near present day Susita (Aramaic for
the Greek?). The remains are primarily Qalat el Husn. A great Hellenistic-Roman
and Byzantine site is there. Its region included dependent villages such as
Apheka. On the plateau east, the Sea of Galilee (K. 72:21) is the present day
Fiq which suits the Onomasticon and is on the road between Damascus and Beisan.
The change in its fortunes over a century may be indicated by the change to
"large castle" in Jerome. Or it may merely be Jerome's Hebrew knowledge coming
through since Hebrew aphek can be translated "fortress" (Appendix IX).

Palestine may be East Jordan called Palastinē Secunda.

64. Algad (Agad). Joshua 13:5; K. 22:22; L. 239:74.

Here as in many entries the Onomasticon merely quotes the Bible. Perhaps this
should be Baalgad as in MT (cf. K. 48:1). The LXX transliteration is used.

65. Aimath (Aemoth). Joshua 13:5; K. 22:23; L. 239:75.

Textual variants: Aitham (Greek) and for "other" Amatha (Latin).

Possibly three or four towns are involved in these lines. In the Peraia and
located in relation to Pella (cf. K. 14:19), this Ammathous was a chief city in
Herodian Peraia. It is probably Tell 'Ammata near Tell el Qos. This site has
many Roman-Byzantine sherds. The Talmud identifies this with Saphon (K. 156:1)
which may have been at Tell el Qos. There was probably a Roman garrison at this
first Ammathous according to Notitia Dignitatum (73:33).

Near Gadara (K. 74:10) in the Bethshan valley there is a Tell el Hamah which may
reflect Emmatha and possibly the city of Roubin. Better for Eusebius is nearby
scheri 'at-el mensdire where there are springs, baths and extensive Roman
establishments. Note how each of these first two are localized in a different
manner.

Jerome's addition is the present Syrian town of Hamath on the Orontes (cf. K.
36:10). The fourth town in Syria was the Northeast limit of David's kingdom as
noted here from II Kings 14:25f. Its identity with Epiphania is repeated in K.
90:7 and in Jeromes' Commentary on Isaiah 10:5. But in the Commentary on Amos
6:2 he apparently sees that as the "little Emath" while the "great Emath is now
called Antiochia." Possibly this Hamath also is in K. 88:30 below.

66. Ammon. Josua 13:10, 25; K. 24:1; L. 239:81.

Cf. 16:15 above.

67. Adira. Joshua 15:3; K. 24:3; L. 239:83. The broken section of the Madaba Map
may include Addara near Diospolis (K. 8:14). The location of the biblical site
is unknown as is the location of the "other" site. The best suggestion is Kh ed
Deir for the region of Diospolis (cp. K. 80:11).

Thamna (K. 96:24) on the southern border of Joudas is in the region also of
Diospolis. It gives its name to the Thamnitikē southwest of Nablus. If Jerome is
consistent, there is indication of a change in fortune for the worse in the
century.

68. Akarka. Joshua 15:3; K. 24:6; L. 239:86.

Textual variants: Akkarka and Akarkas (Greek). The text is unclear. It may be a
confusion for Ekron, Akkarōn (K. 22:6). Or with the LXX it may be the Hebrew
article transliterated. Near the steppe or desert could fit Karkaia (K. 116:18)
a day beyond Petra, but that is inconsistent with the tribe of Jouda annotation.
No identification is possible.

69. Achōr. Joshua 15:7; K. 24:8; L. 239:88. The last part of this entry is
missing in the Vatican Manuscript. A Simple tribal listing. See K. 18:17 and K.
84:18.

70. Adommim. Joshua 15:7; K. 24:9; L. 239:89.

Textual variants: Adonim and Addommim (Latin).

There is a strong possibility that the Greek text is incomplete and that Jerome
is not adding information to Eusebius. The first word is missing in the Vatican
Manuscript. This is "deserted" or in ruins at the editor's time. It is also
called "a place" but not a "deserted place" literally. This is the only use,
however, of "deserted village" in the Onomasticon. Jerome in Epistle 108:12
(Paula PPT I,11) writes, "she passed by, (i.e. on the road from Jerusalem to
Jerico), reflecting on the kindness of the Samaritan, that is of the shepherd
who put the half dead man upon his own beast and brought him to the fold of the
church and the place Adomim which is translated 'of blood' because much blood
was shed there in the frequent inroads of robbers" (Luke 10:30ff.).

Maledommei means "ascent of blood" and in Arabic Qal'at ed damm means almost the
same thing, "fort of blood", while Tal'at ed damm would be identical in meaning.
This spot is located just about half way to Jericho. The tradition of robbers,
of the Good Samaritan is reinforced by the reddish limestone in the area.
Popularly the Chan el Ahmar is pointed out, but the spot is really off the road
farther, perhaps at Qal'at ed damm. The garrison in the area between Jerusalem
and Jericho is reported elsewhere in Notitia Dignitatum (74:47-48). Baldi
suggests that Jerome reflects the present scattered tradition. The ascent of
blood seems to refer to the geographic position; the fort of blood to the Roman
fort, and the supposed sites of the parable Chan el Hatrūn and of the Inn Chan
el Ahmar.

71. Amam. Joshua 15:26; K. 24:12; L. 240:92.

Textual variant: Amem (Greek). A simple listing of the tribal allotment occurs
frequently, especially in the Joshua entries. Jouda more frequently localized
than other tribes suggesting the early source of Onomasticon was developed in
Jewish times in Jerusalem.

72. Aser. Joshua 15:27; K. 24:12; L. 240:93. In Mt.Hezron and Hazor are equated
and located on southern border of Judah (cp. K. 20:3 above). In Eusebius' time
it was a large village but location is uncertain.

73. Asarsoual (Asarsual). Joshua 15:28; K. 24:14; L. 240:95.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "home of foxes" (90).

74. Ain. Joshua 15:32; K. 24:15; L. 240:96.

Textual variants: Baithanin, Bēithanin, Bēthcnim (K. 94:20 Greek) and cf. ēnaim
also.

Located with two mileage markers from the terebinth (K. 76:1) and Chebron (K.
170:25) two well-used referents (cf. Joshua 21:16). This Bēethanin is probably
the same as Beit 'ainun, north of Hebron. This is probably the real location of
either Bethalōth (K. 50:17) or Bēthenim (K. 94:20). In the MT it is quite
probable that Ain was only a prefix to Rimmon (K. 144:11) Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "eye or well" (89); "well" (79); "well or eye" (118); but
"interrogation" (88).

75. Asthaōl. Joshua 15:33; K. 24:18; L. 240:99.

Asthō is not a proper identification for Asthaōl. At Asthō there may have been a
Roman garrison (Notitia Dignitatum 73:35-36) but its remains are undefinable. A
border town in the Onomasticon but not clearly located.

76. Asna. Joshua 15:35; K. 24:20; L. 240:1.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 26:4).

77. Adolam (Adollam). Joshua 15:35; K. 24:21; L. 240:2. The size of this village
seems in debate between Eusebius and Jerome or it changed in the century. It is
dependent upon Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) but is not on a major Roman road. In
the MT it is in the Shephelah and probably located at Tell esh sheikh Madkur
(cf. K. 84:22 and K. 140:20). The Vulgate has variants Adullam. Odullam and
Odollam (cf. K. 84:22 where such a village is twelve miles east of
Eleutheropolis) and K. 172:7 near Chasbi also in the region of Eleutheropolis)
at Kh id el Minya south of Chasbi. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Adollamin,
their society" (89) and Adollam also (106).

78. Adiathaim (Adithaim). Joshua 15:36; K. 24:23; L. 240:4.

Textual variants: Adatha and Adiathaeim (Greek). In the Madaba Map we find
Adlathim which now is Aditha, east of Diospolis. Adia does not appear as the
name of the village near Gaza in the Greek texts. The Latin texts vary as to
Adia a village or little village and Aditha around or near Diospolis. On the
Tabula Peutinger there is an Addianim which may or may not be related to this
entry.

Apparently Aditha is added here by confusion of sounds. This town in Eusebius
and on the Madaba Map is northeast of Lydd at el Haditha (cf. I Maccabees 12:38
and Ezra 2:33). The original Adiathain is located at another el Haditeh, north
of Yalu (Ajalōn). This may be stretched as a location "near Gaza" but probably,
the first village Adia is unknown.

79. Adasa. Joshua 15:37; K. 26:1; L. 240:6.

Textual variants: Gouphna, Gophna, Taphnōn, Gophnōn (Greek cf. K. 168:16, K.
74:2) and Gofnesem (Latin). The biblical reference is to a town in the Shephelah
which is not clearly identified, but Kh el judeideh has been suggested. Eusebius
has been confused and Jerome says so in clear fashion (cf. Joshua 16:5 and
Onomasticon K. 29:7). Probably the village Eusebius would locate for us is Kh
'Adaseh near Beth Horon referred to in I Maccabees 7:40. Gouphōn comes into the
picture because of Josephus Wars I, I, 5-6 which connects Nicanor's retreat and
fall with Gophonitikē. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Adasa, new" (89).

80. Ather. Joshua 15:42; K. 26:3; L. 240:8.

Textual variants: Atherei, Ether and Acherei (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Athar, depreciating"
(89).

81. Asan. Joshua 15:42; K. 26:4; L. 240:9.

Textual variant: Theuasa (Greek). Latin omits "to the west."

Bethasan is a dependent village of Jerusalem. In MT it should be found in the
Shephelah. This may be Adasa of I Maccabees 7:40. It is probably beit shenna
near 'amwas. The Old Testament site is Kh 'Asan northwest of Beersheba. Perhaps
Eusebius is locating here the Ashna of Joshua 15:23 which is only listed in the
Onomasticon at K. 24:20. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Asam, smoke" (90) or
"smoking" (102).

82. Asema. Joshua 15:43; K. 26:6; L. 240:11. A simple tribal listing. Possibly
related to Iedna K. 106:15.

83. Achzeib (Agzif). Joshua 15:44; K. 26:7; L. 240:13.

Textual variant: Azeib (Greek). A simple tribal listing.

84. Anab. Joshua 15:50; K. 26:8; L. 240:14. This entry is probably identical to
K. 20:15. The Anab located by Eusebius in the territory of Eleutheropolis is
appropriate. The reference to Annia is confusing (cf. Bethanatha K. 52:24). This
is another of the villages inhabited by Jews, most of which are in southern
Judah (K. 22:9). A neighboring town is all Christian (K. 26:14). This twin city
has been identified with Kh Juweim el Jarbiya southwest of Hebron. The higher
one to the east is Christian and the lower Jewish. Nine miles marks off from
main road. The Daroma is a region south of Judah and southwest of Edom. Daroma
is one of the many Hebrew words for "South" [(cf. Negeb (K. 136:14) and Theman
(K. 137:15)]. At least 15 towns are in the Daroma according to the Onomasticon
(K. 26:12, 60:8, 68:19, 70:11, 78:21, 86:9, 86:21, 88:4, 88:18, 92:15, 98:27,
108:3, 108:10, 110:18, 120:22, 146:25, 156:12, 172:21).

85. Asthemō (Asthemof). Joshua 15:50; K. 26:11; L. 240:17.

Textual variants: Ansoema, cp. Esthemo (K. 86:20), Esthama (K. 90:2) and Ansim
for the contemporary site (Greek), Anem (Latin).

Only Jerome notes this to be a Jewish village and probably it is es semu'a where
remains of a synagogue have been found. It is near Anaia (K. 26:9) another
Jewish village (cf. Note on K. 22:9). The Greek K. 86:20 notes it is a large
Jewish village in the Daroma (Appendix II). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Esthamoe, woman of the womb" (93) and "Esthamma, passion" (93).

86. Aneim (Anim). Joshua 15:50; K. 26:13; L. 240:19. This entry is related to K.
26:8 above. This is the twin of the Jewish village which probably continued on
the Old Testament site. This Christian village is new and upper Kh Juwein el
Foqa also called Juwien esh-Shargiya. There are only three wholly Christian
villages in the Onomasticon over against almost a dozen wholly Jewish ones
listed (cf. K. 112:16 Kariatha). Very close in the west is Ietheira (K. 108:3).
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Anem, circles or crowns or singing" (89).

87. Aphaka (Afeca). Joshua 15:53; K. 26:15; L. 240:22. A simple tribal listing,
but one of the many related to Aphek in both the Old Testament and the
Onomasticon (cf. K. 22:19).

88. Amata (Ammata). Joshua 15:54; K. 26:16; L. 240:23.

Textual variants: Ammata (Greek), Ammeta (Latin) and Athmatha (Vulgate). A
simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ammeta, light" (89).

89. Arebba. Joshua 15:60; K. 26:17; L. 240:24.

Textual variant: Aremba for MT rabbah (Greek). A simple tribal listing.

90. Archiatarōth (Ataroth). Joshua 16:2; K. 26:18; L. 241:25.

Textual variant: Ramam (Latin). The Greek calls this a biblical city, which the
Latin text omits. The Latin gives a vague location while the Greek has none. The
Greek combines this entry with the next as is done by the LXX.

91. Atarōth. Joshua 16:5; K. 26:19; L. 241:26. The Old Testament site is not
clearly located by scholars. Some see the name as persisting near Bir Zeit in Kh
'Attarah. In Eusebius' time there were two Atarōths dependent on Jerusalem (K.
26:26, K. 112:6). The Onomasticon errs in locating it four miles north of
Sebestē (K. 154:21) at 'attara. But the 4 miles marks the turn off from main
road to the contemporary village there. This is one of the few places in the
Greek text where the word miliōn is used for "mile." The usual word is "semeiōn"
for "sign" indicating milestone or marker. In Latin the most frequent term for
milestone is lapidus but occasionally miliarius is used. More infrequently milus
and millus for 1000 paces or mile "between" or "from" a site. In K. 27:24
lapidus has a textual variant miliarius.

Sebastē is the Roman city of Samaria (K. 162:13, K. 154:21) and is used as a
referent the Bible and Onomasticon. Dothaeim is also north of Sebastē (K.
76:13).

92. Adar. Joshua 16:5; K. 26:21; L. 241:28. A simple tribal listing.

93. Asēr. Joshua 17:10; K. 26:22; L. 241:29.

See also Aser above (K. 24:13) in Judah.

Many of the pilgrims located the home of Job fifteen miles from Nablus on the
main road from the Jordan Valley (cf. PPT I, 18, 67) and it probably is the
present tajasir. In the Onomasticon the home of Job is far away (K. 112:6, K.
142:3).

94. Atarōth. Joshua 18:13; K. 26:25; L. 241:32. The two villages are probably
both called now Kh'attara, one near Bir Zeit (above K. 26:19) and the other east
of Hizma dependent upon Jerusalem (K. 112:6). These may only be retaining the
name and the Old Testament sites are to be located elsewhere.

95. Anathōth. Joshua 21:18; K. 26:27; L. 241:34.

Jerome in Commentary on Jeremiah 11:21 agrees with the three miles given here.
The Roman-Byzantine site for the home of Jeremiah was the present village of
'Anata. Josephus has it 20 stadia from Jerusalem (Antiquities X, 7, 3). There
are more ancient remains but not as many at nearby Ras el Harrubeh which may be
the Old Testament site. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Anathoth, obeying or
responding to signs" (90) and "response or responding to signs or obedience"
(125).

96. Adar (Addar). Joshua 18:13; K. 26:30; L. 241:37. A simple tribal listing.
This may be an addition if the previous entry is correct. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Adar, splendid or coverlet" (89).

97. Ailmōn (Aelomon). Joshua 21:18; K. 28:1; L. 241:38.

Textual variant Ailōn (Greek).

Cf. also K. 18:13. This is out of the biblical order.

98. Amekkasis (Amez-casis). Joshua 18:21; K. 28:2; L. 241:39.

Textual variant Amekasis (Greek). The Latin has proper MT translation of Amek or
emek "valley" but the location is unknown. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Emeccasis, valley of breaking up" (93).

99. Aueim (Avim). Joshua 18:23; K. 28:3; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek text. Not in
Vatican Manuscript. A simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Eneam, behold you or behold they are" (93).

100. Aphra. Joshua 18:23; K. 28:4; L. 241:40.

Textual variant Effrem (Latin). The village Aiphraim fits this location. A
textual variant has six for five miles. Madaba Map with "Ephron or Ephraia" may
reflect Jerome's spelling. Seems that Eusebius has the correct location at et
tayibe (cf. K. 86:1). For Ophra, Ephron, Ephraim and Aphra. Madaba map notes the
New Testament event as in K. 90:18. A strong Maccabean city (I Maccabees 5:46).
It was occupied by Vespasian (Antiquities IV, 9, 9).

101. Ammōenia (Ammoeniam). Joshua 18:24; K. 28:6; L. 241:42. A simple tribal
listing. Vulgate has Emona for MT Ammonah. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Ammona, his people" (90).

102. Aphnei (Afni). Joshua 18:24; K. 28:7; L. 241:43.

Simple tribal listing, probably the same as the Gophna (jifna) of the pilgrims.
Cf. K. 168:16.

103. Alph. Joshua 18:28; K. 28:8; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek text.

Simple tribal listing. Missing in the Latin text.

104. Arēm (Arim). Joshua 18:28; K. 28:9; L. 241:45. This is a Greek
transliteration for "villages" in the MT. The Bēthariph near Diospolis (K. 8:14)
may be dair tarif near Lydda and off the main road. The Greek has been emended
here from the Latin text. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Eram, sublime life"
(94).

105. Amsa. Joshua 18:26; K. 28:11; L. 241:47.

Textual variant Ampsa (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. Possibly out of order and suspect.

106. Asar. Joshua 19:3; K. 28:12; L. 241:48.

Simple tribal listing.

107. Asan. Joshua 19:3; K. 28:13; L. 241:49.

Textual variant Aaon (Latin). A simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Asan, smoke" (90).

108. Amarchabob. Joshua 19:5; K. 28:14; L. 241:50.

Textual variant Amarchabōn (Greek). A simple tribal listing.

109. Ain. Joshua 19:7; K. 28:15; L. 241:51. A simple tribal listing with
editorial addition from the list of priestly cities. Thus a tribe could be given
to two tribes as on the border. Loyalty may have shifted (cp. K. 50:1, 88:11,
98:22, 130:6, 144:11, etc.).

110. Asenna. Joshua 19:7; K. 28:16; L. 241:52. A simple tribal listing.

111. Ammathar. Joshua 19:13; K. 28:17; L. 241:53.

Textual variant Amatha (Greek).

Simple tribal listing.

112. Anoua (Anua). Joshua 19:13; K. 28:18; L. 241:54.

Textual variants: Anoua apioutōn, Anouabōr kai and Anoua boreēthen. Josephus has
Anouathon Borkaios (Wars III 3, 5). Vatican manuscript also has Anouan for
Ailian an obvious scribal error. There is a variation of 5 miles between the
Greek and Latin Text.

Location is unknown for the Roman-Byzantine site.

113. Anathōn. Joshua 19:14; K. 28:21; L. 241:57.

Textual variants: Anathōth (Greek) and Annathon (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ennathon, giving
favor" (93).

114. Acheselōth (Achaseloth). Joshua 19:18; K. 28:22; L. 241:58.

Textual variants: Achaseluth and (for contemporary site) Chaslus (Latin).

Cf. K. 22:4 for similar location of Chaslous probably at iksal southeast of
Nazareth (K. 138:24) which preserves part of the ancient name. Probably to be
equated with Chaselath Thabor (K. 174:11).

115. Aiphraim (Aefraim). Joshua 19:19; K. 28:25; L. 241:61.

Textual variant Afraim (Latin). The biblical site is unknown since et taiyebeh
suggested by some is really Ophra (cf. K. 28:4 above). The Byzantine Aphraia is
probably Kh Fareir northwest of Legeōn (K. 14:21) and properly measured in
distance to turn off from main road. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Efraim,
growing or fruitful" (81, cf. 65) "fertile or growth which we are not able to
call Augentium, from growing." (142).

116. Anerth (Anereth). Joshua 19:19; K. 28:27; L. 242:64. A simple tribal
listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Enarath, behold be takes hold" (93).

117. Aims (Aemes). Joshua 19:20; K. 28:28; L. 242:65.

Textual variant Aim (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ames, powerful" (90).

118. Achsaph (Achsaf). Joshua 19:25; K. 30:1; L. 242:66.

Textual variant Achiam (Greek).

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 22:3). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Acsa,
limping or dead" (89).

119. Alimelech. Joshua 19:26; K. 30:2; L. 242:67.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 22:3). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Ekunekech, my god is king" (102).

120. Amod (Amath). Joshua 19:26; K. 30:3; L. 242:68.

Textual variant in LXX Amad.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Amath, these people"
(90).

121. Abdōn. Joshua 19:28; K. 30:4; L. 242:69.

Textual variants: Ardōn (Greek) and Dabbōn (LXX B).

Simple tribal listing. The Latin has added from the list of Levitical cities and
the Greek could be emended so, but such listings are a later editing. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Abdo, his slave" (90) "Abdon, slave of the wall"
(99).

122. Aneiēl (Aniel). Joshua 19:27; K. 30:5; L. 242:70.

Textual variants: Aneir and Aniel (Greek). The Byzantine Baitoannaia (cf. K.
52:24) is 'Anin, off the road to Legeōn, east of Caesarea the mileage is mark
for leaving main highway. It has nothing to do with the identity of the Old
Testament site. In K. 70:8 a Gabe is 16 miles east of Caesarea but this is no
problem since a quadrant is involved, not the same road. It is peculiar that an
anonymous report on the healing qualities is recorded by an author from nearby
Caesarea. Did Eusebius doubt the volcanic baths' power? Or is this indication of
an editor? (Cp. K. 52:24.) In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Enihel, god is my
grace" (81).

123. Achran. Joshua 19:28; K. 30:8; L. 242:73.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Achran, he disturbed
them" (78).

124. Ammōn. Joshua 19:28; K. 30:9; L. 242:74.

Textual variant Amon (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ammnon, people of the
wall" (90).

125. Akchō (Accho). Joshua 19:30; K. 30:10; L. 242:75.

Textual variant Akko (Greek).

Procopius 1048A has "Agcho, it is now said to be Ptolemais." The identity is
repeated by Jerome's Epistle 108:f. (cf. Paula PPT I, 4) Tabula Peutinger has
Ptolemais 32 miles from Tyre end 20 from Dor. There was a bishop from here at
the Council of Nicea. The ancient city is east of the modern town of Acre. A
whole complex of Roman roads led there. It is often used as a referent in the
Onomasticon. It was a territory as described in Josephus Wars II, 10, 2. The
reference to Israel's incomplete conquest is from Judges 1:31 (cf. below K.
30:12, 16). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Accho, up to this or hook or his
submissiveness" (98).

126. Achzeiph (Achzif). Joshua 19:29; K. 30:12; L. 242:77. The first portion of
this entry is not in the Vatican manuscript but has been emended on the basis of
the Latin. The mileage is also missing in Vatican. Vulgate variant has Achazib.

All agree with Eusebius that Ekdippa was the same as Achzib (Josephus Wars I,
13, 4 (Itin. Bourd 19, 5). Many Roman-Byzantine-Arab artifacts found here. The
distance is exact for ez zib which still reflects the same name. Some
itineraries have 8 miles for Eusebius' 9. This reflects difference in counting:
from center of city or first milestone from edge, etc. Israel's failure noted in
Judges 1:31(cf. K. 30:10).

127. Amma. Joshua 19:30; K. 30:15; L. 242:79.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Amma, his people"
(90).

128. Aphek (Afec). Joshua 19:30; K. 30:16; L. 242:80.

Another of the many Apheks. Israel's failure in Judges 1:31 (cf. K. 30:10, 12).

129. Ademmei (Ademme). Joshua 19:33; K. 30:18; L. 242:82.

Textual variants Armai (LXX) and Aderni (Syr.). Confusing Hebrew daleth and
resh.

Simple tribal listing.

130. Asedeim (Aseddim). Joshua 19:35; K. 30:19; L. 242:83. This is a name based
on a LXX variant which has incorporated the Hebrew article into the
transliteration. LXX also confused the Hebrew daleth and resh. The Vulgate
Assedim appears. Onomasticon correct with d from Hebrew.

Simple tribal listing.

131. Amath. Joshua 19:35; K. 30:20; L. 242:84.

Textual variants: Amathi (Greek) and Ematha (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Amath, this people"
(90).

132. Adami. Joshua 19:36; K. 30:21; L. 242:85.

Simple tribal listing.

133. Asōr. Joshua 19:36; K. 30:22; L. 242:86.

Simple tribal listing plus II Kings 15:29. Cp. K. 20:1 above.

Possibly these five Nephtheim entries are from a late list added or else the
following entry is an addition out of order.

134. Azanōth. Joshua 19:34; K. 30:24; L. 242:88.

Textual variant Azananōth (Greek).

Another of the villages dependent on Diokaesareia but Eusebius is not sure about
the location.

135. Ailōn. Joshua 19:43; K. 30:26; L. 242:90.

Textual variants: Ahialon and Ahilon (Latin).

Eusebius seems to be confused here. Perhaps this is the Aialon of Jerome 19:16.
Nikopolis is in the Valley of Aialon. In 220/1 A.D. Emaus was given the name
Nikopolis (cf. K. 90:1.5). It was a famous city and a regional free city
including both Aislon and Gezer (K. 66:21) in its territory. There was a bishop
at the Council of Nicea from this chief city of the district. Jerome's Epistle
108 reports a church here. It is present day 'Amwas. Alous is the located at
Yalu.

JUDGES 136. Arad. Judges 1:16; K. 32:2; L. 242:94.

Textual variant Arab (Greek).

See above K. 14:1f.

137. Ared. Joshua Judges 7:1; K. 32:4; L. 242:96.

Rivers, wells, mountains are all suspect entries in the Onomasticon. This is
also out of order in the biblical sequence of things and suspect for that second
reason also (cf. K. 36:4, 54:21, 72:22, 116:23, 116:25, 118:11).

138. Arisōth. Judges 4:2; K. 32:5; L. 242:97.

Textual variant Asiroth (Latin).

Eusebius identifies erroneously this with Iabeia Galaad (cf. K. 110:11f). Iabis
is located six miles from Pella (K. 14:19) in both entries and this points to
vicinity of Tell el Maqlub, which is the Old Testament site. Byzantine site is
Kh Isna exactly six miles from Pella. By Procopius' time (1049A) it was a
village, no longer a great city. But Procopius has confused the distance - 20
miles from Pella and 60 from Gerasa. (The Greek of Procopius has been corrected
from the Onomasticon to read six, but only in Latin is the text complete for
Procopius on this item.). Perhaps a corrected distance would be six from Pella
and 20 from Gerasa. Harosheth of Old Testament is not located by the
Onomasticon.

139. Ares. Judges 8:13; K. 32:8; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Text missing in Greek Vatican manuscript.

There seems to be a confusion of the Greek and Hebrew biblical texts.

140. Aroueir (Aruir). Judges 11:33; K. 32:9; L. 243:00.

Textual variant Arouei (Greek). The scene seems to be in Transjordan but the
homecoming has confused Eusebius (cf. K. 12:5). The Greek, if not an error,
points to the vicinity of er Ram, possibly Kh arajanj. If Jerome is followed, as
many prefer to do in order to arrive closer to Mizpeh (K. 130:1), it must be
located at Kh 'arūra. The 20 is in conjuction of main road north from Jerusalem.
A branch goes west to Kh 'arūra.

141. Arima. Judges 9:41; K. 32:11; L. 243:2. A simple report of Scripture (cf.
K. 144:27) 142. Aialon (Aialin). Judges 12:12; K. 32:12; L. 243:3. The judge of
Israel (Judges 12:11) has a name which sounds almost the same as that of the
clan. Probably Ailon or Elon would be proper for both. Biblical information
only.

143. Abel of the vineyards. Judges 11:33; K. 32:14; L. 243:5.

Textual variants: Abel (Greek) and Abila (Latin). The biblical site is located
by Eusebius in the region of Philadelphia (K. 16:15) and seems to be in the
vicinity of Na 'ur, perhaps even Na 'ur or Qom Yajus or else closer to Heshbon
at Kh es Suq. The Greek text makes this very vague (cp. K. 10:28).

Abela near Gadara (cf. K. 74:10) is the large town of the Decapolis (K. 80:16)
which is to be located at Tell Abil. A few scholars would locate it at nearby
Muqes.

Abela of the Phoenicians is not identified as to size by Eusebius. Possibly
following the Tabula Peutinger which has it 18 miles from Damascus (K. 76:4) it
is possibly located at suk wadi barada on the way to Paneas (K. 16:4). In
Eusebius' day Phoenicia was a distinct 'Roman province not to be confused with
Palestine or Syria. This was true from about 194-381 A.D. According to Eusebius
it includes Damascus, Abela, Byblos and Sidon with Tyro as its chief city.

KINGS 144. Armthem Seipha (Sofim). I Samuel 1:1; K. 32:21; L. 243:12. The New
Testament identification (Matthew 21:51) here may be the first real work of the
Christian author (whether Eusebius or not) who compiled and collected several
Jewish and biblical lists (cp. K. 144:29). For Diospolis see K. 8:14 and
Thamnitikē see K. 24:4. In 200 Diospolis took over the region earlier called
Thamna. The Madaba Map has both names and follows Eusebius in identifying the
two Old Testament and New Testament places but does not clearly follow Eusebius
in the location. "Armathem or Arimathea" seems to be due north of Jerusalem near
Nebi Samwil and Ramalla while Eusebius and other Christian traditions locate
Arimathea at Rentis, northeast of Diospolis. Both the map and Eusebius seem to
separate these two names from Ramah (I Samuel 1:19 cf. K. 144:14). The Armathem
in Greek reflects the transcription of the Hebrew article. Jerome writes in
Epistle 108:8 (Paula PPT I, p. 4) "not far from it (Diospolis) is Arimathiam the
little village of Joseph who buried the Lord" (cf. Luke 23:5). The Old Testament
Rama of Samuel is uncertain. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Armathaim, their
height" (102).

145. Abenezer. I Samuel 4:1; K. 32:24; L. 243:15. This is a "place" and possibly
textually suspect as well. Etymology (K. 56:6) plus a biblical reference and a
vague location. Since the Survey of Western Palestine it has been suggested that
Eusebius had in mind Deir Aban near Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) but all agree that
is not the Old Testament site.

Bethsamys or Bēthsames (K. 54:11) is probably 'ain Shema near beit jibrin.

146. Aphesdomeim (Afesdomim). I Samuel 17:1; K. 34:1; L. 243:18.

Textual variant Afesdommim (Latin).

Biblical and Hexaplaric information only.

147. Anegb (Annegeb). I Samuel 20:41; K. 34:3; L. 243:20.

Textual variant Aneka (Greek). The Greek text has again transliterated the
Hebrew article. Two synonyms for the southern quadrant are used in the Greek and
two in the Latin. Only Hexaplaric information (cp. K. 136:14, 137:16f.).

148. Arith. I Samuel 22:5; K. 34:4; L. 243:21. The LXX is followed by our Greek
text and makes this a city while in the New Testament we find "forest." It is a
region west of Jerusalem. Eusebius' Arath which is not the forest may be
perpetuated in Kh Hareish. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Arith, delay"
(102).

149. Aialim. I Samuel 24:3; K. 34:6; L. 243:23.

Textual variants: Aalim, Abialeim (Greek), Achia, Ala, Ahialim (Latin). The
Onomasticon makes a proper name out of the MT phrase. Theodotion is more
literal. Only Hexaplaric information.

150. Aendōr. I Samuel 29:1; K. 34:8; L. 243:25.

Textual variant Iesrael (Greek). The LXX has this place name where the MT only
has "fountain in Israel." It is in the vicinity of Mt.Thabor (K. 22:4, 98:23).
The name is perpetuated at 'Andūr. Perhaps the same as Eddēr (K. 94:22) of Saul
which is located near Nain and so also near Thabōr. 'Andūr has no ancient ruins
and is not a tell. It has been suggested that nearby Kh es safsafeh is the place
and it does have evidence of lengthy occupation. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Aendor, eye or well of the generation" (102) and "Endor well of the
generation" (93).

151. Aphek (Afec). I Samuel 29:1; K. 34:11; L. 243:28.

Textual variant Apher (Greek).

One of the many confused Apheks in Scripture and the Onomasticon. By inference
this is said to be near the above Aendōr. Eusebius gives no location data which
is not directly from the Bible.

152. Arma. I Samuel 30:26, 30; K. 34:13; L. 243:30. In Samuel there are a number
of towns which are listed in the Onomasticon with no other information than the
biblical reference to David's spoils (I Samuel 30:26f.). This may possibly be
identical with K. 88:1 below.

153. Athach. I Samuel 30:26, 30; K. 34:14; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Textual variant Athlac (Latin). This entry is missing in the Vatican manuscript.
Only information is on the spoils as in the above Arma. LXX also has Athach for
Ether (K. 88:3) in Joshua 15:42.

154. Amma. II Samuel 2:24; K. 34:15; L. 243:31.

One of the entries where only the Scripture is quoted for location and identity.

155. Aeththam Adassai (Aethon Adasai). II Samuel 24:6; K. 34:16; L. 243:32.

Textual variant Arnmeiththa (Greek).

Perhaps the same as Thaad in K. 100:19. Only Hexaplaric information. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ammeta, light" (89) and "Adasa, new" (89).

156. Alōn Area Orna. II Samuel 24:16; K. 34:17; L. 243:33.

Textual variant 'orion (Greek). This is not a place in the MT but refers to a
person who is a Jebusite and is connected with Jerusalem. The identification of
Eusebius is in the biblical passage Joshua 18:28 (cf. K. 106:7 below). 'Alōn and
Area both are proper translations of MT "threshing floor."

157. Assour. I Kings 9:15; K. 34:18; L. 243:34. This item is out of order and
may be an editorial addition. The Roman Ioudaia is indicated here rather than
the Old Testament Jouda. If this is one of the cities Solomon built it is a
textual variant for Hazōr (K. 20:1). This same annotation occurs in K. 90:9,
132:2 and 134:1, 3. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Assur, directing or
beauty or stepping or accusing" (60) and "Assur beauty or step" (78).

158. Abelmaelai (Abelmaula). I Kings 4:12; K. 34:20; L. 243:35.

Textual variant Bethaula (Latin).

Eusebius is not sure of the location of this village. He knows only two
possibilities with similar sounds. Josephus' Antiquities VIII 13, 7 notes,
"Elisha of the city of Abela" (cf. I Kings 19:16). This could be Beeleōn (K.
44:21) which is also the large village from which Elissaios came (K. 46:2) but
that is nine miles from Esbus which would put it in the southeastern section of
the Aulōn (K. 14:22).

Bethmaela is 10 miles from Skythopolis (K. 16:2) but only Jerome has "south."
Such a milestone has been reported at Tell Abu Sus. Other scholars would locate
Eusebius' site near 'Ain el helweh or Tell Abu Sifri but the latter has no
Roman-Byzabtine remains. The former has Roman-Byzantine remains but no clear
evidence. Tell Abu Sus is Old Testament site, Kh es Sakut nearby is Byzantine.

Abelmea is perhaps in the other direction on the way west and up to Neapolis (K.
4:28) but only seen from the road. There are remains of a Roman bath, etc. near
the source of the Wadi el Malih so perhaps 'ain malih is correct for this
Eusebius site, but not for the Old Testament location. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Abimahel, my father from God" (61).

159. Auothiaeir (Avothiair). I Kings 4:13; K. 34:24; L. 244:39.

Textual variant Auōthenaēr (Greek).

Simple biblical summary.

160. Ailath. I Kings 9:26; K. 34:25; L. 244:40.

Textual variant. Latin omits Ailas. The first part of the entry quotes the
biblical text. Ailas probably refers to Ailam (K. 6:17 cp. K. 36:1 and K.
62:13).

161. Ailōth (Aeloth). II Kings 14:22; K. 34:27; L. 244:42.

Textual variant Ailōn (Greek) Aloth (Latin). This is out of order and seems to
be an editorial addition to the previous entry and the one in K. 36:1. It gives
an additional item of biblical information.

162. Ainda (Aenda). I Kings 15:20; K. 34:28; L. 244:43.

Textual variant Ain of Dan (Greek). The MT has only Dan. This biblical
information is repeated in K. 148:15 also with the Greek of the LXX text which
varies from the MT.

163. Asiōn Babai (Asiongaber). I Kings 22:49; K. 36:1; L. 244:44.

Additional biblical information is given for the site on the Gulf of Aqabah.
Eusebius seems to try to distinguish two sites nearby: Aisia (K. 62:15) and Alla
(K. 6:17, 34:25, 62:16). The Bible does not distinguish too clearly between
Ezion Geber and Elath (cf. II Chronicles 20:36). A bishop from Ailath at Nicea.

Tell el Kheleifeh is usually identified with Old Testament Ezion Geber after
Glueck, but it has no ruins later than the Israelite captivity. Possible
location may be Jirzere Farra'un. Aila-Aqabah-Elath has Nabatean, Roman,
Byzantine, and Arab occupation.

Another small settlement Aisia between the coast and the Old Testament site
seems to be indicated in Eusebius. Modern Israeli Eilat is a new town. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Esopmgaber, a wish or council of sorrow" (111).

164. Alae (Alle), Abor, Gozan. II Kings 17:6; K. 36:4; L. 244:47.

Textual variant Abar (Latin). This is outside the geographical limits of the
Holy Land. It is out of the proper biblical order. All rivers are suspect as
additions to the text. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Abur, livid spot or
wound" (114) and "Gozan their tone or their courage" (111). The next four
entries are all late editorial additions to the test.

165. Abena (Abana). II Kings 5:12; K. 36:6; L. 244:49.

Suspect on the same grounds as above - a river. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Abana, his stones" (114).

166. Aophsith (Aofsithe). II Kings 15:5; K. 36:7; L. 244:50.

LXX variants of Aphphōsoth and Aophasōth, Hexaplaric elements.

167. Aian. II Kings 15:29; K. 36:8; L. 244:51.

Vulgate has Ahion.

Simple biblical report.

168. Aia. II Kings 17:24; K. 36:9; L. 244:52.

Vulgate has Ava. This and the next entry are probably beyond the geographical
limits of the Holy Land in Syria (cf. K. 36:10 below and K. 174:17). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Aia, vulture" (105).

169. Ainath (Ameth). II Kings 17:24; K. 36:10; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Textual variant Amech (Latin). Probably same as Aemath of K. 23:30.

Part of these two successive entries K. 36:9 & 10 are missing from the Vatican
manuscript.

170. Asimath (Asima). II Kings 17:30; K. 36:11; L. 244:53.

One of the few uses of "oppidum" in Latin (cp. K. 10:25 and Appendix II). No
such designation in Greek.

There seems to be an error in the Vatican manuscript with Idoumaia and Ioudaia.

171. Arkem (Arcem). II Kings 17:30; K. 36:13; L. 244:55. The name is not in the
New Testament but is from the LXX. On the basis of Josephus Antiquities IV, 4, 7
it has been identified with Petra "came to a place in Arabia which the Arabs
have deemed their metropolis, formerly called Arce (Arkēn Greek) today named
Petra" (K. 142:7, 144:7). Personal name in Numbers 31:8 may have influenced
Josephus.

Palestine is here apparently used for the whole country since Petra would not
fit the old Roman province of Palestine. If the later use of I, II and II
Palestine is intended then of course we have evidence of later editing of the
text.

Usually when topography is given, some biblical history is also summarized.
Other exceptions are in K. 124:20, 126:14, 126:19, 132:3, 140:4, 146:23, and
170:23.

172. Adramelech. II Kings 17:31; K. 36:15; L. 244:57. This obviously is not
within the original purview of a book on place names! Other idols noted are Bel
(K. 58:9 cf. K. 44:13), Molchom (K. 134:17), Nesarach (K. 138:19), Chamos (K.
174:22), and Remnan (K. 146:26). A Roman god is mentioned below in K. 36:26 (cf.
K. 8:15 and Appendix II). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Adramelech, stola
of the king or the comeliness of the king" (144).

173. Arōnieim (Aroniim). Isaiah 15:5; K. 36:17; L. 244:59.

Textual variants: Aōronaim (Greek), Arona (Greek A'); Arnomim, Armonum, Oronaim
(Latin). The Vulgate has Oronaeum and Oronaim. The Moabite Stone has Hauranein.
There was a Roman garrison nearby according to Notitia Dignitatum (81:18). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Oronaim, opening of the wall" (121).

It is quite possible that all the prophets listings are a separate editorial
addition or separate source.

174. Agalleim (Agallim). Isaiah 15:8; K. 36:19; L. 244:61. The first of the
entry is missing in Vatican manuscript and is restored from the Latin. Another
Latin variant is Agallim. The Byzantine ruin and name is found at rujm el
jilimeh called Aegalim. This is at the proper distance from Areopolis (K. 10:13)
but probably is not Old Testament site.

175. Aileim (Aelim). Isaiah 15:8; K. 36:22; L. 244:64. The Vulgate has "well of
Elim" which is for the MT birelim. It has been equated with Dimon (Isaiah15:9)
which may be the same Madōn (K. 126:26) but can hardly be Deimona of Jodda
(K.73:16).

176. Arina (omitted in Latin) or also Ariel. Isaiah 15:9; K. 36:24; L. 244:66.
In the MT text the word "lion" is used as noted in Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "lion of God" (106 and 114). Jerome Epistle 108:9 (Paula PPT I, 6) has,
"Woe to thee, city of Ariel, that is lion of God, once most strong, which David
took by storm." In Commentary on Isaiah 29:1 Jerome writes, "Therefore Arihel,
that is lion of God, once most strong is called Jerusalem, out it is preferred
by others temple and altar of God which was in Jerusalem." His Commentary on
Isaiah 15:1 is more apropos, "This metropolis, the city of Ar, which today is
called Areopolis by the combination of Hebrew and Greek words, not as many think
because it is the city of Ares, that is Mars" (cf. K. 10:13). Procopius 2097A
follows this identification and calls it a great village. A number of entries
have double names (cf. K. 25, 48:11, 58:3, 64:6, 76:1, 76:7, 90:10, 132:8,
160:19, etc.). Reference to idols is not uncommon (cf. 36:15 and Appendix) 177.
Adama. Isaiah 15:9; K. 38:1; L. 244:70.

Textual variant in Vatican manuscript where Theodotion is misplaced with Aquila
and Symmachus. This is not a proper name in MT. Only Hexaplaric information
given.

178. Agros (Ager). Isaiah 7:3; K. 38:2; L. 244:71. The fuller's field is
referred to again in K. 102:16. This is one of several entries detailing
Jerusalem areas. Out of order and suspect as later addition.

179. Asedek (Asedec). Isaiah 19:18; K. 38:4; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Textual variant Asedech (Latin). The entry is missing in Vatican manuscript.
Since it is out of the geographical limits of the Holy Land, it probably is not
to be emended from the Latin. Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah19:18 also indicates
the ambiguous etymology from either "clay" or "sun."

Ostracine is out of the Tabula Peutinger 23 miles beyond Rinokoura (K. 148:3).

Heliopolis is identified with ōn (K. 176:2).

180. Arphad (Arfad). Isaiah 36:19, 37:13; K. 38:7; L. 244:73.

Simple biblical summary. The additional notes are to Jeremiah 49:23 and II Kings
18:34. This kind of addenda could be a marginal gloss when it appears at the end
of an entry. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Arpath, healing" (126) or
"Arfath, healing or cure" (114).

181. Anaeougaua (Aneugaua). Isaiah 37:13; K. 38:9; L. 245:75. This is a Greek
combination of two Hebrew names. Textual variants: Anathoysau and Ane and Gaye
(Greek).

These may be out of the geographical limit of the Holy Land. Jerome's Epistle
(?)39:13 notes the possibility that the ou refers to the Hebrew conjunctive wav.
So also in his Commentary on Isaiah 37: 13 he says, "Ana and Aua which the LXX
mixed up calling it Anauegaua with the conjunction and, that is wav, between two
nations which in Hebrew are Ana and Aua." The added reference is to II Kings
18:34 as a gloss or later editing.

182. Armenia. Isaiah 37:38; K. 38:11; L. 245:77.

Also outside the geographical limits of the Holy Land as is the first entry
Ararat (K. 2:23). Sarasa is probably a scribal error written as a variant Arasa,
but it could possibly be confused with a marginal gloss on Sharezer who killed
Sennacherib and escaped to Armenia (Isaiah 37:38).

183. Asel (Asael). Zechariah 14:5; K. 38:12; L. 245:78.

Textual variant Asaēl (Greek). In Commentary on Zechariah 14:5 Jerome writes,
"The LXX transliterates Asael. Aquila puts the Hebrew word as Asel with a short
letter e but Theodotion has a long." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Asahel,
deed of God" (125).

184. Anamaēl (Anameel). Zechariah 14:10; K. 38:13; L. 245:79. The LXX has
changed the N of Hebrew into an M (cf. Jeremiah 31:36). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Ananahel, grace of God."

185. Asademōth (Assaremoth). Jeremiah 31:40; K. 38:14; L. 245:80.

Possible variant in Greek would agree with the Latin form.

Jerome's Commentary on Jeremiah 31:40 also notes Aquila's translation of
Sademoth "suburban." This is probably not a proper name. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Asarmoth, entrance way of the dead." (61).

186. Aeniōth. Jeremiah 37:16; K. 38:16; L. 245:82.

Simple entry with Aquila for evidence that this is not a proper name. LXX also
translated the HebrewMT.

187. Alōth (Alaoth). Jeremiah 48:5; K. 38:17; L. 245:83. The Vatican manuscript
does not have the notation on the MT Loyith. This name appears in K. 122:29 as
Loyeitha (Vulgate Luit), but the location between Areopolis and Zoara is vague.

188. Aitham (Aethan). Jeremiah 49:19; K. 38:18; L. 245:84.

Textual variant Aetham (Greek).

Probably not a proper name. Hexaplaric information noted. THE GOSPELS 189.
Akeldama (Aceldama). Matthew 27:8; K. 38:20; L. 245:86. The New Testament places
are rather limited but may be the only major part of the work done by Eusebius
himself after compiling and collating various Jewish lists. Later editors added
other lists to the work.

Textual variants: Acheldema and Acheldemag (Latin). This is said to be the
earliest non-biblical reference to this site. In K. 102:14 it is written
Acheldamax. In the Madaba Map it is Akeldama following this Onomasticon entry.
Jerome locates it south and Eusebius north of Jerusalem. The pilgrim text
suggests southeast of Silwan and it is probably Deir Abu Tor near Hagg ed Dam
which preserves the etymology. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Acheldemach,
field of blood" (134, 143) which is a quote from Matthew.

190. Ainōn (Aenon). John 3:23; K. 40:1; L. 245:88.

Textual variants: Aleim (Greek) and Salem (Latin). As in previous New Testament
entry the first note after the place name is a quotation from the Gospel. It is
not a city or town in the fourth century but only a "place" which is "near
Saleim" (cf. K. 153:6). Ainon of Onomasticon is just north of Umm el 'umdan. The
Madaba map places the words "Ainōn which in near Salim" at a spring south of
Skythopolis (K. 16:2) following Eusebius. This is probably along the main road
to Ierichō. Possibly the spring is 'Ain el Deir. It should be near to Bethmaoula
(K. 34:22) which is 10 miles South of Beisan. This all seems to place the
tradition on the west bank of the Jordan, so some even suggest the waters of the
Wadi Far'ah are intended. But the Madaba map also has on the east bank an Ainon,
possibly pointing to the Wadi el Harrer cf. Bēthaabara for still another
tradition (K. 58:13).

SECTION B

GENESIS 191. Babel (Which is also) Babylon. Genesis 11:9; K. 40:7; L. 245:94.
The first entry in "B" is quite outside the geographical limits of the Holy Land
just as Ararat, the first entry in "A," and is therefore suspect. This is often
true of first alphabetic entries. Probably a marginal addition.

It has been noted before that occasionally Eusebius gives etymology. It is quite
possible that all the non-biblical etymologies given are the result of an
editor's work or the inclusion of marginal glosses by a copyist. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names this item is paralleled: "Babylon or Babel,
confusion" (62). The simple summary of the biblical story is here recorded as in
Ararat which likewise in turn is filled out from Josephus Antiquities I, 4, 3.
The text in the Onomasticon is only slightly different from that used by
Thackeray in the Loeb series "The place where they built is now called Babylon
from the confusion of that primitive speech once intelligible to all, for the
Hebrews call confusion 'Babel.' This tower and the confusion of the tongues of
men are mentioned also by the Sybl in the following terms: 'When all men spoke a
common language, certain of them built an exceeding high tower, thinking thereby
to mount to heaven. But the gods sent winds against it and overturned the tower
and gave to every man a peculiar language; whence it comes that the city was
called Babylon'" (I p. 177f.). The Syriac text has still other minor variations.

Procopius 309B "Nebrōd was a giant hunter, one of the gods. Joseph tells the
story of the contriving of the tower in the Antiquities."

192. Baithēl (Bethel). Genesis 12:8, K. 40:20; L. 245:9.

Textual variant. Ulammaulus (Latin). The Syriac text seems to follow the Latin
and adds weight perhaps to Klostermann's emendations.

Jerome has the etymology of the name Baithēl as "house of God" (cf.
Interpretation of Hebrew Names 62 and cf. below K. 43:7 as well as Epistle
108:13 and Paula PPT I, 12): "of Bethel, the house of God, in which Jacob, naked
and poor slept upon the bare ground and placing under his head a stone, which in
Zacharias 3:9 is said to have seven eyes in Isaiah 28:16 is called the stone of
the corner, saw a ladder reaching to heaven above which the Lord leaned offering
His hand to those who climbed and casting down those who were negligent." As in
this entry (cf. K. 43:6) Jerome in the Commentary on Hosea 4:15 notes the
identity of Bethel and Bethaven: "it (Bethel) was first called 'house of God'
but after the calves were placed there it is named Bethaven, i.e. house of folly
or house of idols." However (K. 50:24) suggests a separate location which Jerome
denies in (51:24). The identity with Luza (K. 120:8) is also affirmed by
Jerome's note (K. 43:3). Luza means "nut or almond" according to Interpretation
of Hebrew Names (34). The Madaba Map makes this same identification: "loyza
which is also Bethēl" located a bit farther east because of the crowding of the
map at this point, but still beitin. This site has been excavated several times.
Some still believe Bethel should be a shrine separated from a village of Louza.
The biblical information is summarized from Genesis 28:19, Joshua 18:13, Judges
1:23, Joshua 18:22, also Joshua 7:2 and 12:16. The peculiar word Oulamma (K.
140:15) is ridiculed by Jerome with his famous Hebrew knowledge (K. 41: 21).
Also in Hebrew Questions he says, "it is absurd to think Hebrew ulam is the name
of a city since ulam means 'former'" (34).

Locating it near Aggai (K. 4:27) is of no help since neither the Onomasticon nor
biblical site is certain today. Why no mention is made here of the church is
curious. Jerome did note it in relation to Aggai (7:2). Incidentally the Church
is not on the Madaba Map either. The church is located a mile east of beitin.
The pilgrims all agree with the 12 miles from Jerusalem. Procopius 320A writes,
"Baithēl which was earlier called Oulammoaus is at the 12th mile on the right
going from Jerusalem to Neapolis. Also Louza, tribe of Beniamin." This means the
path leading up from Ailias to Bethel leaves the main road at the 12th
milestone. Curiously Procopius 1020A has what must be a scribal error, "Baithēl
is located on the road going up from Ailias to Neopolis on the left of the road
at the 12th mile from Ailias." All other itineraries agree with Paula on the 12
mile figure (PPT I 16, 19).

193. Bala. Genesis 14:2; K. 42:1; L. 246:13.

Textual variants: Babla, Balak (LXX), Balaa (Latin), Zōora (Greek). The Madaba
Map copies Eusebius with all three names listed: "Balak which is also Sēgōr or
now Zoora" and picturing a fortress with palm trees. Zoora is also Soora (K.
15:19) and Zogera (K. 94:1) and is used at times as a referent in the
Onomasticon (K. 112:19, 168:10 etc.). It is located on the Dead Sea (K. 100:4)
where there was a garrison stationed in Notitia Dignitatum (73:26) and a colony
of Jews. A bishop was known in the fourth century as the bishop of Sodom but he
must have been from Zoar. At Kh Sheikh 'isa Byzantine remains may indicate the
city with its nearby fort. This location southeast of the Dead Sea fits the
early geographers and the concept of Moab identity (Isaiah 15:5 and Onomasticon
94:1 for Jerome 48:4). Ptolemy has it 35 miles from Petra, which seems to be an
error. On the Pentapolis of Sodom see K. 8:4 (Genesis 19:21). Jerome's
etymological parallel is repeated in Hebrew Questions: indeed Segor means little
which in the Syriac is Zoara. However, the Valley of Salt, where formerly they
worked pits of bitumin, after the wrath of God and the sulphuric rain, became
the Dead Sea which in Greek is called Iimnē asphaltitis (i.e. lake of Bitumin)"
(117). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bale, casting down or devouring: (62)
cf. Hebrew Questions "Bale in the Hebrew is gulping or devouring" (17).

194. Belanos (Belanus). Genesis 35:8; K. 42:6; L. 246:18.

Simple translation of Hebrew with biblical summary. Not properly a place name.

195. Barad. Genesis 16:14; K. 42:8; L. 246:20. The latter part of this entry and
the beginning of the next are missing in the Vatican manuscript by an obvious
scribal error easily corrected by the Latin. The Syriac text agrees with the
Latin.

Apparently quoting Genesis 16:14 the tradition of a well was perpetuated into
the fourth century. There is a jebel Umm el Bared in the Negeb which perpetuates
the name. Some would see the site at Bir Ma 'in. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Barad, hail" (62).

196. Bēthlehem. Genesis 35:19; K.42:10; L. 246:22.

Textual variant Bethlem (Latin).

There are two startling facts about this entry: 1 - The Greek text has none of
the New Testament references. But the Syriac has an addition "city of David
where our Savior was born, of the tribe of Judah." 2 - Neither Greek nor Latin
mention the Church which was important spiritually and economically (also not
mentioned for Jerusalem K. 106:1). But Eusebius knew of the building in
Bethlehem (Laud. Const. ix and Vita Const. iii, 25, 43). The itinerary mentions
"a basilica built by command of Constantine" (Itin. Bourd 25: 3, PPT I, 12). The
Madaba Map shows a Basillica with the tomb of Rachel not far away. The
Onomasticon has no reference to Bethlehem's size. Josephus reports only on
pre-exile Bethlehem. It may be of interest that Origen reports on a cave near
Bethlem where Christ was born (Contra Celsum I, 51) which tradition Eusebius
also knows (Laud. Const. ix and Vita Const. iii, 41. Jerome knows of this in his
Epistle 46.

Bethlehem is six miles from Jerusalem in the Onomasticon which agrees with the
Bourdeaux Itinerary which notes: Bethlehem is off "to the left of the road"
going to Hebron. The tradition of the tombs is overwhelming in the pilgrims. In
addition to Tessai and David, they report that Ezechikel, Asaph and Solomon are
also buried nearby. The reference to Archalaeus is unique. The town of
Archalaeus is 12 miles from Ierichō in Tabula Peutinger but no strong tradition
of burial recorded there. Perhaps refers to Herodium. The name Ephratha for
Bēthleem region covers the Tomb of Rachel one or two miles away from Bēthleem
itself (K. 82:12,K. 83:14, K 148:1, K. 172:4, cp LXX of Joshua 15:59a). Itin.
Bourd. also has the two mile distance. The tower of Ader is possibly equated by
the Greek with Geder of Joshua (K. 68:11 but note Jerome on the absence of the
guttural K. 63:3). The tower and the real tomb of Rachel most likely should be
looked for north of Jerusalem toward Bethel. The tradition of Eusebius is
maintained in Jerome's Epistle 108: 10 (Paula PPT I, 8) "Not far from there
(Bethlehem) she descended to the tower of Ader, i.e. of the flock, near which
Jacob fed his flocks and the shepherds watching at night were worthy to hear the
Gloria." The mystery of the shepherds receiving the news before the event is
noted by Jerome here and in Hebrew Questions (43).

EXODUS 197. Beelsephōn (Beelrefon). Exodus 14:2; K. 44:2; L. 246:27.

Textual variant "through the waters" is not in the Latin.

Many of the stations are from a separate list and probably were not in the
original Eusebius text since for the most part they are out of the geographical
range of the Holy Land. Occasionally in the early writers this is the boundary
of Palestine. Old Testament site probably Ras Baron. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Beelsefon, having hope" (74) and "Beelsofon Ascent of hope" (79).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 198. Banēiakan (Baneiacan). Numbers 33:31f.; K. 44:5; L.
246:31.

Simple entry of station but out of biblical order.

199. Banōth. Numbers 21:19, 20; K. 44:7; L. 246:33.

Textual variant Babōth (Greek). In the Vatican manuscript the entry does not
start on a new line but follows laou of the previous one. On Arnon cf. K. 10:25
(Josua 13:17) In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Banoth, in death or high" (79).

200. Basan. Numbers 21:33; K. 44:9; L. 246:35.

Textual variants of substitute "kingdom" for "king" or add kingdom to king. The
Latin addendum is confusing. Basan has not been mentioned "above" as an entry,
but in a similar type of reference (cp. K. 13:11and K. 18:4). It is Auoth Iaeir
(K. 18:4) and also Machathi (K. 128:9). Only the Latin gives the etymology of
Auoth. The biblical summary is from Deuteronomy 3:14, Numbers 32:33, and Joshua
13:30. The region of Galaad (cf. K. 60:15f.) is here called Basanitē or
Batanaia, regions of Transjordan. Basan usually is the area between the Jarmuk
and a line between Hermon and Damascus. It is very similar to the Arabic Hauran.
Galaad varies in size from all the hill country of Transjordan, to the territory
of Manasseh, to that which is equal to Basan. Jerome in Commentary on Isaiah2:13
writes, "The region of Basan is Arabia which Og who is called king of Basan
ruled." In the Onomasticon it includes Cerasa (K. 64:1) and possibly Nemra (K.
138:10). Galaad is the biblical name of the area of Basan. Batanaea is
apparently the contemporary name for the village on the site of Basan (K. 64:8)
from which the region is named (K. 138:7).

201. Beelphegōr (Baelfegor). Numbers 25:3; K. 44:12; L. 246:38.

Another of the references to idols (cf. K. 36:15) in the Onomasticon which
technically should be listing only place names (Appendix II). Jerome in
Commentary on Hosea 9:10 also makes the identity, "Beelphegor, idol of the
Moabites, which we call Priapus" (cf. identity of Ariel K. 37:24). Priapus was
the god of gardens and vineyards. It is probably, for our text, the same as
Bethphogor (K. 48:3). The location of Mt.Phogō is in Moab (K. 168:25). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Behelfegor, bone having skin" (79) and
"Behelfegor, bone having skin or bone covered with skin" (86).

202. Baian (Baean). Numbers 32:3; K. 44:14; L. 246:40.

Simple biblical summary, cp. K. 44:21. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baian,
in wickedness" (79).

203. Bēthnamran (Bethamnaram). Numbers 32:36; K. 44:19; L. 246:42.

Textual variants for the contemporary village Bēthnabran (Greek), Bethamnaris
(Latin). This site has moved three times (see Introduction). Tell Nimrin retains
the name and represents the Roman-Byzantine city. The Old Testament site is
farther northeast up the wadi (cf. Bethnemra K. 48::6 and Nemra K. 138:10).

Tell Nimrin is 5 miles from Tell er Rameh which is said to be Livias and was
used frequently as a referent (K. 12:22, K. 16:126, K. 48:4, K. 48:17, and K.
168:26). The name was given to the restored Roman town in honor of Augustus'
wife (K. 49:13). In Jerome's Commentary on Joel3:18 he places Livias (Iulias) at
6 miles from the Dead Sea. The change in name is reported by Josephus in Wars
II, 13, 2 and IV, 7, 6. There was a bishop from here at Nicea. Livias may be Old
Testament Bethharan (K. 48:13). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethanamra,
house of the panther or house of bitterness" (79).

204. Betharran. Across the Jordan. Numbers 32:36; K. 44:19; L. n/a; Lacuna in
Greek Text. This item is missing in the Vatican manuscript. It seems also to be
Bēetharam (K. 48:13) the first part of which is also missing in the Vatican
manuscript. This is closely related to the previous entry and some see Livias as
the site for Old Testament Betharran at Tell er Rameh but better at Tell Iktanu
where more ancient remains are found. Rameh does preserve the ancient name. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Betharan, house of the ark or mountains or
ascent of the ground" (79).

205. Beelmeōn. Numbers 32:38; K. 44:21; L. 246:45.

Textual variant for contemporary village Baarau and Barum (Latin). Vulgate
Baalmaon and Baalmeon. Probably identical with next entry Baal (K. 46:3). The
Onomasticon confused this site with Abelmaelai (K. 34:21) of which Elissaios is
also a native (I Kings 19:16). The city of Ma 'in southwest of Madela (K. 128:9)
fits the location given from Esbous (84:1). It is close enough to the hot
springs of hamman ez Zerqa Ma 'in which could be Baarou. The Madaba map has
Baarou at this location following Eusebius. Another healing spring is reported
at Balthainaia (K. 30:7). Some think Barēn (K. 112:17) is the same as Baaron.

Arabia (K. 10:17) is a frequent designation for this area. In Ptolemy's Arabia
Petraia there is a town near Esbous and Madela called Magouza which could
reflect the Old Testament name with G for the Hebrew guttural. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Bahalmeon, having little habitations" (79).

206. Baal. Numbers 32:38; K. 46:3; L. 247:50. The same as previous entry. Simple
biblical information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Baal, having" (90) and "Baal,
have judgement or superior or having a brawl" (100).

207. Bouthan (Buthan). Numbers 33:6; K. 46:4; L. 247:51.

Textual variants: Atham and possibly ētham (Greek cf. K. 94:15) and Butham
(Latin).

Apparently both entries are transliteration for "in" which is the letter B in
Hebrew then followed by an alef. (cp. Exodus 13:20).

208. Bēla. Numbers 34:11; K. 46:6; L. 247:53.

Simple entry of biblical information. For Arbēla see K. 14:18 above.

209. Bosor. Deuteronomy 4:43; K. 46:8; L. 247:55. The Onomasticon confuses the
city of refuge Bezer (Joshua 20:8, 21:36) with the metropolis of Bostra (K.
12:14). This was a bishop's seat at the time of Council of Nicea. It was a
metropolis of Arabia from the 2nd century and an important military post
according to Notitia Dignitatum (81:21) as well as main transportation center.
It is 25 miles east of Der 'a and is the modern Arabic Busra (cf. K. 166:3). It
is in the Trachonites area (K. 112:22). The Edomite city (Isaiah 63:1) is
probably to be located at the rich site Buseirah south of Taffilah. II Maccabees
12:8 notes Timotheus has a garrison there. It was not too significant in the
fourth century but was very important in the Iron Age. In the Onomasticon Edom
usually refers to the biblical area and era; Idoumaia to the Roman period; while
Gaibalene or Gebalitikē to Eusebius' time (cf. K. 102:23). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Bosor, in distress" (86).

210. Bēroth. Deuteronomy 10:6; K. 46:14; L. 247:61. This is not a contemporary
village only a place. It is located in reference to Petra (K. 8:11, K. 142:7
etc.). This puts it on a mountain near the outlet of the Wadi Musa perhaps at
Biyar et Taiyibe. The mountain is also called ōr (K. 176:7). This is to be
distinguished from the Bērōth (K. 48:9) near Babaōn (K. 66:11). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Beroth, wells" (86).

JOSUE 211. Bounos. Joshua 5:3; K. 46:18; L. 247:65. The Latin translation is
perhaps better than a Greek place name. Galgala (K. 64:24, cf. 64:18) is a
complicated problem (Joshua 4:3) but it seems likely that Josephus and Eusebius
identified the "hill" of Gilgal with Tell es Sultan which is two miles from New
Testament or Roman Iericho (K.104:25). See K. 104:20 on the Jordan.

212. Bēthōrōn. Joshua 10:10; K. 46:21; L. 247:69.

Summary of biblical information interrupted by a location. This order suggests
several hands have been at work on the entry. The Levitical city (Joshua 21:22)
is another addition by an editor. The Madaba map has Bēthōrōn following Eusebius
on the road from Jerusalem to Diospolis (K. 8:14). Paula ascended from Emmaus
along this road, "beholding Ajalon (K. 18:13) and Gabson (K. 66:11) on her
right." She adds from Kings the fact also that Solomon founded the two cities,
(Jerome's Epistle 108:8, PPT 1, 5) later destroyed by the fortunes of war (I
Maccabees 3:16, Josephus Wars II, 5, 16). They are on the map as one of the
stations for Roman couriers. The distance in the Onomasticon is appropriate for
Beit Ur el Foqa and Beit Ur et Tahta twin towns which retain the sound of the
old name. A milestone 14 from Aelia has been found half way between the two
villages, the upper being nearer Jerusalem. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Bethoron, house of wrath" (106) and "Betharan, house or wrath or house of
mountain" (90).

213. Barnē. Joshua 10:41; K. 46:26; L. 247:74.

Identified with the desert stretching south of Petra (K. 142:7) and more
frequently Kadēs Barnē (K. 112:8).

214. Baalgad. Joshua 11:17; K. 48:1; L. 247:76.

Textual variants. Baalgōd (Greek). Procopius 1024A has Balgad but otherwise
quotes Eusebius. It is probably also Algad (K. 22:22).

It is located only generally on the basis of biblical information (cf. Libanon
(K. 122:27) and Hermon (K. 20:6). Some suggest this could be Baalbek. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baalgad, he had equipment or man of arms or
pirate or man of fortune" (90).

215. Bethphogor (Bethfogor). Joshua 13:20; K. 48:3; L. 247:78. The location of
this place depends in Eusebius on Livias (K. 44:17 and K.48:15) and Phogōr (K.
16:4 and K. 168:25) which is only 6 miles from Livias. It is quite possible that
Eusebius has in mind Kh Ajan Musa, but other scholars hold to Kh sheikh jayil,
for the Old Testament site.

216. Bēthasimouth (Bethsimuth). Joshua 12:3; K. 48:6; L. 247:81.

Textual variants: Bethaisimouth (Greek) and Bethsimouth (Greek and Syriac)
reflect the occasional insertion of the Hebrew article between two elements when
transcribed into Greek. It is Bēsimō in Josephus' Wars IV, 7, 6 and a "city"
located near Iulias (Livias 44:17). In the Madaba map a palm tree is here but no
name in the vicinity. The nearby sites of Tell el 'Azeimeh and Kh sweimeh are
candidates for the biblical site. Sweimeh contains some reminiscence of the name
and may be Isimouth (or Isemouth) of the Onomasticon while the Tell closer to
the edge of the mountains may be the biblical site. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Bethaisimouth, desert home or home bringing death" (90).

217. Bērōth (Beeroth). Joshua 9:17, 18:25; K. 48:8; L. 247:83. A number of towns
in the Onomasticon are related to Gabaon (K. 66:11, cf. 172:15) but even its
location at el jib is contested. Here Bērōth is near Jerusalem while Gabaon is
usually located with respect to Bethel. Eusebius' biblical remark on Gabaon,
however, is more political and economic than geographic.

Archaeologists and geographers have had a lively debate over Bērōth and Gabaon
which was not ended with excavations of el-jib. The Madaba Map is inconclusive
because it requires emendation. Only erouta is written. It could be for Berouta
and northwest of Jerusalem could fit our entry. But it has also been related to
Capheruta which is not in the Onomasticon. For some reason Jerome has a
different road than Eusebius. Procopius 1020C follows the Greek text with a
Bēthōr on the road to Nikopolis (K. 30:27) at the seventh milestone. Neither say
from where, but it is usually assumed from Ailia since it is "near." Jerome has
Neapolis (K. 4:18) either as a correction of the Greek or because his Greek
manuscript was in error. The correction could be based on Josephus Wars II 5,
16. This Latin text is one of the few using "stone" for "mile."

If the Neapolis road is intended the majority of scholars fix Jerome's Beroth at
el bire which has carried that name at least since the Middle Ages but as far as
archaeological remains are evident it cannot be the Old Testament site. More
recently it has been suggested at Tell en Nasbeh which is often identified as
the Old Testament Mizpeh, and closer to the 7 miles than el bire. On the basis
of Nikopolis in the Greek text many possibilities are suggested. Some scholars
give up the puzzle. It must be in the vicinity of el jib. Pritchard has no
objections to Roman-Byzantine Beroth at el jib, but feels the evidence that it
is the Old Testament Gabaon is determinative. Others suggest Kh 'id and Nebi
Samwil. A possible solution is that the Greek text does not locate Bērōth except
as in the vicinity of Gabaon which then is properly located 7 miles from
("near") Jerusalem on the Nikopolis road at el-jib.

218. Botnia (Bothnim). Joshua 13:26; K. 48:11; L. 247:85.

Textual variants: Botanin (LXX) and Bothnin (Latin). The location of Old
Testament and Byzantine site is probably at Kh Batneh which has the proper
sherds. The "also Poteein" is omitted in the Latin text. Variant is Botenein.

219. Bētharam. Joshua 13:27; K. 48:13; L. 247:87. The first part of this entry
is missing in Vatican manuscript. Curiously so is its parallel Bētharran (K.
44:19). As in the note on Livias (K. 44:17) this is possibly at Tell er Rameh.
Recent Iron Age pottery in the vicinity makes it possible that it could be the
Old Testament site as well. But Tel Iktanu is still to be preferred.

220. Bethnema. Joshua 13:27; K. 48:16; L. 247:89.

Textual variants: Bethramta and Bethramthit (Latin).

See K. 44:16 and K. 138:10.

221. Bethagla. Joshua 15:6; K. 48:18; L. 248:91.

Part of the beginning of this entry is missing in the Vatican manuscript. This
is not to be confused with Bēthagla (K. 8:19) in the Jordan valley.

One site which the Onomasticon equates with Bēthagla is the village Agla. It is
10 miles from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) probably at Kh 'Ajian. Text notes turn
off from main Roman road. The second site closer to Gaza (K. 62:22) called
Bethagla is probably Tell el 'Ajjul, considered by some to be old Gaza (K.
63:23) but probably Eusebius is wrong in both instances for the Old Testament
site. This is one of the few entries where the Latin uses "milestone." The
Madaba map has a Bēthagidea which could have confused a Delta for a Lambda and
seems to fit Tell el 'Ajjul south of Gaza. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Bethaglan, house of their festivities" (91).

222. Bētharaba. Joshua 15:6; K 48:21; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. Not in the
Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Betharaba, house of
earth or evening" (91).

223. Baal. Joshua 15:9; K. 48:22; L. 248:94. The same as Kariathiareim (K.
114:23). In that latter entry it is nine miles instead of ten as here on the
road to Diospolis (K. 8:14), at joryat al Inab.

224. Baala. Joshua 15:11; K. 48:25; L. 248:97. The alternative is not in the
Latin text but occurs in some manuscript variants.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baala, it or above"
(91).

225. Balōth. Joshua 15:24; K. 48:26; L. 248:98.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baaloth, on the ascent
or ascents in the plural" (91).

226. Bethphalei (Bethfali). Joshua 15:27; K. 48:27; L. 248:99. The alternative
is not in the Latin text. LXX has Baithphaleth.

Textual variant is Belphalei (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethafelet, house of
health" (91).

227. Bērsabee. Joshua 15:28, 19:2; K. 50:1; L. 248:00. The Madaba Map, following
the Onomasticon and the Old Testament (Genesis 21:32, 26:33) has its limits
north and south expressed by Dan and Bērsabee. "Bersabee which is now Berossaba.
The borders of Jordan extend this far to the south from Dan (K. 16:6) near
Paneas (K. 16:14) which forms the border to the North." This is the limit of
Palestine. The west is the sea and the east Damascus (K. 16:4), Bostra (K.
66:3), Petra (K. 142:7) and Ailath (K. 34:25). These limits for Eusebius and the
Madaba map may come from Josephus' Wars I, 12, 1. The location twenty miles
south of Chebron (K. 6:8) is repeated in Jerome's Epistle 103:32. This is about
six miles short of the present Beersheba. The derivation of the name is reported
in K. 166:20 which also notes it to be in the Geraritikē. The Geraritikē has
wells (K. 166:21, 24; and K. 168:3).

Bersabee was an administrative headquarters of the Negev region. It is called a
large village in Eusebius, with a garrison in Notitia Dignitatum (73:18). Ruins
of the Roman fort have been found. In Questions on Genesis21:30 Jerome called it
an "oppidum." A camp seems to be on the Madaba map about 20 miles from Chebrōn
to the south.

Jerome notes a political and military reason why a town could be allotted to two
different tribes. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bersabee, well of abundance
and seven wells" (63) and "Bersabee, well of abundance" (63).

228. Balaam (Balam). Joshua 15:29; K. 50:13; L. 248:12.

Simple tribal listing. See K. 48:25.

229. Baskōth (Bascath). Joshua 15:39, 19:2; K. 50:14; L. 248:13.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Basecoth, soft fat or
defecation" (91).

230. Bethdagōn. Joshua 15:41; K. 50:15; L. 248:14.

Textual variant Bēdagōn and Kai paradagōn (Greek) a scribal error for the
contemporary site. On the Madaba Map is a Bēthodegana which could be the present
Kh Dajun retaining part of the name and fitting Eusebius' location if the road
runs from Ioppa (K.110:24) to Diospolis (K. 8:14) rather than from Iamnia (K.
106:20). It is off the Roman road. The Roman-Byzantine site must be at Beit
Dajun. The Greek kepara or kapher reflect the Hebrew kapher for "village" (cf.
52:21). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethdagan, house of wheat" (91).

231. Bēthalōth. Joshua 15:59; K. 50:17; L. 248:16.

Simple tribal listing. This seems to be a scribal error for Bethanōth and is
located near Chebrōn is Bethenim (K. 94:20). Out of order and suspect. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethanoth, house of prediction" (91).

232. Bēthphou (Bathaffu). Joshua 15:53; K. 50:18; L. 248:17.

Textual variant Bethtaphou (Greek) follows the MT. This entry is about the same
as Tapphou (K. 98:7) but may be mixing up two Old Testament sites. It is on the
road to Egypt on the border of Palestine beyond Raphia (only mentioned here) but
before Rinokoura (K. 148:3). The site is perhaps near Sheih Zuweiyd. Raphia is
another change point on the Roman-Byzantine itineraries and is probably at Tell
Rifah. The Madaba map has a Raphia to cover this point on the sea as well as an
inland city. Just below it is the wording on the map "Border of Egypt and
Palestine." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Beththafue, house of apple tree
not evil, but we understood a tree" (91).

233. Betharaba. Joshua 15:61; K. 50:21; L. 248:20.

Hexaplaric information only. Vatican manuscript faulty in several spots here. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Betharaba, house of many or grand" (91).

234. Beesthara. Joshua 21:27; K. 50:22; L. 248:21.

Summary of biblical information. On Basanite see K. 44:11. Out of order.

235. Bethaun. Joshua 18:12; K. 50:24; L. 249:23.

Cf. the etymology and identification with Baithēl in K. 43:3. LXX has Baithōn.
On Gai (K. 4:27). The identity of the two is not clearly accepted in K. 66:8
where Gai is near Bēthaun and Beithēl. Some suggest it is the enigmatic ruin of
et Tell. If Eusebius knew a real location with late occupation it could be Tell
Mirjam. For Machmas see K. 132:3. Jerome has confused the issue of location by
adding Bethel (K. 51:23) but refers to the previous identification. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethauen, home of futility" (90).

236. Baliloth. Joshua 18:17; K. 50:26; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry
is not in the Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing which has a G not a B in the MT and may be same as
Galeilōoth of K. 70:17.

237. Bethsour (Bethaur). Joshua 15:58; K. 52:1; L. 249:25.

Textual variants: Bedsour (Greek), Bethsor and Bethsoron (Latin).

All the witnesses combine Philippos' well with Bethsour (Acts 8:38). In the
Madaba map they are adjacent: "Bethsoura, the shrine of Philip where they say
Candacē the eunuch was baptized." This follows the error of the Greek which
confused the name of the queen with that of her eunuch. Jerome corrects this.
The pilgrim texts note the well of Philip at Bethasora, fourteen miles from
Bethleem (Itin. Bourd. and PTT I, 21). The road to Gaza went by the well. "From
there she turned to the right through Bethsur and came to Escol" (Jerome's
Epistle 108:11 (Paula PPT I, 9). It is the border of Juda and Edam. The Madaba
map and Eusebius point to the vicinity of modern Beit sur. Since Kh et Tabeiqah
the Old Testament site has no Byzantine or Roman remains and was apparently
abandoned in the second century before Christ, the Burj es Sur may be the
Onomasticon's Bethsōrō. The well is 18 miles from Jerusalem. The Burj is to the
west as Paula noted. The "other" Bethsour is also linked with Iouda. The
distance from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) is missing from the Vatican manuscript.
This site is not identified but could be deir esh shur. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Bethsur, house of strength" (91).

238. Boon. Joshua 18:17; K. 52:6; L. 249:31.

Simple tribal listing.

239. Bēthalōn. Joshua 18:19; K. 52:7; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. The first
part of this entry is missing in the Greek Vatican manuscript. A variant is
Betholon (Latin).

Simple tribal listing plus Hexaplaric data. Not in MT of Hebrew.

240. Bēthagla (Bethalla). Joshua 18:19, 21; K. 52:8; L. 249:32. A simple tribal
listing cf. K. 48:18, K. 8:11.

241. Bērōth. Joshua 18:25; K. 52:9; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry is
not in the Vatican manuscript. A simple tribal listing cf. K. 48:9.

242. Bola. Joshua 19:3; K. 52:10; L. 249:33.

Textual variant Bala (Latin).

Simple tribal listing cf. K.130:6.

243. Bathoul. Joshua 19:4; K. 52:11; L. 249:34.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethula, virgin" (91).

244. Bēth. Joshua 19:5; K. 52:12; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry is
not in the Vatican manuscript. Variant Bethis (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

245. Baaleth. Joshua 19:8; K. 52: 13; L. 249:35.

Simple tribal listing cf. K. 54:20.

246. Bērammōth. Joshua 19:8; K. 52:14; L. 249:36. The Greek has separated the
previous entry and this one differently. At times the Beer is the suffix to
Baaleth and at times prefix to Ramoth.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Beram, well of the
heights" (91).

247. Bēthlabaōth. Joshua 19:6; K. 52:15; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is not in the Vatican manuscript and is out of order in the text.

Simple tribal listing cf. K. 122:4. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Bethlebaoth, house of coming" (91).

248. Bethleem. Joshua 19:15; K. 52:16; L. 249:37. A simple tribal listing plus a
note to distinguish it from the more renowned Bethleem of Iouda (K. 42:10). The
note may be an addition. This other Bethleem according to Jerome's Commentary on
Matthew 2: 5 is in Galilaea.

249. Bēthphasis (Bethfases). Joshua 19:21; K. 52:18; L. 249:39.

Textual variant in Vatican manuscript has this listed for Iouda not Issachar. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethfese, house of the flowing mouth" (91).

250. Batnai (Batnae). Joshua 19:25; K. 52:19; L. 249:40.

Textual variant for contemporary village Bebeten (Greek). The site is really
unknown despite many suggestions. Name recurs in Abtun southeast of Acre
Ptolemais (K. 30:10) is Akehō and is a territory or a region.

251. Bēthdagōn. Joshua 19:27; K. 52:21; L. 249:42.

Textual variants: Bēthphagōn (Greek) and Bethdago (Latin).

Simple tribal listing cf. K. 50:15. Jerome gives a second reason why a site
could be listed for two tribes (cf. K. 50:10f.). It could be a different town
and in the Nablus area, either Ras ed Diyar or Shuweiha.

252. Bēthaemek (Bethemec). Joshua 19:27; K. 52:23; L. 249:44.

Symmachus note plus late gloss on tribal history.

253. Bēthanatha (Bethana). Joshua 19:38; K. 52:24; L. 249:45. The text has
confused several sites. But clearly 'anin is intended cf. K. 30:5, K. 26:9, 13.
Note the caution on healing baths, almost a rumor. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Bethanath, house of humiliation or house of answering" (91).

254. Banē. Joshua 19:45; K. 54:1; L. 249:48.

Simple tribal listing that perhaps should be combined with the next into one
entry.

255. Barakai (Barac). Joshua 19:45; K. 54:1; L. 249:49.

Textual variant Bare (Latin) and in Greek for the contemporary site Barēka and
Barba. LXX has Barak.

Eusebius' identity of the Old Testament site errs, but he intended barqa near
Ashdod.

JUDGES 256. Bezek (Bezec). Judges 1:4; K. 54:5; L. 249:52.

Two sites about a mile apart are clearly the Onomasticon's Bezek. One was a
Roman road station. Perhaps Kh Ibziq and Kh Jebrish with good Roman and
Byzantine sherds. But which of these has any Iron Age pottery needs study so the
Old Testament site is elsewhere. Perhaps this site moved three times as did
Nimrin (see Introduction).

257. Bēthsan. Joshua 1:27; K. 54:8; L. 249:55. This is a famous city of
Palestine in the Jordan Valley (K. 16:2). The identity of Bethshan with
Skythopolis is clearly made. It is used as a referent by the Onomasticon and has
been well excavated at Tell el Husn, near Beisan revealing heavy third to sixth
century occupation (see Appendices VII and VIII). There was a bishop present at
the Council of Nicea. The road from Skythopolis to Neapolis (K. 4:28) was
important to Eusebius (K. 26:23, K. 34:23, K. 54:7, K. 100:13 etc.). The eastern
portion toward Damascus (K. 76:4) is not mentioned as frequently. The etymology
is added almost as a later gloss and without the usual formula (I Samuel 31:10
and I Kings 4:12). In Latin it is both urbs and oppidum (cf. K. 10:25 and
Appendix I).

258. Bethsames. Joshua 1:33; K. 54:11; L. 249:59. In K. 32:26 it is Bethsamys
(cf. 158:20) located at 'ain Shema. A garrison was located there according to
Notitia Dignitatum (73:22). The 10 miles marks turn off from the main road. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethsames, house of the sun" (110).

259. Bathma (Bethnath). Judges 1:33; K. 54:11; L. 250:62. In LXX Baithanath. A
simple biblical report.

260. Bethsames. Judges 1:33; K. 54:16; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry
is missing in Vatican manuscript by simple haplography. This is to be
distinguished from the one above in K. 54:11.

261. Baalermōn. Judges 3:3; K. 54:18; L. 250:64.

Simple biblical reference (cf. K. 20:9). Note Jerome's use of Allofylorum rather
than translating to Filistine (see Appendix I).

262. Baleth (Baaleth). Judges 19:44; K. 54:20; L. 250:66.

Textual variants: Baalōn and Gebeelan (LXX) and Baalech (Latin).

Simple tribal listing which seems to be out of order (cf. K. 52:13). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baaloth, on the heights or heights in the
plural" (91).

263. Bethbēra. Judges 7:24; K. 54:21; L. 250:67.

Etymology plus simple biblical note. Perhaps reference to the fords of the
Jordan (cp. K. 54:26 below).

264. Bēthasetta. Joshua 7:22; K. 54:22; L. 250:68.

Variants Betthasetta (LXX) Bethtasetta and Bethasepta (Latin).

Simple biblical note.

265. Balanos (i.e., oak of) Sikimōn. Judges 9:6; K. 54:23; L. 250:69. This is
the oak of Sychem (K. 150:1 and K.158:1) near Neopolis (K. 4:28) at Tell Balata.
The grave of Joseph is still pointed out south of Balata. The Madaba map
indicates the "shrine of Iosēph." Another oak is recorded in K. 42:6 and the
terebinth in Sikimos in K. 164:11. Out of order, so this or next entry is
suspect.

266. Borkonneim (Borconni). Judges 8:7, 16; K. 54:25; L. 250:71.

Simple Hexaplatic information, repeated by Procopius 1069A. Not a place.

267. Bēra. Judges 9:21; K. 54:26; L. 250:73. The Onomasticon locates the Old
Testament site in the wrong region. The Byzantine Bera is probably Kh el Bireh
near 'ain shems. Bera of Old Testament is in the area of Bethbera (K. 54:21
above).

268. Baalthamar. Judges 20:33, 16; K. 56:1; L. 250:75.

Textual variant for the contemporary site Bethamari (Latin).

Apparently the Onomasticon locates this near Tell el Ful a little village for
Jerome which may be Ras et Tawel where there are Byzantine remains. Uncertain!
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baalthamar, having palms" (99).

KINGS 269. Bēthchōr (Bethchur). I Samuel 7:11f.; K. 56:5; L. 250:79.

Simple biblical notation. Onomasticon equates this with Ebenezer (I Samuel 7:12
and cf. K. 32:24 above). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bethcar, house of
lambs or house of lamb" (103).

270. Bama. I Samuel 9:12; K. 56:7; L. 250:81.

Simple biblical note plus Hexaplaric information. The Aquila meaning is more
exact than Jerome's Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rama in which" (103).

271. Bōsēs. I Samuel 14:4; K. 56:10; L. 250:84.

Simple biblical note. As is frequently the case Jerome refers to Hebrew
Questions but nothing new is given there, suggesting this is not the Church
Father's reference for more information but a marginal gloss cross-reference. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Boses it flourishes in it or precipitous" (103).

272. Basōr (Besor). I Samuel 30:9; K. 56:11; L. 250:85.

Simple biblical note. There are several wadies or torrents listed in the present
text of the Onomasticon which were probably not original with Eusebius. It is
difficult to distinguish the two Greek words being used (cp. K. 92:10, K.
102:19, K. 116:23, 25, K. 118:11, K. 160:2. K. 168:15,20, K. 174:16 etc.). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bosori, announcement or flesh" (103).

273. Bōrasan. I Samuel 30:30; K. 56:12; L. 250:87.

Textual Variant Bōsasan (Greek).

Simple report on David's spoils (cf. K. 34:13).

274. Baoureim (Baurim). II Samuel 3:16; K. 56:13; L. 250:88.

Simple biblical note. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baurim, choices" (106).

275. Baalasōr. II Samuel 13:23; K. 56:15; L. 250:89.

Simple biblical quotation. The Greek omits "sheep" and perhaps can be emended.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Balasor, having arrows of light or ascent of
the hall" (106).

276. Bēthmacha. II Samuel 20:14; K. 56:17; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is missing in Vatican manuscript (cf. II Kings 15:29). The Latin suggests
it is to be identified with Macham 8 miles from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12)
possibly at Kh Mekeuma. Not the Old Testament site. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Bethmacha, house of ground or of forum or of tax" (106).

277. Balth (Balaath). I Kings 9:18; K. 56:20; L. 250:91.

LXX has Balath.

Simple biblical note.

278. Baithsarisa (Bethsarisa). II Kings 4:42; K. 56:21; L. 250:92.

Textual variant Baithsarisath (Greek). In the region of Diospolis (K. 8:14) is
the Thamnitikē (K. 24:4). At the proper distance for turn off from main road is
Kh Sirisiah and a bit farther on the Old Testament site at Kefr tilt, which
retains the name. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Baalsalisa, having three"
(114).

279. Baithaggan (Bethagan). II Kings 9:27; K. 56:24; L. 251:95.

Simple biblical entry. Perhaps not a proper name. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "'Bethagan, house of the garden."

280. Basekath (Bazeoath). II Kings 22:1; K. 56:25; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.
This entry is not in the Greek Vatican manuscript and is out of the proper order
and therefore is suspect as a late intrusion. LXX has Basourōth but the spelling
of Onomasticon is closer to MT.

281. Baithakath (Bethacath). II Kings 10:12; K. 56:26; L. 251:96.

Textual variant Bazechath (Latin). The region of Samaria or the Samaritans is
frequently mentioned in the Onomasticon. In this instance it said to be in the
area of village dependent upon Samaria (K. 162:13). Legeōn is here called an
"oppidum" in Latin (cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix). This village is located by
reference to Legeōn (K. 14:21) and a similar sounding name is still to be heard
at Beit Qad east of Jenin. It is probably not the Old Testament site. The
Vulgate and other versions do not have a proper name here. It has "chamber of
the shepherds" (cf. Hexaplaric data also with more detail in Latin).

282. Baithannē (Baenith). II Kings 17:30; K. 58:3; L. 251:99. The Latin gives
only one form for this entry which appears in several variations in the Greek
and LXX. A simple biblical fact is presented.

283. Bublos (Byblus). Ezekiel 27:9; K. 58:5; L. 251:1. This is almost out of the
geographical limits of the Holy Land. It is the most northern identifiable site
in the text. It is listed as a Phoenician city but it is unclear whether this
refers to biblical or Byzantine terminology, probably the earlier. The Tabula
Peutinger has it seven miles from Beirut and 206 from Aelia. The distances are
not quite correct but the present well-excavated site seems to be intended. It
is never used for any other purpose in the Onomasticon. The difference comes to
the vicinity of Nahr Qelb.

284. Boubastos (Bubastus). Ezekiel 30:17; K. 58:7; L. 251:3.

Textual variant Boubatos (Greek). This is out of the area of the Onomasticon's
interest in the Holy Land. Perhaps most of the entries from the prophetic books
are suspect as incidental addenda by a later editor. Other sites in Egypt are K.
80:11, K. 134:4, K. 148:3, K. 162:17, K. 164:23,24. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Bubastus, mouth or lip of experience" (13).

285. Bōz. Jeremiah 25:23; K. 58:8; L. 251:4.

Textual variant Bōzan (Greek). This is just on the edge of the limits of the
Holy Land as defined by the Onomasticon. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Buz,
despising or contempt" (126).

286. Bēl. Jeremiah 50:2; K. 58:9; L. 251:5.

Another of the "idols" included by a later editor among the place names (cf. K.
36:15 and Appendix II). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Bel age" (126). THE
GOSPELS 287. Bēthsaida. Matthew 11:21; K. 58:11; L. 251:7.

Textual variants: Bethsaidan (Latin) and also Genesar and Genessareth (Latin).
The location is given largely from the New Testament. In Joseph Wars II, 9, 1
and Antiquities XVIII, 2, 1 he notes it was later also called Ioulias after
Augustus' daughter. Formerly only a village it seems to be raised in status. In
the New Testament it is called both terms (Matthew 8:26 and John 1:44). Probably
et Tell on northeast side of the Sea of Galilee with the port at Kh el 'Araj
(cf. John 1:44).

Galilaia is the northern portion of the land west of the Jordan (K. 72:18). It
includes the hill country above the great plain and is sometimes "upper" and
"lower" in the LXX and Vulgate. In Onomasticon it includes Bēthsaida,
Capharnaoum (K. 120:2), Nazareth (K. 138:24) and Chorazein (K. 174:23).

Gennēsaritis is used only twice in the Onomasticon (cf. K. 120:2). The term
Tiberias is preferred (cf. K. 16:1). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Bethsaida, house of fruits or house of hunters" (135).

288. Bēthphagē (Bethfage). Matthew 21:1; K. 58:13; L. 251:9. The conclusion of
this entry and the beginning of the next are missing in the Greek Vatican
manuscript but properly supplied from the Latin.

Traditionally this is located at Kefr et Tur where the Palm Sunday processions
begin, coming down the Mt. of Olives (jebel et Tur) in Bible and Onomasticon as
a referent (K. 58:16, K. 74:17, K. 118:19, K. 175:28). There was intense
Roman-Byzantine occupation on the area from 2nd BC to 8th A.D. Eusebius
describes the Mt. of Olives in other writings also as in Vita Const. iii, 41;
Laud. Const. IX, 17 and Demonstratio Evangelica IV, 18, etc. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Bethfage, house of the mouth of the valley or house of cheeks"
(135).

289. Bēthania. Matthew 21:17; K. 58:15; L. 251:10. The continued identity of
Bethany in the present Arabic el 'Azariyeh is uncontested. It is on the Mt. of
Olives approximately two miles from Jerusalem. The present Arabic name is an
approximation of the late Byzantine Lazarium. The church known by Jerome (K.
59:17), but not by Eusebius, has been excavated (Note on other churches K. 7:3).
The older city is up the slope farther near the medieval tower.

Paula (Migne, Patrologiae Graecae Cursus Completus 22, 888) following the Lord
went from Bethany to Bethfage (K. 58:13). The later pilgrims point to both a
church and a place of the tomb (John 11:1).

290. Bēthaabara (Bethabara). John 1:28; K. 58:18; L. 251:12.

Textual variant Bethtabera (Latin). This place is sometimes called the "other
Bethany," or the "Bethany across the Jordan." The location is not precisely
given, possibly because it was as well know as the previous New Testament
villages to the authors. Origen probably began the written tradition of
Bethaabara combining the crossing of the Israelites into the Promised Land and
the baptism of John. Jerome and Eusebius follow this East bank tradition which
by the time of the Madaba map had come to the present traditional location on
the West bank near Bethagla (K. 8:19). Madaba map reads, "Bēthabara the place of
St. John the Baptist." Origen in his Commentary on John writes, "But the place
named Bethania is across the Jordan. It is said that a Bethabara is pointed out
beside the bank of the Jordan where as it is reported John Baptized" (Migne,
Patrologiae Graecae Cursus Completus, 14, 269). Perhaps Kh el Medesh near the
Wadi Nimrin is the place. Some believe the Madaba map refers to two locations,
but the influence of Origen and Eusebius is still seen. On the tradition of
Ainon for place of Baptism see K. 40:1. The "brothers" of course mean in general
Christians, but it is unclear whether loutron refers to general bathing,
liturgical renewals of baptism or the original baptism of each Christian. In
spite of Constantine there are only three Christian "towns" in the Onomasticon:
Anaia (K. 26:14, Ietheira (K. 108:3) and Kariatha (K. 112:16).

291. Bēzatha (Bethsaida). John 5:2; K. 58:21; L. 251:15.

Textual variants: Bethesda (Latin), Josephus has Bezatha.

Eusebius again follows Origen (Migne, Patrologiae Graecae Cursus Completus 14,
269) in his description of the twin pools and in the general location. The pools
apparently gave their name to the quarter of the city. The Church of St. Ann is
in the general area of the church on the Madaba map. This explanation is
curious. Such explanations are not common in the Onomasticon. In Eusebius only
one of the twin pools is involved in the miracle. The pilgrims report similar
happenings. "There are in Jerusalem two large pools at the north side of the
temple, that is one upon the right hand and one upon the left where were made by
Solomon; and further in the city are twin pools with five porticoes which are
called Bethsaida. There persons who have been sick for many years are cured; the
pools contain water which is red when it is disturbed" (Itin. Bourd. PPT 1, 20).

SECTION G

GENESIS 292. Gaiōn (Geon). Genesis 2:13; K. 60:3; L. 251:24. This entry is out
of the geographical range of the Holy Land as perceived in the Onomasticon just
as entries appearing first in A and B sections also. This is a river which makes
it doubly suspect. The information is dependent on Scripture and Josephus.
"Lastly (of the 4 rivers in Paradise) Geon which flows through Egypt means 'that
which wells up to us from the opposite world' and by the Greeks is called the
Nile" (Antiquities I, 1, 3). For another such river see K. 82:7, K. 164:7, and
K. 166:7). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Geon, breast or broken off" (66).

293. Gomorra. Genesis 10:19; K. 60:5; L. 251:26.

Biblical information on the Pentopolis of Sodom (K. 150:10). Jerome in Hebrew
Questions seems to suggest the vicinity of the hot springs of Callirhoe (14). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names he notes that the Latin G is not here but rather
a vowel should be used to begin these words (cf. his note on Gader (K. 63:4).
"Gomorra, fear of the people or sedition" (67).

294. Gerara. Genesis 20:1; K. 60:7; L. 251:28.

Procopius 309C follows the first sentence almost exactly but shortened the
remainder into "a royal city of the Phylistiems located between the deserts of
Sour and Kadēs." The Madaba map also follows Eusebius "Gerara-once a royal city
of the Phylistia and the southern border of the Chananaia thence the salton
Geraritikon."

Gerara is located from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) in the southwest area of
Palestinē. A vignette on the Madaba map fits the legend and the Onomasticon's
information. The name is still to be found at Kh Um Jerrar but this is not the
location for either the Old Testament site or that of the Onomasticon. The
biblical site is possibly at Tell Abu Hureira. Eusebius does not say if he knows
a village or city existing there in his day so he could have had this tell in
mind. But if a Byzantine town is needed it may be Tell ash Shari'a on the wadi
of the same name which is largely a Roman-Byzantine site. The area was named for
the city back in patriarchal times (Genesis 26:1). It is on the border of
Chananite territory (Genesis 10:19). The Geraritikē is probably the same area
south of the region of Eleutheropolis and west of the Daroma (K. 26:10) or Negeb
(K. 136:14). It may be parallel to Barsama a military area. Later this was a
bishop's seat.

Apparently Sur is the southern and western portion of the Sinai Peninsula (K.
152:6). Kades (K. 112:8) is central and eastern while that belonging to the
Saracees is the northern caravan area which in Transjordan probably extended to
the Syrian Desert (K. 118:21 and K. 124:10). The biblical information is here
summarized from I Samuel 15:7, Exodus 15:22, and Numbers 27:14. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gerara, he saw a chewing of the cud or a garden
wall" (66).

295. Galaad. Genesis 31:21; K. 60:15; L. 252:36.

Originally the area was just south of the Jabboq. In the widest use as in the
Onomasticon it included all the Transjordanian territory ever claimed by ancient
Israel. Procopius 1060B has, "Galaad is located back of Phoenikē and Arabia,
linked with the Libanon and extending through the desert beyond the Iordan
Peraia (to Petra?). Here Sēon the Amorite dwelled. It was received by the two
half tribes. In Jeremia it says, "You are to me like the peak of Lebanon." There
is also a mountain Galaad with a city set upon it which Galaad the son of
Macheir, son of Manassē took from the Amorites." Jerome in Commentary on Ezekeil
14:18 writes, "Galaad, which is connected by hills with Mt. Leban fell by lot to
Ruben and Gad and the half tribe of Manassē. It is back of Phoenice and Arabia.
To this mountain Jacob came fleeing from Charran and was caught by Laban.
Jeremia says of it, 'Galaad, you are to be the beginning of Libani.' Galaad the
son of Machir, the son of Manassē took this from the Amorites." Jerome repeats
this in Commentary on Jeremiah 22:6. The hill country today includes a jebel
jel'ad which is near Kh Jel 'ad, the probable town Eusebius had in mind. It has
Roman-Byzantine sherds but the Old Testament site must be elsewhere. The
biblical information is from Deuteronomy 3:16, Joshua 13:8.11, Jeremiah 22:6 and
Numbers 32:39. Charran although out of the Onomasticon's area is discussed in K.
170:23.

There is a Latin variant Charris.

Mesopotamia is probably here used as the Roman province which includes Euphratēs
(K. 82:7, Phathourra (K. 168:22) and the above Charran (K. 170:23).

Arabia is confusing in the Onomasticon since it is not always the Roman
province. Different editors may be using it differently.

Libanon (K, 10:24), Iordan (K. 104:20) and Petra (K. 142:7). In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Galaad, heap of evidence or migration of evidence" (67).

296. Gader. Genesis 35:21; K. 62:5; L. 252:45.

Textual variant Adda (Syriac). A simple biblical report.

Apparently in K. 68:11 the Onomasticon confuses this with the Canaanite royal
city. The Tower or Migdal is in the Chebrōnrea (K. 43:23). In Hebrew Questions
Jerome locates it near Bethleem (43). Jerome's text frequently makes note of
transliteration problems from Hebrew to Greek and Latin.

297. Gethem (Gethaim). Genesis 36:35; K. 62:7; L. 252:47.

Textual variants: Gethea (Greek), Geththaim, and Adda (LXX).

Here Idumaia is identified with the Gebalēne (cf. K. 26:10 and K. 102:23).

Gethem without the G in Hebrew is Avith but location still unknown.

298. Gesem. Genesis 45:10; K. 62:10; L. 252:50.

Textual variant Gesen (Latin). This is also out of the geographical area of the
Holy Land. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names ""Gesen, approaching flatteries or
vicinity" (67). But, "If as in our codices the final M is written Gesem, which
doesn't please me at all. it signifies fall land" (49).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 299. Gasiōn (Gaber). Numbers 33:35; K. 62:13; L. 252:53.

Cf. K. 36:1. The Onomasticon has only a report on Asian not personal
identification. Cf. the Latin variants Esaiam and Aialam and cf. also
Deuteronomy 2:8.

300. Gai. Numbers 33:44; K. 62:17; L. 252:57.

Gaia is called a city of Petra (K. 142:7) but lacks any other identification or
location.

301. Gelmōn Deblathaeim (Gelmōn Deblathaim). Numbers 33:46; K. 62:19; L. 252:59.

Biblical note on the station but a different formula from the usual.

Also out of order.

302. Gadgad. Numbers 33:23; K. 62:20; L. 252:60.

Another note on the station. Probably a confusion of Dibongad (K. 76:23) Numbers
33:46.

303. Gaza. Deuteronomy 2:23; K. 62:22; L. 252:62.

Gaza has always been a significant or famous city of Palestine. It once formed
the border of the Chanaanites (Genesis 10:19). It was one of the Philistine
cities (K. 22:6, 11, 15 and K. 68:4). They (foreigners-Philistines usually) were
not driven out by Israel (Joshua 15:47, Judges 1:18) The Madaba Map locates Gaza
and describes it as a splendid town with columned streets and a basilica.

Tabula Peutinger locates it 15 miles from Askalon (K. 22:15).

It had suffered under Diocletian but had a bishop at Nicea (Historia
Ecclesiastica VIII, 13, 5). The region of Gaza was important in the Onomasticon
and the Roman road system (cf. Jerome's Epistle 108:11). The city is probably
still ghazzeh. The Greeks and after them, Jerome, seems to have distinguished
another older Gaza. Jerome for some literalistic theological reasons does not
expect such a splendid city to still exist after all the prophetic woes
pronounced against it. Some suggest this old site was Bethaglaim (K. 48:19). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gaza his strength" (66) and "Gaza strength, but
probably one should know that the Hebrews do not have as the first letter a
consonant, but the word begins with a vowel and is pronounced Aza" (87).

304. Gergasei (Gergasi). Deuteronomy 7:1; K. 64:1; L. 252:68.

Textual variants: Gergesa (Greek) and Gargasi (Latin). This is equated with an
important city in Arabia (Coele Syria) called Gerasa. Some falsely equate it
with Gadara (K. 74:10). Both were cities of the Dekopolis (K. 80:16). The
equation with Gerasa, probably modern Jerash, seems more correct than with the
city Galaad (K. 62:2) since the Onomasticon locates it as near Galaad (Joshua
12:5). This Gergasei is distinct in the Onomasticon from the New Testament site
(K. 74:13) (cf. Mark 5:1).

Gerasa has been well excavated to become known as the "Pompeii of Palestine."
According to the Onomasticon the Jabbok flowed between it and Philadelphia only
four miles from Gerasa (K.102:22). Many villages depended on it in
Roman-Byzantine times. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gergesaeum, attached
to the farm" (87).

305. Gadgada. Deuteronomy 10:7; K. 64:5; L. 253:73. A simple entry with no real
identity or location (cp. Gadgad (K. 62:20)).

Either this or the next entry out of order and suspect as late additions.

306. Gaulōn or Gōlan (Gōlam). Deuteronomy 4:43; K. 64:6; L. 253:75. The city
gave its name to a region in Roman times, but is not used as such by the
Onomasticon since it apparently overlaps the region Batauaia (K. 44:10). The
city may possibly be located at Sahem el Jolan cf. Joshua 20:8. See previous
entry. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gaulon, his rolling about" (87).

307. Gaibal (Gebal). Deuteronomy 11:29; K. 64:9; L. 253:79.

Textual variant Gebal (Greek). This and the following entry can be treated
together. The Onomasticon begins by recording the simple biblical information
here. The generally accepted tradition is to follow the Samaritan tradition as
given here. The two mountains are on either side of Neapolis (K. 4:28) and are
Jebel es-Slamiyeh and Jebel et Tur. The Madaba Map reflects this tradition by
having them near Shechem (K. 150:1) called Garizin and Gōbel. The pilgrims also
recognize this identity. "At Neapolis is Mt.Agazaren where the Samaritans say
Abraham brought the sacrifice. And to ascend up to the summit are 300 steps. At
the foot of the mountain is located a place by the name of Shechem" (Itin.
Bourd. PPT I, 18). Zeno and Justinian built churches on Garizein according to
Procopius Buildings V, vii, 5-17. Excavation of this area is going on. But
Eusebius and Jerome prefer to follow an anti-Samaritan location. The Madaba map
hesitates between the two opinions and so locates Gebal Garizeini near Ierichō
(K. 104:25). The use of the LXX names in Ierichō region and the Aramaic in the
Neapolis area may signify some preference. Since Josephus and the later
Byzantines had the correct tradition, this rabbinic tradition must have
developed in the late first and early second centuries. Procopius 905C is also
confused: "This is situated at the Eastern part of Ierichō beyond Galgal" and he
continues by denying the Samaritan tradition. Yet in 908A he seems to accept the
Samaritan location and tradition. The two mountains near Jericho are probably
those above Aqaba jabr sometimes called Tyros and Thrax. The Roman road to
Jerusalem passed between them. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gebal, ancient
abyss or stone building" (87).

308. Garizein (Garizin). Deuteronomy 11:29; K. 64:16; L. 242.

See previous entry. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Garizin, division or
stranger" (87).

309. Golgol or Galgal. Deuteronomy 11:30; K. 64:18; L. 253:88.

Textual variants: Golgōn and Galgan (Greek). The argument of the previous two
entries is continued here in Greek and developed by Jerome. A Galgal could be
located near Neapolis on the basis of the text quoted (K. 66:7) but the
Onomasticon uses the Galgala (K. 64:24) on the Jordan to move mountains. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Galgal, wheel or revelation" (87).

310. Gai. Deuteronomy 34:6; K. 64:21; L. 253:91. This is not a proper name. It
is equated with Bēthphogōr (K. 48:3) with Beth translated "house" of Phogor (K.
168:7, 25). On the Madaba map there is "AIA" which could be related to Bethpeor.
The general area could include the Gai near Petra as in K. 62:17 but it probably
does not. The Gai of K. 66:8 is the same as Aggai (K. 4:27).

Here and in K. 70:1 it is better simply "valley." In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Gai, chasm" (87).

JOSUE 311. Galgala. Joshua 4:19; K. 64:24; L. 253:94.

Textual variant. The distance is omitted in the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Gilgal has been a problem for the Onomasticon's editors, pilgrims and modern
scholars. "East of Jericho" is a biblical reference not a contemporary
geographical one (cf. Joshua 5:11f., Joshua 15:7, I Samuel 7:16, Amos 5:5, II
Kings 2:1, and 4:38 etc.). Even if it were being used the quadrant NE to SE
could be involved. But the location two miles from Ierichō does not include
direction or road. The Madaba map locates it slightly NE of Jericho and records
"Galgala also dōdekalithon" (12 stones). Procopius 1009C records the etymology
"wheel" and the location at second mile from Ierichō. The 12 stones were said to
be visible according to K. 46:20 and Procopius reaffirms this evidence. Paula
only contemplated the "field" of Gilgal on her way from Jericho to the Jordan
(PPT 1, 4 cf. Jerome's Epistle 108, 2).

Biblical Gilgal is not certain but the measurements of Josephus and Eusebius
taken from tubul abu Aliviq (New Testament Jericho) suggest Tell es Sultan was
the revered site of Gilgal, the "hill of foreskins" where stones were pointed
out. The Galgala near Bethel could be the same- on the road to Bethel- or it
could be one of sites in the hill country related to Garizein and Gaibal (cf. K.
64:18).

312. Gai. Joshua 7:2; K. 66:8; L. 253:2.

Textual variants: Bēthaunōn (Greek) and Bethan (Latin). The same as Aggai (K.
4:27) probably already in the 4th century the tradition was settled on the
ruined place et Tell. In this entry the identity of Bethayn with Baithēl is not
made clear (K. 43:3 and Joshua 12:9).

313. Gabaon. Joshua 9:9ff.; K. 66:11; L. 253:6. The complications on Gabaon have
been noted in discussion of Bērōth (K. 48:9). It is further complicated here by
4 miles west of Baithel (K. 40:20). Both the Latin of Jerome and Procopius 1020C
accept this reading. This would make the Gabaon in Onomasticon near Ramallah. In
the Onomasticon Gabaon, Rama, Galgala, Ailon and Aggai are near Baithēl (cf.
Joshua 10:2, 18:25, 21:17; I Kings 3:4). The Madaba map has a Gabaon at the
location generally preferred for the Old Testament site el jib. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gabaon, hill of walls" (94).

314. Gaibe (Gaba). Joshua 18:24; K. 66:17; L. 254:13.

Textual variants: Gabaa (LXX), Gebe (Latin) and Gabe (Syriac). A simple biblical
note (Joshua 21:7) but it is out of order. The last part has been emended from
the Latin since it is missing in the Vatican manuscript along with the first
part of the next entry. However, Hebrew, Greek and Latin names with G-B are all
confused in parts of all the versions.

315. Gazer. Joshua 10:33; K. 64:19; L. 254:14. The first part of this entry is
missing in Vatican manuscript along with the end of the above. A summary of
biblical information from Joshua 21:21, I Kings 9:17, Joshua 16:10, and Judges
1:29. Josephus, Eusebius and the Madaba map seem to be confused about Gazara (K.
72:12), Gedour (K. 68:22) and this Gazer. The Old Testament site is being
excavated at Tell jezer. Seems to have ceased being important before the time of
Constantine. But the direction of 4 miles north of Nikopolis (K. 30:27) cannot
fit unless WNW is the quadrant. Some have corrected it to be west and then it
would be about 5 miles from 'Amwas. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gazer,
mutilation or division" (94).

316. Goson. Joshua 10:41; K. 68:3; L. 254:19.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gosnam, next to him
or located near" (94).

317. Geth. Joshua 11:22; K. 68:4; L. 254:20.

Another of the Philistine cities (cf. K. 22:6, 11, 15; K. 62:22). Since
"foreigners" has been used for 'Enakeim' this is one of the few places in the
Onomasticon where it is clearly stated Phylistaioi were not driven out.

Madaba map has "Geth now Gitta once one of the Satrapies." The Bible and the
Onomasticon as well as the Amarna letters are confusing with several spellings
of similar names (or of the same?) (cp. K. 48:28; K. 70:14; K. 72:2, 4 etc.).
The Madaba map has combined Geth with Geththa (K. 72:2) in the vicinity of Ramle
which may be at Tell Ras Abu Hamid. The Onomasticon has 5 miles from
Eleutheropolis which points northwest to Kh Dikrin (Dikkriya) others see it at
Tell es Safi a bit farther away at 8 miles. This cannot be Canaanite or
Philistine Gath (if they are the same?). The latest suggestions for Old
Testament Gath are Tell en Najilah which has no Philistine remains and Tell esh
sheri'a which does. Jerome's Commentary on Micah1:10 says, "Geth one of the five
cities of Palestine a village on the border of Judaea. There is now a large
hamlet on the road from Eleutherpolis to Gaza, home of Goliath the Gethite."
This points to one of the many earlier candidates for Philistine Gath, Araq el
Manshijeh (but see K. 160:9). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Geth, wine
press" (94).

318. Gesoureim (Gesom). Joshua 12:5; K. 68:8; L. 254:24.

Textual variants: Gegassi and Gergasi (Latin)(cf. K. 64:1 and K. 74:14).

319. Gader. Joshua 12:13; K. 68:11; L. 254:27.

Textual variant in Latin we find "torrentem" (wadi) for "tower." This unknown
Canaanite city is equated by the Onomasticon with the Tower of Genesis 35:16, 22
(cf. K. 62:5). The Hebrew MT is itself questionable.

320. Gōein of Gelgel (Goim in Gelgel). Joshua 12:23; K. 68:13; L. 254:30.

Textual variant Galgalis (Latin).

Simple Hexaplaric information. See next entry.

321. Gelgel. Joshua 12:23; K. 68:14; L. 254:31.

Textual variant Galboulis (Greek). This points to the road going north from
Antipatris and is perhaps indicative of Jaljuliya which is about 5 miles north.
Paula reports Antipatris "a small half ruined town" (PPT I, 4). It is on the
road between Diospolis (K. 8:14) and Caesaria according to the Tabula Peutinger
12 miles from the former. Today this is Ras el 'ain. It was a station on the
Roman courier route. It was redeveloped by Herod, and seems to have been less
significant for our editors than it was in 4th century A. D.

322. Golathmaeim (Golathmaim). Joshua 15:19; K. 68:17; L. 254:34. The
interpretation is missing in Vatican manuscript but properly emended from the
Latin. This is a "place" but not a proper name. The etymology is from the
translation of Symmachus.

323. Gadda. Joshua 15:27; K. 68:18; L. 254:35.

Another border village of Judaea in the Daroma (K. 26:10). The Onomasticon
equates it with an unidentifiable village which is nameless in the Engaddi
region (cf. K. 86:16 and K. 96:9).

324. Gadeira (Gadera). Joshua 15:36; K. 68:20; L. 254:37.

Textual variants for the contemporary village Gadara, Gedora (Latin).

About 5 miles from the Terebinth (K. 6:8 and K. 76:1) is Kh Jedur which must be
the site the Onomasticon's writer has in mind for Gidora but it is not Old
Testament Gadeira, which is in the Jerusalem region, near Gezer and Latrun
probably at Kh Jederah (see K. 68:22). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Gadera, his hedge" (94).

325. Gedour (Gedur). Joshua 15:58; K. 68:22; L. 254:39.

Textual variants: Gedrous (Greek), Gahedur and Cedrus (Latin). This is often
located at the same spot as the previous entry but not according to the
Onomasticon which probably has Qatra in view. So Old Testament Gedour at Kh
Jedur (K. 68: 20). The Madaba map conflates these sites after the Onomasticon
and has "Gedour which is also Gidirtha" in the general vicinity of Gezer (K.
66:19). Perhaps Gazara (K. 72:13) and Gedrous have been confused with Gezer.
This site fits the general distance given here but could also point to Abu
Shusha.

326. Gabli. Joshua 13:5; K. 68:24; L. 254:41.

Textual variants: Gabbli and Gamblē (Greek).

Note again rare use of transliteration of Allofylorum in Latin (cf. K. 23:14;
see Appendix I).

327. Gisōn. Joshua 15:51; K. 68:25; L. 254:42.

Simple tribal listing.

328. Gelōn. Joshua 15:51; K. 68:26; L. 254:43.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 172:24).

329. Gadērōth. Joshua 15:41; K. 68:27; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Textual variant Geddōr (LXX) and Gederoth (Latin). This entry is missing in
Vatican manuscript (cf. K. 68: 22). Out of order and suspect.

330. Gethemmōn. Joshua 21:25; K. 68:28; L. 255:44. This entry in Manassē is
distinct from that of Dan (K. 70:14). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Gethremmon, high press or elevated press" (94).

331. Gai. Joshua 18:16; K. 70:1; L. 255:46.

Simple etymology. See next entry. A number of wadies or ravines are listed in
the present text but do not belong to the original manuscript (K. 168:15, 20
etc.).

332. Galennoum (Geennom). Joshua 18:16; K. 70:2; L. 255:47.

Variant Enom (Latin).

One of several detailed notes about Jerusalem. The etymology is from the Hebrew
(cf. K. 170:8). The valley forms the border of Benjamin and Jouda. In Byzantine
tradition as here, it is equated with the Kedron (K. 118:11 and K. 174:26).

333. Geththepher. Joshua 19:13; K. 70:5; L. 255:50.

Textual variant Geththepha (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gethhaafer, his press
of ground or excavated" (94).

334. Gēephthael. Joshua 19:14; K. 70:6; L. 255:52. The name is missing in
Vatican manuscript but supplied correctly from Latin (cp. K. 110:1).

335. Gabathōn. Joshua 19:14; K. 70:7; L. 255:53. The Onomasticon has added a
number of items from the confused Old Testament Geba concordance. a) The
Onomasticon identified Gabathon of Dan with the city (polichnē in Greek cp. K.
22:11) of Gabe near Kaisareia. This is probably in error. This Gabe is
accurately located southeast of Mt.Karmel at present Jeba. b) A little farther
located generally east in the Great Plain of Legeōn is the first Gabatha at
Jebata (or Gevat) southwest of Nazareth. c) In the Daroma (K. 26:10) the
Onomasticon has a Gabaa and Gabatha. Possibly these are double names for the
same village (plural only in Latin). Perhaps this is same as Gabatha (K. 70:23)
twelve miles from Eleutheropolis but this is toward Jerusalem and not in the
Daroma. Possible near Ziph. d) The Gabatha of Benjamin and Saoul (Joshua 18:28
and I Samuel 10:26) is located by our text and is not the Old Testament site
Tell al Ful which had no Byzantine remains, but the nearby Jaba which is close
to er-Ram and fits Jerome's location of Gabaa of Saul next to Rama (Commentary
on Hosea 5:8). e) The Babathon of the heathen (I Kings 16:15) may be the region
of Dor half-way between Kaisareia and Mt.Karmel. The Latin is confusing. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gabathon, height or high press" (94).

336. Gethremmōn. Joshua 19:45; K. 70:14; L. 255:58. This is one of several
instances where "another" is in its proper biblical order (Joshua 21:24).
Usually in the Onomasticon "another" is out of order and suggests some late
marginal gloss has been incorporated into our manuscripts (cf. K. 68:28 above).
The confusion suggested it is equated with K. 72:3. The contemporary city is
hardly from Dan. There is a possibility the direction of the road has been
reversed, but 12 miles is almost midway, so little is changed, possibly Ras abu
Hamid. If it is to be distinguished from the Madaba map site near Ramle, it
could well be Tell es safi, long a candidate for Philistine Gath which is 8
Roman miles north of Eleutheropolis, but biblical Gethaemmon is located way
north at Tell Jerishe.

337. Galeilōth (Galiloth). Joshua 22:10; K. 70:17; L. 255:61.

Textual variants: Galiloth, Gaieiloth (Greek).

Since the LXX transliterates the Hebrew for "borders" it is listed here as a
"place" but not a contemporary village (cf. Joshua 18:17).

338. Gaas. Joshua 24:30; K. 70:19; L. 255:63. A mountain and so properly not
original in the Onomasticon's text.

There are several references to tombs. This Thamna (cf. K. 96:24) is northwest
of Ramalla at Tibne. Paula viewed the "tombs on Mt. Ephraim of Joshua, son of
Naue and of Eliazar, son of Aron, the priest, one of whom is buried in
Thamathsare on the north side of Mt. Gass and the other in Gabaa of Phinees"
(PPT I, 12 and Jerome's Epistle 108:13). On Thamathaare (cf. Thannathsara 100:1)
Thamna is near Gouphna (K. 76:2 in Josephus Antiquities V, 1, 29.

339. Gabass (Gabath). Joshua 24:33; K. 70:22; L. 255:66.

Textual variants: Gabaath (Greek) and Ambacuc (Latin). The tomb tradition of
Paula is recorded in the note on the previous entry. This Gabatha may be the
same as that in the Daroma (K. 70:10). But it is best at el jeba' north of
Eleutheropolis. For another tradition of the tomb of Ambakoym see K. 88:22 and
K. 114:17. Probably the first and last parts of this entry refer to the Gabatha
(K. 70:6) of Saul and Benjamin located by the Onomasticon and Paula as near
er-Ram. Ephraim and Benjamin have also been confused (Joshua 18:24).

340. Gabaan (Gabaam). Joshua 21:17; K. 70:26; L. 255:70. This is either the
above Gabatha of Saul or another Geba of Benjamin (cf. K. 70:7). "In Gabas, a
city destroyed even to the ground, she stayed for a short time remembering its
sins and the concubine cut into pieces and the 300 men of the tribe of Benjamin
reserved for the sake of the Apostle Paul" (Jerome's Epistle 108:8; Paula PPT I,
5; cf. Judges 20:43). It is out of order and a late addition.

KINGS 341. Geththa. I Samuel 5:8; K. 72:2; L. 255:73.

Textual variant for the second contemporary town Giththim (Latin). The biblical
information on Gath is confused (cf. K. 68:4). There is debate whether Canaanite
and Philistine Gath are identical or not. In the Onomasticon Giththam is equated
with Geththa, but probably also with the previously discussed Geth (K. 70:14) or
Gehtremmon (K. 68:20). The road between Antipatris (K. 68:15) and Iamnia (K.
106:21) is not very important in the Onomasticon so some have tried to emend to
Antipatris to Ioppa (K. 110:24). If the text is correct then the Madaba map
Gitta has followed that road and placed it near Ramle at Tell Ras Abu Hamid. If
we emend the text and change the road it may be Saqya. The second Geththeim is
not located. It may be related to Gethem (K. 62:7).

342. Gallei (Gallim). I Samuel 25:44; K. 72:5; L. 255:77. A biblical note
(Isaiah 10:30) and then a tradition of a similar sounding name Gallaia. This may
be reflected in Jilya half way between Akkarōn (K. 22:6) and Eleutheropolis (K.
18:12) beyond the area of Benjamin and which has no relationship to the biblical
site at Kh Kakul. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gallim, transmigration or
revelations" (104).

343. Gelamsour (Gelamsur). I Samuel 27:8; K. 72:8; L. 255:80.

Simple record of an enemy city.

Jerome does not translate as usual and does not equate with Philistines but
simply transliterates. The entry is the result of a poor LXX transcription.

344. Gelboue (Gelbua). I Samuel 28:4; K. 72:9; L. 256:81.

Textual variant Geboue (Greek). The mountain is not proper for Onomasticon. The
village of Gelbous is probably Jelbun southwest of Beisan. The mountain is Jebel
Fuqua but out text errs in the equations. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Gelboe, rolling about or running around or flowing heap" (104).

345. Geddour (Gedud). I Samuel 30:8; K. 72:11; L. 256:83.

Textual variants: Geddar (Greek) and Gedur (Latin).

Another transcription confusion from the LXX. Not properly a place name as the
Hexaplaric notes show and therefore suspect.

346. Gazēra. II Samuel 5:25; K. 72:13; L. 256:85.

Simple biblical note (cf 66:19).

347. Gessour (Gessur). II Samuel 15:8; K. 72:15; L. 256:87. In region of Syria.

348. Gilōn. II Samuel 15:12; K. 72:16; L. 256:88.

Textual variant Achittophel (Greek).

Simple biblical note.

349. Gob. II Samuel 21:19; K. 72:17; L. 256:89.

Simple biblical note.

350. Gailaia (Gailaea). I Kings 9:11; K. 72:18; L. 256:90.

Textual variants: Gennesar and Gennesareth (Latin).

Summary of biblical information from Isaiah 9:1 and Job 20:7. On the lake see K.
58:12. The latter part of this entry seems to be an addenda after "another."

351. Geiōn (Gion). I Kings 1:33; K. 72:22; L. 256:95.

Simple biblical note. Out of order and suspect late addition.

352. Gēr. II Kings 9:27; K. 72:23; L. 256:96.

Simple biblical note with biblical location (cf. K. 56:26). The LXX has the Gur
of MT transcribed as it is here. It also appears in variant form as Gair.
Ieblaam (K. 108:24) is probably Tell bel 'ameh just south of Jenin. Only a
"place" in the Onomasticon. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gir, division or
broken off" (111).

353. Geththachopher. II Kings 14:25; K. 72:25; L. 256:97.

Textual variant Geththarchopher (Greek).

Jerome in Commentary on Jonah writes "Geth which is in Ofer, about two miles
from Saphorim which is Diocaesarea, is a not large hamlet on the way to Tiberias
where his tomb is shown. There is another near Diospolis, i.e., Lyddat." This
village is just east of Diocaesarea near Mash-had where a shrine is still shown.
This is out of biblical order and a late addition.

354. Gaddei (Gaddi). II Kings 12:18; K. 72:26; L. 256:98.

Simple biblical note (cf. K. 68:18) with no location possible for either. But
also see K. 86:16 Engaddi.

355. Gēmela. II Kings 14:7; K. 72:28; L. 256:00.

Generalized biblical location in Edom (K. 102:23) with Hexaplaric information.

356. Gebein (Gebin). Isaiah 10:31; K. 74:1; L. 256:2.

Onomasticon is confused with Geba (K. 70:7). The town falsely equated with Gebim
is north of Jifneh , which is this Gouphna (cp. K. 26:2 and K. 168:16). This
town is et tell on the Wadi el jib which preserves the Byzantine name. The
biblical site was in vicinity of Mt.Scopus. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Gebim, cisterns" (121).

357. Gōzan. Isaiah 37:12; K. 74:3; L. 256:4.

Textual variant Gōzath (Greek). This is outside the normal limits of the Holy
Land. Probably an addition. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gozan, their nut"
(121).

358. Garēb. Jeremiah 31:39; K. 74:5; L. 256:6.

Textual variant Garēy (Greek).

Simple biblical note. The next 3 entries and this are late additions. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Garab, scabs or many people" (127).

359. Gēbarōth (Gebarth). Jeremiah 41:17; K. 74:6; L. 256:7.

Textual variant Gebaroth (Latin).

Simple Hexaplaric information. Not properly a place name. One of a series of
late additions.

360. Gaimōd (Gemen or Gamon). Isaiah 60:6; K. 74:9; L. 256:8.

Textual variants: Gaimōn or Gaimōl (Greek) and Gamen or Gamol (Latin).

Simple reference to a dubious place. Only the Latin text has the double
tradition of spelling (cf. K. 78:20 and K. 138:8). One of a series of late
additions.

361. Gaipha (Gefa). Isaiah 60:6; K. 74:9; L. 256:8. The order of these last two
entries is reversed in the Latin. This is also out of the territory of the Holy
Land and is suspect as are many of the prophetic entries. Called a region (cp.
K. 138:22) perhaps by interpretation in a marginal gloss. THE GOSPELS 362.
Gadara. Matthew 8:28; K. 74:10; L. 256:11. This is a city of the Decapolis (K.
80:16) which is generally located at Umm Qeis overlooking the Yarmuq. On the
Tabula Peutinger it is 16 miles from Tiberias. It was a strong military city. A
bishop was at the Council of Nicea. The hot baths of Amatha are not far away (K.
22:26). Origen in his Commentary on John 6:4 remarks about the renowned hot
baths of Gadara (cf. K. 64:1 where it is confused with Gerasa).

363. Gergesa. Matthew 5:1; K. 74:13; L. 256:14.

Textual variant Gergessa, Gerges (Latin). At this point we have a distinction
made with Gerasa (K. 64:l). Procopius 349B follows Eusebius "Gergasenes lived
near Gadara. Now Gergesau the desert reaching Lake Tiberias." This location is
dependent upon Origen who in his Commentary on John 6:4 remarks "The Gergasenes
are from an old city near Lake Tiberias on a cliff extending down to the Lake.
Nearby they show (the hill) of the pigs thrown down by the demons." This
probably is present Chorsia (el Kursi) on the East shore of the Sea above Hippos
(K. 22:21).

364. Gethsimanē (Gethsimani). Matthew 26:36; K. 74:16; L. 257:18.

Another site on the Mt. of Olives (cf. Bēthania (K. 58:15) and Bethphagē (K.
58:13)). The "faithful" are the Christians who bath at Bethabara and here are
called "brothers" (K. 58:18). Helen planned a church there and Eusebius knew of
it but only the Latin text (cf. Note on K. 7:3) reports the church (cf. Vita
Const. iii, 43 and Demonstratio Evangelica vi, 18). In the itinerary it is
across the Valley of Josafath (Itin. Bourd. PPT I, 25). The Madaba map has
"Geths" and the remainder must be emended. Perhaps two locations are involved:
the betrayal spot and the place of prayer, one at the foot and another higher
up. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Gethsemani, valley of fatness" (136).

365. Golgotha. Matthew 27:33; K. 74:19; L. 257:21. The tradition of Golgotha has
been of long standing. Some feel it was never lost sight of. The Itinerary notes
"on the left side is the little hill Golgotha" (PPT I, 22). This means a short
distance from the ConstantinianChurch of the Holy Sepulchre. In Vita Const. iii,
25f., Eusebius describes the pagan temple to Venus on the site of the Holy
Sepulchre and the subsequent work of Constantine. Curiously he does not speak of
Golgotha. Here it is in the area north of Mt. Zion (K. 162:12) which is not
clearly located in the Onomasticon, perhaps because the tradition continued
strong to the 4th century A. D. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Golgotha,
skulls" (136).

SECTION D

GENESIS 366. Dasem. Genesis 10:12; K. 74:24; L. 257:25. The LXX has misread the
MT with a D for an R (cp. K. 142:21). This is also outside the area of the Holy
Land and so is doubly suspect, as are many first entries in these alphabetic
sections. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dasem, bridle" (64).

367. Drus (Drys i.e., oak). Genesis 13:18; K. 76:1; L. 257:23. The emended
reading of the Madaba map is "drus mambre and terebinthos." The first name is in
black letters and the second in red, but no tradition that they were really
separated. It is near Chebrōn (K. 6:8) on the map and also here in the
Onomasticon. The pilgrims place it 8 miles from Bethsur (K. 52:1) and two miles
from Chebrōn (Itin. Bourd. PPT I, 27). Constantine built a church there which
Eusebius knew about (Vita Const. iii, 51) but only Jerome mentions it in the
Onomasticon (K. 7:2). It is probably the excavated site of Ramet el Khalil.
Mamre (K. 124:5) and the terebinth are frequently used for referents (K. 6:13,
K. 24:16, K. 68:21 and K. 94:21).

368. Damaskos (Damascus). Genesis 15:2; K. 76:4; L. 257:30. This city is the
limit of the Onomasticon on the east along with Bostra (K.46:10). Damaskos is
one of the Dekapolis (K. 80:16). In Tabula Peutinger it is 56 miles from
Caecarea Paneas. It was a seat of a bishop at the time of Council of Nicea.
Later pilgrims locate Paul's conversion as a few miles out of the city. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names (15:3) Jerome notes that Hebrew is quite
different and lacks the idea of a proper name for a slave.

369. Dan. Genesis 14:14; K. 76:6; L. 257:18. The border of Joudaia went from Dan
to Bērsaba (K. 50:1). It is in the general region of the sources of the Jordan
(K. 104:20 and cf. Josephus' Antiquities I, 10, etc.). Jerome calls one of the
sources Dan and the other Ior close by (Interpretation of Hebrew Names 19). He
also gives Greek etymology in an unusual way. The Syriac text and Procopius 333A
have the little village of Dan 14 miles from Paneas on the road to Tyre which
would be almost midway and so, much too far. In Commentary on Ezekiel 48:18,
Jerome identifies Dan with Paneas (cp. K. 16:4). The site is probably Tell el
Qadi which preserves reminiscences of the meaning of the Hebrew Dan, namely
"judge." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dan, judgment or judging" (64).

370. Danaba (Dannaba). Genesis 36:32; K. 76:9; L. 257:35.

Part of this entry has been emended from the Latin since it is missing in the
Vatican manuscript. The Old Testament site is not identified. The village of
Dannea is probably Kh ed denn about the proper distance north of Areopolis (K.
10:13). The other Danaba comes near Mt.Nebo (K. 136:6) but its location is
uncertain. Silva speaks of a city of Job called Dennaba which is Carneas now
(PPT I, 29). This may relate to Karnaea or Karnaeim (K. 112:3-4). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dennaba, bringing judgment" (65).

371. Dōthaeim (Dothaim). Genesis 37:17; K. 76:13; L. 257:38. This well excavated
site is on the Samaria to Jenin road at Tell Dothan. It has extensive
Roman-Byzantine remains, it was junction for the road east to Merrous (K.
128:4). For Sebaste-Samaria see K. 162:13. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Dothaim, food or his greens or successful rebellion" (65).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 372. Daibōn (Debon) or Dibon. Numbers 21:26f., 30; K.
76:17; L. 257:42.

Textual variant Dabōn (Greek).

Biblical information from Joshua 13:26, Isaiah 15:2, and Jeremiah 48:18. The
Onomasticon does not equate the station of the Israelites with the Moabite Dibōn
(K. 80:5). But no doubt the large village was Dhiban which has been excavated.
Probably a garrison was there according to Notitia Dignitatum (81:27). But
curiously it is not on the Tabula Peutinger. This is the only listing of this
important town unless Dēbous (K. 104:12) is equated with Dibōn rather than
Hesbous (K. 84:4). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dibon, sufficient
intelligence or abundant understanding" (80).

373. Daibōngad (Dabira). Numbers 33:45; K. 76:23; L. 257:48.

Simple listing of station of Israel. This and next are late additions. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dibongad, intelligence is sufficient for the
test" (80).

374. Dusmai Moab (Dysmae Moab i.e., to the west of Moab). Numbers 22:1ff.; K.
78:1;

L. 257:49.

Textual variants: Balaak (Greek) and Balaac (Latin). Not a place and out of
order so this is quite suspect is a late editing or marginal gloss. The "plain"
of Moab is northwest of the Dead Sea in the Aulōn (K. 14:22 and cf. Deuteronomy
31:9, 32:49, 34:1).

JOSUE 375. Dabeira (Dabira). Joshua 10:38; K. 78:5; L. 257:53. The Onomasticon
does not see a village near Chebrōn (see below K. 78:12). In the north another
village is a dependent of Diokaisarea (K. 16:131) and reported near Mt.Thabōr
(K. 98:23). It is another village of the Jews (cf. Note in K. 22:9 and Appendix
II) but remains unidentified but possibly Daburyeh. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Dabir, speaking or speech or fearing the bear" (92).

376. Dor of Naphath (Nafeth). Joshua 11:2; K. 78:8; L. 258:56. The Tabula
Peutinger locates it 8 miles from Kaisarea and 20 miles from Ptolemais. The
directions and mileage are missing in the Vatican Greek manuscript of the
Onomasticon but are properly emended from the Latin and from K. 136:16. Paula
visited the ruins (Epistle 108:8). These are either the site of ancient Dor at
Tantura or just north of it at Kh el burj where Iron Age and Hellenistic remains
are evident (cf. Joshua 17:11). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dor,
generation" (92).

377. Dabeir (Dabir). Joshua 11:21; K. 78:12; L. 258:59. The city of letters is
also Iabeir (K. 106:22 and cf. K. 78:18).

Summary of biblical information with no Byzantine location (Joshua 15:15, 21:
and Judges 1:11). The Old Testament site is contested for identification with
Tell Beit Mirsim most preferred.

378. Dabeir (Dabir). Joshua 13:26; K. 78:15; L. 258:62.

Simple biblical notation.

379. Deimōna (Dimona). Joshua 15:22; K. 78:16; L. 258:63.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dimona, full count or
high" (93).

380. Dalaan (Dadan). Joshua 15:38; K. 78:17; L. 258:64.

Textual variant Daian (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dalani, needy pauper"
(93).

381. Denna. Joshua 15:49; K. 78:18; L. 258:65.

Another form using the biblical equation with Dabir (cf. K. 78:12). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dana, cause or his judgment" (93).

382. Dauid (Dauia). Joshua 15:49; K. 78:20; L. 258:67.

Textual variants: Dad (Greek) and Dabuia and Dauhid (Latin).

Here Jerome has two forms of the name and the Greek only one. Possibly also the
same as the above Dabir as confused in the LXX.

383. Douma (Duma). Joshua 15:52; K. 78:21; L. 258:68. This is in the Daroma (K.
26:10) 17 miles from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) and probably located at Kh dumah
ed deir, just north of dhahiriyeh which is southwest of Chebrōn (K. 6:8). In
Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah21:14 he locates Idumaea to the south of Duma and
locates the village 20 miles from Eleutheropolis. The 17 marks turn off from
main road.

384. Damna. Joshua 19:13; K. 78:23; L. 258:70.

Simple tribal listing plus Levitical addition. This and K. 78:25 may be late
additions. On Levitical city see Joshua 21:35. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Domna, silence" (93).

385. Dabasthe (Dasbath). Joshua 19:11; K. 78:24; L. 258:71.

Textual variants: Dabasse, Damasse (Greek) and Dabasthe (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dabbasth, slope" (93).

386. Dabrath. Joshua 19:22; K. 78:25; L. 258:72.

Simple tribal listing plus Levitical addition (cf. Joshua 21:28). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dabrath, speech" (93).

JUDGES 387. Drus. Judges 6:11; K. 80:2; L. 258:74. Not a legitimate entry for
the place names, but see Oak of Mambre (K. 76:1) and terebinthos (K. 164:11) for
similar items.

Simple biblical information with no location.

KINGS 388. Deibon (Dibon). Isaiah 15:2; K. 80:5; L. 258:77.

Cf. K. 76:17.

389. Deseth. Isaiah 16:7; K. 80:7; L. 258:79.

Textual variant Desek (Greek).

Simple Hexaplaric information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Deseth, shoe
or anointing" (120).

390. Dōdaneim (Dodanim). Isaiah 21:13; K. 80:8; L. 258:80.

Textual variant Dodaneimi (Greek). This must be distinguished from Daidan of K.
80:14. Possibly ed dedan. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dodanim, cousin"
(120).

391. Darōm. Ezekiel 20:46; K. 80:10; L. 258:82.

Hexaplaric information. One of the several words for the southern quadrant (cf.
Daroma (K. 26:10), Negeb (K. 136:14) and Theman (K. 137:16).

392. Diospolis. Ezekiel 30:14; K. 80:11; L. 258:83.

Outside the geographical limits of the Holy Land. Not to be confused with the
Diospolis of the Palestinē (K. 8:14). On Egypt sites see K. 58:7.

393. Dadan. Jeremiah 25:23; K. 80:12; L. 258:84.

Probably also outside the limits of the Holy Land. Both suspect. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Dedan, this judgment or such judgment" (126).

394. Deblathaeim (Deblathaim). Jeremiah 48:22; K. 80:13; L. 258:85.

Textual variant Debaōthaeim (Greek).

Simple biblical location.

395. Daidan (Daedan). Jeremiah 49:8; K. 80:14; L. 258:86.

Textual variants: Foeno (Latin) also Seno for Faeno. The mines are at Phainon
(K. 114:3 and K. 168:8) near Petra (K. 142:7). The Onomasticon's site is
uncertain. THE GOSPELS 396. Dekapolis (Decapolis). Matthew 4:25; K. 80:16; L.
258:89.

Only three of the ten cities are named in this list. No complete list is in
Josephus either but he lists Hippos (K. 22:21), Pella (K. 14:18), Gadara (K.
74:10) along with Dion and Skythopolis (K. 16:2). There are Twelve (sig.) cities
that are usually accepted as part of the Dekapolis, but Ptolemy lists 18.

SECTION E

GENESIS 397. Edem (Eden). Genesis 2:8; K. 80:20; L. 259:95.

Outside the normal limits of the Holy Land just as each first entry in the
previous alphabetic sections. The etymology is not introduced as Hexaplaric
material, but is from Aquila. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Eden, pleasure
or delicacies or embellishments" (65).

398. Eueilat (Euila). Genesis 2:11f.; K. 80:22; L. 259:95.

Textual variants: Euēlat (Greek) also Cepene and Cephene (Latin).

Also outside the normal limits of the Holy Land (Genesis 10:29, 25:18). The
Latin has Hebrew etymology as explanation of the Scriptural annotation. The
quotation is from Josephus' Antiquities I, 6, 4 and is repeated in K. 150:15 and
K. 176:15.

Phisōn is also Pheisōn (K. 166:7). The Gaion (K. 60:3), Euphratēs (K. 82:7) and
Tigris (K. 164:7) are also rivers outside the Holy Land. On Kophenos and Sērias
see reference in K. 150:15. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Evila, sorrowing
or bringing forth" (65).

399. Euphrates. Genesis 2:14; K. 82:7; L. 259:4.

River outside the Holy Land. See previous entry. For rivers of Eden see Note on
K. 60:3. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Euphrates, fertile or waxing" (65).

400. Ellasar. Genesis 14:1; K. 82:9; L. 259:6.

Outside the Holy Land. Syriac had Telarsar. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Ellasar, turning aside of God or his separating" (69).

401. Ephratha. Genesis 35:16, 19; K. 82:10; L. 259:6.

Summary of biblical information from I Samuel 10:2, Genesis 48:7 and I
Chronicles 2:50, 4:4. Ephratha on the Madaba map may be separated from Bēthleem
(K. 42:10). But Eusebius may be identifying them here (cp. K. 172:5). The Tomb
of Rachel is located differently in the Greek and Latin texts. The Syriac text
and the Latin agree with "tribe of Iuda" but Syriac omits Benjamim. Some doubt
if Rachel died here rather than north near Ramah. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Efratha, fruitfulness or dust" (65).

EXODUS 402. Eirōth (Iroth). Exodus 14:2; K. 82:16; L. 259:13.

Outside the normal limits of the Onomasticon's Holy Land. Only a "place" not
even a station.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 403. Empurismos (Conflagration. i.e., empurismos).
Numbers 11:3; K. 82:19; L. 259:16.

Another "place" rather than a station. The Latin does not have this as a proper
name by transliteration of the Greek or Hebrew, but rather from a translation.

404. Enthaath (Inthaath). Numbers 33:26; K. 82:21; L. 259:18.

Simple biblical notation. The b of Hebrew is translated (cf. K. 98:4). Out of
order. Probably a gloss.

405. Ebrōna. Numbers 33:34; K. 82:22; L. 259:19.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ebrona, going over
or passage" (K. 81). Out of order. Late addition.

406. Emath. Numbers 13:22; K. 82:23; L. 259:20.

Simple biblical notation.

407. Ermana (Errma). Numbers 14:45; K. 82:24; L. 259:21.

Summary of biblical information, Deuteronomy 1:44. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Erma, his condemnation" (61).

408. Essebōn. Numbers 21:26; K. 84:1; L. 259:24.

Summary of biblical information from Joshua 21:38, Isaiah 15:4, Jeremiah 48:2,
Numbers 32:37, and Joshua 21:39. A frequent referent in the Onomasticon. An
autonomous famous city in the Roman Province of Arabia from 106 A.D. on. Esbous
now Hesban between Philadelphi (K. 16:15) and Madaba (K. 128:19). It had a
bishop at Council of Nicea and is being excavated. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Esebon, thinking or girdle of the wall" (81).

409. Edraei (Edrai). Numbers 21:33; K. 84:7; L. 259:30.

Eusebius seems to identify this with Adra (K. 12:13) west of Bostra (K. 46:10).
It is 24 or 25 miles away. It is also 16 miles from Capitolias on Tabula
Peutinger. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Edraim, descent of shepherds"
(81).

410. Elealē. Numbers 32:3; K. 84:10; L. 260:33.

Summary of biblical information from Numbers 32:37, Isaiah 15:4, and Jeremiah
48:34.

About one mile north of Esbous (K. 84:1) is a site of this large village and
nearby Tell el 'Al. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Elale, to the height"
(81).

411. Enna. Numbers 34:4; K. 84:14; L. 260:37.

Simple biblical notation.

412. Erman. Deuteronomy 3:9; K. 84:15; L. 260:38.

Cf. K. 20:9.

JOSUE (of Naue) 413. Emekachōr. Joshua 7:26; K. 84:18; L. 260:41.

Etymology plus location. Notes taken by Jerome of the problem of popular
etymology (cf. K. 18:17).

414. Eglōm. Joshua 10:3, 12:12; K. 84:22; L. 260:45.

Biblical information plus location. Greek and Latin disagreement on the distance
(cf. K. 24:22 and K. 40:20). Ten is in agreement with K. 24:22 but that is
probably not Old Testament Eglon.

415. Enemek (Inemec). Joshua 10:12; K. 84:25; L. 260:49.

Hexaplaric information.

Hebrew b is translated "in" or En (cf. K. 18:13).

416. Esōr (Esrom) also Asor. Joshua 11:1; K. 84:26; L. 260:50.

Simple biblical notation (Joshua 15:23 and cf. K. 20:1).

417. Enakeim (Enacim). Joshua 11:21; K. 84:28; L. 260:52.

Probably a people and not a place as Jerome correctly indicates.

418. Ephrōn. Joshua 15:9; K. 86:1; L. 260:54.

Textual variant. For north of Ailia the Vatican manuscript has "region of"
Ailia. This appears in both the Bible and the Onomasticon with several similar
names: e.g. Ephraim, Ophrah, Ephron, and Aphaerema. Probably the same as K. 28:4
which is five miles from Baithēl (K. 40:20) and to be found at et tayibeh.
However, Baithēl is must less than 16 miles from Ailia. In K. 90:19 Eusebius'
cross reference seems to distinguish this entry from Ephraim (K. 90:18). In the
Ephraim New Testament entry (K. 90:18) it may be referring to the area or
province around the village.

419. Edrai (Edre). Joshua 15:21; K. 86:3; L. 260:56.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Edrai, a flood
supports men" (81).

420. Ethnan. Joshua 15:23; K. 86:4; L. 260:57.

Textual variants: Ethman (Greek), Ethnam and Ethna (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

421. Ebeziouthia. Joshua 15:28; K. 86:5; L. 260:58.

Several Hexaplaric variants are not given. This Greek form apparently confuses
the Hebrew conjunction before the Hebrew proper names which begins with a B.

Simple tribal listing.

422. Euein (Euim). Joshua 15:29; K. 86:6; L. 260:59.

Simple tribal listing.

423. Elthōlad (Elthōlath). Joshua 15:30; K. 86:7; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.
Not in the Greek Vatican Manuscript. Latin variant Elolath.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 98:22). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Eltholeth, to the birth" (93).

424. Ereb. Joshua 15:52; K. 86:8; L. 260:60.

Textual variants: Erem (Greek), for the contemporary village Heremetitha and
Eremetatha (Latin).

Jerome gives the etymology for Daroma i.e. "south." It may be at Kh er-rabiyeh
southwest of Chebrōn (K. 6:8). It must be distinguished from K. 16:13, but the
Vatican manuscript has noted "this is in Galilee of the nations. Kadesh (for
Kana?) of tribe of Nephthaleim, former priestly city."

425. Essan (Esan). Joshua 15:52; K. 86:10; L. 260:33.

Simple tribal listing. Vulgate has Esaan. Possibly same as K. 164:16.

426. Eloul (Elul). Joshua 15:58; K. 86:11; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is not in the Greek. The Latin seems to point to the present Halhul just
north of Chebrōn (K. 6:8). A Moslem memorial to the prophet Jonas is located
there. Probably the Alouros or Alulos of Josephus Wars IV, 9, 6.

427. Eltheke. Joshua 15:59; K. 86:13; L. 260:63. The first part of this entry is
missing in Greek but properly emended from the Latin. Textual variant for the
contemporary village Theka (Greek). The Greek also lacks note about dependence
on Ailia. Greek has 12 miles east and Latin has 9 miles south. It is almost due
south at present Tequ but about 12 miles, so both entries seem to be confused
even if quadrants are assumed. Latin reflects turn off from main road. Jerome's
Commentary on Jeremiah 6 "A little village in the hills 12 miles from Jerusalem
which we can still see. But in his introduction to Commentary on Amos, "a town
(oppidum) six miles from Bethlehem to the south next to the desert." The Madaba
map has Thekoya near Bethsur (K. 52:l). This is spelling of the contemporary
site but not the Onomasticon's spelling for the biblical site (cf. K. 98:17).
This records another of several "tombs" or memorials in the Onomasticon. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Elthecem, he brought forth" (93).

428. Engaddi. Joshua 15:62; K. 86:16; L. 260:66.

Textual variant Latin for the contemporary city- Engaddia, Engadila.

Probably also in K. 68:18, K. 72:26, and K. 96:10. The Aulon is described in K.
14:22. This is another of the "large" villages noted by Eusebius (cf. Notes on
22:9; cp. Appendix II; K. 86:20 and K. 88:17). There are Persian, Roman and
Byzantine ruins. Josephus' Antiquities IX, 1, 2 locates it 300 stadia from
Jerusalem. Jerome in Commentary on Ezekiel 47:6 locates it on the Dead Sea where
the Jordan enters. He also identifies it with Asasonthamar (8:6). It must be the
present 'ain jidi. The notation on palms and balsams is also from Josephus where
it is called a "city" (cf. I Samuel 24:1ff.). It has been excavated. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Engaddi, well of goat" (93).

429. Esthemō. Joshua 15:50; K. 86:20; L. 261:70.

Textual variant Esthema (Greek).

Cf. K. 26:11 and Job 21:19 Asthemō.

430. Emekraphaeim (Emecrafaim). Joshua 18:16; K. 86:22; L. 261:72.

Simple tribal listing with Hexaplaric information. Emek for "valley" as Gai also
several times in LXX and Onomasticon.

431. Edōmim (Edomia). Joshua 18:17; K. 86:24; L. 261:74. The first part of the
entry is missing in the Greek Vatican manuscript. Textual variants: Edomaia and
Edumea (Latin). This is probably at ed Duma to the southeast. Note that K.
108:21 Ianō is also 12 miles east of Neapolis. Edouma is off main road from
Akkrabbein.

432. Erma. Joshua 19:4; K. 88:1; L. 261:76.

Simple biblical summary. Possibly same as K. 34:13. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Ermon, his condemnation" (93).

433. Ether. Joshua 19:7; K. 88:3; L. 261:78.

Textual variants: Ieththira and Malatham (Latin) for contemporary sites.

Madaba map has "Iethora which is Iethēra." Eusebius identifies Ether of Simeon
with that of Iouda. It is possibly at Kh 'Attir. The Ietheira is probably found
in K. 108:3 and K. 110:18. Malaatha is used as a referent in K. 14:3 and K.
108:3. It is south of Chebrōn (K. 6:8) in the Daroma (K. 86:8) at Tell Milh.

434. Eththa. Joshua 19:13; K. 88:5; L. 261:80.

Simple tribal listing. LXX has confused the Hebrew here.

435. Elkath. Joshua 19:25; K. 88:6; L. 261:81.

Textual variant Ethaē (Greek).

Simple tribal listing plus added Levitical city of Job 21:31. Sometimes
identified with Tell Harbij.

436. Elkōk (Icoc). Joshua 19:34; K. 88:7; L. 261:83.

LXX has Ikak and Iakak.

Simple tribal location from Scripture.

437. Edraei (Edrai). Joshua 19:37; K. 88:10; L. 261:86.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 86:3 in Iouda).

438. Elthekō. Joshua 19:44; K. 88:11; L. 261:86.

Simple tribal listing plus added Levitical city (cf. Joshua 21:23).

439. Esthaol. Joshua 19:41; K. 88:12; L. 261:87.

Summary of biblical information of Judges 13:25. This and the previous entry are
inverted in the Latin text. Latin is in the biblical order but both Latin and
Greek are out of order for the next entries. In K. 106:10 it is located near
Ierimouth. The 10 miles is too short for the distance to 'Ishwa, but may mark
turn off from main road to a lesser road (cf. Saraa also 10 miles north (K.
156:15) and Iermochos (K. 106:24). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Esthahol,
pregnant with fire." (93).

440. Elba. Joshua 19:28; K. 88:15; L. 261:90.

Simple biblical summary of Judges 1:31. Out of order.

441. Eremmōn. Joshua 19:7; K. 88:17; L. 261:92.

Textual variant: Erembrōn (Greek). The direction "South in Daroma" is missing
from Vatican manuscript. Another of the villages inhabited by Jews (cf. Note on
K. 22:9; Appendix II; cp. K. 86:16). It is probably the same as Remma (K.
146:24). It is located at Umm er ramamin between Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) and
Bērsaba (50:11) about 15 1/2 miles away. Out of order.

442. Emmathdōr. Joshua 21:32; K. 88:19; L. 261:94.

Textual variants: Emmachdōr (Greek) and Chamōth (LXX).

Simple tribal listing plus added Levitical city. The Vatican manuscript
Emmachdor may have confused this with Emekachōr (K. 84:18).

443. Emath. Judges 3:3; K. 88:00; L. 261:96.

Another instance where "foreigners" is transliterated by Jerome rather than
translated and identified as Filistines. Simple biblical location (cf. 122:10).

Possibly the same as K. 96:12; cf. 23:30 and K. 90:4.

444. Enlechi (Inlechi). Judges 15:16, 19; K. 88:21; L. 261:97.

Textual variant in Lechi (Greek).

Simple Hexaplaric data. The Greek has translated Hebrew B (cf. K. 122:16). Out
of order. This and next entry are glosses.

445. Eniakebzēb (Inaczeb). Judges 7:25; K. 88:22; L. 261:99.

Textual variants: Eniam and zēm. The LXX again has "in" for the Hebrew B and so
"In Iakebzēb." Perhaps the same as K. 94:3 (see K. 88:21, a gloss).

KINGS 446. Ergab. I Samuel 20:19; K. 88:24; L. 261:00.

Biblical summary plus Hexaplaric data.

447. Echela. I Samuel 23:19; K. 88:26; L. 261:3.

Textual variant Eccla (Latin) for contemporary village. A different tradition
for the tomb at Gabatha (K. 70:22). The site must be Kh Kilah (cf. K. 114:15)
where it is 8 miles compared with the 7 here, Keeila.

448. Elmōni. I Samuel 21:2; K. 90:1; L. 262:6.

Out of the biblical order. In Hebrew this means "such and such a place." Jerome
repeats his philosophy for a translator rather than a corrector (cp. his preface
3:10f).

449. Esthama. I Samuel 30:26, 28; K. 90:2; L. 262:7.

Textual variant Esthma (Greek).

Simple biblical note on the spoils (cf. K. 34:13, 14).

Probably the same as Asthemō (K. 26:11).

450. Elōth. II Kings 14:22; K. 90:3; L. 262:8.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 6:16; K. 26:11; K. 36:1 and K. 62:13).

451. Emath. II Kings 14:25; K. 90:4; L. 262:9.

These are all the same as Aemath (K. 23:30 and K. 88:20) the present Syriac
Hamath (cf. K. 36:10). Jerome in Commentary on Amos 6:2 distinguishes "little
Emath" which is Epiphania and "great Emath, which is now called Antiochia."

Summary of biblical information from Isaiah 36:19; Zachariah 9:5; Ezekiel 47:16
and Amos 6:2.

452. Eser. II Kings 15:29; K. 90:9; L. 262:14.

Simple biblical notation. Same as K. 20:1, etc. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Eser, falsehood" (65).

453. Enacheim (Inachim) or Enbachein (Inbachim). Micah 1:10; K. 90:10; L.
262:15.

Textual variant en bachein (Greek).

Simple Hexaplaric information. Another instance of Greek en for Hebrew B. LXX
has en Akeim.

454. Enaraba (Inaraba). II Samuel 2:29; K. 90:11; L. 262:17.

Textual variant en araba (Greek).

Out of order and again as previous entry Greek en for Hebrew B.

Hexaplaric information only (cf. K. 12:25 and K. 16:12).

455. Elkese. Nahum 1:1; K. 90:12; L. 262:18.

Vulgate has elcessaeus. In Jerome's Commentary on Nahum, Introduction, he knows
a little village in Galilaea called Elcesi which has old ruins around it, but
this site should be in Judaea.

456. Emakeim (Emacim). Jeremiah 49:4; K. 90:13; L. 262:19.

Textual variants: Enakeim (Greek) and Enacim (Latin). Symmachus missing in
Vatican manuscript.

Simple Hexaplaric information. THE GOSPELS 457. Emmaous (Emmaus). Luke 24:13; K.
90:15; L. 262:28. The identification with Nikopolis (K. 30:26) at Amwas is
clearly made here as well as in Jerome's Epistle 108:8 (Paula PPT I, 4). In the
Epistle Jerome remarks ambiguously on a church consecrated at the house of
Cleopha. A bishop was at the Council of Nicea. Since Jerome, sometimes adds such
information to the Greek Onomasticon it is surprising that he does not do so
here. "Emmaous" is not on the Madaba map but Nikopolis is. On the Tabula
Peutinger it is 12 miles from Diospolis and 19 miles from Gophna. In Itin.
Bourd. it is 10 miles from Diospolis and 22 from Jerusalem. The distance in Luke
does not agree with this location since it is too near to Jerusalem. Some feel
the New Testament text has been changed from 160 to 60 stadia (also 60 in the
Vulgate).

458. Ephraim. John 11:54; K. 90:18; L. 262:24.

Cf. K. 28:4 and K. 86:1. The Madaba map has "Ephron and Ephraia, where the Lord
went." Probably the Map and Eusebius have the village at Et-tayibeh in mind as
the nearest village to the wilderness.

SECTION Z

GENESIS 459. Zaphōeim (Zafoim). Genesis 36:43; K. 92:3; L. 262:28.

Textual variant Zofoim (Latin).

Simple biblical information plus general location. On Gabalenē see K. 10:62.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 460. Zoob. Numbers 21:14; K. 92:6; L. 262:31.

Quotation from Scripture and a biblical location (cf. K. 81:22). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Zoob, gold" (85).

461. Zephrona. Numbers 34:9; K. 92:9; L. 262:34.

Textual variant Idoumaia for Ioudaia (Greek).

Simple border notation from Scripture. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Zeferuna, you saw this face, from mouth not from bone" (85).

462. Zared. Deuteronomy 2:13; K. 92:10; L. 262:35. The Madaba map has Zarea but
the A must be an error for D. One of several ravines in the Onomasticon and of
course suspect (cf. K. 168:20).

JOSUE 463. Zeiph (Zif). Joshua 15:24; K. 92:12; L. 262:37.

Textual variant Zit (Latin). Also in Greek Vatican manuscript this entry comes
before the Jēshua division (cp. Below K. 92:15).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Zif, sprouting" (98).

464. Zanaoua (Zannoua). Joshua 15:56; K. 92:13; L. 262:38.

Textual variant Zanaousa (Greek) for contemporary town Zannua (Latin). The
village is dependent on Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) and probably at Kh Zanu'a. The
last part of this entry and the first part of the next entry are missing because
of the scribal error of shifting his eyes to the second occurrence of
Eleutheropolis. It is also out of order and may be a late addition. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Zanoe, he drove back or he threw yours back"
(98).

465. Ziph. Joshua 15:55; K. 92:15; L. 263:40.

Latin reverses the order of information in the Greek text. The distance is
double that for tell Zif but it is more south than east of Hebron. It is
southeast of Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) and could be considered in the East
Quadrant. Perhaps the text meant to give mileage from Chebrōn (K. 6:8) but the
distance seems to be taken from Eleutheropolis (cf. I Samuel 23:14). It could
refer to a second village with the same name in the Negev.

KINGS 466. Zeib (Zif). I Samuel 23:14; K. 92:19; L. 263:43.

Cf. previous entry Ziph. Region or hill country nearby are intended (cf. I
Samuel 26:2and I Chronicles 2:42.

Karmelos (K. 118:5) is about 10 miles south of Chebrōn (K. 6:8). It is another
village of the Jews (cf. Note on K. 22:9 and Appendix II). It is probably at Kh
el Kamel, where Roman fort is found.

467. Zogera (Zogora). Jeremiah 48:34; K. 94:1; L. 263:48.

One of the Pentapolis of Sodam (cf. K. 42:4).

468. Zēb. Jeremiah 49:4; K. 94:3; L. 263:51. The Mia of Josephus Antiquities XX,
1,1 and XIV, 8,1. An important battle took place in the area. The site Kh Zeiy
is on the old Roman road near es Salt (cf. K. 88:22). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Zeb, wolf" (101).

469. Zōeleth. I Kings 1:9; K. 94:5; L. 263:53.

Out of order and not a true place name so suspect as an editorial addition or
marginal gloss. The words "spring of Rōgēl" are not in Greek Vatican manuscript
(see Rōgēl K. 144:13). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Zoeleth, dragging or
dragging forth" (103).

SECTION E

GENESIS 470. Ēlath. Genesis 36:41; K. 94:9; L. 263:57.

Possibly related to K. 6:16 and K. 90:3 but that is south southwest not east of
Petra (K. 142:7). More probably Udruh which is east at the proper distance. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Elath, terebinth or trees" (87).

471. 'Erōōn (Eroum). Genesis 46:28f.; K. 94:11; L. 263:59. In Egypt and out of
the Holy Land proper for the Onomasticon (see Note on K. 58:7). Out of order as
well, so doubly suspect as late addition. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Eroon, i.e. heroum, in his form or of sorrowful watch" (68).

472. Elioupolis (Eliopolis, city of the sun). Genesis 41:45; K. 94:13; L.
263:61. In Egypt and out of the Holy Land proper for the Onomasticon (cf. K.
176:3; cf. Genesis 41:50 and Exodus 30:17.

473. Etham. Exodus 13:20; K. 94:15; L. 263:64.

Textual variants: Ebuthan (Latin) and Buthan (Syriac).

Simple listing of station as Numbers 33:6 (cf. Onomasticon K. 46:4 above). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Etham, complete or respecting ships" (75).

JOSUE 474. Ēngannim. Joshua 15:34; K. 94:18; L. 263:67.

Textual variant Egannim (Latin). The long E is used here after the LXX. This is
a faulty identification. Perhaps the Onomasticon had 'ain Sinjah north of
Baithēl (K. 40:20) and Gophna (K. 26:2) in mind. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Engannim, well of gardens" (93).

475. Ēnaim. Joshua 15:34; K. 94:20; L. 263:68.

Cf. K. 24:16 above.

476. Ēndōr. Joshua 17:11; K. 94:22; L. 263:70.

Summary of biblical information of I Samuel 28:7 and Luke 7:11. The New
Testament material must be a later addition here but is not in K. 34:8 (q. v.).
Located close to Nain (K. 140:3). If this text is correct in Joshua, 'Andur is
the location.

477. Ēnganni. Joshua 19:21; K. 94:25; L. 263:73.

Textual variant Eganni (Greek). The one city has only biblical information
Joshua 21:29. The other is near Gerasa (K.64:2) perhaps near 'ain jenna or
'arjam (cf. K. 16:21).

478. Ēnada. Joshua 19:21; K. 94:28; L. 263:76. The distance puts Ēnadab at Beit
Nettif if miles are measured as the road is here described. If coming the other
way, the 10th milestone is from Jerusalem and points to location at 'Beit 'Itab.
Neither have anything to do with the biblical site. The Madaba map has an
"enetabe" between Diospolis (K. 8:14) and Iamneia (K. 22:10), but that is not
this site. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Enadda, accurate well" (94).

479. Ēnasōr. Joshua 19:37; K. 96:1; L. 264:79.

Cf. K. 84:26; K. 20:1 etc. LXX has "spring" but again the Onomasticon has Ēn.
q.v. also Ain K. 24:15.

480. 'Ērakōn (Ereccon). Joshua 19:46; K. 96:3; L. 264:81.

Simple tribal border listing. The Greek perhaps has E for the MT definite
article or conjunction wav. (cf. K. 110:10).

JUDGES 481. 'Ētam. Judges 15:8; K. 96:5; L. 264:83.

Textual variant Etham (Latin).

Simple biblical information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Etam, their
bird." (100).

KINGS 482. 'Ēla. I Samuel 17:2; K. 96:9; L. 264:86.

Textual variant Ēlath (Greek).

Simple Hexaplaric information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ela, curse or
self" (111).

483. Ēngaddi. I Kings 24:1; K. 96:9; L. 264:87.

Cf. K. 86:16.

484. Ēmath. II Samuel 8:9; K. 96:12; L. 264:90.

Another instance of transliteration by Latin of "foreigners" (cf. K. 88:20 and
Jeremiah 49:23).

485. Ēnan. Ezekiel 47:17, 19; K. 96:14; L. 264:92.

Out of the Holy Land proper for the Onomasticon but part of the Promised Land
boundary in Ezechiēl. The reference to Thamar is perhaps properly K. 8:6 with
the same prefixed Hazar (cf. K. 14:16). For Thaiman see next entry (K. 96:18 and
K. 102:7) The city of Palm Trees is probably Palmyra (K. 100:21) northeast of
Damascus (Latin variant has Palmetis). But Jericho also was called by this
descriptive phrase (K. 104:25).

SECTION TH

GENESIS 486. Thaiman (Theman). Genesis 36:11; K. 96:18; L. 264:96.

Summary of biblical information of Job 2:11 and Genesis 25:15. The village
Thafman may be in the same region as that of the princes of Edom (cf. K. 102:7).
The distance of 25 miles brings us to Shobek which is 22 miles from Petra. Often
thought to be at Tawilan but recent excavation has Iron through Hellenistic
remains there and no Roman-Byzantine. The southern region in Hebrew is also
called Daroma (K. 26:1); Negeb (K. 136:14) (see Jerome on K. 137:15 and
Interpretation of Hebrew Names 44). If this is Thamana the garrison is verified
by Notitia Dignitatum (74:46). In Tabula Peutinger Theman. Perhaps the 15 and 5
of the Greek and Latin texts respectively are both scribal errors.

487. Thamna. Genesis 38:12; K. 96:24; L. 264:3.

Simple biblical note of Joshua 19:43 and 15:57 The Madaba map seems to be
quoting Eusebius, "Thamna where Ioudas sheared his sheep." It is a village
dependent on Diospolis (K. 8:14) and one of three villages called "great" (cf.
Apbeka K. 22:20 and Magdiēl 130:21). The biblical site has been held to be Kh
Tibnē bur some claim to find no Israelite remains so Tell Batashi has been
suggested. Kh Tibnah which retains the name has Roman-Byzantine remains and is
southeast, that is in the Southern Quadrant from Diospolis and could approximate
the location on the crowded map. Others on basis of K. 8:13 and K. 24:5 suggest
it is northeast of Diospolis near Remphis (K. 144:28) and Aenam (K. 9:11 etc.
cp. K. 70:20 and K. 100:1). Three sites combined in one place. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Thanna, forbidding or failing" (73).

488. Thamna. Genesis 36:40; K. 96:27; L. 264:6.

Biblical summary of Genesis 36:12. "Another" is out of order and a late
addition.

Cf. Thaiman as a son of Esau in K. 96:19.

DEUTERONOMY 489. Thophol (Thafol). Deuteronomy 1:1; K. 98:2; L. n/a; Lacuna in
Greek Text. The next three entries are missing in the Vatican Manuscript. This
is also the only place where the section heading records "Deuteronomy" by itself
rather than all under Pentateuch, or under Numbers. Here entries from Numbers
follow one from Deuteronomy and may all be an editorial insertion.

Summary of biblical information and location. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Thofel, tastelessness" (88).

490. Thaath. Numbers 33:26f.; K. 98:4; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Simple biblical list of station (cf. K. 82:21). Missing in Vatican manuscript.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Theeth, beneath" (85).

491. Thara. Numbers 33:27f.; K. 98:5; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Simple biblical list of station (cf. K. 82:21). Missing in Vatican manuscript.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thare, investigation or pasture or
worthlessness" (85).

JOSUE 492. Thaphphou (Thaffu). Joshua 12:17; K. 98:7; L. 264:10.

Simple biblical summary. Probably falsely equated with each other cf. Joshua
15:34 Cf. Bēthaphou K. 50:18. Variants Betthaffu and Bethaffu (Latin). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thaffue, apple from a tree not from wickedness
or open drum" (98).

493. Thanak (Thaanac). Joshua 12:21; K. 98:10; L. 264:14.

Summary of biblical information of Joshua 17:11, 21:25. The Onomasticon's data
agree with the biblical location of the important mound retaining its name Tell
Ta'anak recently re-excavated. Byzantine city in the plain rather than on the
tell (cf. K. 100:10) where it is three, not four, miles from Legeōn (K. 14:21).
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thaanach, answering or shallow" (98) and
"Thanach, shallow or he answered you" (101) and "Thanach, "he answered you" (K.
113).

494. Thēnath. Joshua 16:6; K. 98:13; L. 265:16. The direction and the distance
suggest Kh Ta'na which contains part of the old name. The upper ruin is not far
enough to be Eusebius' site Thēna which is at Kh Ta'na et tahta where much
Roman-Byzantine remains are found. The Old Testament site may be Kh Ta'aa el
foqa. Whether this is related to Silo (K. 156:28) is unclear from Eusebius. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thenath, fig tree" (98). In Vatican manuscript
these two entries are conflated. Simple tribal listings (cp. K. 98:7 above).

495. Thaphphoue (Thaffue). Joshua 16:8, 17:8; K. 98:15; L. 265:19.

Simple tribal listings (cp. K. 98:7 above).

496. Thaphphouth (Thaffuth). Joshua 17:8; K. 98:16; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek
Text.

Simple tribal listings (cp. K. 98:7 above).

497. Thekō. Joshua 15:59; K. 98:17; L. 265:20.

Cf. K. 86:13. It is out of order of biblical texts (cf. Amos 1:1).

498. Thersa. Joshua 12:24; K. 98:19; L. 265:23.

Simple biblical notation. Order of several entries mixed up. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Thersa, pleasing which is what the Greeks call satisfying"
(98).

499. Therama. Joshua 18:27; K. 98:21; L. 265:25.

Simple tribal listing.

500. Thōlad. Joshua 15:30; K. 98:22; L. 265:26.

Textual variant Thōdlad (Greek).

Simple tribal listing (Joshua 19:4 and cf. K. 86:7 above). Perhaps out of order.

501. Thabōr. Joshua 19:22; K. 98:23; L. 265:27. This mountain is out of order so
is suspect as a later editorial addition even if it were a town (cf. K. 118:8
and K. 150:14). All the traditions point to the same as Mt.Itabyrium in the
Greek Fathers (110:20). Jerome in Commentary on Hosea 5:1 writes, "Thabor which
the LXX interprets Itaburion" a mountain in the plain in Galilaea, "very round
and high with all sides equal" (cf. Joshua 19:34). There is some evidence of a
late fourth century church on Mt.Tabor. Procopius 1049A quotes our text
accurately. Jerome's Epistle 108:13 (Paula Migne PL 22, 889) notes that Paula
could see Aermon from here. There and in Epistle 108:13 (Paula, Migne PL 22:491)
Jerome remarks on the tradition of the Transfiguration. But Eusebius and Origen
are not yet sure which of the two mountains is the Mt. of Transfiguration. For
Diokaisareia see K. 16:13. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thabor, coming
light" (98).

502. Thalcha. Joshua 19:7; K. 98:26; L. 265:30.

Simple tribal listing together with note on contemporary Jewish town (cf. Note
on K. 22:9 and Appendix II) which fits the evidence for Kh or Tell Khuweilife.
In Jerome K. 99:27 one variant has "east" instead of "south," but quadrant is
acceptable (cf. Sikelak, 156:1). For Eleutheropolis see K. 18:2.

503. Thamnathsara. Joshua 19:50; K. 100:1; L. 265:33.

Summary of biblical information of Joshua 19:43. Probably equated with Thanna
(K. 70:20) where the tomb is also mentioned (cf. K. 96:24).Paula remarks on "one
who is buried in Thamnathsare on the north side of Mt. Gaas" in Jerome's Epistle
103:13 (PPT I, 12). Now identified with Tibne. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Thamnathsare, measure of a cover" (98) and "Thamnathares, enumeration of the
sun" (101).

504. Thalassa. Joshua 18:19; K. 100:4; L. 265:36.

Out of order and not a place name but a sea and so suspect as late editorial
addition. On Madaba map the three names all appear: Salt, Asphalt and Dead. In
Jerome's Commentary on Ezekiel 47:6 "Bitter sea which in Greek is called
AsphaltLake, i.e. pool of bitumen." Both lakes come at end of sections (cp. K.
172:12). On Zoara see K. 42:1 above.

JUDGES 505. Thaanach. Judges 1:27; K. 100:7; L. 265:39.

Cf. K. 98:10 above where the distance is 4 miles. Procopius 1061A quotes this
entry here accurately except for the name Thennach (cp. Judges 5:19 and Joshua
21:25).

506. Thēbēs. Judges 9:50; K. 100:11; L. 265:44.

Summary of biblical information of Judges 9:53. A village dependent upon
Neapolis (K. 4:28). In Old Testament times a "city." This is an accurate
location from milestones which have been found. It is at modern Tubas. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thebes, a turning around or having an egg" (101)
and "Thebes, they were in it or my deed" (109).

507. Thamnatha. Judges 14:1; K. 100:15; L. 265:49.

Textual variant Thamnam (Latin) (see above K. 96:24 and K. 100:2).

KINGS 508. Thēlamou land of (Thelamuge). II Samuel 3:12; K. 100:17; L. 265:51.

Simple biblical notation with Hexaplaric information. A name only in LXX.

509. Thaad. II Samuel 24:6; K. 100:19; L. 265:53.

Only a biblical location. A confused entry (cf. K. 34:16 above).

510. Thamsa. I Kings 4:24; K. 100:20; L. 266:54.

Only a biblical location.

511. Thermōth. I Kings 9:18; K. 100:21; L. 266:55.

Biblical notation and location only. This is probably Palmyra (cf. K. 96:15).

512. Tharseis (Tharsis). I Kings 10:22; K. 100:23; L. 266:57. This is out of the
Holy Land proper (Ezekiel 27:25). Josephus Antiquities I, 6, 1 is interpreted in
several of Jerome's commentaries as referring to Tarsus in Cilicia (cf.
Commentary on Jeremiah 10:6 and Commentary on Isaiah2:16). The LXX interprets it
as Carthage (cf. K. 119:12), In Epistle 37:2ff. Jerome repeats his argument used
here.

513. Tharsa. I Kings 15:21; K. 102:3; L. 266:61. A confusion in LXX but here a
simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thersa, pleasing"
(113).

514. Thersila. II Kings 15:14; K. 102:4; L. 266:62. This is out of order and
perhaps identical with K. 98:19 above as well as the previous entry K. 102:3 to
which this may actually be a marginal gloss. It is located at Tsil northwest of
Dera now in the Batanea (K. 44:11). The only contemporary Samaritan village
reported in the text.

515. Thesba. I Kings 17:1; K. 102:6; L. 266:65.

Simple biblical notation. Elijah is also referred to in K. 162:1 and K. 175:16.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thesbi, capturing or revolving" (113).

516. Thaiman (Theman). Ezekiel 20:46; K. 102:7; L. 266:66. An accumulation of
biblical information from Ezekiel 25:13; Isaiah 21:14; Jeremiah 49:7; Obadiah 9,
and Genesis 36:11. One cannot help wondering if these are editorial additions
when they are so mixed up in order (cf. K.96: 18). Perhaps all Ezekiel
references are late since many are out of biblical order in the text of the
Onomasticon. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Theman, south" (123).

517. Tharthak. II Kings 17:31; K. 102:11; L. 266:69.

Textual variant Tharak (Greek).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Tharthac,
overthrown which is better in the Greek, upset" (118).

518. Thalasar. II Kings 19:12; K. 102:12; L. 266:70.

Textual variant Thalassar (Latin).

Syria does not occur often in the Onomasticon. It was a Roman province in 3rd
and 4th centuries but it is not clear if that entity is intended here (cf. K.
72:15, K. 146:13 and K. 146:19). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thalasar,
first weight" (118).

519. Thogarma. Ezekiel 27:14; K. 102:13; L. 266:71.

Textual variant Thourama (Greek).

Simple biblical reference but also perhaps out of the Holy Land proper and
possibly out of order. A suspect entry. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Thogorma, tearing away or a certain kind of people" (133).

520. Thapheth (Thafeth). Jeremiah 7:32; K. 102:14; L. 266:72.

Textual variants: Tapheth (Greek, K. 164:21) and for the other site Acheldema
(Latin) and Acheldama (Latin cf. K. 38:20). The fuller's field in K. 38:2. In
Jerome's Commentary on Jeremiah7:30 Topheth is the Valley of Ennom which is
watered by the springs of Siloe. The name survived for a place or area in the
valley southeast of Jerusalem. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Tof gehenna
(cf. K. 70:2), or cover of eyes" (128).

SECTION I

GENESIS 521. Iabōk (Iabōc). Genesis 32:23ff.; K. 102:19; L. 266:78. The distance
is missing from the Vatican manuscript and several other confusions occur
(Deuteronomy 3:16). This is a river and not properly a place name as the
Onomasticon. Possibly also it is out of order. Just as the first entry under
many alphabetic sections it is highly suspect as a late editorial addition. For
Gerasa see K. 64:1. This tributary to the Jordan is the Zerqa. Syriac and Latin
agree on the 4 mile distance. The Vatican manuscript added note that some think
this is the territory of Job while others say the land of Job is Arabia (see
next entry). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iaboc, sand or wrestling" (68).

522. Idoumaia (Idumaea). Genesis 36:16; K. 102:23; L. 266:82.

Possibly the annotation of the Vatican manuscript as noted in the previous entry
is really a marginal gloss on this entry. Edom is frequently mentioned in the
Onomasticon; Idoumaia, less frequently. Petra (K. 142:7) is used as a referent
often. The Gebalēnē (K.8:10) approximates the area. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Idumaea, red or earthy" (139).

523. Iather. Genesis 36:40; K. 104:1; L. 266:87.

Textual variant Ietheth (Latin).

Simple biblical notation. For Gabalenē see K. 8:10 as editor suggests.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 524. Iatabatha. Numbers 33:33; K. 104:4; L. 267:90.

Textual variant Iegabath (Latin).

Simple listing of station. This one is out of order suggesting an editor may
have added the list of stations (cf. K. 104:23 also). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Etebatha, of goodness or he turned aside to come" (82).

525. Ianna. Numbers 21:20; K. 104:6; L. 267:91.

Textual variant has Phasga (Greek) as also the Latin Fasga.

Summary of biblical verse to give location.

526. Iessa (Iassa). Numbers 21:23; K. 104:9; L. 267:94.

Textual variant Medaban (Latin).

Summary of biblical notations from Isaia 15:1 and Jeremiah 48:21, 34 with a very
generalized location perhaps on border of the two regions. Vulgate has Iasa,
Iassa and Iaser. Perhaps Khel Lirr for the Onomasticon's site and nearby Kh
Iskander or 'Aleiyan for Iron Age. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iassa,
halved or make a charge" (82).

527. Iazēr. Numbers 21:32; K. 104:13; L. 267:98.

Detailed location and summary of biblical information from Joshua 13:25, Isaiah
16:8, Jeremiah 48:32, and Joshua 21:37. Usually Perea (K. 12:28) is used for
Transjordan not for the specific province. In K. 12:3 a Iazer is 8 rather than
10 miles from Philadelphia. The Latin omits the "of Palistinē." Did some editor,
in his time, know that Perea should not be called Palestinē? Perhaps
Onomasticon's location is at Kh sar, but Kh jazzir is biblical site. Others see
Tell 'areme as Eusebius' site. All are near present Nau 'r.

528. Iordanēs. Numbers 22:1; K. 104:20; L. 267:6. The rivers as noted before are
all suspect in the Onomasticon but this one is in the proper order. The Jordan
valley is the Aulon (K.14:22). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iordania,
their descent or their possession or seeing judgment" (140).

529. Ietabatha. Deuteronomy 10:7; K. 104:23; L. 267:9.

Simple biblical notation (see K. 104:4).

530. 'Ierichō. Deuteronomy 32:49; K. 104:25; L. 267:10.

Summary of biblical events including New Testament times (I Kings 16:34 and
Matthew 20:29) with incidental archaeological concern. No locations are given.
The New Testament data may be an original contribution of Eusebius or may be a
still later editor.

Procopius 905C says 52 miles to Neapolis. But in 1016A he quotes this entry
exactly. The Madaba map follows Eusebius' spelling and location. In Tabula
Peutinger it is 12 miles from Archaelaud (K. 45:1) and 32 miles to Neapolis (K.
4:28). A bishop was present at the Council of Nicea. The three cities are not
clearly located or identified. The New Testament one was at Tell abu Aliyiq and
spread out to the flats nearby and has been partially excavated. The later
Byzantine was in the general location of present er-riha extending westward
toward Aliyiq. Usually Tell es-sultan is called Old Testament Ierichō. But it
has its archaeological problems in spite of being twice thoroughly excavated.
Tell es-sultan is for Josephus and the Onomasticon not Jericho but Gilgal (K.
64:24). What the Onomasticon pointed out as Old Testament Iericho is uncertain
but perhaps no ruins. Paula however reports as did Josephus that after Joshua
destroyed it, up to her time "nothing is to be seen of it except the place where
the Ark of the Covenant stood and the 12 stones which the children of Israel
brought out of the Jordan" (PPT I, 25). Obviously this refers to Gilgal as the
near obliterated Ierichō. Only the site of Gilgal was seen. In the Onomasticon
many sites are located in reference to the Roman-Byzantine Jericho region.

JOSUE 531. 'Ierousalēm. Joshua 10:1; K. 106:2; L. 267:18.

Adonibezek is LXX form for Adonsedek. A summary of biblical information from
Josua 15:63, Judges 1:21, 19:10, II Samuel 5:6, Genesis 14:18 and Joshua 18:28.
Identification is made with Iebous (K. 106:7) and Salēm (K. 153: 4). It is also
called 'Alōn Orna (K. 34:17). The Greek text on the later entry about Salēm is
corrupt. Onomasticon mentions Ailia more frequently than any other name (see
Appendices VII and VIII). It is not listed in this entry because it was still a
contemporary name. In 135 A.D. Hadrian began the use of Ailia Kapitōlia. Paula
writes "entered Jerusalem, the city of three names - Jebus, Salem, Jerusalem -
which by Aelius, afterwards Hadrianus, was raised from its ruins and ashes into
Ailia" (Jerome's Epistle 108:9 and PPT I, 5). The Madaba map has a recognizable
vignette and the "Holy City Ierousalēm." No mention is made to Church (cf. Note
on K. 7:13 and Appendix I) in this entry although Eusebius knows of them (Vita
Const. III, 31ff.) as did Paula (PPT I, 6). Some think Eusebius' praise of
Constantine sermon was delivered in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Jerusalem or Ailia is often used as a referent in Eusebius and some details are
given of its surroundings. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iērusalem, vision
of peace" (121).

532. Iebous. Joshua 18:28; K. 106:7; L. 267:23.

Simple biblical quote to identify it with the above (K. 106:2). It is out of
order and probably a gloss on the previous entry later incorporated by a scribe.

533. Iareim (Iarim). Joshua 9:17; K. 106:8; L. 267:24.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 114:19 and K. 114:23). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Iarim, salt or of the woods" (94).

534. Ierimouth (Iarimuth). Joshua 12:11; K. 106:9; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.
The first part of this entry and the end of the previous entry are missing in
the Vatican manuscript. The distance is also corrupted with 7 appearing in the
Vatican and 4 in the Latin. Some emend to 14 on the basis of Procopius 1020C
[cf. K. 106:24 which locates an Iermochōs 10 miles away from Eleutheropolis (K.
18:12)]. If near Esthaol (K. 88:12) it is on the way to Nikopolis (K. 30:27)
rather than Jerusalem and must be at least 7 miles since Eathaol is 10 miles
from Eleutheropolis. The turn off from the main road may be indicated. Probably
Kh Marmita, south of Ishwa is intended by the Onomasticon but it is not the Old
Testament site which is probably Kh Yarmuk (cf. Joshua 15:35). In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Ieritnoth, fearing death or to the heights of death" (94).

535. Isimōth. Joshua 12:3; K. 106:11; L. 268:26.

Biblical information with Hexaplaric data (cf. K. 48:6 and I Samuel 23:19). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Isimoth, he brought death" (82).

536. Iedna. Joshua 15:23; K. 106:15; L. 268:30. This may be out of order. About
halfway between the two major referents is Idna, the site which the Onomasticon
has in mind.

537. Iekkomam (Ieconam). Joshua 12:22; K. 106:17; L. 268:32.

Simple biblical information (perhaps see K. 116:21).

538. Iaeir. Joshua 13:30; K. 106:19; L. 268:34.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 18:4). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iair,
making clear" (94).

539. Iamneia (Iamnel). Joshua 15:11; K. 106:20; L. 268:35.

Called a "polichne" and "oppidum" both relatively infrequent terms in the
Onomasticon (K. 22:11, K. 10:25 and Appendix I and II). It was made into a
municipality by Vespasian. Tabula Peutinger has it 10 miles from Azotus (K.
20:18) and 12 miles from Ioppē (K. 110:24). Its former name was Iabnēl and this
name appears with Iamnia on the Madaba map at the generally agreed on location.
There was a maritime Iamnia also but that is not the one intended here. A bishop
was present at the Council of Nicea.

It is used as a referent in the Onomasticon (K. 22:10, K. 50:16 and K. 72:4). It
is the present Iebna. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iabnehel, building of
God" (94).

540. Iabeir (Iabir). Joshua 15:15; K. 106:22; L. 268:37.

Confused entry probably for Dabeir (K. 78:12). A similar confusion is in K. 78:2
Dayid.

541. Iagour (Iagur). Joshua 15:21; K. 106:23; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is missing in Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iagur, colony or
stranger" (94).

542. Iermous (Iermus). Joshua 15:35; K. 106:24; L. 268:38.

Just north of Beit Nettif is Kh Jarmuk which preserves part of the name and is
about 10 miles from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) to the turn off from main road. It
is probably to be distinguished from Ierimouth (K. 106:9) nearer to Nikopolis
(K. 30:27).

543. Iechthaēl. Joshua 15:38; K. 106:26; L. 268:40.

Textual variants: Iechthael and Iethael (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iecthahel, honor of
God" (94).

544. Iephthan (Iecthan). Joshua 15:43; K. 106:27; L. 268:41.

Simple tribal listing In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iepte, opening or
uncovered" (94).

545. Iether. Joshua 15:48; K. 108:1; L. 268:42.

Textual variant Malatham (Latin).

Eusebius erroneously identifies this with Ether (K. 88:3) of Symeon (Joshua
21:14). Here the information is added that it is entirely Christian, one of two
such in the south (K. 26:13). Kh 'Attir is probably this Christian town. Not on
the main road (cf. K. 110:18), represented on the Madaba map as a small tower
south of Gerara. For Malathen see K. 14:3 and Appendix II.

546. Ianoun (Ianum). Joshua 15:53; K. 108:5; L. 268:46.

Textual variant Ianun (Latin). The strange addendum may be an editor's
questioning the source. The biblical site is not clearly identifiable but near
Kh Gile 'adi with Iron and Persian evidence. But Ianoua is perhaps el Yamun
south of Taanach (K. 100:7) about 5 miles instead of 3 from Legeōn (K. 14:21) or
Kh Niba with some Roman sherds. The 3 miles may be where one left the main road
via Taanach. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ianum, sleeping" (94).

547. Iettan. Joshua 15:55; K. 108:8; L. 268:49.

Textual variant Iethan (Latin).

Another of the all Jewish towns of the fourth century (cf. Note on 22:9 and
Appendix II). The localization points to the present Yatta 6 miles south of
Chebrōn (K. 180:25). It is southeast of Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) but within the
Eastern quadrant (cf. Joshua 21:16). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ietta,
they will stretch out" (94).

548. Iezrael. Joshua 15:56; K. 108:11; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry
is missing in the Greek Vatican manuscript. Jerome's notation is obscure. What
entry "above" is intended? Possibly 34:11? A marginal gloss?

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iezrahel, seed of God"
(95).

549. Iezrael. Joshua 17:16; K. 108:12; L. 268:52.

Textual variant Efratae (Latin). This entry is out of order unless confused with
the previous one from Iouda. The Greek Vatican manuscript perhaps conflated the
two. In the Commentary on Hosea 1:5. Jerome identifies Jezraelem as near
Maximianopolis which is Legeōn (K. 14:21). The plain or valley was named after
this town. The Itin. Bourd. 1, 19 (PPT I, 17) locates it 10 miles from
Maximianopolis and 12 miles from Skythopolis (K. 16:2). This points directly to
Zir 'in (cf. Joshua 19:18 and I Chronicles 4:3).

550. Iekdaan. Joshua 15:56; K. 108:17; L. 268:57.

Textual variant Iekdaad (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iecdom, the people
dwelled in" (95).

551. Iephlithi (Ierflethi). Joshua 16:3; K. 108:18; L. 268:58.

Textual variant Iefleti (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

552. Iano. Joshua 16:6; K. 108:19; L. 268:59.

Summary of biblical information (cf. II Kings 15:29). Very close to Akrabbein
(K. 14:7) is modern Yanum which fits the location and retains the sound of the
Onomasticon's place name. Just north is Kh Yanum with Roman-Byzantine remains.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ianua, rest" (95).

553. Iamein (Iamin). Joshua 17:7; K. 108:22; L. 268:62.

Hexaplaric information. In LXX this is a place name. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Iamin, right hand" (96).

554. Iasēb. Joshua 17:16; K. 108:23; L. 268:63.

Hexaplaric information. Out of order and doubly suspect as a gloss.

555. Ieblaam. Joshua 17:11; K. 108:24; L. 268:64.

Textual variant Iebalam (Greek).

Simple biblical notation (cp. K. 72:24). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Ieblaam, foolish people" (95).

556. Ierphēl. Joshua 18:27; K. 108:26; L. 268:66.

Textual variant Ierdēl (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ierfel, God sent
forth" (95).

557. Ieknal. Joshua 19:11; K. 108:27; L. 269:67.

Simple biblical notation (Joshua 21:34). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Iecnaam, possession of the people" (95).

558. Iapheth (Iafthie). Joshua 19:12; K. 108:29; L. 269:69.

Iapheth is said to be the coastal port of Ioppē. Apparently it was sometimes
confused with 'ēpha or Sykaminos around Mt.Karmēl. Neither 'ēpha nor Sykaminos
are important to the Onomasticon but Ioppē is (cf. 110:24). In Joshua 19 an
Iaphia in v.12 and an Iapho in v.46. The former is in Zebulōn and the latter in
Dan. The Onomasticon conflates the two in this entry unless they switched
loyalty in biblical times. Iaphia-Iapheth is falsely equated with Ioppēe. The
identity of Iaphia and 'Epha are not made clear.

Four sites are involved. Iaphia of Zabulōn is not really localized in the
Onomasticon. It is probably Yafe near Nazareth. Ioppē was a well known port and
referent for the Onomasticon and needed no localization. Sykaminos is located
near Mt.Karmēl identified with 'ēpha but Sykaminos is probably south of
Mt.Karmēl, Tell es Samak and Epha is north and is ancient area of present day
Haifa. Sykaminos is an "oppidum" in Latin (cp. K. 10:25 and Appendix I). Iapho
which is probably Ioppē is not mentioned here or in the entry at K. 110:24. But
Vespasian made Ioppē a municipality. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iafie,
open or exposed or surface" (95).

559. Iephthaēl. Joshua 19:14; K. 110:1; L. 269:72.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 10:6). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Iafthehel, God reveals" (95).

560. Iadela. Joshua 19:15; K. 110:2; L. 269:73.

Textual variant Ioudēla (Greek) Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Iedala, abuse of the hand" (95).

561. Iermoth. Joshua 19:21; K. 110:3; L. 269:74.

Summary of biblical information from Joshua 21:29 and Hosea 5:8 (cf. K. 106:9).

562. Iamnēl (Iabnel). Joshua 19:33; K. 110:5; L. 269:76.

Textual variant Iamel (Latin).

Simple tribal listing (cp. K. 106:20).

563. Ierōn. Joshua 19:38; K. 110:6; L. 269:77.

Textual variant Ierron (Greek).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ieraon, they will
fear" (95).

564. Iethlan (Iethlam). Joshua 19:42; K. 110:7; L. 269:78.

Jethela (Vulgate) Seilatha (LXX).

Simple tribal listing.

565. Iēlōn. Joshua 19:43; K. 110:8; L. 269:79.

Simple tribal listing.

566. Ioud (Iud). Joshua 19:45; K. 110:9; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry missing in Greek Vatican Manuscript Simple tribal listing.

567. 'Ierakō (Ieracon). Joshua 19:46; K. 110:10; L. 269:80.

Some take "waters" me (mai) as the first syllable of a proper name.

Simple tribal listing. This may be the same as K. 96:3, but the Greek may have
conflated or confused two Hebrew place names. LXX has "sea of Ierakōn with
border near Ioppē." The words border and mountain are quite similar in Greek and
Hebrew for mountain is har which could be found in MT harakkon. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ieracon, yellowish which Greeks call jaundiced"
(95).

568. Iabeis Galaad. Judges 21:8; K. 110:11; L. 269:81. In K. 32:6 Iabis is a
large city, but a village of Iabeis here. Procopius 1049A has the distance 20
from Pella (K. 14:19) and 60 from Gerasa (K. 64:2) which are obviously wrong
unless the milestones were taken from other referents than those now in our
text. The name continues in the Wadi Yabis. Onomasticon seems to point to Kir
Isna or nearby Deir el Halaweh, with the former a Roman-Byzantine site to be
preferred. This is not necessarily the identification of the biblical site,
which may be Tell Maqlub. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iabes, dry or
dryness" (100).

KINGS 569. Iaar. I Samuel 14:25; K. 110:15; L. 269:86. The etymology is in the
LXX. This is not a proper name in the MT. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Iaare, salt" (108).

570. 'Ieramēlei. I Samuel 30:29; K. 110:16; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is missing in Greek Vatican manuscript and out of order in Latin. Jerome
transliterates rather than translates the "foreigners." In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Ierameheli, God have mercy on me" (104).

571. Iether. I Samuel 30:26; K. 110:17; L. 269:87.

Textual variants: Iethoeira (Greek) and Ieththira (Latin).

Onomasticon identifies this with K. 88:3 and K. 108:2.

572. Iekmaan. I Kings 4:12; K. 110:19; L. 269:89.

Simple biblical notation.

573. Itaburion. Joshua 5:1; K. 110:20; L. 269:90.

Cf. K. 98:23. Thabor, perhaps out of order and suspect.

574. Iekthoēl. II Kings 14:7; K. 110:22; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Interpretative biblical comment (cf. K. 142:7). In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Ieethel, meeting God or help of God" (116).

575. Ietaba. II Kings 21:19; K. 110:23; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Iothaba, sinning in
him" (116).

576. Ioppē. Jonah 1:3; K. 110:24; L. 269:92.

Madaba map notes this was the home of Jonah. So also does Paula (PTT I, 4) (cf.
K. 108:30 and Joshua 19:46. No details regarded as necessary for a flourishing
"oppidum" (cf. K. 10:25; K. 163:6 and Appendix I). In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Ioppe, beauty" (124). THE GOSPELS 577. Itouraia, Also Trachonitis. Luke
3:1; K. 110:27; L. 269:93. This is the extreme northeast of the Onomasticon. On
Trachonitis see K. 166:1. It is related to Basan (K. 44:9) and Batanaia (cf. K.
12:11). Arabia (K. 10:17) is the most frequently used of these geographical
names but they are not clearly delineated in the Onomasticon, probably because
the lists developed over several centuries of Jewish compilers, Eusebius and
later editors and glossators. In the early fourth century there was an important
town Maximianopolis not to be confused with the similarly named town in Jesreel.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ituraeae, mountainous; this in Syria" (140).

SECTION K

GENESIS K. 112:2; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. In Greek the sub-division under
this alphabetic section is "Genesis" but in Latin it is more correct as
"Pentateuch."

578. Karnaeim. Astaroth Karnaeim. Genesis 14:5; K. 112:3; L. 269:98. The large
village in Batanaia is one of the two villages of K. 6:4. The probability is
that it is Sheikh Sa'ad about 16 miles northwest of Dera near Tell 'ashtarah (K.
12:11). The home of Job is noted in K. 142:3 and such a tradition from pilgrim
times continued into the 20th century at Sheikh Sa'ad (cf. K. 76:10) For
Batanaia see K. 44:11. The second Karnaia (I Maccabees 5:27ff.) belonging to
Ailia perhaps is Ataroth (K. 26:25). Nine miles marks the turn off from main
road northwest toward Bethoron from Jerusalem. All these are to be distinguished
from Ataroth of Ephraim (K. 26:19) near Bir Zeit.

579. Kadēs. Genesis 14:7; K. 112:7; L. 269:3.

Simple biblical notation. In Hebrew Questions Jerome says "Cades is a place near
Petra called the spring of judgment where God judged the people" (18).

580. Kadēa Barnē. Numbers 32:8; K. 112:8; L. 270:4.

Textual variant city of Palestinē (Greek) instead of Arabia. This reflects again
the uncertainty of editorial additions and of the use of Arabia in the
Onomasticon (K. 110:27). Latin combines K. 112:7 and K. 112:8. Some confusion in
order of this and the next three entries. A summary of biblical information from
Numbers 21:1, 11; Numbers 27:14 and Genesis 14:7. A tomb tradition is here. No
location is given other than near Petra (K. 142:7). Procopius repeats the entry
in 332D and 1021D. It also is reaffirmed by Jerome in Commentary on Ezekiel
38:23(cf. K. 46:26). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Cades, holy or change"
(63); "Cades, alteration or holy" (80); "Cadesbarne, selected change or
changeableness" (80).

581. Kenaz. Genesis 36:11; K. 112:13; L. 270:9.

Simple biblical notation. In Hebrew Questions (44) Jerome equated Theman (K.
96:18), Cenaz, Amalec (K. 16:5) with Idumaia (K. 46:11). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Cenez, jealous or his possession" (63).

582. Kariathaeim. Numbers 32:37; K. 112:14; L. 270:10.

Textual variants: Kariathieim (Greek). For contemporary site Coroiath and
Eoraiatat (Latin).

Another wholly Christian town (cf. K. 26:14) is located west of Madaba and
probably indicates Kh el Qureiyat which is near the hot springs of Barē (cf. K.
44:22). Mileage indicates turn off from main Roman highway. Must be distinct
from Kariathiareim of Jerusalem (K. 14:23). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Cariathaim, towns or their city (oppidum)" (80).

583. Kariatharbo. Genesis 23:2; K. 112:18; L. 270:14.

Textual variants: Kariathirbo (Greek) and Ceriath arbeae (Latin).

Etymological information and identification with Chebrōn (K. 6:8 and K. 170:25).
It is out of regular order and probably suspect as addition. See all three
entries above.

584. Kanath. Numbers 32:42; K. 112:20; L. 270:15.

Vatican manuscript is incomplete here. Textual variants: Cannatha and Chanatha
(Latin).

Summary of biblical information and generalized location. The village is
probably el Kanawat and along with Damascus and Bostra forms the eastern limit
of the Onomasticon. In Tabula Peutinger it is 20 Miles from Bostra.

Onomasticon confused Nabo (Numbers 32:42) and Naboth (Numbers 32:3, 78 and K.
136:6, 9) and perhaps is too far northeast for the biblical site. The Syriac has
this "near Petra" which is an attempted correction getting nearer to Kerak. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Canath, striving after or zealous" (80).

585. Kata ta Krusea (Catatachrysea, i.e. to gold). Deuteronomy 1:1; K. 114:1; L.
270:19.

Vatican manuscript adds "Deuteronomy" division marker here. The LXX and Vulgate
translate the biblical Dizahab. The area is located by the Onomasticon as near
Phainon (K. 81:16 and K. 168:8) in the Arabah (K.12:25) somewhere near Aqabah
(cf. Deuteronomy 1:5 and Numbers 33:42). Perhaps Umm el Dahab which retains the
sound and etymology. The mines were worked in Roman-Byzantine times as well as
earlier. Smelters also in later era.

586. Kadēmōth. Deuteronomy 2:26; K. 114:5; L. 270:23.

Simple biblical summary (cf. K. 114:10 below). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Cademoth, beginning of death" (86).

587. Kariath. Joshua 9:17; K. 114:7; L. 270:25.

Simple biblical summary (cf. K. 114:23, K. 48:9, K. 48:24, and K.172:15). And
for Gabaon see K. 66:11.

588. Kades. Joshua 12:22; K. 114:8; L. 270:26.

Simple biblical notation (cf. Joshua 15:3).

589. Kademoth. Joshua 13:18; K. 114:10; L. 270:28.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 114:5). Here "another" is in the proper order.
One of six only in the Onomasticon. All others are out of order.

590. Kedsōn. Joshua 21:37; K. 114:11; L. 270:29.

Part of this entry missing in Vatican manuscript possibly by scribal
homoioteleuton after Roubin. Gloss.

JOSUE 591. Kapseēl. Joshua 15:21; K. 114:13; L. 270:31.

Note "Iesoue" division here but four previous entries were from that book.

Simple tribal listing. Possibly the same as K. 118:10.

592. Kina. Joshua 15:22; K. 114:14; L. 270:32.

Simple tribal listing (cf. Tina (K. 164:14)).

593. Keeila. Joshua 15:44; K. 114:15; L. 270:33.

Textual variant in Vatican manuscript 17 miles.

Probably at Kh Qila today about 7 miles east of Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) but 7
miles more properly a turn off. The tomb is also indicated as elsewhere (K.
70:24 and K. 88:27). This is also called Enkēla (K. 88:26). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Cena, throw a slingstone or arousing him or bearing oneself" (92).

594. Kariathbaal. Joshua 15:60; K. 114:19; L. 270:37. A simple biblical notation
(cf. K. 106:8, K. 114:23 and K. 48:24). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Cariathbaal, he possessed cities or had possessed cities" (92).

595. Kana. Joshua 16:8; K. 114:20; L. 270:38.

Simple tribal listing. A river (cf. K. 114:22).

596. Kabsaeim (Capsaim). Joshua 21:22; K. 114:21; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.
Not in Vatican manuscript and out of order. Textual variant Camsaim (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

597. Kane. Joshua 17:9; K. 114:22; L. 270:39.

Simple tribal listing. A river (cf. K. 114:20).

598. Kariathiareim (Kariathbaal). Joshua 18:14; K. 114:23; L. 271:40.

Summary of biblical items which are divided into two sections by a location
indication. The additions after are perhaps from a later hand (Joshua 26:22, I
Chronicles 2:50, Joshua 15:60, and Judges 10:4). Same as K. 114:19 above.

Procopius 1024A agrees with the location and distance. In K. 48:24 however it is
12 miles not 9 as here (cf. K. 106:8 and K. 128:1). This location generally
points to Qaryat al 'Inab area for the Byzantine site; possibly Deir el Azhar
(cf. K. 116:20). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Cariathiarim, city or
village of the woods" (91).

599. Kisōn (Kision). Joshua 19:20; K. 114:28; L. 271:46.

Simple biblical notation (Joshua 21:28). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Cison, they drive against or their hardness or joy" (99).

600. Kartha. Joshua 21:34; K. 116:1; L. 271:47.

Simple biblical notation, possibly out of order. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Cartham, complete a summons" (92).

601. Katta. Joshua 19:15; K. 116:2; L. 271:48.

Textual variants: Kouta (Greek) and Cotta (Latin).

Simple biblical notation, also possibly out of order. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Catath or Caath, bite or society" (92).

602. Kana. Joshua 19:28; K. 116:4; L. 271:50.

Summary of biblical information including New Testament (John 21:1,2 and
John1:48). Only a general location is given. The Latin text calls the
contemporary town an "oppidum" (cp. K. 10:25 and Appendix I). The Onomasticon
equates Kanah with Cana. Kanah of Asher should be near Aidōn and possibly is at
Qanah 6-7 miles southeast of Tyre (K. 162:15). The New Testament site is quite
older, being in Galilee. It is close to Nazareth (K. 138:24) and Kapharnaum (K.
120:2), according to Jerome's Epistle 108 (Migne PL 22, 889 and PPT I, 15). In
Epistle 46 (Migne PL 22, 91) it is very near Nazareth. It is probably to be
located at Kh Qana but could possibly be Kefr Kenna closer to Nazareth. A late
4th century church is there.

Some scholars think Jerome's note on greater and lesser refer to Kana rather
than to Sidōn. If so, the greater is the New Testament site and the lesser the
Old Testament site. However, the text hardly supports this opinion.

603. Kades (Cades). Joshua 19:37; K. 116:8; L. 271:53.

Summary of biblical information (Joshua 21:32, Joshua 20:7 and II Kings 15:29).
Procopius 1049A has the first part of the entry only.

Kydissos probably also known as Cadasa is located southeast of Tyre (K. 162:15)
and is still known as Qades in Upper Galilee, north of Safed.

604. Kartham. Joshua 21:32; K. 116:12; L. 271:57.

Simple biblical notation.

JUDGES 605. Ketrōn. Judges 1:30; K. 116:15; L. 271:60.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Cetron, their
darkness or incense" (99).

606. Karka (Carcar). Judges 8:10; K. 116:17; L. 271:62.

Biblical summary plus location. No direction is given. If north, it is near
Shobek but it could just as well refer to south or southeast area (cf. Kerak
sound). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Carcar, investigation" (99).

607. Kamōn. Judges 10:5; K. 116:20; L. 271:65. The identification by the
Onomasticon is probably erroneous for the biblical site which should be in
Transjordan. Kammona is near present Qamun which retains the sound of the name
and is approximately 8 miles northwest of Legeōn (K. 14:21) and may be the
Jokneam of the Old Testament for Iaeip (see K. 48:24 and K. 114:23). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Camon, unprofitable reappearance" (99). The next
four entries are all out of order and are not really names of places so are
suspect as later editorial or scribal additions.

608. Kisōn. Judges 4:7; K. 116:23; L. 271:69.

Simple biblical summary for the Wadi (cf. K. 114:28).

609. Kadēmim (Cademi). Judges 5:21; K. 116:25; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Procopius 1061B puts these two places together and notes the possible confusion
of Kisōn and Kadēmim in the Sisara and Debbōra story.

610. Koilas of the Titans (i.e. valley of giants). Judges 1:19; K. 116:26; L.
271:71.

Procopius 1125C suggests "valley of the giants who are called Titans" (cf. II
Samuel 5:18ff.). A gloss.

611. Klauthmōn. Judges 2:1; K. 118:1; L. 271:72.

Etymological information not customary in the Onomasticon. This and the previous
three entries are suspect on various grounds.

KINGS 612. Keni. I Samuel 27:10; K. 118:4; L. 271:75. The order of entries in
this entire section on "Kingdoms" is confused. Here the Latin identifies the
"foreigners" as Pylistii. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ceni, my copper or
my bereaved or passion" (80).

613. Karmēlos. I Samuel 25:2; K. 118:5; L. 271:76. In the Vatican manuscript
this and the following item have been conflated. The village still retains its
old name at Kermela 10 miles south (not east) of Chebrōn (K. 6:8). This
direction in the Onomasticon is obviously an error since even the East quadrant
which is sometimes intended in directions in the Onomasticon would not cover the
road to Malatha. The "South" is in the entry for Chermel (K. 172:20 and cf. K.
92:21). Near Zeif is the home of Nabal at Chermela. Chermala probably had been
fortified by Herod along with Zelph. The garrison is reaffirmed by Notitia
Dignitatum (72:6 and 73:20)(cp. Procopius 1020C). Chebrōn is an "oppidum" in
Latin (cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix I).

614. Karmēlos. Mountain. I Kings 18:42; K. 118:8; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.
The confusion with the above is possible because most mountains are suspect
entries in the Onomasticon. The Greek manuscript lacks the first two words. The
Latin does not have this entry. Jerome in Commentary on Amos 1:2 sees two
mountains: one the home of Nabal, the other near Ptolemais. He repeats this
distinction in Commentary on Isaiah 29:17. The home of Nabal near Chebrōn (K.
6:8) is in the previous entry as well as K. 172:20. This item is one of the few
entries in the Onomasticon giving borders of the Roman-Byzantine period. The
northern boundary of the Province of Palestinē is marked by the mountain.

615. Kabseēl II Samuel 15:23; K. 118:10; L. 272:81.

Simple biblical notation not in the Latin text. Perhaps same as K. 116:13. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Cabseel, assembly of God" (107).

616. Kedrōn. I Samuel 15:23; K. 118:11; L. 272:82. Not originally a place name
entry. The Latin adds New Testament John 18:1 note.

Simple biblical location (cf. K. 174:26 and K. 70:2). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Cedron, sadness or sorrow" (126).

617. Kurinē (Cyrene). II Kings 16:9; K. 118:13; L. 272:84.

Probably outside the Onomasticon's limits for Holy Land. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Cyrene, heir" (144).

618. Kōa. I Kings 10:28; K. 118:15; L. 272:87.

Textual variant Kōd (Greek). Not in MT, an LXX word. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Caue, endurance or sound of trumpet" (110).

619. Karchēdon (i.e. Carthage). Isaiah 23:1; K. 118:16; L. 272:88.

Probably outside of the Onomasticon's limits for Holy Land (Ezekiel 27:12 and
cp. K. 100:25). The reference to Hebrew Tharseis is repeated by Jerome in
Commentary on Isaiah 33:1 and Commentary on Ezekiel 37:12. The Latin makes the
clear identification with Carthago. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Carthaginis, investigation" (120).

620. Kollas Iōsaphat. Joel 13:2; K. 118:18; L. 272:89.

Another detail of Jerusalem. The location given is the same as that for the
Chebrōn (cf. K. 70:2, K. 118:11, and K. 174:26). In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names Jerome adds nothing new. This is possibly only a marginal gloss in the
Latin text.

621. Kedam. Ezekiel 25:4; K. 118:20; L. 272:91.

Hexaplaric information.

622. Kēdar. Ezekiel 27:21; K. 118:21; L. 272:92.

Summary of biblical information (Jeremiah 49:28, Isaiah 21:16 and Genesis 25:13)
and a generalized location. The desert of Sarakēnē (K. 60:13) is related to the
area of the Ishmaelites by Jerome in his Commentary on Jeremiah 2:10. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Cedar, sad or dark" (130).

623. Kariōth. Jeremiah 48:24, 41; K. 120:1; L. 272:95.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Carioth, meeting of
signs" (126).

624. Kapharnaoum. Matthew 4:13; K. 120:2; L. 272:96. No special section in this
listing for New Testament text. This is an "oppidum" in Jerome (see Appendix I).
Localization is general because in Eusebius' time this city at Tell Hum was
flourishing. It was two miles from Chōrazein (K. 174:25). There is debate as to
whether the New Testament site was here. Paula and the pilgrims visited this
site (Epistle 108; PPT I, 16; Epistle 46 and Migne PL 22, 491).

Here ends our reading for the letter C i.e. the Greek Kappa the rest are under
the letter Chi, which has aspiration in itself and of which there is very little
use in Latin. At the end of this alphabetic section Jerome adds another of his
linguistic notes differentiating Greek and Hebrew letters and pronunciation.

SECTION L

GENESIS 625. Lasan. Genesis 10:19; K. 120:7; L. 272:1.

Simple biblical location.

Jerome in Hebrew Questions has "Lece which is not Callirhoe where the hot water
pours out and flows into the dead sea" (14). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Lesa, in salt" (68).

626. Louza (Luza). Genesis 28:19; K. 120:8; L. 272:2.

Textual variant Louzan (Greek).

General directions for Baithel-Louza are correct (K. 40:20ff and cf. Joshua
18:13). The road described in opposite direction in K. 40:20. Site is east and
off the main road.

627. Louza (Luza). Judges 1:23; K. 120:11; L. 272:5. This "another" entry is out
of order as frequently appears and seems to be a marginal gloss on the previous
entry which has been incorporated into the text by a later scribe. The
Onomasticon confuses a contemporary, continuing city with the above. The Greek
has 9 miles and the Latin 3 miles from Neapolis (K. 4:28). The Latin is probably
correct for Luza on Mt.Garisim still known as Kh al-loze. The 9 miles northeast
may point to at talluza.

628. Lōtan. Genesis 36:20; K. 120:13; L. 272:7.

Textual variant Lōtam (Greek).

Possibly a name of a person has been confused with a place. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Loyan, their chain or he was confined" (82).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 629. Lebōna. Numbers 33:20; K. 120:15; L. n/a; Lacuna in
Greek Text. This and the next entry are missing in Vatican Greek manuscript.

Simple listing of station. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Lobna, white or
shining white" (82).

630. Lobon. Deuteronomy 1:1; K. 120:16; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This and
the previous entry are missing in Vatican Greek manuscript.

Simple biblical notation.

631. Lacheis. Joshua 10:3; K. 120:19; L. 272:9.

Summary of biblical information (Isaiah 36:2, Jeremiah 34:7, Joshua 15:19). The
Old Testament Lachish being re-excavated at Tell ed Duweir is not Lacheis as far
as the Onomasticon indicates. The Old Testament site is about four and half
miles, from Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12). Tell el Hesi (once identified as Old
Testament Lachish) is almost twice the distance as here in the Onomasticon. A
Byzantine site at Daweima is about 7 miles southeast and could be the one
intended by Eusebius. Near Tell ed Duweir is an el Qubeibe which is more likely
intended. Procopius 1020e repeats the Greek material here. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Lachis, it is march or man himself" (95).

632. Lebna. Joshua 10:29; K. 120:23; L. 273:13.

Textual variant Leena (Greek).

After the biblical summary (Joshua 15:42, Joshua 21:13 and Isaiah 37:8) only a
generalized location is given. The Old Testament may be Tell Judeidah or Tell
es-Safi. The later is Saphitha for the Madaba map. Lobana is not on the map.
Eusebius may see Tell Bernat. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Lohna, dazzling
white or tiles" (95).

633. Laserōn (Lasaran). Joshua 12:18; K. 122:1; L. 273:17.

Simple biblical notation.

634. Lithos Boen. Joshua 15:6; K. 122:3; L. 273:19.

Textual variant Boethou (Greek). The "stone" has been translated into a proper
name.

635. Labōth. Joshua 15:32; K. 122:4; L. 273:20.

Textual variant Labōn (Greek).

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 52:15). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Lebo,
entrance or coming" (5).

636. Lamas. Joshua 15:40; K. 122:5; L. 273:21.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Laamas, to iniquity"
(95).

637. Labōth. Joshua 19:6; K. 122:6; L. 273:22.

Textual variant Laboth (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

638. Labanath. Joshua 19:26; K. 122:7; L. 273:23.

Simple tribal listing.

639. Lakoum. Joshua 19:33; K. 122:8; L. 273:24.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Lacum, to honor" (95).

JUDGES 640. Labōemath. Judges 3:3; K. 122:10; L. 273:26.

Textual variant Lamoemath (Greek).

Hexaplaric information (cf. K. 88:20). Note order shift in these entries.

641. Lesem. Joshua 19:47; K. 122:11; L. 273:27.

Simple biblical notation (cp. K. 76:6). Order confused. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Lesem, to name" (95).

642. Louza. Judges 1:26; K. 122:12; L. 273:29.

"Another" is frequently suspect but if previous entries are confused this is one
of the few in the proper biblical order (cf. K. 120:8, 11 and Baithēl K. 40:20).

643. Lechei. Judges 15:19; K. 122:16; L. 273:32.

Hexaplaric Information. The Latin lacks the first "in jaw" but it may stand for
Enlechi and is not a translation (cf. K. 88:21).

644. Laisa. Judges 18:27ff.; K. 122:17; L. 273:33.

Textual variant Leisa (Greek).

Summary of biblical information and geography (Judges 20:1, Isaiah 10:30. Old
Testament Laisa probably Tell el Qadi. Perhaps refers to K. 122:11 and K. 76:6
(Tell Dan) or else to other references to Paneas and sources of the Jordan. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Laisa, lion" (121).

KINGS 645. Lemattara. I Samuel 20:20; K. 122:23; L. 273:38.

Procopius 1108A has Lamattaran.

Simple biblical notation and Hexaplaric information. Hebrew has become a proper
name through transliteration (cf. K. 88:24).

646. Ladabar. II Samuel 9:4; K. 122:25; L. 273:40.

Textual variants: Lakamer (Greek) and Memphybosthe and Miphiloseth (Latin).

Simple biblical notation.

647. Lōdabar. II Samuel 17:27; K. 122:26; L. 273:41.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Lodabar, the word
itself" (108).

648. Libanos. I Kings 5:9; K. 122:27; L. 273:42. A mountain, therefore a suspect
entry (cf. K. 18:8).

649. Loueith (Luith). Isaiah 15:5; K. 122:28; L. 273:43. The location is very
general. Some identify Loueitha near Mt.Nebo and others nearer Areoplis (K.
10:17). Perhaps still best at Kh Fas. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Luith,
jaw or cheek" (121).

SECTION M

GENESIS 650. Manassē. Genesis 10:30; K. 124:3; L. 273:47.

Simple biblical notation. Outside of Holy Land proper according to Onomasticon's
limits. Procopius 312B says "Massē territory in India is called thus". In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Mesa, infrequent water or from the Lord" (69).

651. Mambre. Genesis 13:18; K. 124:5; L. 273:49.

Identified with Chebrōn (K. 170:25) and Arboc (K. 6:8) (cf. also Oak of Mamrē in
K. 76:1). The "see above" interrupts the biblical information so the later
notations after that are suspect (Genesis 14:13). In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Mamre, division or clear" (69).

652. Madiam. Genesis 25:2; K. 124:8; L. 274:52.

Textual variants: Cethura and Cettura (Latin). Greek lacks "near Arnon."

Procopius 405A says, "City Madiam extends beyond the Arabian desert, formerly
Pharan, to the east of the Red Sea. Whence the Madianites, the people of Madiam,
son of Abraam and Chettoura as is clear. Iothor, the father-in-law of Mōuses was
descended from Abraam and of the family of Madiam" (cf. Exodus 2:16 and Numbers
10:29). Josephus Antiquities II, 2, 1 reports a town of Madian situated by the
Red San "named after one of Abraham's sons by Katura (cf. Jerome's Commentary on
Isaiah 60: 6 "now Saba" is added by way of identification. Text does not really
locate this city. The second deserted city near the Arnonas (K. 10:15) and
Areopolis (10:17) is perhaps el middin southeast of Kerak. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Madan, measuring or answering" (69).

653. Mōab. Genesis 36:35; K. 124:15; L. 274:59.

Genealogical reference to Genesis 19:37.

Moab is around Areopolis (10:17) which is also called Rabbath Moab (cf. K. 10:13
and K. 36:24). In Jerome's Commentary on Amos 2:1 "Moab or metropolis of the
Moabites which is applied to the whole complete province." In his Commentary on
Zephaniah 8 "Moab which is now called Areopolis." Probably the present town of
Rabba. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Moab, from the father" (69).

654. Masrēka. Genesis 36:36; K. 124:18; L. 274:62.

Textual variant Maasrēka (Greek). A personal name becomes a place name. Located
in general Gebalēnē (K. 10:62). The name may be preserved in jebel mushraq. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Masreca, void tax or hissing or dragging" (69).

655. Mabsar. Genesis 36:42; K. 124:20; L. 274:63.

Textual variant Masaris (Greek). A large village dependent upon Petra (K. 142:7)
in the Gebalēnē (K. 8:10). This may be a bastardization of Bosor (K. 46:11) in
Idumaea, not Bostra north toward Damascus. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Mabsar, fort" (69).

656. Magediēl. Genesis 36:43; K. 124:22; L. 274:65. A proper name of a person
given to a place (cf. K. 124:18 above). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Magdihel, from promise of God or tower of God or God makes me great" (69).

EXODUS 657. Magdolos. Exodus 14:2; K. 124:25; L. 274:68.

Vatican manuscript lacks the name at beginning of the entry. A station (cf. K.
44:2) with additional biblical information (Ezekiel 29:10, Jeremiah 44:1 and
Jeremiah 46:14). Possibly two places are combined in this entry. For Soene see
K. 162:16. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Magdolon, how great or tower"
(76).

658. Merra. Exodus 15:23ff.; K. 126:3; L. 274:73.

Summary of biblical information after etymology. No location given. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Mara or Merra, bitterness" (76).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 659. Mnemata epithumias. Numbers 11:34; K. 126:6; L.
274:76. The MT proper name has been translated into Greek and etymology given.

Simple station listing.

660. Makēlōth. Numbers 33:25; K. 126:8; L. 274:78.

Simple station listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maceloth, church"
(82).

661. Mathekka. Numbers 33:28; K. 126:10; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is missing in Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple station listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Mathca, sweetness or
satiated" (82).

662. Masourouth. Numbers 33:30; K. 126:12; L. 274:80.

Simple station listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maseroth, excluding
or chains or succeeding or of discipline. In our codex we read Mazureth" (82).

663. Maththanem. Numbers 21:18; K. 126:14; L. 274:82. This entry is out of order
and is therefore suspect. The location is on the edge of the desert. Kh or Tell
el Medeiyineh is approximately at this indicated location and would be the
eastern outpost for Madaba (K. 128:19). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Mathana, gift" (82).

664. Misōr. Deuteronomy 3:10; K. 126:16; L. 274:84.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 128:17). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Misor, straight or plain or field" (87).

665. Machanarath. Deuteronomy 3:7; K. 126:17; L. 274:85.

Simple biblical notation. The MA may be the Hebrew "from." The LXX also has this
form.

666. Madbaris. Deuteronomy 4:43; K. 126:18; L. 275:86.

Textual variant Mambrēs (Greek). An etymological entry.

667. Misadai. Deuteronomy 10:6; K. 126:19; L. 275:87.

Greek confused the Hebrew R for D. Onomasticon and LXX often make this error. Is
this distinguished from K. 176:71? Bible and Onomasticon are not clear. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Mosera, teaching or his instruction" (87).

JOSUE 668. Makēda. Joshua 10:10; K. 126:22; L. 275:90.

Procopius 1021A includes this same location. Eusebius does not agree with the
biblical information on location. He seems to locate it southeast at Kh Beit
Maqdum off the main road. Some think the text should read "North." Tell es Safi
is northwest at this distance and may be the ancient Makkedah. The Old Testament
site is still unidentified with scholarly debate. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Maceda, burning or east or antecedent, that is prior" (95).

669. Madōn. Joshua 11:1; K. 126:26; L. 275:94.

Textual variant Modad (Greek) (cf. LXX Mōdōn).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Madon,
contradiction or habitation" (95).

670. Massepha. Joshua 11:3; K. 128:1; L. 275:96. A confused summary of biblical
information (Joshua 15:38; I Samuel 7:1; Jeremiah 40:6 and Judges 20:1) seems to
combine several different sites into this one entry (Judah, Galaad and
Benjamin). It is quoted by Procopius 1024A (cf. K. 130:2 Masseba). For
Kariathiareim see K. 114:23.I In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Masefa,
watchtower" (95).

671. Merran. Joshua 11:7; K. 128:4; L. 275:99. The identity of this site is not
known by the Onomasticon. Eusebius seems to be confused by the similar sound of
Merrous (cf. Marous below K. 128:13). The distance is quoted exactly by
Procopius 1021D. Probably just east of Dothan (K. 76:13) at Qasr Mahrun, in
Sebaste Territory. Dothan is also "12 miles" so perhaps this was turn off to the
east. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Marom, high or from height" (95).

672. Mastraiphōth Maim. Joshua 11:8; K. 128:7; L. 275:2.

Hexaplaric information. Procopius 1021D notes others call it the water or sea of
Massepha (cf. above K. 128:1). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Masarfoth,
fire or from the tribulation of the platform" (96).

673. Machathi. Joshua 12:5; K. 128:9; L. 275:4.

Simple biblical summary (Joshua 13:11, 13). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Maachathi, cut belly or broken by me" (96).

674. Marōm. Joshua 12:20; K. 128:12; L. 275:7.

Simple biblical notation. Perhaps "above" refers to K. 128:15. Most of this
entry missing in Vatican manuscript. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Marom,
another unpleasant or sadness" (96).

675. Maggedo. Joshua 12:21; K. 128:14; L. 275:9.

Textual variant Magsddō (Greek).

Simple biblical information. Jerome speaks of the plain of Megiddo in Epistle
103:8 (PPT I, 4). In his Commentary on Zachariah 12:11 he notes Hadadrimmon is
in valley of Megiddo. Ancient Megiddo has been well excavated. No indication
here is made of its connection with Legeōn (K. 14:21) or the Byzantine name
Maximianopolis. Procopius also only summarizes biblical material without
location (1048A and 1061A). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Mageddo, of his
fruit or his disgrace" (96).

676. Misōr. Joshua 13:9, 16; K. 128:17; L. 275:11.

Hexaplaric information plus biblical summary (Joshua 20:8 and 21:36). On Meddaba
(cf. K. 128:19 and K. 126:16.

677. Meddaba. Joshua 13:9; K. 128:19; L. 275:13. An important referent for the
Onomasticon. It is an autonomous city in the province of Arabia between Esebōn
(K. 84:1) and Dibōn (K. 76:17). The Valley (K. 128:17) may be the plain from
Meddaba to Dibōn. The famous Madaba map is here, recently cleaned and in part
restored. There are vast ruins at Medaha. The source of the Madaba map may have
been the sketch Eusebius claims to have prepared for this work plus of course
the entries of this work itself (cf. K. 2:8 and Introduction). In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Medab, hunger of water" (96) and "Madaba, nativity" (96).

678. Mēphaath. Joshua 13:18; K. 128:21; L. 275:15.

Two sites combined here. One only a tribal listing. The other a similar sounding
name in Transjordan. The second may be Mophath (K. 134:14). A garrison reported
by Notitia Dignitatum (81:19) at a place called Mefa. This is near the Syrian or
Arabian desert probably at Nefa'a northeast of Esebōn (K. 84:1) which in part
preserves the name but it is not pre-Christian in date. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Mefaath, motion of matter or from this time" (96 and 127).

679. Maspha. Joshua 13:26; K. 130:1; L. 275:18.

Textual variants: Massēma (Greek) and Messafa, Masafa, and Masfas (Latin).

Three items are combined in one in Greek. A simple tribal listing (Joshua
21:36). A contemporary town near Eleutheropolis (18:12) and another near Aelia
(Joshua 15:38). Jerome corrects this to make one separate item of the last. The
best identification is Kh Safiyeh just over a mile northeast of Eleutheropolis.
The biblical Mizpeh is most complicated and perhaps led to the confusion in this
entry as well as in K. 128:1.

680. Manaeim. Joshua 13:26; K. 130:4; L. 275:21.

Textual variant Maanaim (Latin).

Simple biblical summary with generalized location (Joshua 21:36). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Manaim, camps" (96).

681. Mōlada (Moladab). Joshua 15:26; K. 130:6; L. 275:23.

Simple tribal listing (Joshua 19:2).

Perhaps same as Malaatha (K. 14:3).

682. Medebēna (Medemena). Joshua 15:31; K. 130:7; L. 276:24.

Textual variant kōmē (village) Noeis (Greek).

Eusebius makes an identity here which is followed by the Madaba map: "Madebēna
which is now Mēnois." He has probably confused two similar Hebrew names with the
contemporary site (Isaiah 10:31).

Madmannah is in the Negev northeast of Bērsaba and falsely equated with Menois.

Madmenah is near Jerusalem but not clearly identified as yet.

Menois is 11 miles southwest of Gaza just off the way to Raphia (K. 50:18).
Probably it is at Kh Ma'in. It is possible that "near Gaza" reflects still a
fourth site that increases the confusion of the Onomasticon perhaps pointing to
Maiumas, the port of Gaza. At Menois the Notitia Dignitatum (73:19) reports a
Roman garrison which is overlooked in our text. Called "oppidum" in the Latin
(cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix I while Greek has Gaza polichne, a rare use (cf. K.
22:11 and Appendix II). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Medabena, from
burden" (96).

683. Magdala. Joshua 15:37; K. 130:9; L. 276:26.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Magdalgad, tower of
pirate or tower of armed" (96).

684. Marēsa. Joshua 15:44; K. 130:10; L. 276:27. The village no longer existed
but ruins were identifiable in Eusebius' time just south of Eleutheropolis (K.
18:12) at Tell Sandahannah. No direction is given in the Onomasticon. Only five
other villages are in ruins or deserted according to the Onomasticon. Near the
Tell is Kh Mar'ash which retains the name. This town was destroyed in 40 B.C.
and from then on the site which became Eleutheropolis began to be developed. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maresa, from the head" (96).

685. Maōn. Joshua 15:55; K. 130:12; L. 276:29.

Textual variant Manōn (Greek). Also by dittography from above K. 130:10 "it is
now deserted" but could be correct information also (cf. K. 134:16). The tribal
entry has only a general localization. Possibly Tell or Kh Ma'in south of
Chermēla (K. 92:20) and Chebrōn (K. 6:8). Perhaps border of Daroma (K. 26:10).
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maon, little habitation" (96).

686. Marōth. Joshua 15:59; K. 130:13; L. 276:31.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maaroth, canes" (96).

687. Maddei (Maddi). Joshua 15:61; K. 130:14; L. 276:32.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Meddin, judgement"
(96).

688. Maspha. Joshua 18:26; K. 130:15; L. 276:33.

Simple tribal listing. Possibly out of order.

689. Machtrōth. Joshua 17:7; K. 130:16; L. 276:34.

Textual variants in Greek sometimes ascribed to Zaboulōn or Beniamin.

Simple tribal listing.

690. Marala. Joshua 19:11; K. 130:17; L. 276:35.

Textual variants in Greek sometimes ascribed to Manassē or Beniamin.

Biblical information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Marala, bitter
embarkation" (96).

691. Masan. Joshua 19:26; K. 130:18; L. 276:36.

Tribal listing plus biblical information and location (Joshua 21:30).

692. Meeleph (Maeleb). Joshua 19:33; K. 130:20; L. 276:38.

Textual variant Methlem (Greek).

Simple tribal listing but the Greek confused the Hebrew M of "from" with the
proper name. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maalaf, from thousand or from
teaching" (96).

693. Magdiel. Joshua 19:38; K. 130:21; L. 276:39.

One of the few villages in the Onomasticon called "Great" in the Greek text (K.
22:10 and K. 96:25). Did the size of the town change in the century between
Eusebius and Jerome or is it all a matter of relativity? The location is in
error. Some Greek texts have 9 miles but the Latin 5 miles is well attested in
Greek also. At 5 miles is Kh Maliha which is Migdal Malha of the Talmud. Nine
miles brings one slightly beyond Atlit where road could have turn off to
mitilia. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Magdalahel, tower of my God" (96).

JUDGES 694. Mosphetham (Mosfethaim). Joshua 5:16; K. 130:24; L. 276:42.

Textual variants: Mosphethaim (Greek) and Mosfethain, Mosfetham (Latin).

Hexaplaric information which is reflected in Procopius 1060A.

695. Mōre. Judges 7:1; K. 130:25; L. 276:43.

Biblical information only. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Mere, manifest or
lightened or opening" (100).

696. Mannēth. Judges 11:33; K. 132:1; L. 276:44.

Textual variants Mensēth (Greek), Manith (Latin). The geography in the biblical
account itself is difficult to understand. The identity with Maanith by the
Onomasticon is questionable since it is a battle area not a village. Some
suggest Umm el Hanafish but the location is most uncertain especially since the
Vulgate does not make the name that of a town but merely translates the Hebrew
word.

697. Machmas. I Samuel 13:2; K. 132:3; L. 276:47.

Textual variant Machma (Greek).

Geographical identity made with present Mukhmas northwest of er-Ram. The
distance given from Jerusalem is accurate for this identification. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Machemas, submission or misappropriated" (104).

KINGS 698. Messab. I Samuel 14:1; K. 132:6; L. 276:50.

Textual variant Greek adds Gaba of Saoul.

Even though biblical information, Jerome calls this "oppidum." Here he is
literally right since it is a fortified town. It is however difficult to
consistently relate his use of "oppidum to fortified city" or "shrine with
suburbs" in most other entries (cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix I).

699. Magdōn (Magrōn). I Samuel 14:2; K. 132:8; L. 276:51.

Textual variant Magaōn in Greek after LXX.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Margeddon, holding
on" (104).

700. Massēpha "of Moab." I Samuel 22:3; K. 132:9; L. 276:52.

Simple biblical information.

Another of the many biblical Mizpeh's (cf. K. 128:1 and K. 130:1,15).

701. Masereth. I Samuel 23:14; K. 132:11; L. 276:54.

Biblical information plus Hexaplaric.

It is deserted in the 4th century according to the Latin. Greek may suggest
biblical "wilderness."

702. Masbak. II Samuel 8:8; K. 132:13; L. 276:56. The MT is confused but the
Greek again seems to have used the Hebrew M "from" as part of the proper name.
LXX has Masbach.

703. Mela (i.e.,) Gemela. II Samuel 8:13; K. 132:14; L. 276:57.

Textual variants: Malagēmala, Mala ē Gēmala (Greek), Latin has "valley of
salts."

Hexaplaric information only (cf. K. 72:28).

704. Maacha. II Samuel 10:6; K. 132:15; L. 276:58.

Textual variant Malaka (Greek). The text is confused in MT and LXX. It seems as
if a personal name has been made into a place name.

705. Mōdeeim. I Maccabees 2:1; K. 132:16; L. 276:59.

Out of the order of the text. Madaba map has "Mōdeeim which is now Mōditha home
of the Makkabai" located east of Diospolis (K. 8:14). This location fits el
Midjeh. The interest in graves is high in our text but possibly not with the
original text of Eusebius. The Madaba map alternate name is a late Aramaic name
for this most significant site.

706. Mapsar Turou. II Samuel 24:7; K. 132:18; L. 276:61.

Textual variants are many and so are suggested emendations.

Hexaplaric information. It is the Fort of Tyre (K. 162:15).

707. Masa. I Kings 2:35 and I Kings 9:15; K. 132:20; L. 277:63.

Textual variants: Magaō and Magdō (Greek).

Simple biblical notation. Difficult to relate this to Megiddo in its present
form (cp. K. 128:14). Possibly relates to Hazor (K. 34:18 and K. 90:9).

708. Meebra. I Kings 4:12; K. 132:21; L. 277:64.

Hexaplaric information. Perhaps emend to Meeber. A gloss.

709. Makes. I Kings 4:9; K. 132:22; L. 277:65.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Maces, from the
end" (111).

710. Melō (Mello). I Kings 9:15; K. 134:1; L. 277:66.

Textual variant Melo (Latin).

Simple biblical notation plus Hexaplaric information.

Perhaps related to similar Millo at Shechem as in Judges 9:6, 20.

711. Maidan. I Kings 9:15; K. 134:3; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 132:20). Maidan often used for the eastern
country beyond the desert but not here.

712. Memphis. Hosea 9:6; K. 134:4; L. 277:67.

Out of the proper Onomasticon's limits of the Holy Land.

Summary of biblical information (Ezekiel 30:13; Jeremiah 2:16 and Jeremiah
44:1). On Egyptian sites see K. 58:7.

713. Macha. Hosea 9:16; K. 134:6; L. 277:70.

Hexaplaric information. Perhaps same as above. LXX text confused (cf. K.
164:24).

714. Milētos. Ezekiel 27:18; K. 134:7; L. 277:71. This is from the LXX only and
is not MT. It is also outside the proper Onomasticon's boundaries for the Holy
Land and is therefore suspect as an entry from a later hand.

715. Maribōth. Ezekiel 48:28; K. 134:8; L. 277:72.

Textual variant Marimōth (Greek) and Marimoth (Latin).

Simple biblical notation plus Hexaplaric information.

These are near Kadēs (K. 112:8).

716. Mōrathei (Morasthi). Micah 1:1; K. 134:10; L. 277:74. The village is
northeast of Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) as in the Madaba map, but the Onomasticon
"east" means the quadrant and the road can be located in the eastern quadrant
from Eleutheropolis. The map quotes Eusebius. The tomb was known in Jerome's day
and was visited by Paula (Epistle 108:14 and PPT I, 15). In Commentary on Micah
Jerome notes "Morasthia a little village near Eleutheropolis." The Madaba map
notes a church which was built later than the time of Eusebius. The Byzantine
site Kh Umm el Basak is not the Old Testament site which is more likely at Tell
el judeideh. This is distinct from Marēsa (K. 130:10). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Morasthi, my heir" (123 and 127).

717. Masogam. Jeremiah 48:1; K. 134:12; L. 277:76.

Taken from the New Testament Qere reading. Not in LSX Simple biblical notation.

718. Misōr. Jeremiah 48:21; K. 134:13; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This and
the next entry are missing in Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple biblical notation.

719. Mōphath. Jeremiah 48:21; K. 134:14; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This and
the previous entry are missing from Greek Vatican manuscript (cf. K. 128:21).

Simple biblical notation.

720. Maōn. Jeremiah 48:23; K. 134:16; L. 277:78.

Simple biblical notation (cp. K. 130:12).

721. Molchom. Jeremiah 49:1; K. 134:17; L. 277:79.

Textual variants: Melchon and Melconi (Latin). Not an original entry. Other
idols are also additions to the Onomasticon (see K. 36:15; K. 58:9; K. 138:19;
K. 146:26 and Appendix II).

722. Magedan. Matthew 15:39; K. 134:18; L. 277:81. No Gospel section division
indicated here. Textual variant Magaidanē (Greek).

Summary of New Testament information. In the New Testament Magedan, Magdala and
Dalmanoutha are all related. The Hebrew sound Migdol (K. 130:9) is suspected as
background. In Matthew 15:39 there is a region of Magadan or Magdala. In Mark
8:10 it is a district of Dalmanutha located by the Onomasticon as near Gerasa
(K. 64:2) but in New Testament times it seems to be in Galilea. The New
Testament site is on the west side of the Sea at Mejdel. What site Eusebius had
intended is unknown. This is one of three references to Mark in the Onomasticon
(K. 64:4 and K. 74:13).

SECTION N

GENESIS (Five Books of Moses) Greek has the subsection division for Genesis but
Latin for five books of Moses.

723. Naid. Genesis 4:16; K. 134:23; L. 277:86.

Textual variant Nain (Greek).

Simple biblical notation plus Hexaplatic information. Procopius 253A and Jerome
in Hebrew Questions (7) follow the etymology of the bible. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Naid, motion or fluctuation" (69).

724. Nineve. Genesis 10:11; K. 136:1; L. 277:88.

Textual variants for the last line: Neneuen, Ninewen and Neuen (Latin).

Outside the normal limits of the Holy Land for the Onomasticon. The second city,
one of the Jews, is the only contemporary Jewish city called a polis in the
Onomasticon (cf. Note on K. 22:9 and Appendix IX). This probably is nawa 36
miles from Capitolias in the pilgrim itineraries. The Gōnia is part of the
Hauron but not clearly identified. In Hebrew Questions Jerome notes the
derivation of the name Nineve and identifies it as Rooboth (K. 142:11). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ninive beauty or bud of beauty" (69).

725. Naaliēl. Numbers 21:19; K. 136:4; L. 277:91.

Textual variant Naaniēl (Greek).

Biblical location and station listing.

726. Nabau. Numbers 32:3; K. 136:6; L. 277:93.

Textual variant. Syriac lacks "where Moses died." Suspected entry.

Biblical summary (Deuteronomy 34:1) and location west of Esbous. The city of
Naboth (K. 136:9) below is the 8 miles south. This could mean southwest since
quadrants are involved. Agri specula (K. 12:16), Phasga (K. 168:28) and Phogōr
(K. 168:7, 25) are names also in this general area. The Mt. of Siyahah with the
Byzantine church fits the 6 miles distance. It could also be located at jebel
Nebo. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nabau, we will come or in conclusion"
(83).

727. Nabōth (Nabo). Numbers 32:38; K. 136:9; L. 277:96.

Textual variant Nabōr (Greek).

Summary of biblical information (Deuteronomy 32:49; Isaiah 15:2; Jeremiah 48:1
and Numbers 32:42). The city is in a different quadrant and is 2 miles farther
than the mountain above (K. 136:6). It is abandoned or in ruins by the time of
Eusebius. The city is probably Kh Mehaiyet. It was rebuilt as a shrine after the
time of Jerome.

728. Nageb. Numbers 34:3; K. 136:14; L. 278:10.

Textual variant. Syriac lacks the Symmachus reference. The etymology and the
Hexaplaric information. The equation of Hebrew' names with the Latin and Greek
is difficult. In Vitruvius on Architecture I, vi, 12, 13 Auster and Meridia are
the southern half quadrant. Africas is southwest and Eurus is southeast. No
evidence that Jerome and Fuschius were this scientific. Any name could be the
entire quadrant from southwest through southeast or even from west-southwest and
east-southeast.

JOSUE 729. Naphethdor (Nafeddor). Joshua 11:2; K. 136:16; L. 278:3.

Dor is located properly by the Onomasticon about 9 miles north of Caesarea. The
emphasis in Latin suggests some change may have taken place in the fourth
century since it is then deserted. An "oppidum" (cf. K. 10:25 and Appendix I).
Naphoth really means "hilly region" rather than Maritine (cf. K. 78:8) In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nafeddor, change of generations" (96).

730. Naphthō. Joshua 15:9; K. 136:18; L. 278:5.

Textual variant Naphthae (Greek).

Summary of biblical information and tribal listing (Joshua 18:15). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Neptoe, of destruction or beguiling" (96).

731. Naam. Joshua 15:41; K. 136:20; L. 278:7.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Naama, comeliness"
(112).

732. Nesib. Joshua 15:43; K. 136:21; L. 278:8.

Textual variant Negib (Latin). The distance varies between Greek and Latin. The
7 miles brings the location to Kh Beit Nesib due east of Marisa off the main
road. The 9 miles seems an error since it brings the location to Tricomias. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nasib, title or station" (96).

733. Nebpsan. Joshua 15:62; K. 136:23; L. 278:10.

Simple tribal listing, In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Naabsan or Nabas,
dried up (96).

734. Naaratha. Joshua 16:7; K. 136:24; L. 278:11.

Textual variants: Narath, Naarta and Naurath (Latin). The location fits 'Ain Duq
better than 'Aujah which may be Archalais and is too far away. Perhaps the
synagogue a few miles from Duq is Noorath. It is another of the all Jewish
cities of the Onomasticon (cf. Note on K. 22:9 and Appendix II). This site does
not fit the Old Testament location archaeologically.

735. Napheth. Joshua 17:11; K. 138:1; L. 278:13.

Simple tribal listing. The word Napheth (see K. 136:16) becomes a proper name.

736. Naalōl. Joshua 19:15; K. 138:2; L. 278:14.

Summary of biblical information (Joshua 21:35 and cf. K. 138:6). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Naalal, they praise" (96).

737. Nakeb. Joshua 19:33; K. 138:4; L. 278:16.

Textual variant Nekem (cf. Annekem) (Greek).

Simple tribal listing.

JUDGES 738. Neala. Judges 1:30; K. 138:6; L. 278:18. The Greek is closer to the
MT than the LXX.

Perhaps entry is the same as K. 138:2 but falsely equated with a Transjordan
Neeila, perhaps at Kh en Nile where the name is preserved. For Batandea see K.
144:11. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nahellel, praise, hymns" (101).

739. Nobba (Nabe or Nobba). Judges 8:11; K. 138:8; L. 278:20.

Textual variant Nomba (Greek).

Summary of biblical information confusing two sites (I Samuel 22:19). In Epistle
108:8 (PPT I, 4) Jerome notes the tomb of those killed near Beit Nuba. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nobe, barking" (101).

740. Nemra. Joshua 13:27; K. 138:10; L. 278:22. This seems related to the
earlier entries K. 44:16; K. 48:16 and possibly K.138:20). The location is vague
and no evidence that the Onomasticon made an identification. The Batanaea
usually does not include the valley. The large village maybe in the northern
region at Nimra. This item is out of order. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Namra, panther or bitterness" (183).

741. Naniōth. I Samuel 19:18; K. 138:13; L. 278:25.

Summary of biblical information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nuath,
beauty" (104).

742. Nachōn. II Samuel 6:6; K. 138:14; L. 278:26.

Hexaplaric information. At best a personal name is indicated.

743. Naphath. I Kings 4:11; K. 138:15; L. 278:27.

Simple biblical notation. Confused again with "region" (cf. K. 136:15 and K.
138:1).

744. Nērigel. II Kings 17:30; K. 138:16; L. 278:28.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nergal, lamp of the
many" (117).

745. Nazeb. II Kings 17:31; K. 138:18; L. 278:30.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nabaaz, he
prophesied thus or futile session" (117).

746. Nasarach. II Kings 19:37; K. 138:19; L. 278:31.

Textual variant Nesareth (Latin).

Another idol not original to the Onomasticon (cf. K. 134:17; K. 146:26; K. 58:4;
K. 36:15 and Appendix II).

747. Nebēreim (Nemerim). Isaiah 15:6; K. 138:20; L. 278:32.

Textual variants: Memerein, Nebērein (Greek), Bennamerim (Latin) for
contemporary site.

Summary of biblical information (Jeremiah 43:34.). The wadi or waters of Nimrin.
Perhaps related to K. 138:1; K. 44:16; and K. 48:16. Jerome in Commentary on
Isaiah 15:6 locates it by the Dead Sea and calls it there an "oppidum" (cf. K.
10:25 and Appendix I). Tell Nimrin is Bennamareim (see Introduction).

748. Nabeōth. Isaiah 60:7; K. 138:22; L. 278:35.

Simple biblical notation. Perhaps out of limits of Holy Land. Region is an
interpretation, perhaps from a marginal gloss (K. 74:9). THE GOSPELS 749.
Nazareth. Matthew 2:23; K. 138:24; L. 278:37. The Vatican manuscript does not
have the "Gospel" division marker before this entry.

Textual variant for Christians in Latin is "Nazorei." In Historia Ecclesiastica
I, 7, 14 Eusebius notes that after the fall of Jerusalem the relatives of Jesus
scattered throughout the countryside. It was a Jewish town in the third century.
In the 4th century a few shrines were built by Christians but the Jews were
dominant. A city Helenopolis was located in the general region, named after
Constantine's mother, but it is never referred to in the Onomasticon any more
than the two towns named after his sister Constantia. Origen didn't know of it.
No church was built here by Constantine. First reference to a church is 355 A.
D. Paula visited it but no church noted there either (PPT I, 15). It was near
Cana (K. 116:4) and Caphernaum (K. 120:2) on the itinerary of Paula. It is
adequately located at en Nasireh which was in the region of Legeōn (K. 14:21).
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Nazareth, flower or his slip or of cleanness
or separate or guardian." In Epistle 46 (Migne PE 22, 49) Jerome's etymology has
"his flower."

750. Naein (Naim). Luke 7:11; K. 140:3; L. 279:41. This name continues near
Aendōr (K. 34:8). Region is not indicated. The location next is repeated by
Jerome in Epistle 108:13 (PPT I, 14) Jerome in 141:4 calls it an "oppidum" (cp.
K. 10:25 and Appendix I). In Epistle 46 (Migne PL22:49) it can be seen from
Thabōr. The distance in Greek 12 miles is erroneous if present Nein is involved.
The Latin has 2 miles from Thabōr points to Nein. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Naa, beauty" (111).

SECTION X

JUDGES 751. Xil. Joshua 15:30; K. 140:8; L. 279:46.

Vulgate has Cesil.

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 172:18).

SECTION O

GENESIS 752. Orech. Genesis 10:10; K. 140:11; L. 279:49.

Outside limits of the Holy Land and therefore suspect. Arach is identified in
Hebrew Questions as Edessa (13). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Orech,
length" (70).

753. Our of the Chaldees. Genesis 11:28; K. 140:12; L. 279:50.

Also outside the limits of the Holy Land and therefore suspect. Josephus in
Antiquities I, vi, 5 notes the sepulchre is still in Ur of the Chaldees. In
Hebrew Questions Jerome notes "region of Chaldaea really is 'in Ur Casdim' in
Hebrew and means fire of Chaldaea" (15). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ur,
fire or light" (77).

754. Oulammaous. Genesis 28:19; K. 140:15; L. 279:53.

Textual variant Ulamma for the other site in Latin text. For the Baithēl-Louza
equation see K. 40:20. For the other east of Nazareth there is 'Ulam which has
Byzantine remains. The distance is incorrect and short. In Hebrew Questions
Jerome notes "Ulam is not a name of a city, but means 'former'" (34).

755. Olibama. Genesis 36:14; K. 140:19; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry
is missing in the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Olibama, my
tabernacle somewhere, or high tabernacle" (70).

756. Odollam. Genesis 38:11; K. 140:20; L. 279:57.

Cf. K. 84:22; K. 24:21 and Micah 1:25. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Odollamites, contesting somewhat or witness in water" (70).

EXODUS 757. Othom (Othon). Exodus 13:20; K. 140:23; L. 279:60.

Summary of biblical information on station.

JOSUE 758. Opher. Joshua 12:17; K. 140:26; L. 279:63.

Simple biblical notation. Could be Joshua 19:12 and so cf. K. 108:29, Epha.

759. Oolei. Joshua 19:25; K. 142:1; L. 279:65.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Oli, weakness" (90).

760. Ophra. I Samuel 13:17; K. 142:2; L. 279:66.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 29:4 and K. 86:1).

[Here we read through O the short letter, later we record the long vowel.] 761.
Ous. Job 1:1; K. 142:3; L. 279:67.

Before this entry the Latin notes the end of the short O but this entry still
follows, possibly an editor's edition.

Summary of biblical information (Genesis 36: 28). Other references to Job are in
K. 76:10 and K. 112:3.

SECTION P THE PENTATEUCH 762. Petra. Judges 1:36; K. 142:7; L. 279:71. No letter
division in the Vatican Greek manuscript here.

Procopius 1048B has Petra in Idumala (K. 102:23). On Tabula Peutinger it is 48
miles south of Theman (K. 96:18). It is an important referent for the
Onomasticon and all the Roman road systems. It is also called Rekem (K. 144:7
and K. 36:13). Mt. Nor (K. 176:7) is nearby. The Nabatean influence lasted into
the Roman period of the Onomasticon. Petra was one of the Nabatean cities given
autonomy about 106 A.D. with the establishment of the Roman Province of Arabia.
It was a great city in the 3rd and 4th centuries. The Christians of Petra were
persecuted by Diocletian.

SECTION R THE PENTATEUCH 763. Roōbōth. Genesis 10:11; K. 142:11; L. 280:75.

Outside the limits of Holy Land proper as so often the first entry in a new
alphabetic section. In Hebrew Questions (13) Jerome believes this is the same as
Nineve (K. 136:1) 764. Roōbōth. Genesis 36:37; K. 142:13; L. 280:77.

Textual variant Assyrian for Idoumaien (Greek). This is probably the Rabath
where the Notitia Dignitatum (73:27) locates a garrison. Jerome sees a large
town but the Greek apparently only a garrison. Some scholars relate this to
Areopolis and Rabbath Moab (K. 10:17). The Onomasticon is too vague to ascertain
a location. Some suggest Kh Musrab. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rooboth,
bending or streets" (70).

765. Ramesse. Exodus 1:11; K. 142:15; L. 280:79.

Outside the Holy Land proper (cf. Genesis 47:11).

766. Roōb. Numbers 13:21; K. 142:18; L. 280:82.

Summary of biblical event, location and added item Levitical city (K. 144:22 and
Joshua 21:31. This is not an accurate identification. Two sites seem confused.
Contemporary site is located four miles south of Scythopolis (K.16:2) may be at
Tell es aa'ram or Sheik er rahab which has Roman-Byzantine sherds. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Roob, streets or wide" (83).

767. Raphaka. Numbers 33:12; K. 142:21; L. 280:85.

Station listing. The Greek confused Hebrew D with R.

768. Raphidim. Numbers 33:14; K. 142:22; L. 280:86.

Summary of biblical information (Exodus 17:6f., 13). The Madaba Map has a
"Raphidinn where Israel and Amalak fought." It is near Mt.Sinai (K. 154:1) or
Paran (K. 166:12). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rafidim, wide hands or
good judgment or eye sight or his suffering" (77).

769. Ratima. Numbers 33:18; K. 144:1; L. 280:90.

Simple listing of station. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rathma, complete
vision or juniper or sound." (83).

770. Remmen Prares. Numbers 33:19; K. 144:2; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Simple listing of station. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Remmonfares, very
bad division or high division" (83).

771. Ressa. Numbers 33:21; K. 144:3; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Simple listing of station. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Recsa, bridle"
(83).

772. Ramōth. Deuteronomy 4:43; K. 144:4; L. 280:91.

Summary of biblical information (Joshua 13:26 and 21:37). The Latin has east for
the Greek west. The Syriac agrees with the Greek in this entry while usually it
follows the Latin text. The ruin of biblical site, Tell er Rumeith could fit the
Onomasticon, especially if this is the same as (K. 146:4) where it is located
near Iabbok (K. 102:19). There is little Roman evidence. Better Roman site at Kh
jal'ad. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ramoth, high sign or he say death or
height" (87).

773. Rekem. Numbers 31:8; K. 144:7; L. 280:94.

Identity and summary of biblical information (Joshua 13:21; Numbers 31:8; cf. K.
142:7 and K.36:13, for Petra, named Rekim by Josephus). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Recem, variety or painting" (83).

JOSUE 774. Remmōn. Joshua 15:32; K. 144:11; L. 280:98. The Madaba map follows
Eusebius and has a Remmōn northeast of Jerusalem. This is an error for the Old
Testament border town (Joshua 19:7). The name for the Onomasticon's site
continues today at Rammun 3 1/2 miles east of Bethel (K. 40:20) which is 12
miles south of et-taiyibeh. This fits the 15 miles of the Onomasticon and may be
the biblical Rimmon of Benjamin. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Remmon,
heights" (97).

775. Rōgēl. Joshua 18:16; K. 144:13; L. 280:00. A spring and so not a proper
entry for the Onomasticon. Near Zōeleth according to K. 94:6. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Rogal, foot or bearing down" (97).

776. Rama. Joshua 18:25; K. 144:14; L. 280:01. In Commentary on Hosea 5:8 Jerome
reconfirms this location. Not a city of Saul (cf. Isaiah 10:24). On the Madaba
map Rama is a bit farther north because of crowding. It is near Gabaon (K.
66:11) and Michmas (K. 132:3) and probably the name continues in er-Ram. The
"opposite" Baithel is from the biblical text and doesn't contradict the
Jerusalem location (cf. Jeremiah 31:15). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Rama, high" (97).

777. Rekēm. Joshua 18:27; K. 144:16; L. 280:03.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Recem, variety or of
death" (97).

778. Remmōn. Joshua 19:13; K. 144:17; L. 280:04.

Biblical information and tribal listing. Probably related to K. 144:11.

779. Rabbōth. Joshua 19:20; K. 144:19; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Textual variants: Raboth and Rabooth (Latin). This entry is missing in the Greek
Vatican manuscript. No identity is made here. Robbo or Rebbo is only vaguely
located in the region of Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12). About 7 miles northeast is
Kh Ribba, not on a Roman road, which retains the name. Perhaps same as K. 26:17.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rabboth, many" (97).

780. Rethōm. Joshua 19:21; K. 144:21; L. 280:06. The first part of this entry is
missing from the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing.

781. Roōb. Joshua 19:28; K. 144:22; L. 280:07. The last part of this entry is
missing from the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Summary of biblical information (Joshua 21:131, possibly Tell Birah). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Roob, widely" (97).

782. Rama. Joshua 19:29; K. 144:23; L. 280:08.

First part of the entry is missing from the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Summary of biblical information.

783. Rama. Joshua 19:36; K. 144:25; L. 280:09.

Simple tribal listing. Jerome notes that K. 144:14, 23 and 25 are all similar
and explains them on the differences in the Hebrew alphabet.

[Some of the names of the villages are assigned to different tribes because with
us we see only one name to pronounce, when among the Hebrews they are written
with various letters.] 784. Rekkath. Joshua 19:35; K. 144:26; L. n/a; Lacuna in
Greek Text. This entry is missing from the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Raccath, jaw bones or
cheeks" (97).

785. Rouma (Arima also). Judges 9:41; K. 144:27; L. 281:10.

Textual variant for contemporary site Remfthis (Latin). The identity of this
Rouma is given as present day Rentia and equated with Arimathaia (cf. K. 32:21)
by Eusebius and Jerome but the Old Testament Arumah (K. 32:11) is probably Kh
el-'Urmeh. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ruma, high" (117).

KINGS 786. Remmōth. I Samuel 30:26f.; K. 146:2; L. 281:14.

Simple biblical notation on "spoils."

787. Rachel. I Samuel 30:26, 29; K. 146:3; L. 281:15.

Simple biblical notation on "spoils." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rachal,
negotiation but Rachel, truly means sheep or God seeing" (104).

788. Remmōth Galaad. I Kings 4:13; K. 146:4; L. 281:16.

Textual variants: Remmōd (Greek) and Iakōb (Greek and Latin) for wadi name (cf.
K. 144:4). This may be Tell er Rumeith. A gloss. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Ramoth, vision of death" (112).

789. Rabbath. II Samuel 12:26; K. 146:6; L. 281:18.

Textual variant Rabba (Greek). This identity of Rabbath Amman with Philadelphia
is made by Jerome in Commentary on Ezekiel21:18 (cf. Jeremiah 49:2; cp. K. 12:1
and K. 16:15 above).

790. Raōs (Roos). II Samuel 15:32; K. 146:8; L. 281:20.

Simple biblical notation plus Hexaplaric information. Not a proper name.

791. Rogellein. II Samuel 17:27; K. 146:9; L. 281:21.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Ragalim, feet"
(108).

792. Raphaein (Raphaeim). II Samuel 23:13; K. 146:11; L. 281:22.

Latin transliterates "foreigners" rather than translate or identify them.

Biblical information and geography.

793. Remman. I Kings 15:17; K. 146:13; L. 281:24.

Textual variant Remmam (Latin).

Biblical information and geography. Not clear if Syria is the Roman province or
not (cf. K. 146:19).

794. Reth. I Kings 15:20; K. 146:15; L. 281:25.

Simple biblical notation. This text is corrupt in the LXX (cf. K. 34:28).

795. Rathem. I Kings 19:4; K. 146:16; L. 281:26.

Textual variant Remth (Greek).

Hexaplaric information. This and the next entry are late additions.

796. Remmōn. Isaiah 15:9; K. 146:17; L. 281:27.

Simple biblical notation.

MT has Hebrew D which is confused in the Greek here with the Hebrew R (see
above).

797. Raseph. Isaiah 37:12; K. 146:19; L. 281:28.

Simple biblical notation (cp. K. 146:13 and K. 146:20). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "'Rasef, pavement" (121).

798. Rapheth. Isaiah 37:12; K. 146:20; L. 281:29.

Textual variant Rapheph (Greek).

Possibly the same as above K. 146:19. Syria and Assyria are occasionally
equated.

799. Rebla. II Kings 23:33; K. 146:22; L. 281:31.

Textual variant Rebas (Greek).

Summary of biblical information (cf. K. 146:27). This may be out of order or
else all the prophetic entries are later addition. For Aimath see K. 22:23. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Rablai, this many or many" (117).

800. Remma. Amos 4:3; K. 146:14; L. 281:33.

Textual variants Remona (Greek) and Emous (Latin). A mountain and not properly
original to Onomasticon's list. It is also out of order if the other King's
entries are correct.

Hexaplaric information indicating another error in Greek transcription.

"In Daroma" is perhaps same as Eremmo in K. 88:17 at Umm er ramamin. Idols of
Damascus refer to II Kings 5:18, "house of Rimmon" (Appendix II).

801. Reblatha. II Kings 25:6; K. 146:27; L. 281:36.

Outside of the Holy Land limits of the Onomasticon. Latin adds a contemporary
identification. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Roblath, many of you or
multitude" (117).

802. Ramade (Ramale). Zechariah 14:10; K. 146:28; L. 281:37.

Textual variant Rabede (Greek).

Hexaplaric information plus an irrelevant remark on Jeremiah 31:15 and Matthew
2:18. The Madaba map quotes the Greek text "Rama a voice heard in Rama." It is
located just west of Bethleheem (K. 42:10) about at the present Rachel's tomb
tradition (PPT I, 26 Itin. Bourd. The confusion is all Christian (cf. K. 82:10
and K. 172:5).

803. Rinokoroura. Isaiah 27:12; K. 148:3; L. 281:40. The border or river of
Egypt in MT. One of the few additions from LXX noted in Onomasticon by Jerome as
such. Procopius 1025B has "Wadi of Aigyptos is said to be the Romokorouros.
Together in the Madaba map are the borders of Aegyptos and Palaistinē,
Rinokoroura." Jerome locates Ostracine in the same area (K. 39:9). In Tabula
Peutinger Ostraciana is 24 miles and Rinocura 34 miles from Rafia (K. 50:19).
The Madaba map has followed Josephus Wars IV, ii, 5 here. Probably el 'arish
today. For other sites in Egypt see note on K. 58:7.

SECTION S

[What we have said in the book on Interpretation of Hebrew Names, even now in
the heading of the letter S we see that among the Hebrews there are three S's:
Samech, Sade and Sin. Yet these are pronounced as one sound among the Greek and
Latin which in the Hebrew language are differentiated. So it is that each name
appears to us to sound differently, and further each has another letter. Not
only from one but from three letters places and cities and villages are
described.]

804. K. 148.4 The Latin again inserts remarks about the difference in the
alphabets. The three S's in Hebrew are all under one section in Greek and Latin.

GENESIS 805. Sidōn. Genesis 10:15; K. 148:6; L. 281:43.

Summary of biblical information Judges 1:31. This city is not located but
occasionally is used as a referent. Jerome here translated "foreigners" of the
Greek text into "enemy."

806. Sennaar. Genesis 11:2f.; K. 148:11; L. This entry is out of the Holy Land
proper (Genesis 10:11). It includes a quotation from Josephus Antiquities I, 4,
3 after a simple biblical summary. Procopius 312B has the same information but
calls it a "city" as well as a "plain." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Sennaar, knocking out teeth, or their stink" (71).

807. Suchem (Sikima) (Salēm). Genesis 12:6; K. 150:1; L. 282:55. This is a much
worked over entry. A simple biblical summary (Genesis 33:18) and traditional
location is followed by additions from scripture including an additional town
(Judges 9:45; I Kings 12:25; I Chronicles 7:28; Genesis 33:19 and Joshua 20:7).
Procopius 320A practically quotes the original two items: "Suchem and Sikima and
Sēlon in the suburbs of Neapolis." Madaba map also follows Eusebius and
separates "Suchem and Sikima and Salēm" from "Neapolis." Sychar (K. 164:1) seems
to be to the left and Jacob's well to the right on the map. An entry on Salēm is
incomplete in the Greek text at K. 152:4. The church at Jacob's well is seen on
the Madaba map and affirmed by Jerome (K. 165:3). That entry does not say,
however, that the well is at Sychar but around Neapolis. Paula "passed through
Sichem, not as most travellers spell it, Sichar, which now is named Neapolis and
entered the church built upon the side of Mt. Gerizim round about Jacob's well"
(Epistle 108: 13 and PPT I, 13). In the time of Eusebius and Jerome the
traditional site of Shechem was "a deserted place." It seems correct to point
this to the well-excavated site of Tell Balata in the pass between Ebal and
Garizim east-southeast of Nablus. The pilgrims followed Eusebius and locate the
tomb of Joseph in Shechem (not in Neapolis) and about a mile from it they locate
Sechar (Itin. Bourd. and PPT I, 18). The oak of Sikimon and the tomb of Joseph
are located in the suburbs of Neapolis in K. 54:23 also. Not until much later
does the Christian tradition identify Neapolis with Shechem. The terebinth of
Sikimon (K. 164:11) is located near Neapolis. In Genesis 33:18 Shalem is not
identified with Shechem itself but is "a city of Shechem." Eusebius seems to
make this identification. The present village of Salim has many Roman-Byzantine
remains with some earlier artifacts as well. A late 4th century church has been
discovered near the well of Jacob. For the other Suchem see the confusion in K.
158:1 below. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sichem, of the shoulder or
labor" (71).

808. Sennaar. Genesis 14:1; K. 150:8; L. 282:63.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 148:11).

809. Sodoma. Genesis 14:2; K. 150:10; L. 282:65. The chief city of the
Pentopolis with only biblical location. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Sodoma, silent beast or blindness or their likeness" 71).

810. Sebōeim. Genesis 14:2; K. 150:12; L. 282:67.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Seboim, of the roes
or of damages or his place on the sea or place of the sea" (71).

811. Sōpheira. Genesis 10:30; K. 150:14; L. 282:69. This entry is outside the
proper limits of the Holy Land and out of order. Josephus Antiquities I, 6, 4
plus summary of the biblical information (I Kings 10:11 and cf. K. 160:20
below). This same quotation from Josephus appears in K. 82:2 and K. 176:14.
Josephus' Antiquities VII, 6, 4 had, "These (ships) Solomon ordered to sail
along with his own stewards to the land anciently called Sopheir but not the
land of gold; it belongs to India." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sefar,
story or book" (71).

812. Soora. Genesis 14:2; K. 150:19; L. 282:74.

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 42:4; K. 94:2 and K. 152:8. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names we find "Segor, which is called Zoara in the Syrian language"
(17). This is repeated in Procopius 373B.

813. Sauē. Genesis 14:5; K. 150:21; L. 282:76.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sau or Saube,
worthy or high" (72).

814. Sēeir. Genesis 14:6; K. 150:23; L. 282:78.

Procopius 332C quotes the entry entirely which in part depends on Josephus'
Antiquities 1, 20, 3. Jerome in Commentary on Obadiah 1 repeats the etymology
and the location. This is a summary of biblical information (Genesis 32:1, 14:6,
25:25, 27:11 and Isaiah 21:11) and no specific location. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Seir, covered with hair or hairy" (72).

815. Salēm. Genesis 14:18; K. 152:4; L. 282:84. The beginning of this entry is
only a revision of K. 150:1. The use of Salēm as identical to Shechem seems to
be the result of the LXX text for Joshua 24:1, 25. There the LXX has Sēlō.
Procopius 333A has the Greek of Eusebius word for word and then continues
following Jerome.

Another village west of Ailia is unidentifiable, perhaps Kh Selma preserves the
name, but perhaps represents the Josephus' tradition that Jebus, Salem and
Jerousalem are all one place. In Hebrew Questions Jerome says "Salem is the name
of the king of Jerusalem which was formerly called Salem" (19).

Salumias is located 8 miles south (direction not given in the text) of
Scythopolis (K. 16:2) at Umm el 'umdan or on the Jordan at Tell Rijba where
there is a Sheik Salim nearby. This could be the tradition of Salem-Aenon (K.
40:1). In Jerome's Epistle 73:7 he attaches the tradition of Melchizedek to this
site called an "oppidum" (see Appendix I), where the ruins were shown (Migne PL
22, 680). The archaeological remains are not decisive. The Salim which belongs
to Shechem is perhaps in the plain about 4 miles east of Shechem at present
Salim. But Eusebius does not make a distinction here (cp. Judith 4:4). This is
probably because LXX and Syriac identify Salem and Shechem as above in K. 150:1
and the first part of this entry. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Salem,
peace or returning" (72).

816. Sour. Genesis 16:7; K. 152:6; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. The Greek text
is lost. The Greek of Procopius 352D says, "The desert of Sour extends opposite
Egypt where the Hebrews came when about to cross the Red Sea, as Exodus says."
In Hebrew Questions (20) Jerome notes the Way of Sur "leads through the desert
to Egypt." For Kades see K. 112:7, 8. Jerome seems to be correcting Eusebius on
the basis of scripture.

817. Sēgōr. Genesis 19:22; K. 152:8; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. The first
part of the Greek is lost (Isaiah 15:5). No real place is pointed here. In
Hebrew Questions (23) Jerome writes, "Segor which is frequently earth and more
frequently destroyed, was first called Bale and later Salissa" (cf. K. 150:19;
K. 42:4 and K. 94:2). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Segor, poor. It is the
same as Seor above" (72).

818. Skēnai (Scenae). Genesis 33:17; K. 152:13; L. 283:87.

Simple biblical notation.

EXODUS 819. Sokchōth. Exodus 12:37; K. 152:16; L. 283:90.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Socchoth,
tabernacle" (77).

820. Sin. Exodus 16:1; K. 152:18; L. 283:93.

Summary of biblical information (Exodus 17:1, 19:1 and Numbers 33:36). LXX and
MT texts disagree as noted in the Onomasticon. Probably this extends from Red
Sea to Sinai. On the Madaba map the desert of Sin is also: "the place of Manna
and quails."

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 821. Selmona. Numbers 33:41; K. 154:5; L. 283:00.

Last part of this entry is missing in Greek Vatican manuscript. A Simple listing
of station. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Salmona, shade of the part or he
reckoned the shade or his image" (85).

822. Saphar. Numbers 33:23; K. 154:7; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

First part of this entry is missing in Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple listing of station.

823. Sattein (Sattim). Numbers 25:1; K. 154:9; L. 283:01.

Summary of biblical information and geography (Numbers 25:3 and Joshua 2:1) On
Phogōr see K. 18:1 and K. 168:25. This and the next entry seem to be late
editorial additions. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Settim, thorns" (84).

824. Sabama. Numbers 32:3, 38; K. 154:12; L. 283:04.

Textual variant Saba (Greek).

Summary of biblical information (Joshua 13:19 and Isaiah 16:8. In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Sabama, turning around of someone, or lift on him or lifted
high" (85).

825. Selcha. Deuteronomy 3:10; K. 154:15; L. 283:07.

Simple biblical notation.

826. Senna. Numbers 34:4; K. 154:16; L. 283:08. A border listing (Joshua 15:3).
The mileage in the two texts is different. This could be the result of the older
Jewish text locating from Roman Jericho (K. 104:25) and Jerome's from er-riha.
The Magdalsenna is hardly in Ioudaia with this location. On the Madaba map east
of Archelais is a small unlabeled town which could be Magdalsenna but cannot be
the Zin of Numbers (cf. K. 84:14) but could be identified with Sennaah of Ezra.
This is possibly located now at Kh el Beiyudat. In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Senna, wished or his teeth" (85).

827. Sephama. Numbers 34:10; K. 154:18; L. 283:10.

Textual variant Sephema (Greek).

Simple biblical listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Safan, life or hair
on the upper lip which the Greeks call a moustache" (85).

828. Sadada. Numbers 34:8; K. 154:19; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. Not in the
Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "from his tile" (85).

JOSUE 829. Somerōn. Joshua 12:20; K. 154:21; L. 283:12. A biblical note and
identification followed by additional biblical information probably added by a
later hand (I Kings 16:24). Onomasticon recognizes a region of Sebastē called
polichnē (cf. K. 22:11; Appendix II), Samaria was called Sebastē in honor of
Augustus (Epistle 108:13, Migne PL 22, 889; PPT I, 13 and cf. K. 162:13). Herod
had much to do with its redevelopment. Jerome notes the graves of Obadiah,
Elisha, and St. John the Baptist are traditionally located here (Epistle 46;
Migne PL 22, 491 and Commentary on Obadia Migne PL 25, 1099 etc.). In this entry
only the Latin text notes the relics of John. Also called an "oppidum" (cf. K.
10:25 and Appendix I). A bishop was present from here at the Council of Nicea.
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Semronmaron, custodian of the bitter walls"
(97).

830. Sēeira. Joshua 11:17; K. 156:1; L. 283:17.

Simple biblical notation.

831. Selcha. Joshua 13:11; K. 156:2; L. 283:18.

Simple biblical notation.

832. Siōr. Joshua 15:54; K. 154:21; L. 283:19.

Two sites are involved in this entry. Sior is from the Onomasticon perhaps
located at Siler north-northeast of Chebrōn (K. 6:8) on the border of
Eleutheropolis and Aelia regions. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sior, very
small or disturbed" (97).

833. Saorth. Joshua 13:19; K. 156:5; L. 283:21.

Textual variants: Saor (Greek) and Saorh (Latin).

Simple tribal listing and biblical location. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Sarth, chains or his narrowness" (97).

834. Sachoth. Joshua 13:27; K. 156:6; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This entry
is not in the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing and biblical location.

835. Saphōn. Joshua 13:27; K. 156:7; L. 283:22.

Simple tribal listing and biblical location.

836. Sachōron. Joshua 15:11; K. 156:8; L. 284:23.

Textual variant Sachorona (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sechrona, intoxicated
or tabernacle" (97).

837. Sama (Samen). Joshua 15:26; K. 156:9; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is not in the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Seme, hearing" (97).

838. Soual. Joshua 15:28; K. 156:10; L. 284:24.

Double tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sualim, foxes" (97).

839. Sikelag (Secelec). Joshua 15:31; K. 156:11; L. 284:25.

Textual variant Sicelec (Latin).

Summary of biblical information (I Samuel 27:6; Joshua 19:5 and cp. Thalcha
98:26). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sicileq, clearing a tight voice or
pouring forth the sixth part" (97).

840. Sansana. Joshua 15:31; K. 156:31; L. 284:27.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Senesanna, bearing a
bramble or holding" (97).

841. Saleei. Joshua 15:32; K. 156:14; L. 284:28.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Saloim, comings forth
or emissions" (97).

842. Saraa. Joshua 15:33; K. 156:15; L. 284:29.

Textual variant Sarda (Greek).

Tribal listing of Joshua 19:41 (cf. K. 160:4).

Esthaol (K. 88:2) is also 10 miles north of Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12). The
distance is somewhat short for both Eathaol and Saraa unless it marks turn off
from the main road to lesser road. They are near each other about 14-15 miles
north. Today at sar'a southeast of Nicopolis (K. 30:27). In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Saraa, hornets or shortness of evil" (97).

843. Sokchō. Joshua 15:35; K. 156:18; L. 284:32.

Twin villages. The Madaba Map has only one Sōchō on the edge of the valley. They
are a few miles west-southwest of Bait Nettif at Kh Abbad and Kh Shuweikeh. The
sound of the name may survive in the second, where there are late remains. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Socha, little tabernacle or shady arbor" (97).

844. Saraein. Joshua 15:36; K. 156:21; L. 284:35.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Saarim, doors" (97).

845. Sennaan (Senam). Joshua 15:37; K. 156:22; L. 284:36.

Textual variant Senna (Latin).

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sanam, abundant or
their departure" (97).

846. Sapheir. Joshua 15:48; K. 156:23; L. 284:37. This is not located along any
main road and does not seem to be the Sapharea of the Madaba map. It is best
located at Sawafir 10 miles northeast of Ascalōn (K. 22:15) on the road to
Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12). Perhaps on the border.

847. Sokchō. Joshua 15:48; K. 156:25; L. 284:39.

Textual variant Socho (Latin).

Cf. II Kings 17:30 and cp. K. 156:18 above.

848. Skacha. Joshua 15:61; K. 156:27; L. 284:41.

Textual variants: Sakcho (Greek) and Scaca and Scatha (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

849. Selo. Joshua 16:6; K. 156:28; L. 284:42.

Two biblical items (Genesis 38:5) separated by a location. The distance varies
by two miles between Latin and Greek. In the Madaba map "Silo where the ark was"
following Eusebius. The present Kh Seilun is over 12 miles from Neapolis (K.
4:28). But turn off from the main road is at 12th milestone. Paula saw a
destroyed altar there (Epistle 108:13, PPT I, 13). Perhaps the 10 miles of
Jerome locates Akkrabein.

850. Suchem (Sechem). Joshua 17:7; K. 158:1; L. 284:46.

Manssseh and Ephraim both hold biblical Shechem. K. 150:7 seems to distinguish
Joshua 20:7, Joshua 21:21 from the area around Neapolis. Yet this entry has been
corrected and the same site is the Ephraim city of refuge and the Manasseh city
with the tomb of Joseph. No location is given here other than reference back to
K. 150:1 which is probably a marginal gloss.

851. Sama. Joshua 18:17; K. 158:4; L. 284:49.

Textual variant "spring of Sam" (Greek).

Biblical and Hexaplaric information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sames,
sun" (97).

852. Semreim. Joshua 18:22; K. 158:5; L. 284:50.

Textual variants: Sereim (Greek) and Semeri (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

853. Sela. Joshua 18:28; K. 158:6; L. 284:51.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sela, bear from, to
bear, not from breadth" (97).

854. Sabe (Sabēe). Joshua 19:2; K. 158:7; L. 284:52.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sabe, seven or seven
times" (97).

855. Sarith (Sarid). Joshua 19:10; K. 158:8; L. 284:53.

Textual variant Sarith (Latin).

Simple tribal border. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sarith, remains" (97).

856. Sams. Joshua 19:12; K. 158:9; L. 284:54.

Textual variants: Sam (Greek) and Samis, Samus (Latin).

Hexaplaric information.

857. Semerōn. Joshua 19:15; K. 158:10; L. 284:55.

Simple tribal listing.

858. Sounēm (Sunem). Joshua 19:18; K. 158:11; L. 284:56.

Textual variant Soubēn (Greek).

Perhaps the tradition confuses this with the Shulamite of Canticles.

It is at Sulem about 3 miles south of Naim (K. 140:3) and correctly located 5
miles from Thabor. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sonim, scarlet colored"
(97).

859. Sion (Seon or Soen). Joshua 19:19; K. 158:13; L. 284:58.

Vague location may point to 'ajun esh sha'en, but it could be the same as the
previous location. Jerome alone gives an alternate. A' has Seian. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Seon, his seeds" (97).

860. Sasima. Joshua 19:22; K. 158:15; L. 284:60.

Simple border listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sassim, going out he
stayed" (97).

861. Sior. Joshua 19:26; K. 158:16; L. 284:61.

Simple tribal listing.

862. Sennanein. Joshua 19:33; K. 158:17; L. 284:62.

Textual variant Sennanim (Latin).

Biblical notation and tribal listing. A corrupt LXX test wherein two Hebrew
names in the MT become coalesced into one.

863. Sorek (Sorec). Joshua 19:41; K. 158:18; L. 285:63.

Summary of biblical information and geography (Judges 13:25 and cf. K. 88:12).
This form is from the MT not from the LXX (cf. K. 160:2).

864. Sames. Joshua 19:41; K. 158:20; L. 285:65.

Textual variant Samer (Greek).

Cf. K. 54:11 and K. 32:26.

865. Salabein (Salabeim). Joshua 19:41; K. 158:21; L. 285:66.

Salaba is only vaguely located, perhaps Onomasticon points to site (not the Old
Testament site) at Kh Selhab north of Tubas (cf. K. 100:11). In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Salabin, growing intelligence" (91).

866. Sepheth. Judges 1:17; K. 158:23; L. 285:68.

Textual variants: Sephet, Seth and Sapeth (Latin).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Safeth, watchtower"
(101).

JUDGES 867. Seirōtha. Judges 3:26; K. 158:25; L. 285:70.

Textual variants: Ahod, Aioth and Ahud (Latin).

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 156:1 related to Mt.Se'ir) In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Sairath, she goat" (101).

868. Sour Oreb. Judges 7:25; K. 158:27; L. 285:72.

Textual variant. A' is lacking in Vatican Greek manuscript.

Hexaplaric information. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Suroreb, rock of the
raven" (101).

869. Selmon. Judges 9:48; K. 158:28; L. 285:73.

Simple biblical notation. This is not Shechem but Sikima near Haifa (K. 108:
30). It is probably located at Tell es Samak. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Salmana, preventing shade or shade of movements" (101) and "Salma, feeling or
perfect or peace making" (101).

870. Sephina. Judges 12:1; K. 160:1; L. 285:75.

Hexaplaric information.

871. Sōrēch. Judges 16:4; K. 160:2; L. 285:76.

Identified with Cafarsorech northwest of Saraa (K. 56:15) possibly Eusebius
points to Kh Surik (not the Old Testament site) Judges 13:2, 25. It is not on a
Roman road. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sorec, best choice" (101).

KINGS 872. Sōpheim. I Samuel 1:1; K. 160:6; L. 285:80.

Textual variants: Armathe and Armathaim (Latin).

Simple biblical location. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sofim, watchtower
or crag." (105).

873. Salisa. I Samuel 9:4; K. 160:7; L. 285:81.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Salisa, third"
(105).

874. Senna. I Samuel 14:4; K. 160:8; L. 285:82.

Textual variant Sanna (Latin). This entry and part of the next are missing in
the Greek Vatican manuscript. As a rock it does not belong to the place names.
It is also out of proper order and doubly suspect (cf. K. 94:5). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sena, borne or narrowness or good" (105).

875. Saaleim. I Samuel 9:4; K. 160:11; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. The first
part of this entry and the previous one are missing in the Greek Vatican
manuscript (cp. K. 156:14). Probably Kh Shaikha 7 miles due west of
Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12). Some scholars see it on the road at Araq el Manshiya
but Eusebius' location seems to be off the road (cf. K. 68:4). In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Salim, foxes but better written Sualim" (105).

876. Seiph (Sthif). I Samuel 9:5; K. 160:11; L. 285:84.

Textual variant Seim (Greek).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Suf, watchtower or
pouring forth" (105).

877. Sabeim. I Samuel 13:18; K. 160:12; L. 285:85.

Simple biblical notation.

878. Sōnam. I Samuel 28:4; K. 160:13; L. 285:86.

Cf. K. 158:11 and K. 158:13. Perhaps also Salim east of Nablus is intended, in
the Akrabattinē (I Kings 1:3 and Song of Solomon 6:12). It could be sanur north
of Samaria as well. Neither site is the Old Testament location. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sonaim, scarlet colored or his standing."

879. Saphamōth. I Samuel 30:28; K. 160:15; L. 285:89.

Textual variant Sophamoth (Latin).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Safathmoth, lip of
death." (105).

880. Seeira. II Samuel 3:26; K. 160:16; L. 285:90.

Simple biblical notation.

881. Souba. II Samuel 8:3; K. 160:17; L. 285:91.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Soba, divided from
cutting, not from following" (105).

882. Sarthan. I Kings 4:12; K. 160:18; L. 285:92.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sarthan, their
tribulation or demolition or limitation " (112).

883. Sōpheira (Soupheir). I Kings 9:28 and I Kings 10:11; K. 160:19; L. 285:93.

Textual variant Sophira (Latin). This variant name is a LXX error.

Out of the Holy Land proper (cf. K. 150:14 and K. 176:13).

884. Serōra. I Kings 11:26; K. 160:21; L. 285:95.

Textual variant Serora (Latin).

Simple biblical notation.

885. Saba. I Kings 10:1; K. 160:22; L. 285:96. This entry is out of the Limits
of the Holy Land and out of order as well, so is quite suspect. In Josephus
Antiquities II, 10, 2 we have "Saba, the capital of the Ethiopian realm which
Cambyses later called Meroe after the name of his sister." In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Saba, captured" (112).

886. Sela. II Kings 12:21; K. 160:25; L. 285:99.

Simple biblical notation.

LXX has Gaalad or Gaalla for the MT "to Silla." In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Sela, always" (117).

887. Sephpharouem (Saffaruaim). II Kings 17:24; K. 160:26; L. 285:00.

Simple biblical notation (Isaiah 36:19). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Safaruahim, books or letters" (118).

888. Sademoth. II Kings 23:4; K. 160:28; L. 286:03.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sademoth, ploughed
land or region" (118).

889. Sarepta. I Kings 17:9; K. 162:1; L. 286:04. This item is perhaps out of
order. This is the only site between Tyre (K. 162:15) and Sidon (K. 148:6)
mentioned in the Onomasticon. Jerome adds it is on the main highway. Tabula
Peutinger locates it 9 miles from Sidon and 12 from Tyre. The Pilgrims note it
is on the coast also 9 miles from Sidon (Paula PPT I, 4 and Itin. Bourd.18:22).
It is the present Sarafand (MT, cf. Luke 4:26 not noted in our text). In Latin
"oppidulum" used only here, the diminutive is "oppidum" (cf. K. 10:25 and
Appendix I).

890. Sarōn. Isaiah 33:9; K. 162:3; L. 286:06.

Part of this entry is missing in the Vatican manuscript.

Ioppa is an "oppidum" in Jerome here (cf. K. 111:25; cp. K. 10:25 and Appendix
I). In Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah 33:7 and elsewhere he describes the plain
of Sharon as near Ioppa and Lidda. This may describe the limits of the plain.
The added notation is more precise for biblical Sharon. The first Saronas is
connected with Aphek and Endor (K. 34:11) of the Esdraelon plain, northeast of
Tabor toward the Sea of Galilee, perhaps named after a town Saruna but not the
biblical site. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Saron, first wall or gloomy
singing" (122).

891. Sephela. Isaiah 32:19; K. 162:7; L. 286:09.

"Another" as the above plain. In Jerome's Commentary on Obadiah 19 he describes
this area of Diospolis (K. 8:14) to Nicopolis (K. 30:27) but notes, as in
Onomasticon that others see it as near Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12). The
Onomasticon locates it between Eleutheropolis and Ioppa (K. 110:24 and cp. I
Maccabees 12:38).

892. Sennaar. Micah 1:11; K. 162:10; L. 286:12.

Textual variants: Sennaan (Greek) and Sennam (Latin).

Hexaplatic information and references (cp. K. 156:22).

893. Sedrach. Zechariah 9:1; K. 162:11; L. 286:13.

Simple biblical notation. LXX has confused the Hebrew of MT here.

894. Siōn. Zechariah 9:9; K. 162:12; L. 286:14.

Mountain and simple biblical location. One of the details of Jerusalem but no
real location given. In Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah1:21 he says, "Sion is the
mountain on which the city of Jerusalem was founded."

895. Samareia (Samaria). Ezekiel 16:46; K. 162:13; L. 286:15.

Samaria is Sebaste and gives its name to the territory (cf. K. 154:21).

896. Sor (Tyre). Ezekiel 26:2; K. 162:15; L. 286:17.

Simple biblical summary (Joshua 19:35). The Onomasticon uses "metropolis" only
rarely for Tyre and Jerusalem. Difficult to know if this is in reference to
biblical or contemporary times. Tyre was the capital of the Roman province of
Phoenicia north of Karmel and Palaistinē. It was 73 miles between Caesarea and
Tyre according to Itin. Bourd. (PPT I, 17). Tabula Peutinger has 12 miles from
Sarepta, 24 from Sidon and 32 from Ptolmais. It is presently called Sur (perhaps
cf. K. 164:17).

897. Soēne. Ezekiel 29:11; K. 162:16; L. 286:19. This is outside the proper
limits of the Holy Land. This is one of the most distant Egyptian cities
mentioned (cp. K. 126: 1). Hebrew has migdol. Eusebius follows the LXX here. For
other sites in Egypt see note on K. 58: 1. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Soene, his circle or expected" (130).

898. Sais. Ezekiel 30:15; K. 162:17; L. 286:20. This is outside the proper
limits of the Holy Land. Greek text is corrupt. The Madaba map has "Sais." In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sais, proof" (132).

899. Sadala. Ezekiel 47:15; K. 162:18; L. 286:21.

Simple biblical notation of border. Name follows Qere vocalization. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sadada, has the same meaning as Sela" (132, cf.
97 also cf. K. 158: 6).

900. Sabareim. Ezekiel 47:16; K. 162:19; L. 286:23.

Simple biblical notation and geography. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Sabarim, to go around the mountains" (132).

901. Salisa. Jeremiah 48:34; K. 162:21; L. 286:25.

Hexaplaric information.

902. Suchar. John 4:5; K. 164:1; L. 286:26. This is not related to Shechem (K.
150:1) by this text. Yet it is east of Neapolis (K. 4:28) near the field of
Jacob and the well where the Samaritan came. In this entry the well seems to be
near or to belong to the village from which the woman came. Jerome notes a
church is now built at the well (cf. Note on K. 7:13). Paula sees Sychar as near
the well but one mile from Shechem (Epistle 108:13 and PTT I, 18).The Madaba map
is unclear, "Sychar now Sychchōra" is usually separated from "Where the well of
Jacob is" as well as from "the tomb of Joseph." None of these is equated with
Shechem. The oak of Sikimon and the tomb of Joseph however are connected in K.
54:23. The well and church tradition has remained constant since the 4th century
(Latin text). Shechem is clearly Balata although later pilgrims identified it
with Neapolis. Sychar is the small village of Samaritans which clustered around
the well a bit south of Balata. The name Sychar has been preserved perhaps in
present 'Askar at the foot of Mt.Ebal. The reality of a Sychar was already
questioned by Jerome. He notes that Sicima was called Sychem in Hebrew but the
Gospel of John through an error wrote Sychar (Migne PL 23, 1055). In Epistle
108:13 he also remarks on this error and equates Sychem with Neapolis (Migne PL
22, 888). Many scholars favor this argument: Sychar is a copyist's error or
alternate form for Sychem in the New Testament. This would mean between the well
and Balata were located the Samaritan inhabitants of Sychem. The fact that no
Roman remains are found on Tell Balata does not preclude the existence of a
small village around the well and under the present village of Balata.

After the 4th century the village north of Sychem was pointed out as Sychar. It
is a Byzantine settlement. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Sichar, conclusion
or twig. However in error for Sichem, which means shoulder, Schar was written."
(142).

SECTION T

GENESIS 903. Tigris. Genesis 2:14; K. 164:7; L. 286:32. A river and outside the
Holy Land limits proper. Also as often in the first entry to a new alphabetic
section this is suspect. The rivers of Paradise are all in the Onomasticon (see
note on K. 60:3). Josephus Antiquities I, 1, 3 says, "The Euphrates and Tigris
end in the Red Sea" apparently meaning the Red Sea includes both gulfs. "Tigris
Diglath expressing at once its narrowness and its rapidity" (Ibid.).

904. Terebinthos in Sikemon. Genesis 35:4; K. 164:11; L. 286:36.

Textual variant Tereminthos (Greek). Sikemos and other idols (see Appendix II).

Simple biblical notation (cf. the oak K. 54:23). Is it possible that terebinthos
or balanos may relate to the Matzevoth? On Sykem see K. 150:1 and K. 158:1.

JOSUE 905. Tina. Joshua 15:22; K. 164:14; L. 287:39.

Simple tribal listing (cp. K. 114:14).

906. Telem. Joshua 15:24; K. 164:15; L. 287:40.

Simple tribal listing. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Talam, their dew or
moistened with dew" (97).

907. Tessem. Joshua 15:52; K. 164:16; L. 287:41.

Simple tribal listing (cp. K. 16:10. Here the guttural is expressed in Greek).

908. Turos. Joshua 19:35; K. 164:17; L. 287:42.

Simple tribal listing (cp. K. 162:15). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Tyrus
which is called Sor in Hebrew and interpreted tribulation or difficulty or
strength" (97).

JUDGES 909. Tabath. Judges 7:22; K. 164:19; L. 287:44.

Textual variant Tabam (Greek).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Tabath, good"
(101).

910. Tōb. Judges 11:3; K. 164:20; L. 287:45.

Simple biblical notation.

911. Tapheth (Tofeth). II Kings 23:10; K. 164:21; L. 287:46.

Simple biblical summary with generalized location (cf. K. 102:14). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Thof, protection of the face or gehenna" (118).

912. Tanis. Isaiah 19:11; K. 164:23; L. 287:48.

Located outside the proper limits of the Holy Land.

Here the Madaba map has "Tania" the only site in the delta of Egypt mentioned in
the Onomasticon. On other sites in Egypt see K. 58:7. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Tanis, commanding humility" (122).

913. Taphnas. Hosea 9:6; K. 164:24; L. 287:49.

Located outside the proper limits of the Holy Land.

Summary of biblical references as Ezekiel 30:14, 18 and Jeremiah 43:7. In the
Greek a confused text (cf. K. 134: 6). On other sites in Egypt see K. 58:7. THE
GOSPELS 914. Trachonitis territory or Itouraia. Luke 3:1; K. 166:1; L. 287:53.

Cp. 110:27. The limits are clear. Bostra was probably the border in Herod's
time. Eusebius equates the two regions but they are not really identical. Philip
did not control up to Damascus. Josephus called the region south of Damascus
Trachōn, roughly equivalent to the basalt desert.

SECTION PH

GENESIS

TH 915. Jerome notes that in the Latin text the TH is followed next as in Hebrew
and Latin alphabet. In Greek they are already included earlier in the alphabet.

PH 916. Pheisōn (Fison). Genesis 2:11; K. 166:7; L. 287:59. A river outside the
limits of Holy Land proper and again suspect as the first entry in alphabetic
section. Again Josephus and the Bible are the simple sources for the entry
inserted by a late editor. In Antiquities I, 1, 3 "one of these (four rivers)
Phison, a name meaning multitude, runs toward India and falls into the sea,
being called by the Greeks Ganges." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names Jerome
repeats this identity of Fison with Ganges (4). On rivers of Eden see note on K.
60:3. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Pison, mouth of an orphan or change of
mouth" (66).

917. Pharan. Genesis 14:6; K. 166:12; L. 287:64.

Summary of biblical information separated by location (Numbers 10:12 and Genesis
21:21, 14:6). Several different hands have been at work adding to this text.
Procopius 332D repeats the first part of this entry. It is three days from Bluth
or Aqabah (K. 6:17). It is south of the Roman province of Arabia. In Jerome's
Commentary on Habakkuk 3:3 he says it is near Mt.Sina. Probably generally from
Aqabah to Suez. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Faran, their courage" (66).

918. Pulistieim. Genesis 21:34; K. 166:18; L. 287:71. The city is Askalōn (K.
22:15) and the territory around it. Does Eusebius mean Philistine coastal area
of the five cities or does he mean Palaistinē the Roman province? Probably here
it is the former although in the Onomasticon the usage is quite irregular.
Jerome at times translated Greek "foreigners" with Filistine (K. 7:15, K. 21:2,
K. 33:25 and K.119:3) but more frequently with the Greek transliteration
Allofylus, but most often as translated into "foreigners" or "enemy" (see
Appendix I). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Filistiim, double ruins" (66).

919. Phrear. Genesis 21:31; K. 166:20; L. 287:73. A series of wells all of which
are additions to the text. Not all the wells of the Bible are inserted by this
later scribe into the Onomasticon. Usually only a biblical notation and no
attempt at specific location is made. The Greek is transliterated above and the
Latin is translated.

Here identical with Bērosoba (K. 50:1) in the Geraritikē (K. 60:7). Confused
entry. In Hebrew Questions21:30 these two are equated, perpetuating an obvious
error.

920. Phrear. Genesis 24:62; K. 166:22; L. 287:75.

Simple biblical notation.

921. Phrear. Genesis 26:20f.; K. 166:23; L. 288:76.

Berdan has the etymology given. It is in the Geraritikē (K. 60:7 and cf. K.
166:20 above). In the Vulgate the well is called Calumnia. The location is
uncertain, perhaps barade.

922. Phrear. Genesis 26:33; K. 168:1; L. 288:78.

Summary of biblical information and a general statement on the many wells in
southwest Palaistinē. This may also be around Bēroeaba (K. 50:1 and cf. K.
166:20). Some early Christians confused this with Askalon possibly here.

923. Phanouēl. Genesis 32:30; K. 168:4; L. 288:83. The Greek text is corrupt
here.

Biblical summary of Genesis 32:24, 28. The location here is not specific, but
location on the Iabok (K. 102:19). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Fanuhel,
face of God" (66).

924. Phogōr (Fogo). Genesis 36:39; K. 168:7; L. 288:84.

Simple biblical notation and geography (cp. K. 48:3 and K. 168:25).

925. Phinōn. Genesis 36:41; K. 168:8; L. 288:86.

Summary of biblical information for two locations.

Phainon is probably present day Fenan. In K. 80:15 it is 4 miles from Daidan. On
these mines see K. 114:1ff. Roman fort remains are nearby, Jerome reports on
labor supply. This may be quite distinct from the station on the desert (Numbers
33:42). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Fiennon, their mouths or mastered
faces" (66).

EXODUS 926. Phithōm. Exodus 1:11; K. 168:12; L. 288:89. This entry is out of the
limits of the Holy Land proper.

Simple biblical notation.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 927. Pharagx. Numbers 13:24f.; K. 168:15; L. 288:92.

Several wadies or ravines are listed in this section (cf. Deuteronomy 1:25).
Most of them are not in the Latin. Not all of the wadies of the Bible are in the
Onomasticon. Just as the wells above, so the wadies are suspect as being of a
later hand. On Gouphna see Gophna (K. 26:2 and K. 74:2) here wrongly equated
with Eshkal. The text seems to hint of a doubt in the unknown source which makes
the spies come so far North.

Fifteen miles from Jerusalem is Jifna on the Nablus road. It is 16 miles on the
Tabula Peutinger and 20 from Neapolis. On the Madaba map it crowds Baithēl (K.
28:5) but "Gophna" is generally located as here (cf. Joshua 18:24).

928. Phin. Numbers 33:42; K. 168:19; L. 288:96.

Simple listing of station.

929. Pharagx Zare. Numbers 21:12; K. 168:20; L. 288:97. Not in the Latin text.

Another wadi or ravine (cf. K. 92:10). Simple biblical notation.

930. Phear. Numbers 21:16; K. 168:21; L. 288:98. Not in the Latin text. A well.
Simple biblical notation.

931. Phathoura. Numbers 22:5; K. 168:22; L. 288:99. This entry is outside the
limits of the Holy Land. But the "another" not in the Roman province of
Mesopotamia or biblical Mesopotamis is Kh Furt about 5 miles southwest of
Eleutheropolis (K. 18:12) off the main road. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Fethora, exploring mouth or mouthful of light or mouth of the turtle dove."
(81).

932. Phogōr (Bēthphogōr). Numbers 33:28; K. 168:25; L. 288:03.

Textual variants: Phephphogōr (Greek) and Fara (Latin). Greek dittography from
K. 168:24. The city Bethphogōr, Mt.Phogōr and another village Phogōr are all
combined in this entry. It is in Moab (K. 12:23; K. 44:13 and K. 64:22).
Bethphogor see K. 48:3. The cities of Phogōr and Phogō (K. 168:7 and K. 170:13)
are probably one and the same in the Scriptures. The mountain as located here is
related to Phasga (K. 16:23; K. 18:3 and K. 168:28) and Nebo (K. 136:6). Dannaba
also is near Mt.Phogōr (K. 76:9) as Sattein (K. 154:10). Bēthphogōr is on this
mountain (cf. Deuteronomy 3:28, 4:46). The one near Bethlehem is based on the
LXX of Joshua 15:59 and probably located at Kh Fajjar or Beit Fajjar southwest
of Tekoa (K. 98:17). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Faqur, skin of the mouth
or he opened" (81).

933. Phasga. Deuteronomy 3:17; K. 168:26; L. 288:05.

Summary of biblical information and Hexaplaric data. The city and mountain are
related to Phogōr (K. 168:25) and to Nebo (K. 136:6). The equation of Phasga and
Phogōr is made also in K. 18:3. The etymology of Phasgō for cliff or cutting is
also in K. 16:24 (cf. K. 12:17). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Fasga, cut
off or hewn or mouth selected" (87).

JUDGES 934. Phanouel. I Kings 12:25; K. 170:2; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.
This entry missing in the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple biblical notation (I Chronicles 4:4).

935. Phanouēl. Judges 8:8, 17; K. 170:3; L. 288:09.

Textual variants: Hor and Cham (Latin).

Summary of biblical information (cf. K. 168:4). In Interpretation of Hebrew
Names "Fanuhel, face of God" (100).

936. Phraathōn. Judges 12:13ff.; K. 170:5; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text. This
entry is missing in the Greek Vatican manuscript.

Simple biblical notation and geography.

KINGS 937. Pharagx Ennom. Judges 15:8; K. 170:8; L. 288:12. A ravine and suspect
as later addition (cf. K. 70:2; K. 164:21 and K. 102:14). The more recent name
is also reported here.

938. Phelmoni Almoni. I Samuel 21:2; K. 170:11; L. 289:15.

Hexaplaric information. This is not a Hebrew proper name in MT. A vague
statement of a king's right to assign his underlings where and how he sees fit.

939. Phogō. I Chronicles 1:50; K. 170:13; L. 289:17.

Textual variants: Phobō (Greek) and Fogor (Latin).

Simple biblical notation (cf. K. 168:7).

940. Pharphar. II Kings 5:12; K. 170:14; L. 289:18. A River and therefore
suspect.

Simple biblical geography. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Farfar, digging or
scattering or moles" (115).

941. Phathori. Ezekiel 29:14; K. 170:15; L. 289:19.

Textual variants: Fatore, Fature and Fathure (Latin).

Cf. Jeremiah 44:15.

SECTION X

GENESIS 942. Chalannē. Genesis 10:10; K. 170:19; L. 289:23.

Again the first entry in an alphabetic section is outside the Holy Land proper
and suspect as a late addition (Isaiah 10:9 and cf. K. 174:8 below).

Summary of biblical information and geography (cf. K. 148:11) Sennaar and K.
40:7 Babel. In Hebrew Questions Jerome notes Chalaane was called later Seleucia
after the name of the king and is also to be known as Ktēsiphōn (13). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chalanne, future completion or all of us." (63).

943. Chalak. Genesis 10:11; K. 170:21; L. 289:25.

Outside the proper limits of the Holy Land.

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chalech, as if
green" (63).

944. Charran. Genesis 11:31; K. 170:23; L. 289:27.

Outside the proper limits of the Holy Land. Probably still retains the name. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Charran, hole or wrath or his digging" (64).

945. Chebrōn. Genesis 13:18; K. 170:25; L. 289:29.

Summary of biblical information (Genesis 23:2; Numbers 13:23 and Joshua 14:15
also cf. Arbō (K. 6:8 as well as K. 76:1)). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Chebron, united or enchanted or everlasting sight" (64).

946. Chōba. Genesis 14:15; K. 172:1; L. 289:32.

Textual variants: Choba and the town Coba (Latin). This is the only mention of
the Ebionites in the Onomasticon. This is probably not a correct identification
of the biblical site. The name is continued in at least three locations from
Byzantine times. Probably Greek text pointed to today's kokaba southwest of
Damascus. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Choba, condemnation" (64).

947. Chabratha. Genesis 35:16; K. 172:4; L. 289:35. The Hexaplaric information
is supplemented with the late tradition of Rachel's tomb near Bethlehem (K.
42:10 and cf. K. 146:28). In Ephata (K. 82:10) the tomb is located near a
Hippodrome. In Hebrew Questions (54) Jerome notes Chabratha is not a proper
name. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chabratha, as if chosen or heavy" (64).

948. Chasbi. Genesis 38:5; K. 172:6; L. 289:37.

Textual variants: dollōm (Greek) and Adollam (Latin).

Possible located in the region of Eleutheropolis (K. 8:12) about 10 miles
northeast at 'Ain el Kazbeh. No indication it was a ruin in the earlier Greek
text (cf. Adullam K. 24:21). In the Hexapla (not noted here) Aquila translated
this word and Jerome in Hebrew Questions (46) writes 'Chasbi therefore is not
the name of a place, but is a lie." In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chazbi, a
lie" (64).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY 949. Chōrēb. Deuteronomy 1:2; K. 172:9; L. 289:40.

Outside the limits of the Holy Land proper. The Onomasticon separates this from
Mt.Sinai but Jerome believes Sinai and Horeb are names for the same mountain.

950. Charada. Numbers 33:24; K. 172:11; L. 289:43.

Simple listing of station.

951. Chenereth. Numbers 34:11; K. 172:12; L. 289:44. A summary of biblical
information (Joshua 19:35) with added identification with Tiberias. At the death
of Agrippa II Tiberias became an autonomous city. Called "oppidum" in Latin (K.
10:25 and Appendix I). This is not an exact equation since Tiberias is quite far
south of the location of Chennereth, Gennesaret at Tell el 'Oreimeh. No location
is given in the Greek. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chenneroth, sign of
lutes or as if lamps" (80).

JOSUE 952. Chepheira. Joshua 9:17; K. 172:15; L. 289:46.

Textual variants: Chepherra (Greek) and Cheffira (Latin).

Simple biblical summary (Joshua 18:26). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Chifara, his whelp or scattered hands or atonement" (92).

953. Chasalōn. Joshua 15:10; K. 172:16; L. 289:47.

Textual variant Chalasōn (Greek). A large village with nothing but the biblical
location written here. Perhaps this is Kasla southwest of Jerusalem near Esthaol
(K. 88:12). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Cheslon, their revelation" (92).

954. Chsil. Joshua 15:30; K. 172:18; L. 289:49.

Textual variant Choilē (Greek).

Simple tribal listing (cf. K. 140:8).

955. Chaphtheis. Joshua 15:40; K. 172:19; L. 290:50.

Textual variant Chasthis (Latin).

Simple tribal listing.

956. Chermel. Joshua 15:35; K. 172:20; L. 290:51.

Chermel is now south of Chebrōn (cf. K. 118:5 and I Samuel 25:2). Notitia
Dignitatum 73:20 confirms the garrison (cf. Procopius 1020C). In Interpretation
of Hebrew Names "Chermel, softly or delicate or knowing the circumstances" (92).

957. Chabōn. Joshua 15:40; K. 172:23; L. 290:54. In Latin this appears before
Chermel (K. 173:25).

Simple tribal listing.

958. Cheilōn. Joshua 15:51; K. 172:24; L. 290:55.

Simple tribal listing.

959. Chephrei. Joshua 18:26; K. 174:1; L. 290:56.

Simple tribal listing.

960. Cheselath Thabor. Joshua 19:12; K. 174:2; L. 290:57.

Cf. below K. 174:11 and Chsalous K. 28:22. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Chsiloth, foolish signs" (92).

KINGS 961. Chettieim. Judges 1:26; K. 174:4; L. 290:59. This entry is not in the
Holy Land limits proper to the Onomasticon. Procopius 1047A follows the Latin
here. But see K. 122:14 for possible relationship to Bethelarea. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chetim. raging or dreading or marked" (99).

962. Charrei. II Samuel 20:14; K. 174:6; L. 290:61.

Simple biblical notation. The CH in Greek seems to be for the Hebrew guttural,
following the LXX.

963. Chomarreim. II Kings 23:5; K. 174:7; L. 290:62.

Textual variant Chōmarrei (Greek).

Simple biblical notation. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chomarim, keepers
of the temple" (115).

964. Chalannē. Isaiah 10:9; K. 174:8; L. 290:63.

Outside the limits of the Holy Land proper as in Onomasticon (cf. K. 170:19). In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chalanne, all" (115).

965. Charran. Isaiah 37:12; K. 174:10; L. n/a; Lacuna in Greek Text.

Textual variant Charan (Latin).

Outside the limits of the Holy Land proper (cf. K. 170:18).

966. Chaselath tou Thabōr. Joshua 19:12; K. 174:11; L. 290:64.

Textual variant Chaselous (Greek) cf. K. 174:2 and K. 28:22.

967. Chōbal. I Kings 9:13; K. 174:13; L. 290:66.

Textual variant Chōbar (Greek).

Simple tribal border (cf. Joshua 19:27).

968. Chalab. Judges 1:31; K. 174:14; L. 290:67.

Textual variants: Chalobter and Chalath (Latin).

Simple biblical notation.

969. Chorra. I Kings 17:3; K. 174:16; L. 290:69.

Simple biblical notation and geography.

LXX has Chorrath for the Wadi. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Charith,
division or knowing" (110).

970. Chōtha. II Kings 17:24; K. 174:17; L. 290:70.

Outside the limits of the Holy Land proper (cf. K. 36:9, 10) for other regions
of Assyria.

971. Chōbar. Ezekiel 1:1; K. 174:18; L. 290:71. A River and also outside the
limits of the Holy Land proper and so doubly suspect as later addition.

Simple biblical notation and geography. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Chobar, heaviness or heavy or near choice" (130).

972. Charchamus. Jeremiah 46:2; K. 174:19; L. 290:72.

Outside the limits of the Holy Land proper. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Charchamos, group of sheep or recognize as if twigs" (126).

973. Chamōam. Jeremiah 41:17; K. 174:20; L. 290:73.

Textual variant Chamoar (Greek).

Simple biblical notation and geography. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Chamoan, his likeness" (126).

974. Chelōn (Elōn). Jeremiah 48:21; K. 174:21; L. 290:74.

Textual variant Aealon (Latin) (cf. K. 176:20).

Simple biblical notation.

975. Chamōs. Jeremiah 48:7; K. 174:22; L. 290:75.

Another idol. It is out of order and suspect double. For other idols see K.
36:15; K. 44:13; K. 58:9; K. 134:17; K. 138:19; K. 146:26 etc. and Appendix II).
In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chamos, assembly" (126).

976. Chōrazein. Matthew 11:21; K. 174:23; L. 290:77. No Gospel section is
indicated by division here. One Latin manuscript does have it.

Textual variant has 12 miles for two.

Two miles from Kapernaoun (K. 120:2) north of the lake are the ruins of Kh
Kerazeh which preserves the name. Deserted in the time of Eusebius and Jerome.
Jerome in Commentary on Isaiah puts Tiberias, Bethsaida, Capharnaum and Chorazin
all along the shore. Called "oppidum" in Latin (K. 10:25 and Appendix I). A
synagogue of early 2nd or 3rd century testifies of the rapid decline, it was
rebuilt in the 5th century A. D. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Chorazaim,
this my mystery" (135).

977. Cheimarrous Kedrōn. John 18:1; K. 174:26; L. 290:80. A wadi in Jerusalem
(cf. K. 70:2 and K. 118:11).

SECTION O

PENTATEUCH 978. ōn. Exodus 1:11; K. 176:3; L. 290:84.

Outside the limits of the Holy Land. Along with Soēnē one of the most southern
cities mentioned in the Onomasticon.

Summary of biblical information (Genesis 41:25). The form of the name is from
the LXX. It is not in the MT. There is some debate therefore on its construction
(cf. K. 94:13). In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "On, work or sorrow" (77).

979. ōr. Numbers 20:22, 28; K. 176:7; L. 291:88.

Mt. near Petra (K. 142:7). Cf. K. 126:19 and K. 46:14 for Aaron's death. See K.
150:23 for Mt. Seir. Josephus Antiquities IV, 4, 7 tells of Aaron's death up on
the mountain range that encloses Petra. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Or,
passionate" (77) and "Or, light" (83).

980. ōbōth. Numbers 21:10; K. 176:9; L. 291:91.

Simple listing of station.

JOSUE and KINGS 981. Osa. Joshua 19:29; K. 176:11; L. 291:93.

Simple tribal listing. Only here are Joshua and Kings combined as a section
heading. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names "Osa, hope" (96).

982. Oram. Joshua 19:38; K. 176:12; L. 291:94.

Simple tribal listing.

983. Opheir. I Kings 9:28; K. 176:13; L. 291:95.

Outside of the Holy Land proper (cf. Genesis 10:29). This quotation of Josephus
Antiquities I, 6, 4 is repeated in K. 82:2 and K. 150:14.

Probably the same site as in K. 160:19 after the LXX. In Interpretation of
Hebrew Names "Ofir, weakening" (112).

984. ōn. Hosea 10:5; K. 176:18; L. 291:00.

Textual variants: Aun and Auna (Greek).

Probably the same as Bēthaun (K. 50:24) an epithet possibly for Baithēl (K.
40:20 cf. Joshua 21:15). Hexaplaric information on the meaning. In
Interpretation of Hebrew Names "On, useless or sorrow or labor or injustice"
(122).

985. ōlō. Joshua 21:15; K. 176:20; L. 291:02.

Simple biblical notation (cp. K. 174:21).

986. ōronaeim. Jeremiah 48:34; K. 176:21; L. 291:03.

Textual variants: Oranaim and Ornaim (Latin).

Simple biblical notation and geography. In Interpretation of Hebrew Names
"Oronaim, opening of the wall" (128). This text was transcribed by Noel Wolf,
2005. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 8: CONCERNING THE PLACE NAMES IN SACRED SCRIPTURE - TRANSLATION
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, Onomasticon (1971) Translation. pp. 1-75.

CONCERNING THE PLACE NAMES IN SACRED SCRIPTURE.

[Translated by C. Umhau Wolf]

• Preface by Eusebius

• Latin preface by Jerome

Alpha

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Beta

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Gamma

•

Genesis

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Delta

•

Genesis

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Epsilon

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

• Joshua (of Naue)

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Zeta

•

Genesis

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Kings

Eta

•

Genesis

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

Theta

•

Genesis

•

Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

Iota

•

Genesis

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Kappa

•

Genesis

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

Lambda

•

Genesis

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

Mu

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

Nu

•

Genesis

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

• The Gospels

Xi

•

Joshua

Omicron

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

•

Joshua

Pi

• The Pentateuch

Rho

• The Pentateuch

•

Joshua

•

Kings

Sigma

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Judges

•

Kings

Tau

•

Genesis

•

Joshua

•

Judges

• The Gospels

Phi

•

Genesis

•

Exodus

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Judges

•

Kings

Chi

•

Genesis

• Numbers and Deuteronomy

•

Joshua

•

Kings

Omega

• The Pentateuch

• Joshua and Kings CONCERNING THE PLACE NAMES IN SACRED SCRIPTURE by Eusebius of
Pamphilia, Bishop of Caesaria Palestine As a kind of preface to the work
proposed by you, O Paulinus, holy man of God, I have previously presented the
subjects suggested. First I translated into the Greek language the names of the
nations throughout the world which have Hebrew names in the sacred Scriptures.
Then on the basis of the whole Bible I composed a map of ancient Judea and
defined the allotments of the twelve tribes within it. Furthermore, using the
"blueprint" as it were, provided by Scripture, I sketched a representation of
their ancient and renowned capital, i.e., Jerusalem, and of its temple with
appended notes of its areas.

Now, in this work and in accordance with those things previously prepared for
the usefulness of the completed project, I continue your proposal and set forth
the names of the cities and villages mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures in their
native language, of what sort of territory they were, and whether our
contemporaries call them by the same name as the ancients or otherwise. I shall
gather the materials sought from all of the inspired Scripture, but for easy
reference I shall organize in alphabetic order each of the citations scattered
among the readings.

Latin Preface by Jerome Eusebius who received his cognomen from the sainted
martyr Pampilius had already written the following:

1) The Ten books of the Church History 2) The Canons of the Times (which we
rendered into Latin)

3) Names of the various Nations (in which he explained how these were formally
spoken among the Hebrews and are now spoken) 4) Description of the land of Judea
and the lots of the separate tribes 5) Also a Plan of Jerusalem and its temple
with a most succinct description

Finally he worked on this little book and gathered together for us from the Holy
Scriptures almost all the names of cities, mountains, rivers, villages and other
places indicating if they still exist, are unchanged or are in part corrupted.
And so we have translated the study of this remarkable man according to the
order of the alphabet in Greek. We have left unchanged those proper records we
have not seen, but have changed a few. As formerly in the preface to The Canons
of the Times, I debated whether I should be only a translator or an author of a
new work. Especially because someone hardly instructed in the language dared to
translate this same book into the Latin language which is not really Latin. The
wise reader will quickly discover the ignorance of him by comparison with what
we have translated. Even though I do not claim for myself eminence, nevertheless
I believe I can surpass those who are farmers.

SECTION A

GENESIS

Ararat, Armenia.1 Scripture says that the ark came to rest (after the deluge) in
the mountains of Ararat. It is asserted that the remains of the ark are still
shown on the mountains of Armenia. Jeremiah also mentions Ararat in his vision
against Babylon. In the first book of the Antiquities of the Jews Josephus
likewise sets forth the story of the place. Upon the testimony of non-scriptural
witnesses he derives this information:

"Noah, thus learning that the earth was delivered from the flood, waited yet
seven days, and then let the animals out of the ark, went forth himself with his
family, sacrificed to God and feasted with his household. The Armenians call
that spot the Landing-Place, for it was there that the ark came safe to land,
and they show the relics of it to this day. This flood and the ark are mentioned
by all who have written histories of the barbarians. Among these is Berosus the
Chaldean who in his description of the events of the flood writes somewhere as
follows: 'It is said, moreover, that a portion of the vessel still survives in
Armenia on the mountains of the Cordyaeans, and that persons carry off pieces of
the bitumen, which they use as talismans.' These matters are also mentioned by
Hieronymus the Egyptian, author of the ancient history of Phoenicia, by Mnaseas
and by many others. Nicolas of Damascus in his 96th book relates the story as
follows: 'There is above the country of Minyas in Armenia a great mountain
called Baris, where, as the story goes, many refugees found safety at the time
of the flood, and one man, transported upon an ark, grounded upon the summit,
and of the timber were for long preserved; this might well be the same man of
whom Moses, the Jewish legislator wrote.'"

Achad.2 City of King Nebrod in Babylon. [According to the Hebrews this is said
to be the Mesopotamia city which today is called Nisibis. It was once besieged
and captured by Lucullus the Roman consul and within a few years was given over
by Emperor Iovianus to the Persians.]

Aggai (Ai).3 To the west of Bethel. They are not far distant from one another.
Bethel is now located on the left side of the road going from Neapolis to
Jerusalem at about the 12th milestone from Jerusalem. Bethel even now exists. [A
church has also been built there where Jacob slept on the way to Mesopotamia
whence this place was given the name Bethel which means "house of God". But for
Aggai, a deserted place, there are shown only ruins. This is also called in
Scripture Gai. [It should be remarked that there is no letter G in Hebrew but it
was called Ai, written with the letter called by them Ain.]

Astarōth Karnaein.4 Territory of the giants situated above (on the ridge). Sodom
which Chodollagomor captured (destroyed). Today there are two towns (forts) of
this name in Batabia or Beloloun the cities of Adara and Abila, about nine miles
apart.

Arbō. [Arboc.5 In our codex written corruptly as Arboc, Arbo is the reading in
the Hebrew. That means "four" since this is where the three patriarchs Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob along with the "great Adam" are buried. So in the book of Josue.
Perhaps some suppose this tradition that he was buried in the location of
Calgary.] "That is, Hebron" now a large town which was formerly a metropolis of
the foreigners where giants dwelled. Afterwards the capital of David. It was
allotted to the tribe of Juda and was a Levitical city and one of the cities of
refuge. It is twenty-two miles south of Jerusalem. The oak of Abraham [which is
also Mamrē, was pointed out up to the time of Constantine, emperor of Rome] and
his tomb are seen there [a church has been constructed there by us]. The
terebinth where angels were entertained by Abraham is openly revered by the
people (in the vicinity as a religious place). Formerly it was called Arbo but
later Hebron after Hebron one of the sons of Caleb according to Paralipomenon.

Ailam (Ailath).6 Is situated at the extremity of Palestine between the southern
desert and the Red Sea where cargo was transported by ship from both Egypt and
India. A detachment of the Tenth Roman Legion is stationed there. Properly
called Aila today (it was formerly pronounced Ailath) from whence the ancient
people the Ailamites whose king was Chodollagomor [who is mentioned in the Acts
of the Apostles]. Another Ailam of the foreigners (of Palestine) is noted in
Kings.

Adama.7 One of the five cities of Sodom which was destroyed with the others.

Asasan Thamar (Asasonthamar).8 Where the Amorrites dwelled whom Chodollagomor
destroyed is located near the wilderness of Cades. It is said there is a village
Tharmara (a fortThamara) one day journey from Mapsis on the road from Hebron to
Ailam. Today there is a garrison (Roman fort) of soldiers there."

Aloua (Allus).9 Region of the princes of Edom (the Edomite) which is now in the
Gebalene near the city of Petra.

Ainan (Aenam).10 "On the road to Thamna." Now Ainan is a deserted place near
Thamna which today is a large populous town situated between Jerusalem and
Diospolis. There is a spring near the place said to be Ainan beside which an
idol used to be worshiped by the inhabitants. [There is a spring at the above
mentioned place Aena whence Aenan, that is "spring" gets its name, where a
strange, large idol is revered by the inhabitants. But the Hebrews declare that
Aenan does not designate a place but a crossroad where a clear prospect is
required to choose one road from another.]

[Ailōn Atad (Areaatad).11 "Which is beyond the Jordan" where they mourned Jacob.
The place is three miles from Jericho and two from the Jordan. It is now called
Bethagla which is interpreted "place of circling" because there (according to
custom) they were circling in lamentation over Jacob.]

EXODUS

Ailim (Aelim).12 "Where there were twelve springs of water and seventy palm
trees." A station of the children of Israel on the desert (to which Moses came
after crossing the Red Sea).

[Ailous (Aelim).13 Station of the children of Israel in the desert (in the
desert where the children of Israel made camp).] NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Aserōth.14 Part of the desert where "Mariam and Aaron spoke against Moses." Once
the Avvim dwelt in Aseroth as far as (the city) Gaza. [But rather this is not
called Aseroth but Aserim in Hebrew.] Asemōna.15 Station of the children of
Israel in the desert.

Aētharim.16 For Aquila and Symmachus (interpreted) "road of the spies." There
"the Canaanite who lived in the Negreb" (south) came and fought the Israelite in
the desert.

Aiē or Achelgai.17 Symmachus (interpreted) "on the hills." It is said to be
"fronting Moab" (now) Areopolis, "on the east."

Arnōn.18 [A high cliff] "which extends from the territory of the Amorrites"
situated between "Moab and the Amorrites" it is also the "border of Moab." Which
is Areopolis in Arabic. Today a place called Arnon is pointed out by the nearby
inhabitants extending north to Areopolis. Units of soldiers are spread out there
to guard it because of the dangers in that place (soldiers from many forts are
spread out because of the many bloody and formidable invasions). Once Sehon,
king of the Amorrites, took it from the Moabites. (Once this belonged to the
Moabites but Sehon, king of the Amorrites, waged war against it and took it.)
Afterwards it was given to the children of Israel who took possession of the
territory beyond the Jordan reaching from the Arnon to Mt.Hermon and Lebanon.
(The territory of the children of Israel beyond the Jordan beginning at the
Arnon extends up to Mt.Hermon and Lebanon.)

Ar.19 Place (or city) on the Arnon which according to the Septuagint LXX
(hereafter LXX) [the Septuagint interprets with a long vowel] Er.

Aēsimōn.20 Place in the desert [in short this word itself signifies arid land or
desert].

Abelsattein (Abelsattim).21 Place in the desert "to the west of Moab" (south).

Azōr (Iazer).22 "Boundary of the children of Ammon" (border city of Ammon) which
is called Philadelphia now. It along with Philadelphia delimits the region of
the Amorrites. There is eight miles (about) from Philadelphia a village Azer
(Iazer) remaining today.

Aroēr.23 "It is on the edge of the Wadi Arnon." A city of Moab which the Emin,
an ancient people, once possessed, which the children of Lot, that is those from
Moab, seized [and overthrew the former inhabitants]. It is today pointed out
perched on the brow of the mountain where the torrent flows through the gorge
(abruptly) to the Dead Sea. Aroer was given by lot to the tribe of Gad and is
said to be "toward" (opposite) "Rabba."

Astarōth.24 The ancient city of Og [king of Basan] where giants dwelled. It was
given to the tribe of Manasse. It is located in the Batanea six miles from Adraa
a city of Arabia. Adraa is twenty-five miles from Bostra. Note also the previous
Astaroth Karaein.

Agrou Skopia.25 (Lookout). Mountain of Moab to which Balac [son of Sepphor]
brought Balaam "on the peak of cursing" overlooking the Dead Sea. It is still
pointed out not far from the Arnon. (Diviner to curse against Israel above the
precipice which because it falls quite strongly is called "cleft" and impinges
over the Dead Sea not far from the Arnon.)

Arabōth Mōab.26 Where the people were numbered a second time. Aquila "on the
plain of Moab." Symmachus "on the field of Moab." "It is on the Jordan opposite
Jericho." A place is pointed out now near Mt.Phogor which is located on the road
from Livias to Hesebon of Arabia opposite Jericho.

Araba. Aquila 27 "In the plain." Symmachus "in the field." Theodotion "in the
west." Symmachus also once "uncultivatable."

Astarōth (Ataroth).28 Ancient city of the Amorrites in Peraia [across the
Jordan] which was given by lot to the tribe of Gad. Adtaroth is also the name of
the son of Salma or Salomon according to Paralipomenon.

Astarōth Sōphar (Ataroth Sofan).29 This is also a city of the tribe of Gad.

Arad.30 City of the Amorrites near the desert of Cades. There is now (shown) a
village four miles from Malaatha, and twenty from Hebron. Tribe of Juda.

Asemōna.31 A city in the desert south of Judaea. It determines the border
between Egypt and the sea [and the lot of] the tribe of Juda. Note another
[Asemōna above], a camp [of the children of Israel].

Akrabbein (Acrabbi).32 Eastern boundary of Judaea. Tribe of Juda. There is a
large village nine miles east of Neapolis on the road descending via the
so-called Akrabattine toward the Jordan at Jericho. The Akrabbein is said to be
also the region of the Amorrites from which according to Judges "the tribe of
Nephthali did not drive out" the heathen.

Asadadda (Asadada).33 Northern boundary of Judaea.

[Arad.34 This is also a boundary of Judaea], twenty miles south of Hebron. Note
another above.

Asarēnan (Asarenam).35 Northern boundary of Judaea.

Aserna (Asernai).36 This is also a boundary of Judaea.

Arbēla.37 Eastern boundary of Judaea. There is a village of Arbela across the
Jordan in the region of Pella, a city of Palestine. Another Arbela lies in the
Great Plain nine mile north from Legeon.

Aulōn.38 [Not Greek as one might think since this is a Hebrew word] The Great
long plain is still called the Aulon. It is bordered on both sides by mountains
[and is very long] extending from Lebanon to the desert of Pharan. In the Aulon
[that is the valley plain] is the famous city [Tiberias] and nearby the lake,
Scythopolis, Jericho and the Dead Sea and their surrounding regions. The Jordan
flows through the midst of the whole region (which river) arising from the
springs near Paneas and disappearing into the Dead Sea.

Amalēkitis (Amalecitis).39 Territory in the desert to the south of Judaea beyond
the city called Petra going toward Aila. The Scripture emphasizes this, "Amalek
lived in the region of the Negeb (south)." From this region other Canaanites
came and fought the children of Israel in the desert. The same Scripture
testifies "The Amalecites and Canaanites are living in the valley."

Araba.40 [Aquila "plain." Symmachus] "field." Note above also. There is a
village called Araba in the district of Diocaesarea [which was formerly called
Safforinia] and another about three miles west of Scythopolis.

Amman.41 This is now Philadelphia, a famous city of Arabia. "The Raphaim
formerly lived" there. The sons of Lot drove out the inhabitants who lived there
in Amman before them.

Argob.42 Territory of the kingdom of Og [king of Basan] above the Jordan which
was taken [by lot] by the half tribe of Manasse. There is even now a village
called Erga near Gerash, a city of Arabia, fifteen miles to the west. It is
interpreted by Symmachus "outskirts."

Asēdōth.43 City of the Amorrites which was given [by lot] to the tribe of Ruben.
It is called Asedoth Phasga which is "hewn in rock" (in our tongue "cut away").

Abareim (Abarim).44 The mountain on which Moses died. It is said to be "Mt.Nebo
which is in the land of Moab facing Jericho "beyond the Jordan on the summit of
Phasga." The very same names are pointed out when one goes from Livias to
Hesebon near Mt.Phogor itself which still bears that name, from which the
territory is also even now called Phasga.

Auōth Iaeir (Avothiair).45 [Which is interpreted "home of Iair."] It is in Basan
(where there are sixty villages in Mt.Galaad). There is a village Iaeir in the
mountains of Galaad which was taken (by lot) by the half tribe of Manasse. It is
now in the place called Gonia (Golan) in the (region of) Batanaea.

JOSHUE

Antilibanos (Antilibanus).46 What is beyond the Lebanon to the East toward
(near) region of Damascus (is called Antilibanus). Tribe of Manasse (which the
tribe of Manasse received by lot).

Azēka (Azeca).47 City of the Chanaanites to which Josue pursued the five kings.
It was given to the tribe of Juda. There is even now a village called Azeka
between Eleutheropolis and Jerusalem.

Ailōm (Aialon).48 Ravine. Where "the moon" stood when Josue prayed, near the
village which is even today called Aialon, three miles from Bethel to the east.
It is near Gabaa and Rama, cities of Saul. [The Hebrews assert the town of
Aialon to be near Nicopolis in the second mile on the road to Jerusalem.]

Achōr.49 The valley called Achor [in Hebrew emecachor which means valley of
confusion or violence because of the confusion or violence in Israel] where they
stoned Achor (Achan), who stole what was under ban from whom Achor is named. It
lies north of Jericho and is even now the name by those nearby [by the
inhabitants. Mentioned by Osee the prophet.] Asēdōth.50 This is another city
[not that which has the same name above] which Josue fought, killing its king.

Asōr.51 City of King Jabin which Josue burned because it was alone "chief of all
the kingdoms of the foreigners (Philistines)." There is even now another village
called Asor in the eastern region of Ascalon. Give [by lot] to the tribe of
Juda. Scripture also knows the new Asor [calling it so to distinguish it from
the old].

Aermōn.52 Territory of the Hevites captured by Josue. [The Hebrews properly as
the reading indicates, affirm that Mt. Hermon is near Paneas which was once held
by the Hevites and the Amorrites, from where in summer delicacies of snow are
brought down now to Tyre.]

Alak (Aalac).53 Aquila "division of the mountain." Symmachus "smooth mountain"
[that is clear or slippery]. A mountain above Paneas.

Aermōn.54 Mountain of the Amorrites [which is reported] the Phoenicians called
Sanior and the Amorrites called it "This Sanir." They say it is the mountain
even now called Mt. Hermon which is revered as a shrine by the gentiles (on its
summit is a wonderful temple where the people worship) opposite (near) Paneas
and Lebanon. To the east is the boundary of the inheritance of the children of
Israel beyond the Jordan (extends) from Mt.Hermon to the Wadi Arnon.

Anōb.55 A city which Josue fought. There is even now a village near Diospolis,
four miles to the east called Betoannaba. [Others however affirm it located
eight miles from there and is called Bethannaba.]

Asdōd.56 Which is also (now called) Azotus. The Enacim remained in it (giants as
they were called). Today it is a famous city of Palestine. It was in the lot of
the tribe of Juda.

Ader.57 A city which Josue fought, killing its king.

Aphek (Afec).58 A city which Josue also fought, killing its king.

Aksaph (Acsaf).59 This king Josue also fought. It is reported there is a village
(called) Chasalous in the plain below Mt.Thabor eight miles from Diocaesarea.

Akkarōn (Accaron).60 (In) tribe of Dan [or as I determine in the tribe of Juda].
"It is counted among the Chanaanites." One city of the five satrapies of the
heathen (Palestine) which was also allotted to the tribe of Judah. But they did
not possess it since they did not destroy the heathen (never were able to expel
the original inhabitants from it). There is also a large village of Jews called
Accaron between Azotus and Iamnia to the east. [Some believe Accaron to be the
Tower of Strato afterwards called Caesarea.]

Azōtos (Azotus).61 Which is called (above) Asdod. The (not ignoble) city of
Palestine still remains. Formerly one of the five satraps of the heathen which
was also allotted to Juda, but they did not possess it because they did not
destroy the heathen (were not able to expel the original inhabitants).

Askalōn (Ascalon).62 A renowned city of Palestine. Formerly one of the five
satrapies (of the heathen) which was allotted to Judah but they did not possess
it because they did not destroy the heathen (were not able to overcome its
inhabitants).

Apheka (Afeca).63 Boundary "of the Amorrites" beyond the Jordan which was given
to the tribe of Ruben. There is now a large village (castle) called Aphec near
Hippos a city of Palestine.

Algad (Agad).64 (Located) "at (the foot of) Mt.Hermon."

Aimath (Aemoth).65 City of the valley was given to Ruben. They say there is now
a village Amathous in the lower Peraea (beyond the Jordan), south of Pella.
Another village near Gadaranis (named) Emmath where there is hot water (where
hot water flows forth) for hot baths. In Kings it is said, "from the entrance of
Emath unto the sea of the Arabia" (that is wilderness) which is the Dead Sea. [I
have however discovered upon investigation a city of Coele Syria called Aemath
which is now called Epifania in the Greek tongue.] Ammon.66 Beyond the Jordan.
City of the tribe of Gad. It is Amman or Philadelphia, a famous city of Arabia.

Adira.67 (In) the tribe of Juda near the desert. There is another village in the
region of Diospolis near Thamnitike which region itself is called after the
village Thamna.

Akarka.68 Symmachus "the ground." A village near the desert. Tribe of Juda.

Achōr.69 (In) the [tribe of Juda. Note also above.

Adommim].70 (Lot of) the tribe of Juda. (Once) a little village, now deserted.
The place is called Maledamim on the road going down from Jerusalem to Jericho.
A garrison is there. [In Greek "the ascent of blood." The Latin also calls it
the ascent of red or redness for the blood of those so often poured out by the
soldiers. It is also on the boundary of the tribes of Juda and Benjamin. A fort
of soldiers is located there to help travelers. This is the place of the wounded
and bloodied of which the Lord speaks in the Parable of the one going down from
Jerusalem to Jericho.] Amam.71 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Aser.72 (In) the tribe of Juda. There is now a large village called Aser on the
road from Azotus to Ascalon.

Asarsoual (Asarsual).73 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Ain.74 (In) the tribe of Juda. (City) set aside for priests. There is now a
village called Bethanin two miles from the terebinth (that is the tent of
Abraham) and four from Hebron.

Asthaōl.75 (In) the tribe of Juda. There is (remains today) now a (little)
village called Astha between Azotus and Ascalon.

Asna.76 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Adolam (Adollam).77 (In) the tribe of Juda. A large (not small) village (called
by that name) is now ten miles east of Eleutheropolis.

Adiathaim (Adithaim).78 (In the lot of) the tribe of Juda. It is reported that
there is a village Adia near Gaza and another Adatha near Diospolis to the east.

Adasa.79 (In) the tribe of Juda. There is now even a village near Gophna. [But I
wonder how Gufna region can possibly be in the tribe of Juda. Evidently it
should be as again in the Book of Josue I is given to the lot of Ephraim.]
Ather.80 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Asan.81 (In) the tribe of Juda. There is now also a village called Bethasan in
the region of Jerusalem sixteen miles (in the fifteenth) to the west.

Asema.82 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Achzeib (Agzif).83 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Anab.84 (In) the tribe of Juda. It is even now in the in the boundary of
Eleutheropolis. Also another large village of the Jews called Ania in the Daroma
nine miles south Hebron.

Asthemō (Asthemof).85 (In) the tribe of Juda. This village (of the Jews) is also
in the Daroma north of Aneon.

Aneim (Anim).86 (In) the tribe of Juda. Another Anaia near the former (of which
we spoke above) now happens to be wholly Christian (all its inhabitants are
Christians) to the east of the first.

Aphaka (Afeca).87 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Amata (Ammata).88 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Arebba.89 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Archiatarōth (Ataroth).90 City of the tribe of Joseph [near Rama in the tribe of
Joseph].

Atarōth.91 (City of) the tribe of Ephraim. There is now also a village Ataros
four miles north of Sebaste (it is said).

Adar.92 City of the tribe of Ephraim.

Asēr.93 City of the tribe of Manasse. There is also now (pointed out) a village
called thus on the road (descending) from Neapolis to Scythopolis in the
fifteenth mile near the main highway.

Atarōth.94 City of the lot (tribe) of Benjamin. There are now two Ataroths near
Jerusalem.

Anathōth.95 City or the lot of Benjamin. Set aside for priests near Jerusalem at
the third milestone. The home of Jeremia the prophet.

Adar (Addar).96 City of the lot of Benjamin.

Ailmōn (Aelomon).97 City or lot (tribe) of Benjamin. Set aside for priests.

Amekkasis (Amez-casis).98 City or lot of Benjamin [that is valley of Casis in
tribe of Benjamin].

[Aueim (Avim).99 (In tribe of) lot of Benjamin.] Aphra.100 (In tribe of) lot of
Benjamin. There is also even now a village Aphra (in of Bethel) five miles to
the east.

Ammōenia (Ammoeniam).101 (In the tribe of) lot of Benjamin.

Aphnei (Afni).102 (In tribe of) lot of Benjamin.

Alph.103 Lot of Benjamin. (This entry is missing in Latin.) Arēm (Arim).104 (In
tribe of) lot of Benjamin. It in now a village near Diospolis called Bethariph.

Amsa.105 (In tribe of) lot of Benjamin.

Asar.106 (In tribe of) lot of Simeon.

Anan.107 (In tribe of) lot of Simeon.

Amarchabob.108 (In tribe of) lot of Simeon.

Ain.109 (In tribe of) lot of Juda or Simeon. Priestly city.

Asenna.110 (In tribe of) lot of Simeon.

Ammathar.111 (In tribe of) lot of Zabulon.

Anoua (Anua).112 (In tribe of) lot of Zabulon. There is another village Anoua on
the road from Neapolis to Jerusalem at the fifteenth (tenth) milestone.

Anathōn.113 (In the tribe of) lot of Zabulon.

Acheselōth (Achaseloth).114 City of (tribe of) lot of Issachar. They say there
is a village (called) Chaalous in the plain by Mt.Tabor eight miles east of
Diocaesarea (as we said above).

Aiphraim (Aefraim).115 City of (tribe of) lot of Issachar. There is a village
Aphraia called Aphraia six miles north of Legeōn.

Anerth (Anereth).116 (In) lot of (tribe of) Issachar.

Aims (Aemes).117 (In) lot of (tribe of) Issachar.

Achsaph (Achsaf).118 (In tribe of) lot of Aser.

Alimelech.119 Lot of Aser.

Amod (Amath).120 (In tribe of) lot of Aser.

Abdōn.121 (In tribe of) lot of Aser. [City separated to Levites.]

Aneiēl (Aniel).122 (In tribe of) lot of Aser. There is a village (named)
Baitonnaia, fifteen miles east of Caesarea, lying in the mountains were there
are said to be healing baths.

Achran.123 (In tribe of) city of Aser.

Armmōn.124 (In tribe of) lot of Aser.

Akchō (Accho).125 It is now called Ptolemais. Lot of Aser where Aser "did not
destroy" the heathen (drive out the former inhabitants).

[Achzeiph (Achzif).126 (In tribe of) lot of Aser, from which they did not
destroy the heathen] (in which the foreigners remained). It is Ekdippa, nine
miles from Ptolemais, on the road to Tyre.

Amma.127 Lot of Aser.

Aphek (Afec).128 Lot of Aser from which they did not destroy the heathen (in
which the early inhabitants remained).

Ademmei (Ademme).129 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Asedeim (Aseddim).130 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Amath.131 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Adami.132 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Asōr.133 Lot of Nephthali. (It is written) the King of Assyria also destroyed
this.

Azanōth.134 Boundary of Nephthali. (Now there is also) a village in the plain in
the region of Diocaesarea.

Ailōn.135 City of the lot of Dan. Separated to the Levites. A village of Alon is
near Nicopolis. Before "Ailon" Origen (Septuagint) interprets "where there were
bears."

JUDGES

Arad.136 City where "the children of Iothor (omitted pr. n.), of Iobab
father-in-law of Moses" dwelled in the midst of Israel.

Ared.137 Spring beside which Gadeon camped.

Arisōth.138 City of Sisara, general of Jabin. Tabis is now a great city
(village) beyond the Jordan six miles from the city of Pella on the road to
Geresh.

[Ares.139 Ascet of Hares. Aquila "thicket." Symmachus "mountain."] Aroueir
(Aruir).140 Where Jephte fought. It is a village in the mountains six miles
north of Jerusalem.

Arima.141 Where Abimelech was crowned.

Aialon (Aialin).142 City "in the land of Zabulon." Home of Elon the judge of
Israel.

Abel.143 Of the vineyards. Where Jephte fought. Land of the children of Amman.
There is even now a village Abela, a fertile vineyard, (to be seen in the
seventh) six miles from Philadelphia. Also another famous wine producing city
called Abela is twelve miles east of Gadara. And there is (still) a third Abela
of the Phoenicians (in Phoenicia) between Damascus and Paneas.

KINGS

Armthem Seipha (Sofim).144 City of Elcana and Samuel. It is situated (in the
region of Thamna) near Diospolis. The home of Joseph who was from Arimathea in
the Gospels.

Abenezer.145 A stone of help (hearing or of help). Place where "the heathen
carried away the ark of the covenant" between Jerusalem and Ascalon near the
village of Bethaamas.

Aphesdomeim (Afesdomim).146 Where Saul fought. Aquila (interprets) "on the
boundary of Dommein."

Anegb (Annegeb).147 Aquila "south." Symmachus "south."

Arith.148 Where David dwelled. There is a village (named) Arath west of
Jerusalem.

Aialim.149 Aquila (translates) "of the deer." Theodotion "the stones of the
deer."

Aendōr.150 (Which is "in Jezrahel" where the children of Israel prepared for
battle. There is now a large town Endor four miles south of Mt.Thabor.

Aphek (Afec).151 Near Endor of Jezrahel where the war broke out against Saul.

Arma.152 Where David sent some of "the spoils."

Athach.153 Where David sent some of the "spoils."

Amma.154 "By the wilderness road of Gabaon."

Aeththam Adassai (Aethon Adasai).155 (Which for Symmachus is (interpreted) "the
lower road."

Alōn Area Orna.156 This is Jerusalem.

Assour.157 City in Judaea which Solomon built.

Abelmaelai (Abelmaula).158 One of the capital cities of Solomon. Home of Eliseus
(the prophet). There is now a village called Bethmaela (Bethmaula) in the Aulon
[of which we have spoken above], ten miles from Scythopolis (to the south).
There is also a (little village Abelmea seen on the road from (between) Neapolis
to (and) Scythopolis.

Auothiaeir (Avothiair).159 One of the capital cities of Solomon.

Ailath.160 "On the shore of the red sea in the land of Edom." Note above Ailas
also.

Ailōth (Aeloth).161 Azarias built this.

Ainda (Aenda).162 Asa (the king) fought against this (and overthrew it).

Asiōn Babai (Asiongaber).163 (Which is also Asion Gaber. There the ships of
Josaphat were broken (the fleet was destroyed). It is said to be Aisla (Essia)
quite near Aila beside the Red Sea.

Alae (Alle), Abor, Gozan.164 (Names) of rivers in the territory of the Medes on
whose mountains Israel was resettled (was led away captive).

Abena (Abana).165 River of Damascus.

Aophsith (Aofsithe).166 Or Aphousoth which Aquila (understands) "in freedom."

Aian.167 The "king of Assyria" captured this.

Aia.168 [Place in the territory of Assyria.

Ainath] (Ameth).169 Territory of Assyria.

Asimath (Asima).170 [City in the land of Judaea which] those from Aimath (Emath)
built there.

Arkem (Arcem).171 According to Josephus this is Petra the famous city of
Palestine.

Adramelech.172 Assyrian idol. The same as Anemelech (Latin omits this phrase)
[which the Samaritans worshiped] which were the gods of the Samaritans.

Arōnieim (Aroniim).173 A road (according to) Isaia. Aquila Oronaim, Symmachus
Aranneim. In the vision "against the Moabs."

[Agalleim (Agallim).174 Isaia (also mentions this) in his vision "against the
Moabites."] There is now the village Aigalleim (Aegalim) eight miles south of
Areopolis.

Aileim (Aelim).175 Well of Deimmon (Dimon). [This place is also recorded in]
Isaia in the vision "against the Moabites."

Arina (omitted in Latin) or also Ariel.176 Aquila and Symmachus "lion of God."
It is asserted that this is (the same as) Areopolis since the inhabitants of
Areopolis still call their idol Ariel worshiping Ares (that is Mars) from whom
the city (supposedly) is named. [It seems to be, however, that as a consequence
of the prophetic text Ariel signifies allegorically Jerusalem or the temple
itself, and that is the lion of God who bears the rule strongly and powerfully.
Concerning this I speak more fully in the book Hebrew Questions.] Adama.177 (In
Isaia). Aquila and Symmachus "ground," Theodotion (interprets) "land."

Agros (Ager).178 Of the fullers. According to Isaia. The place is pointed out
now in the suburbs of Jerusalem.

[Asedek (Asedec).179 Isaia the prophet predicts the future of this place in
Egypt. Remember, however, that in Hebrew this name should be written Aares which
is dryness and some interpret "'in the sun," but others translate "in the clay"
probably designating either Heliopolis or Ostracinas. But these disputed matters
are discussed more fully in the book Hebrew Questions.]

Arphad (Arfad).180 City of Damascus against which the King of Assyria fought.
(as it is written) in Isaia, Jeremia and Kings.

Anaeougaua (Aneugaua).181 In Isaia. Aquila [Ane and Gaua]. Symmachus "rouse up"
and "humiliate." [Perhaps the U syllable in the middle of the word should be
interpreted as the conjunction "and."] Also in Kings (we read about this also in
Kings).

Armenia.182 (In) Isaia (Which is) Ararat. Sarasa (Latin omits).

Asel (Asael).183 Zachariah mentions this.

Anamaēl (Anameel).184 Tower of Jerusalem [as written in the book of] Zachariah.

Asademōth (Assaremoth).185 In Jeremia. In Hebrew "of Sademoth" (is written).
Aquila "the suburbs."

Aeniōth.186 In Jeremia. Aquila "workshop" (or shop).

Alōth (Alaoth).187 In Jeremia. (For which) in Hebrew Louith (Luith is written).

Aitham (Aethan).188 In Jeremia. (Which) Aquila (interprets) "firm" ("powerful").
Symmachus "ancient." THE GOSPELS

Akeldama (Aceldama).189 "Field of blood." in the Gospels. It is even now pointed
out on the north (south side) of Mt. Zion in Jerusalem.

Ainōn (Aenon).190 "Near Saleim" (Salim), where John baptized according to the
Gospel of John. The place is pointed out even now eight miles south of
Scythopolis near Salalm (Salim) and the Jordan.

SECTION B

GENESIS

Babel (Which is also) Babylon.191 Interpreted "confusion." It was the city of
Nemrod, king of the giants. Where the tongues of those who designed the tower
were confused, whose chief, Josephus affirms, had been Nimrod. He also is a
witness to the story about the tower which the Greek Sibylline taught, saying.
"The place in which they built the tower" is now called Babylon because of the
obvious confusion of their first language. The Hebrews called that confusion
Babel. [Because of the confusion of the speech of those who were building the
most high tower with all zeal since the Hebrews call confusion Babel.]
Concerning this tower and the dialects of man the Sibylline also recalls writing
thus. All mankind had one language but some built a high tower so they might
climb up to heaven by it. The gods sending winds overturned the tower and gave
to each his own (peculiar and unique) language. And so because of this the city
is called Babylon."

Baithēl (Bethel).192 It is now a village twelve miles from Jerusalem to the
right of the road going to Neapolis. It was formerly called Oulamma and also
Luza. It was given to (the lot of) the tribe of Benjamin, near Bethaven and Gai.
Josue also fought there killing the king. [Further, since some hold Ulammaus to
be the old form following the error of the Greek volume, they err greatly.
Surely the word is Hebrew and they appear to have confused the name of the city
with Ulam meaning "first," i.e., former, while Luza really means "almond." So
properly Bethel was first called Luza. Neither this nor Bathaun should be looked
for in another city since the Hebrews reckoned them to be Bethel. But from the
time of Jeroboam, son of Nabat, made there the Golden calves and the ten tribes
worshiped there, it has been called Betraun, i.e., "House of God." But we have
spoken of this fully in the book Hebrew Questions.]

Bala.193 "That is Sigor (Segor) It is now called Zoora (Zoara), the only one [of
the five cities] of the territory of Sodom [cursed by Lot] which escaped. It is
now inhabited (remains still) in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. A garrison of
(Roman) soldiers is (stationed) there (a peculiar people crowd in there.) The
Balsam and the date palm in the land surrounding it proves the ancient fertility
of the place. [Nothing is wrong because Segor is said to be Zoara, for they are
the same word for "very little" or "little." It is Segor in Hebrew and Zoara in
Syriac. Bala however is interpreted "swallowed." On this we have spoken fully in
the book: Hebrew Questions.] Belanos (Belanus).194 "Mourning" (i.e., oak) under
which Rebecca's nurse died and was buried.

Barad.195 "Between Cades and Barad the well of Agar is even now pointed out.

Bēthlehem.196 [City of David. In the lot of the] tribe of Juda (in which our
Lord and Savior was born.] It is six miles south of Jerusalem near the road
descending to Hebron. There the tombs of Jesse and David are pointed out. [One
mile farther. near the tower of Ader, which means "tower of the flock," is where
the shepherds heard prophetically of the Lord's birth before it happened. Also
near this same Bethlehem is pointed out the tomb of one of the kings of Judaea,
Archalaeus, which is reached first on a narrow path diverting from the main
highway to our cell.] Also called Bēthleem is the son of Efratha, (i.e. of Mary)
according to Paralipomenon (book it is fully spoken. Read the story well!).

EXODUS

Beelsephōn (Beelrefon).197 Station of the children of Israel near the desert
going out of Egypt through the waters, near the Red Sea.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY Banēiakan (Baneiacan).198 Station on the desert in the
journey of the people (children of Israel).

Bamōth.199 City of the Amorrites near the Jordan in the region of the Arnon
which the sons of Ruben took.

Basan.200 [Of which is written above] "Og, king of Basan." This is also the
Maachathites who are called Aouth Iaeir (that is resident Iair). And the (half-)
tribe of Manasse received it (by lot). Located in the Galaad, it is the region
of the Basanites which is now called Batanaia.

Beelphegōr (Baelfegor).201 (Which is interpreted "idol of shame." It is the idol
of Moab which is Baal on Mt.Phogor [which the Latins call Priapus. This is fully
discussed in the book Hebrew Questions].

Baian (Baean).202 City of the Amorrites which the sons of Ruben took.

Bēthnamran (Bethamnaram).203 Across the Jordan. Which the tribe of Gad built.
There is even now a village Bethnampris five miles north of Livias.

[Betharran.204 Across the Jordan. Which the tribe of Gad built.]

Beelmeōn.205 Across the Jordan. Which the sons of Ruben built. There is a large
village near the hot waters of Baara [where the water springs freely from the
earth] called Beelmaous of Arabia, located nine miles from Hesebon. Eliseus the
prophet came from here.

Baal.206 Across the Jordan. City of the sons of Ruben.

Bouthan (Buthan).207 Station of the children of Israel in the desert which is
also (called) Aitham (Aetham).

Bēla.208 Eastern boundary of Judaea. Note also the above (named) Arbela.

Bosor.209 "In the desert," "across the Jordan," (given in the lot to) "the tribe
of Ruben," "east of Jericho," a priestly city of refuge. This is Bostra a
metropolis of Arabia. There is also another Bosor, city of Esau, now in the
hills of Idumea which Isaia mentions saying, "Who is this coming from Edom? The
one in red garments from Bosor?"

Bēroth.210 "Of the sons of Jakeim (Iacim)." Place in the desert where Aaron
died. It is pointed out (still today) ten miles from Petra on the summit of the
mountain.

JOSUE

Bounos.211 (That is hill) of foreskins. Place at Galgal where Josue circumcised
the people (of Israel). At the second mile from Jericho is pointed out even now
(today) the stones which were brought up out of the Jordan (as scripture
records).

Bēthōrōn.212 To where the (enemy) kings were pursued by Josue. Given (in lot) to
the sons of Joseph, that is Ephraim. There are two villages twelve miles from
Jerusalem on the road to Nicopolis, [of which the near] one called [Bethoron the
Lower] set apart for the Levites.

Barnē.213 This is Cades Barne, on the desert which extends up to the city of
Petra.

Baalgad.214 In the plain "of the Lebanon at the foot of Mt.Hermon. Josua also
captured this.

Bethphogor (Bethfogor).215 Across the Jordan. City of the sons of Ruben near
Mt.Phogor, opposite Jericho, six miles above Livias.

Bēthasimouth (Bethsimuth).216 Place of (home of) Isimouth. [There is even now
(up to today a village Ismouth] opposite Jericho, ten miles to the south near
the Dead Sea.

Bērōth (Beeroth).217 At the foot (the hill) Gabaon. There is now (pointed out
today) a village near Jerusalem on the road to Nicopolis (Neapolis) at the
seventh milestone.

Botnia (Bothnim).218 Also Poteein (Latin omits). Across the Jordan, a city of
the tribe of Gad. There is even now (today) a place called by this same name.

[Bētharam.219 City of the tribe of Gad near the Jordan,] which (is called)
according to the Assyrians (Syrians) Bethramphtha. It is now called Livias [so
named by Herod in honor of Augustus].

Bethnema.220 Across the Jordan. City (of the tribe) of Gad near Livias.

[Bethagla.221 Tribe of Juda.] There is now a village called Agla ten miles from
Eleutheropolis on the road to Gaza. Also another (maritime) Bethagla by the sea
eight miles (from Gaza).

Bētharaba.222 (In) the tribe of Juda.]

Baal.223 "This is Carlatihjarim, city of Iarim," (i.e., town of the forest or as
some think city of Iarim) tribe of Juda. There is a village Cariathiareim
(today) on the road descending from Jerusalem to Diospolis at the tenth
milestone.

Baala.224 Also Bala (not in Latin). (In) tribe of Juda.

Balōth.225 (In) tribe of Juda.

Bethphalei (Bethfali).226 Also Bethelei (not in Latin). (In) tribe of Juda.

Bērsabee.227 (In) tribe of Juda or Simeon. There is now a large village twenty
miles south of Hebron in which a garrison of (Roman) soldiers is stationed. Here
the territory of Judaea begins extending up to Dan near Paneas. Bersabee is
interpreted "well of the oath" because there Abraham and Isaac swore (a pact of
alliance) with Abimelech. It is not necessary to move the cities reported in
Juda which are also found in Simeon and/or Benjamin. For since the tribe of Juda
excelled in war it is likely that through a successful action, in the final
description of the territory it was given a share of the inheritance allotted to
the other tribes. Scripture indicates quite clearly that Simeon lived in the
midst of Juda. [Once the men of the tribe of Juda were most warlike, strong and
numerous, dominating all as the chief tribe and so therefore the lots of other
tribes are occasionally reported as bound to it. Scripture also teaches quite
clearly that Simeon dwelled in the mist of the tribe of Juda.] Balaam
(Balam).228 (In) tribe of Juda.

Baskōth (Bascath).229 (In) tribe of Juda.

Bethdagōn.230 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now (still today) a large village
Keparadagōn (Caferdago) [pointed out] between Diosopolis and Iamnia.

Bēthalōth.231 (In) tribe of Juda.

Bēthphou (Bathaffu).232 (In) tribe of Juda. A village fourteen miles beyond
Raphia on the road to Egypt. It is the border of Palestine.

Betharaba.233 Symmachus "near the uninhabitable" [translates "in the place which
is near the uninhabitable," meaning desert.] Beesthara.234 (In) tribe of
Manasse. Separated to the Levites "in the Basanite" (region).

Bethaun.235 (In) tribe of Benjamin. Near Gai and Bethel, opposite Machmas,
[which some regard to be the same as Bethel as said above].

[Baliloth.236 (In) tribe of Benjamin.]

Bethsour (Bethaur).237 (In) tribe of Juda or Benjamin. There is now a village
Bēthsōrō at the twentieth milestone on the road going from Jerusalem to Hebron.
(Near) there is also pointed out a spring coming out of the hill where it is
said the eunuch Candaces was baptized by Philipp. (There is a spring arises at
the foot of the hill and bubbles forth, and is swallowed by the ground.) There
is also another Bethsour (in) the tribe of Juda one mile (a thousand paces) from
Eleutheropolis.

Boon.238 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

[Bēthalōn.239 (In) tribe of Benjamin.] Symmachus (interprets) "in the field."

Bēthagla (Bethalla).240 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

[Bērōth.241 (In) tribe of Benjamin.] Bola.242 (In) lot of (tribe of) Simeon.

Bathoul.243 (In) lot of (tribe of) Simeon.

[Bēth.244 (In) lot of (tribe of) Simeon.] Baaleth.245 (In) lot of (tribe or)
Simeon.

Bērammōth.246 (In) lot of (tribe of) Simeon.

[Bēthlabaōth.247 (In) lot of (tribe of) Simeon.]

Bethleem.248 (In) lot of (tribe of Zabulon. There is another one of Juda.
(Distinct from the other named Bethleem of Juda.) Bēthphasis (Bethfases).249
(In) tribe of Issachar.

Batnai (Batnae).250 (In) tribe of Aser. Now a village called Bethbeten (about)
eight miles east of Ptolemais.

Bēthdagōn.251 Linking up "with Zabulon." Lot of Issachar. (Place where the two
tribes Zebulon and Issachar have common borders.) Bēthaemek (Bethemec).252
Symmachus (interprets) "of the valley" (place of the valley). Lot of Aser.

Bēthanatha (Bethana).253 (In) tribe of Nephthali. There is a village (named)
Batanaia fifteen miles from Caesarea in which there are said to be healing
baths. Note also (under the name) Anaia above.

Banē.254 (In) tribe of Dan.

Barakai (Barac).255 (In) tribe of Dan. There is even now [a little] village
(called) Barka (Bareca) near Azotos.

JUDGES

Bezek (Bezec).256 City of (king) Adonibezek. There are now two villages (named)
Bezek near each other seventeen miles from Neapolis on the road to Scythopolis
(descending to).

Bēthsan.257 The tribe of Manasse "did not destroy" the heathen of this city
(were not able to expel the original inhabitants). It is (now called)
Scythopolis, a famous Palestinian city. The Scriptures call it also the house of
San, which (in our language is interpreted "enemy") is "house of enmity."

Bethsames.258 Priestly city of (in) tribe of Benjamin. It is even now (today
pointed out about) ten miles east of Eleutheropolis toward Nicopolis.

Bathma (Bethnath).259 (In) lot of (the tribe of) Nephthali. They did not destroy
the heathen here. (But the tribe of Nephthali could not expel the former
inhabitants from here.) [Bethsames.260 Another one.] (The former inhabitants
remained here.) Baalermōn.261 Mountain near Lebanon in the territory of the
heathen (Allofylus).

Baleth (Baaleth).262 (In) lot of (tribe of) Dan.

Bethbēra.263 (Interpreted house of) water (or well) which Gideon seized (by
warlike expedition).

Bēthasetta.264 Where Madian fled (turned in flight).

Balanos (i.e., oak of) Sikimōn.265 Where Abimelech reigned. It is pointed out
(up to today) in the suburbs of Neapolis toward the tomb of Joseph.

Borkonneim (Borconni).266 Aquila "blackthorn" Symmachus (interpreted) "prickly
plant."

Bēra.267 Where Joatham stood when he fled from Abimelech. The village (Bera) is
eight miles north of Eleutheropolis.

Baalthamar.268 Near Gaba. Where the children of Israel prepared for war against
the tribe of' Benjamin. This place (little town) is also (even today) called
Beththamar (as noted above).

KINGS

Bēthchōr (Bethchur).269 Where (up to this place) the people pursued closely (the
fleeing) "heathen." It is also called "the s tone of help."

Bama.270 Where Saul ate with Samuel when he was about to be anointed king.
Aquila translates for Bama "hill."

Bōsēs.271 Name of a rock. [About which we speak in the book Hebrew Questions.]
Basōr (Besor).272 Wadi to which David came.

Bōrasan.273 Where (place to which) David sent some of "the spoils."

Baoureim (Baurim).274 Where (place to which) her weeping husband followed
Michol, Saul's daughter.

Baalasōr.275 "Near Ehraim" where "(the sheep) of Absalom" were shorn.

[Bēthmacha.276 (Here Joab followed the fleeing Seba and afterwards, we read, it
was taken by the Assyrian king. There is now a village called) Machamim] (in the
eighth mile going up from Eleutheropolis to Jerusalem).

Balth (Balaath).277 City which Solomon built.

Baithsarisa (Bethsarisa).278 Where the man came to (the prophet) Eliseus (with
his gifts). It is in the boundary of (a village of) Diospolis fifteen miles to
the north in the Thamnitica.

Baithaggan (Bethagan).279 Road through which (we read) Ochozias fled.

[Basekath (Bazeoath).280 Ancient city of Judaea.]

Baithakath (Bethacath).281 (Village of Samaria) to which Jehu went. There is a
village of Samaria (located not more than) fifteen Miles from (the city of)
Legeōn in the great plain. Aquila (interprets) "house of bending" Symmachus
"separated house." [This is because of the narrow and low entrance of such a
separated house and because one is not able to stand up on entering.] Baithannē
(Baenith).282 Also Bainith. The Samaritans (who were brought from) Babylon built
this.

Bublos (Byblus).283 City of the Phoenicians. In Ezechiel. For this the Hebrews
have Gobel.

Boubastos (Bubastus).284 City of Egypt in Ezechiel.

Bōz.285 In the land of Kedar. In Jeremia (as Jeremia writes).

Bēl.286 Idol of Babylon. THE GOSPELS

Bēthsaida.287 City of "Andrew and Peter" and Philipp (the apostles). Located in
Galilee on (near) the Lake of Gennesareth.

Bēthphagē (Bethfage).288 (Little) village on the Mt. of Olives where the Lord
Jesus came.

Bēthania.289 Village two miles from Jerusalem on the slope of the Mt. of Olives
where the Christ (Savior) raised Lazarus. The place (tomb) of Lazarus is pointed
out even now [where a church has been constructed.]

Bēthaabara (Bethabara).290 "Where John was baptizing" (the penitent) "across the
Jordan." The place is pointed out where many of the brothers even now consider
it an honor to wash. (Where today many of the brothers, the believers, desiring
a renewal of life are baptized in the Depths.)

Bēzatha (Bethsaida).291 Pool in Jerusalem which is (called probatike and
interpreted by us) "sheep." Once it had five porticos. There are now pointed out
twin pools, of which one is filled by the rain water (winter rains) and the
other it appears that the water becomes miraculously red, as they say, bearing
the traces of the sacrificial victims formerly washed in it. So it is called the
sheep after the sacrifice. (Red like blood which in itself is seen as a sign of
old. The sacrificial victims were brought unbound by the priests into the bath,
whence it received its name.)

SECTION G

GENESIS Gaiōn (Geon).292 The Nile according to the Egyptians, arising out of
Paradise and encircling "all of Ethiopia."

Gomorra.293 One of the five cities of Sodom (which divine punishment) destroyed
at the same time as the rest.

Gerara.294 The Geraritike is now called after this, (the region) beyond the
Daroma. Twenty-five miles south of Eleutheropolis. It is the old southern
boundary of the Chanaanites and a royal city of the Philistines (metropolis of
Palestine). It is located, as Scripture affirms, "between Cades and Sur" (i.e.,
between) two deserts. The one adjoins Egypt whence the people came having come
through the (straits of the) Red Sea. The other (true) Cades extends up to the
desert of the Saracens.

Galaad.295 Mountain to which Jacob went fleeing from Laban, a full "seven days"
journey from Haran. It is situated back of Phoenicia and Arabia, connected with
(the hills of) Lebanon, extending through the desert as far as Petra beyond the
Jordan. There Sehon the Amorrite dwelled. It (the above mentioned mountain) was
given by lot to the sons of Ruben and [Gad and the half-tribe of Menasse. In
Jeremia it is said], "Galaad, [you are to me] like the peak of Lebanon." There
is also a city Galaad set on the mountain with the same name. "The descendants
of Machir son of Manasse" took Galaad from the Amorrites.

Gader.296 Tower where Jacob dwelled and Ruben violated the bed (of his father).
[Since the letter G is absent in Hebrew it is written Ader.]

Gethem (Gethaim).297 According to the Hebrew, Aueith (Auith). City of Adad, the
fourth to rule the land of Edom in Idumaea now called Gebalene.

Gesem.298 District in Egypt in which Jacob dwelled with his sons.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Gasiōn (Gaber).299 Station of the children of Israel in the desert as it is in
Numbers and in Deuteronomy. It is the city of Esau. It is thought to be Asian
(Essiam) near the Red Sea and Aila.

Gai.300 Station of the children of Israel in the desert. There is even now (said
to be) a city Gaia (of Palestine) near (the city of) Petra.

Gelmōn Deblathaeim (Gelmōn Deblathaim).301 Station (i.e., halting place of the
children of Israel) in the desert.

Gadgad.302 Mountain in the desert. Station of the children of Israel. (Where the
children of Israel made camp.)

Gaza.303 City of the Avvim in which the Caphthorim dwelled who destroyed the
Avvim (the former inhabitants). The ancient boundary of the Chanaanites with
Egypt. It was allotted to the tribe of Juda but they did not possess it and did
not expel the heathen from it. [The Enacim, i.e., giants, of the Allofylus
remained most strong.] It remains even now a famous city of Palestine. [It is
still to be inquired after since the prophet said Gaza would be an everlasting
mound in the future. The solution is: the place of the ancient city hardly shows
traces of foundations, yet that which is now seen was in a place different from
the one which was destroyed.]

Gergasei (Gergasi).304 Located on the Jordan near the city of the Galaad (City
of Transjordan near tribe Mt.Galaad) which the tribe of Manasse received. It is
said to be Gerash the famous city of Arabia. Some affirm it to be Gadara. But
the Gospel mentions the Gerassenes (Gergessenes).

Gadgada.305 Where "there is a torrent of water" a place in the desert.

Gaulōn or Gōlan (Gōlam).306 (In) the tribe of Manasse. A priestly city of refuge
"in the Basanitide." Now a great city (large village) called Golan in the
Batanaia. The city and the district have the same name. (From this name the
whole region is also named.)

Gaibal (Gebal).307 Mountain in the Promised Land where Moses commanded an altar
to be built (at the command of Moses an alter was built). They say (there are)
two neighboring mountains facing each other located at (near) Jericho, one of
which (is said) to be Garizin, the other Gaibal. But the Samaritans erroneously
point out two others near Neapolis (argue for two mountains near Neapolis but
they err greatly) since the great distance of one from the other there shows
that they are not able to hear one another when calling out from one (hear the
voices calling out in turn blessing or cursing as Scripture records).

Garizein (Garizin).308 Mountain where those calling out the blessing (curse)
stood. Read the above mentioned Gaibal (Gebal).

Golgol or Galgal.309 The Scriptures teach this is near Mt.Garisein and
Mt.Gaibal. The place of Galgal is in the Jericho region (near Jericho).
[Therefore the Samaritans err who would point out Mt.Gairsin and Mt.Gebal near
Neapolis which Scripture testifies are near Galgal.] Gai.310 "In the land of
Moab." Ravine of Moab. "Near the house of Phogor" where Moses is buried.

JOSUE

Galgala.311 This is the above mentioned Golgol, "to the east" of old Jericho
going toward the Jordan. There Josue circled with the people and made "the
Passover" using wheat for the first time after the cessation of the manna. (In
this place) He set up stones from (carried from the bed of) "the Jordan." The
tent of witness remained there. Given by lot to the tribe of Juda. The deserted
place is pointed out [two miles from Jericho which the people] today worship as
holy (some men of that region hold in holy awe). Another Galgala is found (is
looked for) around (near) Bethel.

Gai.312 It is near Bethaun and Bethel. Josue attacked it killing its king. It is
now deserted. (Now only a ruined place is shown.) The Amorrites from the Jordan
formerly inhabited it.

Gabaon.313 From whence came the Gabaonites in order to make supplication to
Josue. It was (once) a great metropolis and capital (royal city) of the Hevites
which was given by lot to (tribe of) Benjamin. There is even now a village
called the same (pointed out) near Bethel, four miles to the west on the road to
Rama. (It lies near Rama and Remmon.) Set aside for Levites near Remmaa. Here
Solomon while he was sacrificing (animals) was found worthy of an oracle from
God.

Gaibe (Gaba).314 Lot of Benjamin. [City set aside for Levites.

Gazer.315 (In) lot of (tribe of) Ephraim.] (City) set aside for Levites. Josue
attacked it killing its king. (Later) Solomon built it up. Now called Gazara, a
village four miles north of Nicopolis. (Quite obvious) the tribe of Ephraim did
not capture it from the heathen (were not able to expel from it the foreigners).

Goson.316 Josue also attacked this.

Geth.317 (In which the giants) The heathen (called) Enacim and the Philistines
not being driven out remained here. There is (pointed out) even now a village
(in the fifth mile) on the road from Eleutheropolis to Diospolis five miles from
Eleutheropolis.

Gesoureim (Gesom).318 City of the heathen. This is the same as Gargasei in the
Basanitide from which the children of Israel did not drive out the Gesoureim
(were not strong enough to drive out).

Gader.319 Josue conquered (killed) its king. (We read that) Jacob "pitched his
tent beyond the tower of Gadar."

Gōein of Gelgel (Goim in Gelgel).320 Aquila and Symmachus (interpret) "of
nations of Gelgel."

Gelgel.321 Josue also took this. Even now (is shown) a village (hamlet) called
Galgoulis (Galgulis) six miles north of Antipatris.

Golathmaeim (Golathmaim).322 A place which is interpreted "possessing water."

Gadda.323 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now a village on "the border of the
Daroma to the east above (overlooking) the Dead Sea.

Gadeira (Gadera).324 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now a village (hamlet called)
Gidora (Gadora) in the district of (city of) Jerusalem around the terebinth.

Gedour (Gedur).325 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now a large village (called)
Gedrous (Geddrus) ten miles from Diospolis on the road to Eleutheropolis.

Gabli.326 Land of the heathen (Allofylus).

Gisōn.327 (In) tribe of Juda.

Gelōn.328 (In) tribe of Juda.

Gadērōth.329 (In) tribe of Juda.

Gethemmōn.330 (In) tribe of Manasse. City separated to the Levites.

Gai.331 Ravine (valley or gorge).

Galennoum (Geennom).332 Which is interpreted ravine of Ennoum. This is said to
be (thought) Geenna. (Given by) lot of tribe of Benjamin. It is close to the
wall of Jerusalem to the East. [More fully discussed in the book Hebrew
Questions.] Geththepher.333 Lot of (in tribe of) Zabulon.

Gēephthael.334 Ravine (i.e., valley) Ephthael. Lot of (in tribe of) Zabulon.

Gabathōn.335 Lot or (in tribe of) Dan. City separated to the Levites. There is a
city called Gabe sixteen miles from Caesarea and another village Gabatha on the
boundary of Diocaesarea near the great plain of Legeon. And there are villages
Gabaa and Gabatha in the eastern region of the Daroma. Another Gabatha, lot
(tribe of) of Benjamin where Saul's home was. Still another Gabathon of the
heathen as noted in Kings [near Bethlehem in the tribe of Juda].

Gethremmōn.336 Another. (Another city in tribe of) lot of Dan. Separated to the
Levites. There is now a large village twelve miles from Diospolis on the road to
Eleutheropolis.

Galeilōth (Galiloth).337 Place by (near) the Jordan where the sons of Ruben set
up an altar (to God). (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Gaas.338 Mountain (in the tribe of Ephaim) where Josue was buried north of it.
His (the) monument (of Josue son of Nun) is now pointed out near the village of
Thamna.

Gabass (Gabath).339 Mountain of Ephraim (Latin omits). City of Phineas son of
Eleazar, where Eleazar was buried. There is a village Gabatha twelve miles from
Eleutheropolis where the monument of Habacuc is pointed out. (In) tribe of
Benjamin.

Gabaan (Gabaam).340 As far as this place (here) Benjamin (the tribe of Benjamin)
fought (was fought against) as it is in Judges.

KINGS

Geththa.341 The ark (of the covenant) was brought here from Azotos. Now it is a
large village which is called Giththam on the road between Antipatris and
Iamnia. There is also another Geththeim (Geththim).

Gallei (Gallim).342 Home of Phalti, who after David fled got Michol "David's
(his) wife." Mentioned both here and in Isaia. They say there is a village
called Gallaia (Gallaa) near Accaron.

Gelamsour (Gelamsur).343 Territory of the heathen (Allofylus).

Gelboue (Gelbua).344 Mountain of the heathen six miles from Scythopolis on which
there is a (large) village called Gelbous (Gelbus).

Geddour (Gedud).345 Whence David went down. Aquila "Marauder" (i.e., lightly
equipped or armed). Symmachus "armed band."

Gazēra.346 Where David struck down "the heathen." Also note Gazer previously
(above).

Gessour (Gessur).347 Territory of the heathen in Syria.

Gilōn.348 Home of Achitophel.

Gob.349 Where a battle was fought.

Gailaia (Gailaea).350 There are two Galilees. One of these is Galilee of the
nations located in the region of Tyre where Solomon gave "twenty cities to
Hiram." (In) lot of (the tribe of) Nephthali. The other is near Tiberias and its
lake (the Lake of Gennesareth) lot of (in tribe of) Zabulon.

Geiōn (Gion).351 Where Solomon was anointed (king).

Gēr.352 Where Jehu (king of Israel) struck down Ochozias (king of Juda) "Near
Jeblaam."

Geththachopher.353 Home of Jona the prophet.

Gaddei (Gaddi).354 Hazael (king of Damascus) defeated it. Note also Gadda above.

Gēmela.355 Territory of Edam (Idumaeans). Aquila and Symmachus (interpret)
"ravine of salt."

Gebein (Gebin).356 Isaia mentions this. There is now a village Geba five miles
from Gouphnis (Gufnis) on the road to Neapolis.

Gōzan.357 In the territory of Hamath (Emath). Isaia mentions this. It is in the
region (borders of) the Damascanes.

Garēb.358 Hill near Jerusalem. In Jeremia (As Jeremia writes).

Gēbarōth (Gebarth).359 Aquila "in defenses." Symmachus "in the community" in
Jeremia. (Symmachus correctly read Jeremia "in the farm-estate.") Gaimōd (Gemen
or Gamon).360 Territory of Moab (Moabites) according to Isaia.

Gaipha (Gefa).361 (Name of a) territory. In Isaia (as is written in Isaia). THE
GOSPELS

Gadara.362 City beyond the Jordan opposite Scythopolis and Tiberias (situated)
to the east in the mountains at the foot of which baths of hot water are located
(at whose foot hot water flows out and baths are built over it).

Gergesa.363 Where the Lord (Savior) heated the demoniacs (restored those vexed
with demons to sanity). Now (today) a village is pointed out on the mountains
near Lake Tiberias where the swine were condemned (cast down) to death. Noted
also above.

Gethsimanē (Gethsimani).364 Place where the Christ (the Savior) prayed before
the passion. It is located at (the foot of) the Mt. of Olives where even now the
faithful fervently utter prayers (where now a church has been built over it).

Golgotha.365 "Place of the skull" (Calvary) where the Christ (the Savior) was
crucified [for the salvation of all]. It is pointed out (today) in Jerusalem
north of Mt.Zion.

SECTION D

GENESIS Dasem.366 Great Assyrian city which Assur built "between Nineve and
Chalach."

Drus (Drys i.e., oak).367 Mambre near Hebron, where there is a [very old and of
many years] terebinth even now [up to the time of my childhood and the reign of
Emperor Constantine] pointed out. There (under which) Abraham pitched his tent.
It is also venerated by the people (just as perhaps it also is dedicated to an
extraordinary power).

Damaskos (Damascus).368 Famous Phoenician city. So also the son of Abraham's
steward is called "Masek." [It is the same name by which Masec the son of
Abraham's steward is called. Further "Masec" is fully discussed in the book
Hebrew Questions I must merely fulfill the role of translator and determine why
the servant of Abraham was named Masec.]

Dan.369 The village called that (up to today) is four miles from Petra on the
road toward Tyre. This is also the border of (promised to) Judaea (on the north)
from whence the Jordan arises [bursts forth and receives its name. Ior is Hebrew
for reithron, i.e., stream. or river].

Danaba (Dannaba).370 City of Balac son of Beor, king of Edom. After him Iob
became king [it seems to me a long time after]. There is now a village Dannea
(Dannaia) eight miles from Areopolis on the road to the Arnon and another Danaba
(Dannaba) on Mt.Phogor seven miles from Hesebon.

Dōthaeim (Dothaim).371 Where Joseph found his brothers grazing (cattle). It
remains (is shown up to today) in the region of Sabaste about twelve miles to
the north.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Daibōn (Debon) or Dibon.372 Station of the children of Israel in the desert.
There is another very large village even now near the Arnon which once was the
possession of the eons of Moab and then the children of Israel took it from
Sehon the Amorrite. (Afterwards Sehon the Amorrite held it by right of conquest.
but the children of Israel captured it and held it so in the partition it came
to the tribe of Gag.) Also given to the tribe of Gad. Isaia mentions it in the
vision "against the Moabites (Moab)." Isaia mentions it.

Daibōngad (Dabira).373 Station of the children of Israel.

Dusmai Moab (Dysmae Moab i.e., to the west of Moab).374 "Along the Jordan
opposite Jericho" where Balac "king of Moab" and "the elders of Madian" deceived
(cheated with the plot) Israel. There Moses also wrote Deuteronomy.

JOSUE

Dabeira (Dabira).375 (City given to (in tribe of) Dan whose king Josue killed.
There is another Jewish village on Mt.Thabor in the region of Diocaesarea.

Dor of Naphath (Nafeth).376 Symmachus (translates) "by the sea" (maritime). Dora
near Caesarea Palestine [at the ninth milestone on the road to Tyre. Now
deserted.] (Given in lot to) the tribe of Manasee did not possess it since they
did not destroy the heathen. (They were not able to possess it since the former
inhabitants remained in it.)

Dabeir (Dabir).377 (In) the tribe of Juda. Called "city of letters" which
Gothoniel Caleb's brother seized [or as some say the son of Caleb's brother]
killing the Enacim in it. Given (separated to) to the priests.

Dabeir (Dabir).378 Above the Jordan. City of the Amorrites.

Deimōna (Dimona).379 (In) tribe of Juda.

Dalaan (Dadan).380 (In) tribe of Juda.

Denna.381 (In) tribe of Juda. It is also (as Dabir) the city or letters.

Dauid (Dauia).382 (In) tribe of Juda.

Douma (Duma).383 (In) the tribe of Juda. Now a large village in the Deroma (to
the south) in the region of Eleutheropolis at the seventeenth milestone.

Damna.384 (In) tribe of Zabulon. City separated to the Levites.

Dabasthe (Dasbath).385 (In) tribe of Zabulon.

Dabrath.386 (In) tribe of Issacher. City separated to the Levites.

JUDGES

Drus.387 (i.e., oak) which is "in Ephratha." In lot (tribe) of Manasse. Home of
Gedeon. [We have spoken on this in the book Hebrew Questions, how Ephratha is
now thought to be found in the tribe of Manasse.]

KINGS Deibon (Dibon).388 (Of which we spoke above.) Isaia mentions this in the
vision "Against the Moabites" (Moab).

Deseth.389 Aquila (translates) "house wall" Symmachus "city wall."

Dōdaneim (Dodanim).390 Isaia (writes of this) in the vision on Arabia. It is
also near Areopolis.

Darōm.391 Symmachus (changes to) "in the south." In Ezechiel. (Ezechiel mentions
it.) Diospolis.392 City of Egypt. In Ezechiel. (As Ezechiel writes.) Dadan.393
In the land of Cedar according to Jeremia.

Deblathaeim (Deblathaim).394 In the land of Moab according to Jeremia.

Daidan (Daedan).395 In the (territory) or Idumaea according to Jeremia (as
Jeremia writes). Located four miles north of Phainon (of the mines of Phainon).
THE GOSPELS

Dekapolis (Decapolis).396 (As we read) in the Gospels. It is located in Persea,
Hippos, Pella and Gadara. (It is in the territory of the ten Transjordanian
cities around Hippos, Pella and Gadara.)

SECTION E

GENESIS Edem (Eden).397 The place to the east of the paradise of God.
Interpreted "delight" (Translated pleasure or delight).

Eueilat (Euila).398 "Where there is gold" [Where there is found purest gold
which in Hebrew is called Zaab] and "ruby" and "emerald" (and most precious
jewels, stones and emeralds). The Phison flowing from Paradise encircles it.
According to the Greeks it is the Ganges "flowing from India" (which we call
Ganges), changing its name). One of the descendants of Noe is called Eueilat
(Euila) who, Josephus tells, "dwelled with his brothers, who were from the river
Kophenos (Cofene), in parts of India and region of Syria (in the region of India
and even to the place called Ieria)." Ismael it is said (written) lived on the
desert of Euila which (Holy) Scriptures affirm to be the desert of Sour (sur)
"opposite Egypt" and extending to the midst (Latin omits) of the land of
Assyria.

Euphrates.399 River of Mesopotamia coming forth (rising) from Paradise. [Further
Salustius a reliable author asserts, however, the source of the Tigris and
Euphrates to be proven in Armenia, from which we perceive something also about
Paradise and its rivers must be known.] Ellasar.400 City of King Arioch.

Ephratha.401 Region of Bethlehem the City of David in which the Christ was born.
Tribe of Benjamin. [It is also however in the tribe of Juda, apparently wrongly
ascribed to the tribe of Benjamin.] There "on the way" Rachel is buried, (Near
the road where Rachel is buried) at the fourth (fifth) milestone from Jerusalem
in the place called (by the Septuagint) the Hippodrome. The monument is pointed
out even now. (Latin omits this sentence.) Also the father of Bethlehem was
called Ephratha according to Paralipomenon. (We read also of Efratha in the book
of Paralipomenon as noted above.)

EXODUS

Eirōth (Iroth).402 Place in the desert at which they (the children of Israel)
arrived from Egypt after coming through the Red Sea.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Empurismos (Conflagration. i.e., empurismos).403 Place on the desert where those
speaking against God were burned up. (Where some of those people were consumed
by fire.) Enthaath (Inthaath).404 Station of the children of Israel in the
desert.

Ebrōna.405 Station of the people (children of Israel) in the desert.

Emath.406 Where the spies with Josue came through. (Spies Josue sent.)

Ermana (Errma).407 Where some of the people were defeated by the Chanaanites and
Amalecites. The Chanaanites (who) are called Amorrites in Deuteronomy.

Essebōn.408 "City of Sehon" the Amorrite "in the land of Galaad" who took up
arms against the king of Moab (and took possession of it from the Moabites by
right or war). Isaia mentions this in the vision of the Moabites (against Moab)
and also Jeremia. Further it is now called Esbous (Esbus) a famous city of
Arabia situated in the mountains opposite Jericho, twenty miles from the Jordan.
Given to the tribe of Ruben. Separated to the Levites.

Edraei (Edrai).409 Whence the gigantic (and powerful) Og, king of Basan, (was
killed and all his people (struck down). Now there is Adra a famous city of
Arabia, twenty-four miles from Bostra.

Elealē.410 City of the Amorrites in Galaad which was given to the tribe of
Ruben. Isaia also mentions it in his vision of the Moabites (against Moab). Also
noted in Jeremia. There is now a large village preserved (is shown) not more
than one (in the first) mile from Esbous (Esbus).

Enna.411 Which is located near the desert of Cades.

Erman.412 Mt. Hermon which "the Phoenicians" called Sanior. Note also above.

JOSUE (of Naue)

Emekachōr.413 Which means valley of Achor (i.e., tumult or confusion) where
Achar (Achan) the condemned thief was stoned, from whom it derives its name. The
place is even now pointed out near Jericho beside (not far from) Galgala. [It is
quite wrong to think the Valley of Achor is named for the name of the one
atoned, for he is called Achan, not Achor or Achar.]

Eglōm.414 Also Odollam. Whose king (named) Dabeir Josue struck down. (In) tribe
of Juda. Even now there is a (very) large village ten (twelve) miles east of
Eleutheropolis. Note above also (of which we have spoken above).

Enemek (Inemec).415 Aquila and Symmachus (translate) "in the valley."

Esōr (Esrom) also Asor.416 (In) tribe of Juda near the desert. Note above also
(of which we have spoken above).

Enakeim (Enacim).417 Josue destroyed "the Enacim (giants) from the mountains (of
the region) of Hebron." [But it seems to be that Enacim is not the name at a
place but of the inhabitants.]

Ephrōn.418 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now a (very) large village (named)
Ephraim (Efraea) twenty miles north of Jerusalem.

Edrai (Edre).419 (In) tribe of Juda.

Ethnan.420 (In) tribe of Juda.

Ebeziouthia.421 (In) tribe of Juda.

Euein (Euim).422 (In) tribe of Juda.

Elthōlad (Elthōlath).423 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Ereb.424 (In) tribe of Juda. Eremintha now a village in the Daroma. (Today a
village in the Daroma, i.e., to the south, is called Eremiththa.) Essan
(Esan).425 (In) tribe of Juda.

Eloul (Elul).426 (In) tribe of Juda. [Is a village today in the region belonging
to Jerusalem named Alula near Hebron.]

Eltheke.427 (In) tribe of Juda. Now is Thekoua (Thecua) a village twelve (nine)
miles east (south) of Jerusalem. Home of Amos the prophet whose tomb is pointed
out there even now.

Engaddi.428 (In) tribe of Juda. Where David fled (hid) in the wilderness of
Jericho in the Aulon (which is a district of the plain of which we spoke above).
A large Jewish village Engaddi is now located near the Dead Sea where there are
balsams. Note also above Gaddi (Latin omits). [Of whose vineyards Solomon
speaks.] Esthemō.429 Priestly city. It is now a large Jewish village of the
region of Eleutheropolis in the Daroma.

Emekraphaeim (Emecrafaim).430 Aquila and Symmachus "in the valley of Raphaeim."
Lot or (in tribe of) [Benjamin.

Edōmim (Edomia).] 431 Lot of (in tribe of) Benjamin. There is now (shown) a
village Edouma in the Akkrabattine twelve miles east [of Neapolis].

Erma.432 Josue also took this and killed its king. Given by lot to Simeon and
(or) Juda.

Ether.433 Lot or Simeon. It is now (named) Ietheira a large village in the
interior of the Daroma close to Malatha.

Eththa.434 Lot of (in tribe of) Simeon.

Elkath.435 Lot of (in tribe of) Aser. City separated to Levites.

Elkōk (Icoc).436 Lot of Nephthali. (On the border of three tribes. i.e.,)
joining "Zabulon on the south and Aser" by the sea (west) and "Juda to the
east."

Edraei (Edrai).437 Lot of (in tribe of) Naphthali.

Elthekō.438 Lot of (in tribe of) Dan. Separated to the Levites.

Esthaol.439 Lot of (in tribe of) Dan. Where Samson died. It is even now (shown)
ten miles north of Eleutheropolis on the road to Nicopolis.

Elba.440 Lot of (in tribe of) Aser. Aser did not drive out the heathen. (They
did not stop to drive out the former inhabitants.) Eremmōn.441 A (very) large
Jewish village sixteen miles south of Eleutheropolis in the Daroma.

Emmathdōr.442 Lot of (in tribe of) Nephthali. Separated to the Levites.

Emath.443 Boundary of the heathen (Allofylis) in the region of Daroma.

Enlechi (Inlechi).444 Aquila (interprets) "jaw."

Eniakebzēb (Inaczeb).445 Symmachus (translates) "in the valley of Zeb."

KINGS

Ergab.446 Where Jonathan (son of Saul) "shot the arrows" (the place he
accurately aimed the arrows he was using). Aquila (interprets) "to the stones"
Symmachus "stone." Also elsewhere Symmachus (says) "for this perimeter."

Echela.447 Where David hid. Now (properly) called Enkela (Eccela), a village)
seven miles from Eleutheropolis. The tomb of the prophet Habacuc is pointed out
nearby.

Elmōni.448 A place. Which is interpreted by Aquila and Theodotion "here or
there." [As we are able to say this or that. However let the diligent reader
recognize what in principle any part of this book can only touch briefly, I do
not agree with all that I pass on, but defer to the Greek authority since I have
disputed more fully on this in the book Hebrew Questions.] Esthama.449 When
(place to which) David sent.

Elōth.450 Azarias the king built this.

Emath.451 In Isaia. A city of Damascus which the king of Assyria besieged. Also
Zacharia and Ezechiel also mention it. But in Amos (it is written) Emath Rebba
(Rabba) which is (signifies to us) Emath the great. Note also above (We spoke of
this also above). Perhaps (it seems to us) it is Epiphaneia near Emesēs (where
even today Syrians say it thus).

Eser.452 City which Solomon built.

Enacheim (Inachim) or Enbachein (Inbachim).453 In Michea (Micheas the prophet
also mentions it). Aquila and Symmachus (translate) "in weeping."

Enaraba (Inaraba).454 Aquila (translates) "in level ground" (or plain).
Symmachus "in the field."

Elkese.455 Home of Nahum (the prophet, also called) the Elkesite.

Emakeim (Emacim).456 Aquila and Symmachus (translate) "valleys." THE GOSPELS

Emmaous (Emmaus).457 Home of Cleopas who is mentioned in the Gospel of Luke. It
is now Nicopolis a famous city of Palestine.

Ephraim.458 "Near the desert" where the Christ (the Lord Jesus) came "with his
disciples." Note also the above Ephron (We have spoken of this also above under
Efron).

SECTION Z

GENESIS

(These above words are mostly to be read with the shortened letter E accordingly
we read with a long vowel what in Greek is called Eta.) Zaphōeim (Zafoim).459
Territory of the princes of Edom now in the region (called) Gebalene.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Zoob.460 "As It is said in the book, The Ward of the Lord burned Zoob and the
torrents of Arnon." City of the Amorrites located on the Arnon.

Zephrona.461 Northern boundary of Judaea.

Zared.462 Ravine Zared in the midst of the desert.

JOSUE Zeiph (Zif).463 (In) tribe of Juda.

Zanaoua (Zannoua).464 (In) tribe of Juda. Now (today) there is a village [called
Zanoua] in the boundary of Eleutheropolis on the road to Jerusalem.

Ziph.465 Tribe of Juda (Latin omits). A village now (up to the present day) is
in the Daroma on the boundary of Eleutheropolis near Chebron at the eighth mile
to the East. There David hid.

KINGS

Zeib (Zif).466 "Dry mountain" of Zeib (rough mountain or foggy or cloudy near
Zif), in which David lived near Chumalba, which is called (in scriptures)
Karmelos. This is name given today to a village of Jews. Home of Nabal the
Camelite. One of the descendants of Caleb is said to be Zeib (Zif) according to
Paralipomenon.

Zogera (Zogora).467 In Jeremia. City of Moab. It is now called Zoora or Sigor
(Segor), one of the five cities of Sodom.

Zēb.468 In Jeremia City of Amman. There is now (shown) a village Zia fifteen
miles west of Philadelphia.

Zōeleth.469 (Name of) a stone called this on which Adonias sacrificed "near the
spring Rogel."

SECTION E

GENESIS Ēlath.470 Territory of the princes of Edom and a city of Esau ten miles
east of Petra.

'Erōōn (Eroum).471 City in Egypt where Joseph met his father (Jacob).

Elioupolis (Eliopolis, city of the sun).472 City in Egypt which the Hebrews
called On, of which it is said Potiphar was priest. Also noted in Ezechiel.

Etham.473 Station of the children of Israel in the desert. Also (called) Bouthan
(Buthan).

JOSUE Ēngannim.474 (In) tribe of Juda. It is now (a village) near Bethel.

Ēnaim.475 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now a village Bethenim near the
terebinth.

Ēndōr.476 (In) tribe of Manasse. Home of the witch [the priestess of oracle who
was consulted by Saul king of Israel]. Also note the above Aendōor, which is
near (the city of) Nain where (in whose gates) the Christ (the Savior) raised up
the son of the widow. It is also near Scythopolis.

Ēnganni.477 (In tribe of) lot of Issachar. City separated to the Levites.
Another village Ēnganna is said to be around Cerasa in Perea (across the
Jordan).

Ēnada.478 (In tribe of) lot of Issachar. There is now another village Ēnadab
about ten miles from Eleutheropolis on the road to Jerusalem.

Ēnasōr.479 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali. Note also Asor above.

'Ērakōn (Ereccon).480 Boundary or the tribe of Dan near Joppa.

JUDGES 'Ētam.481 Where Samson dwelled "in the cave Etam" beside the wadi.

KINGS 'Ēla.482 (We read) valley Ēla (which) Aquila and Theodotion (interpret)
"valley of the oak."

Ēngaddi.483 Desert where David hid. Note above Engaddi (in) tribe of Juda
located west of the Dead Sea.

Ēmath.484 Territory of the heathen. According to Jeremia, a city of Damascus.

Ēnan.485 "Border of Damascus" according to Ezechiel, (to the East "from Thaiman
and the city of the palm trees," which according to the others (other
Interpreters taught it is) Thamar.

SECTION TH

GENESIS

Thaiman (Theman).486 Territory of the princes of Edom in the (land of) the
Gebalitikes named from Thaiman the son of Eliphaz the son of Esau. It is even
now a village Thaiman about fifteen (five) miles from Petra. (A garrison of
Roman) soldiers are (is) stationed there. Home of Eliphaz the king of the
Thaimanites. One of the children born to Israel is (called) Thaiman. (It is
understood that) all the southern region is called thus (Theman in Hebrew) for
Thaiman is to be interpreted "south."

Thamna.487 Where Juda sheared his sheep. A (very) large village remains (is
shown) in the boundary of Diospolis midway to Jerusalem. (In) tribe of Dan or
Juda.

Thamna.488 Another city of the princes of Edom. Also "the concubine of Eliphaz
son of Esau who bore Amalec to him" from whom the Amalecites.

DEUTERONOMY [Thophol (Thafol).489 Place in the desert "beyond the Jordan" where
Moses wrote Deuteronomy. Opposite Jericho.

Thaath.490 Station of the children of Israel.

Thara.491 Station of the children of Israel.]

JOSUE

Thaphphou (Thaffu).492 City which Josue besieged and captured (killed) its king.
It was given to the tribe of Juda. Noted also above Bethaphou (Bothafu) on
border of Palestine and Egypt.

Thanak (Thaanac).493 City which Josue besieged and captured (killed) its king.
It was given to the tribe of Manasse. Separated to the Levites. Now it (there is
a village of this name in the fourth mile) is four miles from Legeon.

Thēnath.494 (In) tribe of Joseph. There is today a village Thena ten miles east
of Neapolis on the way down to the Jordan.

Thaphphoue (Thaffue).495 (In) tribe of Joseph.

Thaphphouth (Thaffuth).496 (In) tribe of Manasse.

Thekō.497 Now (a village) Thekōe is (shown) near the desert of Ailias, home of
Amos the prophet. Formerly a city of refuse (Latin omits last phrase).

Thersa.498 Josue took this along with its king.

Therama.499 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Thōlad.500 (In) tribe of Juda or Simeon.

Thabōr.501 Border of Zebulon. There is a (high and wonderfully rounded) mountain
near (in the middle) of the plain (of Galilee) ten miles East of Diocaesarea. It
is also the border of the tribes of Issachar and Nephthali.

Thalcha.502 (In) tribe of Simeon. Now a large village of Jews called Thala
(Thella about) sixteen miles from Eleutheropolis in the Daroma (to the south).

Thamnathsara.503 City of Josue son of Nun located "in the mountain." It is
Thamna noted also above in which even now there sepulchre of Josue is pointed
out. (In) tribe of Dan.

Thalassa.504 The salt (sea) also called Dead and Asphalt (i.e., bitumin) between
Jericho and Zoora.

JUDGES

Thaanach.505 The tribe of Manasse did not possess it since they did not expel
the heathen from it. Here Debora fought Sisara. Also separated to the Levites.
It is now a large village three miles from Legeon.

Thēbēs.506 City which Abimelech was fighting. From the tower "a woman threw a
piece of the millstone on his head" (and he was killed). There is now in the
district of Neopolis a village called Thebes at the thirteenth milestone on the
road to Scythopolis.

Thamnatha.507 Note also Thamna above. (In) tribe of Dan.

KINGS

Thēlamou land of (Thelamuge).508 (Place) to which "Abner sent to David." Aquilla
(interprets this word) "immediately" Symmachus "for himself."

Thaad.509 Near Galaad.

Thamsa.510 Border of Solomon's kingdom.

Thermōth.511 City which Solomon built "in the desert" (of which we make further
mention in the book Hebrew Questions).

Tharseis (Tharsis).512 Where gold from (brought to) Solomon. According to
Josephus (Josephus thinks) Tarsos is Cilicia. According to Ezechiel Charchedon
but according to the Hexapla the Hebrews hold Tarseis to be located at
Karchedon. Others claim it is India. [Ezechiel the prophet perceives it to be
Carthage since according to the interpretation of the Hexapla where we read
Carthage the Hebrew has written Tharsis. Some others suggest even India. We
wrote of this indeed in the Epistle to Marcellus as is fully discussed in the in
the book Hebrew Questions.] Tharsa.513 Home of Aseph (Asa) king of Israel.

Thersila.514 Home of Manaeim. There is now a village of Samaritans called
Tharaila in the Batanaia.

Thesba.515 Home of Elias, (the prophet) the Tishbite.

Thaiman (Theman).516 According to Ezechiel a city of Idumea. Isaiah also
(mentions it) in the (his) vision against Arabia. Noted also in Jeremiah. The
city of Esau is also reported in the book of Abdia. One of the sons of Esau is
also called Thaiman. Noted also above.

Tharthak.517 The Hevites founded this in the land of Judea.

Thalasar.518 Territory of Syria.

Thogarma.519 (We read) in Ezechiel.

Thapheth (Thafeth).520 (We read) in Jeremia of the altar of Tapheth. In the
suburbs of Jerusalem there is even now pointed out a place called this near the
fuller's pool end of the field of Acheldamach.

SECTION I

GENESIS

Iabōk (Iabōc).521 River of the ravine where after Jacob crossed it, he struggled
with the apparition and so his name was changed to Israel. It flows between
Amman, that is Philadelphia, and Gerasa at the fourth mile and then goes down
and joins the Jordan (mixes finally with the waters of the Jordan).

Idoumaia (Idumaea.).522 Territory of Esau after whose similar name it is named.
Others call it Edom. It is around Petra (now) called the Gebalene.

Iather.523 Territory of the princes of Edom in this same Gebalene (of which we
spoke above).

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY Iatabatha.524 Station of the children of Israel in the
desert.

Ianna.525 "Which is in the plain of Moab looking from the summit of the cleft
(under the cliff of Phasga, i.e., cut out) (toward) the desert." Beside the
Arnon.

Iessa (Iassa).526 Where Sedon king of the Ammorites was fought. Isaiah also
mentions this in the vision "Against the Moabites." Also noted in Jeremia. It is
now pointed out between Madaba and Dibon.

Iazēr.527 City of the Ammorites ten miles west at Philadelphia in the Perea of
Palestine beyond the Jordan. It was made the boundary of the tribe of Gad (Latin
omits this sentence), "reaching to Aroer which is opposite Rabba." Also Jeremia.
It was separated to the Levites. Fifteen miles from Essebon and from it a great
river flows forth to fall into the Jordan (bursts forth and is received by the
Jordan).

Iordanēs.528 River dividing Judaea and Arabia and the Aulim (of which we spoke
above) next to the Dead Sea. It runs through Jericho and is lost in the Dead
Sea. (After many twists it joins the Dead Sea near Jericho and disappears.)
Ietabatha.529 "Wadies of water" place in the desert.

'Ierichō.530 City which Josue razed (after crossing the Jordan) and captured
(killed) its king. Afterwards Ozan from Bethel, from the tribe of Ephraim
restored it. Here our Lord Jesus the Christ (our Lord and Savior) came and
revealed himself as worthy of honor. It was also destroyed at the siege of
Jerusalem (by the Romans) because of the faithlessness (perfidy) of the
inhabitants. It was rebuilt a third time and the city is now pointed out (which
city remains today). Of the two former cities there is even now some evidence
remaining. (Remains of both older cities are pointed out up to the present day.)

JOSUE

'Ierousalēm.531 Adonibezek ruled this and afterward the Jebusites from whom it
was called Iebus. (Much later) David destroyed it and made it the metropolis of
(all the providence) of Judaea. Because of this it was the place for the temple
[the expenses of the structure were neglected by the sons of Solomon]. In
Genesis it is Salem which Melchizedec ruled (according to Josephus). Given by
lot to the tribe of Benjamin.

Iebous.532 "This is Jerusalem."

Iareim (Iarim).533 City [of the Gabaonites.

Ierimouth (Iarimuth).534 "City] which Josue took. Tribe of Juda. Four miles from
Eleutheropolis near the village of Esthaol.

Isimōth.535 Where David hid. Noted above as Bēthsimouth by mistake. But in the
first Book of Kings Aquila (interprets) for iessemos "disappear." Symmachus
correctly has "desert."

Iedna.536 At the sixth milestone from Eleutheropolis on the road to Hebron.

Iekkomam (Ieconam).537 City of Carmel which Josue besieged and captured (killed)
its king.

Iaeir.538 City of the tribe of Manasse.

Iamneia (Iamnel).539 (In tribe of) city of Juda. It is now a city of Palestine
Jamneia between Diospolis and Azotos.

Iabeir (Iabir).540 City of letters. Tribe of Juda.

[Iagour (Iagur).541 (In) tribe of Juda.]

Iermous (Iermus).542 (In) tribe of Juda. There is now a village Iermochos ten
miles from Eleutheropolis on the way to Jerusalem.

Iechthaēl.543 (In) tribe of Juda.

Iephthan (Iecthan).544 (In) tribe of Juda.

Iether.545 (In) tribe of Juda. Priestly city. There is also now a (very) large
village (named) Ietheria twenty miles from Eleutheropolis in the (interior of)
Daroma near Malathōn. All its inhabitants are Christian. Noted also above.

Ianoun (Ianum).546 (In) tribe of Juda. A village Ianoua is now three miles south
of Legeōn. But this does not appear to be the explanation (as written).

Iettan.547 (In) tribe of Juda. Priestly city. It is a (very) large village of
the Jews now eighteen miles south of Eleutheropolis in the Daroma.

[Iezrael.548 (In) tribe of Juda. But not the same as above.]

Iezrael.549 (In) tribe of Manasse. Another. There is even now a most famous
(very great) village Esdraela in the great plain located between Scythopolis and
Legeon. Also the border or Issachar. One of the posterity of Ephratha was called
Iezrael according to Paralipomenon.

Iekdaan.550 (In) tribe of Juda.

Iephlithi (Ierflethi).551 (In) tribe of Joseph.

Iano.552 (In) tribe of Ephraim. The king of Assyria took this. There is even now
a village Ianō in the (region of) Akrabattine, twelve miles East of Neapolis.

Iamein (Iamin).553 (Which) Aquila and Symmachus (interpret) "right hand."

Iasēb.554 Aquila and Symmachus "the inhabitants." (For which the Hebrews read
"the inhabitants.") Ieblaam.555 (In) tribe of Mannase from which they did not
drive out the heathen.

Ierphēl.556 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Ieknal.557 Lot of Zabulon (in tribe of). City separated to Levites.

Iapheth (Iafthie).558 (In) tribe of Zabulon on the east. Also called Joppe. (Now
Joppe is called the ascent of Iafo). The maritime village (city above the sea
called) Symmachus on the way from Caesarea to Ptolemais near the Mt.Carmel is
said to be Epha.

Iephthaēl.559 (In tribe of) Lot of Zabulon.

Iadela.560 (In tribe of) lot of Zabulon.

Iermoth.561 (In tribe of) lot of Issachar. City separated for priests. (Probably
also) another Iermouth (above). Hosea (the prophet) mentioned it.

Iamnēl (Iabnel).562 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Ierōn.563 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Iethlan (Iethlam).564 (In tribe of) lot of Dan.

Iēlōn.565 (In tribe of) lot of Dan.

[Ioud (Iud).566 (In tribe of) Dan.] 'Ierakō (Ieracon).567 Water of (tribe of)
lot of Dan.

Iabeis Galaad.568 The children of Israel fought here. There is now a village
beyond the Jordan located on the mountains six miles from the city of Pella on
the road to Gerasa.

KINGS Iaar.569 Salt. Where there was an apiary.

['Ieramēlei.570 Territory of the heathen.] Iether.571 To which David sent. There
is now a village (named) Ietheira in the Daroma. Noted also above.

Iekmaan.572 City of the chief of Solomon.

Itaburion.573 Aquila and Symmachus (translated) "Thabor." In Oseo. (It is also
Mt. Thabor.) Located in the Great plain east of Legeon.

Iekthoēl.574 (Name of) Petra in the book of Kings.

Ietaba.575 Ancient city of Judaea.

Ioppē.576 City of Palestine which is now on the coast. (in tribe of) (maritime)
lot of Dan. THE GOSPELS

Itouraia, Also Trachonitis.577 Territory which Philip ruled as tetrarch
according to the Gospels. There territory extended into the desert (of Arabia)
(Latin omits) near Bostra of Arabia (Latin omits) is said to be the Trachonitis.

SECTION K

GENESIS

Karnaeim. Astaroth Karnaeim.578 There is now a large village of Arabia (in a
corner of the Batanea) which is called Karnaia beyond the (river) Jordan. There
according to tradition the house of Job is pointed out. There is also another
village called Karnaia in the region (nine miles from) of Jerusalem.

Kadēs.579 Where the spring "of judgment" was.

Kadēa Barnē.580 The desert which extends to (the city of) Petra a city or
Arabia. There Mariam went up and died, and there the doubting Moses struck the
rock to give water to the thirsty people. The tomb of Mariam herself is pointed
out there even now. There also Chodollagomor beat the chiefs of the Amalakites.

Kenaz.581 Territory or the princes of Edom.

Kariathaeim.582 City which "the sons or Ruben" built. There is now a
(flourishing) wholly Christian village called Kariatha (Coraiatha), near Mēdaba,
city of Arabia, ten miles west toward (the place called) Barē.

Kariatharbo.583 "That is Hebron" noted also above. (i.e., the village of the
four which is Hebron of which we spoke above.)

Kanath.584 Village of Arabia [called Manatha] even now, [which Nobe took] and
named Naboth. Given to tribe of Manasse. It is located even now in the
Trachoitis near Bostra.

Kata ta Krusea (Catatachrysea, i.e., to gold).585 Mountain which is full of gold
dust on the desert eleven days distant from Mt.Choreb beside which Moses wrote
Deuteronomy. It is said that (formerly) the mountain (full) of gold veins was
near the copper mines in Phainon (which in our tine were still working.

Kadēmōth.586 Desert from which Moses sent the elders (ambassadors) "to Sohon"
[king of the Amorrites].

Kariath.587 City (village) which was under the metropolis of Gabaon.

Kades.588 City which Josue besieged, killing its king. Given (in lot) to tribe
of Juda.

Kademoth.589 (Another) city of the sons of Ruben.

[Kedsōn.590 (In) tribe of Ruben.] (City) separated to Levites.

JOSUE Kapseēl.591 (In) tribe of Juda.

Kina.592 (In) tribe of Juda.

Keeila.593 (In) tribe of Juda. Where David once lived. Even now a village Kela
(nearly) eight miles east of Eleutheropolis on the road to Hebron. The Tomb of
Habacuc the prophet is pointed out there.

Kariathbaal.594 This is the city Iareim. Tribe of Juda.

Kana.595 (In) tribe of Ephraim.

[Kabsaeim (Capsaim).596 (In) tribe of Ephraim.] Kane.597 (In) tribe of Manasse.

Kariathiareim (Kariathbaal).598 Or city Iareim (of salt). One of the (cities of
the Gabaonites. (Belonging to) tribe of Juda between Jerusalem and Diospolis.
Located on the road nine miles from Jerusalem. The home of Uria the prophet whom
Ioakim killed in Jerusalem according to Jeremia. The son of Sobal is called
Cariathiareim according to Paralipomenon.

Kisōn (Kision).599 (In tribe of) lot of Issachar. City separated to the Levites.

Kartha.600 (In tribe of) city of Zabulon separated to Levites.

Katta.601 (In tribe of) lot of Zabulon. City separated to Levites.

Kana.602 Near Sidōn the Great (to distinguish it from the other, the less). Lot
of (tribe of) Aser. There (it was in Cana) our Lord and God (Savior) Jesus
Christ changed the water into wine. Home of Nathanael (judged a true Israelite
as the Savior testified). It is (today a city) in Galilee of the Nations.

Kades (Cades).603 Lot of Naphthali. Priestly city formerly city of refuge "in
Galilee in the mountains of Nephthali." The king of Assyria took it. It is now
(called) Kudissos, twenty miles from Tyro near Paneas.

Kartham.604 City (in) of tribe of Nephthali, separated to Levites.

JUDGES Ketrōn.605 (In tribe of) Zabulon "did not drive out the heathen" (in
which the former inhabitants remained).

Karka (Carcar).606 Home of "Zebee and Salmana" whom Gedeon killed. There is now
a Fort Karkaria one day journey from the city of Petra.

Kamōn.607 City of Iaeir where the judge of Israel was buried. There is now a
village Kammōna in the great plain six miles north of Legeon on the road to
Ptolemais.

Kisōn.608 Wadi near Mt.Thabōr where Sisara was fought.

Kadēmim (Cademi).609 Wadi where Debora fought.

Koilas of the Titans (i.e., valley of giants).610 Against whom David fought.

Klauthmōn.611 Territory of lamentation (i.e., place of weeping) a place so
called (receiving its name from lamentation).

KINGS Kēni.612 Territory of the heathen (Philistines).

Karmēlos.613 Home of Nabal. A village called Chermala which is interpreted
Karmelos is now ten miles east of Hebron. A (Roman) garrison is located there.

[Karmēlos. Mountain.]614 On the Phoenician sea and dividing Palestine from
Phoenicia. Where Elias lived. (Entry not in Latin.) Kabseēl.615 Home of Banaias
son of Ioda. (Entry not in Latin.) Kedrōn.616 Wadi or ravine of Kedron near
Jerusalem. (To the east, the Gospel of John mentions it.) Kurinē (Cyrene).617
(On the border of Egypt) where the Assyrian king sent away the Damascenes.

Kōa.618 Near Egypt.

Karchēdon (i.e., Carthage).619 Isaia in vision of Tyre and also Ezechiel. In the
Hebrew it is Tharsis [of this we have spoken fully in the book Hebrew
Questions].

Kollas Iōsaphat.620 (Coelas, i.e., valley) located between Jerusalem and the Mt.
of Olives. [We read in the prophet Joel.] Kedam.621 In Ezechiel. Aquila and
Symmachus (interpret) "east."

Kēdar.622 In Ezechiel. "Princes of Kedar." Also in Jeremia and Isaia in the
"vision of Arabia." It is in the territory of the Saracans (desert). The son of
Ismael, son of Abraham (Latin omits phrase) is (named) Kedar.

Kariōth.623 In territory of Moab according to Jeremia.

Kapharnaoum.624 By the Lake of Gennesaret. It is now a village (city) in the
Galilee of the nations, (located) "on the border of Zebulon and Naphthali."

[Here ends our reading for the letter C i.e., the Greek Kappa the rest are under
the letter Chi, which has aspiration in itself and of which there is very little
use in Latin.]

SECTION L

GENESIS Lasan.625 Border of the Chanaanites with the Sodomites.

Louza (Luza).626 Jacob renamed this Bethel. This village, inhabited even now, is
on the left of the road going to Jerusalem from Neapolis. Given to tribe of
Benjamin.

Louza (Luza).627 Another. Given to the sons of Joseph. Near Suchem (Sychem) nine
(three) miles from Neapolis.

Lōtan.628 City of the princes of Edom.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY [Lebōna.629 Station of the children of Israel in the
desert.

Lobon.630 Place on the desert "'Beyond the Jordan" where Moses read Deuteronomy.

JOSUE]

Lacheis.631 This also Josue besieged and captured (killed) its king. Isaiah (and
Jeremia) also mention(s) this. There is even now a village seven miles south of
Eleutheropolis toward the Daroma. Noted also in Jeremia. (In) tribe of Juda.

Lebna.632 Josue also besieged this and captured (killed) its king. Given to the
tribe of Juda. Priestly city. There now is a village called Lobana in the area
of Eleutheropolis. Isaia noted it also.

Laserōn (Lasaran).633 Josue also besieged this and captured (killed) its king.

Lithos Boen.634 "In sons of Ruben." Border of the tribe of Juda.

Labōth.635 (In) tribe of Juda.

Lamas.636 (In) tribe of Juda.

Labōth.637 (In tribe of) lot of Simeon.

Labanath.638 (In tribe of) lot of Aser.

Lakoum.639 Border of Nephthali.

JUDGES Labōemath.640 (For which) Aquila (interprets) "entrance of Emath."

Lesem.641 This "the sons of Dan" besieged and called it Dan.

Louza.642 Another near Baithel located in the land of the Hethites. The one left
from Bethel founded it as it is told in Judges.

Lechei.643 (For which) Aquila and Symmachus (interpret) "in the jaw."

Laisa.644 The sons of Dan took this which was some distance from (near) Sidon
and called it Dan. It was the northern border [of Judaea which reached from Dan
to Beersheba]. Isaia also mentions it. Noted above near Paneados from whence the
Jordan (river) originates.

KINGS Lemattara.645 Where Jonathan shot "the arrow" (dart). Aquila "to the
mark." Symmachus "to the set place."

Ladabar.646 Where Memphibosthe was.

Lōdabar.647 Home of Machir.

Libanos.648 Conspicuous (very high) mountain of Phoenicia.

Loueith (Luith).649 Isaia mentions this. There is a village (today) between
Areopolis and Zoora called Loueitha.

SECTION M

GENESIS Manassē.650 Territory of India where the sons of Jectan the son of Eber
dwelled.

Mambre.651 That is Hebron. The tomb of both of the sons of Abraham is located
there. (Tomb of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is located there.) Noted also above.
One of the companions of Abraham is also called Mambre.

Madiam.652 City of one of the sons of Abraham and Cetura. Located beyond Arabia
to the south in the desert of the Saracens, to the east of the Red Sea whence it
was called Madiani and now is called (the territory of) Madian. Scripture calls
the daughter of Iobab [Moses' father-in-law] daughter of Madian. There is a
second city named thus near Arnon and Areopolis, the ruins of which are pointed
out.

Mōab.653 (Called) from Moab the son of Lot. City of Arabia which is now (called)
Areopolis. Noted also above. The territory is also called Moab, but its city is
(rightly called) Habbath Moab (i.e., The Great of Moab).

Masrēka.654 City of the king of Edom near the Gebalene.

Mabsar.655 This large village (called) Mabsara remains even now in the Gebalene
dependent upon Petra.

Magediēl.656 It also belonged to one of the princes of Edom in the Gebalene.

EXODUS

Magdolos.657 Station on the journey of Israel (coming out of) from Egypt, where
they stopped before (crossing) the Red Sea. Also noted in Ezechiel: From
Magdolos to Syene. According to Jeremia here those Jews [fleeing the impending
destruction by Babylonians] dwelled with Jeremia in Egypt.

Merra.658 (Which means) "bitter." Place on the desert where the available water
was bitter. Moses sweetened it by throwing in a wood.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Mnemata epithumias.659 (Memoriae, i.e., graves) of lust. Station of the children
of Israel in the desert where they were destroyed because of the meat (where
while eating the meat the wrath of God rose upon them).

Makēlōth.660 Station of the children of Israel in the desert.

[Mathekka.661 Station of the children of Israel in the desert.] Masourouth.662
Station of the children of Israel in the desert.

Maththanem.663 Now called Maschana. Located on the Arnon (about) twelve miles
east of Madaba.

Misōr.664 City of Og king of Basan. [However Misor means flat place or plain.]
Machanarath.665 Border of Amman which is also Philadelphia.

Madbaris.666 According to the Hebrews the desert is so called. [What we call the
desert the Hebrews call Madbarim.] Misadai.667 "Of the sons of Iakeim." Place on
the desert where Aaron died.

JOSUE

Makēda.668 Where Josue shut up five kings in the cave, which kings he also
killed along with the king of Makeda. Given to tribe of Juda. Now it is eight
miles east of Eleutheropolis.

Madōn.669 City where Iobab ruled (was king) and against whom Josue fought.

Massepha.670 (In) tribe of Juda. There Jephthae dwelled. Near Kariathiareim in
which the ark was once kept and where Samuel judged the people. Jeremia also
notes it.

Merran.671 It is the water where they prepared for war. Now there is a village
(named) Merrous twelve miles from Sebaste near Dothaeim.

Mastraiphōth Maim.672 (Which for) Aquila "Mastaiphoth water." Symmachus
"Mastraiphōth sea" (is interpreted).

Machathi.673 City of the Ammorites beyond the Jordan and near Mt.Hermon from
which the children of Israel did not expel the Machathites (were not able to
expel).

Marōm.674 [Josue also besieged this and captured (killed) its king. Note above
Marous.

Maggedo.675] Josue also besieged this and captured (killed) its king. Given to
tribe of Manasse who (never) did not possess it since they did not drive out the
heathen (former inhabitants).

Misōr.676 (For which) Aquila and Symmachus (interpret) "level plain." City of
tribe of Ruben. Separated to Levites in the Gebalene.

Meddaba.677 City now in the mist of Arabia which in even now called Medaba near
Essebon. (A city of Arabia today which retains its ancient name near Esebon.)

Mēphaath.678 (In) tribe of Benjamin. Another is beyond the Jordan where a
garrison of (Roman) soldiers is stationed, near the desert.

Maspha.679 (In) tribe of Gad. Separated to Levites. There is another Masseba
(Masfa) on the northern border of Eleutheropolis. (There is still another of the
tribe of Juda on the way to Jerusalem.

Manaeim.680 (In) tribe of Gad. Separated to Levites in the Galaaditide.

Mōlada (Moladab).681 (In) tribe of Juda or Simeon.

Medebēna (Medemena).682 (In) tribe of Juda. It is now Menoeis (a city) near the
city of Gaza. Noted in Isaia.

Magdala.683 (In) tribe of Juda.

Marēsa.684 (In) tribe of Juda. It is now deserted at the second milestone from
Eleutheropolis. (Its ruins are now only two miles from Eleutheropolis.) Maōn.685
(In) tribe of Juda. East of the Daroma.

Marōth.686 (In) tribe of Juda.

Maddei (Maddi).687 (In) tribe of Juda.

Maspha.688 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Machtrōth.689 (In) tribe of Manassa.

Marala.690 Ascent of Zebulon. Tribe of Manasse (Latin omits phrase).

Masan.691 (In) tribe of Aser. Near Carmel at the sea. City separated to Levites.

Meeleph (Maeleb).692 Border of Nephthai.

Magdiel.693 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthai. It is now a large (small) village
five mile from Dor on the road to Ptolemais.

JUDGES Mosphetham (Mosfethaim).694 (For which) Aquila (interprets) "of the lot."
Symmachus "midpoint" (of the vicinity).

Mōre.695 Name of a hill. (More fully discussed in the book Hebrew Questions.)

Mannēth.696 Where Japhte fought. There is now (shown) a village Maanith four
miles from Esbon on the road to Philadelphia.

Machmas.697 There is now a large village in the region of Jerusalem called
Machamas (retaining the old name) at the ninth mile near hamlet of Rama.

KINGS Messab.698 "Of the heathen" (enemy city) near Gaba (Gabaa).

Magdōn (Magrōn).699 Where Saul stayed.

Massēpha "of Moab."700 Where David came fleeing from Saul (fleeing to avoid
Saul's hatred).

Masereth.701 Desert now deserted where David stayed. (Which) Aquila (interprets)
"in fortress" Symmachus "in place of refuge," Theodotion "in the caves."

Masbak.702 City of the heathen (enemy), king Adrazar.

Mela (i.e.) Gemela.703 (Which) Aquila and Symmachus (translate) "valley of
salt." (We spoke of this above.) Maacha.704 Territory of king of Gesour.

Mōdeeim.705 Village near Diospolis. Home of the Maccabees where their tomb is
pointed out even now. (Indeed it is amazing that their remains are shown in
Antioch, but our author is to be believed.) Mapsar Turou.706 Aquila "wall of
Tyre." Symmachus "fortification of Tyre."

Masa.707 City which Solomon built.

Meebra.708 (For which) Aquila (translates) "from across." Symmachus "from
opposite" (i.e., across or opposite).

Makes.709 City of one of the chiefs of Solomon.

Melō (Mello).710 City which Solomon built. (Further) Symmachus and Theodotion
(translate) "completion." (This also is more fully discussed in the book Hebrew
Questions.) Maidan.711 City which Solomon built.

Memphis.712 In Osee. City of Egypt. (Osee, Ezechiel, Jeremia the prophets
mention this.) Also in Ezechiel. In Jeremia those Jews (who fled Jerusalem) with
Jeremia went to Memphis.

Macha.713 In Osee. (For which) Aquila and Symmachus (translate) "the desire."

Milētos.714 City of Asia. Noted in Ezechiel.

Maribōth.715 (Which Ezechiel mentions saying) "to the waters of Maribeth,"
Ezechiel. Aquila "litigation." Symmachus "controversy."

Mōrathei (Morasthi).716 Home of Michea the prophet. (It is a village) east of
Eleutheropolis.

Masogam.717 Territory of Moab according to Jeremia.

[Misōr.718 Territory of Moab according to Jeremia (near Jeremia).

Mōphath.719 Territory of Moab according to Jeremia.] Noted above Mēphaath.

Maōn.720 Territory of Moab according to Jeremia (near Jeremia).

Molchom.721 Idol of Ammon according to Jeremia (as Jeremia writes).

Magedan.722 The Christ went to the region of Magedan according to Matthew and
Mark also mentions Magedan. Now (the region called) Magedanē is around Gerasa.

SECTION N

GENESIS (Five Books of Moses) Naid.723 Land where Cain dwelled. (Properly)
interpreted "restlessness," (i.e., in motion or fluctuation).

Nineve.724 City of Assyria which Assur built going from the land of Sammaar.
There is now (another) city of Jews called Nineve near the Gonias (corner) of
Arabia.

Naaliēl.725 Near the Arnon. A station of the children of Israel.

Nabau.726 (Which the Hebrews called Nebō.) Mountain above the Jordan opposite
Jericho on the land Moab. There Moses died. It is pointed out even now about six
miles west of Esbon (opposite the east region of Esbon).

Nabōth (Nabo).727 City of the sons of Ruben in the territory of Galaad. Noted
also by Isaia in the vision "against the Moabites" and in Jeremia. There is also
(a certain) man named Nabau who was of Kanath and this city was named from that
Naboth. Nabau is now shown deserted eight miles south of (the city of) Hesbon.

Nageb.728 The South (is called Nageb) according to the Hebrews. Symmachus
(interprets) "south." [It should be known that this area among the Hebrew tribes
is called Nageb, Theman, and Darom, which we are able to translate as south.
(Latin uses four synonyms for south quadrant; austrum (south), adricum
(southwest), meridiem (south), eurum (southeast).]

JOSUE

Naphethdor (Nafeddor).729 Symmachus (interprets) "Dora on the coast" (maritime).
It is nine miles from Kaisareia. (Dor is today a deserted city in the ninth mile
on the road from Caesarea to Ptolemaise.) Naphthō.730 A spring of water is so
called. Tribe of Benjamin.

Naam.731 City of the tribe of Juda.

Nesib.732 (In) tribe of Juda. There is a Nasib (which is now called Nasibi) nine
(seven) miles from Eleutheropolis on the road to Hebron.

Nebpsan.733 (In) tribe of Juda.

Naaratha.734 (In) tribe of Ephraim. There is now a village of Jews Noorath five
miles from Jericho.

Napheth.735 (In) tribe of Manasse.

Naalōl.736 (In tribe of) lot of Zabulon. City separated to Levites.

Nakeb.737 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

JUDGES

Neala.738 From here the heathen "were not driven out" by Zabulon (Zabulon could
not expel). Located in the Batanaca is (a village named) Neeila (Neila).

Nobba (Nabe or Nobba).739 To which Gedeon went up. City separated to the priests
which (afterwards we read) Saul [in a rage] destroyed.

Nemra.740 City of (tribe of) Ruben in land of Galaad. There is now a large
village Namara in the (region or the) Batanaea.

KINGS Naniōth.741 (Place) "in Rama." City where David dwelled. (We spoke of this
in the book Hebrew Questions.) Nachōn.742 "Threshing floor of Nachōn" which
Aquila (interprets) "threshing floor prepared."

Naphath.743 The city of one of the chiefs of Solomon.

Nērigel.744 The Samaritans from Babylon (who had been brought from Babylon)
built this in (the region of) Judaea.

Nazeb.745 The Hevites built this in (the land of) Judaea.

Nasarach.746 Idol of Assyria.

Nebēreim (Nemerim).747 Isaia (mentions this) in the vision "against the
Moabites." Also Jeremia. It is now (a village called) Bennamareim north of
Zoora.

Nabeōth.748 Territory in Isaia. THE GOSPELS

Nazareth.749 Whence the Christ was called a Nazorite (Our Lord and Savior was
called). Formerly (as a taunt were called) the Nazarenes are now the Christians.
It is even now in Galilee (a village) opposite Legeōn fifteen miles to the east
near Mt.Thabor (named Nazara).

Naein (Naim).750 Village (city) in which the son of the widow was raised from
the dead (The Lord raised). It is today twelve (two) miles south of (Mount)
Thabor near Aendor.

SECTION X

JOSHUE Xil.751 (In) tribe of Juda.

SECTION O

GENESIS Orech.752 City of King Nebrod (Nemrod) in Babylon. Our of the
Chaldees.753 Where "Arran died" the brother of Abraham. Where also Josephus
reports his tomb is even "now pointed out." [Of this also we have looked into
and have spoken in the book Hebrew Questions.]

Oulammaous.754 The Hebrew has Louza. This is called also both Louza and Bethel.
Noted above. There is (shown) another Oullama twelve miles east of Diocaesarea.

[Olibama.755 City of the princes of Edom.] Odollam.756 Noted above also. Isaia
mentions it.

EXODUS

Othom (Othon).757 The second station where those (the children of Israel) coming
from Egypt came from Sokchōth "near the desert."

JOSUE Opher.758 Josue besieged this and captures (killed) its king.

Oolei.759 City (in tribe of) of lot of Aser.

Ophra.760 Orad Ophra up to (the land of) Saul.

[Here we read through O the short letter, later we record the long vowel.]

Ous.761 Home of Job. In the territory of Ausitide. One of the sons of Esau is
also called thus. [Of which we spoke in the book Hebrew Questions.]

SECTION P THE PENTATEUCH

Petra.762 City in the land of Edom in Arabia which is called Iechthoel. This is
also called Rekem by the Assyrians (Syrians).

SECTION R THE PENTATEUCH

Roōbōth.763 City of Assyria which Assur built going from the land of Sennaar.
[Of this also we have spoken fully in the book Hebrew Questions.]

Roōbōth.764 Another City which is "by the river" which was the home of the king
of Idumea. Now there is a fortress in the Gebalene (and a large village called
by this name).

Ramesse.765 City which the children of Israel built in Egypt. The whole
territory was formerly called this. In it Jacob dwelled with his children.

Roōb.766 Through which came (crossed) the spies with Josue (son of Nun). There
is a village (today called) Roōb four miles from Scythopolis. Separated to the
Levites.

Raphaka.767 Station of the children of Israel in the desert.

Raphidim.768 Place in the desert beside Mt.Horeb where the water flowed "from
the rock" in Mt.Horeb. The place is called "Temptation." There Josue also fought
Amalek near Pharan.

Ratima.769 Station of the children of Israel in the desert.

Remmen Phares.770 Station of the children of Israel.

Ressa.771 Station of the children of Israel.

Ramōth.772 City (in) the tribe of Gad. Priestly and refuge, in the (land of)
Galaaditide. It is now (a village) fifteen miles west (against the east) of
Philadelphia.

Rekem.773 It is also Petra, city of Arabia, "whose ruler Rocom the children of
Israel killed. It is said he was also king of Madiam.

JOSUE Remmōn.774 (In) tribe of Simeon or Juda. Now Remmōn is a village near
Jerusalem, fifteen miles to the north.

Rōgēl.775 Spring is called this. In lot (tribe) of Benjamin.

Rama.776 (In) tribe of Benjamin. City of Saul. Seven (six) miles north of
Jerusalem opposite Bethel. Jeremia mentioned it.

Rekēm.777 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Remmōn.778 Rock Remmon. (In tribe of) lot of Simeon or Zabulon.

[Rabbōth.779 (In tribe of) lot of Issachar. There is now another village Robbo
in the region of Eleutheropolis to the east.

Rethōm.780] (In tribe of) lot of Issachar.

Roōb.781 (In tribe of) lot of Aser. [City separated to the Levites.

Rama.782 (In tribe of) lot of Aser.] "Up to the fortress city of Tyre."

Rama.783 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

[Some of the names of the villages are assigned to different tribes because with
us we see only one name to pronounce, when among the Hebrews they are written
with various letters.] [Rekkath.784 (In tribe of); lot of Nephthali.]

Rouma (Arima also).785 Where "Abimelech sat" as in Judges. Now it is called
Remphis (Remthis) in the region of Diospolis which is called by many Arimathaia.

KINGS Remmōth.786 Where David sent "the spoils."

Rachel.787 Where David sent "the spoils."

Remmōth Galaad.788 Now there is a village in Perea (beside the Jordan) beside
the river Jobok. Noted also above.

Rabbath.789 City of the king of Ammon which is (now) Philadelphia. Jeremia also
mentions it.

Raōs (Roos).790 David came here (crossed through). Aquila and Symmachus
(interpret) "the top" (the vault).

Rogellein.791 Home of Bersellein the Galladi.

Raphaein (Raphaeim).792 Valley of the heathen (Allofylus). North of Jerusalem.

Remman.793 City of the king of Syria near Damascus.

Reth.794 Asa conquered this.

Rathem.795 (Which for) Aquilla (is interpreted) "juniper tree" and Symmachus
"shelter" (shady place).

Remmōn.796 Isaia (mentioned this) in the vision "Against the Moabites."

Raseph.797 City of Syria.

Rapheth.798 City "in the territory of Thaimon" (Theman) of Assyria. In Isaia (it
is written).

Rebla.799 In the land of Aimath where (victorious) Pharaoh led away Ioachaz (to
Egypt).

Remma.800 Mountain in Isaia. (For which Aquila (interprets) "Mt.Ermona"
(Emmona), Symmachus "in Armenia." There is a village Remmous (Remmus) in Daroma.
(Further) in the (book) of Kings Remman is the home of the idol of the
Damascenes.

Reblatha.801 Territory (or city) of Babylon (which they now call Antioch).

Ramade (Ramale).802 (For which) Aquila (interprets) "be lifted up." (Written) in
Zacharia. There is also (another place) Rama of Benjamin (in the tribe of)
around Bethlehem where "a voice is heard in Rama." (Of this we have fully spoken
in the book Hebrew Questions.)

Rinokoroura.803 Isaia. City of Egypt. [You should know that this word is not
found in the Hebrew books but has been added by the translators of the
Septuagint at the noted place.]

SECTION S

[What we have said in the book on Interpretation of Hebrew Names, even now in
the heading of the letter S we see that among the Hebrews there are three S's:
Samech, Sade and Sin. Yet these are pronounced as one sound among the Greek and
Latin which in the Hebrew language are differentiated. So it is that each name
appears to us to sound differently, and further each has another letter. Not
only from one but from three letters places and cities and villages are
described.] 804

GENESIS

Sidōn.805 Famous Phoenician city. Formerly the northern boundary of the
Chanaanites. Later of Judaea. Given by lot (to tribe of Aser) of Israel. Tribe
of Aser fought to possess it but the tribe of Aser' "did not drive out the
heathen" (were not able to drive out the enemy) Scripture affirms.

Sennaar.806 Plain of Babylon where the Tower was built. From which "Assur went
out and built Nineve." Josephus mentions it saying in the first book of
Antiquities, "And as concerning the plain called Senaar in the region of
Babylon, Hestiaeus speaks as follows, 'Now the priests who escaped took the
sacred vessels of Zeus Enyalius (war like) and came to Sanaar in Babylonia.'"

Suchem (Sikima) (Salēm).807 City of Jacob now deserted. The place is pointed out
in the suburb of Neapolis. There (near) the tomb of Joseph is pointed out near
by. Abimelech came down on it (Latin omits phrase) "And sowed it with salt" as
in (the book of) Judges. (Afterwards) Jeroboam rebuilt it according to Kings.
Located on the border of the (tribe of) lot of Ephraim. One of the sons of Emmōr
is called Suchem from which the place is called. There is also another Suchem in
the mountain of Ephraim, a city of refuge.

Sennaar.808 Home of Amarphal who fought against (the king of) Sodom.

Sodoma.809 City of wicked men which was completely destroyed (divine fire
consumed) near the Dead Sea.

Sebōeim.810 City of the wicked near Sodom which was completely destroyed
(disappeared in eternal ashes).

Sōpheira.811 "Mountain of the East" in India. The sons of Iektan son of Eber
dwelled near it as Josephus affirms, "Those from the river Kōphēn inhabited
parts of India and of the adjacent country of Sēria." Here also the ships of
Solomon carried cargo for three years' journey.

Soora.812 City near Sodom also called Sigor and Zoora. (Of which we spoke
above.) Sauē.813 Ancient city in which the Ammorites dwelled beyond Sodom, which
Chodollagomar destroyed.

Sēeir.814 Mountain of the land of Edom where Easu dwelled in the (region of)
Gebalene. It is named after him for he was fully covered with hair (he was hairy
and bristly) and "being covered with hair" is the interpretation of Sēeir.
(Seeir means hairy and so gets its name.) Scripture also says that before Esau,
the Chorraites dwelled in the place called Seeir and were destroyed by
Chodollagomor. Isaia also mentioned Seeir in the vision "of the Idumeans."

Salēm.815 City of Sikimōn as Scripture affirms. Another village [is shown up to
the present day near Jerusalem, to the west, by this same name. In the eighth
mile toward Scythopolis in the plain there is a village Salumias. Josephus
affirms the true Salem to be that in which Melchisedec ruled which later is
called Solyma and finally gets the name Jerusalem.]

Sour.816 [Where the angel came to Sarai's maid Agar between Kades and Barad. The
desert of Sur extends up to the Red Sea which goes around the border of Egypt.
Further Kades is the desert beyond the city Petra. But Scripture notes the
desert of Kades extends beyond Egypt to which the Hebrews first came after
crossing the Red Sea.]

Sēgōr.817 [Which is also Sala and Zoara, one of the five cities of Sodom. By the
prayer of Lot was saved from fire.] Up to now it is still pointed out, Isaia
mentions it in the vision "Against the Moabites." (As we have spoken above.)

Skēnai (Scenae).818 (i.e., tabernacle.) Where Jacob dwelled after coming from
Mesopotamia. [Which in the Hebrew language is called Socchoth.]

EXODUS

Sokchōth.819 First station of the children of Israel in the desert before
(crossing) the Red Sea (after) coming out of Egypt.

Sin.820 Desert extending between the Red Sea and the desert of Sina. From Sin
they came into Raphidin, from there "into the desert of Sina" near Mt.Sina where
Moses received (the tables of) the law. This desert the Hebrew Scriptures call
Kades, but this is not in (the interpretation of) the Septuagint.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY Selmona.821 Station [of the children of Israel in the
desert.

Saphar.822 Mt.Saphar. Station] of the children of Israel in the desert.

Sattein (Sattim).823 Where "the degraded people fornicated with the daughters of
Moab" near Mt.Phagōr. From here Josue sent those to spy out Jericho.

Sabama.824 City of Moab in (land of) Galaad which the tribe of Ruben received.
Isaia also mentions this in the vision "Against the Moabites."

Selcha.825 City of King Og in the (region of) the Basanitide.

Senna.826 Border of Judaea which is now (a hamlet) Magdalsenna [which means
tower of Sena] eight (seven) miles north of Jericho.

Sephama.827 Border of Judaea to the east.

[Sadada.828 Border of Judaea.]

JOSUE

Somerōn.829 Josue besieged this and captured (killed) its king. This is said to
be (now called) Sebaste now a city of Palestine (where relics of Saint John the
Baptist are kept). It is said in Kings that Zambri, king of Israel, bought "the
Mountain of Semeron from one Semel" and he built on it (its top) a city and
named it Sameron after Semel (from the name of its owner he called it Serneron).

Sēeira.830 Josue also besieged this.

Selcha.831 City in the Basanitide.

Siōr.832 Which was opposite Egypt. There is (today shown) a village Sior between
Jerusalem and Eleutheropolis. (In) tribe of Juda. [Of which there is full
discussion in the book Hebrew Questions.] Saorth.833 (In) tribe of Ruben, above
the Jordan.

[Sachoth.834 (In) tribe of Gad, above the Jordan.] Saphōn.835 (In) tribe of Gad,
above the Jordan.

Sachōron.836 (In) tribe of Juda.

[Sama (Samen).837 (In) tribe of Juda.] Soual.838 (In) tribe of Juda or Simeon.

Sikelag (Secelec).839 Agchous (Anchus) (king of the heathen) gave this over to
(the people) of David. Tribe of (lot of) Juda or Simeon in the Daroma.

Sansana.840 (In) tribe of Juda.

Saleei.841 (In) the tribe of Juda.

Saraa.842 Village in the boundary of Eleutheropolis, (about) ten miles north on
the road to Nicopolis. (In) tribe of Dan or Juda.

Sokchō.843 (Today there are) two villages nine miles from Eleutheropolis on the
road (highway) to Jerusalem. The upper (one in the Mountains) and the lower (the
other in the plain) are named Sokchōth. (In) tribe of Juda.

Saraein.844 (In) tribe of Juda.

Sennaan (Senam).845 (In) tribe of Juda.

Sapheir.846 Village in the mountains which is (located) between Eleutheropolis
and Askalon. (In) tribe of Juda.

Sokchō.847 Noted also above Sokcho (is spoken of also above). It is said (also)
the Samaritans from Babylon (who were brought from Babylon) founded it (the
village).

Skacha.848 (In) tribe of Juda.

Selo.849 (In) tribe of Ephraim. In this the ark (of the testament and the
tabernacle of the Lord remained) was first kept up to the time of Samuel. It is
twelve (ten) miles from Neapolis in the Akrabattine. One of the sons of the
patriarch Juda was called Selon (we read).

Suchem (Sechem).850 (In) tribe of Manasse. City of priests and refuge in the
Mountains of Ephraim where the bones of Joseph are buried. Noted also above
Suchem (of which we spoke above).

Sama.851 (i.e.,) Spring of Sama. (Sames) (in) tribe of Benjamin. (For which)
Aquila (interprets) "spring or the sun."

Semreim.852 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Sela.853 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Sabe (Sabēe).854 (In) tribe of Simeon.

Sarith (Sarid).855 Border of Zabulon.

Sams.856 (For which) Symmachus and Theodotion (interpret) "sun."

Semerōn.857 Lot or (in tribe of) Zabulon.

Sounēm (Sunem).858 Lot of (in tribe of) Issachar. There now is a village Soulēm
(shown) five miles south of Mt.Thabor.

Sion (Seon or Soen).859 Lot of (in tribe of) Issachar. Now (there is shown a
village) is beside Mt.Thabor.

Sasima.860 Border of Issachar.

Sior.861 Lot of (in tribe of) Aser.

Sennanein.862 Oak. (Belonging to) border of Naphthali.

Sorek (Sorec).863 Lot of (in tribe of) Dan. Samson was there (we read) near
Esthaol [of which we have spoken above].

Sames.864 Lot of (in tribe of) Dan. Noted above. [Which was mentioned above
under the name of] Bethsamus.

Salabein (Salabeim).865 Lot of (in tribe of) Dan. But there is now another
(large) village (shown) in the border of Sebastē called Salaba.

Sepheth.866 (Place) of the Chanaanites.

JUDGES Seirōtha.867 Where Aod fled (the judge fled). Noted above also Seeira (we
spoke about above).

Sour Oreb.868 (Which) Aquila (interprets) "Rook of Oreb."

Selmon.869 Mountain on which Abimelech went fighting Sikima.

Sephina.870 (Which for) Aquila and Symmachus (is interpreted) "north."

Sōrēch.871 (Name of) wadi. Home of Balila wife of Samson. It is (today) the
village called Sōrēch (Cafarsorch) north of Eleutheropolis near (the hamlet)
Saraa the home of Samson.

KINGS Sōpheim.872 In Mt. Ephraim (in neighborhood) of Armathaim.

Salisa.873 Through which Saul went.

[Senna.874 Name or a rook.

Saaleim.875 (Village) through which Saul went.] A village of the region of
Eleutheropolis seven miles to the west.

Seiph (Sthif).876 Where Saul met Samuel.

Sabeim.877 Where Saul fought.

Sōnam.878 Home of the [woman] Somanite. There is a village (today) called Sanim
on the border of Sabastē in the Akrabattinē.

Saphamōth.879 Where David sent.

Seeira.880 (Name of) well (at which) Joab turned away (back) Abner (the chief of
the army).

Souba.881 Whose king David defeated.

Sarthan.882 Below (at the foot of) Iezrael.

Sōpheira (Soupheir).883 Where Solomon's ships went. Noted above (of which we
spoke above). Mountain in the east (region) of India.

Serōra.884 City on the way to Edom.

Saba.885 Royal city of the Aithiopians which Josephus affirms Cambuse (the
queen) named Meroen from the name or her own sister.

Sela.886 Where Joas was beaten.

Sephpharouem (Saffaruaim).887 From here the Assyrians moved to another place
(transmigrating) to live in Samaria, from whom (arose the beginnings of the) are
the Samaritan nation. Isaia mentions it.

Sademoth.888 Where Josias (the king) burned (the images of) the idols.

Sarepta.889 Famous village (little city) of Sidon (Sidonians on the highway)
where Elias (once) "dwelled.

Sarōn.890 (Which) Isaia (mentions saying), "Sarōn became a swamp" and the
territory from Mt.Thabor to Lake Tiberias is now called Sarōnas. There is
another Saronas, the region from Caesarea to Joppa. (All the land from Caesarea
Palestine to the city of Joppa is called Saronas.)

Sephela.891 (As written) in Isaia. (For which) Aquila (interprets) "plain,"
Symmachus "valley." Even now it is called Sephela. It is all the region (fields
and plains) around Eleutheropolis to the north and the west.

Sennaar.892 In Micheae. (For which) Aquila (interprets) "Sannaan," Symmachus
"flourishing" (fertile). (Michea the prophet mentions this.) Sedrach.893 Land or
Damascus. (We read) in Zacharia.

Siōn.894 Mountain (in the city) of Jerusalem.

Samareia (Samaria).895 Royal city of Israel. Now (it is called) Sebastē. Also
the region around it. [Receives its name from that city.] Sor (Tyre).896
Phoenician metropolis. Lot of (in tribe of) Naphthali.

Soēne.897 City of Thebes. In Ezechiel (as Ezechiel writes).

Sais.898 City of Egypt. [Ezechiel mentions it. District of Saites also.]
Sadala.899 Border of Judaea as in Ezechiel (as Ezechiel writes).

Sabareim.900 "On the border between Damascus and Aimath" as in Ezechiel (as
Ezechiel writes).

Salisa.901 (For which) Aquila (interprets) "three years." As in Jeremia.
(Jeremia mentions this.)

Suchar.902 Before Neapolis near the field which Jacob gave to Joseph his son. In
it the Christ (our Savior) according to John conversed with the Samaritan
(woman) at the well. It is even now pointed out (where a church is now built).

SECTION T

GENESIS

Tigris.903 The river going out east from Paradise, according to Scripture, "over
against Assyria" (after many turns) flowing "into the Red Sea" as Josephus
affirms. It is called by the nickname Tigris because of the violence resembling
that of the like-named animal. (Properly called by this name because the
excessively swift current is like the quickness of the animal.) Terebinthos in
Sikemon.904 Under which Jacob hid "strange gods" (idols) near Neapolis.

JOSUE Tina.905 (In) tribe of Juda.

Telem.906 (In) tribe of Juda.

Tessem.907 (In) tribe of Juda.

Turos.908 (In) tribe of Nephthali.

JUDGES Tabath.909 Where they fought against the Midianites.

Tōb.910 Land where Jephte dwelled.

Tapheth (Tofeth).911 "In the valley of the sons of Ennom" where the people
committed idolatry (worshiped pagan idols), (is a place) in the suburbs of
Jerusalem.

Tanis.912 City of Egypt. (As) in Isaia and Ezechiel.

Taphnas.913 City of Egypt. In Osee and Ezechiel and Jeremia. There the Jews who
fled to Egypt with Jeremia [for fear of the Babylonians] dwelled. THE GOSPELS

Trachonitis territory or Itouraia.914 Of which Philip was tetrarch according to
the Gospel of Luke. Noted above (we spoke of it above). It is extending from
Bostra in the southern desert up to Damascus. (Beyond Bostra city of Arabia in
the southern desert almost up to Damascus.)

[We read this with the simple letter but truly that which follows is not from
Teth but from Tau, i.e., for which the Greek Theta is written we must read with
aspiration.] Note: in the Latin Manuscripts TH now follows.915

SECTION PH

GENESIS

Pheisōn (Fison).916 Interpreted "multitude." It is the river the Greeks (we)
called (call) Ganges which flowing from Paradise to (going through the regions
at) India flows out into the sea. (Scripture) also said it encircles "all the
land of Hevila where gold and rubies and (precious) emeralds (are produced)."

Pharan.917 (Now) a city beyond Arabia adjoining the desert of the Saracens [who
wander in the desert] through which the children or Israel went moving (camp)
from Sinai. Located (we say) beyond Arabia on the south, three days journey to
the east of Aila (in the desert Pharan) where Scripture affirms Ismael dwelled,
whence the Ishmaelites [who are not the Saracens]. It is said (we read) also
that (king) Chodollagomor cut to pieces those in "Pharan which is in the
desert."

Pulistieim.918 Now called Askalon and the famous territory of Palestine around
it.

Phrear.919 (Well) of the oath. Which Abraham dug where he swore an oath. It is
now called Bērosaba in the (region) of the Geraritike (of which we spoke above).

Phrear.920 (Well) of vision. On the desert where Isaak dwelled.

Phrear.921 (Well) of judgments. Up to the present time there is a village in the
Geraritike called (by name) Berdan (which means in Latin "well of judgments").

Phrear.922 (Well) of Oath. Where Isaac and Abimelech swore. It is called the
city of Isaac. There are also many other and different wells in (Holy) Scripture
which are even now pointed out in the (region of) Geraritike and near Askalon.

Phanouēl.923 Where after an all-night of wrestling Jacob's (Jacob merited the
name Israel) name was changed to Israel near the Wadi Iabok, which in Hebrew is
called [Fanuel, i.e., "face of God" because he saw god there].

Phogōr (Fogo).924 City of (king) Adad in the (region of) Geralitike.

Phinōn.925 Station of the children of Israel in the desert, which was (one of) a
city of the princes of Edom. It is Phainon where there are copper mines between
the city of Petra and Zoara. [Now a village Phainon in the desert where copper
is mined by condemned prisoners between the city of Petra and Zoara of which we
spoke above.]

EXODUS Phithōm.926 City in Egypt which the children of Israel built.

NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Pharagx.927 Botrous. Ravine of the cluster where the spies got fruit as proof of
the land. It is said to be Gophna interpreted "vine" fifteen miles from
Jerusalem on the road going up to Neapolis. The report they swear is true. (This
entry is not in the Latin) Phin.928 Station of the children of Israel in the
desert.

Pharagx Zare.929 Ravine Zared. Section of the desert. (This entry is not in the
Latin.) Phear.930 Well in the desert. Where the people were. (This entry is not
in the Latin.)

Phathoura.931 City beyond Mesopotamia where Balaam (the soothsayer) came from.
Located near Eleutheropolis there is another village (named Phathoura) on the
road to Gaza.

Phogōr (Bēthphogōr).932 Mountain in Moab to which (king) Balak led Balaam (the
Soothsayer). Located above the place now called Libiados (Livias). There is
another (village) Phogōr near Bethlehem (which is now called Faora).

Phasga.933 City of the Amorrites. It is also a mountain to the east of Phasga.
Aquila (interprets) "tomb" (quarry) and the Septuagint "of the tomb" (in a
quarried place).

JUDGES [Phanouel.934 City which Jeroboam built.] Phanouēl.935 Tower which Gedeon
destroyed. One of the sons of ōr is called Phanouēl.

[Phraathōn.936 Home of Abdon judge of Israel "in the mountain of Amalek."]

KINGS

Pharagx Ennom.937 Ravine Ennon. Ge Ennom in Hebrew. Therefore some affirm this
to be Gebenna near Jerusalem. It is said to be the name of the Ravine of
Josephat. (This entry is not in the Latin.)

Phelmoni Almoni.938 Aquila "so and so" or "a certain." Symmachus "such a place."
Theodotion "to a certain (place)" Elmoni (of which there is a full discussion in
the book Hebrew Questions).

Phogō.939 City of the king of Edom.

Pharphar.940 River of Damascus.

Phathori.941 Territory of Egypt as in Ezechiel and Jeremia where the Jews
(having fled) dwelled.

SECTION X

GENESIS Chalannē.942 City of King Nebrod (Nemrod) in Babylon. Noted in Isaia
(saying) "Chalanne where the tower was built."

Chalak.943 City of Assyria which Assur built coming from the land of Sennaar.

Charran.944 There is even now in Mesopotamia (beyond Edessa) a city called
Karra. [Where the Roman soldiers were defeated and Grassus, their leader, was
captured.]

Chebrōn.945 Formerly called Arbok. (Arbe for which the Greek wrongly has Arbok.)
Founded seven years before Tanis of Egypt. Noted above and described. Was the
royal city of the Enakim. [Who we must believe were strong and gigantic.]

Chōba.946 "It is left (north) of Damascus." There is a village Choba now in that
region where Hebrews believing on the Christ [and keeping all the commandments
of the Torah] are called Ebionites. [Against such doctrines Paul the apostle
wrote to the Galatians.]

Chabratha.947 Aquila (interprets) "by the road" (i.e., near the road) going to
Ephratha of Bethleem where Rachel died bearing Benjamin. [We have seen this word
above and we spoke of it in the book Hebrew Questions.]

Chasbi.948 Where the wife of Juda bore a son. A deserted place (ruin) is now
pointed out in the region of Eleutheropolis near Odollam. [This is fully
discussed in the book Hebrew Questions.] NUMBERS AND DEUTERONOMY

Chōrēb.949 Mountain of God in the territory of Moab. Near Mt.Sinai beyond Arabia
in the desert [Where the mountain and the desert or the Saracens called Faran
meet. It seems to me that the two names are for the same mountain which is now
called Sinai and now Choreb.] Charada.950 Station of the children of Israel.

Chenereth.951 Sea. Border of Judaea. Lot of (tribe of) Nephthali. [But the town
which later in honor of Tiberius Caesar, Herod the King of Judaea restored and
called Tiberias first bore this name.]

JOSUE Chepheira.952 City (village) of Gabaōn (of the city of Gabaon). (In) tribe
of Benjamin.

Chasalōn.953 Tribe of Benjamin on the border of Jerusalem. A (very) large
village.

Chsil.954 (In) tribe of Juda.

Chaphtheis.955 (In) tribe of Juda.

Chermel.956 Tribe of Juda. Large city Chermel in the Daroma (Latin omits these
two phrases). Home of Nabal (the Canaanite). Near Chebrōn (of which we spoke
above) to the south. A guard of soldiers is stationed there. (Latin omits the
last two sentences.) Chabōn.957 (In) tribe of Juda.

Cheilōn.958 (In) tribe of Juda.

Chephrei.959 (In) tribe of Benjamin.

Cheselath Thabor.960 Lot of (in tribe of) Zabulon.

KINGS

Chettieim.961 Land of the Chittites or (is said to be) Cyprus. Whence the city
Louza was founded. (There is also now a city of Cyprus called Cititium.)
Charrei.962 (To this place) where Joab pursued Sabee (who was stirring up a
revolution).

Chomarreim.963 Where Josias put to flames (burned) the idols (images).

Chalannē.964 "Where the tower was built" according to Isaia. Noted above (as we
spoke above).

Charran.965 City of Assyria around Thaiman (region) according to Isaia.

Chaselath tou Thabōr.966 Border of Zabulon. Noted above Chessalous (we spoke of
it above under the name Chsalus).

Chōbal.967 Border of Aser.

Chalab.968 "Aser did not drive out" the heathen (former inhabitants) from here.

Chorra.969 Wadi across the Jordan [in which Elias hid in the region of the same
river].

Chōtha.970 Territory of Assyria.

Chōbar.971 River of Assyria as in Ezechiel.

Charchamus.972 City beside the river Euphrates.

Chamōam.973 Village near Bethlehem.

Chelōn (Elōn).974 City of Moab as in Jeremia.

Chamōs.975 Idol of Moab.

Chōrazein.976 Village (city) of Galilee over which the Christ suffered [wept and
wailed at unbelief] according to the Gospel. Now deserted two miles from
Capharnaoum.

Cheimarrous Kedrōn.977 (i.e., Wadi) before Jerusalem (of which we spoke above
between the Mt. of Olives and Jerusalem) where the Christ (Lord and Savior) was
handed over as the Gospel of John affirms.

SECTION O THE PENTATEUCH ōn.978 "Which is Heliopolis" (i.e., city of the sun)
city in Egypt. The children of Israel built this according to the interpretation
of the Septuagint. But more correctly the Hebrew (books) did not hold this since
it existed (was built) before the coming of the children of Israel (before Jacob
came into Egypt). (Petefrem) the father of Asennek was priest here. ōr.979
Mountain on which Aaron died near the city of Petra. There is now pointed out
the rock which flowed for Moses (which Moses struck and gave water to the
people). ōbōth.980 Station of the children of Israel in the desert.

JOSUE and KINGS Osa.981 (In tribe of) lot of Aser.

Oram.982 (In tribe of) lot of Nephthali.

Opheir.983 Where gold was brought by Solomon as (we read) in (the book of)
Kings. One of the descendants of Eber was named Oupheir whose sons (coming)
"from the river Kōphenos in inhabited India and the nearby Syrias" (from the
river Kophene dwelled in the region of India called Ieria) according to
Josephus. (I believe) this region is properly named from him.

Ôn.984 City of Samaria. The Hebrew had (written) Aun. Aquila and Symmachus
(interpret) "useless." Theodotion "unjust." ōlō.985 City of priests.
ōronaeim.986 City of Moab in Jeremia (as Jeremia has written). This text was
transcribed by Noel Wolf, 2005. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 9: ENCOMIUM ON THE MARTYRS
========================================================================

W. WRIGHT, The Encomium of the Martyrs: Journal of Sacred Literature, 4th series
vol. 5 (1864), pp.403-408 (Syriac text with introduction by B.H.COWPER); 4th
series vol. 6 (1864-5), pp.129-133 (English translation and introduction by
B.H.COWPER).

Journal of Sacred Literature 4th series 5 (1864) pp. 403-408 THE ENCOMIUM OF THE
MARTYRS. AN INEDITED ORATION or EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA.--Syriac text.

[THE following short oration is found near the end (fol. 250 rect.) of the
venerable volume from which, at different times, there have been printed:

1. The Recognitions of Clement.

2. Titus of Bostra against the Manicheans.

3. The Theophany of Eusebius.

4. The Martyrs of Palestine, also by Eusebius.

This last was published by Dr. Cureton in 1861 ; but it is singular that the
learned editor, whose premature decease all Orientalists deplore,a made no
allusion to the Encomium, which |404 has been detected by Dr. W. Wright during
his labours as curator of the Syriac MSS. in the British Museum. The same
gentleman has also called our attention to an unfortunately imperfect list of
early martyrs following this oration, and forming the actual conclusion of the
volume (Add. MS. 12,150). We cannot say whether Eusebius is the writer of this
venerable martyrology, but it must be older than the MS. in which we find
it,--the oldest dated Syriac MS. in our Museum (written A.D. 411). Those who
possess Dr. Cureton's Martyrs of Palestine, will welcome the Encomium as its
natural complement. As for the authorship, it is undoubted. Among the works of
Eusebius, mentioned by Ebed-Jesu in his catalogue, the Martyrs of Palestine is
followed by an oration with exactly the same title as ours. This may be seen in
Assemani's Bibliotheca Orientalis, i., 184 ; iii., 19. Through the courtesy of
Mr. Watts, the oriental printer, we are enabled to present our readers with the
Syriac text of this curious little document. We intend to give an English
version of the Encomium in our October number.] [404] ܡܐܡܪ̈ܐ ܕܩܘ̈ܠܨܐ ܕܡܝܬܪ̈ܬܗܘܢ܀

ܐܘܢ ܢܛܘܪ̈ܝܗܿ ܕܚܐܪܘܬܼܐ ܐܠܗܢܝܬܐ ܘܕܫܪܪܐ ܒܐܘܠܨܢܐ ܘܒܥܡܠܐ. ܡܝ̈ܬܐ ܘܒܦܓܪܐ ܘܡܚܪܪ̈ܐ
ܒܢܼܦܫܐ. ܐܢܬܘܢ ܒܡܝܬܘܬܐ ܕܦܓܪܐ ܙܒܝܬܼܘܢ. ܠܡܘܬܐ ܡ̈ܙܝܢܝ ܠܗܝܡܢܘܬܐ. ܘܠܒܝܼܫܝܢ ܠܥܠܡ ܬܢܘܪܐ
ܕܗܝܡܢܘܬܐ. ܫܪܝܪܐܝܬ ܓܝܪ ܠܟܘܢ ܙܝܢܐ ܕܠܐ ܡܙܕܟܐ. ܒܗܝܡܢܘܬܐ ܘܒܙܟܘܬܐ ܐܬܝܼܗܒ. ܫܪܬ ܓܝܪ
ܒܐܝܕ̈ܝܟܘܢ ܣܒܪܐ ܕܒܢܡܘܣܐ ܘܣܢܘܪ̈ܬܐ ܕܒܪ̈ܫܝܟܘܢ ܠܐ ܬܚܒ ܘܠܬܚܬ ܠܐ ܪܬܥ. ܘܒܟܘܢ ܠܐ ܐܬܪܦܝܼܘ.
ܦܘܩܕ̈ܢܐ ܕܡܣܝܒܪ̈ܢܐ. ܘܚܪܦܬܿ ܘܠܐ ܩܗܬ. ܣܟܝܢܐ ܪܘܚܢܝܬܐ ܘܒܨ̈ܠܘܬܐ ܬܟܝܒ̈ܬܐ ܕܒܝܕ ܡܫܝܚܐ
ܠܘܬܐ ܡܪܐ ܟܠ. ܨܒܝܢܟܘܢ ܬܪܨܬܼܘܢ. ܠܟܘܢ ܓܝܪܪ ܐܙܕܕܩ ܩܪܒܐ ܫܡܝܢܐ. ܘܒܙܟܘܬܐ ܠܟܢ̈ܫܐ ܫܡ̈ܝܢܐ
ܫܘܝܬܐܘܢ. ܠܐ ܓܝܪ ܫܕܠܟܘܢ ܘܠܐ ܚܬܚܬܟܘܢ ܥܠܡܐ ܥܒܘܪܐ ܘܠܘܚܡܐ ܕܡ̈ܠܟܐ ܠܐ ܕܚܠܟܘܢ. ܘܠܐ ܫܘܕܝܐ
ܕܡܘܗܒܬܐ ܕܥܘܬܪܗ ܕܥܠܡܐ ܠܣܝܡܬܐ ܕܫܪܪܐ ܕܠܥܠܡ. ܕܝܠܟܘܢ ܡܢ ܢܦܫܟܘܢ ܠܐ ܚܪܨܘ. ܘܠܐ ܫܘܒܗܪܐ
ܕܐܣܟܡܐ ܕܥܠܡܐ ܢܟܦܘܬܟܘܢ ܫܓܢܝ. ܣܢܝܼܬܘܢ ܓܝܪ ܒܗܬܬܐ ܘܪܚܡܬܘܢ ܡܫܠܛܘܬܐ. ܘܒܪܓܬܐ [405]
ܕܚܘܒܐ ܕܙܩܝܦܗ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܡܢ ܢܦܫܬܟܘܢ ܦܪܩܬܘܢ. ܠܘܓܬܐ ܕܙܩܝܦܘܬܐ ܕܐܝܬܝܗܿ ܒܥܠܘܠܘܬܐ ܘܒܒܝܼܫܬܐ.
ܒܐܘܠܨܢܐ ܓܝܪ ܕܙܒܢܐ ܩܠܝܠܐ. ܫܘܒܚܐ ܕܠܐ ܡܫܘܚܬܐ ܩܢܝܼܬܘܢ. ܒܫܪܪܐ ܓܝܪ ܕܗܝܡܢܘܬܐ ܥܡ ܢܒܝܐ
ܐܦܿܠܚܬܼܘܢ. ܘܥܡ ܫܠܝܚ̈ܐ ܒܩܝܡܐ ܩܡܬܘܢ. ܘܥܡ ܫܒܝ̈ܚܐ ܛܘܒ̈ܬܢܐ. ܪܒ ܚܝܠܐ ܐܠܗܬܢܐ ܡܫܝܚܐ
ܟܠܝܠܐ ܕܫܒܘܚܐ ܩܒܼܠܬܘܢ܀

ܐܘ ܡܝ̈ܬܝ ܒܕܘܓܠܐ ܘܚܝܝܢ ܒܫܪܪܐ. ܕܝܠܟܘܢ ܓܝܪ ܒܘܨܪܐ ܕܡܢ ܡܠܐܟ̈ܐ. ܒܚܫܐ ܕܓܕܫܐ ܕܚܠܦ ܡܫܝܚܐ
ܐܬܡܠܝ. ܘܒܛܝܒܘܬܐ ܙܟܘܬܐ ܕܠܐ ܡܪܢܝܬܐ ܣܓܝܐܬܐ ܠܟܘܢ ܐܙܕܕܩܼܬ. ܘܕܘܟܪܢܟܘܢ ܒܟܠ ܫܥܐ ܫܦܝܪ ܡܠܐ
ܫܘܒܚܐ. ܐܬ̈ܘܬܐ ܓܝܪ ܕܨܥܪܐ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܒܦܓܪܟܘܢ ܩܒܠܼܬܘܢ ܠܚܪܘܪܐ ܕܢܦ̈ܫܬܟܘܢ. ܡܝܬܘܬܟܘܢ ܓܝܪ
ܕܚܠܦ ܡܫܝܚܐ ܐܫܪܬ ܣܒܪܐ ܕܗܝܡܢܘܬܟܘܢ. ܘܒܡܣܝܒܪܢܘܬܐ ܕܡܢ ܠܥܠ ܩܒܠܼܬܘܢ. ܫܚܠܦܼܬܘܢ ܩܛܝܪܘܬܐ
ܕܟܝܢܟܘܢ ܩܕܡܝܐ. ܘܗܘܼܝܬܘܢ ܒ̈ܢܝܐ ܘܝܠܕܐ ܕܚܟܡܬܐ ܐܪܓܝܓܬܐ ܘܒܣܘܟܠܐ ܕܐܝܕܥܬܐ ܠܘܬ ܙܕܝ̈ܩܐ
ܢܦܫ̈ܬܟܘܢ ܐܦܪܚܼܬܘܢ ܘܪܗܼܛܬܘܢ ܪܗܛܐ ܕܠܐ ܠܐܘܬܐ ܠܘܬ ܡܿܠܟܐ ܕܫܪܪܐ. ܘܡܪܐ ܟܢ̈ܫܐ ܕܠܥܠܡ.
ܡܟܝܠ ܢܒܗܬ ܥܡܠܐ ܘܚܠܝܨܘܬܐ ܫܠܝܚܬܐ ܕܕܪ̈ܐ ܕܒ̈ܢܝ ܐܢܫܐ ܕܠܐ ܡܙܕܕܩܐ ܠܐܘܬܗܘܢ ܚܠܦ ܡܫܝܚܐ.
ܘܢܦܝܓܘܢ ܕܘܥܬܗܘܢ ܒܛܠܬܐ ܕܚܠܦ ܕܪܐ ܕܫܡܝܐ ܠܐ ܢܛܦܬ. ܘܢܣܬܪܩ ܪܗܛܐ ܕܪ̈ܟܫܐ ܚ̈ܠܝܨܐ ܘܬܬܡܝܩ
ܙܟܘܬܗܘܿܢ ܡܛܠ ܕܥܠ ܪ̈ܟܫܐ ܕܐܠ̈ܝܐ ܕܢܬܦܚܡܘܢ ܠܐ ܡܫܟܚܝܢ. ܠܢܦܫ̈ܬܐ ܕܒܫܪܪܐ ܕܢܚܼ. ܒܗܝܢ
ܡܪܝܐ. ܟܐܢܘܬܗܿ ܓܝܪ ܕܢܦܫܐ ܡܪܟܒܬܗ ܕܡܪܝܡܐ ܘܬܘܕܝܬܐ ܕܒܗܿ ܢܘܛܪܐ ܕܦܘ̈ܓܕܘܗܝ ܘܢܕܡܟܘܢ ܟܢ̈ܫܐ
ܕܥܐܕ̈ܐ ܥ̈ܠܡܝܐ. ܐܝܠܝܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܕܘܟܬܐ ܠܐ ܡܙܕܕܩܐ ܠܗܘܢ ܟܠܗܘܢ ܓܝܪ ܚ̈ܠܝܼܨܝ ܒܦܓܪܐ.
ܘܬܪܒܝܬܐ ܕܐܘܡܢܘܬܐ ܕܕܪ̈ܐ ܥ̈ܠܡܝܐ ܢܒܗܬܘܢ ܒܥܡܠܗܘܢ ܕܡܣܪܩ ܡܢ ܛܝܒܘܬܗ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ. ܐܝܠܝܢ ܓܝܪ
ܕܚܠܦ ܡܪܢ ܘܐܠܗܢ ܕܝܢܼܿܐ ܕܦܓܪܗܘܢ ܫܚܠܦܘ. ܒܡܝܐ ܒܫܘܒܚܐ ܘܒܙܟܘܬܐ ܘܒܚܕܘܬܐ ܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܡܬܪܝܡ
ܚܢܢܝܐ ܘܥܙܪܝܐ ܡܬܗܠܠ. ܘܫܒܝܚܐ ܡܬܩܪܐ [406]ܡܝܫܐܝܠ ܚܝܠܬܢܐ. ܚܡܬ ܘܠܪܘܡܐ ܠܐ ܐܬܪܝܡܬ. ܢܘܪܐ
ܕܒܟܠ ܘܒܥܘܬܪܐ ܕܩܝ̈ܣܐ ܣܓ̈ܝܐܐ ܕܒܗܿ. ܡܢ ܚܝܠܗܿ ܡܣܬܼܪܩܐ ܗܘܬ. ܘܟܝܢܗܿ ܡܚܒܠܢܐ ܡܢ ܫܘܠܛܢܗ
ܒܛܠ. ܡܛܘܠ ܚܘܒܐ ܕܬܝܩܪ ܠܒܢ̈ܝ ܢܡܘܣܐ. ܡܬܬܥܝܪܐ ܗܘܬ ܕܝܢ ܘܡܬܚܝܠܐ ܗܘܬ. ܘܡܘܩܕܐ ܘܡܚܒܠܐ
ܠܐܟ̈ܠܝ ܩܪܨܐ ܚܙ̈ܝܐ ܕܚ̈ܠܝܨܐ ܘܛܘܒ̈ܬܢܐ. ܗܿܢܘܢ ܡܘ̈ܕܝܢܐ ܘܟܕ ܬܚܦܝܬܐ ܕܚܫܗܘܢ ܕܩܕܡ
ܥܝ̈ܢܝܗܘܢ ܠܒܙܚܐ ܘܠܬܘܕܝܬܐ ܠܘܬ ܢܘܪܐ ܕܡܘ̈ܕܝܢܐ ܐܬܩܪܒܘ. ܒܛܠ ܕܝܢ ܐܦ ܓܘܒܐ ܐܪ̈ܝܘܬܐ ܒܟܦܢܐ.
ܕܒܚܫܐ ܕܙܕ̈ܝܩܐ ܠܐ ܐܬܛܢܦܼܘ. ܢܘܚ ܓܝܪ ܬܪܣܼܝ ܚܝ̈ܘܬܐ ܒܒܣܪܐ ܐܝܟ ܦܘܩܕܢܐ ܩܕܡܝܐ. ܕܢܝܐܝܠ
ܕܝܢ ܢܟܦ ܐܢܢ ܕܢܨܘܡܘܢ ܐܝܟ ܕܐܫܬܟܚ ܦܩܕ ܗܘܐ ܬܟܬܘܫܐ ܕܙܕܝܩܘܬܐ. ܢܚܘܐ ܕܝܢ ܓܘܒܐ ܐܚܪܢܐ ܚܣܕܐ
ܘܒܗܬܬܐ ܕ̈ܛܠܘܡܐ ܝܗܘ̈ܕܝܐ ܗܘܿ ܕܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܣܗܕܘܬܐ ܕܚܠܝܨܘܬܗ ܘܓܢܒܪܘܬܗ ܕܐܪܡܝܐ ܡܕܒܚܐ ܘܗܝܟܠܐ
ܣܗܕ ܘܐܬܪܐ ܩܕܝܫܐ ܕܒܝܢܬܗܘܢ ܕܬܡܢ ܩܒܠ ܙܟܪܝܐ ܟܠܝܠܐ ܕܙܟܘܬܐ. ܢܡܠܠ ܕܝܢ ܗܒܝܠ ܡܢ ܒܬܪ ܡܘܬܗ.
ܟܕ ܩܿܒܼܠ ܥܠ ܡܟܐܪܐ ܘܣܢܐ ܒܙܢ̈ܝܐ ܩܐܝܢ. ܣܡܬ ܕܝܢ ܟܠܝܠܐ ܕܙܟܘܬܐ ܕܐܝܓܘܢܐ ܪܒܐ ܠܓܒܪ̈ܐ ܐܦ
ܠܢ̈ܫܐ ܐܝܠܝܢ ܕܒܼܬܘܕܝܬܐ ܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ. ܐܡܪܐ ܕܫܒ̈ܥܐ ܒ̈ܢܝܢ ܗܿܝ ܕܒܒܥܘܬܐ ܘܒܚܠܒܐ ܕܢܡܘܣܐ
ܘܒܣܝܒܪ̈ܬܐ ܫܡܝܢ̈ܝܬܐ ܠܒܢ̈ܝܗܿ ܪܒܝܬ ܘܥܡ ܚܕ ܚܕ ܡܢܗܘܢ ܒܬܘܕܝܬܐ ܕܒ̈ܢܬ ܩ̈ܠܐ ܕܢܡܘܣܐ ܩܿܡܼܬ.
ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕܚܕ ܡܢ ܚ̈ܒܠܝܗܿ ܠܐ ܢܣܬܪܩ ܡܢ ܛܝܒܘܬܐ ܘܣܓܝ ܛܒ ܚܕܝܐ ܗܘܬ. ܥܠ ܦܐܪܐ ܕܗܘܐ ܗܘܐ ܠܚܕ
ܚܕ ܡܢ ܦܪ̈ܥܝܗܿ. ܠܐ ܗܘܐ ܓܝܪ ܥܠ ܚܕ ܡܢ ܒܢ̈ܝܗܿ ܡܬܟܠܐ ܗܘܬ. ܘܥܠ ܐܚܪܢܐ ܫܘܒܚܐ ܡܬܒܨܪ ܗܘܐ.
ܘܠܐ ܗܘܐ ܥܠ ܚܕ ܪܘܙܐ ܗܘܬ ܒܙܟܘܬܗܿ. ܘܥܠ ܐܚܪܢܐ ܕܝܢ ܡܬܥܝܼܩܐ ܗܘܬ ܒܡܦܠܗ ܐܠܐ ܕܥܠ ܟܠܗܘܢ
ܘܡܢ ܟܠܗܘܢ ܣܓܝܐܐ ܗܘܬ ܚܕܘܬܐ ܕܠܟܠܗܘܢ ܚܙܝܐ ܗܘܬ ܕܩܡܝܢ ܗܘܘ ܒܦܘܩܕܢܐ ܕܢܡܘܣܐ. ܘܪܘܙܐ ܗܘܬ
ܘܡܗܠܠܐ ܗܘܬ ܥܠ ܟܐܢܘܬܐ ܕܒܢܡܼܘܼܣܐ ܕܣܘܟ̈ܝܗܿ ܘܝܗܒܐ ܗܘܬ ܬܫܒܘܚܬܐ ܕܟܝܬܐ ܘܨܠܘܬܐ ܙܕܝܩܬܐ
ܠܡܪܝܡܐ [407]ܡܚܝܠܢܐ ܕܥܒܼܕܘ̈ܗܝ. ܐܘ ܫܦܝܪܬ ܒܚܘܒܐ ܘܙܕܝܩܬ ܒܢܡܘܣܐ. ܘܛܘܒܢܝܬܐ ܒܝܠܕܗܿ. ܐܡܐ
ܚܟܝܡܬܐ ܐܪܚܩܬܝ ܡܢ ܝ̈ܠܕܝܟܝ ܫܦܝܪ̈ܐ ܪܦܝܘܬܐ. ܘܩܡܘ ܕܠܐ ܡܚ̈ܘܬܐ ܒܐܝܓܘܢܐ ܘܗܕܐ ܗܝ ܬܚܘܝܬܐ
ܕܐܡܗ̈ܬܐ ܕܫܪܪܐ. ܙܕܩܐ ܗܝ ܓܝܪ ܡܢ ܥܘܬܪܐ ܥܠܡܝܐ. ܘܡܢ ܚܘܒܐ ܕܐܢܫܐ ܒ̈ܢܝ ܓܢܣܐ ܕܢܚܒ ܚܘܒܐ
ܕܐܠܗܐ. ܘܕܢܩܦ ܠܡܫܝܚܐ ܘܠܢܒ̈ܝܐ ܒܩܢܘܢܐ ܐܠܗܬܢܐ ܢܪܚܡ. ܘܒܟܠ ܡܕܡ ܠܐܒܪܗܡ ܠܡܬܕܡܝܘ. ܐܘ
ܐܢܬܬܐ ܛܘܒܢܝܬܐ. ܕܝܠܕܬܝ ܒܚ̈ܒܠܐ ܩܫ̈ܝܐ. ܘܕܠܐ ܟܐܒ̈ܐ ܦܢܝܬܝ ܒܨܠܘܬܐ ܦܐܪ̈ܐ ܕܪܒܝܬܝ ܐܢܬܝ
ܕܠܐ ܐܒܠܐ ܐܝܙܓܕܐ ܫܕܪܬܝ ܚܠܦ ܢܦܫܟܝ. ܩܕܡ ܐܠܗܐ. ܐܝܢܘ ܓܝܪ ܙܒܢܐ ܐܘ ܐܝܢܘ ܝܘܡܐ ܐܘ ܐܝܢܘ
ܟܢܘܫܝܐ ܐܠܗܬܢܐ ܕܚܫܗ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܘܝܘܡܐ ܡܫܒܚܐ ܕܕܘܟܪܢܐ ܕܩܝܡܗ. ܕܠܐ ܒܟܘܠ ܦܘܡ ܘܒܟܠ ܠܫܢ
ܢܬܥܗܕܘܢ ܘܢܫܬܒܚܘܢ ܗܕ̈ܡܐ ܕܩܝܡܐ ܕܡܘܕܝܢܐ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܢܥܒܪܘܢ ܕܝܢ ܒܕܘܟܪܢܐ ܘܒܡܠܬܐ ܩܕܡ
ܥܝ̈ܢܝܢ. ܘܩܕܡ ܡܪܐ ܙܟܘܬܐ ܘܝܗܘܒܐ ܕܟ̈ܠܝܠܐ ܡܪܝܐ ܡܫܝܚܐ ܦ̈ܠܚܐ ܚܕ̈ܬܐ ܕܗܝܡܢܘܬܐ ܟܕ ܡܙܝܼܢܝܢ
ܒܫܘܒܚܐ ܕܫܪܪܗ. ܟܕ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܬܪܝܢܐ ܕܡܕܒܢܘܬܐ ܒܬܪ ܡܪܢ ܝܫܘܥ ܕܚܝܠܐ ܫܡܝܢܐ ܕܣܕܪ̈ܐ ܡܫܒܚܐ.
ܦܛܪܘܣ ܒܫܡܝܐ ܫܠܝܛܐ ܐܦ ܒܐܪܥܐ ܐܚܕ ܘܦܬܚ ܕܠܐ ܛܢܢܐ ܒܟܐܢܘܬܐ ܐܘܪܚܐ ܕܬܪܥܐ ܕܫܡܝܐ. ܘܒܦܪ̈ܝܫܐ
ܠܐ ܡܬܕܡܐ ܒ̈ܢܝ ܕܡܗ ܘܒ̈ܢܝ ܓܢܣܗ. ܢܩܦܼ ܕܝܢ ܠܗܘܢ ܘܠܚܕ ܚܕ ܡܢ ܫ̈ܠܝܚܐ ܟܕ ܡܬܟܼܪܙ ܒܫܡܝܐ
ܘܒܚܘܪܐ ܕܡܼܫܡܫܢܗܘܢ ܕܙܕܝܩܘܬܐ ܟܠܝܠܐ ܢܩܒܠ܀

ܢܬܟܠܠ ܕܝܢ ܐܣܛܦܢܘܣ ܐܦ ܦܘܠܘܣ ܟܕ ܬܘܒ ܠܐ ܪܕܦ ܥܕ̈ܬܐ ܟܕ ܬܢܐ ܗܦܟܐ ܕܪܥܝܢܗ ܒܣܒܪܬܐ ܕܫܪܪܐ
ܗܿܝ ܕܡܢ ܐܠܗܘܬܐ ܕܩܒܼܠ ܘܐܘܕܝ ܒܚܫܗ ܕܚܠܦ ܡܫܝܚܐ. ܘܡܠܝ ܒܦܓܪܗ ܒܘܨܪܐ ܐܘ̈ܠܨܢܐ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܚܠܦ
ܦܓܪܐ ܕܢܦܫܗ. ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܕܝܢ ܥܕܬܐ܀

ܢܬܕܟܪܘܢ ܕܝܢ ܘܐܦ ܐܚܪ̈ܢܐ ܐܝܠܝܢ ܕܒܬܪ ܗܠܝܢ ܐܝܓܘܢܐ ܩܒܼܠܘ. ܘܒܫܪܪܐ ܕܐܝܓܘܢܐ ܕܚܠܦ ܡܫܝܚܐ
ܕܢܩܘܡܘܢ ܫܼܘܘ. ܫܿܘܝܢ ܕܝܢ ܕܒܥܘܗܕܢܢ. ܢܬܕܟܪܘܢ ܐܢܫܐ ܕܒܬܪ ܗܠܝܢ ܕܗܘܼܘ ܓܒ̈ܝܐ ܘܕܠܐ ܒܙܚܐ
[408]ܘܛܠܘܡܝܐ ܒܢܦܫܗܘܢ ܗܝܡܢܘܬܐ ܐܫܪܘ. ܗܿܢܘܢ ܕܫܼܘܘ ܕܢܩܒܠܘܢ ܣܒܪܐ ܕܫ̈ܠܝܚܐ ܢܬܝܩܪܘܢ ܕܝܢ
ܒܥܘܗܕܢܢ ܐܦ ܐܣܩܠܦܝܕܣ ܘܣܪܦܝܘܢ ܘܦܝܠܛܘܣ ܘܙܒܢܘܣ ܘܕܡܛܪܝܘܣ ܘܦܠܒܝܢܘܣ ܘܩܪܠܘܣ ܘܣܘܣܝܦܛܪܘܣ
ܘܐܢܕܪܝܘܣ ܘܒܒܠܘܣ ܘܩܪܝܠܘܣ ܘܐܝܙܒܢܘܣ ܘܙܢܘܒܣ ܘܦܘܠܘܣ ܒܪ ܓܢܣܐ ܗܿܘ ܕܫܼܘܐ ܕܢܩܘܡ ܒܡܢܬܐ
ܐܠܗܢܝܬܐ ܘܕܢܗܘܐ ܡܢܗ. ܡܪܝܢܘܣ ܕܝܢ ܢܩܠ ܘܠܫܡܝܐ ܢܡܛܐ ܦܪܘܢܛܘܢ ܘܣܒܐ ܢܟܦܐ ܗܦܘܠܝܛܘܦ ܝܕܥ
ܐܢܐ ܕܝܢ ܘܡܘܕܐ ܐܢܐ ܕܣܓܝ̈ܐ ܐܚܪ̈ܢܐ ܒܗ ܒܐܝܓܘܢܐ ܗܢܐ ܢܨܚܼܘ. ܐܠܐ ܐܦܢ ܫܡܗܝ̈ܗܘܢ ܥܒܪܝܢ ܠܝ.
ܕܟܘܟܪܢܗܘܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܒܢܦܫܝ ܥܗܝܕ ܐܢܐ. ܘܚ̈ܫܐ ܕܥܕܬܐ ܕܒܡܫܝܚܐ ܡܠܒܒ ܐܢܐ. ܒܫܪܪܐ ܗܿܘ ܓܝܪ
ܡܣܒܪ ܐܢܐ ܥܡ ܟܠܟܘܢ ܒܣܒܪܬܐ ܐܠܗܢܝܬܐ ܒܫܪܪܐ ܕܬܘܕܝܬܐ ܕܒܡܫܝܚܐ ܕܐܩܒܠ ܦܐܪ̈ܐ ܒܩܝܡܬܐ ܕܡ̈ܝܬܐ
ܡܘܣܦ ܐܢܐ ܕܐܡܿܪ ܠܟܘܢ ܐܘ ܛܘܒ̈ܬܢܐ ܡܘܕ̈ܝܢܐ ܠܟܘܢ ܪܓܬ ܡܢ ܥܠܡܐ ܠܡܦܩ ܘܢܡ ܦܓܪܐ ܕܬܫܬܪܘܢ
ܚܒܘ ܕܝܢ ܚܘܒܐ ܕܠܘܬ ܡܫܝܚܐ. ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕܝܘܡܢܐ ܐܝܬܝܟܘܢ ܘܡܣܬܒܪܝܢ ܐܢܬܘܢ. ܝܗܝܒ ܗܘ ܚܕܐ ܙܒܢ
ܫܘܠܛܢܐ ܠܡܐܡܪ ܡܢܟܘܢ ܥܪܩܘ ܟ̈ܐܟܐ ܥܩܬܐ ܓܪܕܝܬ. ܘܬܢܚܬܐ ܐܬܦܨܝܬ ܐܘ ܩܝ̈ܡܝ ܒܕܡܘܬܐ ܕܚܫܗ
ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܘܠܥܠܡ ܠܐ ܡܝܬܝܢ܀ ܫܠܡ ܡܐܡܪܐ ܕܥܠ ܡܘ̈ܕܝܢܐ. a Dr. Cureton died at his country
residence, Westbury, in Shropshire, on the 18th of June, after an illness of
several months, arising from a shock to the nervous system received last year on
the occasion of a railway accident. He was educated at Christ Church, Oxford,
where he graduated in 1830 ; and after having been ordained deacon in 1831 by
the Bishop of Rochester, was admitted to priest's orders in the following year
by the Bishop of Oxford. He was for some time sub-librarian in the Bodleian
Library, and afterwards for several years assistant-keeper in the department of
MSS. in the British Museum, of which institution he was latterly a royal
trustee. In 1847 he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to the Queen, and two
years after was nominated to a canonry in Westminster Abbey, to which is annexed
the rectory of St. Margaret's ; the two appointments being worth about £1,800 a
year. Dr. Cureton was a scholar whose personal character and great literary
attainments won for him the respect and admiration of the learned at home and
abroad. He was an honorary D.D. of Halle, member of the French Institute and of
the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, corresponding member of the
German Oriental Society, etc., etc. His publications in the departments of
Arabic and Syriac literature are numerous. Among the former we may mention
editions of Rabbi Janchum's Commentary on the Book of Lamentations, of
An-Nasafi's Pillar of the Creed of the Sunnites, and of Ash-Shahrastani's Book
of Religious Sects and Philosophical Schools. The list of the latter is still
longer, comprising the Epistles of St. Ignatius, 1845; the Vindiciae Ignatianae,
1846; the Corpus Ignatianum, 1849; the Festal Letters of St. Athanasius, 1848 ;
fragments of the Iliad from a Syriac palimpsest, 1851; the third part of the
Ecclesiastical History of John of Ephesus, 1853 ; the Spicilegium Syriacum, 1855
; the celebrated Curetonian Gospels, 1858; and the History of the Martyrs in
Palestine by Eusebius, 1861. He has, we understand, left behind him an almost
finished work on the establishment and early history of Christianity in Edessa
-- texts, translation, and notes, to the publication of which we look forward
with the deepest interest.

Journal of Sacred Literature 4th series 6 (1865) 129-133

|128

Above all, consider the design and tendency of the New Testament. See to what it
will lead you, and all those who cordially obey it; and then say, whether it be
not good. And consider how naturally its truth is connected with its goodness.
Trace the character and sentiments of its authors, whose living image (if I may
be allowed the expression) is still preserved in their writings. And then ask
your own heart, Can you think this was a forgery, an impious cruel forgery? For
such it must have been, if it were a forgery at all; a scheme to mock God and to
ruin men, even the best of men, such as reverenced conscience, and would abide
all extremities for what they apprehended to be truth. Put the question to your
own heart, Can I in my conscience believe it to be such an imposture? Can I look
up to an omniscient God, and say, "O Lord, thou knowest that it is in reverence
to thee, and in love to truth and virtue, that I reject this book, and the
method to happiness here laid down." But there are difficulties in the way. And
what then? Have those difficulties never been cleared? Go to the living
advocates for Christianity, to those of whose abilities, candour, and piety, you
have the best opinion ; if your prejudices will give you leave to have a good
opinion of any such, tell them your difficulties; hear their solutions; weigh
them seriously, as those who know they must answer it to God: and while doubts
continue, follow the truth as far as it will lead you, and take heed that you do
not " imprison it in unrighteousness " (Rom. i. 18). Nothing appears more
inconsistent and absurd, than for a man solemnly to pretend dissatisfaction with
the evidences of the gospel, as a reason why he cannot in conscience be a
thorough Christian ; when yet at the same time he violates the most apparent
dictates of reason and conscience, and lives in vices condemned even by the
heathens.--Dr. Doddridge.

|129 SELECTIONS FROM THE SYRIAC.--No. II. : THE ENCOMIUM OF THE MARTYRS. BY
EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA. ENGLISH TRANSLATION.1 Encomium of their Excellences.

1. O YE retainers of Godly freedom and truth in tribulation and in labour; dead
in body and free in soul; through the death of the body ye overcame death, armed
with faith, and clothed for ever in the robe 2 of faith. For, verily, invincible
armour was given to you in faith and in victory ;3 for in your hands abode the
shield which is by the law; and the helmets which were on your heads were not
weakened nor cast down,4 and the precepts which are sustaining were not relaxed
in you; and sharp, and not blunt, was the spiritual sword; and by earnest
prayers through Christ unto the Lord of all, your will ye directed. For unto you
was adjudged 5 a heavenly war, and by victory ye became worthy of the heavenly
assemblies; for the world which passeth away did not flatter you, nor did it
entice you, neither did the wrath of kings make you afraid; and the promise of a
gift of the wealth of the world wrested not from your souls the treasure of
truth which is for ever; and the pomp of the fashion of the world perverted not
your sobriety. For ye hated dishonour and loved distinction, and through the
desire of the love 6 of the cross of Christ ye put away from yourselves the
curse of crucifixion, which is in malice and in evil. For by affliction for a
little time ye acquired immeasurable glory; for in the truth of faith ye served
with the prophets, and stood in agreement with |130 the apostles; and with the
glorified blessed, Christ the divine chief, the crown of glory ye received.7

2. O ye who are dead in appearance,8 and alive in reality, for your inferiority
to the angels is filled up by the suffering which has happened on behalf of
Christ, and through grace victory is vouchsafed to you without much solicitude,
and your memory every hour is very full of glory; for ye received in your body
the signs of the reproach of Christ, the setting free of your souls; for your
death on behalf of Christ assured the hope of your faith; and by the constancy
which ye received from above, ye changed the constitution of your former nature,
and became the sons and children of desirable wisdom; and by the understanding
of knowledge, ye caused your souls to fly to the righteous, and ye ran the race
without weariness to the King of truth, and the Lord of the assemblies, which
are for ever. Therefore, let labour 9 be ashamed, and the stripped 10 eagerness
of the conflicts 11 of men whose labour is not vouchsafed on behalf of Christ;
and let them restrain their unprofitable sweat, which is not distilled for the
conflict of heaven ; and let the race of the eager horses be accounted vain, and
their victory be derided, because they cannot be compared to souls upon the
horses of Elijah, on which he has in truth arisen.12 In these the Lord is; for
the righteousness of the soul is the chariot of the Lofty One, and a confession
wherein is the keeping of his restraints.13 And let the assemblies of worldly
festivals slumber,14 --those to which a place in heaven is not vouchsafed; for
all of them are earnest in body, and an increase of the trade of worldly
contests.15 Let them be ashamed in their labour, which maketh void of the grace
of Christ. For those who on behalf of our Lord and our God received in exchange
the judgment of their body, are in heaven, in glory, and in victory,16 and in
joy. Hananiah is exalted, and Azariah is lauded, and Mishael the strong one is
called glorious. The fire of Babel was kindled, and did not |131 ascend 17 on
high, and by the abundance of much wood that was in it, it was deprived of its
power, and its destroying nature was shorn of its might, because of the love
wherewith it would honour the sons of the law.18 But it was fierce and it was
strong, and it burned and destroyed the slanderers who were spectators of the
zealous and the blessed. These were confessors, and when the veil of their
suffering was before their eyes for reproach and for praise, they drew near to
the confessors' fire. The den of hungry mountain-lions also was nullified
through fear of the servant of God, of Christ; and the lions were appeased in
their hunger, so that they were not defiled by the suffering of the righteous.
For Noah fed the beasts with flesh according to the former commandment; but
Daniel made them abstinent, that they should fast, as he was able to command in
the conflict of righteousness. But let another pit shew the reproach and
ignominy of Jewish oppressors,--the one which is a testimony to the earnestness
and manliness of Jeremiah. The altar and temple bore witness, and the holy place
which was between them, where Zechariah received the crown of victory. And let
Abel speak after his death, by denouncing the cruel and hateful in the manners
of Cain. But the crown of victory in the great contest both for men and for
women, who are in confession (or become confessors), the mother of seven sons
put on :19 she who reared her sons by prayer and by the milk of the law and by
heavenly food, stood with every one of them in confession of the utterances of
the law, in order that not one of her pains might be deprived of grace, and very
much rejoiced because of the fruit which there was upon each one of her
branches. For she was not crowned on account of one of her sons, while honour
was taken away because of another; nor was it over one that she rejoiced in
victory, and was in anguish over another because of his fall; but over all of
them, and through all of them, she had great rejoicing, because she saw them all
that they stood in the commandment of the law; and she was glad and gave praise,
because of the righteousness of her branches in the law; and she offered pure
praise and righteous prayer to the Most High the Strengthener of his servants.
How fair was she in duty,20 and righteous in the law, and blessed in her
offspring! A wise mother, thou didst remove indifference far away from thy
lovely children, and |132 without blows 21 they took their stand in the arena:
and this is an evidence 22 of true mothers. For it behoves that more than
worldly wealth, and than love to our fellow-men, we should love the love of God,
and that we should cleave to Christ and love the prophets according to the
divine rule, and in everything be like Abraham.23 O blessed woman, who didst
bring forth with hard pains, and without griefs didst restore, by prayer, the
fruit thou didst rear ; thou, without laments, didst send a messenger for
thyself before God. For what time is there, or what day, or what godly
congregation of the passion of Christ, and glorious day of the memorial of his
resurrection,24 when the members of the resurrection of the confessor Christ may
not be remembered and honoured by every mouth and by every tongue? So, then, let
the new soldiers of his faith, equipped with the glory of his truth, pass in
remembrance and in word before our eyes, and before the Lord of victory, and the
giver of crowns, the Lord Christ, Peter being second in command after our Lord
Jesus, in the heavenly host of the glorious ranks, powerful in heaven and also
upon earth, closing and opening without envy, in righteousness, the way of the
gate of heaven, and not like the Pharisees, the partakers of his blood and of
his race.25 Let us cleave to them, and to every one of the apostles, since it is
proclaimed in heaven and by observation that their minister shall receive a
crown of righteousness.26

3. Let Stephen be crowned ; and also Paul, no longer persecuting the churches,27
declaring his conversion in the Gospel of truth which is from the Deity, which
he received and confessed by his suffering for Christ, and he filled up in his
body what was behind of the afflictions of Christ for his body, that is, the
Church.

4. But also let others be remembered, who, after them, accepted the conflict,
and were counted worthy to stand in the true conflict for Christ. Now as worthy
of our commemoration, let the men be remembered who, after these, were the |133
elect, and who, without reproach and violence, with their souls affirmed the
faith,28--those who were counted worthy to receive the hope of the apostles. Let
there be honoured in our commemoration then, both Asclepiades and Serapion, and
Philetus, and Zebinas, and Demetrius, and Flavianus, and Cyrillus (?), and
Sosipater, and Andrew, and Babylas, and Caerealis (?), and Izabenus(?), and
Zenobius, and Paulus, a kinsman, who was counted worthy to stand in the divine
portion, and to be of it. Let Marinus also hasten, and to heaven let Fronto
come, and the abstinent old man Hippolytus.29 Now I know and confess that many
others were victorious in this conflict. But although their names escape me,
their record, which is in heaven, I remember in my soul, and I lay to heart the
sufferings of the Church which is in Christ. For, truly, I hope with all of you,
through the divine message, by the truth of the confession 30 which, is in
Christ, that I shall receive fruit at the resurrection of the dead. I further
say to you, O blessed confessors, I desire to depart from the world unto you,
and from the body from which you are freed. Now faults fail (those) that (are)
with Christ,31 as ye are this day, and are accounted. May there, at some time,
be given the power to say after you, Pains flee, anguish is worn away, and
groaning is departed : O ye who exist in the likeness of the suffering of
Christ, and die not for ever.

End of the Discourse upon the Confessors.

[I have moved the footnotes to the end from the bottom of the pages, and used
numbers instead of the letters of the original]

1. a The Syriac text of this discourse, from a MS. written A.D. 411, was printed
in our last, pp. 403-408. We were then under the impression that, because the
late Canon Cureton had not referred to it in his Martyrs of Palestine, to which
it is appended in the MS., he had not observed it at ail. This was a mistake.
"We are reminded by Dr. Tregelles that Dr. Cureton alludes to it in the Festal
Letters of Athanasius (Pref., p. 16); and that it is also mentioned by the late
Professor Lee, in his translation of the Theophany of Eusebius (Pref., p. xi.).
The following attempt at a translation is generally literal, but the original,
like all new documents in the same language, contains words and idioms not
explained in grammars and lexicons. This circumstance, and the absence of
vowel-points, causes some ambiguity in certain places, but we hope we have
succeeded in conveying the general sense. Some of the peculiarities are noticed
in the following short annotations.

2. b The word rendered "robe" is the same as that for "furnace," but it occurs
in the sense of a vestment of some kind in Ephraeem Syrus, as is observed by Dr.
Burgess, Repentance of Nineveh, note, p. 54.

3. c Or "innocence." The word has both meanings.

4. d The rendering of this clause is uncertain.

5. e Or, "vouchsafed." The word usually means "justified."

6. f Or, " the affectionate desire."

7. g The sections we indicate are the same in the original.

8. h Literally, " in falsehood."

9. i The similar Syriac word, "world," might seem more appropriate here, but is
not required, as the orator is about to speak of the toil of competitors in
ancient contests.

10. j The Syriac word is the one commonly meaning "Apostolic," but doubtless
"stripped" is the idea; perhaps "gymnastic."

11. k Here again the form is that usually rendered "generations" and "courts,"
but it sometimes means conflicts or contests.

12. l As the sun rises.

13. m "Restraints" seems to be the sense, but the word may be a mistake for
"commands." In any case the clause is not quite clear.

14. n Probably "be lost in silence and forgot."

15. o The preceding clause is not clear.

16. p Or, "in purity."

17. q Or, "was hot, and did not ascend."

18. r i.e., Those who were obedient to the law.

19. s Although most of the illustrations are from our Canonical books, it is
plain that Eusebius did not feel himself under any restraint in that direction.

20. t "Duty." We assign this meaning to a word which has the sense of
"retribution," "recompence," "suffering," "dissolution," etc.

21. u They did not require to be driven by blows into the arena, like cowards.

22. v Or, "a specimen."

23. w We are not sure that the foregoing sentence is correctly rendered
throughout ; it is certainly obscure and irregular in its construction.

24. x The special allusions here seem to be to Good Friday and Easter Sunday.
The phrase rendered "resurrection of the confessor Christ" is ambiguous.

25. y Although this sentence is not very plain, there is no doubt that Peter has
ascribed to him all the honour mentioned above.

26. z We are really uncertain as to the precise idea of this place: possibly the
"minister" is one who honours the memory of the saints.

27. a Obscure again. Eusebius appears to mean that Paul, instead of persecuting
the churches, narrates his conversion in the exercise of that true hope which
God gives, and which he has received and avowed.

28. b Or, with their lives attested the faith.

29. c The eminent saints and martyrs whom Eusebius mentions will not, even in
name, be all recognized, owing to the loose way in which their names are spelled
in the Syriac. A reference to the Martyrs of Palestine supplies the names of
Zebinas, and Paulus, but whether they are the same as those in our text does not
appear (Martyrs, p. 31, 39, 47). Of the rest, we find the names of two or three
in other works of Eusebius, and more in the old martyrologies; but we are not
about to investigate them here, and will only remark that all the martyrs
mentioned in this part of the oration may be such as suffered in Palestine, but
are not named in the larger work.

30. d Another ambiguous phrase.

31. e There is a paronomasia in the original here, which is at the same time
obscure and abrupt. The whole piece abounds with remarkably crabbed and doubtful
expressions, possibly because the translator was not sufficiently master of
Greek. This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 26th July 2002. All material
on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 10: ON THE CELEBRATION OF EASTER
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea, On the Celebration of Easter; De sollemnitate Paschali
(2010) Angelo Mai, Novae Patrum Bibliotheca 4 (1847), pp.209-216 (De
sollemnitate paschali) EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA On the Celebration of the Pascha
[Translated by Andrew Eastbourne]

1. It would perhaps not be inappropriate here again to discuss the Pascha, which
was handed down long ago[1] to the children of the Hebrews as an image. Now
then, when the Hebrews, performing "shadows of things to come,"[2] first used to
celebrate the festival of Phasek,[3] they would take for themselves a young
domestic animal (this was a lamb or a sheep[4]). Next, they would sacrifice this
animal themselves; and then, with the blood, everyone would first anoint the
lintels and door-posts of their own homes, bloodying the thresholds and houses
to ward off the destroyer.[5] The flesh of the lamb, on the other hand, they
would use for food; and girding up their loins with a belt, partaking of the
nourishment of unleavened bread, and serving themselves bitter herbs, they would
"pass over" from one place to another—[meaning,] the [journey] from the land of
Egypt to the wilderness.[6] It had been enjoined by Law that they do this, along
with the slaughter and eating of the lamb. Hence, the passing over out of Egypt
produced[7] for them the name of the "Passover."[8] But these things happened to
them by way of a type; and they were written down for our sake.[9] Indeed, Paul
[implicitly] gives this interpretation, revealing the truth of the ancient
symbols, when he says, "For indeed, Christ our Pascha has been sacrificed."[10]
And the reason for his being sacrificed is presented by the Baptist, when he
says, "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world."[11] The
Savior's body,[12] you see, was handed over to death as a sacrificial victim to
ward off all evils: In the manner of a purificatory ritual, it took away the sin
of the whole world. That is why Isaiah cried out clearly, "This one bears our
sins, and suffers pain on our behalf."[13]

2. When we are nourished by the rational[14] flesh of this sacrificial
Savior,[15] who rescued the entire human race by his own blood—that is, when we
are nourished by his teachings and discourses, which announce the kingdom of
heaven—then we are rightly luxuriating with the luxury[16] that is in accordance
with God. But in addition to this, when we mark the houses of our souls, that
is, our bodies, by faith in his blood, which he gave as a ransom in exchange for
our salvation, we drive away from ourselves every kind of treacherous demon. And
when we celebrate the "Passover" festival, we are training ourselves to pass
over to divine things, just as in ancient times they passed over out of Egypt
into the desert. Indeed, in this way, we too are setting out on a kind of path
that is untraversed and left deserted by the many, putting out of our souls the
ancient "leaven" of godless error; and we serve ourselves "bitter herbs" by
means of a bitter and painful way of life. The appointed time for the festival
is well-timed too: It did not come along in the midst of the winter season—for
that time is gloomy—nor yet did it correspond to the middle of summer, when the
sweltering solstice takes away the beauty of those who spend their time in the
fields, and the length of the hours is too greedy, not balanced with equal
shares.[17] For[18] the sight of the autumnal equinox is not pleasing, as the
countryside is then bereft and deprived of its characteristic fruits, as though
of its children. What is left is spring, the radiant season that takes the lead
as head of the year, like the head of the body, when the sun is just now
traversing the first section [of the Zodiac], and the moon likewise, with its
light full, is shifting its nightly course into bright day. This season relieves
the terrors of winter-storm thunders, removes the long intervals of time,[19]
adjusts the floods of water;[20] and now, as the fresh fair weather shines
forth, calmness settles the seas for the sailors and grants land-travellers a
mild atmosphere; in this season, the countryside is pregnant with seeds in the
fields, and the plants swelling with fruit, exulting in the gifts of God,
provide to farmers the due returns for their toil, with blessings.

3. This is the appointed time for the festival. To the Egyptians, the friends of
demons, it brought destruction, but to the Hebrews, who celebrate the festival
in God's honor, it brought freedom from evils. This very time was that one which
was observed at the original creation[21] of the universe, when the earth
sprouted plants, when the luminaries came into existence, when heaven and earth
were brought onto the scene, and all that is in them. At this time, the Savior
of the whole world[22] accomplished the mystery of his own festival, and the
"great luminary" brightened the earth[23] with the rays of piety; indeed, this
time seems to embrace[24] the birthday of the world. At this time also, the type
was celebrated—the ancient Pascha which was also called Passover. But it also
bore a symbol—consisting of the slaughter of a lamb; and also obscurely
presented an image—that of nourishment by unleavened bread; and all these things
were fulfilled in the Savior's festival. For he himself was the lamb, insofar as
he was clothed with a body; he himself was also the sun of righteousness, when
the truly divine spring and the saving equinox, the turn[25] from worse things
toward the better, took hold of human life. And god-driven scourges are sent
down even to this day on the demons of the Egyptians, whereas peoples who dwell
everywhere on earth are festively celebrating their freedom from long wandering
in godlessness. And as the deceitful spirits have ceased, along with the storm
of evils, an abundance of new fruits garlands the church of God with various
gifts of the Holy Spirit. And simply put, the whole human race has been changed
to take up our side, and all the fields, having received the cultivation of the
soul from the Logos who is the husbandman, have sprouted the seasonable flowers
of virtue. But also, now that we have been freed from the evils of darkness, we
have been deemed worthy of light, in the day of the knowledge of God.[26]

4. Such are the new teachings which in olden days were obscured through symbols,
but which have now been unveiled and brought into the light. And in particular,
we rekindle the beginning of the festival every year with periods of cycles.
Before the festival, for the sake of preparation, we take up the forty-day
training period, in emulation of the holy Moses and Elijah. And the festival
itself we keep renewing, unforgetful forever.[27] Indeed, as we set forth on our
journey toward God, we bind our loins well with the bond of self-control; we
guard the steps of our soul with caution, and, as though in sandals, we prepare
for the course of our heavenly calling; we use the staff of the divine word with
the power of prayer to ward off the enemy, and with all eagerness we pass over
to the path that leads to the heavens, hurrying from earthly affairs to heavenly
things, and from mortal life to the immortal. For in this way, when we have
accomplished the pass-over nobly and well, another, greater festival will greet
us. The children of the Hebrews call it by the name of Pentecost; it bears the
image of the kingdom of heaven. Indeed, Moses says, "When you begin [to use] the
sickle on the crop, you shall count for yourself seven sevens, and you shall
present new loaves from new crops to God."[28] Now then, he was giving
indications by prophetic types: By the "crop," he was referring to the calling
of the nations; and by the "new loaves," he was referring to the souls presented
to God by Christ, the churches from the nations, in which[29] the greatest
festival is celebrated in honor of the God who loves mankind. We have been
harvested by the spiritual sickles of the Apostles, and have been gathered
together into the churches everywhere in the world, as it were into
threshing-floors; we have been made into a body by a harmonious disposition of
faith, and have been prepared with the salt of teachings from the divine words;
we have been reborn through the water and fire of the Holy Spirit—and we are
presented to God by Christ, as nourishing, agreeable, and well-pleasing loaves.

5. In this way, as the prophetic symbols spoken by Moses give way to realities,
with more solemn results, we ourselves, at all events, have learned to conduct
the festival [i.e., Pentecost] with more lustre, as though we had already been
assembled together with Christ and were enjoying his kingdom. For this reason,
at this festival we are no longer allowed to undergo laborious toil, and we are
taught to bear the image of the rest that is hoped for in heaven. Hence, we do
not bend the knee as we pray, nor do we wear ourselves out with fasting; for
those who been deemed worthy of the resurrection effected by God[30] can no
longer fall down on the ground, nor can those who have been freed from the
passions have the same experience[31] as those who are enslaved. Therefore,
after the Pascha we celebrate Pentecost, with seven complete sets of seven
[days]—after manfully completing the previous forty-day period of training
before the Pascha with six sets of seven. For the number six relates to action
and accomplishment, and for this reason God is said to have made the universe in
six days. The labors in that [number six] will be quite rightly succeeded by the
second festival in seven sevens, when there is a multiplication of our rest,
which the number seven signifies symbolically. The number of Pentecost [i.e.,
50], however, is not complete with these [seven sevens]; overshooting the seven
sevens, it puts a seal on the all-festive day of Christ's ascension by means of
a monad,[32] the last day after these [seven sevens].[33] Rightly then, as we
trace out in the days of the holy Pentecost a representation of the rest that is
to come, we rejoice in soul, and rest for a time in body, as though we were
already with the bridegroom himself, and unable to fast.

6. But no one would dispute the fact that the sacred Gospel-writers reported
that the Savior's passion took place during the days of the Jewish Pascha of the
Unleavened Bread. For the reason for the law that was proclaimed regarding the
Pascha by Moses was as follows: Because the Lamb of God was going to be led to
the slaughter among the Jews themselves, and was going to suffer this for the
sake of the common salvation of all mankind at no time other than the one now
being described, God anticipated the future by means of symbolic images, and
commanded that the Jews sacrifice a physical lamb at that very time that was
going to be established at some point after the passage of years. And this was
performed by them every year, until the truth in its full completeness put an
end to the old images. Hence, from that time, the true festival of the mysteries
has held sway among the nations, whereas among the Jews, not even the memory of
the symbols themselves is preserved any longer, since the place in which the Law
had prescribed that the festival's rituals be carried out[34] has been taken
away from them. Quite rightly then does the divine Scripture of the Gospels say
that the Savior suffered at the time of the Jewish festival of Unleavened Bread,
since he was indeed at that time led as a sheep to slaughter, in conformity with
the words of prophecy.

7. Also, they [i.e., the Jews], following Moses, would sacrifice the sheep of
the Pascha once in the whole year, on the fourteenth day of the first month, at
evening. We of the new covenant, on the other hand, who celebrate our own Pascha
each Lord's day, always take our fill of the Savior's body, always partake of
the blood of the Lamb; we have always girded the loins of our souls with
chastity and self-control, we have always prepared our feet in readiness for the
Gospel;[35] we always hold the staves in our hands, and rest on the rod that
came forth from the root of Jesse;[36] we are always being set free from Egypt,
we are always going in search of the wilderness of human life, we are always
setting out on the journey toward God: We are always celebrating the Passover.
For the Gospel's word [/ Word] wants us to do this, not once in the year, but
always and every day. For this reason, we celebrate the festival of our Pascha
every week, on the day of our Savior and Lord, carrying out the mysteries of the
true Lamb, by whom we have been ransomed. And we do not circumcise our bodies
with a blade—rather, we remove every evil of the soul by means of the sharp word
[/Word]; nor do we make use of physical unleavened bread—but only the unleavened
bread of sincerity and truth. For grace, having freed us from our former habits
that had grown old, bestowed on us the new man, the one created in accordance
with God, and the new Law, a new circumcision, a new Pascha, and the "Jew in
secret."[37] And thus, it also left us free from the old appointed times.

8. When, however, the emperor most beloved of God was presiding in the midst of
the holy Synod,[38] and the question of the Pascha was brought forward, there
was said all that was said. And three [fourths] of the bishops of the whole
world had the advantage in numbers as they strove against those of the East: The
peoples of the North, the South, and the Occident together, being fortified by
their harmony, pulled in the opposite direction from those of the Orient, who
were defending their ancient custom. But at the end of the discussion, the
Orientals yielded, and thus there came to be a single festival of Christ—and
thus they stood apart from the killers of the Lord, and were joined to those who
hold the same doctrine.[39] For nature draws like to like. And if someone were
to say that it is written, "On the first day of [the festival] of Unleavened
Bread the disciples approached the Savior and said to him, 'Where do you want us
to make preparations for you to eat the Pascha?'—and he sent them to
such-and-such a man, bidding them to say, 'I am celebrating the Pascha at your
house'"[40]—I will answer that this is not a command, but a historical account
of an event that took place at the time of the Savior's passion. It is one thing
to recount the ancient event, and quite another to make a law and to leave
behind commands for posterity.

9. But furthermore, the Savior did not celebrate the Pascha along with the Jews
at the time of his passion. For when they were sacrificing the lamb, at that
time he himself was conducting his own Pascha with his disciples. They [i.e.,
the Jews] were doing this[41] on the Preparation day on which the Savior
suffered; for this reason, they did not enter the praetorium, but instead Pilate
came out to them. But he [i.e., Jesus] a full day earlier, on the fifth day of
the week, was reclining at table with his disciples, and as he ate with them he
said, "I have very much desired to eat this Pascha with you."[42] Do you see how
the Savior did not eat the Pascha along with the Jews? Because this was a new
custom, and one foreign to the customary Jewish ways, it was necessary for him
to institute it by saying, "I have very much desired to eat this Pascha with you
before I suffer." The one set of practices, being now ancient and indeed
antiquated—the [Pascha] which he used to eat along with the Jews—was not
desirable; but the new mystery of his new covenant, which he imparted to his
disciples, was desirable to him, quite rightly so. Since many prophets and
righteous ones before him desired to see the mysteries of the new covenant, and
since the Word himself, who thirsted at all times for the general salvation, was
passing down a mystery by which all people would celebrate the festival, he
professed that this was desirable to him. The Pascha of Moses was not suitable
for all the nations of all time—of course not, when the Law had stipulated that
it be celebrated in a single place, namely Jerusalem.[43] And so it was not
desirable. But the Savior's mystery of the new covenant is suitable for all
people, and so it was naturally desirable to him.

10. But he himself, before he suffered, ate the Pascha and celebrated the
festival with his disciples, not with the Jews. But when had celebrated the
festival at evening, the chief priests came upon him with the traitor and laid
their hands on him; for they were not eating the Pascha [that] evening,
otherwise they would not have busied themselves with him. And then, having
seized him, they led him off to the house of Caiaphas, where, after spending the
night, they gathered together and conducted the preliminary inquiry. Then, after
that, they arose and led him, in company with the crowd, to Pilate; and at that
point, the Scripture says that they did not enter the praetorium, so that they
would not become defiled[44] (so they thought) by coming in under a pagan roof,
and would eat the Pascha at evening with their purity intact—those most foul
ones—who strained out a gnat but swallowed a camel;[45] those who had become
defiled already in soul and body by their bloodthirstiness against the Savior
feared to come in under [Pilate's] roof! They, on the one hand, on that very day
of the passion, ate the Pascha that was injurious to their own souls, and asked
for the Savior's blood—not on their own behalf, but to their own detriment; our
Savior, on the other hand, not then, but the day before, reclined at table with
his disciples and conducted the festival that was desirable to himself.

11. Do you see how from that time, he [i.e., Jesus] was separating himself from
them and moving away from the Jews' bloodthirstiness, but was joining himself
with his disciples, celebrating the desirable festival together with them? So
then, we too ought to eat the Pascha with Christ, while purifying our minds from
all leaven of evil and wickedness, and taking our fill of the unleavened bread
of truth and sincerity, and having within ourselves, in our souls, the "Jew in
secret"[46] and the true circumcision, and anointing the doorposts of our minds
with the blood of the Lamb who was sacrificed for us, to ward off our destroyer.
And we do this not only at a single time of the whole year, but every week. Let
our "Preparation" be fasting,[47] the symbol of mourning, on behalf of our
former sins, and for the sake of remembering the Savior's passion.

12. I assert that the Jews have gone astray from the truth, ever since they
plotted against the Truth itself and drove away from themselves the Word of
Life. And the Scriptures of the holy Gospels present this fact clearly. For they
testify that the Lord ate the Pascha on the first day of Unleavened Bread; but
they did not eat the Pascha that was customary for them on the day on which, as
Luke says, "the Pascha had to be sacrificed,"[48] but instead on the following
day, which was the second day of Unleavened Bread and the fifteenth day of the
lunar month, on which, when our Savior was being judged by Pilate, they did not
enter the praetorium—and consequently, they did not eat it on the first day of
Unleavened Bread, on which it had to be sacrificed, in accordance with the Law.
For in that case they themselves too would have been celebrating the Pascha
along with the Savior; instead, they were blinded by their own wickedness from
that very time, concurrently with their plot against the Savior, and they
wandered from all truth. We, on the other hand, conduct the same mysteries [as
Christ did] all through the year: On every day before the Sabbath we carry out a
remembrance of the Savior's passion through a fast that the Apostles first
engaged in at the time when the bridegroom had been taken away from them; and
every Lord's day we are made alive by the consecrated body of the same Savior,
and are sealed in our souls by his precious blood.

[1] Gk. ἄνωθεν; alternatively, "from above" (i.e., by God).

[2] Col. 2.17.

[3] Gk. φασέκ. For this transliteration of the Hebrew Pesach, cf. 2 Chron. 30.1,
5, 15, 17, 18; Jer. 38.8 (LXX). Elsewhere, Pascha (Gk. πάσχα) is typically used,
as also elsewhere in the present text. For the Biblical injunctions relating to
the celebration of the Passover, see especially Ex. 12; Lev. 23; Deut. 16.

[4] Gk. πρόβατον; I have translated this term freely as "lamb" elsewhere in this
text. Ex. 12.5, by contrast, allows for a young sheep or goat; Deut. 16.2, for
sheep or cattle.

[5] Gk. εἰς ἀνατροπὴν τοῦ ὀλοθρευτοῦ; Ex. 12.23 speaks of the ὀλοθρεύων; for
ὀλοθρευτής, see 1 Cor. 10.10. Euseb., Comm. on the Psalms [PG 23: 560], uses the
phrase εἰς ἀποτροπὴν τοῦ ὀλοθρευτοῦ—similarly also section 11 in the present
text.

[6] At this point, Euseb. is really thinking of the absolutely first "Passover,"
not simply the early celebration of the festival.

[7] Gk. ἐπλήρου. This meaning is odd, but something like this is required for
the sense here; corruption may have obscured the original wording. Mai
translates similarly: Quamobrem illa ex Aegypto digressio, nomen fecit apud
Hebraeos festo transitus.

[8] Gk. τὰ διαβατήρια, i.e., "[festival / rites] of crossing / passing over";
Philo uses this term for Passover (LSJ).

[9] Cf. 1 Cor. 10.11.

[10] 1 Cor. 5.7.

[11] John. 1.29.

[12] Gk. τὸ σῶμα τὸ σωρήριον, which can be translated either as "the Savior's
body" or "the saving / salvific body." The adjective appears frequently in this
text; I have normally translated it as "Savior's."

[13] Isa. 53.2 (LXX).

[14] Alternatively, "spiritual"; Gk. λογικός, which is of course derived from
the word λόγος, and thus Euseb. is playing on the fact that Christ was
identified as the Logos. The phrase could almost be translated, "the Word's
flesh."

[15] Gk. τὸ σωτήριον θῦμα; lit., "sacrifice of the Savior" or "saving / salvific
sacrifice."

[16] Both "luxuriating" and "luxury" are based on a Greek root (τρύφ-) that is
very similar-sounding to the one for "nourishment" (τρέφ-/τρόφ-).

[17] I.e., when the hours of daylight are much longer than the hours of night,
and thus each of the twelve daylight hours is much longer than each of the
twelve nocturnal hours. (So Mai.)

[18] Gk. γάρ; the odd defective logical connection here suggests that a sentence
or clause has been lost before this one.

[19] A reference to the long winter nights, according to Mai.

[20] That is, it moves away from the storms typical of winter.

[21] Gk. κοσμογονία.

[22] Gk. κόσμος.

[23] Gk. οἰκουμένη.

[24] Gk. περιέχειν; alternatively, "seems to contain a reference to..."

[25] Gk. τροπή, which means a "turn" and so by extension the solstice or equinox
as one of the turning points of the year—I have thus had to translate it twice
to capture the proper effect, first as "equinox," second as "turn."

[26] Mai interprets this as meaning "the day of our knowledge of God": qua die
Dei notitiam hausimus.

[27] Gk. εἰς ἄληστον αἰῶνα.

[28] Deut. 16.9, somewhat freely cited; the last part is not in that verse,
however—cf. Lev. 23.16-17 for the content, although there too the phraseology is
somewhat different.

[29] Gk. ἐφ' αἷς.

[30] Gk. κατὰ Θεόν.

[31] Gk. πάσχειν - the verb is related to the noun "passion" (πάθος) used just
before.

[32] I.e., a single (50th) day in addition to the 49.

[33] I.e., the ascension, 40 days after the resurrection, was followed up by the
experience of Pentecost (Acts 1.3; 2.1).

[34] Cf. Deut. 16.6.

[35] Cf. Eph. 6.15.

[36] Cf. Isa. 11.1.

[37] Cf. Rom. 2.29. The phrase, "in secret" (Gk. ἐν κρυπτῷ) is rendered by many
translations as "inwardly."

[38] I.e., Constantine at the Council of Nicaea.

[39] I.e., fellow Christians, as opposed to Jews.

[40] Mt. 26.17-18, freely cited.

[41] I.e., celebrating their Pascha. That is, not only was the Pascha instituted
by Christ different in character, but it was also not on the same day as the
Jewish authorities celebrated their Pascha.

[42] Lk. 22.15.

[43] Cf. Deut. 16.6.

[44] Cf. Jn. 18.28.

[45] Cf. Mt. 23.24.

[46] Cf. Rom. 2.29 and the end of section 7 above.

[47] Cf. the end of section 12 below.

[48] Lk. 22.7. This text was commissioned by Roger Pearse, 2010. It was
translated from Angelo Mai, Novae Patrum Bibliotheca 4 (1847), pp.209-216 (De
sollemnitate paschali), This file and all material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 11: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 1
========================================================================

Book I.

Chapter I. The Plan of the Work.

Chapter II. Summary View of the Pre-Existence and Divinity of Our Saviour and
Lord Jesus Christ.

Chapter III. The Name Jesus and Also the Name Christ Were Known from the
Beginning,and Were Honored by the Inspired Prophets.

Chapter IV. The Religion Proclaimed by Him to All Nations Was Neither New Nor
Strange.

Chapter V. The Time of His Appearance Among Men.

Chapter VI. About the Time of Christ, in Accordance with Prophecy, the Rulers
Who Had Governed the Fewish Nation in Regular Succession from the Days of
Antiquity Came to an End, and Herod, the First Foreigner, Became King.

Chapter VII. The Alleged Discrepancy in the Gospels in Regard to the Genealogy
of Christ.

Chapter VIII. The Cruelty of Herod Toward the Infants, and the Manner of His
Death.

Chapter IX. The Times of Pilate.

Chapter X. The High Priests of the Jews Under Whom Christ Taught.

Chapter XI. Testimonies in Regard to John the Baptist and Christ.

Chapter XII. The Disciples of Our Saviour.

Chapter XIII. Narrative Concerning the Prince of the Edessences.

Book I.

Chapter I. The Plan of the Work.

1 It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles,
as well as of the times which have elapsed from the days of our Saviour to our
own; and to relate the many important events which are said to have occurred in
the history of the Church; and to mention those who have governed and presided
over the Church in the most prominent parishes, and those who in each generation
have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing.

2 It is my purpose also to give the names and number and times of those who
through love of innovation have run into the greatest errors, and, proclaiming
themselves discoverers of knowledge falsely so-called1 have like fierce wolves
unmercifully devastated the flock of Christ.

3 It is my intention, moreover, to recount the misfortunes which immediately
came upon the whole Jewish nation in consequence of their plots against our
Saviour, and to record the ways and the times in which the divine word has been
attacked by the Gentiles, and to describe the character of those who at various
periods have contended for it in the face of blood and of tortures, as well as
the confessions which have been made in our own days, and finally the gracious
and kindly succor which our Saviour has afforded them all. Since I propose to
write of all these things I shall commence my work with the beginning of the
dispensation2 of our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ.3

4 But at the outset I must crave for my work the indulgence of the wise,4 for I
confess that it is beyond my power to produce a perfect and complete history,
and since I am the first to enter upon the subject, I am attempting to traverse
as it were a lonely and untrodden path.5 I pray that I may have God as my guide
and the power of the Lord as my aid, since I am unable to find even the bare
footsteps of those who have traveled the way before me, except in brief
fragments, in which some in one way, others in another, have transmitted to us
particular accounts of the times in which they lived. From afar they raise their
voices like torches, and they cry out, as from some lofty and conspicuous
watch-tower, admonishing us where to walk and how to direct the course of our
work steadily and safely.

5 Having gathered therefore from the matters mentioned here and there by them
whatever we consider important for the present work, and having plucked like
flowers from a meadow the appropriate passages from ancient writers,6 we shall
endeavor to embody the whole in an historical narrative, content if we preserve
the memory of the successions of the apostles of our Saviour; if not indeed of
all, yet of the most renowned of them in those churches which are the most
noted, and which even to the present time are held in honor.

6 This work seems to me of especial importance because I know of no
ecclesiastical writer who has devoted himself to this subject; and I hope that
it will appear most useful to those who are fond of historical research.

7 I have already given an epitome of these things in the Chronological Canons7
which I have composed, but notwithstanding that, I have undertaken in the
present work to write as full an account of them as I am able.

8 My work will begin, as I have said, with the dispensation8 of the Saviour
Christ,-which is loftier and greater than human conception,

9 -and with a discussion of his divinity9 ; for it is necessary, inasmuch as we
derive even our name from Christ, for one who proposes to write a history of the
Church to begin with the very origin of Christ's dispensation, a dispensation
more divine than many think.

Chapter II. Summary View of the Pre-Existence and Divinity of Our Saviour and
Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Since in Christ there is a twofold nature, and the one-in so far as he is
thought of as God-resembles the head of the body, while the other may be
compared with the feet,-in so far as he, for the sake of our salvation, put on
human nature with the same passions as our own,-the following work will be
complete only if we begin with the chief and lordliest events of all his
history. In this way will the antiquity and divinity of Christianity be shown to
those who suppose it of recent and foreign origin,10 and imagine that it
appeared only yesterday11

2 No language is sufficient to express the origin and the worth, the being and
the nature of Christ. Wherefore also the divine Spirit says in the prophecies,
"Who shall declare his generation?"12 For none knoweth the Father except the
Son, neither can any one know the Son adequately except the Father alone who
hath begotten him.13

3 For alone who beside the Father could clearly understand the Light which was
before the world, the intellectual and essential Wisdom which existed before the
ages, the living Word which was in the beginning with the Father and which was
God, the first and only begotten of God which was before every creature and
creation visible and invisible, the commander-in-chief of the rational and
immortal host of heaven, the messenger of the great counsel, the executor of the
Father's unspoken will, the creator, with the Father, of all things, the second
cause of the universe after the Father, the true and only-begotten Son of God,
the Lord and God and King of all created things, the one who has received
dominion and power, with divinity itself, and with might and honor from the
Father; as it is said in regard to him in the mystical passages of Scripture
which speak of his divinity: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God."14

4 "All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made."15 This,
too, the great Moses teaches, when, as the most ancient of all the prophets, he
describes under the influence of the divine Spirit the creation and arrangement
of the universe. He declares that the maker of the world and the creator of all
things yielded to Christ himself, and to none other than his own clearly divine
and first-born Word, the making of inferior things, and communed with him
respecting the creation of man.

5 "For," says he," God said, Let us make man in our image and in our
likeness."16 And another of the prophets confirms this, speaking of God in his
hymns as follows: "He spake and they were made; he commanded and they were
created."17 He here introduces the Father and Maker as Ruler of all, commanding
with a kingly nod, and second to him the divine Word, none other than the one
who is proclaimed by us, as carrying out

6 the Father's commands. All that are said to have excelled in righteousness and
piety since the creation of man, the great servant Moses and before him in the
first place Abraham and his children, and as many righteous men and prophets as
afterward appeared, have contemplated him with the pure eyes of the mind, and
have recognized him and offered to him the worship which is due him as Son of
God.

7 But he, by no means neglectful of the reverence due to the Father, was
appointed to teach the knowledge of the Father to them all. For instance, the
Lord God, it is said, appeared as a common man to Abraham while he was sitting
at the oak of Mambre.18 And he, immediately failing down, although he saw a man
with his eyes, nevertheless worshiped him as God, and sacrificed to him as Lord,
and confessed that he was not ignorant of his identity when he uttered the
words, "Lord, the judge of all the earth, wilt thou not execute righteous
judgment?"19

8 For if it is unreasonable to suppose that the unbegotten and immutable essence
of the almighty God was changed into the form of man or that it deceived the
eyes of the beholders with the appearance of some created thing, and if it is
unreasonable to suppose, on the other hand, that the Scripture should falsely
invent such things, when the God and Lord who judgeth all the earth and
executeth judgment is seen in the form of a man, who else can be called, if it
be not lawful to call him the first cause of all things, than his only
pre-existent Word?20 Concerning whom it is said in the Psalms, "He sent his Word
and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions."21

9 Moses most clearly proclaims him second Lord after the Father, when he says,
"The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord."22
The divine Scripture also calls him God, when he appeared again to Jacob in the
form of a man, and said to Jacob, "Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but
Israel shall be thy name, because thou hast prevailed with God."23 Wherefore
also Jacob called the name of that place "Vision of God,"24 saying, "For I have
seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."25

10 Nor is it admissible to suppose that the theophanies recorded were
appearances of subordinate angels and ministers of God, for whenever any of
these appeared to men, the Scripture does not conceal the fact, but calls them
by name not God nor Lord, but angels, as it is easy to prove by numberless
testimonies.

11 Joshua, also, the successor of Moses, calls him, as leader of the heavenly
angels and archangels and of the supramundane powers, and as lieutenant of the
Father,26 entrusted with the second rank of sovereignty and rule over all,
"captain of the host of the Lords" although he saw him not otherwise than again
in the form and appearance of a man. For it is written:

12 "And it came to pass when Joshua was at Jericho27 that he looked and saw a
man standing over against him with his sword drawn in his hand, and Joshua went
unto him and said, Art thou for us or for our adversaries? And he said unto him,
As captain of the host of the Lord am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to
the earth and said unto him, Lord, what dost thou command thy servant? and the
captain of the Lord said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy feet, for the
place whereon thou standest is holy."28

13 You will perceive also from the same words that this was no other than he who
talked with Moses29 For the Scripture says in the same words and with reference
to the same one, "When the Lord saw that he drew near to see, the Lord called to
him out of the bush and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, What is it? And he
said, Draw not nigh hither; loose thy shoe from off thy feet, for the place
whereon thou standest is holy ground. And he said unto him, I am the God of thy
fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob."30

14 And that there is a certain substance which lived and subsisted31 before the
world, and which ministered unto the Father and God of the universe for the
formation of all created things, and which, is called the Word of God and
Wisdom, we may learn, to quote otherproofs in addition to those already cited,
from the mouth of Wisdom herself, who reveals most clearly through Solomon the
following mysteries concerning herself: "I, Wisdom, have dwelt with prudence and
knowledge, and I have invoked understanding. Through me kings reign, and princes
ordain righteousness.

15 Through me the great are magnified, and through me sovereigns rule the
earth."32 To which she adds: "The Lord created me in the beginning of his ways,
for his works; before the world he established me, in the beginning, before he
made the earth, before he made the depths, before the mountains were settled,
before all hills he begat me. When he prepared the heavens I was present with
him, and when he established the fountains of the region under heaven33 I was
with him, disposing.

16 I was the one in whom he delighted; daily I rejoiced before him at all times
when he was rejoicing at having completed the world."34 That the divine Word,
therefore, pre-existed and appeared to some, if not to all, has thus been
briefly shown by us.

17 But why the Gospel was not preached in ancient times to all men and to all
nations, as it is now, will appear from the following considerations.35 The life
of the ancients was not of such a kind as to permit them to receive the all-wise
and all-virtuous teaching 18 of Christ.

18 For immediately in the beginning, after his original life of blessedness, the
first man despised the command of God, and fell into this mortal and perishable
state, and exchanged his former divinely inspired luxury for this curse-laden
earth. His descendants having filled our earth, showed themselves much worse,
with the exception of one here and there, and entered upon a certain brutal and
insupportable mode of life.

19 They thought neither of city nor state, neither of arts nor sciences. They
were ignorant even of the name of laws and of justice, of virtue and of
philosophy. As nomads, they passed their lives in deserts, like wild and fierce
beasts, destroying, by an excess of voluntary wickedness, the natural reason of
man, and the seeds of thought and of culture implanted in the human soul. They
gave themselves wholly over to all kinds of profanity, now seducing one another,
now slaying one another, now eating human flesh, and now daring to wage war with
the Gods and to undertake those battles of the giants celebrated by all; now
planning to fortify earth against heaven, and in the madness of ungoverned pride
to prepare an attack upon the very God of all.36

20 On account of these things, when they conducted themselves thus, the
all-seeing God sent down upon them floods and conflagrations as upon a wild
forest spread over the whole earth. He cut them down with continuous famines and
plagues, with wars, and with thunderbolts from heaven, as if to check some
terrible and obstinate disease of souls with more severe punishments.

21 Then, when the excess of wickedness had overwhelmed nearly all the race, like
a deep fit of drunkenness, beclouding and darkening the minds of men, the
first-born and first-created wisdom of God, the pre-existent Word himself,
induced by his exceeding love for man, appeared to his servants, now in the form
of angels, and again to one and another of those ancients who enjoyed the favor
of God, in his own person as the saving power of God, not otherwise, however,
than in the shape of man, because it was impossible to appear in any other way.

22 And as by them the seeds of piety were sown among a multitude of men and the
whole nation, descended from the Hebrews, devoted themselves persistently to the
worship of God, he imparted to them through the prophet Moses, as to multitudes
still corrupted by their ancient practices, images and symbols of a certain
mystic Sabbath and of circumcision, and elements of other spiritual principles,
but he did not grant them a complete knowledge of the mysteries themselves.

23 But when their law became celebrated, and, like a sweet odor, was diffused
among all men, as a result of their influence the dispositions of the majority
of the heathen were softened by the lawgivers and philosophers who arose on
every side, and their wild and savage brutality was changed into mildness, so
that they enjoyed deep peace, friendship, and social intercourse.37 Then,
finally, at the time of the origin of the Roman Empire, there appeared again to
all men and nations throughout the world, who had been, as it were, previously
assisted, and were now fitted to receive the knowledge of the Father, that same
teacher of virtue, the minister of the Father in all good things, the divine and
heavenly Word of God, in a human body not at all differing in substance from our
own. He did and suffered the things which had been prophesied. For it had been
foretold that one who was at the same time man and God should come and dwell in
the world, should perform wonderful works, and should show himself a teacher to
all nations of the piety of the Father. The marvelous nature of his birth, and
his new teaching, and his wonderful works had also been foretold; so likewise
the manner of his death, his resurrection from the dead, and,finally, his divine
ascension into heaven.

24 For instance, Daniel the prophet, under the influence of the divine Spirit,
seeing his kingdom at the end of time,38 was inspired thus to describe the
divine vision in language fitted to human comprehension: "For I beheld," he
says, "until thrones were placed, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment
was white as snow and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was a
flame of fire and his wheels burning fire. A river of fire flowed before him.
Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand
stood beforehim.

25 He appointed judgment, and the books were opened."39 And again, "I saw," says
he, "and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and he
hastened unto the Ancient of Days and was brought into his presence, and there
was given him the dominion and the glory and the kingdom; and all peoples,
tribes, and tongues serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which
shall not pass away, and his kingdom shall not be destroyed."40

26 It is clear that these words can refer to no one else than to our Saviour,
the God Word who was in the beginning with God, and who was called the Son of
man because of his final appearance in the flesh.

27 But since we have collected in separate books41 as the selections from the
prophets which relate to our Saviour Jesus Christ, and have arranged in a more
logical form those things which have been revealed concerning him, what has been
said will suffice for the present.

Chapter III. The Name Jesus and Also the Name Christ Were Known from the
Beginning,and Were Honored by the Inspired Prophets.

1 It is now the proper place to show that the very name Jesus and also the name
Christ were honored by the ancient prophets beloved of God.42

2 Moses was the first 2 to make known the name of Christ as a name especially
august and glorious. When he delivered types and symbols of heavenly things, and
mysterious images, in accordance with the oracle which said to him, "Look that
thou make all things according to the pattern which was shown thee in the
mount,"43 he consecrated a man high priest of God, in so far as that was
possible, and him he called Christ.44 And thus to this dignity of the high
priesthood, which in his opinion surpassed the most honorable position among
men, he attached for the sake of honor and glory the name of Christ.

3 He knew so well that in Christ was something divine. And the same one
foreseeing, under the influence of the divine Spirit, the name Jesus, dignified
it also with a certain distinguished privilege. For the name of Jesus, which had
never been uttered among men before the time of Moses, he applied first and only
to the one who he knew would receive after his death, again as a type and
symbol, the supreme command.

4His successor, therefore, who had not hitherto borne the name Jesus, but had
been called by another name, Auses,45 which had been given him by his parents,
he now called Jesus, bestowing the name upon him as a gift of honor, far greater
than any kingly diadem. For Jesus himself, the son of Nave, bore a resemblance
to our Saviour in the fact that he alone, after Moses and after the completion
of the symbolical worship which had been transmitted by him, succeeded to the
government of the true and pure religion.

5 Thus Moses bestowed the name of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, as a mark of the
highest honor, upon the two men who in his time surpassed all the rest of the
people in virtue and glory; namely, upon the high priest and upon his own
successor in the government.

6 And the prophets that came after also clearly foretold Christ by name,
predicting at the same time the plots which the Jewish people would form against
him, and the calling of the nations through him. Jeremiah, for instance, speaks
as follows: "The Spirit before our face, Christ the Lord, was taken in their
destructions; of whom we said, under his shadow we shall live among the
nations."46 And David, in perplexity, says, "Why did the nations rage and the
people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth set themselves in array, and
the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ";47 to
which he adds, in the person of Christ himself, "The Lord said unto me, Thou art
my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I will give thee the
nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy
possession."48

7 And not only those who were honored with the high priesthood, and who for the
sake of the symbol were anointed with especially prepared oil, were adorned with
the name of Christ among the Hebrews, but also the kings whom the prophets
anointed under the influence of the divine Spirit, and thus constituted, as it
were, typical Christs. For they also bore in their own persons types of the
royal and sovereign power of the true and only Christ, the divine Word who
ruleth over all.

8 And we have been told also that certain of the prophets themselves became, by
the act of anointing, Christs in type, so that all these have reference to the
true Christ, the divinely inspired and heavenly Word, who is the only high
priest of all, and the only King of every creature, and the Father's only
supreme prophet of prophets.

9 And a proof of this is that no one of those who were of old symbolically
anointed, whether priests, or kings, or prophets, possessed so great a power of
inspired virtue as was exhibited by our Saviour and Lord Jesus, the true and
only Christ.

10 None of them at least, however superior in dignity and honor they may have
been for many generations among their own people, ever gave to their followers
the name of Christians from their own typical name of Christ. Neither was divine
honor ever rendered to any one of them by their subjects; nor after their death
was the disposition of their followers such that they were ready to die for the
one whom they honored. And never did so great a commotion arise among all the
nations of the earth in respect to any one of that age; for the mere symbol
could not act with such power among them as the truth itself which was exhibited
by our Saviour.

11 He, although he received no symbols and types of high priesthood from any
one, although he was not born of a race of priests, although he was not elevated
to a kingdom by military guards, although he was not a prophet like those of
old, although he obtained no honor nor pre-eminence among the Jews, nevertheless
was adorned by the Father with all, if not with the symbols, yet with the truth
itself.

12 And therefore, although he did not possess like honors with those whom we
have mentioned, he is called Christ more than all of them. And as himself the
true and only Christ of God, he has filled the whole earth with the truly august
and sacred name of Christians, committing to his followers no longer types and
images, but the uncovered virtues themselves, and a heavenly life in the very
doctrines of truth.

13 And he was not anointed with oil prepared from material substances, but, as
befits divinity, with the divine Spirit himself, by participation in the
unbegotten deity of the Father. And this is taught also again by Isaiah, who
exclaims, as if in the person of Christ himself, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon
me; therefore hath he anointed me. He hath sent me to preach the Gospel to the
poor, to proclaim deliverance to captives, and recovery of sight to the
blind."49

14 And not only Isaiah, but also David addresses him, saying, "Thy throne, O
God, is forever and ever. A scepter of equity is the scepter of thy kingdom.
Thou hast loved righteousness and hast hated iniquity. Therefore God, thy God,
hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows."50 Here the
Scripture calls him God in the first verse, in the second it honors him with a
royal scepter.

15 Then a little farther on, after the divine and royal power, it represents him
in the third place as having become Christ, being anointed not with oil made of
material substances, but with the divine oil of gladness. It thus indicates his
especial honor, far superior to and different from that of those who, as types,
were of old anointed in a more material way.

16 And elsewhere the same writer speaks of him as follows: "The Lord said unto
my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool";51
and, "Out of the womb, before the morning star, have I begotten thee. The Lord
hath sworn and he will not repent. Thou art a priest forever after the order of
Melchizedec."52

17 But this Melchizedec is introduced in the Holy Scriptures as a priest of the
most high God,53 not consecrated by any anointing oil, especially prepared, and
not even belonging by descent to the priesthood of the Jews. Wherefore after his
order, but not after the order of the others, who received symbols and types,
was our Saviour proclaimed, withan appeal to an oath, Christ and priest.

18 History, therefore, does not relate that he was anointed corporeally by the
Jews, nor that he belonged to the lineage of priests, but that he came into
existence from God himself before the morning star, that is before the
organization of the world, and that he obtained an immortal and undecaying
priesthood for eternal ages.

19 But it is a great and convincing proof of his incorporeal and divine unction
that he alone of all those who have ever existed is even to the present day
called Christ by all men throughout the world, and is confessed and witnessed to
under this name, and is commemorated both by Greeks and Barbarians and even to
this day is honored as a King by his followers throughout the world, and is
admired as more than a prophet, and is glorified as the true and only high
priest of God.54 And besides all this, as the pre-existent Word of God, called
into being before all ages, he has received august honor from the Father, and is
worshiped as God.

20 But most wonderful of all is the fact that we who have consecrated ourselves
to him, honor him not only with our voices and with the sound of words, but also
with complete elevation of soul, so that we choose to give testimony unto him
rather than to preserve our own lives.

21 I have of necessity prefaced my history with these matters in order that no
one, judging from the date of his incarnation, may think that our Saviour and
Lord Jesus, the Christ, has but recently come into being.

Chapter IV. The Religion Proclaimed by Him to All Nations Was Neither New Nor
Strange.

1 But that no one may suppose that his doctrine is new and strange, as if it
were framed by a man of recent origin, differing in no respect from other men,
let us now briefly consider this point also.

2 It is admitted that when in recent times the appearance of our Saviour Jesus
Christ had become known to all men there immediately made its appearance a new
nation; a nation confessedly not small, and not dwelling in some corner of the
earth, but the most numerous and pious of all nations,55 indestructible and
unconquerable, because it always receives assistance from God. This nation, thus
suddenly appearing at the time appointed by the inscrutable counsel of God, is
the one which has been honored by all with the name of Christ.

3 One of the prophets, when he saw beforehand with the eye of the Divine Spirit
that which was to be, was so astonished at it that he cried out, "Who hath heard
of such things, and who hath spoken thus? Hath the earth brought forth in one
day, and hath a nation been born at once?"56 And the same prophet gives a hint
also of the name by which the nation was to be called, when he says, "Those that
serve me shall be called by a new name, which shall be blessed upon the
earth."57

4 But although it is clear that we are new and that this new name of Christians
has really but recently been known among all nations, nevertheless our life and
our conduct, with our doctrines of religion, have not been lately invented by
us, but from the first creation of man, so to speak, have been established by
the natural understanding of divinely favored men of old. That this is so we
shall show in the following way.

5 That the Hebrew nation is not new, but is universally honored on account of
its antiquity, is known to all. The books and writings of this people contain
accounts of ancient men, rare indeed and few in number, but nevertheless
distinguished for piety and righteousness and every other virtue. Of these, some
excellent men lived before the flood, others of the sons and descendants of Noah
lived after it, among them Abraham, whom the Hebrews celebrate as their own
founder and forefather.

6 If any one should assert that all those who have enjoyed the testimony of
righteousness, from Abraham himself back to the first man, were Christians in
fact if not in name, he would not go beyond the truth.58

7 For that which the name indicates, that the Christian man, through the
knowledge and the teaching of Christ, is distinguished for temperance and
righteousness, for patience in life and manly virtue, and for a profession of
piety toward the one and only God over all-all that was zealously practiced by
them not less than by us.

8 They did not care about circumcision of the body, neither do we. They did not
care about observing Sabbaths, nor do we. They did not avoid certain kinds of
food, neither did they regard the other distinctions which Moses first delivered
to their posterity to be observed as symbols; nor do Christians of the present
day do such things. But they also clearly knew the very Christ of God; for it
has already been shown that he appeared unto Abraham, that he imparted
revelations to Isaac, that he talked with Jacob, that he held converse with
Moses and with the prophets that came after.

9 Hence you will find those divinely favored men honored with the name of
Christ, according to the passage which says of them, "Touch not my Christs, and
do my prophets no harm."59

10 So that it is clearly necessary to consider that religion, which has lately
been preached to all nations through the teaching of Christ, the first and most
ancient of all religions, and the one discovered by those divinely favored men
in the age of Abraham.

11 If it is said that Abraham, a long time afterward, was given the command of
circumcision, we reply that nevertheless before this it was declared that he had
received the testimony of righteousness through faith; as the divine word says,
"Abraham believed in God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."60

12 And indeed unto Abraham, who was thus before his circumcision a justified
man, there was given by God, who revealed himself unto him (but this was Christ
himself, the word of God), a prophecy in regard to those who in coming ages
should be justified in the same way as he. The prophecy was in the following
words: "And inthee shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed."61 And again,
"He shall become a nation great and numerous; and in him shall all the nations
of the earth be blessed."62

13 It is permissible to understand this as fulfilled in us. For he, having
renounced the superstition of his fathers, and the former error of his life, and
having confessed the one God over all, and having worshiped him with deeds of
virtue, and not with the service of the law which was afterward given by Moses,
was justified by faith in Christ, the Word of God, who appeared unto him. To
him, then, who was a man of this character, it was said that all the tribes and
all the nations of the earth should be blessed in him.

14 But that very religion of Abraham has reappeared at the present time,
practiced in deeds, more efficacious than words, by Christians alone throughout
the world.

15 What then should prevent the confession that we who are of Christ practice
one and the same mode of life and have one and the same religion as those
divinely favored men of old? Whence it is evident that the perfect religion
committed to us by the teaching of Christ is not new and strange, but, if the
truth must be spoken, it is the first and the true religion. This may suffice
for this subject.

Chapter V. The Time of His Appearance Among Men.

1 And now, after this necessary introduction to our proposed history of the
Church, we can enter, so to speak, upon our journey, beginning with the
appearance of our Saviour in the flesh. And we invoke God, the Father of the
Word, and him, of whom we have been speaking, Jesus Christ himself our Saviour
and Lord, the heavenly Word of God, as our aid and fellow-laborer in the
narration of the truth.

2 It was in the forty-second year of the reign of Augustus63 and the
twenty-eighth after the subjugation of Egypt and the death of Antony and
Cleopatra, with whom the dynasty of the Ptolemies in Egypt came to an end, that
our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem of Judea, according to
the prophecies which had been uttered concerning him.64 His birth took place
during the first census, while Cyrenius was governor of Syria.65

3 Flavius Josephus, the most celebrated of Hebrew historians, also mentions this
census,66 which was taken during Cyrenius' term of office. In the same
connection he gives an account of the uprising of the Galileans, which took
place at that time, of which also Luke, among our writers, has made mention in
the Acts, in the following words: "After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in
the days of the taxing, and drew away a multitude67 after him: he also perished;
and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed."68

4 The above-mentioned author, in the eighteenth book of his Antiquities, in
agreement with these words, adds the following, which we quote exactly:
"Cyrenius, a member of the senate, one who had held other offices and had l
passed through them all to the consulship, a man also of great dignity in other
respects, came to Syria with a small retinue, being sent by Caesar to be a judge
of the nation and to make an assessment of their property."69

5 And after a little70 he says: "But Judas,71 a Gaulonite, from a city called
Gamala, taking with him Sadduchus,72 a Pharisee, urged the people to revolt,
both of them saying that the taxation meant nothing else than downright slavery,
and exhorting the nation to defend their liberty."

6 And in the second book of his History of the Jewish War, he writes as follows
concerning the same man: "At this time a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas,
persuaded his countrymen to revolt, declaring that they were cowards if they
submitted to pay tribute to the Romans, and if they endured, besides God,
masters who were mortal."73 These things are recorded by Josephus.

Chapter VI. About the Time of Christ, in Accordance with Prophecy, the Rulers
Who Had Governed the Fewish Nation in Regular Succession from the Days of
Antiquity Came to an End, and Herod, the First Foreigner, Became King.

1 When Herod,74 the first ruler of foreign blood, became King, the prophecy of
Moses received its fulfillment, according to which there should "not be wanting
a prince of Judah, nor a ruler from his loins, until he come for whom it is
reserved."75 The latter, he also shows, was to be the expectation of the
nations.76

2 This prediction remained unfulfilled so long as it was permitted them to live
under rulers from their own nation, that is, from the time of Moses to the reign
of Augustus. Under the latter, Herod, the first foreigner, was given the Kingdom
of the Jews by the Romans. As Josephus relates,77 he was an Idumean78 on his
father's side and an Arabian on his mother's. But Africanus,79 who was also no
common writer, says that they who were more accurately informed about him report
that he was a son of Antipater, and that the latter was the son of a certain
Herod of Ascalon,80 one of the so-called servants81 of the temple of Apollo.

3 This Antipater, having been taken a prisoner while a boy by Idumean robbers,
lived with them, because his father, being a poor man, was unable to pay a
ransom for him. Growing up in their practices he was afterward befriended by
Hyrcanus,82 the high priest of the Jews. A son of his was that Herod who lived
in the, times of our Saviour.83

4 When the Kingdom of the Jews had devolved upon such a man the expectation of
the nations was, according to prophecy, already at the door. For with him their
princes and governors, who had ruled in regular succession from the time of
Moses came to an end.

5 Before their captivity and their transportation to Babylon they were ruled by
Saul first and then by David, and before the kings leaders governed them who
were called Judges, and who came after Moses and his successor Jesus.

6 After their return from Babylon they continued to have without interruption an
aristocratic form of government, with an oligarchy. For the priests had the
direction of affairs until Pompey, the Roman general, took Jerusalem by force,
and defiled the holy places by entering the very innermost sanctuary of the
temple.84 Aristobulus,85 who, by the right of ancient succession, had been up to
that time both king and high priest, he sent with his children in chains to
Rome; and gave to Hyrcanus, brother of Aristobulus, the high priesthood, while
the whole nation of the Jews was made tributary to the Romans from that time.86

7 But Hyrcanus, who was the last of the regular line of high priests, was, very
soon afterward taken prisoner by the Parthians,87 and Herod, the first
foreigner, as I have already said, was made King of the Jewish nation by the
Roman senate and by Augustus.

8 Under him Christ appeared in bodily shape, and the expected Salvation of the
nations and their calling followed in accordance with prophecy.88 From this time
the princes and rulers of Judah, I mean of the Jewish nation, came to an end,
and as a natural consequence the order of the high priesthood, which from
ancient times had proceeded regularly in closest succession from generation to
generation, was immediately thrown into confusion,89

9 Of these things Josephus is also a witness,90 who shows that when Herod was
made King by the Romans he no longer appointed the high priests from the ancient
line, but gave the honor to certain obscure persons. A course similar to that of
Herod in the appointment of the priests was pursued by his son Archelaus,91 and
after him by the Romans, who took the government into their own hands.92

10 The same writer shows93 that Herod was the first that locked up the sacred
garment of the high priest under his own seal and refused to permit the high
priests to keep it for themselves. The same course was followed by Archelaus
after him, and after Archelaus by the Romans.

11 These things have been recorded by us in order to show that another prophecy
has been fulfilled in the appearance of our Saviour Jesus Christ. For the
Scripture, in the book of Daniel,94 having expressly mentioned a certain number
of weeks until the coming of Christ, of which we have treated in other books,95
most clearly prophesies, that after the completion of those weeks the unction
among the Jews should totally perish. And this, it has been clearly shown, was
fulfilled at the time of the birth of our Saviour Jesus Christ. This has been
necessarily premised by us as a proof of the correctness of the time.

Chapter VII. The Alleged Discrepancy in the Gospels in Regard to the Genealogy
of Christ.

1 Matthew and Luke in their gospels have given us the genealogy of Christ
differently, and many suppose that they are at variance with one another. Since
as a consequence every believer, in ignorance of the truth, has been zealous to
invent some explanation which shall harmonize the two passages, permit us to
subjoin the account of the matter which has come down to us,96 and which is
given by Africanus, who was mentioned by us just above, in his epistle to
Aristides,97 where he discusses the harmony of the gospel genealogies. After
refuting the opinions of others as forced and deceptive, he give the account
which he had received from tradition98 in these words:

2 "For whereas the names of the generations were reckoned in Israel either
according to nature or according to law;-according to nature by the succession
of legitimate offspring, and according to law whenever another raised up a child
to the name of a brother dying childless;99 for because a clear hope of
resurrection was not yet given they had a representation of the future promise
by a kind of mortal resurrection, in order that the name of the one deceased
might be perpetuated;-

3 whereas then some of those who are inserted in this genealogical table
succeeded by natural descent, the son to the father, while others, though born
of one father, were ascribed by name to another, mention was made of both of
those who were progenitors in fact and of those who were so only in name.

4 Thus neither of the gospels is in error, for one reckons by nature, the other
by law. For the line of descent from Solomon and that from Nathan100 were so
involved, the one with the other, by the raising up of children to the childless
and by second marriages, that the same persons are justly considered to belong
at one time to one, at another time to another; that is, at one time to the
reputed fathers, at another to the actual fathers. So that both these accounts
are strictly true and come down to Joseph with considerable intricacy indeed,
yet quite accurately.

5 But in order that what I have said may be made clear I shall explain the
interchange of the generations. If we reckon the generations from David through
Solomon, the third from the end is found to be Matthan, who begat Jacob the
father of Joseph. But if, with Luke, we reckon them from Nathan the son of
David, in like manner the third from the end is Melchi,101 whose son Eli was the
father of Joseph. For Joseph was the son of Eli,the son of Melchi.

6 Joseph therefore being the object proposed to us, it must be shown how it is
that each is recorded to be his father, both Jacob, who derived his descent from
Solomon, and Eli, who derived his from Nathan; first how it is that these two,
Jacob and Eli, were brothers, and then how it is that their fathers, Matthan and
Melchi, although of different families, are declared to be grandfathers of
Joseph.

7 Matthan and Melchi having married in succession the same woman, begat children
who were uterine brothers, for the law did not prohibit a widow, whether such by
divorce or by the death of her husband, from marrying another.

8 By Estha102 then (for this was the woman's name according to tradition)
Matthan, a descendant of Solomon, first begat Jacob. And when Matthan was dead,
Melchi, who traced his descent back to Nathan, being of the same tribe103 but of
another family,104 married her as before said, and begat a son Eli.

9 Thus we shall find the two, Jacob and Eli, although belonging to different
families, yet brethren by the same mother. Of these the one, Jacob, when his
brother Eli had died childless, took the latter's wife and begat by her a son105
Joseph, his own son by nature106 and in accordance with reason. Wherefore also
it is written: `Jacob begat Joseph.'107 But according to law108 he was the son
of Eli, for Jacob, being the brother of the latter, raised up seed to him.

10 Hence the genealogy traced through him will not be rendered void, which the
evangelist Matthew in his enumeration gives thus: `Jacob begat Joseph.' But
Luke, on the other hand, says: `Who was the son, as was supposed'109 (for this
he also adds), `of Joseph, the son of Eli, the son of Melchi'; for he could not
more clearly express the generation according to law. And the expression `he
begat' he has omitted in his genealogical table up to the end, tracing the
genealogy back to Adam the son of God. This interpretation is neither incapable
of proof nor is it an idle conjecture.110

11 For the relatives of our Lord according to the flesh, whether with the desire
of boasting or simply wishing to state the fact, in either case truly, have
banded down the following account:111 Some Idumean robbers,112 having attacked
Ascalon, a city of Palestine, carried away from a temple of Apollo which stood
near the walls, in addition to other booty, Antipater, son of a certain temple
slave named Herod. And since the priest113 was not able to pay the ransom for
his son, Antipater was brought up in the customs of the Idumeans, and afterward
was befriended by Hyrcanus, the high priest of the Jews.

12 And having, been sent by Hyrcanus on an embassy to Pompey, and having
restored to him the kingdom which had been invaded by his brother Aristobulus,
he had the good fortune to be named procurator of Palestine.114 But Antipater
having been slain by those who were envious of his great good fortune115 was
succeeded by his son Herod, who was afterward, by a decree of the senate, made
King of the Jews116 under Antony and Augustus. His sons were Herod and the other
tetrarchs.117 These accounts agree also with those of the Greeks.118

13 But as there had been kept in the archives119 up to that time the genealogies
of the Hebrews as well as of those who traced their lineage back to
proselytes,120 such as Achior121 the Ammonite and Ruth the Moabitess, and to
those who were mingled with the Israelites and came out of Egypt with them,
Herod, inasmuch as the lineage of the Israelites contributed nothing to his
advantage, and since he was goaded with the consciousness of his own ignoble
extraction, burned all the genealogical records,122 thinking that he might
appear of noble origin if no one else were able, from the public registers, to
trace back his lineage to the patriarchs or proselytes and to those mingled with
them, who were called Georae.123

14 A few of the careful, however, having obtained private records of their own,
either by remembering the names or by getting them in some other way from the
registers, pride themselves on preserving the memory of their noble extraction.
Among these are those already mentioned, called Desposyni,124 on account of
their connection with the family of the Saviour. Coming from Nazara and
Cochaba,125 villages of Judea,126 into other parts of the world, they drew the
aforesaid genealogy from memory127 and from the book of daily records128 as
faithfully aspossible.

15 Whether then the case stand thus or not no one could find a clearer
explanation, according to my own opinion and that of every candid person. And
let this suffice us, for, although we can urge no testimony in its support,129
we have nothing. better or truer to offer. In any case the Gospel states the
truth." And at the end of the same epistle he adds these words: "Matthan, who
was descended from Solomon, begat Jacob. And when Matthan was dead, Melchi, who
was descended from Nathan begat Eli by the same woman. Eli and Jacob were thus
uterine brothers. Eli having died childless, Jacob raised up seed to him,
begetting Joseph, his own son by nature, but by law the son of Eli. Thus Joseph
was the son of both."

17 Thus far Africanus. And the lineage of Joseph being thus traced, Mary also is
virtually shown to be of the same tribe with him, since, according to the law of
Moses, inter-marriages between different tribes were not permitted.130 For the
command is to marry one of the same family131 and lineage,132 so that the
inheritance may not pass from tribe to tribe. This may suffice here.

Chapter VIII. The Cruelty of Herod Toward the Infants, and the Manner of His
Death.

1 When Christ was born, according to the prophecies, in Bethlehem of Judea, at
the time indicated, Herod was not a little disturbed by the enquiry of the magi
who came from the east, asking where he who was born King of the Jews was to be
found,-for they had seen his star, and this was their reason for taking so long
a journey; for they earnestly desired to worship the infant as God,133 - for he
imagined that his kingdom might be endangered; and he enquired therefore of the
doctors of the law, who belonged to the Jewish nation, where they expected
Christ to be born. When he learned that the prophecy of Micah134 announced that
Bethlehem was to be his birthplace he commanded, in a single edict, all the male
infants in Bethlehem, and all its borders, that were two years of age or less,
according to the time which he had accurately ascertained from the magi, to be
slain, supposing that Jesus, as was indeed likely, would share the same fate as
the others of his own age.

2 But the child anticipated the snare, being carried into Egypt by his parents,
who had learned from an angel that appeared unto them what was about to happen,
These things are recorded by the Holy Scriptures in the Gospel.135

3 It is worth while, in addition to this, to observe the reward which Herod
received for his daring crime against Christ and those of the same age. For
immediately, without the least delay, the divine vengeance overtook him while he
was still alive, and gave him a foretaste of what he was to receive after death.

4 It is not possible to relate here how he tarnished the supposed felicity of
his reign by successive calamities in his family, by the murder of wife and
children, and others of his nearest relatives and dearest friends.136 The
account, which casts every other tragic drama into the shade, is detailed at
length in the histories of Josephus.137 5How, immediately after his crime
against our Saviour and the other infants, the punishment sent by God drove him
on to his death, we can best learn from the words of that historian who, in the
seventeenth book of his Antiquities of the Jews, writes as follows concerning
his end:138 "

6 But the disease of Herod grew more severe, God inflicting punishment for his
crimes. For a slow fire burned in him which was not so apparent to those who
touched him, but augmented his internal distress; for he had a terrible desire
for food which it was not possible to resist. He was affected also with
ulceration of the intestines, and with especially severe pains in the colon,
while a watery and transparent humor settled about his feet.

7 He suffered also from a similar trouble in his abdomen. Nay more, his privy
member was putrefied and produced worms. He found also excessive difficulty in
breathing, and it was particularly disagreeable because of the offensiveness of
the odor and the rapidity of respiration.

8 He had convulsions also in every limb, which gave him uncontrollable strength.
It was said, indeed, by those who possessed the power of divination and wisdom
to explain such events, that God had inflicted this punishment upon the King on
account of his great impiety."

9 The writer mentioned above recounts these things in the work referred to. And
in the second book of his History he gives a similar account of the same Herod,
which runs as follows:139 "The disease then seized upon his whole body and
distracted it by various torments. For he had a slow fever, and the itching of
the skin of his whole body was insupportable. He suffered also from continuous
pains in his colon, and there were swellings on his feet like those of a person
suffering from dropsy, while his abdomen was inflamed and his privy member so
putrefied as to produce worms. Besides this he could breathe only in an upright
posture, and then only with difficulty, and he had convulsions in all his limbs,
so that the diviners said that his diseases were a punishment.140

10 But he, although wrestling with such sufferings, nevertheless clung to life
and hoped for safety, and devised methods of cure. For instance, crossing over
Jordan he used the warm baths at Callirhoë,141 which flow into the Lake
Asphaltites,142 but are themselves sweet enough to drink.

11 His physicians here thought that they could warm his whole body again by
means of heated oil. But when they had let him down into a tub filled with oil,
his eyes became weak and turned up like the eyes of a dead person. But when his
attendants raised an outcry, he recovered at the noise; but finally, despairing
of a cure, he commanded about fifty drachms to be distributed among the
soldiers, and great sums to be given to his generals 12 and friends.

12 Then returning he came to Jericho, where, being seized with melancholy, he
planned to commit an impious deed, as if challenging death itself. For,
collecting from every town the most illustrious men of all Judea, he commanded
that they be shut up in the so-called hippodrome.

13 And having summoned Salome,143 his sister, and her husband, Alexander,144 he
said: `I know that the Jews will rejoice at my death. But I may be lamented by
others and have a splendid funeral if you are willing to perform my commands.
When I shall expire surround these men, who are now under guard, as quickly as
possible with soldiers, and slay them, in order that all Judea and every house
may weep for me even against their will.'"145

14 And after a little Josephus says, "And again he was so tortured by want of
food and by a convulsive cough that, overcome by his pains,he planned to
anticipate his fate. Taking anapple he asked also for a knife, for he was
accustomed to cut apples and eat them. Then looking round to see that there was
no one to hinder, he raised his right hand as if to stab himself."146

15 In addition to these things the same writer records that he slew another of
his own sons147 before his death, the third one slain by his command, and that
immediately afterward he breathed his last, not without excessive pain.

16 Such was the end of Herod, who suffered a just punishment for his slaughter
of the children of Bethlehem,148 which was the result of his plots against our
Saviour.

17 After this an angel appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt and commanded him
to go to Judea with the child and its mother, revealing to him that those who
had sought the life of the child were dead.149 To this the evangelist adds, "But
when he heard that Archelaus did reign in the room of his father Herod he was
afraid to go thither; notwithstanding being warned of God in a dream he turned
aside into the parts of Galilee."150 Chapter IX. The Times of Pilate.

1 The historian already mentioned agrees with the evangelist in regard to the
fact that Archelaus151 succeeded to the government after Herod. He records the
manner in which he received the kingdom of the Jews by the will of his father
Herod and by the decree of Caesar Augustus, and how, after he had reigned ten
years, he lost his kingdom, and his brothers Philip152 and Herod the younger,153
with Lysanias,154 still ruled their own tetrarchies. The same writer, in the
eighteenth book of his Antiquities,155 says that about the twelfth year of the
reign of Tiberius,156 who had succeeded to the empire after Augustus had ruled
fifty-seven years,157 Pontius Pilate was entrusted with the government of Judea,
and that he remained there ten full years, almost until the death of Tiberius.

2 Accordingly the forgery of those who have recently given currency to acts
against our Saviour158 is clearly proved. For the very date given in them159
shows the falsehood of their fabricators.

3 For the things which they have dared to say concerning the passion of the
Saviour are put into the fourth consulship of Tiberius, which occurred in the
seventh year of his reign; at which time it is plain that Pilate was not yet
ruling in Judea, if the testimony of Josephus is to be believed, who clearly
shows in the above-mentioned work160 that Pilate was made procurator of Judea by
Tiberius in the twelfth year of his reign.

Chapter X. The High Priests of the Jews Under Whom Christ Taught.

1 It was in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius,161 according to the
evangelist, and in the fourth year of the governorship of Pontius Pilate,162
while Herod and Lysanias and Philip were ruling the rest of Judea,163 that our
Saviour and Lord, Jesus the Christ of God, being about thirty years of age,164
came to John for baptism and began the promulgation of the Gospel.

2 The Divine Scripture says, moreover, that he passed the entire time of his
ministry under the high priests Annas and Caiaphas,165 showing that in the time
which belonged to the priesthood of those two men the whole period of his
teaching was completed. Since he began his work during the high priesthood of
Annas and taught until Caiaphas held the office, the entire time does not
comprise quite four years.

3 For the rites of the law having been already abolished since that time, the
customary usages in connection with the worship of God, according to which the
high priest acquired his office by hereditary descent and held it for life, were
also annulled and there were appointed to the high priesthood by the Roman
governors now one and now another person who continued in office not more than
one year.166

4 Josephus relates that there were four high priests in succession from Annas to
Caiaphas. Thus in the same book of the Antiquities167 he writes as follows:
"Valerius Graters168 having put an end to the priesthood of Ananus169 appoints
Ishmael,170 the son of Fabi, high priest. And having removed him after a little
he appoints Eleazer,171 the son of Ananus the high priest, to the same office.
And having removed him also at the end of a year he gives the high priesthood to
Simon,172 the son of Camithus. But he likewise held the honor no more than a
year, when Josephus, called also Caiaphas,173 succeeded him." Accordingly the
whole time of our Saviour's ministry is shown to have been not quite four full
years, four high priests, from Annas to the accession of Caiaphas, having held
office a year each. The Gospel therefore has rightly indicated Caiaphas as the
high priest under whom the Saviour suffered. From which also we can see that the
time of our Saviour's ministry does not disagree with the foregoing
investigation.

5 Our Saviour and Lord, not long after the 5 beginning of his ministry, called
the twelve apostles,174 and these alone of all his disciples he named apostles,
as an especial honor. And again he appointed seventy others whom he sent out two
by two before his face into every place and city whither he himself was about to
come.175 Chapter XI. Testimonies in Regard to John the Baptist and Christ.

1 Not long after this John the Baptist was beheaded by the younger Herod,176 as
is stated in the Gospels.177 Josephus also records the same fact,178 making
mention of Herodias179 by name, and stating that, although she was the wife of
his brother, Herod made her his own wife after divorcing his former lawful wife,
who was the daughter of Aretas,180 king of Petra, and separating Herodias from
her husband while he was still alive.

2 It was on her account also that he slew John, and waged war with Aretas,
because of the disgrace inflicted on the daughter of the latter. Josephus
relates that in this war, when they came to battle, Herod's entire army was
destroyed,181 and that he suffered this calamity on account of his crime against
John.

3 The same Josephus confesses in this account that John the Baptist was an
exceedingly righteous man, and thus agrees with the things written of him in the
Gospels. He records also that Herod lost his kingdom on account of the same
Herodias, and that he was driven into banishment with her, and condemned to live
at Vienne in Gaul.182

4 He relates these things in the eighteenth book of the Antiquities, where he
writes of John in the following words:183 "It seemed to some of the Jews that
the army of Herod was destroyed by God, who most justly avenged John called the
Baptist.

5 For Herod slew him, a good man and one who exhorted the Jews to come and
receive baptism, practicing virtue and exercising righteousness toward each
other and toward God; for baptism would appear acceptable unto Him when they
employed it, not for the remission of certain sins, but for the purification of
the body, as the soul had been already purified in righteousness.

6 And when others gathered about him (for they found much pleasure in listening
to his words), Herod feared that his great influence might lead to some
sedition, for they appeared ready to do whatever he might advise. He therefore
considered it much better, before any new thing should be done under John's
influence, to anticipate it by slaying him, than to repent after revolution had
come, and when he found himself in the midst of difficulties.184 On account of
Herod's suspicion John was sent in bonds to the above-mentioned citadel of
Mach'ra,185 and there slain."

7 After relating these things concerning John, he makes mention of our Saviour
in the same work, in the following words:186 "And there lived at that time
Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it be proper to call him a man. For he was a doer
of wonderful works, and a teacher of such men as receive the truth in gladness.
And he attached to himself many of the Jews, and many also of the Greeks. He was
the Christ.

8 When Pilate, on the accusation of our principal men, condemned him to the
cross, those who had loved him in the beginning did not cease loving him. For he
appeared unto them again alive on the third day, the divine prophets having told
these and countless other wonderful things concerning him. Moreover, the race of
Christians, named after him, continues down to the present day."

9 Since an historian, who is one of the Hebrews themselves, has recorded in his
work these things concerning John the Baptist and our Saviour, what excuse is
there left for not convicting them of being destitute of all shame, who have
forged the acts against them?187 But let this suffice here.

Chapter XII. The Disciples of Our Saviour.

1 The names of the apostles of our Saviour are known to every one from the
Gospels.188 But there exists no catalogue of the seventy disciples.189 Barnabas,
indeed, is said to have been one of them, of whom the Acts of the apostles makes
mention in various places,190 and especially Paul in his Epistle to the
Galatians.191

2 They say that Sosthenes also, who wrote tothe Corinthians with Paul, was one
of them.192 This is the account of Clement193 in the fifthbook of his
Hypotyposes, in which he also says that Cephas was one of the seventy
disciples,194 a man who bore the same name as the apostle Peter, and the one
concerning whom Paul says, "When Cephas came to Antioch I withstood him to his
face."195

3 Matthias,196 also, who was numbered with the apostles in the place of Judas,
and the one who was honored by being made a candidate with him,197 are like-wise
said to have been deemed worthy of the same calling with the seventy. They say
that Thaddeus198 also was one of them, concerning whom I shall presently relate
an account which has come down to us.199 And upon examination you will find that
our Saviour had more than seventy disciples, according to the testimony of Paul,
who says that after his resurrection from the dead he appeared first to Cephas,
then to the twelve, and after them to above five hundred brethren at once, of
whom some had fallen asleep;200 but the majority were still living 4 at the time
he wrote.

4 Afterwards he says he appeared unto James, who was one of the so-called
brethren of the Saviour.201 But, since in addition to these, there were many
others who were called apostles, in imitation of the Twelve, as was Paul
himself, he adds: "Afterward he appeared to all the apostles."202 So much in
regard to these persons. But the story concerning Thaddeus is as follows.

Chapter XIII. Narrative Concerning the Prince of the Edessences.

1 The divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ being noised abroad among
all men on account of his wonder-working power, he attracted countless numbers
from foreign countries lying far away from Judea, who had the opening of being
cured of their diseases and of all kinds of sufferings.

2 For instance the King Abgarus,203 who ruled with great glory the nations
beyond the Euphrates, being afflicted with a terrible disease which it was
beyond the power of human skill to cure, when he heard of the name of Jesus, and
of his miracles, which were attested by all with one accord sent a message to
him by a courier and begged him to heal his disease.

3 But he did not at that time comply with his request; yet he deemed him worthy
of a personal letter in which he said that he would send one of his disciples to
cure his disease, and at the same time promised salvation to himself and all his
house.

4 Not long afterward hispromise was fulfilled. For after his resurrection from
the dead and his ascent into heaven, Thomas,204 one of the twelve apostles,
under divine impulse sent Thaddeus, who was also numbered among the seventy
disciples of Christ,205 to Edessa,206 as a preacher and evangelist of the
teaching of Christ.

5 And all that our Saviour had promised received through him its fulfillment.
You have written evidence of these things taken from the archives of Edessa,207
which was at that time a royal city. For in the public registers there, which
contain accounts of ancient times and the acts of Abgarus, these things have
been found preserved down to the present time. But there is no better way than
to hear the epistles themselves which we have taken from the archives and have
literally translated from the Syriac language208 in the following manner.

Copy of an epistle written by Abgarus the ruler to Jesus, tend sent to him at
Jerusalem by Ananias209 the swift courier.

6 "Abgarus, ruler Of Edessa, to Jesus the 6 excellent Saviour who has appeared
in the country of Jerusalem, greeting. I have heard the reports of thee and of
thy cures as performed by thee without medicines or herbs. For it is said that
thou makest the blind to see and the lame to walk, that thou cleansest lepers
and castest out impure spirits and demons, and that thou healest those afflicted
with lingering disease, and raisest the dead.

7 And having heard all these things concerning thee, I have concluded that one
of two things must be true: either thou art God, and having come down from
heaven thou doest these things, or else thou, who doest these things, art the
Son of God.210

8 I have therefore written to thee to ask thee that thou wouldest take the
trouble to come to me and heal the disease which I have. For I have heard that
the Jews are murmuring against thee and are plotting to injure thee. But I have
a very small yet noble city which is great enough for us both." The answer of
Jesus to the ruler Abgarus by the courier Ananias.

9 "Blessed art thou who hast believed in me without having seen me.211 For it is
written concerning me, that they who have seen me will not believe in me, and
that they who have not seen me will believe and be saved.212 But in regard to
what thou hast written me, that I should come to thee, it is necessary for me to
fulfill all things here for which I have been sent, and after I have fulfilled
them thus to be taken up again to him that sent me. But after I have been taken
up I will send to thee one of my disciples, that he may heal thy disease and
give life to thee and thine."

10 To these epistles there was added the following account in the Syriac
language. "After the ascension of Jesus, Judas,213 who was also called Thomas,
sent to him Thaddeus, an apostle,214 one of the Seventy. When he was come he
lodged with Tobias,215 the son of Tobias. When the report of him got abroad, it
was told Abgarus that an apostle of Jesus was come, as he had written him.

11 Thaddeus began then in the power of God to heal every disease and infirmity,
insomuch that all wondered. And when Abgarus heard of the great and wonderful
things which he did and of the cures which he performed, he began to suspect
that he was the one of whom Jesus had written him, saying, `After I have been
taken up I will send to thee one of my disciples who will heal thee.'

12 Therefore, summoning Tobias, with whom Thaddeus lodged, he said, I have heard
that a certain man of power has come and is lodging in thy house. Bring him to
me. And Tobias coming to Thaddeus said to him, The ruler Abgarus summoned me and
told me to bring thee to him that thou mightest heal him. And Thaddeus said, I
will go, for I have been sent to him with power.

13 Tobias therefore arose early on the following day, and taking Thaddeus came
to Abgarus. And when he came, the nobles were present and stood about Abgarus.
And immediately upon his entrance a great vision appeared to Abgarus in the
countenance of the apostle Thaddeus. When Abgarus saw it he prostrated himself
before Thaddeus, while all those who stood about were astonished; for they did
not see the vision, which appeared to Abgarus alone.

14 He then asked Thaddeus if he were in truth a disciple of Jesus the Son of
God, who had said to him, `I will send thee one of my disciples, who shall heal
thee and give thee life.' And Thaddeus said, Because thou hast mightily believed
in him that sent me, therefore have I been sent unto thee. And still further, if
thou believest in him, the petitions of thy heart shall be granted thee as thou
believest.

15 And Abgarus said to him, So much have I believed in him that I wished to take
an army and destroy those Jews who crucified him, had I not been deterred from
it by reason of the dominion of the Romans. And Thaddeus said, Our Lord has
fulfilled the will of his Father, and having fulfilled it has been taken up to
his Father. And Abgarus said to him, I too have believed in him and in his
Father.

16 And Thaddeus said to him, Therefore I place my hand upon thee in his name.
And when he had done it, immediately Abgarus was cured of the disease and of the
suffering which he had.

17 And Abgarus marvelled, that as he had heard concerning Jesus, so he had
received in very deed through his disciple Thaddeus, who healed him without
medicines and herbs, and not only him, but also Abdus216 the son of Abdus, who
was afflicted with the gout; for he too came to him and fell at his feet, and
having received a benediction by the imposition of his hands, he was healed. The
same Thaddeus cured also many other inhabitants of the city, and did wonders and
marvelous works, and preached

18 the word of God. And afterward Abgarus said, Thou, O Thaddeus, doest these
things with the power of God, and we marvel. But, in addition to these things, I
pray thee to inform me in regard to the coming of Jesus, how he was born; and in
regard to his power, by what power he performed those deeds of which I have
heard.

19 And Thaddeus said, Now indeed will I keep silence, since I have been sent to
proclaim the word publicly. But tomorrow assemble for me all thy citizens, and I
will preach in their presence and sow among them the word of God, concerning the
coming of Jesus, how he was born; and concerning his mission, for what purpose
he was sent by the Father; and concerning the power of his works, and the
mysteries which he proclaimed in the world, and by what power he did these
things; and concerning his new preaching, and his abasement and humiliation, and
how he humbled himself, and died and debased his divinity and was crucified, and
descended into Hades,217 and burst the bars which from eternity had not been
broken,218 and raised the dead; for he descended alone, but rose with many, and
thus ascended to his Father.219

20 Abgarus 20 therefore commanded the citizens to assemble early in the morning
to hear the preaching of Thaddeus, and afterward he ordered gold and silver to
be given him. But he refused to take it, saying, If we have forsaken that which
was our own, how shall we take that which is another's? These things were done
in the three hundred andfortieth year."220 I have inserted them here in their
proper place, translated from the Syriac221 literally, and I hope to good
purpose.

1: Cf. 1 Tim. vi. 20.

2: Greek oikonomia oikonomia triu xristu is the incarnation, as the last
oikonomia is the passion." The word in the present case is used in its wide
sense to denote not simply the act of incarnation, but the whole economy or
dispensation of Christ upon earth. See the notes of Heinichen upon this passage,
Vol. III. p. 4 sq., and of Valesius, Vol. I. p. 2.

3: Five mss. followed by nearly all the editors of the Greek text and by the
translators Stigloher and Crusè, read tou qeou after xriston . The words,
however, are omitted by the majority of the best mss. and by Rufinus, followed
by Heinichen and Closs. (See the note of Heinichen, Vol. I. p. 4).

4: All the mss. followed by the majority of the editors read eugnwmonwn , which
must agree with logoj . Heinichen, however, followed by Burton, Schwegler,
Closs, and Stigloher, read eugnwmonwn

5: Eusebius is rightly called the "Father of Church History." He had no
predecessors who wrote, as be did, with a comprehensive historical plan in view;
and yet, as he tells us, much had been written of which he made good use in his
History. The one who approached nearest to the idea of a Church historian was
Hegesippus (see Bk. IV. chap. 22, note 1), but his writings were little more
than fragmentary memoirs, or collections of disconnected reminiscences. For
instance, Eusebius, in Bk. II. chap 23, quotes from his fifth and last book the
account of the martyrdom of James the Just, which shows that his work lacked at
least all chronological arrangement. Julius Africanus (see Bk. VI. chap. 31,
note 1) also furnished Eusebius with much material in the line of chronology,
and in his Chronicle Eusebius made free use of him. These are the only two who
can in any sense be said to have preceded Eusebius in his province, and neither
one can rob him of his right to be called the "Father of Church History."

6: One of the greatest values of Eusebius' History lies in the quotations which
it contains from earlier ecclesiastical writers. The works of many of them are
lost, and are known to us only through the extracts made by Eusebius. This fact
alone is enough to make his History of inestimable worth.

7: On Eusebius' Chronicle, see the Prolegomena, p. 31, above.

8: oikonomia . See above, note 2.

9: qeologia oikonomia , which is then quite commonly used to denote the "human
nature" of Christ. In the present chapter oikonomia keeps throughout its more
general signification of "the Dispensation of Christ," and is not confined to
the mere act of incarnation, nor to his "human nature."

10: nean unthn kai ektetopismenhn .

11: This was one of the principal objections raised against Christianity.
Antiquity was considered a prime requisite in a religion which claimed to be
true, and no reproach was greater than the reproach of novelty. Hence the
apologists laid great stress upon the antiquity of Christianity, and this was
one reason why they appropriated the Old Testament as a Christian book. Compare,
for instance, the apologies of Justin Martyr, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus,
Tertullian and Minucius Felix, and the works of l Clement of Alexandria. See
Engelhardt's article on Eusebius, in the Zeitschrift für die hist. Theologie ,
1852, p. 652 sq.; Schaff's Church History , Vol. II. p. 110; and Tzschirner's
Geschichte der Apologetik , p. 99 sq.

12: Isa. liii. 8.

13: Cf. Matt. xi. 27.

14: John i. 1.

15: John i. 3.

16: Gen. i. 26.

17: Ps. xxxiii. 9. There is really nothing in this passage to imply that the
Psalmist thinks, as Eusebius supposes, of the Son as the Father's agent in
creation, who is here addressed by the Father. As Stroth remarks, "According to
Eusebius, `He spake 0' is equivalent to `He said to the Son, Create 0'; and
`They were created 0' means, according to him, not `They arose immediately upon
this command of God, 0' but `The Son was immediately obedient to the command of
the Father and produced them. 0' For Eusebius connects this verse with the
sixth, `By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, 0' where he understands
Christ to be referred to. Perhaps this verse has been omitted in the Greek
through an over- sight for it is found in Rufinus."

18: See Gen. xviii. 1 sq.

19: Gen. xviii. 25.

20: Eusebius accepts the common view of the early Church, that the theophanies
of the Old Testament were Christophanies; that is, appearances of the second
person of the Trinity. Augustine seems to have been the first of the Fathers to
take a different view, main- taining that such Christophanies were not
consistent with the identity of essence between Father and Son, and that the
Scriptures themselves teach that it was not the Logos, but an angel, that
appeared to the Old Testament worthies on various occasions (cf. De Trin. III.
11). Augustine's opinion was widely adopted, but in modern times the earlier
view, which Eusebius represents, has been the prevailing one (see Hodge,
Systematic Theology , I. p. 490, and Lange's article Theaphany in Herzog).

21: Ps. cvii. 20.

22: Gen. xix. 24.

23: Gen. xxxii. 28.

24: eidoj qeou .

25: Gen. xxxii. 30.

26: The mss. differ greatly at this point. A number of them followed by
Valesius, Closs, and Crusè, read, wsanei tou patroj uparxonta dunamin kai sofian
. Schwegler, Laemmer, Burton, and Heinichen adopt another reading which has some
ms. support, and which we have followed in our translation: wsanei tou patroj
uparxon . See Heinichen's edition, Vol. 1. p. 10, note 41.

27: en Ierixw .

28: Josh. v. 13-15.

29: Eusebius agrees with other earlier Fathers (e.g. Justin Martyr, Origen, and
Cyprian) in identifying the one that appeared to Joshua with him that had
appeared to Moses, on the ground that the same words were used in both cases
(cf. especially Justin's Dial. c. Trypho , chap. 62). Many later Fathers (e.g.
Theodoret) regard the person that appeared to Joshua as the archangel Michael,
who is described by Daniel (x. 21 and xii. 1) as fighting for the people of God.
See Keil's Commentary on Joshua, chap. 5, vv. 13-15.

30: Ex. iii. 4-6. Cf. Justin's Dial., chap. 63.

31: ouia tij prokosmioj zwsa kai ufestwsa .

32: Prov. viii. 12, Prov. viii. 15, Prov. viii. 16.

33: thj up ouranon taj up ouranon . Closs, Stigloher, and Crusè translate in the
same way.

34: Prov. viii. 22-25, Prov. viii. 27, Prov. viii. 28, Prov. viii. 30, Prov.
viii. 31.

35: Eusebius pursues much the same line of argument in his Dem. Evang ., Proem.
Bk. VIII.; and compare also Gregory of Nyssa's Third Oration on the birth of the
Lord (at the beginning). The objection which Eusebius undertakes to answer here
was an old one, and had been considered by Justin Martyr, by Origen in his work
against Celsus, and by others (see Tzschirner's Geschichte der Apologetik, p. 25
ff.).

36: The reference here seems to be to the building of the tower of Babel (Gen.
xi. 1-9), although Valesius thinks otherwise. The fact that Eusebius refers to
the battles of the giants, which were celebrated in heathen song, does not
militate against a reference in this passage to the narrative recounted in
Genesis. He illustrates the presumption of the human race by instances familiar
to his readers whether drawn from Christian or from Pagan sources. Compare the
Praep. Evang . ix. 14.

37: It was the opinion of Eusebius, in common with most of the Fathers, that the
Greek philosophers, lawgivers, and poets had obtained their wisdom from the
ancient Hebrews, and this point was pressed very strongly by many of the
apologists in their effort to prove the antiquity of Christianity. The assertion
was made especially in the case of Plato and Pythagoras, who were said to have
become acquainted with the books of the Hebrews upon their journey to Egypt.
Compare among other passages Justin's Apol. I. 59 ff.; Clement of Alexandria's
Cohort. ad Gentes , chap. 6; and Tertullian's Apol. chap. 47. Compare also
Eusebius' Praep. Evang., Bks. IX. and X.

38: The Greek has only epi telei , which can refer, however, only to the end of
time or to the end of the world.

39: Dan. vii. 9, Dan. vii. 10.

40: Dan. vii. 13, Dan. vii. 14.

41: Eusebius refers here probably to his Eclogoe propheticoe , or Prophetical
Extracts, possibly to his Dem. Evang.; upon these works see the Prolegomena, p.
34 and. 37, above.

42: Compare the Dem. Evang. iv. 17 .

43: Ex. xxv. 40.

44: "Eusebius here has in mind the passages Lev. iv. 5, Lev. iv. 16, and Lev.
vi. 22, where the LXX. reads o iereuj o xristoj

45: A few mss., followed by Laemmer and Heinichen, read here Nauh , but the best
mss. followed by the majority of editors read Aush 46: Sam. iv. 20.

47: Ps. ii. 1, Ps. ii. 2.

48: Ps. ii. 7, Ps. ii. 8.

49: Isa. lxi. 1. Eusebius as usual follows the LXX., which in this case differs
somewhat from the Hebrew, and hence the translation differs from the English
version. The LXX., however, contains an extra clause which Eusebius omits. See
Heinichen's edition, Vol. I. p. 21, note 49.

50: Ps. xlv. 6, Ps. xlv. 7.

51: Ps. cx. 1.

52: Ps. cx. 4.

53: See Gen. xiv. 18; Heb. v. 6, Heb. v. 10; Heb. vi. 20; Heb. viii.

54: Eusebius, in this chapter and in the Dem. Evang. IV. 15, is the first of the
Fathers to mention the three offices of Christ.

55: Cf. Tertullian, Apol. XXXVII. ( Ante-Nicene Fathers, Am. Ed. Vol. III. p.
45).

56: Isa. lxvi. 8.

57: Isa. lxv. 15, Isa. lxv. 16.

58: Compare Justin Martyr's Apol. I. 46.

59: 1 Chron. xvi. 22, and Ps. cv. 15.

60: Gen. xv. 6.

61: Gen. xii. 3.

62: Gen. xviii. 18.

63: Eusebius here makes the reign of Augustus begin with the death of Julius
Caesar (as Josephus does in chap. 9, §1, below), and he puts the birth of Christ
therefore into the year 752 U.C. (2 b.c.), which agrees with Clement of
Alexandria's Strom. I. (who gives the twenty-eighth year after the conquest of
Egypt as the birth-year of Christ), with Epiphanius, Hoer. LI. 22, and Orosius,
Hist. I. 1. Eusebius gives the same date also in his Chron. (ed. Schoene, II. p.
144). Irenaeus, III. 25, and Tertullian, Adv. 4Jud. 8, on the other hand, give
the forty-first year of Augustus, 751 U.C. (3 b.c.). But all these dates are
certainly too late. The true year of Christ's birth has always been a matter of
dispute. But it must have occurred before the death of Herod, which took place
in the spring of 750 U.C. (4 b.c.). The most widely accepted opinion is that
Christ was born late in the year 5, or early in the year 4 b.c., though some
scholars put the date back as far as 7 b.c.

64: Micah v. 2.

65: Cf. Luke ii. 2.

66: Eusebius here identifies the census mentioned by Josephus ( Ant. XVIII. 1.
1) and referred to in Acts v. 37, with the one mentioned in Luke ii. 2; but this
is an obvious error, as an interval of ten years separated the two. Valesius
considers it all one census, and hence regards Eusebius as correct in his
statement; but this is very improbable. Jachmann (in Illgen's Zeitschrift f.
hist. Theologie, 1839, II. p. 35 sq.), according to his custom, charges Eusebius
with willful deception and perversion of the facts. But such a charge is utterly
without warrant. Eusebius, in cases where we can control his statements, can be
shown to have been always conscientious. Moreover, in his Chron. (ed. Schoene
II. p. 144) he identifies the two censuses in the same way. But his Chronicles
were written some years before his History, and he cannot have had any object to
deceive in them such as Jachmann assumes that he had in his History. It is plain
that Eusebius has simply made a blunder, a thing not at all surprising when we
remember how frequent his chronological errors are. He is guilty of an
inexcusable piece of carelessness, but nothing worse. It was natural to connect
the two censuses mentioned as taking place under the same governor, though a
little closer attention to the facts would have shown him the discrepancy in
date, which he simply overlooked.

67: The New Testament ( Textus Rec. ) reads laon ikanon , with which Laemmer
agrees in his edition of Eusebius. Two mss., followed by Stephanus and Valesius,
and by the English and German translators, read laon polun . All the other mss.,
and editors, as well as Rufinus, read laon alone.

68: Acts v. 37.

69: Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 1. 1. Upon Josephus and his works, see below, Bk. III.
c. 9.

70: Ibid.

71: Judas the Gaulonite. In Acts v. 37, and in Josephus, B. J. II. 8. 1 (quoted
just below), and 17.8, and in Ant. XVIII 1.6 and XX. 5. 2, he is called Judas of
Galilee. But in the present section Josephus gives the fullest and most accurate
account of him. Gaulonitis lay east of the Jordan, opposite Galilee. Judas of
Galilee was probably his common designation, given to him either because his
revolt took rise in Galilee, or because Galilee was used as a general term for
the north country. He was evidently a man of position and great personal
influence, and drew vast numbers to his standard, denouncing, in the name of
religion, the payment of tribute to Rome and all submission to a foreign yoke.
The revolt spread very rapidly, and the whole country was thrown into excitement
and disorder; but the Romans proved too strong for him, and he soon perished,
and his followers were dispersed, though many of them continued active until the
final destruction of the city. The influence of Judas was so great and lasted so
long that Josephus ( Ant. XVIII. 1. 1 and 6) calls the tendency represented by
him the "fourth philosophy of the Jews," ranking it with Pharisaism,
Sadduceeism, and Essenism. The distinguishing characteristic of this "fourth
philosophy" or sect was its love of freedom. For an excellent account of Judas
and his revolt, see Ewald's Geshichte des Volkes Israel, V. p. 16 sq.

72: Greek, Saddoxon 73: Josephus, B. J. II. 8.1.

74: Herod the Great, son of Antipater, an Idumean, who had been appointed
procurator of Judea by Caesar in b.c. 47. Herod was made governor of Galilee at
the same time, and king of Judea by the Roman Senate in b.c. 40.

75: Gen. xlix. 10. The LXX., which Eusebius quotes here, according to his
custom, is in the present instance somewhat different from the Hebrew.

76: Ibid.

77: Eusebius refers here to Ant. XIV. 1. 3 and 7. 3. According to Josephus,
Herod's father was Antipater, and his mother Cypros, an Arabian woman of noble
birth.

78: The Idumeans or Edomites were the descendants of Esau, and inhabited the
Sinaitic peninsula south of the Dead Sea. Their principal city and stronghold
was the famous rock city, Petra. They were constant enemies of the Jews, refused
them free passage through their land (Num. xx. 20); were conquered by Saul and
David, but again regained their independence, until they were finally completely
subjugated by John Hyrcanus, who left them in possession of their land, but
compelled them to undergo circumcision, and adopt the Jewish law. Compare
Josephus, Ant. XIII. 9. 1; XV. 7.9; B. J. IV. 5. 5.

79: On Africanus, see Bk. VI. chap. 31. This account is given by Africanus in
his epistle to Aristides, quoted by Eusebius in the next chapter. Africanus
states there (§11) that the account, as he gives it, was handed down by the
relatives of the Lord. But the tradition, whether much older than Africanus or
not, is certainly incorrect. We learn from Josephus ( Ant. XIV. 2), who is the
best witness upon this subject, that Antipater, the father of Herod the Great,
was the son of another Antipater, or Antipas, an Idumean who had been made
governor of Idumea by the Jewish king Alexander Jannaeus (of the Maccabaean
family). In Ant. XVI. 11 Josephus informs us that a report bad been invented by
friends and flatterers of Herod that he was descended from Jewish ancestors. The
report originated with Nicolai Damasceni, a writer of the time of the Herods.
The tradition preserved here by Africanus had its origin, evidently, in a desire
to degrade Herod by representing him as descended from a slave.

80: Ascalon, one of the five cities of the Philistines (mentioned frequently in
the Old Testament), lay upon the Mediterranean Sea, between Gaza and Joppa. It
was beautified by Herod (although not belonging to his dominions), and after his
death became the residence of his sister Salome. It was a prominent place in the
Middle Ages, but is now in ruins. Of this Herod of Ascalon nothing is known.
Possibly no such man existed.

81: ierodouloj , "a temple-slave."

82: Hyrcanus II., eldest son of the King Alexander Jannaeus of the Maccabaean
family, became high priest upon the death of his father, in 78 b.c.; and upon
the death of his mother, in 69 b.c., ascended the throne. He gave up his kingdom
afterward (66 b.c.) to his younger brother, Aristobulus; but under the influence
of Antipater the Idumean endeavored to regain it, and after a long war with is
brother, was re-established in power by Pompey, in 63 b.c., but merely as high
priest and governor, not with the title of king. He retained his position until
40 b.c., when he was driven out by his nephew Antigonus. He was murdered in 30
b.c., by command of Herod the Great, who had married his grand-daughter
Mariamne. He was throughout a weak man, and while in power was completely under
the influence of his minister, Antipater.

83: Herod the Great.

84: In 63 b.c., when Pompey's curiosity led him to penetrate into the Holy of
Holies. He was much impressed, however, by its simplicity, and went away without
disturbing its treasures, wondering at a religion which had no visible God.

85: Aristobulus II., younger brother of Hyrcanus, a much abler and more
energetic man, assumed the kingdom by an arrangement with his brother in 66 b.c.
(see note 9, above). In 63 b.c. he was deposed, and carried to Rome by Pompey.
He died about 48 b.c. Eusebius is hardly correct in saying that Aristobulus was
king and high priest by regular succession, as his elder brother Hyrcanus was
the true heir, and he had assumed the power only because of his superior
ability.

86: The real independence of the Jews practically ceased at this time. For three
years only, from 40 to 37 b.c., while Antigonus, son of Aristobulus and nephew
of Hyrcanus, was in power, Jerusalem was independent of Rome, but was soon
retaken by Herod the Great and remained from that time on in more or less
complete subjection, either as a dependent kingdom or as a province.

87: 40 b.c., when Antigonus, by the aid of the Parthians took Jerusalem and
established himself as king there, until conquered by Herod in 37 b.c. Hyrcanus
returned to Jerusalem in 36 b.c., but was no longer high priest.

88: Compare Isa. ix. 2; Isa. xlii. 6; Isa. xlix. 6, etc.

89: Eusebius' statement is perfectly correct. The high priestly lineage had been
kept with great scrupulousness until Hyrcanus II., the last of the regular
succession. (His grandson Aristobulus, however, was high priest for a year under
Herod, but was then slain by him.) Afterward the high priest was appointed and
changed at pleasure by the secular ruler.

90: Josephus, Ant. XX. 8.

91: Archelaus, a son of Herod the Great by Malthace, a Samaritan woman, and
younger brother of Herod Antipas. Upon the death of his father, b.c. 4, he
succeeded to the government of Idumea, Samaria, and Judea, with the title of
Ethnarch.

92: After the death of Archelaus (a.d. 7), Judea was made a Roman province, and
ruled by procurators until Herod Agrippa I. came into power in 37 a.d. (see
below, Bk. II. chap. 4, note 3). The changes in the high priesthood during the
most of this time were very rapid, one after another being appointed and removed
according to the fancy of the procurator, or of the governor of Syria, who held
the power of appointment most of the time. There were no fewer than nineteen
high priests between the death of Archelaus and the fall of Jerusalem.

93: Josephus, Ant. XV. 11. 4.

94: Dan. ix. 26.

95: It is commonly assumed that Eusebius refers here to the Dem. Evang. VIII. 2
sq., where the prophecies of Daniel are discussed at length. But, as Lightfoot
remarks, the reference is just as well satisfied by the Eclogoe Proph. III. 45.
We cannot, in fact, decide which work is meant.

96: "Over against the various opinions of uninstructed apologists for the Gospel
history, Eusebius introduces this account of Africanus with the words, thn peri
toutwn katelqousan ." (Spitta.)

97: On Africanus, see Bk. VI. chap. 31. Of this Aristides to whom the epistle is
addressed we know nothing. He must not be confounded with the apologist
Aristides, who lived in the reign of Trajan (see below, Bk. IV. c. 34). Photius
( Bibl. 34) mentions this epistle, but tells us nothing about Aristides himself.
The epistle exists in numerous fragments, from which Spitta ( Der Brief des
Julius Africanus an Aristides kritisch untersucht und hergestellt, Halle, 1877)
attempts to reconstruct the original epistle. His work is the best and most
complete upon the subject. Compare Routh, Rel. Sacroe, II. pp. 228-237 and pp.
329-356, where two fragments are given and discussed at length. The epistle (as
given by Mai) is translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Am. ed. VI. p. 125 ff.

98: Eusebius makes a mistake in saying that Africanus had received the
explanation which follows from tradition. For Africanus himself says expressly
(§15, below) that his interpretation is not supported by testimony. Eusebius'
error has been repeated by most writers upon the subject, but is exposed by
Spitta, ibid. p. 63.

99: The law is stated in Deut. xxv. 5 sq.

100: Nathan was a son of David and Bathsheba, and therefore own brother of
Solomon.

101: Melchi, who is here given as the third from the end, is in our present
texts of Luke the fifth (Luke iii. 24), Matthat and Levi standing between Melchi
and Eli. It is highly probable that the text which Africanus followed omitted
the two names Matthat and Levi (see Westcott and Hort's Greek Testament,
Appendix, p. 57). It is impossible to suppose that Africanus in such an
investigation as this could have overlooked two names by mistake if they had
stood in his text of the Gospels.

102: We know nothing more of Estha. Africanus probably refers to the tradition
handed down by the relatives of Christ, who had, as he says, preserved
genealogies which agreed with those of the Gospels. He distinguishes here what
he gives on tradition from his own interpretation of the Gospel discrepancy upon
which he is engaged.

103: fulh .

104: genoj . "In this place genoj

105: All the mss., and editions of Eusebius read triton instead of uion here.
But it is very difficult to make any sense out of the word triton uion instead
of triton , an emendation which he has ventured to make upon the authority of
Rufinus, who translates "genuit Joseph filium suum," showing no trace of a
triton . The word triton

106: kata logon . These words have caused translators and commentators great
difficulty, and most of them seem to have missed their significance entirely.
Spitta proposes to alter by reading kata logon , but the emendation is
unnecessary. The remarks which he makes (p. 89 sqq.) upon the relation between
this sentence and the next are, however, excellent. It was necessary to
Africanus' theory that Joseph should be allowed to trace his lineage through
Jacob, his father "by nature," as well as through Eli, his father "by law," and
hence the words kata logon are added and emphasized. He was his son by nature
and therefore "rightfully to be reckoned as his son." This explains the Biblical
quotation which follows: "Wherefore"-because he was Jacob's son by nature and
could rightfully be reckoned in his line, and not only in the line of Eli-"it is
written," &c.

107: Matt. i. 6.

108: See Rev. John Lightfoot's remarks on Luke iii. 23, in his Hebrew and
Talmudical Exercitations on St. Luke.

109: This passage has caused much trouble. Valesius remarks, "Africanus wishes
to refer the words wj enomizeto (`as was supposed 0'') not only to the words
uios =Iwshf , but also to the words tou Hli , which follow, which although it is
acute is nevertheless improper and foolish; for if Luke indicates that legal
generation or adoption by the words wj enomizeto , as Africanus claims, it would
follow that Christ was the son of Joseph by legal adoption in the same way that
Joseph was the son of Eli. And thus it would be said that Mary, after the death
of Joseph, married his brother, and that Christ was begotten by him, which is
impious and absurd. And besides, if these words, wj enomizeto , are extended to
the words tou Hli , in the same way they can be extended to all which follow.
For there is no reason why they should be supplied in the second grade and not
in the others."

110: This seems the best possible rendering of the Greek, which reads thn
anaforan poihsamenoj ewj tou =Adam, tou qeou kat= analusin. oude anapodeikton
k.t.l .,, which is very dark, punctuated thus, and it is difficult to understand
what is meant by kat= analusin in connection with the preceding words. (Crusè
translates, "having traced it back as far as Adam, `who was the son of God, 0'
he resolves the whole series by referring back to God. Neither is this incapable
of proof, nor is it an idle conjecture.") The objections which Spitta brings
against the sentence in this form are well founded. He contends (p. 63 sqq.),
and that rightly, that Africanus could not have written the sentence thus. In
restoring the original epistle of Africanus, therefore, he throws the words kat=
analusin into the next sentence, which disposes of the difficulty, and makes.
good sense. We should then read, "having traced it back as far as Adam, the Son
of God. This interpretation (more literally, `as an interpretation, 0' or `by
way of interpretation 0') is neither incapable of proof, nor is it an idle
conjecture." That Africanus wrote thus I am convinced. But as Spitta shows,
Eusebius must have divided the sentences as they now stand, for, according to
his idea, that Africanus' account was one which he had received by tradition,
the other mode of reading would be incomprehensible, though he probably did not
understand much better the meaning of kat analusin as he placed it. In
translating Africanus' epistle here, I have felt justified in rendering it as
Africanus probably wrote it, instead of following Eusebius' incorrect
reproduction of it.

111: The Greek reads: paredosan kai touto kai occurs in all the mss. and
versions of Eusebius, and was undoubtedly written by him, but Spitta supposes it
an addition of Eusebius, caused, like the change in the previous sentence, by
his erroneous conception of the nature of Africanus' interpretation. The kai is
certainly troublesome if we suppose that all that precedes is Africanus' own
interpretation of the Biblical lists, and not a traditional account handed down
by the "relatives of our Lord"; and this, in spite of Eusebius' belief, we must
certainly insist upon. We may therefore assume with Spitta that the kai did not
stand in the original epistle as Africanus wrote it. The question arises, if
what precedes is not given upon the authority of the "relatives of our Lord,"
why then is this account introduced upon their testimony, as if confirming the
preceding? We may simply refer again to Africanus' words at the end of the
extract (§15 below) to prove that his interpretation did not rest upon
testimony, and then we may answer with Spitta that their testimony, which is
appealed to in §14 below, was to the genealogies themselves, and in this
Africanus wishes it to be known that they confirmed the Gospel lists.

112: See above, chap. VI. notes 5 and 6.

113: We should expect the word "temple-servant" again instead of "priest"; but,
as Valesius remarks, "It was possible for the same person to be both priest and
servant, if for instance it was a condition of priesthood that only captives
should be made priests." And this was really the case in many places.

114: Appointed by Julius Caesar in 47 b.c. (see chap. VI. note 1, above).

115: He was poisoned by Malichus in 42 b.c. (see Josephus, Ant. XIV. 11. 4).

116: Appointed king in 40 b.c. (see chap. VI. note 1, above).

117: The ethnarch Archelaus (see chap. VI. note 18) and the tetrarchs Herod
Antipas and Herod Philip II.

118: Cf. Dion Cassius, XXXVII. 15 sqq. and Strabo, XVI. 2. 46.

119: It was the custom of the Jews, to whom tribal and family descent meant so
much, to keep copies of the genealogical records of the people in the public
archives. Cf. e.g. Josephus, De Vita, §1, where he draws his own lineage from
the public archives; and cf. Contra Apion. I.7.

120: axri proshlutwn . Heinichen and Burton read arxiproshlutwn , "ancient
proselytes." The two readings are about equally supported by ms. authority, but
the same persons are meant here as at the end of the paragraph, where
proshlutouj , not arxiproshlutouj

121: Achior was a general of the Ammonites in the army of Holofernes, who,
according to the Book of Judith, was a general of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the
Assyrians, and was slain by the Jewish heroine, Judith. Achior is reported to
have become afterward a Jewish proselyte.

122: The Greek reads eneprhsen autwn taj anagrafaj twn genwn , but, with Spitta,
I venture, against all the Greek mss. to insert pasaj before anagrafaj

123: touj te kaloumenouj geiwraj . The word geiwraj occurs in the LXX. of Ex.
xii. 19, where it translates the Hebrew rn

124: desposunoi : the persons called above (§11) the relatives of the Saviour
according to the flesh ( oi kata sarka suggeneij ). The Greek word signifies
"belonging to a master."

125: Cochaba, according to Epiphanius ( Haer. XXX. 2 and 16), was a village in
Basanitide near Decapolis. It is noticeable that this region was the seat of
Ebionism. There may therefore be significance in the care with which these
Desposyni preserved the genealogy of Joseph, for the Ebionites believed that
Christ was the real son of Joseph, and therefore Joseph's lineage was his.

126: "Judea" is here used in the wider sense of Palestine as a whole, including
the country both east and west of the Jordan. The word is occasionally used in
this sense in Josephus; and so in Matt. xix. 1, and Mark x. 1, we read of "the
coasts of Judea beyond Jordan." Ptolemy, Dion Cassius, and Strabo habitually
employ the word in the wide sense.

127: mnhmhj . These words are not found in any extant mss., but I have followed
Stroth and others in supplying them for the following reasons. The Greek, as we
have it, runs: kai thn prokimenhn genealogian ek te thj biblou twn hmerwn k.t.l
. The particle te te , which still remains, shows that words which Rufinus
translated thus must have stood originally in the Greek. The Syriac version also
confirms the conclusion that something stood in the original which has since
disappeared, though the rendering which it gives rests evidently upon a corrupt
text (cf. Spitta, p. 101). Valesius suggests the insertion of apo mnhmhj ,
though he does not place the phrase in his text. Heinichen supplies
mnhmoneusantej , and is followed by Closs in his translation. Stroth, Migne,
Routh, and Spitta read ek mnhmhj . The sense is essentially the same in each
case.

128: It has been the custom since Valesius, to consider this "Book of daily
records" ( bibloj twn hmerwn ) the same as the "private records" ( idiwtikaj
apogpafaj idiwtikaj apografaj , but exactly what we are to understand by it is
not so easy to say. It cannot denote the regular public records (called the
archives above), for these were completed, and would not need to be supplemented
by memory; and apparently, according to Africanus' opinion, these private
records were made after the destruction of the regular public ones. The "Book of
daily records" referred to must have been at any rate an incomplete genealogical
source needing to be supplemented by the memory. Private family record books, if
such existed previous to the supposed destruction of the public records, of
which we have no evidence, would in all probability have been complete for each
family. Spitta maintains (p. 101 sq.) that the Book of Chronicles is meant: the
Hebrew Mmd dbde

129: Compare note 3, above. Africanus' direct statement shows clearly enough
that he does not rest his interpretation of the genealogies (an interpretation
which is purely a result of Biblical study) upon the testimony of the relatives
of the Saviour. Their testimony is invoked with quite a different purpose,
namely, in confirmation of the genealogies themselves, and the long story (upon
the supposition that their testimony is invoked in support of Africanus'
interpretation, introduced absolutely without sense and reason) thus has its
proper place, in showing how the "relatives of the Saviour" were in a position
to be competent witnesses upon this question of fact (not interpretation ), in
spite of the burning of the public records by Herod.

130: The law to which Eusebius refers is recorded in Num. xxxvi. 6 Num. xxxvi.
7. But the prohibition given there was not an absolute and universal one, but a
prohibition which concerned only heiresses, who were not to marry out of their
own tribe upon penalty of forfeiting their inheritance (cf. Josephus, Ant. IV.
7. 5). It is an instance of the limited nature of the law that Mary an Elizabeth
were relatives, although Joseph and Mary belonged to the tribe of Judah, and
Zacharias, at least, was a Levite. This example lay so near at hand that
Eusebius should not have overlooked it in making his assertion. His argument,
therefore in proof of the fact that Mary belonged to the tribe of Judah has no
force, but the fact itself is abundantly established both by the unanimous
tradition of antiquity (independent of Luke's genealogy, which was universally
supposed to be that of Joseph), and by such passages as Ps. cxxxii. 11, Acts ii.
30, Acts xiii. 23, Rom. i. 3.

131: dhmou ..

132: patriaj .

133: oia qew proskunhsai . Eusebius adds the words oia qew , which are not found
in Matt. ii. 2 Matt. ii. 11, where proskunhsai is used.

134: Mic. v. 2.

135: Matt. ii.

136: Herod's reign was very successful and prosperous, and for most of the time
entirely undisturbed by external troubles; but his domestic life was embittered
by a constant succession of tragedies resulting from the mutual jealousies of
his wives (of whom he had ten) and of their children. Early in his reign he slew
Hyrcanus, the grandfather of his best-loved wife Mariamne, upon suspicion of
treason; a little later, Mariamne herself was put to death; in 6 b.c. her sons,
Alexander and Aristobulus, were condemned and executed; and in 4 b.c., but a few
days before his death, Antipater, his eldest son, who had been instrumental in
the condemnation of Alexander and Aristobulus, was also slain by his orders.
These murders were accompanied by many others of friends and kindred, who were
constantly falling under suspicion of treason.

137: In the later books of the Antiquities and in the first book of the Jewish
war.

138: Josephus, Ant. XVII. 6. 5.

139: B. J. I. 33.5 and 6.

140: poinhn einai ta noshmata legein . Josephus, according to the text of
Hudson, reads poinhn einai twn sofistwn ta noshmata legein twn sofistwn 141:
Callirhoë was a town just east of the Dead Sea.

142: thn Asfaltitin limnhn . This is the name by which Josephus commonly
designates the Dead Sea. The same name occurs also in Diodorus Siculus (II. 48,
XIX. 98).

143: Salome was own sister of Herod the Great, and wife in succession of Joseph,
Costabarus, and Alexas. She possessed all the cruelty of Herod himself and was
the cause, through her jealousy and envy, of most of the terrible tragedies in
his family.

144: Alexander, the third husband of Salome, is always called Alexas by
Josephus.

145: B. J. I. 13. 6 (cf. Ant. XVII. 6. 5). This terrible story restsupon the
authority of Josephus alone, but is so in keeping with Herod's character that we
have no reason to doubt its truth. The commands of Herod, however, were not
carried out, the condemned men being released after his death by Salome (see
ibid. §8).

146: B. J. I. 33. 7 (cf. Ant. XVII. 7). Herod's suicide was prevented by his
cousin Achiabus, as Josephus informs us in the same connection.

147: B. J. I. 33. 7 and 8 (cf. Ant. XVII. 7). Antipater, son of Herod and his
first wife Doris, was intended by his father to be his successor in the kingdom.
He was beheaded five days before the death of Herod, for plotting against his
father. He richly deserved his fate.

148: Eusebius gives here the traditional Christian interpretation of the cause
of Herod's sufferings. Josephus nowhere mentions the slaughter of the innocents;
whether through ignorance, or because of the insignificance of the tragedy when
compared with the other bloody acts of Herod's reign, we do not know.

149: See Matt. ii. 19 Matt. ii. 20.

150: Matt. ii. 22.

151: Archelaus was a son of Herod the Great, and own brother of the Tetrarch
Herod Antipas, with whom he was educated at Rome. Immediately after the death of
Antipater he was designated by his father as his successor in the kingdom, and
Augustus ratified the will, but gave him only the title of ethnarch. The title
of King he never really received, although he is spoken of as king in Matt. ii.
22, the word being used in a loose sense. His dominion consisted of Idumea,
Judea, Samaria, and the cities on the coast, comprising a half of his father's
kingdom. The other half was divided between Herod Antipas and Philip. He was
very cruel, and was warmly hated by most of his subjects. In the tenth year of
his reign (according to Josephus, Ant. XVII. 13. 2), or in the ninth (according
to B. J. II. 7. 3), he was complained against by his brothers and subjects on
the ground of cruelty, and was banished to Vienne in Gaul, where he probably
died, although Jerome says that he was shown his tomb near Bethlehem. Jerome's
report, however, is too late to be of any value. The exact length of his reign
it is impossible to say, as Josephus is not consistent in his reports. The
difference may be due to the fact that Josephus reckoned from different
starting-points in the two cases. He probably ruled a little more than nine
years. His condemnation took place in the consulship of M. Aemilius Lepidus and
L. Arruntius (i.e. in 6 a.d.) according to Dion Cassius, LV. 27. After the
deposition of Archelaus Judea was made a Roman province and attached to Syria,
and Coponius was sent as the first procurator. On Archelaus, see Josephus, Ant.
XVII. 8, 9, 11 sq., and B. J. I. 33. 8 sq.; II. 6 sq.

152: Philip, a son of Herod the Great by his wife Cleopatra, was of Batanea,
Trachonitis, Aurinitis, &c., from b.c. 4 to a.d. 34. He was distinguished for
his justice and moderation. He is mentioned only once in the New Testament, Luke
iii. 1. On Philip, see Josephus, Ant. XVII. 8. 1; 11. 4; XVIII. 4. 6.

153: Herod Antipus, son of Herod the Great by his wife Malthace, was Tetrarch of
Galilee and Perea from b.c. 4 to a.d. 39. In 39 a.d. he went to Rome to sue for
the title of King, which his nephew Herod Agrippa had already secured. But
accusations against him were sent to the emperor by Agrippa, and he thereby lost
his tetrarchy and was banished to Lugdunum (Lyons) in Gaul, and died (according
to Josephus, B. J. II. 9. 6) in Spain. It was he who beheaded John the Baptist,
and to him Jesus was sent by Pilate. His character is plain enough from the New
Testament account. For further particulars of his life, see Josephus, Ant. XVII.
8. 1; 11. 4; XVIII. 2. 1; 5 and 7; B. J. II. 9.

154: The Lysanias referred to here is mentioned in Luke iii. 1 as Tetrarch of
Abilene. Eusebius, in speaking of Lysanias here, follows the account of Luke,
not that of Josephus, for the latter nowhere says that Lysanias continued to
rule his tetrarchv after the exile of Archelaus. Indeed he nowhere states that
Lysanias ruled a tetrarchy at this period. He only refers ( Ant. XVIII. 6. 10;
XIX. 5. 1; XX. 7. 1; and B. J. II. 12. 8) to "the tetrarchy of Lysanias," which
he says was given to Agrippa I. and II. by Caligula and Claudius. Eusebius thus
reads more into Josephus than he has any right to do, and yet we cannot assume
that he is guilty of willful deception, for he may quite innocently have
interpreted Josephus in the light of Luke's account, without realizing that
Josephus' statement is of itself entirely indefinite. That there is no real
contradiction between the statements of Josephus and Luke has been abundantly
demonstrated by Davidson, Introduction to the New Testament, I. p. 215 sq.

155: Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 2. 2 and 4. 2.

156: Josephus reckons here from the death of Augustus (14 a.d.), when Tiberius
became sole emperor. Pilate was appointed procurator in 26 a.d. and was recalled
in 36.

157: Josephus dates the beginning of Augustus' reign at the time of the death of
Julius Caesar (as Eusebius also does in chap. 5, §2), and calls him the second
emperor. But Augustus did not actually become emperor until 31 b.c., after the
battle of Actium.

158: Eusebius refers here, not to the acts of Pilate written by Christians, of
which so many are still extant (cf. Bk. II. chap. 2, note 1), but to those
forged by their enemies with the approval of the emperor Maximinus (see below,
Bk. IX. chap. 5).

159: o thj parashmeiwsewj xronoj . "In this place paraj 160: Ant. XVIII. 2. 2.
Compare §1, above.

161: Luke iii. 1. Eusebius reckons the fifteenth year of Tiberius from 14 a.d.,
that is, from the time when he became sole emperor. There is a difference of
opinion among commentators as to whether Luke began to reckon from the
colleagueship of Tiberius (11 or 12 a.d.), or from the beginning of his reign as
sole emperor. Either mode of reckoning is allowable, but as Luke says that
Christ "began to be about thirty years of age" at this time, and as he was born
probably about 4 b.c., the former seems to have been Luke's mode. Compare
Andrew's Life of our Lord, p. 28.

162: Luke says simply, "while Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea," and does
not mention the year, as Eusebius does.

163: See the previous chapter.

164: Eusebius' reckoning would make Christ's birthday synchronize with the
beginning of our Christian era, which is at least three years out of the way.

165: Luke iii. 2 compared with John xi. 49 John xi. 51, and John xviii. 13.

166: It is true that under the Roman governors the high priests were frequently
changed (cf. above, chap. 6, note 19), but there was no regularly prescribed
interval, and some continued in office for many years; for instance, Caiaphas
was high priest for more than ten years, during the whole of Pilate's
administration, having been appointed by Valerius Gratus, Pilate's predecessor,
and his successor being appointed by the Proconsul Vitellius in 37 a.d. ( vid.
Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 2. 2 and 4. 3).

167: Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 2.2.

168: This Valerius Gratus was made procurator by Tiberius, soon after his
accession, and ruled about eleven years, when he was succeeded by Pilate in 26
a.d.

169: Ananus (or Annas) was appointed high priest by Quirinius, governor of
Syria, in 6 or 7 a.d. (Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 2. 1), and remained in office until
a.d. 14 or 15, when he was deposed by Valerius Gratus ( ib. §2). This forms
another instance, therefore, of a term of office more than one year in length.
Annas is a familiar personage from his connection with the Gospel history; but
the exact position which he occupied during Christ's ministry is difficult to
determine (cf. Wieseler's Chronology of the Life of Christ ).

170: Either this Ishmael must have held the office eight or ten years, or else
Caiaphas that long before Pilate's time, for otherwise Gratus' period is not
filled up. Josephus' statement is indefinite in regard to Ishmael, and Eusebius
is wrong in confining his term of office to one year.

171: According to Josephus, Ant. XX. 9. 1, five of the sons of Annas became high
priests.

172: This Simon is an otherwise unknown personage.

173: Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas, is well known from his connection
with the Gospel history.

174: 14 See Matt. x. 1-4; Mark iii. 14-19; Luke vi. 13-16.

175: See Luke x. 1.

176: Herod Antipas.

177: Matt. xiv. 1-12; Mark vi. 17 sq.

178: Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 5. 2.

179: Herodias, a daughter of Aristobulus and grand-daughter of Herod the Great,
first married Herod Philip (whom Josephus calls Herod, and whom the Gospels call
Philip), a son of Herod the Great, and therefore her uncle, who seems to have
occupied a private station. Afterwards, leaving him during his lifetime, she
married another uncle, Herod Antipas the Tetrarch. When her husband, Antipas,
was banished to Gaul she voluntarily shared his banishment and died there. Her
character is familiar from the accounts of the New Testament.

180: Aretas Aeneas is identical with the Aretas mentioned in 2 Cor. xi. 32, in
connection with Paul's flight from Jerusalem (cf. Wieseler, Chron. des ap.
Zeitalters , p. 142 and 167 sq.). He was king of Arabia Nabataea, whose capital
was the famous rock city, Petra, which gave its name to the whole country, which
was in consequence commonly called Arabia Petraea.

181: In this emergency Herod appealed to Tiberius, with whom he was a favorite,
and the emperor commanded Vitellius, the governor of Syria, to proceed against
Aretas. The death of Tiberius interrupted operations, and under Caligula
friendship existed between Aretas and the Romans.

182: Josephus gives the account of Herod's banishment in his Antiquities XVIII.
7. 2, but names Lyon's instead of Vienne as the place of his exile. Eusebius
here confounds the fate of Herod with that of Archelaus, who was banished to
Vienne (see above, chap. 9, note 1).

183: Ant. XVIII. 5. 2. This passage upon John the Baptist is referred to by
Origen in his Contra Cels. I. 47, and is found in all our mss. of Josephus. It
is almost universally admitted to be genuine, and there is no good reason to
doubt that it is, for such a dispassionate and strictly impartial account of
John could hardly have been written by a Christian interpolator.

184: Josephus differs with the Evangelists as to the reason for John's
imprisonment, but the accounts of the latter bear throughout the stamp of more
direct and accurate knowledge than that of Josephus. Ewald remarks with truth,
"When Josephus, however, gives as the cause of John's execution only the
Tetrarch's general fear of popular outbreaks, one can see that he no longer had
perfect recollection of the matter. The account of Mark is far more exact and
instructive."

185: Machaera was an important fortress lying east of the northern end of the
Dead Sea. It was the same fortress to which the daughter of Aretas had retired
when Herod formed the design of marrying Herodias; and the word "aforesaid"
refers to Josephus' mention of it in that connection in the previous paragraph.

186: Ant. XVIII. 3. 3. This account occurs before that of John the Baptist, not
after it. It is found in all our mss. of Josephus, and was considered genuine
until the sixteenth century, but since then has been constantly disputed. Four
opinions are held in regard to it; (1) It is entirely genuine. This view has at
present few supporters, and is absolutely untenable. A Christian hand is
unmistakably apparent,-if not throughout, certainly in many parts; and the
silence in regard to it of all Christian writers until the time of Eusebius is
fatal to its existence in the original text. Origen, for instance, who mentions
Josephus' testimony to John the Baptist in Contra Cels. I. 47, betrays no
knowledge of this passage in regard to Christ. (2) It is entirely spurious. Such
writers as Hose, Keim, and Schürer adopt this view. (3) It is partly genuine and
partly interpolated. This opinion has, perhaps, the most defenders among them
Gieseler, Weizsaecker, Renan, Edersheim, and Schaff. (4) It has been changed
from a bitter Jewish calumny of Christ to a Christian eulogy of him. This is
Ewald's view. The second opinion seems to me the correct one. The third I regard
as untenable, for the reason that after the obviously Christian passages are
omitted there remains almost nothing; and it seems inconceivable that Josephus
should have given so colorless a report of one whom the Jews regarded with such
enmity, if he mentioned him at all. The fourth view might be possible, and is
more natural than the third; but it seems as if some trace of the original
calumny would have survived somewhere, had it ever existed. To me, however, the
decisive argument is the decided break which the passage makes in the context;
§2 gives the account of a sedition of the Jews, and §4 opens with the words,
"About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder";
while §3, containing the account of Christ, gives no hint of sedition or
disorder among the Jews.

187: See chap. 9, note 8, above.

188: See Matt. x. 2-4; Luke vi. 13-16; Mark iii. 14-19.

189: See Luke x. 1-20.

190: See Acts iv. 36, Acts xiii. 1 et passim . Clement of Alexandria ( Strom.
II. 20) calls Barnabas one of the Seventy. This tradition is not in itself
improbable, but we can trace it back no further than Clement. The Clementine
Recognitions and Homilies frequently mention Barnabas as an apostle active in
Alexandria and in Rome. One tradition sends him to Milan and makes him the first
bishop of the church there, but the silence of Ambrose in regard to it is a
sufficient proof of its groundlessness. There is extant an apocryphal work,
probably of the fifth century, entitled Acta et Passio Barnabae in Cypro, which
relates his death by martyrdom in Cyprus. The tradition may be true, but its
existence has no weight. Barnabas came from Cyprus and labored there for at
least a time. It would be natural, therefore, to assign his death (which was
necessarily martyrdom, for no Christian writer of the early centuries could have
admitted that he died a natural death) to that place.

191: Gal. ii. 1, Gal. ii. 9, and Gal. ii. 13.

192: Sosthenes is mentioned in 1 Cor. i. 1. From what source Eusebius drew this
report in regard to him I cannot tell. He is the first to mention it, so far as
I know. A later tradition reports that be became Bishop of Colophon, a city in
Ionia. A Sosthenes is mentioned also in Acts xviii. 17, as ruler of the Jewish
synagogue in Corinth. Some wish to identify the two, supposing the latter to
have been afterward converted, but in this case of course he cannot have been
one of the Seventy. Eusebius' tradition is one in regard to whose value we can
form no opinion.

193: On Clement and his works see Bk. V. chap. 11, note 1, and Bk. VI. chap. 13.

194: Clement is, so far as I know, the first to make this distinction between
Peter the Apostle, and Cephas, one of the Seventy. The reason for the invention
of a second Peter in the post-apostolic age is easy to understand as resulting
from the desire to do away with the conflict between two apostles. This Cephas
appears frequently in later traditions and is commemorated in the Menology of
Basil on December 9, and in the Armenian calendar on September 25. In the
Eeclesiastical Canons he is made one of the twelve apostles, and distinguished
from Peter.

195: Gal. ii. 11.

196: We learn from Acts i. 21 sqq. that Matthias was a follower of Christ
throughout his ministry and therefore the tradition, which Eusebius is, so far
as we know, the first to record, is not at all improbable. Epiphanius (at the
close of the first book of his Hoer., Dindorf's ed. I. p. 337) a half-century
later records the same tradition. Nicephorus Callistus (II. 40) says that he
labored and suffered martyrdom in Ethiopia (probably meaning Caucasian Ethiopia,
east of the Black Sea). Upon the Gospel of Matthias see below, III. 25, note 30.

197: Joseph Barsabas, surnamed Justus. He, too, bad been with Christ from the
beginning, and therefore may well have been one of the Seventy, as Eusebius
reports. Papias (quoted by Eusebius, III. 39, below) calls him Justus Barsabas,
and relates that he drank a deadly poison without experiencing any injury.

198: From a comparison of the different lists of apostles given by Matthew,
Mark, and Luke, Thaddeus is seen to be one of the Twelve, apparently identical
with Jude and Lebbaeus (compare Jerome, In Matt. X .). Eusebius here sunders him
from the apostles and makes him one of the Seventy, committing an error similar
to that which arose in the case of Peter and Cephas. He perhaps records only an
oral tradition, as he uses the word fasi . He is, so far as is known, the first
to mention the tradition.

199: See the next chapter.

200: See 1 Cor. xv. 5-7.

201: The relationship of James and Jesus has always been a disputed matter.
Three theories have been advanced, and are all widely represented.

202: 1 Cor. xv. 7.

203: Abgarus was the name of several kings of Edessa, who reigned at various
periods from b.c. 99 to a.d. 217. The Abgar contemporary with Christ was called
Abgar Ucomo, or "the Black." He was the fifteenth king, and reigned, according
to Gutschmid, from a.d. 13 to a.d. 50. A great many ecclesiastical fictions have
grown up around his name, the story, contained in its simplest form in the
present chapter, being embellished with many marvelous additions. A
starting-point for this tradition of the correspondence with Christ,-from which
in turn grew all the later legends,-may be found in the fact that in the latter
part of the second century there was a Christian Abgar, King of Edessa, at whose
court Bardesanes, the Syrian Gnostic, enjoyed high favor, and it is certain that
Christianity had found a foothold in this region at a much earlier period. Soon
after the time of this Abgar the pretended correspondence was very likely
forged, and foisted back upon the Abgar who was contemporary with Christ.
Compare Cureton's Anc. Syriac Documents relative go the Earliest Establishment
of Christianity in Edessa, London, 1864.

204: On the traditions in regard to Thomas, see Bk. III. chap 1.

205: See chap. 12, note 11.

206: Edessa, the capital of Abgar's dominions, was a city of Northern
Mesopotamia, near the river Euphrates. History knows nothing of the city before
the time of the Seleucidae, though tradition puts its origin back into distant
antiquity, and some even identify it with Abraham's original home, Ur of the
Chaldees. In the history of the Christian Church it played an important part as
a centre of Syrian learning. Ephraem, the Syrian, founded a seminary there in
the fourth century, which after his death fell into the hands of the Arians.

207: We have no reason to doubt that Eusebius, who is the first to mention these
apocryphal epistles, really found them in the public archives at Edessa. Moses
Chorenensis, the celebrated Armenian historian of the fifth century, who studied
a long time in Edessa, is an independent witnesss to their existence in the
Edessene archives. Eusebius has been accused of forging this correspondence
himself; but this unworthy suspicion has been refuted by the discovery and
publication of the original Syriac ( The Doct. of Addai the Apostle, with an
English Translation and Notes, , by G. Phillips, London, 1876; compare also
Contemp. Rev., May, 1877, p. 1137). The epistles were forged probably long
before his day, and were supposed by him to be genuine. His critical insight,
but not his honesty, was at fault. The apocryphal character of these letters is
no longer a matter of dispute, though Cave and Grabe defended their genuineness
(so that Eusebius is in good company), and even in the present century Rinck (
Ueber die Echtheit des Briefwechsels des Königs Abgars mit Jesu, Zeitschrift für
Hist. Theol., 1843, II. p. 326) has had the hardihood to enter the lists in
their defense; but we know of no one else who values his critical reputation so
little as to venture upon the task.

208: Ensebius does not say directly that he translated these documents himself,
but this seems to be the natural conclusion to be drawn from his words. =Hmin is
used only with analhfqeiswn , and not with metablhqeiswn . It is impossible,
therefore, to decide with certainty; but the documents must have been in Syriac
in the Edessene archives, and Eusebius' words imply that, if he did not
translate them himself, he at least employed some one else to do it. At the end
of this chapter he again uses an indefinite expression, where perhaps it might
be expected that he would tell us directly if he had himself translated the
documents.

209: In the greatly embellished narrative of Cedrenus ( Hist. Compendium, p.
176; according to Wright, in his article on Abgar in the Dict. of Christian
Biog. ) this Ananias is represented as an artist who endeavored to take the
portrait of Christ, but was dazzled by the splendor of his countenance;
whereupon Christ, having washed his face, wiped it with a towel, which
miraculously retained an image of his features. The picture thus secured was
carried back to Edessa, and acted as a charm for the preservation of the city
against its enemies. The marvelous fortunes of the miraculous picture are traced
by Cedrenus through some centuries (see also Evagrius, H. E. IV. 27).

210: The expression "Son of God" could not be used by a heathen prince as it is
used here.

211: Compare John xx. 29.

212: gegraptai , as used by Christ and his disciples, always referred to the Old
Testament. The passage quoted here does not occur in the Old Testament; but
compare Isa. vi. 9, Jer. v. 21, and Ezek. xii. 2; and also Matt. xiii. 14, Mark
iv. 12, and especially Acts xxviii. 26-28 and Rom. xi. 7 sq.

213: Thomas is not commonly known by the name of Judas, and it is possible that
Eusebius, or the translator of the document, made a mistake, and applied to
Thomas a name which in the original was given to Thaddeus. But Thomas is called
Judas Thomas in the Apocryphal Acts of Thomas, and in the Syriac Doctrina
Apostolorum, published by Cureton.

214: The word "apostle" is by no means confined to the twelve apostles of
Christ. The term was used very Commonly in a much wider sense, and yet the
combination, "the apostle, one of the Seventy," in this passage, does not seem
natural, and we cannot avoid the conclusion that the original author of this
account did not thus describe Thaddeus. The designation, "one of the Seventy,"
carries the mind back to Christ's own appointment of them, recorded by Luke, and
the term "apostle," used in the same connection, would naturally denote one of
the Twelve appointed by Christ,-that is, an apostle in the narrow sense. It
might be suggested as possible that the original Syriac connected the word
"apostle" with Thomas, reading, "Thomas the apostle sent Judas, who is also
called Thaddeus, one of the Seventy," &c. Such a happy confusion is not beyond
the power of an ancient translator, for most of whom little can be said in the
way of praise. That this can have been the case in the present instance,
however, is rendered extremely improbable by the fact that throughout this
account Thaddeus is called an apostle, and we should therefore expect the
designation upon the first mention of him. It seems to me much more probable
that the words, "one of the Seventy," are an addition of Eusebius, who has
already, in two places (§4, above, and chap. 12, §3), told us that Thaddeus was
one of them. It is probable that the original Syriac preserved the correct
tradition of Thaddeus as one of the Twelve; while Eusebius, with his false
tradition of him as one of the Seventy, takes pains to characterize him as such,
when he is first introduced, but allows the word "apostle," so common in its
wider sense, to stand throughout. He does not intend to correct the Syriac
original; he simply defines Thaddeus, as he understands him, more closely.

215: Tobias was very likely a Jew, or of Jewish extraction, the name being a
familiar one among the Hebrews. This might have been the reason that Thaddeus
(if he went to Edessa at all) made his home with him.

216: Moses Chorenensis reads instead (according to Rinck), "Potagrus, the son of
Abdas." Rinck thinks it probable that Eusebius or the translator made a mistake,
confusing the Syrian name Potagrus with the Greek word podagra Abdon ton tou
=Abdou podagran exonta .

217: This is probably the earliest distinct and formal statement of the descent
into Hades; but no special stress is laid upon it as a new doctrine, and it is
stated so much as a matter of course as to show that it was commonly accepted at
Edessa at the time of the writing of these records, that is certainly as early
as the third century. Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen,
Tertullian, &c., all witness to the belief of the Church in this doctrine,
though it did not form an article in any of the older creeds, and appeared in
the East first in certain Arian confessions at about 360 a.d. In the West it
appeared first in the Aquileian creed, from which it was transferred to the
Apostles' creed in the fifth century or later.The doctrine is stated in a very
fantastic shape in the Gospel of Nicodemus , part II. ( Ante-Nicene Fathers, Am.
ed. VIII. p. 435sq.), which is based upon an apocryphal gospel of the second
century, according to Tischendorf. In it the descent of Christ into Hades and
his ascent with a great multitude are dwelt upon at length. Compare Pearson, On
the Creed , p. 340 sq.; Schaff's Creeds of Christendom, I. p. 46; and
especially, Plumptre's Spirits in Prison , p. 77 sq.

218: Compare the Gospel of Nicodemus , II. 5.

219: katabaj gar monoj sunhgeiren pollouj, eiq= outwj anebh rpoj ton patera
autou . other mss. read katebh monoj, anebh de meta pollou oxlou proj ton patera
autou kathlqen eij ta kataxqonia, ina kakeiqen lutrwshtai touj dikaiouj , "He
descended into the depths, that he might ransom thence the just."

220: According to the Chronicle of Eusebius (ed. Schoene, II. p. 116) the
Edessenes dated their era from the year of Abraham 1706 (b.c. 310), which
corresponded with the second year of the one hundred and seventeenth Olympiad
(or, according to the Armenian, to the third year of the same Olympiad), the
time when Seleucus Nicanor began to rule in Syria. According to this reckoning
the 340th year of the Edessenes would correspond with the year of Abraham 2046,
the reign of Tiberius 16 (a.d. 30); that is, the second year of the two hundred
and second Olympiad (or, according to the Armenian, the third year of the same).
According to the Chronicle of Eusebius, Jesus was crucified in the nineteenth
year of Tiberius (year of Abraham 2048 = a.d. 32), according to Jerome's version
in the eighteenth year (year of Abraham 2047 = a.d. 31). Thus, as compared with
these authorities, the 340th year of the Edessenes falls too early. But
Tertullian, Lactantius, Augustine, and others put Christ's death in 783 U.C.,
that is in 30 a.d., and this corresponds with the Edessene reckoning as given by
Eusebius.

221: See note 6.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 12: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 10
========================================================================

Book X.

Chapter I. The Peace Granted Us by God.

Chapter II. The Restoration of the Churches.

Chapter III. The Dedications in Every Place.

Chapter IV. Panegyric on the Splendor of Affairs.

Chapter V. Copies of Imperial Laws.

Chapter VI. Copy of an Imperial Epistle in Which Money is Granted to the
Churches.

Chapter VII. The Exemption of the Clergy. Copy of an Epistle in Which the
Emperor Commands that the Rulers of the Churches Be Exempted from All Political
Duties.

Chapter VIII. The Subsequent Wickedness of Licinius, and His Death.

Chapter IX. The Victory of Constantine, and the Blessings Which Under Him
Accrued to the Subjects of the Roman Empire. The End, with God's Help, of the
Tenth Book of the Church History of Eusebius Pamphili.

Book X.

Chapter I. The Peace Granted Us by God.

1 Thanks for all things be given unto God the Omnipotent Ruler and King of the
universe, and the greatest thanks to Jesus Christ the Saviour and Redeemer of
our souls, through whom we pray that peace may be always preserved for us firm
and undisturbed by external troubles and by troubles of the mind.

2 Since in accordance with thy wishes, my most holy Paulinus,1 we have added the
tenth book of the Church History to those which have preceded,2 we will inscribe
it to thee, proclaiming thee as the seal of the whole work; and we will fitly
add in a perfect number the perfect panegyric upon the restoration of the
churches,3 obeying the Divine Spirit which exhorts us in the following words:

3 "Sing unto the Lord a new song, for he hath done marvelous things. His right
hand and his holy arm hath saved him. The Lord hath made known his salvation,
his righteousness hath he revealed in the presence of the nations."4

4 And in accordance with the utterance which commands us to sing the new song,
let us proceed to show that, after those terrible and gloomy spectacles which we
have described,5 we are now permitted to see and celebrate such things as many
truly righteous men and martyrs of God before us desired to see upon earth and
did not see, and to hear and did not hear.6

5 But they, hastening on, obtained far better things,7 being carried to heaven
and the paradise of divine pleasure. But, acknowledging that even these things
are greater than we deserve, we have been astonished at the grace manifested by
the author of the great gifts, and rightly do we admire him, worshiping him with
the whole power of our souls, and testifying to the truth of those recorded
utterances, in which it is said, "Come and see the works of the Lord, the
wonders which he hath done upon the earth; he removeth wars to the ends of the
world, he shall break the bow and snap the spear in sunder, and shall burn the
shields with fire."8 6 Rejoicing in these things which have been clearly
fulfilled in our day, let us proceed with our account.

7 The whole race of God's enemies was destroyed in the manner indicated,9 and
was thus suddenly swept from the sight of men. So that again a divine utterance
had its fulfillment: "I have seen the impious highly exalted and raising himself
like the cedars of Lebanon and I have passed by, and behold, he was not and I
have sought his place, and it could not be found."10

8 And finally a bright and splendid day, overshadowed by no cloud, illuminated
with beams of heavenly light the churches of Christ throughout the entire world.
And not even those without our communion11 were prevented from sharing in the
same blessings, or at least from coming under their influence and enjoying a
part of the benefits bestowed upon us by God.12 Chapter II. The Restoration of
the Churches.

1 All men, then, were freed from the oppression of the tyrants, and being
released from the former ills, one in one way and another in another
acknowledged the defender of the pious to be the only true God. And we
especially who placed our hopes in the Christ of God had unspeakable gladness,
and a certain inspired joy bloomed for all of us, when we saw every place which
shortly before had been desolated by the impieties of the tyrants reviving as if
from a long and death-fraught pestilence, and temples again rising from their
foundations to an immense height, and receiving a splendor far greater than that
of the old ones which had been destroyed.

2 But the supreme rulers also confirmed to us still more extensively the
munificence of God by repeated ordinances in behalf of the Christians; and
personal letters of the emperor were sent to the bishops, with honors and gifts
of money. It may not be unfitting to insert these documents, translated from the
Roman into the Greek tongue, at the proper place in this book,13 as in a sacred
tablet, that they may remain as a memorial to all who shall come after us.

Chapter III. The Dedications in Every Place.

1 After this was seen the sight which had been desired and prayed for by us all;
feasts of dedication in the cities and consecrations of the newly built houses
of prayer took place, bishops assembled, foreigners came together from abroad,
mutual love was exhibited between people and people, the members of Christ's
body were united in complete harmony.

2 Then was fulfilled the prophetic utterance which mystically foretold what was
to take place: "Bone to bone and joint to joint,"14 and whatever was truly
announced in enigmatic expressions in the inspired passage.

3 And there was one energy of the Divine Spirit pervading all the members, and
one soul in all, and the same eagerness of faith, and one hymn from all in
praise of the Deity. Yea, and perfect services were conducted by the prelates,
the sacred rites being solemnized, and the majestic institutions of the Church
observed,15 here with the singing of psalms and with the reading of the words
committed to us by God, and there with the performance of divine and mystic
services; and the mysterious symbols of the Saviour's passion were dispensed.

4 At the same time people of every age, both male and female, with all the power
of the mind gave honor unto God, the author of their benefits, in prayers and
thanksgiving, with a joyful mind and soul. And every one of the bishops present,
each to the best of his ability, delivered panegyric orations, adding luster to
the assembly.

Chapter IV. Panegyric on the Splendor of Affairs.

1 A Certain one of those of moderate talent,16 who had composed a discourse,
stepped forward in the presence of many pastors who were assembled as if for a
church gathering, and while they attended quietly and decently, he addressed
himself as follows to one who was in all things a most excellent bishop and
beloved of God,17 through whose zeal the temple in Tyre, which was the most
splendid in Phoenicia, had been erected.

2 Panegyric upon the building of the churches, addressed to Paulinus, Bishop of
Tyre.

"Friends and priests of God who are clothed in the sacred gown and adorned with
the heavenly crown of glory, the inspired unction and the sacerdotal garment of
the Holy Spirit; and thou,18 oh pride of God's new holy temple, endowed by him
with the wisdom of age, and yet exhibiting costly works and deeds of youthful
and flourishing virtue, to whom God himself, who embraces the entire world, has
granted the distinguished honor of building and renewing this earthly house to
Christ, his only begotten and first-born Word, and to his holy and divine
bride;19 - one might call thee a new Beseleel,20 the architect of a divine
tabernacle, or Solomon, king of a new and much better Jerusalem, or also a new
Zerubabel, who added a much greater glory than the former to the temple of
God;21 -and you also, oh nurslings of the sacred flock of Christ, habitation of
good words, school of wisdom, and august and pious auditory of religion:22

5 It was long ago permitted us to raise hymns and songs to God, when we learned
from hearing the Divine Scriptures read the marvelous signs of God and the
benefits conferred upon men by the Lord's wondrous deeds, being taught to say
`Oh God! we have heard with our ears, our fathers have told us the work which
thou didst in their days, in days of old.'23

6 But now as we no longer perceive the lofty arm24 and the celestial right hand
of our all-gracious God and universal King by hearsay merely or report, but
observe so to speak in very deed and with our own eyes that the declarations
recorded long ago are faithful and true, it is permitted us to raise a second
hymn of triumph and to sing with loud voice, and say, `As we have heard, so have
we seen; in the city of the Lord of hosts, in the city of our God.'25

7 And in what city but in this newly built and God-constructed one, which is a
`church of the living God, a pillar and foundation of the truth,'26 concerning
which also another divine oracle thus proclaims, `Glorious things have been
spoken of thee, oh city of God.'27 Since the all-gracious God has brought us
together to it, through the grace of his Only-Begotten, let every one of those
who have been summoned sing with loud voice and say, `I was glad when they said
unto me, we shall go unto the house of the Lord,' and `Lord, I have loved the
beauty of thy house and the place where thy glory dwelleth.'28

8 And let us not only one by one, but all together, with one spirit and one
soul, honor him and cry aloud, saying, `Great is the Lord and greatly to be
praised in the city of our God, in his holy mountain.'29 For he is truly great,
and great is his house, lofty and spacious and `comely in beauty above the sons
of men.'30 `Great is the Lord who alone doeth wonderful things';31 `great is he
who doeth great things and things past finding out, glorious and marvelous
things which cannot be numbered';32 is great is he `who changeth times and
seasons, who exalteth and debaseth kings';33 `who raiseth up the poor from the
earth and lifteth up the needy from the dunghill.'34 `He hath put clown princes
from their thrones and hath exalted them of low degree from the earth. The
hungry he hath filled with good things and the arms of the proud he hath
broken.'35

9 Not only to the faithful, but also to unbelievers, has he confirmed the record
of ancient events; he that worketh miracles, he that doeth great things, the
Master of all, the Creator of the whole world, the omnipotent, the all-merciful,
the one and only God. To him let us sing the new song,36 supplying in thought,37
`To him who alone doeth great wonders: for his mercy endureth forever';38 `To
him which smote great kings, and slew famous kings: for his mercy endureth
forever';39 `For the Lord remembered us in our low estate and delivered us from
our adversaries.'40

10 And let us never cease to cry aloud in these words to the Father of the
universe. And let us always honor him with our mouth who is the second cause of
our benefits, the instructor in divine knowledge, the teacher of the true
religion, the destroyer of the impious, the slayer of tyrants, the reformer of
life, Jesus, the Saviour of us who were in despair.

11 For he alone, as the only all-gracious Son of an all-gracious Father, in
accordance with the purpose of his Father's benevolence, has willingly put on
the nature of us who lay prostrate in corruption, and like some excellent
physician, who for the sake of saving them that are ill, examines their
sufferings, handles their foul sores, and reaps pain for himself from the
miseries of another,41 so us who were not only diseased and afflicted with
terrible ulcers and wounds already mortified, but were even lying among the
dead, he hath saved for himself from the very jaws of death. For none other of
those in heaven had such power as without harm42 to minister to the salvation of
so many.

12 But he alone having reached our deep corruption, he alone having taken upon
himself our labors, he alone having suffered the punishments due for our
impieties, having recovered us who were not half dead merely, but were already
in tombs and sepulchers, and altogether foul and offensive, saves us, both
anciently and now, by his beneficent zeal, beyond the expectation of any one,
even of ourselves, and imparts liberally of the Father's benefits,-he who is the
giver of life and light, our great Physician and King and Lord, the Christ of
God.

13 For then when the whole human race lay buried in gloomy night and in depths
of darkness through the deceitful arts of guilty demons and the power of
God-hating spirits, by his simple appearing he loosed once for all the
fast-bound cords of our impieties by the rays of his light, even as wax is
melted.

14 But when malignant envy and the evil-loving demon wellnigh burst with anger
at such grace and kindness, and turned against us all his death-dealing forces,
and when, at first, like a dog gone mad which gnashes his teeth at the stones
thrown at him, and pours out his rage against his assailants upon the inanimate
missiles, he leveled his ferocious madness at the stones of the sanctuaries and
at the lifeless material of the houses, and desolated the churches,-at least as
he supposed,-and then emitted terrible hissings and snake-like sounds, now by
the threats of impious tyrants, and again by the blasphemous edicts of profane
rulers, vomiting forth death, moreover, and infecting with his deleterious and
soul-destroying poisons the souls captured by him, and almost slaying them by
his death-fraught sacrifices of dead idols, and causing every beast in the form
of man and every kind of savage to assault us-then, indeed, the `Angel of the
great Council,'43 the great Captain44 of God after the mightiest soldiers of his
kingdom had displayed sufficient exercise through patience and endurance in
everything, suddenly appeared anew, and blotted out and annihilated his enemies
and foes, so that they seemed never to have had even a name.

15 But his friends and relatives he raised to the highest glory, in the presence
not only of all men, but also of celestial powers, of sun and moon and stars,
and of the whole heaven and earth, so that now, as has never happened before,
the supreme rulers, conscious of the honor which they have received from him,
spit upon the faces of dead idols, trample upon the unhallowed rites of demons,
make sport of the ancient delusion handed down from their fathers, and
acknowledge only one God, the common benefactor of all, themselves included.

16 And they confess Christ, the Son of God, universal King of all, and proclaim
him Saviour on monuments,45 imperishably recording in imperial letters, in the
midst of the city which rules over the earth, his righteous deeds and his
victories over the impious. Thus Jesus Christ our Saviour is the only one from
all eternity who has been acknowledged, even by those highest in the earth, not
as a common king among men, but as a trite son of the universal God, and who has
been worshiped as very God,46 and that rightly.

17 For what king that ever lived attained such virtue asto fill the ears and
tongues of all men upon earth with his own name? What king, after ordaining such
pious and wise laws, has extended them from one end of the earth to the other,
so that they are perpetually read in the hearing of all men?

18 Who has abrogated barbarous and savage customs of uncivilized nations by his
gentle and most philanthropic laws? Who, being attacked for entire ages by all,
has shown such superhuman virtue as to flourish daily, and remain young
throughout his life?

19 Who has founded a nation which of old was not even heard of, but which now is
not concealed in some corner of the earth, but is spread abroad everywhere under
the sun? Who has so fortified his soldiers with the arms of piety that their
souls, being firmer than adamant, shine brilliantly in the contests with their
opponents?

20 What king prevails to such an extent, and even after death leads on his
soldiers, and sets up trophies over his enemies, and fills every place, country
and city, Greek and barbarian, with his royal dwellings, even divine temples
with their consecrated oblations, like this very temple with its superb
adornments and votive offerings, which are themselves so truly great and
majestic, worthy of wonder and admiration, and clear signs of the sovereignty of
our Saviour? For now, too, `he spake, and they were made; he commanded, and they
were created.'47 For what was there to resist the nod of the universal King and
Governor and Word of God himself?48

21 "A special discourse would be needed accurately to survey and explain all
this; and also to describe how great the zeal of the laborers is regarded by him
who is celebrated as divine,49 who looks upon the living temple which we all
constitute, and surveys the house, composed of living and moving stones, which
is well and surely built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, the
chief cornerstone being Jesus Christ himself, who has been rejected not only by
the builders of that ancient building which no longer stands, but also by the
builders - evil architects of evil works - of the structure, which is composed
of the mass of men and still endures50 But the Father has approved him both then
and now, and has made him the head of the corner of this our common church.

22 Who that beholds this living temple of the living God formed of ourselves -
this greatest and truly divine sanctuary, I say, whose inmost shrines are
invisible to the multitude and are truly holy and a holy of holies - would
venture to declare it? Who is able even to look within the sacred enclosure,
except the great High Priest of all, to whom alone it is permitted to fathom the
mysteries of every rational soul?

23 But perhaps it is granted to another, to one only, to be second after him in
the same work, namely, to the commander of this army whom the first and great
High Priest himself has honored with the second place in this sanctuary, the
shepherd of your divine flock who has obtained your people by the allotment and
the judgment of the Father, as if he had appointed him his own servant and
interpreter, a new Aaron or Melchizedec, made like the Son of God, remaining and
continually preserved by him in accordance with the united prayers of all of
you.

24 To him therefore alone let it be granted, if not in the first place, at least
in the second after the first and greatest High Priest, to observe and supervise
the inmost state of your souls,-to him who by experience and length of time has
accurately proved each one, and who by his zeal and care has disposed you all in
pious conduct and doctrine, and is better able than any one else to give an
account, adequate to the facts, of those things which he himself has
accomplished with the Divine assistance.

25 As to our first and great High Priest, it is said,51 `Whatsoever he seeth the
Father doing those things likewise the Son also doeth.'52 So also this one,53
looking up to him as to the first teacher, with pure eyes of the mind, using as
archetypes whatsoever things he seeth him doing, produceth images of them,
making them so far as is possible in the same likeness, in nothing inferior to
that Beseleel, whom God himself `filled with the spirit of wisdom and
understanding'54 and with other technical and scientific knowledge, and called
to be the maker of the temple constructed after heavenly types given in symbols.

26 Thus this one also bearing in his own soul the image of the whole Christ, the
Word, the Wisdom, the Light, has formed this magnificent temple of the highest
God, corresponding to the pattern of the greater as a visible to an invisible,
it is impossible to say with what greatness of soul, with what wealth and
liberality of mind, and with what emulation on the part of all of you, shown in
the magnanimity of the contributors who have ambitiously striven in no way to be
left behind by him in the execution of the same purpose. And this place,-for
this deserves to be mentioned first of all,-which had been covered with all
sorts of rubbish by the artifices of our enemies he did not overlook, nor did he
yield to the wickedness of those who had brought about that condition of things,
although he might have chosen some other place, for many other sites were
available in the city, where he would have had less labor, and been free from
trouble.

27 But having first aroused himself to the work, and then strengthened the whole
people with zeal, and formed them all into one great body, he fought the first
contest. For he thought that this church, which had been especially besieged by
the enemy, which had first suffered and endured the same persecutions with us
and for us, like a mother bereft of her children, should rejoice with us in the
signal favor of the all-merciful God.

28 For when the Great Shepherd had driven away the wild animals and wolves and
every cruel and savage beast, and, as the divine oracles say, `had broken the
jaws of the lions,'55 , he thought good to collect again her children in the
same place, and in the most righteous manner he set up the fold of her flock,
`to put to shame the enemy and avenger,'56 and to refute the impious daring of
the enemies of God.57

29 And now they are not,-the haters of God,-for they never were. After they had
troubled and been troubled for a little time, they suffered the fitting
punishment, and brought themselves and their friends and their relatives to
total destruction, so that the declarations inscribed of old in sacred records
have been proved true by facts. In these declarations the divine word truly says
among other things the following concerning them:

30 `The wicked have drawn out the sword, they have bent their bow, to slay the
righteous in heart; let their sword enter into their own heart and their bows be
broken.'58 And again: `Their memorial is perished with a sound'59 and `their
name hast thou blotted out forever and ever';60 for when they also were in
trouble they `cried out and there was none to save: unto the Lord, and he heard
them not.'61 But `their feet were bound together, and they fell, but we have
arisen and stand upright.'62 And that which was announced beforehand in these
words,-`O Lord, in thy city thou shalt set at naught their image,'63 -has been
shown to be true to the eyes of all.

31 But having waged war like the giants against God,64 they died in this way.
But she that was desolate and rejected by men received the consummation which we
behold in consequence of her patience toward God, so that the prophecy of Isaiah
was spoken of her:

32 `Rejoice, thirsty desert, let the desert rejoice and blossom as the lily, and
the desert places shall blossom and be glad.'65 `Be strengthened, ye weak hands
and feeble knees. Be of good courage, ye feeble-hearted, in your minds; be
strong, fear not. Behold our God recompenseth judgment and will recompense, he
will come and save us.'66 `For,' he says, `in the wilderness water has broken
out, and a pool in thirsty ground, and the dry land shall be watered meadows,
and in the thirsty ground there shall be springs of water.'67

33 These things which were prophesied long ago have been recorded in sacred
books; but no longer are they transmitted to us by hearsay merely, but in facts.
This desert, this dry land, this widowed and deserted one, `whose gates they cut
down with axes like wood in a forest, whom they broke down with hatchet and
hammer,'68 whose books also they destroyed,69 `burning with fire the sanctuary
of God, and profaning unto the ground the habitation of his name,'70 `whom all
that passed by upon the way plucked, and whose fences they broke down, whom the
boar out of the wood ravaged, and on which the savage wild beast fed,'71 now by
the wonderful power of Christ, when he wills it, has become like a lily. For at
that time also she was chastened at his nod as by a careful father; `for whom
the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.'72

34 Then after being chastened in a measure, according to the necessities of the
case, she is commanded to rejoice anew; and she blossoms as a lily and exhales
her divine odor among all men. `For,' it is said, `water hath broken out in the
wilderness,'73 the fountain of the saving bath of divine regeneration.74 And now
she, who a little before was a desert, `has become watered meadows. and springs
of water have gushed forth in a thirsty land.'75 The hands which before were
`weak' have become `truly strong';76 and these works are great and convincing
proofs of strong hands. The knees, also, which before were `feeble and infirm,'
recovering their wonted strength, are moving straight forward in the path of
divine knowledge, and hastening to the kindred flock77 of the all-gracious
Shepherd.

35 And if there are any whose souls have been stupefied by the threats of the
tyrants, not even they are passed by as incurable by the saving Word; but he
heals them also and urges them on to receive divine comfort, saying, `Be ye
comforted, ye who are faint-hearted; be ye strengthened, fear not.'78

36 This our new and excellent Zerubabel, having heard the word which announced
beforehand, that she who had been made a desert on account of God should enjoy
these things, after the bitter captivity and the abomination of desolation, did
not overlook the dead body; but first of all with prayers and supplications
propitiated the Father with the common consent of all of you, and invoking the
only one that giveth life to the dead as his ally and fellow-worker, raised her
that was fallen, after purifying and freeing her from her ills. And he clothed
her not with the ancient garment, but with such an one as he had again learned
from the sacred oracles, which say clearly, `And the latter glory of this house
shall be greater than the former.'79

37 Thus, enclosing a much larger space, he fortified the outer court with a wall
surrounding the whole, which should serve as a most secure 38 bulwark for the
entire edifice.80

38 And he raised and spread out a great and lofty vestibule toward the rays of
the rising sun,81 and furnished those standing far without the sacred enclosure
a full view of those within, almost turning the eyes of those who were strangers
to the faith, to the entrances, so that no one could pass by without being
impressed by the memory of the former desolation and of the present incredible
transformation. His hope was that such an one being impressed by this might be
attracted and be induced to enter by the very sight.

39 But when one comes within the gates he does not permit him to enter the
sanctuary immediately, with impure and unwashed feet; but leaving as large a
space as possible between the temple and the outer entrance, he has surrounded
and adorned it with four transverse cloisters, making a quadrangular space with
pillars rising on every side, which he has joined with lattice-work screens of
wood, rising to a suitable height; and he has left an open space82 in the
middle, so that the sky can be seen, and the free air bright in the rays of the
sun.

40 Here he has placed symbols of sacred purifications, setting up fountains
opposite the temple which furnish an abundance of water wherewith those who come
within the sanctuary may purify themselves. This is the first halting-place of
those who enter; and it furnishes at the same time a beautiful and splendid
scene to every one, and to those who still need elementary instruction a fitting
station.

41 But passing by this spectacle, he has made open entrances to the temple with
many other vestibules within, placing three doors on one side, likewise facing
the rays of the sun. The one in the middle, adorned with plates of bronze, iron
bound, and beautifully embossed, he has made much higher and broader than the
others, as if he were making them guards for it as for a queen.

42 In the same way, arranging the number of vestibules for the corridors on each
side of the whole temple, he has made above them various openings into the
building, for the purpose of admitting more light, adorning them with very fine
wood-carving. But the royal house he has furnished with more beautiful and
splendid materials, using unstinted liberality in his disbursements.

43 It seems to me superfluous to describe here in detail the length and breadth
of the building, its splendor and its majesty surpassing description, and the
brilliant appearance of the work, its lofty pinnacles reaching to the heavens,
and the costly cedars of Lebanon above them, which the divine oracle has not
omitted to mention, saying, `The trees of the Lord shall rejoice and the cedars
of Lebanon which he hath planted.'83

44 Why need I now describe the skillful architectural arrangement and the
surpassing beauty of each part, when the testimony of the eye renders
instruction through the ear superfluous? For when he had thus completed the
temple, he provided it with lofty thrones in honor of those who preside, and in
addition with seats arranged in proper order throughout the whole building, and
finally placed in the middle84 the holy of holies, the altar, and, that it might
be inaccessible to the multitude, enclosed it with wooden lattice-work,
accurately wrought with artistic carving, presenting a wonderful sight to the
beholders.

45 And not even the pavement was neglected by him; for this too he adorned with
beautiful marble of every variety. Then finally he passed on to the parts
without the temple, providing spacious exedrae and buildings85 on each side,
which were joined to the basilica, and communicated with the entrances to the
interior of the structure. These were erected by our most peaceful86 Solomon,
the maker of the temple of God, for those who still needed purification and
sprinkling by water and the Holy Spirit, so that the prophecy quoted above is no
longer a word merely, but a fact; for now it has also come to pass that in truth
`the bitter glory of this house is greater than the former.'87

46 For it was necessary and fitting that as her shepherd and Lord had once
tasted death for her, and after his suffering had changed that vile body which
he assumed in her behalf into a splendid and glorious body, leading the very
flesh which had been delivered88 from corruption to incorruption, she too should
enjoy the dispensations of the Saviour. For having received from him the promise
of much greater things than these, she desires to share uninterruptedly
throughout eternity with the choir of the angels of light, in the far greater
glory of regeneration, in the resurrection of an incorruptible body, in the
palace of God beyond the heavens, with Christ Jesus himself, the universal
Benefactor and Saviour.

47 But for the present, she that was formerly widowed and desolate is clothed by
the grace of God with these flowers, and is become truly like a lily, as the
prophecy says, and having received the bridal garment and the crown of beauty,
she is taught by Isaiah to dance, and to present her thank-offerings unto God
the King in reverent words.

48 Let us hear her saying, `My soul shall rejoice in the Lord; for he hath
clothed me with a garment of salvation and with a robe of gladness; he hath
bedecked me like a bridegroom with a garland, and he hath adorned me like a
bride with jewels; and like the earth which bringeth forth her bud, and like a
garden which causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth, thus the
Lord God hath caused righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the
nations.'

49 In these words she exults. And in similar words the heavenly bridegroom, the
Word Jesus Christ himself, answers her. Hear the Lord saying, `Fear not because
thou hast been put to shame, neither be thou confounded because thou hast been
rebuked; for thou shalt forget the former shame, and the reproach of thy
widowhood shalt thou remember no more.' `Not as a woman deserted and
faint-hearted I hath the Lord called thee, nor as a woman hated from her youth,
saith thy God. For a small moment have I forsaken thee, but with great mercy
will I have mercy upon thee; in a little wrath I hid my face from thee, but with
everlasting mercy will I have mercy upon thee, saith the Lord that hath redeemed
thee.'

50 `Awake, awake, thou who hast drunk at the hand of the Lord the cup of his
fury; for thou hast drunk the cup of ruin, the vessel of my wrath, and hast
drained it. And there was none to console thee of all thy sons whom thou didst
bring forth, and there was none to take thee by the hand.' `Behold, I have taken
out of thine hand the cup of ruin, the vessel of my fury, and thou shalt no
longer drink it. And I will put it into the hands of them that have treated thee
unjustly and have humbled thee.'

51 `Awake, awake, put on thy strength, put on thy glory. Shake off the dust and
arise. Sit thee down, loose the bands of thy neck.' `Lift up thine eyes round
about and behold thy children gathered together; behold they are gathered
together and are come to thee. As I live, saith the Lord, thou shalt clothe thee
with them all as with an ornament, and gird thyself with them as with the
ornaments of a bride. For thy waste and corrupted and ruined places shall now be
too narrow by reason of those that inhabit thee, and they that swallow thee up
shall be far from thee.

52 For thy sons whom thou hast lost shall say in thine ears, The place is too
narrow for me, give place to me that I may dwell. Then shalt thou say in thine
heart, Who hath begotten me these? I am childless and a widow, and who hath
brought up these for me? I was left alone, and these, where were they for me?'

53 "These are the things which Isaiah foretold; and which were anciently
recorded concerning us in sacred books and it was necessary that we should
sometime learn their truthfulness by their fulfillment.

54 For when the bridegroom, the Word, addressed such language to his own bride,
the sacred and holy Church, this bridesman, -when she was desolate and lying
like a corpse, bereft of hope in the eyes of men,-in accordance with the united
prayers of all of you, as was proper, stretched out your hands and aroused and
raised her up at the command of God, the universal King, and at the
manifestation of the power of Jesus Christ; and having raised her he established
her as he had learned from the description given in the sacred oracles.

55 This is indeed a very great wonder, passing all admiration, especially to
those who attend only to the outward appearance; but more wonderful than wonders
are the archetypes and their mental prototypes and divine models; I mean the
reproductions of the inspired and rational building in our souls.

56 This the Divine Son himself created after his own image, imparting to it
everywhere and in all respects the likeness of God, an incorruptible nature,
incorporeal, rational, free from all earthly matter, a being endowed with its
own intelligence; and when he had once called her forth from non-existence into
existence, he made her a holy spouse, an all-sacred temple for himself and for
the Father. This also he clearly declares and confesses in the following words:
`I will dwell in them and will walk in them; and I will be their God, and they
shall be my people.' Such is the perfect and purified soul, so made from the
beginning as to bear the image of the celestial Word.

57 But when by the envy and zeal of the malignant demon she became, of her own
voluntary choice, sensual and a lover of evil, the Deity left her; and as if
bereft of a protector, she became an easy prey and readily accessible to those
who had long envied her; and being assailed by the batteries and machines of her
invisible enemies and spiritual foes, she suffered a terrible fall, so that not
one stone of virtue remained upon another in her, but she lay completely dead
upon the ground, entirely divested of her natural ideas of God.

58 "But as she, who had been made in the image of God, thus lay prostrate, it
was not that wild boar from the forest which we see that despoiled her, but a
certain destroying demon and spiritual wild beasts who deceived her with their
passions as with the fiery darts of their own wickedness, and burned the truly
divine sanctuary of God with fire, and profaned to the ground the tabernacle of
his name. Then burying the miserable one with heaps of earth, they destroyed
every hope of deliverance.

59 But that divinely bright and saving Word, her protector, after she had
suffered the merited punishment for her sins, again restored her, securing the
favor of the all-merciful Father.

60 Having won over first the souls of the highest rulers, he purified, through
the agency of those most divinely favored princes, the whole earth from all the
impious destroyers, and from the terrible and God-hating tyrants themselves.
Then bringing out into the light those who were his friends, who had long before
been consecrated to him for life, but in the midst,as it were, of a storm of
evils, had been concealed under his shelter, he honored them worthily with the
great gifts of the Spirit. And again, by means of them, he cleared out and
cleaned with spades and mattocks-the admonitory words of doctrine -the souls
which a little while before had been covered with filth and burdened with every
kind of matter and rubbish of impious ordinances.

61 And when he had made the ground of all your minds clean and clear, he finally
committed it to this all-wise and God-beloved Ruler, who, being endowed with
judgment and prudence, as well as with other gifts, and being able to examine
and discriminate accurately the minds of those committed to his charge, from the
first day, so to speak, down to the present, has not ceased to build.

62 Now he has supplied the brilliant gold, again the refined and unalloyed
silver, and the precious and costly stones in all of you, so that again is
fulfilled for you in facts a sacred and mystic prophecy, which says, `Behold I
make thy stone a carbuncle, and thy foundations of sapphire, and thy battlements
of jasper, and thy gates of crystals, and thy wall of chosen stones; and all thy
sons shall be taught of God, and thy children shall enjoy complete peace; and in
righteousness shall thou be built.'

63 Building therefore in righteousness, he divided the whole people according to
their strength. With some he fortified only the outer enclosure, walling it up
with unfeigned faith; such were the great mass of the people who were incapable
of bearing a greater structure. Others he permitted to enter the building,
commanding them to stand at the door and act as guides for those who should come
in; these may be not unfitly compared to the vestibules of the temple. Others he
supported by the first pillars which are placed without about the quadrangular
hall, initiating them into the first elements of the letter of the four Gospels.
Still others he joined together about the basilica on both sides; these are the
catechumens who are still advancing and progressing, and are not far separated
from the inmost view of divine things granted to the faithful.

64 Taking from among these the pure souls that have been cleansed like gold by
divine washing, he then supports them by pillars, much better than those
without, made from the inner and mystic teachings of the Scripture, and
illumines them by windows.

65 Adorning the whole temple with a great vestibule of the glory of the one
universal King and only God, and placing on either side of the authority of the
Father Christ, and the Holy Spirit as second lights, he exhibits abundantly and
gloriously throughout the entire building the clearness and splendor of the
truth of the rest in all its details. And having selected from every quarter the
living and moving and well-prepared stones of the souls, he constructs out of
them all the great and royal house, splendid and full of light both within and
without; for not only soul and understanding, but their body also is made
glorious by the blooming ornament of purity and modesty.

66 And in this temple there are also thrones, and a great number of seats and
benches, in all those souls in which sit the Holy Spirit's gifts, such as were
anciently seen by the sacred apostles, and those who were with them, when there
`appeared unto them tongues parting asunder, like as of fire, and sat upon each
one of them.'

67 But in the leader of all it is reasonable to suppose that Christ himself
dwells in his fullness, and in those that occupy the second rank after him, in
proportion as each is able to contain the power of Christ and of the Holy
Spirit. And the souls of some of those, namely, who are committed to each of
them for instruction and care - may be seats for angels.

68 But the great and august and unique altar, what else could this be than the
pure holy of holies of the soul of the common priest of all? Standing at the
right of it, Jesus himself, the great High Priest of the universe, the Only
Begotten of God, receives with bright eye and extended hand the sweet incense
from all, and the bloodless and immaterial sacrifices offered in their prayers,
and bears them to the heavenly Father and God of the universe. And he himself
first worships him, and alone gives to the Father the reverence which is his
due, beseeching him also to continue always kind and propitious to us all.

69 "Such is the great temple which the great Creator of the universe, the Word,
has built throughout the entire world, making it an intellectual image upon
earth of those things which lie above the vault of heaven, so that throughout
the whole creation, including rational beings on earth, his Father might be
honored and adored.

70 But the region above the heavens, with the models of earthly things which are
there, and the so-called Jerusalem above, and the heavenly Mount of Zion, and
the supramundane city of the living God, in which innumerable choirs of angels
and the Church of the first born, whose names are written in heaven, praise
their Maker and the Supreme Ruler of the universe with hymns of praise
unutterable and incomprehensible to us,-who that is mortal is able worthily to
celebrate this? `For eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into
the heart of men those things which God hath prepared for them that love him.'

71 Since we, men, children, and women, small and great, are already in part
partakers of these things, let us not cease all together, with one spirit and
one soul, to confess and praise the author of such great benefits to us, `Who
forgiveth all our iniquities, who healeth all our diseases, who redeemeth our
life from destruction, who crowneth us with mercy and compassion, who satisfieth
our desires with good things.' `For he hath not dealt with us according to our
sins, nor rewarded us according to our iniquities;' `for as far as the east is
from the west, so far hath he removed our iniquities from us. Like as a father
pitieth his own children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him.'

72 Rekindling these thoughts in our memories, both now and during all time to
come, and contemplating in our mind night and day, in every hour and with every
breath, so to speak, the Author and Ruler of the present festival, and of this
bright and most splendid day, let us love and adore him with every power of the
soul. And now rising, let us beseech him with loud voice to shelter and preserve
us to the end in his fold, granting his unbroken and unshaken peace forever, in
Christ Jesus our Saviour; through whom be the glory unto him forever and ever.
Amen."

Chapter V. Copies of Imperial Laws.

1 Let us finally subjoin the translations from the Roman tongue of the imperial
decrees of Constantine and Licinius.

2 Copy of imperial decrees translated from the Roman tongue.

"Perceiving long ago that religious liberty ought not to be denied, but that it
ought to be granted to the judgment and desire of each individual to perform his
religious duties according to his own choice, we had given orders that every
man, Christians as well as others, should preserve the faith of his own sect and
religion.

3 But since in that rescript, in which such liberty was granted them, many and
various conditions seemed clearly added, some of them, it may be, after a little
retired from such observance.

4 When I, Constantine Augustus, and I, Licinius Augustus, came under favorable
auspices to Milan and took under consideration everything which pertained to the
common weal and prosperity, we resolved among other things, or rather first of
all, to make such decrees as seemed in many respects for the benefit of every
one; namely, such as should preserve reverence and piety toward the deity. We
resolved, that is, to grant both to the Christians and to all men freedom to
follow the religion which they choose, that whatever heavenly divinity exists
may be propitious to us and to all that live under our government.

5 We have, therefore, determined, with sound and upright purpose, that liberty
is to be denied to no one, to choose and to follow the religious observances of
the Christians, but that to each one freedom is to be given to devote his mind
to that religion which he may think adapted to himself, in order that the Deity
may exhibit to us in all things his accustomed care and favor.

6 It was fitting that we should write that this is our pleasure, that those
conditions being entirely left out which were contained in our former letter
concerning the Christians which was sent to your devotedness, everything that
seemed very severe and foreign to our mildness may be annulled, and that now
every one who has the same desire to observe the religion of the Christians may
do so without molestation.

7 We have resolved to communicate this most fully to thy care, in order that
thou mayest know that we have granted to these same Christians freedom and full
liberty to observe their own religion.

8 Since this has been granted freely by us to them, thy devotedness perceives
that liberty is granted to others also who may wish to follow their own
religious observances; it being clearly in accordance with the tranquillity of
our times, that each one should have the liberty of choosing and worshiping
whatever deity he pleases. This has been done by us in order that we might not
seem in any way to discriminate against any rank or religion.

9 And we decree still further in regard to the Christians, that their places, in
which they were formerly accustomed to assemble, and concerning which in the
former letter sent to thy devotedness a different command was given if it appear
that any have bought them either from our treasury or from any other person,
shall be restored to the said Christians, without demanding money or any other
equivalent, with no delay or hesitation.

10 If any happen to have received the said places as a gift, they shall restore
them as quickly as possible to these same Christians: with the understanding
that if those who have bought these places, or those who have received them as a
gift, demand anything from our bounty, they may go to the judge of the district,
that provision may be made for them by our clemency. All these things are to be
granted to the society of Christians by your care immediately and without any
delay.

11 And since the said Christians are known to have possessed not only those
places in which they were accustomed to assemble, but also other places,
belonging not to individuals among them, but to the society as a whole, that is,
to the society of Christians, you will command that all these, in virtue of the
law which we have above stated, be restored, without any hesitation, to these
same Christians; that is, to their society and congregation: the above-mentioned
provision being of course observed, that those who restore them without price,
as we have before said, may expect indemnification from our bounty.

12 In all these things, for the behoof of the aforesaid society of Christians,
you are to use the utmost diligence, to the end that our command may be speedily
fulfilled, and that in this also, by our clemency, provision may be made for the
common and public tranquillity.

13 For by this means, as we have said before, the divine favor toward us which
we have already experienced in many matters will continue sure through all time.

14 And that the terms of this our gracious ordinance may be known to all, it is
expected that this which we have written will be published everywhere by you and
brought to the knowledge of all, in order that this gracious ordinance of ours
may remain unknown to no one."

15 Copy of another imperial decree which they issued, indicating that the grant
was made to the Catholic Church alone.

"Greeting to thee, our most esteemed Anulinus. It is the custom of our
benevolence, most esteemed Anulinus, to will that those things which belong of
right to another should not only be left unmolested, but should also be
restored.

16 Wherefore it is our will that when thou receivest this letter, if any such
things belonged to the Catholic Church of the Christians, in any city or other
place, but are now held by citizens or by any others, thou shalt cause them to
be restored immediately to the said churches. For we have already determined
that those things which these same. churches formerly possessed shall be
restored to them.

17 Since therefore thy devotedness perceives that this command of ours is most
explicit, do thou make haste to restore to them, as quickly as possible,
everything which formerly belonged to the said churches,-whether gardens or
buildings or whatever they may be,-that we may learn that thou hast obeyed this
decree of ours most carefully. Farewell, our most esteemed and beloved
Anulinus."

18 Copy of an epistle in which the Emperor commands that a synod of bishops be
held at Rome in behalf of the unity and concord of the churches.

19 "Constantine Augustus to Miltiades, bishop of Rome, and to Marcus. Since many
such communications have been sent to me by Anulinus, the most illustrious
proconsul of Africa, in which it is said that Caecilianus, bishop of the city of
Carthage, has been accused by some of his colleagues in Africa, in many matters;
and since it seems to me a very serious thing that in those provinces which
Divine Providence has freely entrusted to my devotedness, and in which there is
a great population, the multitude are found following the baser course, and
dividing, as it were, into two parties, and the bishops are at variance,-it has
seemed good to me that Caecilianus himself, with ten of the bishops that appear
to accuse him, and with ten others whom he may consider necessary for his
defense, should sail to Rome, that there, in the presence of yourselves and of
Retecius and Maternus and Marinus, your colleagues, whom I have commanded to
hasten to Rome for this purpose, he may be heard, as you may understand to be in
accordance with the most holy law.

20 But in order that you may be enabled to have most perfect knowledge of all
these things, I have subjoined to my letter copies of the documents sent to me
by Anulinus, and have sent them to your above-mentioned colleagues. When your
firmness has read these, you will consider in what way the above-mentioned case
may be most accurately investigated and justly decided. For it does not escape
your diligence that I have such reverence for the legitimate Catholic Church
that I do not wish you to leave schism or division in any place. May the
divinity of the great God preserve you, most honored sirs, for many years."

21 Copy of an epistle in which the emperor commands another synod to be held for
the purpose of removing all dissensions among the bishops.

"Constantine Augustus to Chrestus, bishop of Syracuse. When some began wickedly
and perversely to disagree among themselves in regard to the holy worship and
celestial power and Catholic doctrine, wishing to put an end to such disputes
among them, I formerly gave command that certain bishops should be sent from
Gaul, and that the opposing parties who were contending persistently and
incessantly with each other, should be summoned from Africa; that in their
presence, and in the presence of the bishop of Rome, the matter which appeared
to be causing the disturbance might be examined and decided with all care.

22 But since, as it happens, some, forgetful both of their own salvation and of
the reverence due to the most holy religion, do not even yet bring hostilities
to an end, and are unwilling to conform to the judgment already passed, and
assert that those who expressed their opinions and decisions were few, or that
they had been too hasty and precipitate in giving judgment, before all the
things which ought to have been accurately investigated had been examined,-on
account of all this it has happened that those very ones who ought to hold
brotherly and harmonious relations toward each other, are shamefully, or rather
abominably, divided among themselves, and give occasion for ridicule to those
men whose souls are aliens to this most holy religion. Wherefore it has seemed
necessary to me to provide that this dissension, which ought to have ceased
after the judgment had been already given by their own voluntary agreement,
should now, if possible, be brought to an end by the presence of many.

23 Since, therefore, we have commanded a number of bishops from a great many
different places to assemble in the city of Arles, before the kalends of August,
we have thought proper to write to thee also that thou shouldst secure from the
most illustrious Latronianus, corrector of Sicily, a public vehicle, and that
thou shouldst take with thee two others of the second rank whom thou thyself
shalt choose, together with three servants who may serve you on the way, and
betake thyself to the above-mentioned place before the appointed day; that by
thy firmness, and by the wise unanimity and harmony of the others present, this
dispute, which has disgracefully continued until the present time, in
consequence of certain shameful strifes, after all has been heard which those
have to say who are now at variance with one another, and whom we have likewise
commanded to be present, may be settled in accordance with the proper faith, and
that brotherly harmony, though it be but gradually, may be restored.

24 May the Almighty God preserve thee in health for many years."

Chapter VI. Copy of an Imperial Epistle in Which Money is Granted to the
Churches.

1 "Constantine Augustus to Caecilianus, bishop of Carthage. Since it is our
pleasure that something should be granted in all the provinces of Africa and
Numidia and Mauritania to certain ministers of the legitimate and most holy
catholic religion, to defray their expenses, I have written to Ursus, the
illustrious finance minister of Africa, and have directed him to make provision
to pay to thy firmness three thousand folles.

2 Do thou therefore, when thou hast received the above sum of money, command
that it be distributed among all those mentioned above, according to the brief
sent to thee by Hosius.

3 But if thou shouldst find that anything is wanting for the fulfillment of this
purpose of mine in regard to all of them, thou shalt demand without hesitation
from Heracleides, our treasurer, whatever thou findest to be necessary. For I
commanded him when he was present that if thy firmness should ask him for any
money, he should see to it that it be paid without delay.

4 And since I have learned that some men of unsettled mind wish to turn the
people from the most holy and catholic Church by a certain method of shameful
corruption, do thou know that I gave command to Anulinus, the proconsul, and
also to Patricius, vicar of the prefects, when they were present, that they
should give proper attention not only to other matters but also above all to
this, and that they should not overlook such a thing when it happened. Wherefore
if thou shouldst see any such men continuing in this madness, do thou without
delay go to the above-mentioned judges and report the matter to them; that they
may correct them as I commanded them when they were present. The divinity of the
great God preserve thee for many years."

Chapter VII. The Exemption of the Clergy. Copy of an Epistle in Which the
Emperor Commands that the Rulers of the Churches Be Exempted from All Political
Duties.

1 "Greeting to thee, our most esteemed Anulinus. Since it appears from many
circumstances that when that religion is despised, in which is preserved the
chief reverence for the most holy celestial Power, great dangers are brought
upon public affairs; but that when legally adopted and observed it affords the
most signal prosperity to the Roman name and remarkable felicity to all the
affairs of men, through the divine beneficence,-it has seemed good to me, most
esteemed Anulinus, that those men who give their services with due sanctity and
with constant observance of this law, to the worship of the divine religion,
should receive recompense for their labors.

2 Wherefore it is my will that those within the province entrusted to thee, in
the catholic Church, over which Caecilianus presides, who give their services to
this holy religion, and who are commonly called clergymen, be entirely exempted
from all public duties, that they may not by any error or sacrilegious
negligence be drawn away from the service due to the Deity, but may devote
themselves without any hindrance to their own law. For it seems that when they
show greatest reverence to the Deity, the greatest benefits accrue to the state.
Farewell, our most esteemed and beloved Anulinus."

Chapter VIII. The Subsequent Wickedness of Licinius, and His Death.

1 Such blessings did divine and heavenly grace confer upon us through the
appearance of our Saviour, and such was the abundance of benefits which
prevailed among all men in consequence of the peace which we enjoyed. And thus
were our affairs crowned with rejoicings and festivities.

2 But malignant envy, and the demon who loves that which is evil, were not able
to bear the sight of these things; and moreover the events that befell the
tyrants whom we have already mentioned were not sufficient to bring Licinius to
sound reason.

3 For the latter, although his government was prosperous and he was honored with
the second rank after the great Emperor Constantine, and was connected with him
by the closest ties of marriage, abandoned the imitation of good deeds, and
emulated the wickedness of the impious tyrants whose end he had seen with his
own eyes, and chose rather to follow their principles than to continue in
friendly relations with him who was better than they. Being envious of the
common benefactor he waged an impious and most terrible war against him, paying
regard neither to laws of nature, nor treaties, nor blood, and giving no thought
to covenants.

4 For Constantine, like an all-gracious emperor, giving him evidences of true
favor, did not refuse alliance with him, and did not refuse him the illustrious
marriage with his sister, but honored him by making him a partaker of the
ancestral nobility and the ancient imperial blood, and granted him the right of
sharing in the dominion over all as a brother-in-law and co-regent, conferring
upon him the government and administration of no less a portion of the Roman
provinces than he himself possessed.

5 But Licinius, on the contrary, pursued a course directly opposite to this;
forming daily all kinds of plots against his superior, and devising all sorts of
mischief, that he might repay his benefactor with evils. At first he attempted
to conceal his preparations, and pretended to be a friend, and practiced
frequently fraud and deceit, in the hope that he might easily accomplish the
desired end.

6 But God was the friend, protector, and guardian of Constantine, and bringing
the plots which had been formed in secrecy and darkness to the light, he foiled
them. So much virtue does the great armor of piety possess for the warding off
of enemies and for the preservation of our own safety. Protected by this, our
most divinely favored emperor escaped the multitudinous plots of the abominable
man.

7 But when Licinius perceived that his secret preparations by no means
progressed according to his mind,-for God revealed every plot and wickedness to
the God-favored emperor,-being no longer able to conceal himself, he undertook
an open war.

8 And at the same time that he determined to wage war with Constantine, he also
proceeded to join battle with the God of the universe, whom he knew that
Constantine worshiped, and began, gently for a time and quietly, to attack his
pious subjects, who had never done his government any harm. This he did under
the compulsion of his innate wickedness which drove him into terrible blindness.

9 He did not therefore keep before his eyes the memory of those who had
persecuted the Christians before him, nor of those whose destroyer and
executioner he had been appointed, on account of the impieties which they had
committed. But departing from sound reason, being seized, in a word, with
insanity, he determined to war against God himself as the ally of Constantine,
instead of against the one who was assisted by him.

10 And in the first place, he drove from his house every Christian, thus
depriving himself, wretched man, of the prayers which they offered to God in his
behalf, which they are accustomed, according to the teaching of their fathers,
to offer for all men. Then he commanded that the soldiers in the cities should
be cashiered and stripped of their rank unless they chose to sacrifice to the
demons. And yet these were small matters when compared with the greater things
that followed.

11 Why is it necessary to relate minutely and in detail all that was done by the
hater of God, and to recount how this most lawless man invented unlawful laws?
He passed an ordinance that no one should exercise humanity toward the sufferers
in prison by giving them food, and that none should show mercy to those that
were perishing of hunger in bonds; that no one should in any way be kind, or do
any good act, even though moved by Nature herself to sympathize with one's
neighbors. And this was indeed an openly shameful and most cruel law, calculated
to expel all natural kindliness. And in addition to this it was also decreed, as
a punishment, that those who showed compassion should suffer the same things
with those whom they compassionated; and that those who kindly ministered to the
suffering should be thrown into bonds and into prison, and should endure the
same punishment with the sufferers. Such were the decrees of Licinius.

12 Why should we recount his innovations in regard to marriage or in regard to
the dying - innovations by which he ventured to annul the ancient laws of the
Romans which had been well and wisely formed, and to introduce certain barbarous
and cruel laws, which were truly unlawful and lawless? He invented, to the
detriment of the provinces which were subject to him, innumerable prosecutions,
and all sorts of methods of extorting gold and silver. new measurements of land
and injurious exactions from men in the country, who were no longer living, but
long since dead.

13 Why is it necessary to speak at length of the banishments which, in addition
to these things, this enemy of mankind inflicted upon those who had done no
wrong, the expatriations of men of noble birth and high reputation whose young
wives he snatched from them and consigned to certain baser fellows of his own,
to be shamefully abused by them, and the many married women and virgins upon
whom he gratified his passions, although he was in advanced age - why, I say, is
it necessary to speak at length of these things, when the excessive wickedness
of his last deeds makes the first appear small and of no account?

14 For, finally, he reached such a pitch of madness that he attacked the
bishops, supposing that they - as servants of the God over all - would be
hostile to his measures. He did not yet proceed against them openly, on account
of his fear of his superior, but as before, secretly and craftily, employing the
treachery of the governors for the destruction of the most distinguished of
them. And the manner of their murder was strange, and such as had never before
been heard of.

15 The deeds which he performed at Amaseia and in the other cities of Pontus
surpassed every excess of cruelty. Some of the churches of God were again razed
to the ground, others were closed, so that none of those accustomed to frequent
them could enter them and render the worship due to God.

16 For his evil conscience led him to suppose that prayers were not offered in
his behalf; but he was persuaded that we did everything in the interest of the
God-beloved emperor, and that we supplicated God for him. Therefore he hastened
to turn his fury against us.

17 And then those among the governors who wished to flatter him, perceiving that
in doing such things they pleased the impious tyrant, made some of the bishops
suffer the penalties customarily inflicted upon criminals, and led away and
without any pretext punished like murderers those who had done no wrong. Some
now endured a new form of death: having their bodies cut into many pieces with
the sword, and after this savage and most horrible spectacle, being thrown into
the depths of the sea as food for fishes.

18 Thereupon the worshipers of God again fled, and fields and deserts, forests
and mountains, again received the servants of Christ. And when the impious
tyrant had thus met with success in these measures, he finally planned to renew
the persecution against all.

19 And he would have succeeded in his design, and there would have been nothing
to hinder him in the work, had not God, the defender of the lives of his own
people, most quickly anticipated that which was about to happen, and caused a
great light to shine forth as in the midst of a dark and gloomy night, and
raised up a deliverer for leading into those regions with a lofty arm, his
servant, Constantine.

Chapter IX. The Victory of Constantine, and the Blessings Which Under Him
Accrued to the Subjects of the Roman Empire.

1 To him, therefore, God granted, from heaven above, the deserved fruit of
piety, the trophies of victory over the impious, and he cast the guilty one with
all his counselors and friends prostrate at the feet of Constantine.

2 For when Licinius carried his madness to the last extreme, the emperor, the
friend of God, thinking that he ought no longer to be tolerated, acting upon the
basis of sound judgment, and mingling the firm principles of justice with
humanity, gladly determined to come to the protection of those who were
oppressed by the tyrant, and undertook, by putting a few destroyers out of the
way, to save the greater part of the human race.

3 For when he had formerly exercised humanity alone and had shown mercy to him
who was not worthy of sympathy, nothing was accomplished; for Licinius did not
renounce his wickedness, but rather increased his fury against the peoples that
were subject to him, and there was left to the afflicted no hope of salvation,
oppressed as they were by a savage beast.

4 Wherefore, the protector of the virtuous, mingling hatred for evil with love
for good, went forth with his son Crispus, a most beneficent prince, and
extended a saving right hand to all that were perishing. Both of them, father
and son, under the protection, as it were, of God, the universal King, with the
Son of God, the Saviour of all, as their leader and ally, drew up their forces
on all sides against the enemies of the Deity and won an easy victory; God
having prospered them in the battle in all respects according to their wish.

5 Thus, suddenly, and sooner than can be told, those who yesterday and the day
before breathed death and threatening were no more, and not even their names
were remembered, but their inscriptions and their honors suffered the merited
disgrace. And the things which Licinius with his own eyes had seen come upon the
former impious tyrants he himself likewise suffered, because he did not receive
instruction nor learn wisdom from the chastisements of his neighbors, but
followed the same path of impiety which they had trod, and was justly hurled
over the same precipice. Thus he lay prostrate.

6 But Constantine, the mightiest victor, adorned with every virtue of piety,
together with his son Crispus, a most God-beloved prince, and in all respects
like his father, recovered the East which belonged to them; and they formed one
united Roman empire as of old, bringing under their peaceful sway the whole
world from the rising of the sun to the opposite quarter, both north and south,
even to the extremities of the declining day.

7 All fear therefore of those who had formerly afflicted them was taken away
from men, and they celebrated splendid and festive days. Everything was filled
with light, and those who before were downcast beheld each other with smiling
faces and beaming eyes. With dances and hymns, in city and country, they
glorified first of all God the universal King, because they had been thus
taught, and then the pious emperor with his God-beloved children.

8 There was oblivion of past evils and forgetfulness of every deed of impiety;
there was enjoyment of present benefits and expectation of those yet to come.
Edicts full of clemency and laws containing tokens of benevolence and true piety
were issued in every place by the victorious emperor.

9 Thus after all tyranny had been purged away, the empire which belonged to them
was preserved firm and without a rival for Constantine and his sons alone. And
having obliterated the godlessness of their predecessors, recognizing the
benefits conferred upon them by God, they exhibited their love of virtue and
their love of God, and their piety and gratitude to the Deity, by the deeds
which they performed in the sight of all men. The End, with God's Help, of the
Tenth Book of the Church History of Eusebius Pamphili.

1: The toleration edict of Galerius, given in Bk. VIII. chap. 17.

2: For the reason of Maximin's failure to join with the other emperors in the
issue of this edict, see Bk. VIII. chap. 17, note 1.

3: Of Sabinus we know only what is told us here. He seems to have been Maximin's
prime minister or praetorian prefect ( tw twn ecoxtatwn eparxwn aciwmati
tetimhmenod , Eusebius says of him). He is mentioned again in chap. 9, where an
epistle of Maximin addressed to him is quoted.

4: Literally, "the divinity of our most divine masters, the emperors." The style
throughout the epistle is of an equally stilted character.

5: Literally, "have commanded my devotedness to write to thy wisdom." It is
clear that the communication was dictated, or at least directly inspired, by
Maximin himself.

6: touj logistaj

7: touj strathgouj (the common designation for the chief magistrates of cities
in the eastern part of the empire) kai touj praipositouj tou pagou .

8: The mss. all read grammatoj , but Valesius conjectures that pragmatoj is the
true reading, and his conjecture is supported by Nicephorus,who has frontida
peri xristianwn poiesqai grammatoj ina gnwen, peraiterw antoid tonton ton
grammatod frontida poiesqai mh proshkein ), and there seems to be no other
alternative than to change the word grammatoj to pragmatoj , or at least give it
the meaning of pragmatoj , as Mason does, without emending the text (though I am
not aware that gramma pragma epistogh , for he calls the document an epitostolh
gramma by Eusebius, we should have expected him to call the document a gramma ,
not an epistolh in §3.

9: toij kat agrouj epitetagmenoij .

10: The Edict of Galerius was issued in April, 311 (see Lactantius, de Mort.
pers. 35, and Bk. VIII. chap. 17, note 1, above), so that Maximin's change of
policy, recorded in this chapter, must have begun in October, or thereabouts.
Valesius supposes that the death of Galerius was the cause of Maximin's return
to persecuting measures. But Galerius died, not some months after the issue of
the edict, as Valesius, and others after him, assert, but within a few days
after it, as is directly stated by Lactantius ( ibid. ), whose accuracy in this
case there is no reason to question. Another misstatement made by Valesius in
the same connection, and repeated by Heinichen, Crus_, and others, is that
Maximin became Augustus only after the death of Galerius. The truth is, he was
recognized as an Augustus in 308 (see Lactantius, ibid. chap. 32; and Bk. VIII.
chap. 13, note 22, above). The cause of the renewal of the persecution seems to
have been simply impatience at the exultation of the Church and at the wonderful
recuperative power revealed the moment the pressure was taken off. That it was
not renewed sooner was doubtless due to the more important matters which engaged
the attention of Maximinus immediately after the death of Galerius, in
connection with the division of the Eastern Empire between himself and Licinius
(see Lactantius, ibid. chap. 36). It would seem from the passage just referred
to, that as soon as these matters were satisfactorily adjusted, Maximin turned
his attention again to the Christians, and began to curtail their liberty.

11: Very likely under the pretext that night gatherings at the tombs of the
martyrs, with the excitement and enthusiasm necessarily engendered under such
circumstances, were of immoral tendency. Naturally, the honor shown by the
Christians to their fellows who had been put to death at the command of the
state was looked upon as an insult to the authorities, and could not but be very
distasteful to them. They imagined that such meetings would only tend to foster
discontent and disloyalty on the part of those who engaged in them, and
consequently they were always suspicious of them.

12: The same account is given by Lactantius, ibid. chap. 36 ("First of all he
took away the toleration and general protection granted by Galerius to the
Christians, and, for this end, he secretly procured addresses for the different
cities, requesting that no Christian church might be built within their walls;
and thus he meant to make that which was his own choice appear as if extorted
from him by importunity"). It is possible that the account is correct, but it is
more probable that the embassies were genuine, and were voluntarily sent to the
emperor, while he was on a tour through his dominions, by the pagan population
of some of the cities who knew the emperor's own position an the matter, and
desired to conciliate him and secure favors from him. Of course such deputations
would delight him greatly; and what one city did, others would feel compelled to
do also, in order not to seem behindhand in religious zeal and in order not to
run the risk of offending the emperor, who since the death of Galerius was of
course a more absolute master than before. Cf. Mason, p. 313 sq.

13: Theotecnus, according to the Passion of St. Theodotus (translated in Mason,
p. 354 sq.) an apostate from Christianity, was for some time chief magistrate of
Galatia, where he indulged in the most terrible cruelties against the
Christians. Beyond the account given in the Passion referred to we know in
regard to Theotecnus only what is told us by Eusebius in the present book, in
which he is frequently mentioned. His hatred of the Christians knew no bounds.
He seems, moreover, to have been something of a philosopher and literary man
(Mason calls him a Neo-Platonist, and makes him the author of the anti-Christian
Acta Pilati; but see below, chap. 5, note 1). He was executed by command of
Licinius, after the death of Maximinus (see below, chap. 11).

14: Qeoteknoj , "child of God."

15: The logistai

16: Jupiter Philius, the god of friendship or good-will, was widely honored in
the East. He seems to have been the tutelary divinity of Antioch, and, according
to Valesius, a temple of his at Antioch is mentioned by the emperor Julian and
by Libanius.

17: "The ceremonies of the Gentiles, used in the erection and consecration of
images to their gods, were various. Jupiter Ctesius was consecrated with one
sort of rites, Herceus with another, and Philius with a third sort" (Valesius).
For farther particulars, see his note ad locum.

18: peri twn kaq hmwn yhfismatwn .

19: yhfon .

20: yhfismasi .

21: Lactantius ( ibid. chap. 36) says: "In compliance with those addresses he
[Maximinus] introduced a new mode of government in things respecting religion,
and for each city he created a high priest, chosen from among the persons of
most distinction. The office of those men was to make daily sacrifices to all
their gods, and, with the aid of the former priests, to prevent the Christians
from erecting churches, or from worshiping God, either publicly or in private;
and he authorized them to compel the Christians to sacrifice to idols, and, on
their refusal, to bring them before the civil magistrate; and, as if this had
not been enough, in every province he established a superintendent priest, one
of chief eminence in the state; and he commanded that all those priests newly
instituted should appear in white habits, that being the most honorable
distinction of dress." Maximin perceived the power that existed in the Catholic
Church with its wonderful organization, and conceived the stupendous idea of
rejuvenating paganism by creating a pagan Catholic Church. The Roman religion
should cease to be the loose unorganized, chaotic thing it had always been, and
should be made a positive aggressive power over against Christianity by giving
it a regular organization and placing the entire institution in the hands of
honorable and able men, whose business it should be to increase its stability
and power in every way and in all quarters. We are compelled to admire the
wisdom of Maximin's plan. No persecutor before him had ever seen the need of
thus replacing the Christian Church by another institution as great and as
splendid as itself. The effort, like that of Julian a half-century later, must
remain memorable in the annals of the conflict of paganism with Christianity.

22: These Acts are no longer extant, but their character can be gathered from
this chapter. They undoubtedly contained the worst calumnies against Christ's
moral and religious character. They cannot have been very skillful forgeries,
for Eusebius, in Bk. I. chap. 9, above points out a palpable chronological
blunder which stamped them as fictitious on their very face. And yet they
doubtless answered every purpose; for few of the heathen would be in a position
to detect such an error, and perhaps fewer still would care to expose it if they
discovered it. These Acts are of course to be distinguished from the numerous
Acta Pilati which proceeded from Christian sources (see above, Bk. II. chap. 2,
note 1). The way in which these Acts were employed was diabolical in its very
shrewdness. Certainly there was no more effectual way of checking the spread of
Christianity than systematically and persistently to train up the youth of the
empire to look with contempt and disgust upon the founder of Christianity, the
Christian's Saviour and Lord. Incalculable mischief must inevitably have been
produced had Maximin's reign lasted for a number of years. As it was, we can
imagine the horror of the Christians at this new and sacrilegious artifice of
the enemy. Mason assigns "the crowning, damning honor of this masterstroke" to
Theotecnus, but I am unable to find any proof that he was the author of the
documents. It is, of course, not impossible nor improbable that he was; but had
Eusebius known him to be the author, he would certainly have informed us. As it
is, his statement is entirely indefinite, and the Acts are not brought into any
connection with Theotecnus.

23: The commandant of the Roman garrison in Damascus.

24: Damascus, from the time of Hadrian (according to Spruner-Menke), or of
Severus (according to Mommsen), was the capital of the newly formed province of
Syna-Phoenice, or Syro-Phoenicia.

25: Emesa was an important city in Northern Phoenicia, the birthplace of the
Emperor Elagabalus, and chiefly famous for its great temple of the Sun.

26: On Peter, bishop of Alexandria, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 54.
According to that chapter he suffered in the ninth year of the persecution; that
is, at least as early as April, 312.

27: The presbyter Lucian, who is mentioned also in Bk. VIII. chap. 13, above,
was one of the greatest scholars of the early Church, and with Dorotheus (see
above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 9) at the head of the famous theological school
at Antioch. He produced a revised version of the LXX, which enjoyed a wide
circulation (see Jerome's de vir. ill. 77, and Westcott's Hist. of the N. T.
Canon, p. 392 sq.); and also wrote some books on Faith (see Jerome, ibid. ),
some epistles (see ibid., and Suidas, s.v. ), and a commentary on Job, of which
a Latin fragment has been preserved and is given by Routh, Rel. Sacrae, IV. p.
7-10. His works have perished, with the exception of a brief fragment of an
epistle, the fragment from his commentary on Job just referred to, and a part of
his defense before Maximmus (referred to in the present chapter) which is
preserved by Rufinus, H. E. IX. 6, and is probably genuine (cf. Westcott, ibid.
p. 393). These extant fragments are given, with annotations, by Routh, ibid. p.
5 sq. Lucian's chief. historical significance lies in his relation to Arianism.
On this subject, see above, p. 11 sq.

28: See above, chaps. 2 and 4.

29: These decrees must have been published in this way in June, 312, or
thereabouts; for in chap. 10, §12, we learn that they were thus made public a
little less than a year before the final edict of toleration, which was
apparently issued in May, 313.

30: See chap. 5.

31: ouk eij makron tanantia peri hmwn ebouleusato te kai di eggrafwn nomwn
edogmatise . Crusè translates, "So that he did not long devise hostilities and
form decrees against us." It is true that the phrase ouk eij maxron may in
general bear the meaning "not for long," as well as "not long afterward"; but an
examination of the numerous passages in which the words are used by Eusebius
(e.g. I. 11. 1; I. 13. 4; II. 6. 5; II. 7; III. 5. 7; IV. 7. 12; VII. 13. 1)
will show that, with a single exception, he uniformly employs them in the sense
of "not long afterward." The single exception occurs in Bk. IV. chap. 7, §12,
where the phrase is clearly used with the other meaning-"not for long." In view
of this preponderance of instances for the former use of the phrase in this
single work, it seems best in the present case-the only doubtful one, so far as
I am aware-to follow Valesius, Stroth, and Closs in translating "not long
afterward," which is in full accord with the context, and more in harmony than
the other reading with the structure of this particular sentence.

32: Matt. xxiv. 24.

33: anqac

34: We do not know when Christianity was first preached in Armenia, but late in
the third century Gregory, "the Illuminator," an Armenian of royal blood who had
received a Christian training in Cappadocia, returned as a missionary to his
native land, which was mainly heathen, and at the beginning of the fourth
century succeeded in converting the king, Tiridates III., and a large number of
the nobles and people, and Christianity was established as the state religion
(see the articles Armenia and Gregory, the Illuminator, in the Dict. of Christ.
Biog. ).

35: See the previous chapter, §8.

36: An Attic drachm was a silver coin, worth about eighteen or nineteen cents.

37: aulwn te kai ktupwn .

38: All the mss., followed by Valesius and Crusè, give this as the title of the
next chapter, and give as the title of this chapter the one which I have placed
at the head of chapter 10. It is plain enough from the contents of the two
chapters that the titles have in some way become transposed in the mss., and so
they are restored to their proper position by the majority of the editors, whom
I have followed.

39: See above, Bk. VIII. chap. 13.

40: On Licinius. see ibid. note 21. Constantine and Licinius were both Augusti,
and thus nominally of equal rank. Nevertheless, both in the edict of Galerius,
quoted in Bk. VIII. chap. 17, and in the edict of Milan, given in full in the De
Mort. pers. chap. 48, Constantine's name precedes that of Licinius, showing that
he was regarded as in some sense the latter's senior, and thus confirming
Eusebius' statement, the truth of which Closs unnecessarily denies. It seems a
little peculiar that Constantine should thus be recognized as Licinius' senior,
especially in the edict of Galerius; for although it is true that he had been a
Caesar some time before Licinius had been admitted to the imperial college, yet,
on the other hand, Licinius was made Augustus by Galerius before Constantine
was, and enjoyed his confidence and favor much more fully than the latter.

41: On Maxentius, see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 14, note 1.

42: i.e. Maximinus. For an account of his defeat by Licinius and his death, see
below, chap. 10.

43: oupw manentoj tote . This refers to Licinius' hostility to the Christians,
which made its appearance some years later, and resulted in a persecution (see
below, Bk. X. chap. 8). The clause, if a part of the original, obliges us to
suppose that the ninth book was composed after Licinius had begun to persecute,
but there are strong reasons for thinking that the first nine books were
completed before 314 (see above, p. 45); indeed, we cannot explain Eusebius'
eulogistic words in speaking of Licinius here and elsewhere in this book on any
other ground. It seems necessary, therefore, to regard this clause and the
similar clause in §12, below, as later insertions, made possibly at the time of
the addition of the tenth book (see p. 45).

44: See above, note 2.

45: Constantine's battle with Maxentius, described in this chapter, took place
on the sixth anniversary of the latter's accession, Oct. 27, 312 (see
Lactantius, De Mort. pers. 44 and 46). For particulars respecting Constantine
himself and his campaign against Maxentius, see Dr. Richardson's prolegomena to
his translation of the Life of Constantine, p. 416. sq. of this volume.

46: Ex. xv. 4, Ex. xv. 5. The phrase translated "charioteers" is anabataj
tristataj , which is employed in the LXX to translate the Hebrew wy#$l#$i

47: Ex. xv. 5.

48: Psa. vii. 15, Psa. vii. 16.

49: Ex. xv. 10.

50: Ibid. verse 1. Eusebius, in this and the next passage, follows the LXX,
which differs considerably from the Hebrew.

51: The LXX, followed by Eusebius, reads dedocasmenoj en agioij to translate the
Hebrew #$dmbd d@d@-b@i

52: Ex. xv. 11.

53: Upon Constantine's conversion, see Dr. Richardson's prolegomena, p. 431,
below. On the famous tale of the flaming cross with its inscription toutw nika
54: See above, note 5.

55: This is the famous edict of Milan, which was issued late in the year 312,
and which is given in the Latin original in Lactantius' De Mort. pers. 48, and
in a Greek translation in Eusebius' History, Bk. X. chap. 5, below. For a
discussion of its date and significance, see the notes upon that chapter.

56: This epistle or rescript (Eusebius calls it here a gramma , just below an
epistolh 57: On Sabinus, see above, chap. 1, note 3.

58: Nothing could be farther from the truth than this and the following
statement.

59: That is, after the death of Galerius in the year 311. "Maximinus, on
receiving this news (i.e. of the death of Galerius), hasted with relays of
horses from the East that he might seize the provinces, and, while Licinius
delayed, might arrogate to himself the Chalcedonian straits. On his entry into
Bithynia, with the view of acquiring immediate popularity, he abolished the tax
to the great joy of all. Dissension arose between the two emperors, and almost
war. They stood on the opposite shores with their armies. But peace and
friendship were established under certain conditions; a treaty was concluded on
the narrow sea, and they joined hands" (Lactantius, De morg. pers. 36). See
above, chap. 2, note 1.

60: On these embassies, see ibid. note 1.

61: There is no sign of such consideration in Maximin's rescript, quoted in
chap. 7, above. The sentences which follow are quite contradictory. Certainly no
one could gain from them any idea as to what the emperor had done in the matter.

62: seismouj 63: benefikialiwn 64: toij grammasi . On the use of the plural in
speaking of a single epistle, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 8, note 12.

65: See note 24.

66: See above, note 17, and below, Bk. X. chap. 5.

67: On the transposition of the titles of chaps. 9 and 10, see the previous
chapter, note 1.

68: That Maximin should arrogate to himself, as Eusebius says, the highest rank
is not very surprising, when we realize that that position, in so far as any
difference in rank between the different rulers was acknowledged, belonged to
him by right, inasmuch as he was Constantine's senior (having been first Caesar
when the latter was only second), while Constantine (see above, chap. 9, note 2)
was regarded as the senior of Licinius.

69: The treaty made in 311,just after the death of Galerius (see De mort. pers.
36).

70: This battle between Licinius and Maximin was fought on April 30, 313, at
Adrianople, in Thrace. For a more detailed but somewhat imaginative account of
the battle, see De mort. pers. chap. 45 sq. Lactantius is considerate enough to
accord Licinius the honor of a divine vision, that he may not be behind his
imperial colleague Constantine; and he is pious enough to ascribe the victory
wholly to the divine aid vouchsafed in response to the prayers of Licinius and
his soldiers.

71: The word Licinius is omitted by Laemmer and Heinichen, but without
sufficient warrant, for it is found in nearly all the mss.

72: Lactantius ( ibid. chap. 47) informs us that Maximin's flight was so rapid
that he reached Nicomedia, which was 160 miles from Adrianople, on the evening
of the day following the battle. As Gibbon remarks, "The incredible speed which
Maximin exerted in his flight is much more celebrated than his prowess in
battle."

73: Ps. xxxiii. 16-19.

74: The final toleration edict of Maximin must have been issued very soon after
his defeat, and its occasion is plain enough. If he were to oppose Licinius
successfully, he must secure the loyalty of all his subjects, and this could be
done only by granting the Christians full toleration. He could see plainly
enough that Licinius' religious policy was a success in securing the allegiance
of his subjects, and he found himself compelled in self-defense to pursue a
similar course, distasteful as it was to him. There is no sign that he had any
other motive in taking this step. Religious considerations seem to have had
nothing to do with it; he was doubtless as much of a pagan as ever. The edict
itself is composed in an admirable vein. As Mason remarks, "Maximin made the
concession with so much dignity and grace, that it is impossible to help wishing
that his language were truer." As in the previous decree, he indulges his
passion for lying without restraint; but, unlike that one, the present edict is
straightforward and consistent throughout, and grants the Christians full
liberty in the most unequivocal terms.

75: Maximin's death took place at Tarsus (according to De mort. pers. chap. 49),
and apparently within a few weeks after his defeat at Adrianople and the
publication of his edict of toleration. The reports of his death are somewhat
conflicting. Zosimus and the epitomist of Victor say merely that he died a
natural death: Lactantius tells us that he took poison; while Eusebius in ae14
sq. gives us a horrible account of his last sickness which, according to him,
was marked, to say the least, with some rather remarkable symptoms. Mason
facetiously remarks that Eusebius seems to be thinking of a spontaneous
combustion. It was quite the fashion in the early Church to tell dreadful tales
in connection with the deaths of the persecutors, but in the present case
exaggeration is hardly necessary, for it would seem from Lactantius' account,
that he died not of poison, as he states, but of delirium tremens. As Mason
remarks, "It is probable that Maximin died of nothing worse than a natural
death. But the death which was natural to him was the most dreadful perhaps that
men can die. Maximin was known as an habitual drunkard; and in his dying
delirium he is said to have cried out that he saw God, with assessors, all in
white robes, judging him."

76: See chap. 9, note 24.

77: i.e. the epistle addressed to Sabinus, and quoted in the previous chapter,
which was written toward the end of 312 (see that chapter, note 18).

78: See above, chap. 7.

79: Maximian died in 310 (see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 13, note 23), Galerius in
311 (see ibid. chap. 16, note 5), Maxentius in 312 (see above, chap. 9, note 7),
and Diocletian early in 313 (see Bk. VIII. App. note 3).

80: Of this Peucetius (Rufinus Peucedius ) we know only what is told us here.
Valesius says: "The name is to be rendered Picentius, a name which was borne by
a certain calumniator in the time of Constantine, as is stated by Zosimus at the
end of his second book. The Latins, indeed, call them Picentes whom the Greeks
call Puketiouj ."

81: twn kaqolou logwn eparxoj , apparently equivalent to the phrase epi twn
kaqolou logwn

82: This same Culcianus appears in the Acts of St. Phileas of Thmuis (Ruinart,
p. 434 sq.; see the extract printed in Mason, p. 290 sq.) as the magistrate or
governor under whom Phileas suffered in Thebais. He is doubtless to be
identified, as Valesius remarks, with Culeianus ( Koulhianoj

83: Culcianus seems to have been governor of Thebais (where Phileas suffered,
according to Bk. VIII. chap. 9), not of Egypt. Possibly Eusebius employs the
word Egypt in its general sense, as including Thebais.

84: On Theotecnus, see above, chap. 2, note 4.

85: See chap. 3.

86: Lactantius ( De mort. pers. chap. 50) tells us that Maximin left a wife and
two children, a boy eight years old, named Maximus, and a daughter seven years
old who was betrothed to Candidianus.

87: Ps. cxlvi. 3, Ps. cxlvi. 4.

88: See below, Bk. X. chap. 5.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 13: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 2
========================================================================

Book II.

Introduction.

Chapter I. The Course Pursued by the Apostles After the Ascension of Christ.

Chapter II. How Tiberius Was Affected When Informed by Pilate Concerning Christ.

Chapter III. The Doctrine of Christ Soon Spread Throughout All the World.

Chapter IV. After the Death of Tiberius, Caius Appointed Agrippa King of the
Jews, Having Punished Herod with Perpetual Exile.

Chapter V. Philo's Embassy to Caius in Behalf of the Jews.

Chapter VI. The Misfortunes Which Overwhelmed the Jews After Their Presumption
Against Christ.

Chapter VII. Pilate's Suicide.

Chapter VIII. The Famine Which Took Place in the Reign of Claudius.

Chapter IX. The Martyrdom of James the Apostle.

Chapter X. Agrippa, Who Was Also Called Herod, Having Persecuted the Apostles,
Immediately Experienced the Divine Vengeance.

Chapter XI. The Impostor Theudas and His Followers.

Chapter XII. Helen, the Queen of the Osrhoenians.

Chapter XIII. Simon Magus.128 Chapter XIV. The Preaching of the Apostle Peter in
Rome.

Chapter XV. The Gospel According to Mark.

Chapter XVI. Mark First Proclaimed Christianity to the Inhabitants of Egypt.

Chapter XVII. Philo's Account of the Ascetics of Egypt.

Chapter XVIII. The Works of Philo188 That Have Came Down to Us.

Chapter XIX. The Calamity Which Befell the Jews in Jerusalem an the Day of the
Passover.

Chapter XX. The Events Which Took Place in Jerusalem During the Reign of Nero.

Chapter XXI. The Egyptian, Who is Mentioned Also in the Acts of the Apostles.

Chapter XXII. Paul Having Been Sent Bound from Judea to Rome, Made His Defense,
and Was Acquitted of Every Charge.

Chapter XXIII. The Martyrdom of James, Who Was Called the Brother of the Lord.

Chapter XXIV. Annianus the First Bishop of the Church of Alexandria After Mark.

Chapter XXV. The Persecution Under Nero in Which Paul and Peter Were Honored at
Rome with Martyrdom in Behalf of Religion.

Chapter XXVI. The Jews, Afflicted with Innumerable Evils, Commenced the Last War
Against the Romans.

Book II.

Introduction.

1 We have discussed in the preceding book those subjects in ecclesiastical
history which it was necessary to treat by way of introduction, and have
accompanied them with brief proofs. Such were the divinity of the saving Word,
and the antiquity of the doctrines which we teach, as well as of that
evangelical life which is led by Christians, together with the events which have
taken place in connection with Christ's recent appearance, and in connection
with his passion and with the choice of the apostles.

2 In the present book let us examine the events which took place after his
ascension, confirming some of them from the divine Scriptures, and others from
such writings as we shall refer to from time to time.

Chapter I. The Course Pursued by the Apostles After the Ascension of Christ.

1 First, then, in the place of Judas, the betrayer, Matthias,1 who, as has been
shown2 was also one of the Seventy, was chosen to the apostolate. And there were
appointed to the diaconate,3 for the service of the congregation, by prayer and
the laying on of the hands of the apostles, approved men, seven in number, of
whom Stephen was one.4 He first, after the Lord, was stoned to death at the time
of his ordination by the slayers of the Lord, as if he had been promoted for
this very purpose.5 And thus he was the first to receive the crown,
corresponding to his name,6 which belongs to the martyrs of Christ, who are
worthy of the meed of victory.

2 Then James, whom the ancients surnamed the Just7 on account of the excellence
of his virtue, is recorded to have been the first to be made bishop of the
church of Jerusalem. This James was called the brother of the Lord8 because he
was known as a son of Joseph,9 and Joseph was supposed to be the father of
Christ, because the Virgin, being betrothed to him, "was found with child by the
Holy Ghost before they came together,"10 as the account of the holy Gospels
shows.

3 But Clement in the sixth book of his Hypotyposes11 writes thus: "For they say
that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also
preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop
of Jerusalem."12

4 But the same writer, in the seventh book of the same work, relates also the
following things concerning him: "The Lord after his resurrection imparted
knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter, and they imparted it to the
rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom
Barnabas was one.13 But there were two Jameses:14 one called the Just, who was
thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and was beaten to death with a club by a
fuller,15 and another who was beheaded."16 Paul also makes mention of the same
James the Just, where he writes, "Other of the apostles saw I none, save James
the Lord's brother."17

5 At that time also the promise of our Saviour to the king of the Osrhoenians
was fulfilled. For Thomas, under a divine impulse, sent Thaddeus to Edessa as a
preacher and evangelist of the religion of Christ, as we have shown a little
above from the document found there?18

7 When he came to that place he healed Abgarus by the word of Christ; and after
bringing all the people there into the right attitude of mind by means of his
works, and leading them to adore the power of Christ, he made them disciples of
the Saviour's teaching. And from that time down to the present the whole city of
the Edessenes has been devoted to the name of Christ,19 offering no common proof
of the beneficence of our Saviour toward them also.

8 These things have been drawn from ancient accounts; but let us now turn again
to the divine Scripture. When the first and greatest persecution was instigated
by the Jews against the church of Jerusalem in connection with the martyrdom of
Stephen, and when all the disciples, except the Twelve, were scattered
throughout Judea and Samaria,20 some, as the divine Scripture says, went as far
as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, but could not yet venture to impart the
word of faith to the nations, and therefore preached it to the Jews alone.21

9 During this time Paul was still persecuting the church, and entering the
houses of believers was dragging men and women away and committing them to
prison.22

10 Philip also, one of those who with Stephen had been entrusted with the
diaconate, being among those who were scattered abroad, went down to Samaria,23
and being filled with the divine power, he first preached the word to the
inhabitants of that country. And divine grace worked so mightily with him that
even Simon Magus with many others was attracted by his words.24

11 Simon was at that time so celebrated, and had acquired, by his jugglery, such
influence over those who were deceived by him, that he was thought to be the
great power of God.25 But at this time, being amazed at the wonderful deeds
wrought by Philip through the divine power, he reigned and counterfeited faith
in Christ, even going so far as to receive baptism.26 12And what is surprising,
the same thing is done even to this day by those who follow his most impure
heresy.27 For they, after the manner of their forefather, slipping into the
Church, like a pestilential and leprous disease greatly afflict those into whom
they are able to infuse the deadly and terrible poison concealed in
themselves.28 The most of these have been expelled as soon as they have been
caught in their wickedness, as Simon himself, when detected by Peter, received
the merited punishment.29

13 But as the preaching of the Saviour's Gospel was daily advancing, a certain
providence led from the land of the Ethiopians an officer of the queen of that
country,30 for Ethiopia even to the present day is ruled, according to ancestral
custom, by a woman. He, first among the Gentiles, received of the mysteries of
the divine word from Philip in consequence of a revelation, and having become
the first-fruits of believers throughout the world, he is said to have been the
first on returning to his country to proclaim the knowledge of the God of the
universe and the life-giving sojourn of our Saviour among men;31 so that through
him in truth the prophecy obtained its fulfillment, which declares that
"Ethiopia stretcheth out her hand unto God."32

14 In addition to these, Paul, that "chosen vessel,"33 "not of men neither
through men, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ himself and of God the Father
who raised him from the dead,"34 was appointed an apostle, being made worthy of
the call by a vision and by a voice which was uttered in a revelation from
heaven.35 Chapter II. How Tiberius Was Affected When Informed by Pilate
Concerning Christ.

1 And when the wonderful resurrection and ascension of our Saviour were already
noised abroad, in accordance with an ancient custom which prevailed among the
rulers of the provinces, of reporting to the emperor the novel occurrences which
took place in them, in order that nothing might escape him, Pontius Pilate
informed Tiberius36 of the reports which were noised abroad through all
Palestine concerning the resurrection of our Saviour Jesus from the dead.

2 He gave an account also of other wonders which he had learned of him, and how,
after his death, having risen from the dead, he was now believed by many to be a
God.37 They say that Tiberius referred the matter to the Senate,38 but that they
rejected it, ostensibly because they had not first examined into the matter (for
an ancient law prevailed that no one should be made a God by the Romans except
by a vote and decree of the Senate), but in reality because the saving teaching
of the divine Gospel did not need the confirmation and recommendation of men.

3 But although the Senate of the Romans rejected the proposition made in regard
to our Saviour, Tiberius still retained the opinion which he had held at first,
and contrived no hostile measures against Christ.39

4 These things are recorded by Tertullian,40 a man well versed in the laws of
the Romans,41 and in other respects of high repute, and one of those especially
distinguished in Rome.42 In his apology for the Christians,43 which was written
by him in the Latin language, and has been translated into Greek,44 he writes as
follows:45

5 "But in order that we may give an account of these laws from their origin, it
was an ancient decree46 that no one should be consecrated a God by the emperor
until the Senate had expressed its approval. Marcus Aurelius did thus concerning
a certain idol, Alburnus.47 And this is a point in favor of our doctrine,48 that
among you divine dignity is conferred by human decree. If a God does not please
a man he is not made a God. Thus, according to this custom, it is necessary for
man to be gracious to God.

6 Tiberius, therefore, under whom the name of Christ made its entry into the
world, when this doctrine was reported to him from Palestine, where it first
began, communicated with the Senate, making it clear to them that he was pleased
with the doctrine.49 But the Senate, since it had not itself proved the matter,
rejected it. But Tiberius continued to hold his own opinion, and threatened
death to the accusers of the Christians."50 Heavenly providence had wisely
instilled this into his mind in order that the doctrine of the Gospel,
unhindered at its beginning, might spread in all directions throughout the
world.

Chapter III. The Doctrine of Christ Soon Spread Throughout All the World.

1 Thus, under the influence of heavenly power, and with the divine co-operation,
the doctrine of the Saviour, like the rays of the sun, quickly illumined the
whole world;51 and straightway, in accordance with the divine Scriptures,52 the
voice of the inspired evangelists and apostles went forth through all the earth,
and their words to the end of the world.

2 In every city and village, churches were quickly established, filled with
multitudes of people like a replenished threshing-floor. And those whose minds,
in consequence of errors which had descended to them from their forefathers,
were fettered by the ancient disease of idolatrous superstition, were, by the
power of Christ operating through the teaching and the wonderful works of his
disciples, set free, as it were, from terrible masters, and found a release from
the most cruel bondage. They renounced with abhorrence every species of
demoniacal polytheism, and confessed that there was only one God, the creator of
all things, and him they honored with the rites of true piety, through the
inspired and rational worship which has been planted by our Saviour among men.

3 But the divine grace being now poured out upon the rest of the nations
Cornelius, of Caesarea in Palestine, with his whole house, through a divine
revelation and the agency of Peter, first received faith in Christ;53 and after
him a multitude of other Greeks in Antioch,54 to whom those who were scattered
by the persecution of Stephen had preached the Gospel. When the church of
Antioch was now increasing and abounding, and a multitude of prophets from
Jerusalem were on the ground,55 among them Barnabas and Paul and in addition
many other brethren, the name of Christians first sprang up there,56 as from a
fresh and life-giving fountain.57

4 And Agabus, one of the prophets who was with them, uttered a prophecy
concerning the famine which was about to take place,58 and Paul and Barnabas
were sent to relieve the necessities of the brethren.59

Chapter IV. After the Death of Tiberius, Caius Appointed Agrippa King of the
Jews, Having Punished Herod with Perpetual Exile.

1 Tiberius died, after having reigned about twenty-two years,60 and Caius
succeeded him in the empire.61 He immediately gave the government of the Jews to
Agrippa,62 making him king over the tetrarchies of Philip and of Ly-sanias; in
addition to which he bestowed upon him, not long afterward, the tetrarchy of
Herod,63 having punished Herod (the one under whom the Saviour suffered64 ) and
his wife Herodias with perpetual exile65 on account of numerous crimes. Josephus
is a witness to these facts.66

2 Under this emperor, Philo67 became known; a man most celebrated not only among
many of our own, but also among many scholars without the Church. He was a
Hebrew by birth, but was inferior to none of those who held high dignities in
Alexandria. How exceedingly he labored in the Scriptures and in the studies of
his nation is plain to all from the work which he has done. How familiar he was
with philosophy and with the liberal studies of foreign nations, it is not
necessary to say, since he is reported to have surpassed all his contemporaries
in the study of Platonic and Pythagorean. philosophy, to which he particularly
devoted his attention.68 Chapter V. Philo's Embassy to Caius in Behalf of the
Jews.

1 Philo has given us an account, in five books, of the misfortunes of the Jews
under Caius.69 He recounts at the same time the madness of Caius: how he called
himself a god, and performed as emperor innumerable acts of tyranny; and he
describes further the miseries of the Jews under him, and gives a report of the
embassy upon which he himself was sent to Rome in behalf of his
fellow-countrymen in Alexandria;70 how when he appeared before Caius in behalf
of the laws of his fathers he received nothing but laughter and ridicule, and
almost incurred the risk of his life.

2 Josephus also makes mention of these things in the eighteenth book of his
Antiquities, in the following words:71 "A sedition having arisen in Alexandria
between the Jews that dwell there and the Greeks,72 three deputies were chosen
from each faction and went to Caius.

3 One of the Alexandrian deputies was Apion,73 who uttered many slanders against
the Jews; among other things saying that they neglected the honors due to
Caesar. For while all other subjects of Rome erected altars and temples to
Caius, and in all other respects treated him just as they did the gods, they
alone considered it disgraceful to honor him with statues and to swear by his
name.

4 And when Apion had uttered many severe charges by which he hoped that Caius
would be aroused, as indeed was likely, Philo, the chief of the Jewish embassy,
a man celebrated in every respect, a brother of Alexander the Alabarch,74 and
not unskilled in philosophy, was prepared to enter upon a defense in reply to
his accusations.

5 But Caius prevented him and ordered him to leave, and being very angry, it was
plain that he meditated some severe measure against them. And Philo departed
covered with insult and told the Jews that were with him to be of good courage;
for while Caius was raging against them he was in fact already contending with
God."

6 Thus far Josephus. And Philo himself, in the work On the Embassy75 which he
wrote, describes accurately and in detail the things which were done by him at
that time. But I shall omit the most of them and record only those things which
will make clearly evident to the reader that the misfortunes of the Jews came
upon them not long after their daring deeds against Christ and on account of the
same.

7 And in the first place he relates that at Rome in the reign of Tiberius,
Sejanus, who at that time enjoyed great influence with the emperor, made every
effort to destroy the Jewish nation utterly;76 and that in Judea, Pilate, under
whom the crimes against the Saviour were committed, attempted something contrary
to the Jewish law in respect to the temple, which was at that time still
standing in Jerusalem, and excited them to the greatest tumults.77 Chapter VI.
The Misfortunes Which Overwhelmed the Jews After Their Presumption Against
Christ.

1 After the death of Tiberius, Caius received the empire, and, besides
innumerable other acts of tyranny against many people, he greatly afflicted
especially the whole nation of the Jews78 These things we may learn briefly from
the words of Philo, who writes as follows:79

2 "So great was the caprice of Caius in his conduct toward all, and especially
toward the nation of the Jews. The latter he so bitterly hated that he
appropriated to himself their places of worship in the other cities,80 and
beginning with Alexandria he filled them with images and statues of himself (for
in permitting others to erect them he really erected them himself). The temple
in the holy city, which had hitherto been left untouched, and had been regarded
as an inviolable asylum, he altered and transformed into a temple of his own,
that it might be called the temple of the visible Jupiter, the younger Caius."81

3 Innumerable other terrible and almost indescribable calamities which came upon
the Jews in Alexandria during the reign of the same emperor, are recorded by the
same author in a second work, to which he gave the title, On the Virtues.82 With
him agrees also Josephus, who likewise indicates that the misfortunes of the
whole nation began with the time of Pilate, and with their daring crimes against
the Saviour.83

4 Hear what be says in the second book of his Jewish War, where he writes as
follows:84 "Pilate being sent to Judea as procurator by Tiberius, secretly
carried veiled images of the emperor, called ensigns,85 to Jerusalem by night.
The following day this caused the greatest disturbance among the Jews. For those
who were near were confounded at the sight, beholding their laws, as it were,
trampled under foot. For they allow no image to be set up in their city."

5 Comparing these things with the writings of the evangelists, you will see that
it was not long before there came upon them the penalty for the exclamation
which they had uttered under the same Pilate, when they cried out that they had
no other king than Caesar.86

6 The same writer further records that after this another calamity overtook
them. He writes as follows:87 "After this he stirred up another tumult by
snaking use of the holy treasure, which is called Corban,88 in the construction
of an aqueduct three hundred stadia in length.89

7 The multitude were greatly displeased at it, and when Pilate was in Jerusalem
they surrounded his tribunal and gave utterance to loud complaints. But he,
anticipating the tumult, had distributed through the crowd armed soldiers
disguised in citizen's clothing, forbidding them to use the sword, but
commanding them to strike with clubs those who should make an outcry. To them he
now gave the preconcerted signal from the tribunal. And the Jews being beaten,
many of them perished in consequence of the blows, while many others were
trampled under foot by their own countrymen in their flight, and thus lost their
lives. But the multitude, overawed by the fate of those who were slain, held
their peace."

8 In addition to these the same author records90 many other tumults which were
stirred up in Jerusalem itself, and shows that from that time seditions and wars
and mischievous plots followed each other in quick succession, and never ceased
in the city and in all Judea until finally the siege of Vespasian overwhelmed
them. Thus the divine vengeance overtook the Jews for the crimes which they
dared to commit against Christ.

Chapter VII. Pilate's Suicide.

It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our
Saviour, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius, whose
times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and
executioner;91 and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in
overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the
Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each
period.92 Chapter VIII. The Famine Which Took Place in the Reign of Claudius.

1 Caius had held the power not quite four years,93 when he was succeeded by the
emperor Claudius. Under him the world was visited with a famine,94 which writers
that are entire strangers to our religion have recorded in their histories.95
And thus the prediction of Agabus recorded in the Acts of the Apostles,96
according to which the whole world was to be visited by a famine, received its
fulfillment.

2 And Luke, in the Acts, after mentioning the famine in the time of Claudius,
and stating that the brethren of Antioch, each according to his ability, sent to
the brethren of Judea by the hands of Paul and Barnabas,97 adds the following
account.

Chapter IX. The Martyrdom of James the Apostle.

1 "98 Now about that time" (it is clear that he means the time of Claudius)
"Herod the King99 stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the Church. And he
killed James the brother of John with the sword."

2 And concerning this James, Clement, in the seventh book of his Hypotyposes,100
relates a story which is worthy of mention; telling it as he received it from
those who had lived before him. He says that the one who led James to the
judgment-seat, when he saw him bearing his testimony, was moved, and confessed
that he was himself also a Christian.

3 They were both therefore, he says, led away together; and on the way he begged
James to forgive him. And he, after considering a little, said, "Peace be with
thee," and kissed him. And thus they were both beheaded at the same time.

4 And then, as the divine Scripture says,101 Herod, upon the death of James,
seeing that the deed pleased the Jews, attacked Peter also and committed him to
prison, and would have slain him if he had not, by the divine appearance of an
angel who came to him by night, been wonderfully released from his bonds, and
thus liberated for the service of the Gospel. Such was the providence of God in
respect to Peter.

Chapter X. Agrippa, Who Was Also Called Herod, Having Persecuted the Apostles,
Immediately Experienced the Divine Vengeance.

1 The consequences of the king's undertaking against the apostles were no, long
deferred, but the avenging minister of divine justice overtook him immediately
after his plots against them, as the Book of Acts records.102 For when he had
journeyed to Caesarea, on a notable feast-day, clothed in a splendid and royal
garment, he delivered an address to the people from a lofty throne in front of
the tribunal. And when all the multitude applauded the speech, as if it were the
voice of a god and not of a man, the Scripture relates that an angel of the Lord
smote him, and being eaten of worms he gave up the ghost.103

2 We must admire the account of Josephus for its agreement with the divine
Scriptures in regard to this wonderful event; for he clearly bears witness to
the truth in the nineteenth book of his Antiquities, where he relates the wonder
in the following words:104

3 "He had completed the third year of his reign over all Judea105 when hecame to
Caesarea, which was formerly called Strato's Tower.106 There he held games in
honor of Caesar, learning that this was a festival observed in behalf of
Caesar's safety.107 At this festival was collected a great multitude of the
highest and most honorable men in the province.

4 And on the second day of the games he proceeded to the theater at break of
day, wearing a garment entirely of silver and of wonderful texture. And there
the silver, illuminated by the reflection of the sun's earliest rays, shone
marvelously, gleaming so brightly as to produce a sort of fear and terror in
those who gazed upon him.

5 And immediately his flatterers, some from one place, others from another,
raised up their voices in a way that was not for his good, calling him a god,
and saying, `Be thou merciful; if up to this time we have feared thee as a man,
henceforth we confess that thou art superior to the nature of mortals.'

6 The king did not rebuke them, nor did he reject their impiousflattery. But
after a little, looking up, he saw an angel sitting above his head.108 And this
he quickly perceived would be the cause of evil as it had once been the cause of
good fortune,109 and he was smitten with a heart-piercing pain.

7 And straightway distress, beginning with the greatest violence, seized his
bowels. And looking upon his friends he said, `I, your god, am now commanded to
depart this life; and fate thus I on the spot disproves the lying words you have
just uttered concerning me. He who has been called immortal by you is now led
away to die; but our destiny must be accepted as God has determined it. For we
have passed our life by no means ingloriously, but in that splendor which is
pronounced happiness.'110

8 And when he had said this he labored with an increase of pain. He was
accordingly carried in haste to the palace, while the report spread among all
that the king would undoubtedly soon die. But the multitude, with their wives
and children, sitting on sackcloth after the custom of their fathers, implored
God in behalf of the king, and every place was filled with lamentation and
tears.111 And the king as he lay in a lofty chamber, and saw them below lying
prostrate on the ground, could not refrain from weeping himself.

9 And after suffering continually for five days with pain in the bowels, he
departed this life, in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and in the seventh year
of his reign.112 Four years he ruled under the Emperor Caius-three of them over
the tetrarchy of Philip, to which was added in the fourth year that of Herod113
-and three years during the reign of the Emperor Claudius."

10 I marvel greatly that Josephus, in these things as well as in others, so
fully agrees with the divine Scriptures. But if there should seem to any one to
be a disagreement in respect to the name of the king, the time at least and the
events show that the same person is meant, whether the change of name has been
caused by the error of a copyist, or is due to the fact that he, like so many,
bore two names.114 Chapter XI. The Impostor Theudas and His Followers.

1 Luke, in the Acts, introduces Gamaliel as saying, at the consultation which
was held concerning the apostles, that at the time referred to,115 "rose up
Theudas boasting himself to be somebody; who was slain; and all, as many as
obeyed him, were scattered."116 Let us therefore add the account of Josephus
concerning this man. He records in the work mentioned just above, the following
circumstances:117

2 "While Fadus was procurator of Judea118 a certain impostor called Theudas119
persuaded a very great multitude to take their possessions and follow him to the
river Jordan. For he said that he was a prophet, and that the river should be
divided at his command, and afford them an easy passage.

3 And with these words he deceived many. But Fadus did not permit them to enjoy
their folly, but sent a troop of horsemen against them, who fell upon them
unexpectedly and slew many of them and took many others alive, while they took
Theudas himself captive, and cut off his head and carried it to Jerusalem."
Besides this he also makes mention of the famine, which took place in the reign
of Claudius, in the following words.

Chapter XII. Helen, the Queen of the Osrhoenians.

1120 "And at this time121 it came to pass that the great famine122 took place in
Judea, in which the queen Helen,123 having purchased grain from Egypt with large
sums, distributed it to the needy."

2 You will find this statement also in agreement with the Acts of the Apostles,
where it is said that the disciples at Antioch, "each according to his ability,
determined to send relief to the brethren that dwelt in Judea; which also they
did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Paul."124

3 But splendid monuments125 of this Helen, Of whom the historian has made
mention, are still shown in the suburbs of the city which is now called
Aelia,126 But she is said to have been queen of the Adiabeni.127 Chapter XIII.
Simon Magus.128

1 But faith in our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ having now been diffused among
all men,129 the enemy of man's salvation contrived a plan for seizing the
imperial city for himself. He conducted thither the above-mentioned Simon,130
aided him in his deceitful arts, led many of the inhabitants of Rome astray, and
thus brought them into his own power.

2 This is stated by Justin,131 one of our distinguished writers who lived not
long after the time of the apostles. Concerning him I shall speak in the proper
place.132 Take and read the work of this man, who in the first Apology133 which
he addressedto Antonine in behalf of our religion writes as follows:134

3 "And after the ascension ofthe Lord into heaven the demons put forward certain
men who said they were gods, and who were not only allowed by you to go
unpersecuted, but were even deemed worthy of honors. One of them was Simon, a
Samaritan of the village of Gitto,135 who in the reign of Claudius Caesar136
performed in your imperial city some mighty acts of magic by the art of demons
operating in him, and was considered a god, and as a god was honored by you with
a statue, which was erected in the river Tiber,137 between the two bridges, and
bore this inscription in the Latin tongue, Simoni Deo Sancto, that is, To Simon
the Holy God.138

4 And nearly all the Samaritans and a few even of other nations confess and
worship him as the first God. And there went around with him at that time a
certain Helena139 who had formerly been a prostitute in Tyre of Phoenicia; and
her they call the first idea that proceeded from him."140

5 Justin relates these things, and Irenaeus also agrees with him in the first
book of his work, Against Heresies, where he gives an account of the man141 and
of his profane and impure teaching. It would be superfluous to quote his account
here, for it is possible for those who wish to know the origin and the lives and
the false doctrines of each of the heresiarchs that have followed him, as well
as the customs practiced by them all, to find them treated at length in the
above-mentioned work of Irenaeus.

6 We have understood that Simon was the author of all heresy.142 From his time
down to the present those who have followed his heresy have reigned the sober
philosophy of the Christians, which is celebrated among all on account of its
purity of life. But they nevertheless have embraced again the superstitions of
idols, which they seemed to have renounced; and they fall down before pictures
and images of Simon himself and of the above-mentioned Helena who was with him;
and they venture to worship them with incense and sacrifices and libations.

7 But those matters which they keep more secret than these, in regard to which
they say that one upon first hearing them would be astonished, and, to use one
of the written phrases in vogue among them, would be confounded,143 are in truth
full of amazing things, and of madness and folly, being of such a sort that it
is impossible not only to commit them to writing, but also for modest men even
to utter them with the lips on account of their excessive baseness and
lewdness.144

8 For what ever could be conceived of, viler than thevilest thing - all that has
been outdone by this most abominable sect, which is composed of those who make a
sport of those miserable females that are literally overwhelmed with all kinds
of vices.145 Chapter XIV. The Preaching of the Apostle Peter in Rome.

1 The evil power,146 who hates all that isgood and plots against the salvation
of men, constituted Simon at that time the father and author of such
wickedness,147 as if to make him a mighty antagonist of the great, inspired
apostles of our Saviour.

2 For that divine and celestial grace which co-operates with its ministers, by
their appearance and presence, quickly extinguished the kindled flame of evil,
and humbled and cast down through them "every high thing that exalted itself
against the knowledge of God."148

3 Wherefore neither the conspiracy of Simon nor that of any of the others who
arose at that period could accomplish anything in those apostolic times. For
everything was conquered and subdued by the splendors of the truth and by the
divine word itself which had but lately begun to shine from heaven upon men, and
which was then flourishing upon earth, and dwelling in the apostles themselves.

4 Immediately149 the above-mentioned impostor was smitten in the eyes of his
mind by a divine and miraculous flash, and after the evil deeds done by him had
been first detected by the apostle Peter in Judea,150 he fled and made a great
journey across the sea from the East to the West, thinking that only thus could
he live according to his mind.

5 And coming to the city of Rome,151 by the mighty co-operation of that power
which was lying in wait there, he was in a short time so successful in his
undertaking that those who dwelt there honored him as a god by the erection of a
statue.152

6 But this did not last long. For immediately, during the reign of Claudius, the
all-good and gracious Providence, which watches over all things, led Peter, that
strongest and greatest of the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue
was the speaker for all the others, to Rome153 against this great corrupter of
life. He like a noble commander of God, clad in divine armor, carried the costly
merchandise of the light of the understanding from the East to those who dwelt
in the West, proclaiming the light itself, and the word which brings salvation
to souls, and preaching the kingdom of heaven.154 Chapter XV. The Gospel
According to Mark.

1 And thus when the divine word had made its home among them,155 the power of
Simon was quenched and immediately destroyed, together with the man himself.156
And so greatly did the splendor of piety illumine the minds of Peter's hearers
that they were not satisfied with hearing once only, and were not content with
the unwritten teaching of the divine Gospel, but with all sorts of entreaties
they besought Mark,157 a follower of Peter, and the one whose Gospel is extant,
that he would leave them a written monument of the doctrine which had been
orally communicated to them. Nor did they cease until they had prevailed with
the man, and had thus become the occasion of the written Gospel which bears the
name of Mark.158

2 And they say that Peter when he had learned, through a revelation of the
Spirit, of that which had been done, was pleased with the zeal of the men, and
that the work obtained the sanction of his authority for the purpose of being
used in the churches.159 Clement in the eighth book of his Hypotyposes gives
this account, and with him agrees the bishop of Hierapolis named Papias.160 And
Peter makes mention of Mark in his first epistle which they say that he wrote in
Rome itself, as is indicated by him, when he calls the city, by a figure,
Babylon, as he does in the following words: "The church that is at Babylon,
elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son."161 Chapter
XVI. Mark First Proclaimed Christianity to the Inhabitants of Egypt.

1 And they say that this Mark was the first1 that was sent to Egypt, and that he
proclaimed the Gospel which he had written, and first established churches in
Alexandria.162

2 And the multitude of believers, both men and women, that were collected there
at the very outset, and lived lives of the most philosophical and excessive
asceticism, was so great, that Philo thought it worth while to describe their
pursuits, their meetings, their entertainments, and their whole manner of
life."163 Chapter XVII. Philo's Account of the Ascetics of Egypt.

1 It is also said that Philo in the reign of Claudius became acquainted at Rome
with Peter, who was then preaching there.164 Nor is this indeed improbable, for
the work of which we have spoken, and which was composed by him some years
later, clearly contains those rules of the Church which are even to this day
observed among us.

2 And since he describes as accurately as possible the life of our ascetics, it
is clear that he not only knew, but that he also approved, while he venerated
and extolled, the apostolic men of his time, who were as it seems of the Hebrew
race, and hence observed, after the manner of the Jews, the most of the customs
of the ancients.

3 In the work to which he gave the title, On a Contemplative Life or on
Suppliants,165 after affirming in the first place that he will add to those
things which he is about to relate nothing contrary to truth or of his own
invention,166 he says that these men were called Therapeutae and the women that
were with them Therapeutrides.167 He then adds the reasons for such a name,
explaining it from the fact that they applied remedies and healed the souls of
those who came to them, by relieving them like physicians, of evil passions, or
from the fact that they served and worshiped the Deity in purity and sincerity.

4 Whether Philo himself gave them this name, employing an epithet well suited to
their mode of life, or whether the first of them really called themselves so in
the beginning, since the name of Christians was not yet everywhere known, we
need not discuss here.

5 He bears witness, however, that first of all 5 they renounce their property.
When they begin the philosophical168 mode of life, he says, they give up their
goods to their relatives, and then, renouncing all the cares of life, they go
forth beyond the walls and dwell in lonely fields and gardens, knowing well that
intercourse with people of a different character is unprofitable and harmful.
They did this at that time, as seems probable, under the influence of a spirited
and ardent faith, practicing in emulation the prophets' mode of life.

6 For in the Acts of the Apostles, a work universally acknowledged as
authentic,169 it is recorded that all the companions of the apostles sold their
possessions and their property and distributed to all according to the necessity
of each one, so that no one among them was in want. "For as many as were
possessors of lands or houses," as the account says, "sold them and brought the
prices of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles' feet, so
that distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."170

7 Philo bears witness to facts very much like those here described and then adds
the following account:171 "Everywhere in the world is this race172 found. For it
was fitting that both Greek173 and Barbarian should share in what is perfectly
good. But the race particularly abounds in Egypt, in each of its so-called
nomes,174 and especially about Alexandria.

8 The best men from every quarter emigrate, as if to a colony of the Therapeut's
fatherland,175 to a certain very suitable spot which lies above the lake
Maria176 upon a low hill excellently situated on account of its security and the
mildness of the atmosphere."

9 And then a little further on, after describing the kind of houses which they
had, he speaks as follows concerning their churches, which were scattered about
here and there:177 "In each house there is a sacred apartment which is called a
sanctuary and monastery,178 where, quite alone, they perform the mysteries of
the religious life. They bring nothing into it, neither drink nor food, nor any
of the other things which contribute to the necessities of the body, but only
the laws, and the inspired oracles of the prophets, and hymns and such other
things as augment and makeperfect their knowledge and piety."

10 And after some other matters he says:179

"The whole interval, from morning to evening, is for them a time of exercise.
For they read the holy Scriptures, and explain the philosophy of their fathers
in an allegorical manner, regarding the written words as symbols of hidden truth
which is communicated in obscure figures.

11 They have also writings of ancient men, who were the founders of their sect,
and who left many monuments of the allegorical method. These they use as models,
and imitate their principles."

12 These things seem to have been stated by a man who had heard them expounding
their sacred writings. But it is highly probable that the works of the ancients,
which he says they had, were the Gospels and the writings of the apostles, and
probably some expositions of the ancient prophets, such as are contained in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, and in many others of Paul's Epistles.

13 Then again he writes as follows concerning the new psalms which they
composed:180 "So that they not only spend their time in meditation, but they
also compose songs and hymns to God in every variety of metre and melody, though
they divide them, of course, into measures of more than common solemnity."

14 The same book contains an account of many other things, but it seemed
necessary to select those facts which exhibit the characteristics of the
ecclesiastical mode of life.

15 But if any one thinks that what has been said is not peculiar to the Gospel
polity, but that it can be applied to others besides those mentioned, let him be
convinced by the subsequent words of the same author, in which, if he is
unprejudiced, he will find undisputed testimony on this subject. Philo's words
are as follows:181

16 "Having laid down temperance as a sort of foundation in the soul, they build
upon it the other virtues. None of them may take food or drink before sunset,
since they regard philosophizing as a work worthy of the light, but attention to
the wants of the body as proper only in the darkness, and therefore assign the
day to the former, but to the latter a small portion of the night.

17 But some, in whom a great desire for knowledge dwells, forget to take food
for three days; and some are so delighted and feast so luxuriously upon wisdom,
which furnishes doctrines richly and without stint, that they abstain even twice
as long as this, and are accustomed, after six days, scarcely to take necessary
food." These statements of Philo we regard as referring clearly and indisputably
to those of our communion.

18 But if after these things any one still obstinately persists in denying the
reference, let him renounce his incredulity and be convinced by yet more
striking examples, which are to be found nowhere else than in the evangelical
religion of the Christians.182

19 For they say that there were women also with those of whom we are speaking,
and that the most of them were aged virgins183 who had preserved their chastity,
not out of necessity, as some of the priestesses among the Greeks,184 but rather
by their own choice, through zeal and a desire for wisdom. And that in their
earnest desire to live with it as their companion they paid no attention to the
pleasures of the body, seeking not mortal but immortal progeny, which only the
pious soul is able to bear of itself.

20 Then after a little he adds still more emphatically:185 "They expound the
Sacred Scriptures figuratively by means of allegories. For the whole law seems
to these men to resemble a living organism, of which the spoken words constitute
the body, while the hidden sense stored up within the words constitutes the
soul. This hidden meaning has first been particularly studied by this sect,
which sees, revealed as in a mirror of names, the surpassing beauties of the
thoughts."

21 Why is it necessary to add to these things their meetings and the respective
occupations of the men and of the women during those meetings, and the practices
which are even to the present day habitually observed by us, especially such as
we are accustomed to observe at the feast of the Saviour's passion, with fasting
and night watching and study of the divine Word.

22 These things the above-mentioned author has related in his own work,
indicating a mode of life which has been preserved to the present time by us
alone,recording especially the vigils kept in connectionwith the great festival,
and the exercises performed during those vigils, and the hymns customarily
recited by us, and describing how, while one sings regularly in time, the others
listen in silence, and join in chanting only the close of the hymns; and how, on
the days referred to they sleep on the ground on beds of straw, andto use his
own words,186 "taste no wine at all, norany flesh, but water is their only
drink, and therelish with their bread is salt and hyssop."

23 In addition to this Philo describes the order of dignities which ists among
those who carry on the services of the church, mentioning the diaconate, and the
office of bishop, which takes the precedence over all the others.187 But
whosoever desires a more accurate knowledge of these matters may get it from the
history already cited.

24 But that Philo, when he wrote these things, had in view the first heralds of
the Gospel and the customs handed down from the beginning by the apostles, is
clear to every one.

Chapter XVIII. The Works of Philo188 That Have Came Down to Us.

1 Copious in language, comprehensive in thought, sublime and elevated in his
views of divine Scripture, Philo has produced manifold and various expositions
of the sacred books. On the one hand, he expounds in order the events recorded
in Genesis in the books to which he gives the title Allegories of the Sacred
Laws;189 on the other hand, he makes successive divisions of the chapters in the
Scriptures which are the subject of investigation, and gives objections and
solutions, in the books which he quite suitably calls Questions and Answers an
Genesis and Exodus.190

2 There are, besides these, treatises expressly worked out by him on certain
subjects, such as the two books On Agriculture,191 and the same number On
Drunkenness;192 and some others distinguished by different titles corresponding
to the contents of each; for instance, Concerning the things which the Sober
Mind desires and execrates,193 On the Confusion of Tongues,194 On Flight and
Discovery,195 On Assembly for the sake of Instruction,196 On the question, `Who
is heir to things divine?' or On the division of things into equal and
unequal,197 and still further the work On the three Virtues which with others
have been described by Moses.198

3 In addition to these is the work On those whose Names have been changed and
why they have been changed,199 in which he says that he hadwritten also two
hooks On Covenants.200

4 And there is also a work of his On Emigration,201 and one On the life of a
Wise Man made perfect in Righteousness, or On unwritten Laws;202 and still
further the work On Giants or On the Immutability of God,203 and a first,
second, third, fourth and fifth book On the proposition, that Dreams according
to Moses are sent by God.204 These are the hooks on Genesis that have come down
to us.

5 But on Exodus we are acquainted with the first, second, third, fourth and
fifth books of Questions and Answers;205 also with that On the Tabernacle,206
and that On the Ten Commandments,207 and the four books On the laws which refer
especially to the principal divisions of the ten Commandments,208 and another On
animals intended for sacrifice and On the kinds of sacrifice,209 and another On
the rewards fixed in the law for the good, and on the punishments and curses
fixed for the wicked.210

6 In addition to all these there are extantalso some single-volumed works of
his; as for instance, the work On Providence,211 and the book composed by him On
the Jews,212 and The Statesman;213 and still further, Alexander, or On the
possession of reason by the irrational animals.214 Besides these there is a work
On the proposition that every wicked man is a slave, to which is subjoined the
work On the proposition that every goad man is free.215

7 After these was composed by him the work On the contemplative life, or On
suppliants,216 from which we have drawn the facts concerning the life of the
apostolic men; and still further, the Interpretation of the Hebrew names in the
law and in the prophets are said to be the result of his industry.217

8 And he is said to have read in the presence of the whole Roman Senate during
the reign of Claudius218 the work which he had written, when he came to Rome
under Caius, concerning Caius' hatred of the gods, and to which, with ironical
reference to its character, he had given the title On the Virtues.219 And his
discourses were so much admired as to be deemed worthy of a place in the
libraries.

9 At this time, while Paul was completing his journey "from Jerusalem and round
about unto Illyricum,"220 Claudius drove the Jews out of Rome; and Aquila and
Priscilla, leaving Rome with the other Jews, came to Asia, and there abode with
the apostle Paul, who was confirming the churches of that region whose
foundations he had newly laid. The sacred book of the Acts informs us also of
these things.221 Chapter XIX. The Calamity Which Befell the Jews in Jerusalem an
the Day of the Passover.

1 While Claudius was still emperor, it happened that so great a tumult and
disturbance took place in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, that thirty
thousand of those Jews alone who were forcibly crowded together at the gate of
the temple perished,222 being trampled under foot by one another. Thus the
festival became a season of mourning for all the nation, and there was weeping
in every house. These things are related literally223 by Josephus.

2 But Claudius appointed Agrippa,224 son of Agrippa, king of the Jews, having
sent Felix225 as procurator of the whole country of Samaria and Galilee, and of
the land called Perea.226 And after he had reigned thirteen years and eight
months227 he died, and left Nero as his successor in the empire.

Chapter XX. The Events Which Took Place in Jerusalem During the Reign of Nero.

1 Josephus again, in the twentieth book of his Antiquities, relates the quarrel
which arose among the priests during the reign of Nero, while Felix was
procurator of Judea.

2 His words are as follows228 : "There arose a quarrel between the high priests
on the one hand and the priests and leaders of the people of Jerusalem on the
other.229 And each of them collected a body of the boldest and most restless
men, and put himself at their head, and whenever they met they hurled invectives
and stones at each other. And there was no one that would interpose; but these
things were done at will as if in a city destitute of a ruler.

3 And so great was the shamelessness and audacity of the high priests that they
dared to send their servants to the threshing-floors to seize the tithes due to
the priests; and thus those of the priests that were poor were seen to be
perishing of want. In this way did the violence of the factions prevail over all
justice."

4 And the same author again relates that about the same time there sprang up in
Jerusalem a certain kind of robbers,230 " who byday," as he says, "and in the
middle of the city slew those who met them."

5 For, especially at the feasts, they mingled with the multitude, and with short
swords, which they concealed under their garments, they stabbed the most
distinguished men. And when they fell, the murderers themselves were among those
who expressed their indignation. And thus on account of the confidence which was
reposed in them by all, they remained undiscovered.

6 The first that was slain by them was Jonathan the high priest;231 and after
him many were killed every day, until the fear became worse than the evil
itself, each one, as in battle, hourly expecting death.

Chapter XXI. The Egyptian, Who is Mentioned Also in the Acts of the Apostles.

1 After other matters he proceeds as follows:232 "But the Jews were afflicted
with a greater plague than these by the Egyptian false prophet.233 For there
appeared in the land an impostor who aroused faith in himself as a prophet, and
collected about thirty thousand of those whom he had deceived, and led them from
the desert to the so-called Mount of Olives whence he was prepared to enter
Jerusalem by force and to overpower the Roman garrison and seize the government
of the people, using those who made the attack with him as body guards.

2 But Felix anticipated his attack, and went out to meet him with the Roman
legionaries, and all the people joined in the defense, so that when the battle
was fought the Egyptian fled with a few followers, but the most of them were
destroyed or taken captive."

3 Josephus relates these events in the secondbook of his History.234 But it is
worth while comparing the account of the Egyptian given here with that contained
in the Acts of the Apostles. In the time of Felix it was said to Paul by the
centurion in Jerusalem, when the multitude of the Jews raised a disturbance
against the apostle, "Art not thou he Who before these days made an uproar, and
led out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?"235 These are
the events which took place in the time of Felix.236 Chapter XXII. Paul Having
Been Sent Bound from Judea to Rome, Made His Defense, and Was Acquitted of Every
Charge.

1 Festus237 was sent by Nero to be Felix's successor. Under him Paul, having
made his defense, was sent bound to Rome238 Aristarchus was with him, whom he
also somewhere in his epistles quite naturally calls his fellow-prisoner.239 And
Luke, who wrote the Acts of the Apostles,240 brought his history to a close at
this point, after stating that Paul spent two whole years at Rome as a prisoner
at large, and preached the word of God without restraint.241

2 Thus after he had made his defense it is said that the apostle was sent again
upon the ministry of preaching,242 and that upon coming to the same city a
second time he suffered martyrdom.243 In this imprisonment he wrote his second
epistle to Timothy,244 in which he mentions his first defense and his impending
death.

3 But hear his testimony on these matters: "At my first answer," he says, "no
man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to
their charge. Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that
by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear:
and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion."245

4 He plainly indicates in these words that 4 on the former occasion, in order
that the preaching might be fulfilled by him, he was rescued from the mouth of
the lion, referring, in this expression, to Nero, as is probable on account of
the latter's cruelty. He did not therefore afterward add the similar statement,
"He will rescue me from the mouth of the lion"; for he saw in the spirit that
his end would not be long delayed.

5 Wherefore he adds to the words, "And he delivered me from the mouth of the
lion," this sentence: "The Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will
preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom,"246 indicating his speedy martyrdom;
which he also foretells still more clearly in the same epistle, when he writes,
"For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand."247

6 In his second epistle to Timothy, moreover, he indicates that Luke was with
him when he wrote,248 but athis first defense not even he.249 Whence it is
probable that Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles at that time, continuing his
history down to the period when he was with Paul.250

7 But these things have been adduced by us to show that Paul's martyrdom did not
take place at the time of that Roman sojourn which Luke records.

8 It is probable indeed that as Nero was more disposed to mildness in the
beginning, Paul's defense of his doctrine was more easily received; but that
when he had advanced to the commission of lawless deeds of daring, he made the
apostles as well as others the subjects of his attacks.251 Chapter XXIII. The
Martyrdom of James, Who Was Called the Brother of the Lord.

1 But after Paul, in consequence of his appeal to Caesar, had been sent to Rome
by Festus, the Jews, being frustrated in their hope of entrapping him by the
snares which they had laid for him, turned against James, the brother of the
Lord,252 to whom the episcopal seat at Jerusalem bad been entrusted by the
apostles.253 The following daring measures were undertaken by them against him.

2 Leading him into their midst they demanded of him that he should renounce
faith in Christ in the presence of all the people. But, contrary to the opinion
of all, with a clear voice, and with greater boldness than they had anticipated,
he spoke out before the whole multitude and confessed that our Saviour and Lord
Jesus is the Son of God. But they were unable to bearlonger the testimony of the
man who, on account of the excellence of ascetic virtue254 and of piety which he
exhibited in his life, wasesteemed by all as the most just of men,
andconsequently they slew him. Opportunity forthis deed of violence was
furnished by the prevailing anarchy, which was caused by the fact that Festus
had died just at this time in Judea,and that the province was thus without a
governor and head.255

3 The manner of James' death has been already indicated by the above-quoted
words of Clement, who records that he was thrown from the pinnacle of the
temple, and was beaten to death with a club.256 But Hegesippus,257 who lived
immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth
book of his Memoirs.258 He writes as follows:

4 "James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in
conjunction with the apostles.259 He has been called the Just260 by all from the
time of our Saviour to the present day; for there were many that bore the name
of James.

5 He was holy from his mother's womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor
did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with
oil, and he did not use the bath.

6 He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen
but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple,
and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so
that his knees became hard like those of a camel, in consequence of his
constantly bending them in his worship of God, and asking forgiveness for the
people.261

7 Because of his exceeding great justice he was called the Just, and Oblias,262
which signifies in Greek, `Bulwark of the people' and `Justice,'263 in
accordance with what the prophets declare concerning him.264

8 Now some of the seven sects, which existed among the people and which have
been mentioned by me in the Memoirs,265 asked him, `What is the gate of
Jesus?'266 and he replied that he was the Saviour.

9 On account of these words some believed that Jesus is the Christ. But the
sects mentioned above did not believe either in a resurrection or in one's
coming to give to every man according to his works.267 But as many as believed
did so on account of James.

10 Therefore when many even of the rulersbelieved, there was a commotion among
the Jews and Scribes and Pharisees, who said that there was danger that the
whole peoplewould be looking for Jesus as the Christ. Coming therefore in a body
to James they said, `We entreat thee, restrain the people; for they are gone
astray in regard to Jesus, as if he were the Christ.268 We entreat thee to
persuade all that have come to the feast of the Passover concerning Jesus; for
we all have confidence in thee. For we bear thee witness, as do all the people,
that thou art just, and dost not respect persons.269

11 Do thou therefore persuade themultitude not to be led astray concerning
Jesus. For the whole people, and all of us also, have confidence in thee. Stand
therefore upon the pinnacle of the temple,270 that from that high position thou
mayest be clearly seen, and that thy words may be readily heard by all the
people. For all the tribes, with the Gentiles also, are come together on account
of the Passover.'

12 The aforesaid Scribes and Pharisees therefore placed James upon the pinnacle
of the temple, and cried out to him and said: `Thou just one, in whom we ought
all to have: confidence, forasmuch as the people are led, astray after Jesus,
the crucified one, declare to us, what is the gate of Jesus.'271

13 And he answered with a loud voice, `Why do ye ask me concerning Jesus, the
Son of Man? He himself sitteth in heaven at the right hand of the great Power,
and is about to come upon the clouds of heaven.'272

14 And when many were fully convinced and gloried in the testimony of James, and
said, `Hosanna to the Son of David,' these same Scribes and Pharisees said again
to one another, `We have done badly in supplying such testimony to Jesus. But
let us go up and throw him down, in order that they may be afraid to believe
him.'

15 And they cried out, saying, `Oh! oh! the just man is also in error.' And they
fulfilled the Scripture written in Isaiah,273 `Let us take away274 the just man,
because he is troublesome to us: therefore they shall eat the fruit of their
doings.'

16 So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to each other, `Let us
stone James the Just.' And they began to stone him, for he was not killed by the
fall; but he turned and knelt down and said, `I entreat thee, Lord God our
Father,275 forgive them, for they know not what they do.'276

17 And while they were thus stoning him one of the priests of the sons of
Rechab, the son of the Rechabites,277 who are mentioned by Jeremiah the
prophet,278 cried out, saying, `Cease, what do ye? The just one prayeth for
you.'279

18 And one of them, who was a fuller, took the club with which he beat out
clothes and struck the just man on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom.280
And they buried him on the spot, by the temple, and his monument still remains
by the temple.281 He became a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus
is the Christ. And immediately Vespasian besieged them."282

19 These things are related at length by Hegesippus, who is in agreement with
Clement.283 James was so admirable a man and so celebrated among all for his
justice, that the more sensible even of the Jews were of the opinion that this
was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened to them immediately
after his martyrdom for no other reason than their daring act against him.

20 Josephus, at least, has not hesitated to testify this in his writings, where
he says,284 "These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was
a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although
he was a most just man."

21 And the same writer records his death also in the twentieth book of his
Antiquities in the following words:285 "But the emperor, when he learned of the
death of Festus, sent Albinus286 to be procurator of Judea. But the younger
Ananus,287 who, as we have already said,288 had obtained the high priesthood,
was of an exceedingly bold and reckless disposition. He belonged, moreover, to
the sect of the Sadducees, who are the most cruel of all the Jews in the
execution of judgment, as we have already shown.289

22 Ananus, therefore, being of this character, and supposing that he had a
favorable opportunity on account of the fact that Festus was dead, and Albinus
was still on the way, called together the Sanhedrim, and brought before them the
brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, James by name, together with some
others,290 and accused them of violating the law, and condemned them to be
stoned.291

23 But those in the city who seemed most moderate and skilled in the law were
very angry at this, and sent secretly to the king,292 requesting him to order
Ananus to cease such proceedings. For he had not done right even this first
time. And certain of them also went to meet Albinus, who was journeying from
Alexandria, and reminded him that it was not lawful for Ananus to summon the
Sanhedrim without his knowledge.293

24 And Albinus, being persuaded by their representations, wrote in anger to
Ananus, threatening him with punishment. And the king, Agrippa, in consequence,
deprived him, of the high priesthood,294 which he had held threemonths, and
appointed Jesus, the son of Damnaeus."295

25 These things are recorded in regard to James, who is said to be the author of
the first of the so-called catholic296 epistles. But it is to be observed that
it is disputed;297 at least, not many of the ancients have mentioned it, as is
the case likewise with the epistle that bears the name of Jude,298 which is also
one of the seven so-called catholic epistles. Nevertheless we know that these
also,299 with the rest, have been read publicly in very many churches.300
Chapter XXIV. Annianus the First Bishop of the Church of Alexandria After Mark.

1 When Nero was in the eighth year of his reign,301 Annianus302 succeeded Mark
the evangelist in the administration of the parish of Alexandria.303

Chapter XXV. The Persecution Under Nero in Which Paul and Peter Were Honored at
Rome with Martyrdom in Behalf of Religion.

1 When the government of Nero was now firmly established, he began to plunge
into unholy pursuits, and armed himself even against the religion of the God of
the universe.

2 To describe the greatness of his depravity does not lie within the plan of the
present work. As there are many indeed that have recorded his history in most
accurate narratives,304 every one may at his pleasure learn from them the
coarseness of the man's extraordinary madness, under the influence of which,
after he had accomplished the destruction of so many myriads without any reason,
he ran into such blood-guiltiness that he did not spare even his nearest
relatives and dearest friends, but destroyed his mother and his brothers and his
wife,305 with very many others of his own family as he would private and public
enemies, with various kinds of deaths.

3 But with all these things this particular in the catalogue of his crimes was
still wanting, that he was the first of the emperors who showed himself an enemy
of the divine religion.

4 The Roman Tertullian is likewise a witness of this. He writes as follows:306
"Examine your records. There you will find that Nero was the first that
persecuted this doctrine,307 particularly then when after subduing all the east,
he exercised his cruelty against all at Rome.308 We glory in having such a man
the leader in our punishment. For whoever knows him can understand that nothing
was condemned by Nero unless it was something of great excellence."

5 Thus publicly announcing himself as the first among God's chief enemies, he
was led on to the slaughter of the apostles. It is, therefore, recorded that
Paul was beheaded in Rome itself,309 and that Peter likewise was crucified under
Nero.310 This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their
names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day.

6 It is confirmed likewise by Caius,311 a member of the Church,312 who arose313
under Zephyrinus,314 bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with
Proclus,315 the leader of the Phrygian heresy,316 speaks as follows concerning
the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid:

7 "But317 I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the
Vatican318 or to the Ostian way,319 you will find the trophies of those who laid
the foundations of this church."320

8 And that they both suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius,
bishop of Corinth,321 in his epistle to the Romans,322 in the following words:
"You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of
Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both of them planted and likewise taught us in our
Corinth.323 And they taught together in like manner in Italy, and suffered
martyrdom at the same time."324 I have quoted these things in order that the
truth of the history might be still more confirmed.

Chapter XXVI. The Jews, Afflicted with Innumerable Evils, Commenced the Last War
Against the Romans.

1 Josephus again, after relating many things in connection with the calamity
which came upon the whole Jewish nation, records,325 in addition to many other
circumstances, that a great many326 of the most honorable among the Jews were
scourged in Jerusalem itself and then crucified by Florus.327 It happened that
he was procurator of Judea when the war began to be kindled, in the twelfth year
of Nero.328

2 Josephus says329 that at that time a terrible commotion was stirred up
throughout all Syria in consequence of the revolt of the Jews, and that
everywhere the latter were destroyed without mercy, like enemies, by the
inhabitants of the cities, "so that one could see cities filled with unburied
corpses, and the dead bodies of the aged scattered about with the bodies of
infants, and women without even a covering for their nakedness, and the whole
province full of indescribable calamities, while the dread of those things that
were threatened was greater than the sufferings themselves which they anywhere
endured."330 Such is the account of Josephus; and such was the condition of the
Jews at that time.

1: See Acts i. 23-26.

2: Bk. I. chap. 12, §2.

3: The view that the Seven were deacons appears first in Irenaeus ( adv. Haer.
I. 26. 3; III. 12. 10; IV. 15. I), then in Cyprian ( Ep. 64. 3), and was the
commonly accepted opinion of the Roman Church in the third century (for, while
they had forty-six presbyters, they had only seven deacons; see below, Bk. VI.
chap. 43), and has been ever since almost universally accepted. In favor of the
identification are urged this early and unanimous tradition, the similarity of
the duties assigned to the Seven and to later deacons, and the use of the words
diakonia and diakonein diakonein and diakonia in connection with the Seven, for
these words are used always in a general, never in an official sense in other
parts of the Acts and of the New Testament, and, what is still more decisive,
the same word ( diakonia ) is used in the same passage in connection with the
apostles; the Seven are "to serve tables" ( diakonein taij trapezaij ,) the
apostles are to give themselves to "the service of the word" ( diakonia tou
logou 4: See Acts vi. 1-6.

5: See Acts vii.

6: stefanoj , "a crown."

7: James is not called the "Just" in the New Testament, but Hegesippus (quoted
by Eusebius, chap. 23) says that he was called thus by all from the time of
Christ, on account of his great piety, and it is by this name that he is known
throughout history.

8: See above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 13.

9: Eusebius testimony is in favor of the half-brother theory; for had he
considered James the son of Mary, he could not have spoken in this way.

10: Matt. i. 18.

11: On Clement's Hypotyposes, see Bk. VI. chap. 13, note 3. On Clement's life
and writings, see Bk. V. chap. 11.

12: all Iakwbon ton dikaion episkopon twn Ierosolumwn elesqai ,, as the majority
of the mss. and editions read. Laemmer, followed by Heinichen, substitutes
genesqai for elesqai on the authority oftwo important codices. The other
reading, however, is as well, ifnot better, supported.

13: See above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 3.

14: Clement evidently identifies James, the brother of the Lord, with James, the
son of Alphaeus (compare the words just above: "These delivered it to the rest
of the apostles," in which the word "apostles," on account of the "Seventy" just
following, seems to be used in a narrow sense, and therefore this lames to be
one of the Twelve), and he is thus cited as a witness to the cousin hypothesis
(see above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 13). Papias, too, in a fragment given by Routh
( Rel. Sac. I. p. 16) identifies the two. But Hegesippus (quoted by Eusebius in
chap. 23) expressly states that there were many of this name, and that he was
therefore called James the Just to distinguish him from others. Eusebius quotes
this passage of Clement with apparently no suspicion that it contradicts his own
opinion in regard to the relationship of James to Christ. The contradiction,
indeed, appears only upon careful examination.

15: Josephus ( Ant. XX. 9. 1) says he was stoned to death. The account of
Clement agrees with that of Hegesippus quoted by Eusesebius in chap. 23, below,
which see.

16: James, the son of Zebedee, who was beheaded by Herod Agrippa I., 44 a.d. See
Acts xii. 2, and Bk. II. chap. 9 below.

17: Gal. i. 19.

18: See above, Bk. I. chap. 13.

19: The date of the introduction of Christianity into Edessa is not known (see
above, Bk. I. chap. 13, notes 1 and 3) but it was the seat of a bishop in the
third century, and in Eusebius' time was filled with magnificent churches and
monasteries.

20: See Acts viii. 1.

21: See Acts viii. 3.

22: See Acts xi. 19.

23: See Acts viii. 5.

24: See Acts viii. 9 sqq. Upon Simon, see chap. 13, note 3.

25: thn megalhn dunamin tou qeou . Compare Acts viii. 10, which has h dunamij
tou qeou h kaloumenh ton prwton qeon anwtath tij dunamij

26: Eusebius here utters the universal belief of the early Church, which from
the subsequent career of Simon, who was considered the founder of all heresies,
and the great arch-heretic himself, read back into his very conversion the
hypocrisy for which he was afterward distinguished in Church history. The
account of the Acts does not say that his belief was hypocritical, and leaves it
to be implied (if it be implied at all) only from his subsequent conduct in
endeavoring to purchase the gift of God with money.

27: Eusebius may refer here to the Simonians, an heretical sect (mentioned by
Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and others), which recognized him as
its founder and leader (though they originated probably at a later date), and
even looked upon him as a God. They were exceedingly licentious and immoral.
Their teachings gradually assumed a decidedly Gnostic character, and Simon came
to be looked upon as the father of all Gnostics (compare Irenaeus, I. 27. 4),
and hence of heretics in general, and as himself the archheretic. Eusebius,
therefore, perhaps refers in this place simply to the Gnostics, or to the
heretics in general.

28: Another instance of the external and artificial conception of heresy which
Eusebius held in common with his age.

29: Acts viii. tells of no punishment which befell Simon further than the rebuke
of Peter which Hippolytus ( Phil. vi. 15) calls a curse, and which as such may
have been regarded by Eusebius as a deserved punishment, its effect clinging to
him, and finally bringing him to destruction (see below, chap. 14, note 8).

30: Acts viii. 26 sqq. This queen was Candace, according to the Biblical
account; but Candace was the name, not of an individual, but of a dynasty of
queens who ruled in Meroë, an island formed by two branches of the Nile, south
of Egypt. See Pliny, H. N. VI. 35 (Delphin edition); Dion Cassius, LIV. 5; and
Strabo, XVII. 1. 54 (Müller's edit., Paris, 1877).

31: Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. III. 12. 8) says that this Eunuch returned to Ethiopia
and preached there. But by no one else, so far as I know, is the origin of
Christianity in Ethiopia traced back to him. The first certain knowledge we have
of the introduction of Christianity into Ethiopia is in the fourth century,
under Frumentius and Aedesius, of whom Rufinus, I. 9, gives the original
account; and yet it is probable that Christianity existed there long before this
time. Compare Neander's Kirchengeschichte, I. p. 46. See also H. R. Reynolds'
article upon the "Ethiopian Church" in Smith and Wace's Dictionary of Christian
Biography, II. 232 sqq.

32: Psa. xviii. 31.

33: Acts ix. 15.

34: Gal. i. 1.

35: See Acts ix. 3 sqq.; Acts xxii. 6 sqq.; Acts xxvi. 12 sqq.; Gal. i. 16; 1
Cor. xv. 8-10.

36: That Pilate made an official report to Tiberius is stated also by Tertullian
( Apol. 21), and is in itself quite probable. Justin Mar-tyr ( Apol. I. 35 and
Apol. I. 48) mentions certain Acts of Pilate as well known in his day, but the
so-called Acts of Pilate which are still extant in various forms are spurious,
and belong to a much later period. They are very fanciful and curious. The most
important of these Acts is that which is commonly known under the title of the
Gospel of Nicodemus. There are also extant numerous spurious epistles of Pilate
addressed to Herod, to Tiberius, to Claudius, &c. The extant Acts and Epistles
are collected in Tischendorf's Evang. Apoc., and most of them are translated by
Cowper in his Apocryphal Gospels. See also the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Am. ed.,
VIII. p. 416 sqq. Compare the excellent article of Lipsius upon the Apocryphal
Gospels in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. p. 707 sqq., also the Prolegomena of
Tischendorf, p. lxii sqq.

37: The existing Report of Pilate (translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, ibid.
p. 460, 461) answers well to Eusebius' description, containing as it does a
detailed account of Christ's miracles and of his resurrection. According to
Tischendorf, however, it is in its present form of a much later date, but at the
same time is very likely based upon the form which Eusebius saw, and has been
changed by interpolations and additions. See the Prolegomena of Tischendorf
referred to in the previous note.

38: See below, note 12.

39: That Tiberius did not persecute the Christians is a fact; but this was
simply because they attracted no notice during his reign, and not because of his
respect for them or of his belief in Christ.

40: Tertullian was born in Carthage about the middle of the second century. The
common opinion is that he was born about 160, but Lipsius pushes the date back
toward the beginning of the fifties, and some even into the forties. For a
recent study of the subject, see Ernst Nöldechen in the Zeitschrift fÜr
wissenschaftliche Theologie, 1886, Heft 2. He concludes that he was born about
150 and lived until about 230. Tertullian's father was a Roman centurion, and he
himself became a lawyer and rhetorician in Rome. He was converted to
Christianity probably between 180 and 190, and according to Jerome, became a
presbyter and continued as such until middle life (whether in Rome or in
Carthage we cannot tell; probably in the latter, for he certainly spent the
later years of his life, while he was a Montanist, in Carthage, and also a
considerable part of his earlier life, as his writings indicate), when he went
over to Montanism (probably about 200 a.d.), and died at an advanced age (22+).
That he was a presbyter rests only upon the authority of Jerome ( de vir. ill.
53), and is denied by some Roman Catholic historians in the interest of clerical
celibacy, for Tertullian was a married man. He wrote a great number of
works,-apologetic, polemic, and practical-a few in Greek, but most of them in
Latin,-and many of the Latin ones are still extant. The best edition of them is
by Oehler, Leipzig, 1853, in three volumes. Vol. IlI. contains valuable
dissertations upon the life and works of Tertullian by various writers. An
English translation of his works is given in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vols. III.
and IV. 1-125. Our main sources for a knowledge of his life are his own
writings, and Jerome's de vir. ill. chap. 53. For a fuller account of
Tertullian, see any of the larger Church histories, and especially a good
monograph by A. Hauck, Tertullian's Leben und Schriften, Erlangen, 1877. For the
literature, see Schaff's Church Hist. II. p. 818.

41: His accurate acquaintance with the laws of the Romans is not very
conspicuous in his writings. His books lead us to think that as a lawyer he must
have been noted rather for brilliancy and fertility of resource than for
erudition. And this conclusion is borne out by his own description of his life
before his conversion, which seems to have been largely devoted to pleasure, and
thus to have hardly admitted the acquirement of extensive and accurate learning.

42: Kai twn malista epi 9Rwmhj lamprwn epi Rwmhj

43: Tertullian's Apology ranks first among his extant works, and is "one of the
most beautiful monuments of the heroic age of the Church" (Schaff). The date of
its composition is greatly disputed, though it must have been written during the
reign of Septimius Severus, and almost all scholars are agreed in assigning it
to the years 197-204. Since the investigations of Bonwetsch ( Die Schriften
Tertullian's, Bonn, 1878), of Harnack (in the Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte,
1878, p. 572 sqq.), and of Nöldechen (in Gebhardt and Harnack's Texte und
Untersuchungen, Band V. Heft 2), all of whom agree in assigning its composition
to the latter part (summer or fall) of the year 197, its date may be accepted as
practically established.

44: Some have contended that Eusebius himself translated this passage from
Tertullian, but his words show clearly enough that he quotes from an already
existing translation. His knowledge of the Latin language appears to have been
very limited. He must have had some acquaintance with it, for he translates
Hadrian's rescript to Fundanus from Latin into Greek, as he informs ns in Bk.
IV. chap. 8; but the translation of so brief and simple a piece of writing would
not require a profound knowledge of the language, and there are good reasons for
concluding that he was not a fluent Latin scholar. For instance, the only work
of Tertullian's which he quotes is his Apology, and he uses only a Greek
translation of that. It is not unnatural to conclude that the rest of
Tertullian's works, or at least the most of them, were not translated, and that
Eusebius was not enough of a Latin scholar to be able to read them in the
original with any degree of ease. Moreover, this conclusion in regard to his
knowledge of Latin is confirmed by the small acquaintance which he shows with
the works of Latin writers in general. In fact, he does not once betray a
personal acquaintance with any of the important Latin works which had been
produced before his time, except such as existed in Greek translations. Compare
Heinichen's note in his edition of Eusebius' History, Vol. III. p. 128 sqq. The
translation of Tertullian's Apology used by Eusebius was very poor, as may be
seen from the passage quoted here, and also from the one quoted in Bk. II. chap.
25, §4. For the mistakes, however, of course not Eusebius himself, but the
unknown translator, is to be held responsible.

45: Tertullian's Apology, chap. 5.

46: Havercamp remarks (in his edition of Tertullian's Apology, p. 56) that this
law is stated in the second book of Cicero's De Legibus in the words: Separatim
nemo habessit deos, neve novos; sed ne advenas nisi publice adscitos privatim
colunto.

47: Markoj 'Aimilioj outwj peri tinoj eidwlou pepoihken' Albournon

48: Literally, "This has been done in behalf of (or for the sake of) our
doctrine" ( kai touto uper tou hmwn logou pepoihtai

49: This entire account bears all the marks of untruthfulness, and cannot for a
moment be thought of as genuine. Tertullian was probably, as Neander suggests,
deceived by falsified or interpolated documents from some Christian source. He
cannot have secured his knowledge from original state records. The falsification
took place, probably, long after the time of Tiberius. Tertullian is the first
writer to mention these circumstances, and Tertullian was not by any means a
critical historian. Compare Neander's remarks in his Church History, Vol. I. p.
93 sqq. (Torrey's Translation).

50: Were this conduct of Tiberius a fact, Trajan's rescript and all subsequent
imperial action upon the subject would become inexplicable.

51: Compare Col. i. 6. That Christianity had already spread over the whole world
at this time is, of course, an exaggeration; but the statement is not a mere
rhetorical flourish; it was believed as a historical fact. This conception arose
originally out of the idea that the second coming of Christ was near, and the
whole world must know of him before his coming. The tradition that the apostles
preached in all parts of the world is to be traced back to the same cause.

52: Ps. xix. 4.

53: See Acts x. 1 sq.

54: See Acts xi. 20. The Textus Receptus of the New Testament reads at this
point Ellhnistaj , a reading which is strongly supported by external testimony
and adopted by Westcott and Hort. But the internal evidence seems to demand
Ellhnaj , and this reading is found in some of the oldest versions and in a few
mss., and is adopted by most modern critics, including Tischendorf. Eusebius is
a witness for the latter reading. He takes the word Ellhnaj in a broad sense to
indicate all that are not Jews, as is clear from his insertion of the allwn 55:
See Acts xi. 22 sqq.

56: See Acts xi.26. This name was first given to the disciples by the heathen of
Antioch, not by the Jews, to whom the word "Christ" meant too much; nor by the
disciples themselves, for the word seldom appears in the New Testament, and
nowhere in the mouth of a disciple. The word xristianoj has a Latin termination,
but this does not prove that it was invented by Romans, for Latinisms were
common in the Greek of that day. It was probably originally given as a term of
contempt, but accepted by the disciples as a term of the highest honor.

57: ap euqalouj kai gonimou phghj . Two mss., followed by Stephanus, Valesius,
Closs, and Crusè, read ghj ; but all the other mss., together with Rufinus,
support the reading phghj , which is adopted by the majority of editors.

58: See Acts xi. 28. Agabus is known to us only from this and one other passage
of the Acts (xxi. 10), where he foretells the imprisonment of Paul. The famine
here referred to took place in the reign of Claudius, where Eusebius puts it
when he mentions it again in chap. 8. He cannot therefore be accused, as many
accuse him, of putting the famine itself into the reign of Tiberius, and hence
of committing a chronological error. He is following the account of the Acts,
and mentions the prominent fact of the famine in that connection, without
thinking of chronological order. His method is, to be sure, loose, as he does
not inform his readers that he is anticipating by a number of years, but leaves
them to discover it for themselves when they find the same subject taken up
again after a digression of four chapters. Upon the famine itself, see below,
chap. 8.

59: See Acts xi. 29, Acts xi. 30.

60: From Aug. 29, a.d. 14, to March 16, a.d. 37.

61: Caius ruled from the death of Tiberius until Jan. 24, a.d. 41.

62: Herod Agrippa I. He was a son of Aristobulus, and a grandson of Herod the
Great. He was educated in Rome and gained high favor with Caius, and upon the
latter's accession to the throne received the tetrarchies of Philip and
Lysanias, and in a.d. 39 the tetrarchy of Galilee and Perea, which had belonged
to Herod Antipas. After the death of Caius, his successor, Claudius, appointed
him also king over the province of Judea and Samaria, which made him ruler of
all Palestine, a dominion as extensive as that of Herod the Great. He was a
strict observer of the Jewish law, and courted the favor of the Jews with
success. It was by him that James the Elder was beheaded, and Peter imprisoned
(Acts xii.). He died of a terrible disease in a.d. 44. See below, chap. 10.

63: Herod Antipas.

64: See Luke xxiii. 7-11.

65: He was banished in a.d. 39 to Lugdunum in Gaul (according to Josephus, Ant.
XVIII. 7. 2; or to Spain, according to his B. J. II. 9. 6), and died in Spain
(according to B. J. II. 9. 6).

66: See Ant. XVIII. 6 and 7, and B. J. II. 9.

67: Philo was an Alexandrian Jew of high family, who was born probably about
20-10 b.c. (in his Legat. ad Cajum, he calls himself an old man). Very little is
known about his life, and the time of his death is uncertain. The only fixed
date which we have is the embassy to Caligula (a.d. 40), and he lived for at
least some time after this. He is mentioned by Jerome ( de vir. ill. 11), who
says he was born of a priestly family; but Eusebius knows nothing of this, and
there is probably no truth in the statement. He is mentioned also by Josephus in
his Ant. XVIII. 8. 1. He was a Jewish philosopher, thoroughly imbued with the
Greek spirit, who strove to unite Jewish beliefs with Greek culture, and exerted
immense influence upon the thought of subsequent ages, especially upon Christian
theology. His works (Biblical, historical, philosophical, practical, &c.) are
very numerous, and probably the majority of them are still extant. For
particulars, see chap. 18, below. For an excellent account of Philo, see
Schürer, Geschichte des Füdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi; zweite
Auflage, Bd. II. p. 831 to 884 (Leipzig, 1886), where the chief literature upon
the subject is given.

68: Philo was thoroughly acquainted with Greek literature in all its
departments, and shows great familiarity with it in his works. The influence of
Plato upon him was very great, not only upon his philosophical system, but also
upon his language; and all the Greek philosophers were studied and honored by
him. He may, indeed, himself be called one of them. His system is eclectic, and
contains not only Platonic, but also Pythagorean, and even Stoic, elements. Upon
his doctrinal system, see especially Schürer, ibid. p. 836 sq.

69: Upon this work, see Schürer, p. 855 sqq. According to him, the whole work
embraced five books, and probably bore the title peri aretwn kai presbeiaj proj
Gaion h presbeia in so complete a catalogue of Philo's works makes its
identification with peri aretwn very probable. Of the five, only the third and
fourth are extant,- eij Flakkon peri presbeiaj proj Gaion palinwdia (which is
lost), contained an account of the change for the better in the Jews' condition
through the death of Caius, and the edict of toleration published by Claudius.
Upon the other works of Philo, see chap. 18, below.

70: The occasion of this embassy was a terrible disturbance which had arisen
between the Jews and Greeks in Alexandria, and had continued with occasional
interruptions for more than a year. Much blood had been shed, and affairs were
becoming constantly worse. All efforts to secure peace utterly failed, and
finally, in 40 a.d., the Greeks dispatched an embassy to the emperor, hoping to
secure from him an edict for the extermination of the Jews. The Jews, on their
side, followed the example of the Greeks, sending an embassy for their own
defense, with Philo at its head. The result was as Eusebius relates, and the
Jews were left in a worse condition than before, from which, however, they were
speedily relieved by the death of Caius. Claudius, who succeeded Caius, restored
to them for a time religious freedom and all the rights which they had hitherto
enjoyed.

71: Josephus, Ant. XVIII. 8. 1.

72: This sedition, mentioned above, began in 38 a.d., soon after the accession
of Caius. The Jews, since the time of Alexander the Great, when they had come in
great numbers to the newly founded city, Alexandria, had enjoyed with occasional
interruptions high favor there, and were among the most influential inhabitants.
They possessed all the rights of citizenship and stood upon an equality with
their neighbors in all respects. When Alexandria fell into the hands of the
Romans, all the inhabitants, Jews as well as Greeks, were compelled to take a
position subordinate to the conquerors, but their condition was not worse than
that of their neighbors. They had always, however, been hated more or less by
their fellow-citizens on account of their prosperity, which was the result of
superior education and industry. This enmity came to a crisis under Caius, when
the financial condition of Egypt was very bad, and the inhabitants felt
themselves unusually burdened by the Roman demands. The old hatred for their
more prosperous neighbors broke out afresh, and the terrible disturbance
mentioned was the result. The refusal of the Jews to worship Caius as a God was
made a pretext for attacking them, and it was this refusal which gained for them
the hatred of Caius himself.

73: Apion, chief of the Greek deputies, was a grammarian of Alexandria who had
won great fame as a writer and Greek scholar. He seems to have been very
unscrupulous and profligate, and was a bitter and persistent enemy of the Jews,
whom he attacked very severely in at least two of his works-the Egyptian History
and a special work Against the Jews, neither of which is extant. He was very
unscrupulous in his attacks, inventing the most absurd and malicious falsehoods,
which were quite generally believed, and were the means of spreading still more
widely the common hatred of the Jews. Against him Josephus wrote his celebrated
work, Contra Apionem (more fully de antiquitate Judaeorum contra Apionem ),
which is still extant, and in the second book of which he exposes the ignorance
and mendacity of Apion. In the Pseudo-Clementines he plays an important (but of
course fictitious) role as an antagonist of the Gospel. The extant fragments of
Apion's works are given, according to Lightfoot, in Müller's Fragm. Hist. Graec.
II. 506 sq., and in Fabricius' Bibl. Graec. I. 503, and VII. 50. Compare
Lightfoot's article in Smith and Wace's Dict. of Christ. Biog.

74: The Alabarch was the chief magistrate of the Jews at Alexandria. Alexander
was a very rich and influential Jew, who was widely known and held in high
esteem. His son Tiberius Alexander was appointed procurator of Judea in 46 a.d.,
as successor of Cuspius Fadus. Philo thus belonged to a high and noble Jewish
family. The accuracy of Josephus' statement that Philo was the brother of the
Alabrach Alexander has been denied (e.g., by Ewald. Gesch. des Jüdischen Volkes,
Vol. VI. p. 235), and the Alabarch has been assumed to have been the nephew of
Philo, but this without sufficient ground (compare Schürer, ibid. p. 832, note
5).

75: See note 1, above. The work is cited here under the title hresbeia

76: The Jews in Rome had enjoyed the favor of Augustus, and had increased
greatly in numbers and influence there. They were first disturbed by Tiberius,
who was very hostile to them, and to whose notice all the worst sides of Jewish
character were brought by their enemies, especially by Sejanus, who had great
influence with the emperor, and was moreover a deadly enemy of the Jews. The
Jews were driven out of Rome, and suffered many acts of violence. After the
death of Sejanús, which took place in 31 a.d., they were allowed to return, and
their former rights were restored.

77: Pilate proved himself exceedingly tyrannical and was very obnoxious to the
Jews, offending them greatly at different times during his administration by
disregarding their religious scruples as no procurator before him had ventured
to do. Soon after his accession he changed his quarters from Caesarea to
Jerusalem, and introduced the Roman standard into the Holy City. The result was
a great tumult, and Pilate was forced to yield and withdraw the offensive
ensigns (Josephus, B. J. II. 9. 2; see the next chapter). At another time he
offended the Jews by hanging in his palace some shields inscribed with the names
of heathen deities, which he removed only upon an express order of Tiberius
(Philo, ad Caium, chap. 38). Again, he appropriated a part of the treasure of
the temple to the construction of an aqueduct, which caused another terrible
tumult which was quelled only after much bloodshed (Josephus, B. J. II. 9. 4;
see the next chapter). For further particulars about Pilate, see chap. 7, below.

78: Caius' hostility to the Jews resulted chiefly (as mentioned above, chap. 5,
note 4) from their refusal to pay him divine honors, which he demanded from them
as well as from his other subjects. His demands had caused terrible disturbances
in Alexandria; and in Jerusalem, where he commanded the temple to be devoted to
his worship, the tumult was very great and was quieted only by the yielding of
the emperor, who was induced to give up his demands by the request of Agrippa,
who was then at Rome and in high favor with him. Whether the Jews suffered in
the same way in Rome we do not know, but it is probable that the emperor
endeavored to carry out the same plan there as elsewhere.

79: Philo, Legat. ad Caium, 43.

80: en taij allaij polesi . The reason for the use of the word "other" is not
quite clear, though Philo perhaps means all the cities except Jerusalem, which
he mentions a little below.

81: "`Caius the younger, 0' to distinguish him from Julius Caesar who bore the
name Caius, and who was also deified" (Valesius).

82: This work is probably the same as that mentioned in the beginning of chap.
5. (See chap. 5, note 1.) The work seems to have borne two titles h presbeia and
peri aretwn deuterw here the addition of a copyist, who could not reconcile the
two different titles given by Eusebius.

83: This is rather an unwarranted assumption on the part of Eusebius, as
Josephus is very far from intimating that the calamities of the nation were a
consequence of their crimes against our Saviour.

84: Josephus, B. J. II. 9. 2.

85: shmaiai kalountai .

86: John xix. 15.

87: Josephus, B. J. II. 9. 4.

88: Heb. zprq

89: Josephus, in Ant. XVIII. 3. 2, says that the aqueduct was 200 stadia long.
In the passage which Eusebius quotes the number given is 400, according to the
Greek mss. of Josephus, though the old Latin translation agrees with Eusebius in
reading 300. The situation of the aqueduct we do not know, though the remains of
an ancient aqueduct have been found to the south of Jerusalem, and it is thought
that this may have been the same. It is possible that Pilate did not construct a
new aqueduct, but simply restored one that had been built in the time of
Solomon. Schultz ( Jerusalem, Berlin, 1845) suggests the number 40, supposing
that the aqueduct began at Bethlehem, which is 40 stadia from Jerusalem.

90: See B. J. II. 10, 12 sqq.

91: Pilate's downfall occurred in the following manner. A leader of the
Samaritans had promised to disclose the sacred treasures which Moses was
reported to have concealed upon Mt. Gerizim, and the Samaritans came together in
great numbers from all quarters. Pilate, supposing the gathering to be with
rebellious purpose, sent troops against them and defeated them with great
slaughter. The Samaritans complained to Vitellius, governor of Syria, who sent
Pilate to Rome (36 a.d.) to answer the charges brought against him. Upon
reaching Rome he found Tiberius dead and Caius upon the throne. He was
unsuccessful in his attempt to defend himself, and, according to tradition, was
banished to Vienne in Gaul, where a monument is still shown as Pilate's tomb.
According to another tradition he committed suicide upon the mountain near Lake
Lucerne, which bears his name.

92: Eusebius, unfortunately, does not mention his authority in this case, and
the end of Pilate is recorded by no Greek historians known to us. We are unable,
therefore, to form a judgment as to the trustworthiness of the account.

93: Caius ruled from March 16, a.d. 37, to Jan. 24, a.d. 41, and was succeeded
by his uncle Claudius.

94: Several famines occurred during the reign of Claudius (cf. Dion Cassius, LX.
11, Tacitus, Annal. XII. 13, and Eusebius, Chron., year of Abr. 2070) in
different parts of the empire, but no universal famine is recorded such as
Eusebius speaks of. According to Josephus ( Ant. XX. 2.5 and 5. 2), a severe
famine took place in Judea while Cuspius Fadus and Tiberius Alexander were
successively procurators. Fadus was sent into Judea upon the death of Agrippa
(44 a.d.), and Alexander was succeeded by Cumanus in 48 a.d. The exact date of
Alexander's accession we do not know, but it took place probably about 45 or 46.
This famine is without doubt the one referred to by Agabus in Acts xi. 28. The
exact meaning of the word oikouenh , in that passage, is a matter of dispute.
Whether it refers simply to Palestine, or is used to indicate a succession of
famines in different parts of the world, or is employed only in a rhetorical
sense, it is impossible to say. Eusebius understands the word in its widest
sense, and therefore assumes a universal famine; but he is mistaken in his
assumption.

95: The only non-Christian historians, so far as we know, to record a famine
during the reign of Claudius, are Dion Cassius and Tacitus, who mention a famine
in Rome, and Josephus, who speaks of the famine in Judea (see the previous note
for the references). Eusebius, in his Chron., mentions famines both in Greece
and in Rome during this reign, but upon what authority we do not know. As
already remarked, we have no extant account of a general famine at this time.

96: Acts xi. 28.

97: Acts xi. 29, Acts xi.30.

98: Acts xii.1. Acts xii.2.

99: Herod Agrippa I.; see above, chap. 4, note 3.

100: On Clement's Hypotyposes, see below, Bk. VI. chap. 13, note 3. This
fragment is preserved by Eusebius alone. The account was probably received by
Clement from oral tradition. He had a great store of such traditions of the
apostles and their immediate followers,-in how far true or false it is
impossible to say; compare the story which he tells of John, quoted by Eusebius,
Bk. III. chap. 23, below. This story of James is not intrinsically improbable.
It may have been true, though external testimony for it is, of course, weak. The
Latin legends concerning James' later labors in Spain and his burial in
Compostella are entirely worthless. Epiphanius reports that he was unmarried,
and lived the life of a Nazarite; but he gives no authority for his statement
and it is not improbable that the report originated through a confusion of this
James with James the Just.

101: Acts xii. 3 sqq.

102: See Acts xii. 19 sqq.

103: Acts xii. 23.

104: Josephus, Ant. XIX. 8. 2.

105: 44 a.d. Agrippa began to reign over the whole kingdom in 41 a.d. See above,
chap. 4, note 3.

106: Caesarea lay upon the Mediterranean Sea, northwest of Jerusalem. In the
time of Strabo there was simply a small town at this point, called "Strato's
Tower"; but about 10 b.c. Herod the Great built the city of Caesarea, which soon
became the principal Roman city of Palestine, and was noted for its
magnificence. It became, later, the seat of an important Christian school, and
played quite a part in Church history. Eusebius himself was Bishop of Caesarea.
It was a city of importance, even in the time of the crusades, but is now a
scene of utter desolation.

107: The occasion of this festival is uncertain. Some have considered it the
festival in honor of the birth of Claudius; others, a festival in honor of the
return of Claudius from Britain. But neither of these suggestions is likely. It
is more probable that the festival mentioned was the Quinquennalia, instituted
by Herod the Great in honor of Augustus in 12 b.c. (see Josephus, Ant. XV. 8. 1;
B. J. I. 21. 8), and celebrated regularly every five years. See Wieseler's
Chronologie des ap. Zeitalters, p. 131 sqq., where this question is carefully
discussed in connection with the date of Agrippa's death which is fixed by
Wieseler as Aug. 6, 44 a.d.

108: The passage in Josephus reads: "But as he presently afterward looked up he
saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood
that this bird was the messenger of evil tidings, as it had once been the
messenger of good tidings to him." This conveys an entirely different sense, the
owl being omitted in Eusebius. As a consequence most writers on Eusebius have
made the gravest charges against him, accusing him of a willful perversion of
the text of Josephus with the intention of producing a confirmation of the
narrative of the Acts, in which the angel of God is spoken of, but in which no
mention is made of an owl. The case certainly looks serious, but so severe an
accusation-an accusation which impeaches. the honesty of Eusebius in the most
direct manner-should not be made except upon unanswerable grounds. Eusebius
elsewhere shows himself to be a writer who, though not always critical, is at
least honest in the use he makes of his materials. In this case, therefore, his
general conduct ought to be taken into consideration, and he ought to be given
the benefit of the doubt. Lightfoot, who defends his honesty, gives an
explanation which appears to me sufficiently satisfactory. He says: "Doubtless
also the omission of the owl in the account of Herod Agrippa's death was already
in some texts of Josephus. The manner in which Eusebius deals with his very
numerous quotations elsewhere, where we can test his honesty, is a sufficient
vindication against this unjust charge." And in a note he adds: "It is not the
substitution of an angel for an owl, as the case is not uncommonly stated. The
result is produced mainly by the omission of some words in the text of Josephus,
which runs thus: anakuyaj d oun met oligon [ ton boubwna ] thj eautou kefalhj
uper kaqezomenon eiden [ epi sxoiniou tinoj ] aggelon [ te ] touton euquj enohse
kakwn einai, ton kai pote twn agaqwn genomenon . The words bracketed are
omitted, and aition is added after einai , so that the sentence runs, eiden
aggelon touton euquj enohse kakwn einai aition k.t.l . This being so, I do not
feel at all sure that the change (by whomsoever made) was dictated by any
disingenuous motive. A scribe unacquainted with Latin would stumble over ton
boubwna boubwna de oi =Pwmaioi ton ornin touton kalousi boubwn

109: Josephus ( Ant. XVIII. 6. 7) records that while Agrippa was in
chains-having been condemned to imprisonment by Tiberius-an owl made its
appearance and perched upon a tree near him. A fellow-prisoner interpreted the
event as a good omen, prophesying that Agrippa would soon be released from his
bonds and become king, but that the same bird would appear to him again five
days before his death. Tiberius died in the following year, and the events
prophesied came to pass. The story was apparently implicitly believed by
Josephus, who relates it in good faith.

110: The text of Josephus, as well as the majority of the mss. of Eusebius,
followed by Valesius, Stroth, Burton, and Schwegler, read epi thj makarizomenhj
lamprothtoj , which I have adopted in preference to the reading of Heinichen,
who follows a few good mss. in substituting makariothtoj for lamprothtoj .

111: This shows the success with which Agrippa had courted the favor of the
Jews. A far different feeling was shown at his death from that exhibited at the
death of his grandfather, Herod the Great.

112: He was born in 10 b.c., and began to reign as successor of Philip and
Lysanias in 37 a.d. See above, chap. 4, note 3.

113: Herod Antipas.

114: Luke always calls the king, Herod, which was the family name, while
Josephus calls him by his given name Agrippa. He is known to us under the name
of Herod Agrippa I. It seems strange that Eusebius should not have known that he
bore the two names, Herod Agrippa, instead of expressing doubt in the matter, as
he does. In the heading of the chapter he gives the king both names, without
intimating that he entertained any uncertainty in the matter.

115: kata ton dhloumenon xronon , i.e. about the time of Agrippa's death. But
Luke writes pro gap toutwn twn hmerwn , "Before these days."

116: Acts v. 36.

117: Josephus, Ant. XX. 5. 1.

118: About 44 a.d. See above, chap. 8, note 2.

119: There is a chronological difficulty in connection with this Theudas which
has caused much dispute. The Theudas mentioned by Josephus arose in the time of
Claudius; but the Theudas referred to by Gamaliel in the Acts must have lived
many years before that. Various solutions of greater or less plausibility have
been offered, almost any one of which is possible, and abundantly sufficient to
account for the alleged discrepancy, though none can be proved to be true.
Compare Wieseler's Chron. des ap. Zeitalters, p. 138, note 1; Ewald's Gesch. des
Füdischen Volkes, Bd. VI. p. 532; Jost's Gesch. der Israeliten, Bd. II. Anhang,
p. 86; and the various commentaries on the Acts in loco.

120: Josephus, Ant. XX. 5. 2.

121: In the times of these procurators, Cuspius Fadus and Tiberius Alexander
122: Josephus had already mentioned this famine in the same book of his Ant.,
chap. 2, §5.

123: Josephus gives an extensive account of this Helen and of her son Izates in
the Ant. XX. 2. Helen was the wife of the king Monabazus of Adiabene, and the
mother of Izates, his successor. Both Izates and Helen embraced the Jewish
religion, and the latter happening to come to Jerusalem in the time of the
famine, did a great deal to relieve the distress, and was seconded in her
benefactions by her son. After their death the bones of both mother and son were
brought to Jerusalem and buried just outside of the walls, where Helen had
erected three pyramids (Jos. Ant. XX. 4. 3).

124: Acts xi. 29, Acts xi. 30. The passage in Acts has Saul instead of Paul. But
the change made by Eusebius is a very natural one.

125: "Pausanias ( in Arcadicis ) speaks of these great monuments of Helen and
compares them to the tomb of Mausolus. Jerome, too, testifies that they were
standing in his time. Helen had besides a palace in Jerusalem" (Stroth).

126: Aelia was the heathen city built on the site of Jerusalem by Hadrian (see
below, Bk. IV. chap. 6).

127: Adiabene was probably a small province lying between the Tigris, Lycus, and
the Gordiaean Mountains (see Dion Cassius, LXVIII.), but before the time of
Pliny, according to Vaux (in Smith's Dict. of Greek and Roman Geography ), the
word was used in a wider sense to indicate Assyria in general (see Pliny, H. N.
VI. 12, and Ammianus Marcellinus, XXIII. 6). Izates was king of Adiabene in the
narrower sense.

128:

129: See chap. 3, note 1.

130: Simon Magus, of whom mention is first made in Acts viii. 9 sqq. (quoted
above, in chap. 1), played a very prominent role in early Church history. His
life has been so greatly embellished with legends that it is very difficult to
extract a trustworthy account of him. Indeed the Tübingen school, as well as
some other modern critics, have denied altogether the existence of such a
personage, and have resolved the account of him into a Jewish Christian fiction
produced in hostility to the apostle Paul, who under the mask of Simon was
attacked as the real heretic. But this identification of Paul and Simon rests
upon a very slender foundation, as many passages can be adduced in which the two
are expressly distinguished, and indeed the thought of identifying Paul and
Simon seems never to have occurred to the writer of the Recognitions. The most
that can be said is that the author of the Homilies gives, and without doubt
purposely, some Pauline traits to his picture of Simon, but this does not imply
that he makes Simon no more than a mask for Paul (cf. the words of Salmon in his
article, Clementine Literature, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. Vol. I. p. 576).
The original of Simon then is not to be found in Paul. The third century fiction
is based upon a real historic person whose actual existence must be assumed to
account for the early notices of him in the Acts and in Justin Martyr, as well
as the common tradition of him among all parties in the Church. Salmon considers
Simon of Gitton-the basis of the account of Justin Martyr and of all the later
Simon legends-a second century Gnostic distinct from the Simon mentioned in the
Acts (see his excellent article Simon Magnus, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. IV.
p. 68r sqq.). In the Pseudo-Clementines Simon is represented as traveling widely
and spreading his errors in all directions, while Peter follows him for the
purpose of exposing his impostures, and refutes him repeatedly in public
disputations, until at length he conquers him completely in Rome, and Simon ends
his life by suicide. His death, as well as his life, is recorded in various
conflicting and fabulous traditions (see note 9, below). For ancient accounts of
Simon, see Justin Martyr, Apol. I. 26 and 56 and Dial. c. Trypho. CXX.; the
Pseudo-Clementine Homilies and Recognitions; Irenaeus, I. 23; Hippolytus, VI. 2
sq.; Tertullian's Apology, On Idolatry, On the Soul, etc.: Apost. Constitutions,
VII. 7 sq.; Arnobius, Adv. Gentes, II. 12, &c.; Acts of the Holy Apostles Peter
and Paul (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Am. ed. VIII. p. 477 sqq.); Epiphanius, Haer.
XXI.: and Theodoret, Haer. Fab. I. 1. See also Lipsius, article in Schinkel's
Bibel-Lexicon, Vol. V.

131: In his Apology, I. 26, 56.

132: In Bk. IV. chaps. 8, 11, 16-18.

133: On Justin's Apology, see below, Bk. IV. chap. 18, note 2.

134: Justin's Apology, I. 26.

135: Gitton was a village of Samaria, near Flavia Neapoils (the modern Nâblus),
and is identified by Robinson with the present village of Kuryet JÎt (see
Robinson's Biblical Researches, III. p. 144, note). Some have doubted the
accuracy of Justin's report, for the reason that Josephus ( Ant. XXII. 7. 2)
mentions a magician named Simon, of about the same date, who was born in Cyprus.
There was a town called Kition in Cyprus, and it has been thought that Justin
may have mistaken this place for the Samaritan Gitton. But even if we assume the
identity of the two Simons as many critics do, it is less likely that Justin, a
native of Samaria, was mistaken upon a question concerning his own country, than
that Josephus was. Simon's activity may have extended to Cyprus, in which case
Josephus might easily have mistaken his birthplace.

136: Justin here assigns Simon's visit to Rome to the reign of Claudius (41-54
a.d.), as Irenaeus also does. Other accounts assign it to the reign of Nero, but
all differ as to the details of his death; suicide, death from injuries received
while trying to fly, voluntary burial in expectation of rising again on the
third day, &c., are reported in different traditions. All, however, agree that
he visited Rome at some time or another.

137: That is, on the island which lies in the middle of the Tiber, a short
distance below the Vatican, and which now bears the name Isola Tiberiana, or di
S. Sebastiano.

138: In 1574 a statue, bearing the inscription Semoni Sanco deo fidio, &c., was
found in the place described by Justin Martyr, but this statue was erected to
the Sabine divinity Semo Sancus. It is therefore highly probable that Justin
mistook this statue for a statue of Simon Magus. This is now the commonly
accepted view, though the translator of Justin Martyr in the Ante-Nicene Fathers
ventures to dispute it (see the Am. ed. Vol. I. p. 171, note). The report is
given a second time by Justin in his Apol. 56, and also by Irenaeus, I. 23. 1
(who, however, simply says "It is said," and may have drawn his knowledge only
from Justin Martyr) and by Tertullian, Apol. chap. 13. The last named is in
general a poor authority even if he be independent of Justin at this point,
which is not probable. Hippolytus, who lived at Rome, and who gives us an
account of the death of Simon (Bk. VII. chap. 15), says nothing about the statue
and his silence is a strong argument against it.

139: A similar story is told of this Helen by Irenaeus, I. 23; by Hippolytus,
VI. 15 (who adds some important particulars); by Tertullian, De Anima, 34; by
Epiphanius, Haer. 21; and by Theodoret, Haer. Fab. I. 1; compare also Origen,
Contra Celsum, V. 62. Simon taught that this Helen was the first conception of
his mind, the mother of all things, the impersonation of the divine
intelligence, &c. The Simonians, according to Irenaeus (I. 23. 4), and
Hippolytus (VI. 15; see chap. 14, note 8), had images of Simon and Helen whom
they honored as Jupiter and Minerva. Simon's doctrines and practice, as recorded
by these Fathers, show some of the general conceptions common to all the Gnostic
systems, but exhibit a crude and undeveloped form of Gnosticism. Upon Helen, see
Salmon, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. p. 880 sq., and all the works upon
Simon Magus.

140: This conception of the idea ( ennoia ) is thoroughly Gnostic, and plays an
important part in all the Gnostic systems. Most of these systems had a dualistic
element recognizing the dunamij and the ennoia as the original principles from
whose union all beings emanated. These general conceptions appeared in all
varieties of forms in the different systems.

141: Irenaeus adv. Haer. I. 23.

142: See note 3, above.

143: qambwqhsesqai .

144: This was the general opinion of the early Fathers, all of whom picture
Gnosticism as a wilderness of absurdities and nonsense; and Irenaeus,
Hippolytus, and others undertake its refutation only for the purpose of exposing
these absurdities. It is treated by none of them as an intelligent speculation
with a foundation in reason or sense. This thorough misunderstanding of the
nature and aim of Gnosticism has been perpetuated in our day by many writers
upon the subject, Neander was the first to attempt a thoroughly philosophical
treatment of it (in his Genetische Entwickelung d. gnost. Systeme, Berlin,
1818), and since that time the subject has been treated intelligently and
discriminatingly by many writers, e.g. Baur, Lipsius, Lightfoot, Salmon and
especially Harnack who has grasped the true principle of Gnosticism perhaps more
fully than any one else. See his Dogmengeschichte, I. p. 158 sqq.

145: This was true of the Simonians, who were very immoral and licentious, and
of some other Gnostic sects, as e.g. the Ophites, the Carpocratians, &c. But
many of the Gnostics, e.g. Marcion (but see below, IV. 11, note 24), Saturninus,
Tatinn, &c., went to the opposite extreme, teaching a rigid and gloomy
asceticism. Underlying both of these extremes we perceive the same principle-a
dualism of matter and spirit, therefore of body and mind-the former considered
as the work of the devil, and therefore to be despised and abused: the latter as
divine, and therefore to be honored above all else. The abhorrence of the body,
and of matter and nature in general, logically led to one of the two opposite
results asceticism or antinomianism, according to the character and instincts of
the person himself. See Schaff, Church Hist. II. p. 457 sqq. The Fathers, in
their hatred of all forms of heresy, naturally saw no good in any of them, and
heretics were therefore indiscriminately accused of immorality and
licentiousness in their worst forms.

146: See the previous chapter, note 1.

147: See chap. 1, note 25.

148: 2 Cor. x. 5.

149: The significance of the word "immediately" as employed her is somewhat
dark. There is no event described in the preceding context with which it can be
connected. I am tempted to think that Eusebius may have been using at this point
some unknown source and that the word "immediately" refers to an encounter which
Simon had had with Peter (perhaps his Caesarean discussion, mentioned in the
Clementines), of which an account was given in the document employed by
Eusebius. The figure employed here is most remarkable.

150: Acts viii. 9 sqq. This occurred in Samaria, not in Judea proper, but
Eusebius evidently uses the word "Judea" in a wide sense, to indicate the Roman
province of Judea, which included also Samaria. It is not impossible, especially
if Eusebius is quoting here from a written source, that some other encounter of
Simon and Peter is referred to. Such a one e.g. as is mentioned in the Apostolic
Constitutions, VI. 8.

151: Rome was a great gathering place of heretics and schismatics. They were all
attracted thither by the opportunities for propagandism which the city afforded,
and therefore Eusebius, with his transcendental conception of heresy, naturally
makes it the especial seat of the devil.

152: See above, chap. 13, note 11.

153: Upon the historic truth of Peter's visit to Rome, see below, chap. 25, note
7. Although we may accept it as certain that he did visit Rome, and that he met
his death there, it is no less certain that he did not reach there until late in
the reign of Nero. The tradition that he was for twenty-five years bishop of
Rome is first recorded by Jerome ( de vir. ill. c. 1), and since his time has
been almost universally accepted in the Roman Catholic Church, though in recent
years many more candid scholars of that communion acknowledge that so long an
episcopate there is a fiction. The tradition undoubtedly took its rise from the
statement of Justin Martyr (quoted in the previous chapter) that Simon Magus
came to Rome during the reign of Claudius. Tradition, in the time of Eusebius,
commonly connected the Roman visits of Simon and of Peter; and consequently
Eusebius, accepting the earlier date for Simon's arrival in Rome, quite
naturally assumed also the same date for Peter's arrival there, although Justin
does not mention Peter in connection with Simon in the passage which Eusebius
quotes. The assumption that Peter took up his residence in Rome during the reign
of Claudius contradicts all that we know of Peter's later lif from the New
Testament and from other early writers. In 44 a.d. he was in Jerusalem
(according to Acts xii. 3); in 51 he was again there (according to Acts xv.);
and a little later in Antioch (according to Gal. i. 11 sq.). Moreover, at some
time during his life he labored in various provinces in Asia Minor, as we learn
from his first epistle, and probably wrote that epistle from Babylon on the
Euphrates (see chap. 15, note 7). At any rate, he cannot have been in Rome when
Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans (57 or 58 a.d.), for no mention is made of
him among the brethren to whom greetings are sent. Nor can he have been there
when Paul wrote from Rome during his captivity (61 or 62 to 63 or 64 a.d.). We
have, in fact, no trace of him in Rome, except the extra-Biblical but
well-founded tradition (see chap. 25, note 7) that he met his death there. We
may assume, then, that he did not reach Rome at any rate until shortly before
his death; that is, shortly before the summer of 64 a.d. As most of the accounts
put Simon Magus' visit to Rome in the reign of Nero (see above, chap. 13, note
9), so they make him follow Peter thither (as he had followed him everywhere,
opposing and attacking him), instead of precede him, as Eusebius does. Eusebius
follows Justin in giving the earlier date for Simon's visit to Rome; but he goes
beyond Justin in recording his encounter there with Peter, which neither Justin
nor Irenaeus mentions. The earlier date for Simon's visit is undoubtedly that
given by the oldest tradition. Afterward, when Peter and Paul were so
prominently connected with the reign of Nero, the visit of Simon was postponed
to synchronize with the presence of the two apostles in Rome. A report of
Simon's meeting with Peter in Rome is given first by Hippolytus (VI. 15);
afterward by Arnobius (II. 12), who does not describe the meeting; by the Ap.
Const., the Clementine Recognitions and Homilies, and the Acts of the Apostles
Peter and Paul. It is impossible to tell from what source Eusebius drew his
information. Neither Justin, Irenaeus, nor Tertullian mentions it. Hippolytus
and Arnobius and the App. Const. give too much, as they give accounts of his
death, which Eusebius does not follow. As to this, it might, however, be said
that these accounts are so conflicting that Eusebius may have omitted them
entirely, while yet recording the meeting. Still, if he had read Hippolytus, he
could hardly have omitted entirely his interesting account. Arnobius and
Tertullian, who wrote in Latin, he did not read, and the Clementines were
probably too late for him; at any rate, they cannot have been the source of his
account, which differs entirely from theirs. It is highly probable, therefore,
that he followed Justin and Irenaeus as far as they go, and that he recorded the
meeting with Peter in Rome as a fact commonly accepted in his time, and one for
which he needed no written authority; or it is possible that he had another
source, unknown to us, as suggested above (note 4).

154: A most amazing mixture of metaphors. This sentence furnishes an excellent
illustration of Eusebius' rhetorical style.

155: The origin of the Church at Rome is shrouded in mystery. Eusebius gives the
tradition which rules in the Catholic Church, viz.: that Christianity was
introduced into Rome by Peter, who went there during the reign of Claudius. But
this tradition is sufficiently disproved by history. The origin of the Church
was due to unknown persons, though it is possible we may obtain a hint of them
in the Andronicus and Junta of Romans xvi. 7, who are mentioned as apostles, and
who were therefore, according to the usage of the word in Paul's writings,
persons that introduced Christianity into a new place-missionaries proper, who
did not work on others' ground.

156: See chap. 12, note 9, and chap. 14, note 8.

157: John Mark, son of Mary (Acts xii. 12), a sister of Barnabas (Col. iv. 10),
was a companion of Paul and Barnabas in their missionary journeys, and afterward
a companion of Barnabas alone (Acts xv. 39), and still later was with Paul again
in Rome (Col. iv. 10 and Philemon 24), and with Peter when he wrote his first
epistle (1 Pet. v. 13). For the later traditions concerning Mark, see the next
chapter, note 1.

158: That Mark wrote the second Gospel under the influence of Peter, or as a
record of what he had heard from him, is the universal tradition of antiquity.
Papias, in the famous and much-disputed passage (quoted by Eusebius, III. 39,
below), is the first to record the tradition. Justin Martyr refers to Mark's
Gospel under the name "Memoirs ( apomnhoneumata autou

159: This mention of the "pleasure" of Peter, and the "authority" given by him
to the work of Mark, contradicts the account of Clement to which Eusebius here
appeals as his authority. In Bk. VI. chap. 14 he quotes from the Hypotyposes of
Clement, a passage which must be identical with the one referred to in this
place, for it is from the same work and the general account is the same; but
there Clement says expressly, "which when Peter understood he neither directly
hindered nor encouraged it."

160: The passage from Papias is quoted below in Bk. III. chap. 39. Papias is a
witness to the general fact that Mark wrote down what he had heard from Peter,
but not (so far as he is extant) to the details of the account as given by
Eusebius. Upon Papias himself, see Bk. III. chap. 39.

161: 1 Pet. v. 13. Commentators are divided as to the place in which Peter wrote
this epistle (compare Schaff's Church Hist. I. p. 744 sqq.). The interpretation
given by Eusebius is the patristic and Roman Catholic opinion, and is maintained
by many Protestant commentators. But on the other hand the literal use of the
word "Babylon" is defended by a great number of the leading scholars of the
present day. Compare Weiss, N. T. Einleitung, p. 433, note 1.

162: That Mark labored in Egypt is stated also by Epiphanius ( Haer. LI. 6), by
Jerome ( de vir. ill. 8), by Nicephorus ( H. E. II. 43), and by the Acta
Barnabae, p. 26 (Tischendorf's Acta Apost. Apocr. p. 74), which were written
probably in the third century. Eusebius gained his knowledge apparently from
oral tradition, for he uses the formula, "they say" ( fasin .). In chap. 24,
below, he says that Annianus succeeded Mark as a leader of the Alexandrian
Church in the eighth year of Nero (62 a.d.), thus implying that Mark died in
that year; and Jerome gives the same date for his death. But if the tradition
that he wrote his Gospel in Rome under Peter (or after Peter's death, as the
best tradition puts it, so e.g. Irenaeus) be correct, then this date is
hopelessly wrong. The varying traditions are at best very uncertain, and the
whole career of Mark, so far as it is not recorded in the New Testament, is
involved in obscurity.

163: See the next chapter.

164: This tradition that Philo met Peter in Rome and formed an acquaintance with
him is repeated by Jerome ( de vir ill. 11), and by Photius ( Cod. 105), who
even goes further, and says directly that Philo became a Christian. The
tradition, however, must be regarded as quite worthless. It is absolutely
certain from Philo's own works, and from the otherwise numerous traditions of
antiquity that he never was a Christian, and aside from the report of Eusebius
(for Jerome and Photius do not represent an independent tradition) there exists
no hint of such a meeting between Peter and Philo; and when we realize that
Philo was already an old man in the time of Caius (see above, chap. 4, note 8),
and that Peter certainly did not reach Rome before the later years of Nero's
reign, we may say that such a meeting as Eusebius records (only upon tradition,
logoj exel 165: peri biou qewrhtikou h iketwn

166: It may fairly be doubted whether the work does not really contain
considerable that is not in strict accordance with the facts observed by the
author, whether his account is not to an extent idealized, and whether, in his
endeavor to emphasize the Jewish character of the Therapeutae, with the design
of establishing the antiquity of monasticism (compare the review of Schürer
referred to above), he has not allowed himself to introduce some imaginative
elements. The strong asseveration which he makes of the truthfulness of his
account would rather increase than allay this suspicion, and the account itself
at certain points seems to bear it out. On the whole, however, it may be
regarded as a reasonably accurate sketch. Were it not such, Eusebius would not
have accepted it, so unreservedly as he does, as an account of Christian monks.
Lucius' exhibition of the points of similarity between the practices of the
Therapeutae, as described here, and of early Christian monks, as known from
other sources, is very interesting (see p. 158 sq.).

167: qerapeutai and qerapeutridej , "worshipers" or "physicians"; from qerapeuw
, which means either to do service to the gods, or to tend the sick.

168: See Bk. VI. chap. 3, note 9.

169: See Bk. III. chap. 4, note 14.

170: Acts ii. 45.

171: De Vita Contemplativa, §3.

172: Namely, the Therapeutae.

173: Heinichen omits, without explanation, the words kai thn Ellada , which are
found in all the other editions that I have examined. Inasmuch as Heinichen
gives no hint of an alternatereading at this point, I can conclude only that the
words wereaccidentally omitted by him.

174: Egypt, exclusive of the cities Alexandria and Ptolemais, was divided into
land districts, originally 36 in number, which were called nomoi 175: patrida
oikoumenh , mentioned in the previous paragraph, being the fatherland of the
Therapeutae.

176: uper limnhj Mariaj . In Strabo the name is given as h Marewtij or Mareia
limnh . The Lake Mareotis (as it is most commonly called) lies in the northern
part of the Delta, just south of Alexandria. It was in ancient times much more
of a lake than it is now, and the description of the climate as given here is
quite accurate.

177: Ibid.

178: semneion kai monasthrion .

179: Ibid.

180: Ibid.

181: Ibid. §.

182: See Ibid. §8.

183: How Eusebius, who knew that Philo lived wrote during the reign of Claudius,
could have overlooked the fact that Christianity had not at that time been long
enough established to admit of virgins growing old within the Church, is almost
inexplicable. It is but another example of his carelessness in regard to
chronology which comes out so often in his history. Compare Stroth's words: "In
der That ein wichtiger Beweis, der gerade der irrigen Meinung des Eusebius am
meisten entgegen ist. Denn sie hätten alt zum Christenthum kommen m_ssen, sonst
konnten sie ja zu Philo's Zeiten unmöglich im Christenthum alt geworden sein,
dessen Schrift Eusebius selbst indie Regierung des Claudius setzt. Es ist
beinahe unbegreiflich, wie ein so guter Kopf, wie Eusebius ist, in so grobe
Irrthümer fallen konnte."

184: For a description of the religious cults among the Greeks and Romans, that
demanded virginity in their priests or priestesses, see Döllinger's Heidenthum
und Fudenthum, p. 182 and 521 sq.

185: De Vita Contemplativa, §10.

186: Ibid. §9.

187: Ibid. §§8-10. The author of the D. V. C. mentions young men that serve at
table ( diakonountej ,) and a president ( proedroj ) who leads in the exposition
of the Scriptures. Eusebius is quite right in finding in these persons deacons
and bishops. The similarity is too close to be merely accidental, and the
comment of Stroth upon this passage is quite unwarranted: "Was einer doch alles
in einer Stelle finden kann, wenn er es darin finden will! Philo sagt, dass bei
ihren gemeinschaftlichen Gastmählern einige bei Tische dienten ( diakonountej ,)
hieraus macht Eusebius Diakonate; und dass bei ihren Untersuchungen _ber die
Bibel einer ( proedroz ) den Vorsitz habe; hieraus macht Eusebius die
bischöfliche würde ( episkophj proedrian )."

188:

189: nomwn ierwn allhgoriai 190: zhthmata kai luseij

191: peri gewrgiaj duo nomwn ierwn allhgoriai , mentioned above (note 2). This
work is still extant, and is given by Mangey, I. 300-356, as two works with
distinct titles: peri gewrgiaj and peri futourgiaj Nwe to deuteron (Schürer, p.
843).

192: peri meqhj tosauta 193: peri wn nhyaz o nouz euxetai kai katapatai peri tou
ecenhye Nwe 194: peri sugkusewz twn dialektwn . Upon Gen. xi. 1-9. Still extant,
and given by Mangey, I. 404-435 (Schürer, p. 844).

195: pri fugnz kai eupesewz . The same title is found in Johannes Monachus
(Mangey, I. 546, note), and it is probably correct, as the work treats of the
flight and the discovery of Hagar (Gen. xvi. 6-14).It is still extant and is
given by Mangey (I. 546-577) under the title peri fugadwn , `On Fugitives. 0'
The text of Eusebius in this place has been very much corrupted. The reading
which I give is supported by good ms. authority, and is adopted by Valesius,
Stroth, and Laemmer. But Nicephorus reads peri fughz kai airesewz kai o peri
fusewz kai euresewz , which is also supported by ms. authority, and is adopted
by Burton, Schwegler, and Heinichen. But upon comparing the title of the work,
as given by Johannes Monachus and as found in the various mss. of Philo, with
the contents of the work itself, there can be little doubt of the correctness of
the shorter reading. Of the second work, which the longer reading introduces
into the text of Eusebius, we have no knowledge, and Philo can hardly have
written it. Schürer, who adopts the shorter reading, expresses himself very
strongly (p. 845, note 34).

196: peri thz proz ta paideumata sunodou , "On Assembly for the sake oil
instruction." Upon Gen. xvi. 1-6, which is interpreted to mean that one must
make himself acquainted with the lower branches of knowledge (Hagar) before he
can go on to the higher (Sarah), and from them obtain the fruit, viz.: virtue
(Isaac). Still extant, and given by Mangey, I. 519-545 (Schürer, 844 sqq.).

197: peri te tou, tiz o twn qeiwn esti klhronomoz, h peri thz eiz taisa kai
enantia tomhz peri tou tiz o twn qeiwn pragmatwn klhponomoz (Schürer, 844).

198: peri twn triwn aretwn az sun allaiz anegraye Mwushz . This work is still
extant, and is given by Mangey under the title peri triwn aretwn htoi peri
andreiaz kai filanqrwpiaz kai metanoiaz: peri andreiaz , II. 375-383; peri
filanqrwpiaz , II. 383-405; peri metanoiaz 199: peri twn metonomazomenwn kai wn
eneka metonomazontai

200: en w fhsi suntetaxenai kai peri diaqhkwn prwton kai deuteron . Nearly all
the mss., followed by some of the editors, read prwthz kai deuteraj , instead of
prwton kai deuteron , thus making Eusebius mention a work "On the first and
second covenants," instead of a first and second book "On the covenants." It is
plain from Philo's own reference to the work (on p. 586 in Mangey's ed.) that he
wrote two books "On covenants," and not a work "On the two covenants." I have
therefore felt warranted in reading with Heinichen and some other editors prwton
kai deuteron , a reading which is more natural in view of the absence of an
article with diaqhkwn , and which is confirmed by Nicephorus Callistus. This
reading must be correct unless we are to suppose that Eusebius misread Philo.
Fabricius suggests that Eusebius probably wrote a kai b , which the copyists
wrongly referred to the "covenants" instead of to the number of the books, and
hence gave the feminine instead of the neuter form.

201: peri apoikiaz

202: biou safou tou kata dikaiosunhn teleiwqentoj, h nomwn agrafwn . (According
to Schürer, dikaiosunhn here is a mistake for didaskalian , which is the true
reading in the original title.) This work, which is still extant, is given by
Mangey, II. 1-40, under the same title ( didaskalian , however, instead of
dikaiosunhn ), with the addition, o esti peri 'Abraam

203: peri gigantwn, h peri tou mh trepesqai to qeion peri gigantwn (according to
Mangey, I. 262, note, and 272, note). But the two are divided in Mangey's
edition, where the first is given under the title peri gigantwn (I. 262-272),
the second under the title oti atrepton (I. 272-299). See Schürer, p. 843. The
title is found in the form given at the beginning of this note in all the mss.
of Eusebius except two, which have kai instead of h , thus making two separate
works. This reading is adopted by Heinichen and by Closs, but is poorly
supported by ms. authority, and since the two titles cover only one work, as
already mentioned, the h is more natural than the kai .

204: peri te tou kata Mwusea qeopemptouj einai touj oneirouj prwton, deuteron,
k.t.l

205: zhthmata kai luseij ; see above, note 3. Eusebius knew only five books upon
Exodus, and there is no reason to think there were any more.

206: Philo wrote a work entitled peri biou Mwsewj peri thj skhnhj ) represents
that portion of the larger work. If this be the case, it is possible that the
section in the mss. used by Eusebius was detached from the rest of the work and
constituted an independent book. The omission of the title of the larger work is
doubtless due, as Schürer remarks, to the imperfect transmission of the text of
Eusebius' catalogue. See Schürer, p. 855.

207: peri twn deka logiwn bioj politikoj 208: ta peri twn anaferomenwn en eidei
nomwn eij ta sunteinonta kefalaia twn deka logwn, abgd 209: peri twn eij taj
ierourgiaj zwwn, kai tina ta twn qusiwn eioh

210: peri twn prokeimenwn en tw nomw toij men agaqoij aqlwn, toij de ponhroij
epitimiwn kai a rwn , still extant and given by Mangey (incorrectly as two
separate works) under the titles peri aqlwn kai epitimiwn peri arwn

211: to peri pronoiaj to is to be read instead of ta , though some mss. have the
latter. The work (which is not found m Mangey's ed.) is one of Philo's separate
works which does not fall under any of the three groups upon the Pentateuch.

212: peri 'Ioudaiwn , which is doubtless to be identified with the h uper
'Ioudaiwn apologia

213: o politikoj . Still extant, and given by Mangey (II. 41-79) under the title
bioj politikoj oper esti peri ' Iwshf peri biou politikou . This forms a part of
the second division of the third great group upon the Pentateuch (see above,
note 11), and follows directly the Life of Abraham, the Lives of Isaac and Jacob
probably having fallen out (compare note 15, above). The work is intended to
show how the wise man should conduct himself in affairs of state or political
life. See Schürer, p. 849.

214: o 'Alecandroj h peri tou logou exein ta aloga zwa 215: o peri tou doulon
einai panta faulon, w echj estin o peri tou panta spoudaion eleuqeron einai 216:
See the preceding chapter; and on the work, see note a on that chapter.

217: twn en /omw de kai profhtaij 'Ebraikwn onomatwn ai ermh-neiai . The way in
which Eusebius speaks of this work tou autou spoudai einai legontai

218: "This report is very improbable, for a work full of hatred to the Romans
and of derogatory references to the emperor Caligula could not have been read
before the Roman Senate, especially when the author was a Jew" (Closs). It is in
fact quite unlikely that Philo was in Rome during the reign of Claudius (see
above, chap. 17, note 1). The report given here by Eusebius owes its origin
perhaps to the imagination of some man who supposed that Philo was in Rome
during the reign of Claudius (on the ground of the other tradition already
referred to), and whose fancy led him to picture Philo as obtaining at that time
his revenge upon the emperor Caligula in this dramatic way. It was not difficult
to imagine that this bitterly sarcastic and vivid work might have been intended
for public reading, and it was art attractive suggestion that the Senate might
have constituted the audience.

219: See above, chap. 5, note 1.

220: Romans xv. 19.

221: See Acts xviii. 2, Acts xviii. 18, Acts xviii. 19 sqq.

222: This disturbance (described by Jos. B. J. II. 12. 1, and Ant. XX. 5. 3)
took place in 48 a.d. while Cumanus was procurator of Judea. During the Passover
feast the procurator, as was the custom, brought extra troops to Jerusalem to
guard against any uproar which might arise among the great mass of people. One
of the soldiers, with the view of insulting the Jews, conducted himself
indecently in their presence, whereupon so great an uproar arose that the
procurator felt obliged to collect his troops upon the temple hill, but the
appearance of the soldiers so greatly alarmed the multitude assembled there that
they fled in all directions and crushed each other to death in their eagerness
to escape. Josephus, in his Jewish War, gives the number of the slain as ten
thousand, and in the Antiquities as twenty thousand. The latter work was written
last, but knowing Josephus' fondness for exaggerating numbers, we shall perhaps
not accept the correction as any nearer the truth. That Eusebius gives thirty
thousand need not arouse suspicion as to his honesty,-he could have had no
object for changing "twenty" to "thirty," when the former was certainly great
enough,-we need simply remember how easily numbers become altered in
transcription. Valesius says that this disturbance took place under Quadratus in
52 a.d. (quoting Pearson's Ann. Paull. p. 11 sqq., and Tacitus, Ann. XII. 54).
But Eusebius, in his Chron., gives the eighth year of Claudius (48 a.d.), and
Orosius, VII. 4, gives the seventh year. Jost and Ewald agree with Eusebius in
regard to the date.

223: Eusebius simply sums up in the one sentence what fills half a page in
Josephus.

224: Herod Agrippa II., son of Herod Agrippa I. At the time of his father's
death (44 a.d.) he was but seventeen years of age, and his youth deterred
Claudius from giving him the kingdom of his father, which was therefore again
converted into a Roman province, and Fadus was sent as procurator. In 49 a.d.
Agrippa was given the kingdom of Chalcis which had belonged to his uncle Herod
(a brother of Agrippa I.), and in 53 a.d. he was transferred to the tetrarchies
of Philip and Lysanias with the title of King. He was never king of the Jews in
the same sense in which his father was, as Judea remained a Roman province
throughout his reign, while his dominion comprised only the northeastern part of
Palestine. He enjoyed, however, the right of appointing and removing the high
priests, and under Nero his domain was somewhat increased by the addition of
several cities of Galilee, and Perea. He sided with the Romans in the Jewish
war, and afterwards went to Rome, where he died in 100 a.d., the last prince of
the Herodian line. It was before this Agrippa that Paul made his defense
recorded in Acts xxvi.

225: Felix, a freedman of Claudius, succeeded Cumanus as procurator of Judea in
52 (or, according to Wieseler, 53) a.d. The territory over which he ruled
included Samaria and the greater part of Galilee and Perea, to which Judea was
added by Nero, according to Josephus, B. J. II. 13. 2. Ewald, in the attempt to
reconcile Tacitus, Ann. XII. 54, and Josephus, Ant. XX. 5. 2-7. 1,-the former of
whom makes Cumanus and Felix contemporary procurators, each over a part of the
province, while the latter makes Felix the successor of Cumanus,-concludes that
Felix was sent to Judea as the assistant of Cumanus, and became procurator upon
the banishment of the latter. This is not impossible, though we have no
testimony to support it. Compare Wieseler, p. 67, note. Between 59 and 61
(according to Wieseler, in 60; see chap. 22, note 1, below) he was succeeded by
Porcius Festus. For the relations of these two procurators to the apostle Paul,
see Acts xx. sqq. Eusebius, in his Chron., puts the accession of Felix in the
eleventh year of Claudius (51 a.d.), and the accession of Festus in the
fourteenth year (54 a.d.), but both of these dates are clearly incorrect (cf.
Wieseler, p. 68, note).

226: Eusebius evidently supposed the Roman province at this time to have been
limited to Samaria, Galilee, and Perea; but in this he was wrong, for it
included also Judea (see preceding note), Agrippa II. having under him only the
tetrarchies mentioned above (note 3) and a few cities of Galilee and Perea. He
had, however, the authority over the temple and the power of appointing the high
priests (see Jos. Ant. XX. 8. 11 and 9. 1, 4, 6, 7), which bad been given by
Claudius to his uncle, the king of Chalcis (Jos. Ant. XX. 1. 3).

227: Claudius ruled from Jan. 24, 41 a.d., to Oct. 13, 54.

228: Jos. Ant. XX. 8. 8. Felix showed himself throughout very mean and cruel,
and his procuratorship was marked with continual disturbances.

229: This disturbance arose toward the end of Felix's term, under the high
priest Ishmael, who had been appointed by Agrippa but a short time before. No
cause is given by Josephus for the quarrel.

230: B. J. II. 13. 3. These open robberies and murders, which took place in
Jerusalem at this period, were in part a result of the conduct of Felix himself
in the murder of Jonathan (see the next note). At least his conduct in this case
started the practice, which was kept up with zeal by the ruffians who were so
numerous at that time.

231: This high priest, Jonathan, had used his influence in procuring the
appointment of Felix as procurator, and was therefore upon intimate terms with
him, and took the liberty of advising and rebuking him at pleasure; until at
last he became so burdensome to Felix that he bribed a trusted friend of
Jonathan to bring about his murder. The friend accomplished it by introducing a
number of robbers into the city, who, being unknown, mingled freely with the
people and slew Jonathan and many others with him, in order to turn away
suspicion as to the object of the crime. See Jos. Ant. XX. 8. 5. Josephus has
omitted to mention Jonathan's appointment to the high priesthood, and this has
led Valesius to conclude that he was not really a high priest, but simply one of
the upper class of priests. But this conclusion is unwarranted, as Josephus
expressly calls him the high priest in the passage referred to (cf. also the
remarks of Reland, quoted in Havercamp's ed. of Josephus, p. 912). Wieseler (p.
77, note) thinks that Jonathan was not high priest at this time, but that he had
been high priest and was called so on that account. He makes Ananias high priest
from 48 to 57, quoting Anger, De temporum in Act. Ap. ratione.

232: Jos. B. J. II. 13. 5.

233: An Egyptian Jew; one of the numerous magicians and false prophets that
arose during this century. He prophesied that Jerusalem, which had made itself a
heathen city, would be destroyed by God, who would throw down the walls as he
had the walls of Jericho, and then he and his followers, as the true Israel and
the army of God, would gain the victory over the oppressors and rule the world.
For this purpose he collected his followers upon the Mount of Olives, from
whence they were to witness the falling of the walls and begin their attack.

234: Josephus gives two different accounts of this event. In the B. J. he says
that this Egyptian led thirty thousand men out of the desert to the Mount of
Olives, but that Felix attacked them, and the Egyptian "escaped with a few,"
while most of his followers were either destroyed or captured. In Ant. XX. 8. 6,
which was written later, he states that the Egyptian led a multitude "out from
Jerusalem" to the Mount of Olives, and that when they were attacked by Felix,
four hundred were slain and two hundred taken captive. There seems to be here a
glaring contradiction, but we are able to reconcile the two accounts by
supposing the Egyptian to have brought a large following of robbers from the
desert, which was augmented by a great rabble from Jerusalem, until the number
reached thirty thousand, and that when attacked the rabble dispersed, but that
Felix slew or took captive the six hundred robbers, against whom his attack had
been directed, while the Egyptian escaped with a small number (i.e. small in
comparison with the thirty thousand), who may well have been the four thousand
mentioned by the author of the Acts in the passage quoted below by Eusebius. It
is no more difficult therefore to reconcile the Acts and Josephus in this ease
than to reconcile Josephus with himself, and we have no reason to assume a
mistake upon the part of either one, though as already remarked, numbers are so
treacherous in transcription that the difference may really have been originally
less than it is. Whenever the main elements of two accounts are in substantial
agreement, little stress can be laid upon a difference in figures. Cf. Tholuck,
Glaubwürdigkeit, p. 169 (quoted by Hackett, Com. on Acts, p. 254).

235: Acts xxi. 38.

236: Valesius and Heinichen assert that Eusebius is incorrect in assigning this
uproar, caused by the Egyptian, to the reign of Nero, as he seems to do. But
their assertion is quite groundless, for Josephus in both of his accounts
relates the uproar among events which he expressly assigns to Nero's reign, and
there is no reason to suppose that the order of events given by him is
incorrect. Valesius and Heinichen proceed on the erroneous assumption that
Festus succeeded Felix in the second year of Nero, and that therefore, since
Paul was two years in Caesarea before the recall of Felix, the uprising of the
Egyptian, which was referred to at the time of Paul's arrest and just before he
was carried to Caesarea, must have taken place before the end of the reign of
Claudius. But it happens to be a fact that Felix was succeeded by Festus at the
earliest not before the sixth year of Nero (see chap. 22, note 2, below). There
is, therefore, no ground for accusing either Josephus or Eusebius of a blunder
in the present case.

237: The exact year of the accession of Festus is not known, but it is known
that his death occurred before the summer of 62 a.d.; for at that time his
successor, Albinus, was already procurator, as we can see from Josephus, B. J.
VI. 5. 3. But from the events recorded by Josephus as happening during his term
of office, we know he must have been procurator at least a year; his accession,
therefore, took place certainly as early as 61 a.d., and probably at least a
year earlier, i.e. in 60 a.d., the date fixed by Wieseler. The widest possible
margin for his accession is from 59-61. Upon this whole question, see Wieseler,
p. 66 sqq. Festus died while in office. He seems to have been a just and capable
governor,-in this quite a contrast to his predecessor.

238: Acts xxv. sqq. The determination of the year in which Paul was sent as a
prisoner to Rome depends in part upon the determination of the year of Festus'
accession. He was in Rome (which he reached in the spring) at least two years
before the Neronic persecution (June, 64 a.d.), therefore as early as 62 a.d. He
was sent from Caesarea the previous autumn, therefore as early as the autumn of
61. If Festus became procurator in 61, this must have been the date. But if, as
is probable, Festus became procurator in 60, then Paul was sent to Rome in the
autumn of the same year, and reached Rome in the spring of 61. This is now the
commonly accepted date; but the year 62 cannot be shut out (cf. Wieseler, ibid.
). Wieseler shows conclusively that Festus cannot have become procurator before
60 a.d., and hence Paul cannot have been taken to Rome before the fall of that
year.

239: Col. iv. 10.

240: See below, Bk. III. chap. 4.

241: See Acts xxviii. 30.

242: Eusebius is the first writer to record the release of Paul from a first,
and his martyrdom during a second Roman imprisonment. He introduces the
statement with the formula logoj exei , which indicates probably that he has
only an oral tradition as his authority, and his efforts to establish the fact
by exegetical arguments show how weak the tradition was. Many maintain that
Eusebius follows no tradition here, but records simply his own conclusion formed
from a study of the Pastoral Epistles, which apparently necessitate a second
imprisonment. But were this the case, he would hardly have used the formula
logoj exei 243: See below, chap. 25, note 6.

244: Eusebius looked upon the Pastoral Epistles as undoubtedly genuine, and
placed them among the Homologumena, or undisputed writings (compare Bk. III.
chaps. 3 and 25). The external testimony for them is very strong, but their
genuineness has, during the present century, been quite widely denied upon
internal grounds. The advanced critical scholars of Germany treat their
non-Pauline authorship as completely established, and many otherwise
conservative scholars follow their lead. It is impossible here to give the
various arguments for or against their genuineness; we may refer the reader
particularly to Holtzmann's Die Pastoralbriefe, kritisch und exegetisch
behandelt (1880), and to his Einleitung (1886), for the most complete
presentation of the case against the genuineness; and to Weiss' Einleitung in
das N. T. (1886), p. 286 sqq., and to his Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles,
in the fifth edition of the Meyer Series, for a defense of their genuineness,
and also to Woodruff's article in the Andover Review, October, 1886, for a brief
and somewhat popular discussion of the subject. The second epistle must have
been written latest of all Paul's epistles, just before his death,-at the
termination of his second captivity, or of his first, if his second be denied.

245: 2 Tim. iv. 16, 2 Tim. iv. 17.

246: 2 Tim. iv. 18.

247: Ibid. iv. 6 .

248: See 2 Tim. iv. 11.

249: See 2 Tim. iv. 16.

250: This is a very commonly accepted opinion among conservative commentators,
who thus explain the lack of mention of the persecution of Nero and of the death
of Paul. On the other hand, some who accept Luke's authorship of the Acts, put
the composition into the latter part of the century and explain the omission of
the persecution and the death of Paul from the object of the work, e.g. Weiss,
who dates the Gospel of Luke between 70 and 80, and thus brings the Acts down to
a still later date (see his Einleitung, p. 585 sqq.). It is now becoming quite
generally admitted that Luke's Gospel was written after the destruction of
Jerusalem, and if this be so, the Acts must have been written still later. There
is in fact no reason for supposing the book to have been written at the point of
time at which its account of Paul ceases. The design of the book (its text is
found in the eighth verse of the first chapter) was to give an account of the
progress of the Church from Jerusalem to Rome, not to write the life of Paul.
The record of Paul's death at the close of the book would have been quite out of
harmony with this design, and would have formed a decided anti-climax, as the
author was wise enough to understand. He was writing, not a life of Paul, nor of
any apostle or group of apostles, but a history of the planting of the Church of
Christ. The advanced critics, who deny that the Acts were written by a pupil of
Paul, of course put its composition much later,-some into the time of Domitian,
most into the second century. But even such critics admit the genuineness. of
certain portions of the book (the celebrated "We" passages), and the old
Tübingen theory of intentional misrepresentation on the part of the author is
finding less favor even among the most radical critics.

251: Whether Eusebius' conclusion be correct or not, it is a fact that Nero
became much more cruel and tyrannical in the latter part of his reign. The
famous "first five years," however exaggerated the reports about them, must at
least have been of a very different character from the remainder of his reign.
But those five years of clemency and justice were past before Paul reached Rome.

252: See above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 14.

253: See above, chap. 1, note 11.

254: filosofiaj . See Bk. VI. chap. 3, note 9.

255: See the preceding chapter, note 1, and below, note 40.

256: See chap. 1, above.

257: On Hegesippus, see Bk. IV. chap. 22.

258: As the Memoirs of Hegesippus consisted of but five books, this account of
James occurred in the last book, and this shows how entirely lacking the work
was in all chronological arrangement (cf. Book IV. chap. 22). This fragment is
given by Routh, Rel. Sac. I. p. 108 sqq., with a valuable discussion on p. 228
sqq.

259: meta twn apostolwn meta touj apostolouj . This statement of Hegesippus is
correct. James was a leader of the Jerusalem church, in company with Peter and
John, as we see from Gal. ii. 9. But that is quite different from saying, as
Eusebius does just above, and as Clement (quoted by Eusebius, chap. 1, §3) does,
that he was appointed Bishop of Jerusalem by the apostles. See chap. 1, note 11.

260: See chap. 1, note 6.

261: "The dramatic account of James by Hegesippus is an overdrawn picture from
the middle of the second century, colored by Judaizing traits which may have
been derived from the Ascents of James, and other Apocryphal sources. He turns
James into a Jewish priest and Nazarite saint (cf. his advice to Paul, Acts xxi.
23, Acts xxi. 24), who drank no wine, ate no flesh, never shaved nor took a
bath, and wore only linen. But the Biblical James is Pharisaic and legalistic,
rather than Essenic and ascetic" (Schaff, Ch. Hist. I. p. 268). For Peter's
asceticism, see the Clementine Recognitions, VII. 6; and for Matthew's, see
Clement of Alexandria's Paedagogus, II. 1 .

262: Wbliaj : probably a corruption of the Heb. M(lp) 263: perioxh tou laou kai
dikaiosunh .

264: To what Hegesippus refers I do not know, as there is no passage in the
prophets which can be interpreted in this way. He may have been thinking of the
passage from Isaiah quoted in §15, below, but the reference is certainly very
much strained.

265: See Bk. IV. chap. 22.

266: For a discussion of this very difficult question, whose interpretation has
puzzled all commentators, see Routh Rel. Sac. I. p. 434 sq., and Heinichen's
Mel. IV., in his edition of Eusebius, Vol. III., p. 654 sqq. The explanation
given by Grabe (in his Spic. PP. p. 254), seems to me the best. According to
him, the Jews wish to ascertain James' opinion in regard to Christ, whether he
considers him a true guide or an impostor, and therefore they ask, "What (of
what sort) is the gate (or the way) of Christ? Is it a gate which opens into
life (or a way which leads to life); or is it a gate which opens upon death (or
a way which leads to death)?" Cf. Matt. vii. 13, Matt. vii. 14, where the two
ways and the two gates are compared. The Jews had undoubtedly often heard Christ
called "the Way," and thus they might naturally use the expression in asking
James' opinion about Jesus, "Is he the true or the false way?" or, "Is this way
true or false?" The answer of James which follows is then perfectly consistent:
"He is the Saviour," in which words he expresses as decidedly as he can his
belief that the way or the gate of Christ led to salvation. And so below, in
§12, where he gives a second answer to the question, expressing his belief in
Christ still more emphatically. This is somewhat similar to the explanation of
Heinichen ( ibid. p. 659 sq.), who construes the genitive 'Ihsou as in virtual
apposition to qura : "What is this way, Jesus?" But Grabe seems to bring out
most clearly the true meaning of the question.

267: Rufinus translates non crediderunt neque surrexisse eum, &c., and he is
followed by Fabricius ( Cod. Apoc. N. T. II. p. 603). This rendering suits the
context excellently, and seems to be the only rendering which gives any meaning
to the following sentence. And yet, as our Greek stands, it is impossible to
translate thus, as both anastasin and erxomenon are left entirely indefinite.
The Greek runs, ouk episteuon anastasin, oute erxomenon apodounai, k.t.l . Cf.
the notes of Valesius and of Heinichen on this passage. Of these seven sects, so
far as we know, only one, the Sadducees, disbelieved in the resurrection from
the dead. If Hegesippus' words, therefore, be understood of a general
resurrection, he is certainly in error.

268: This sentence sufficiently reveals the legendary character of Hegesippus'
account. James' position as a Christian must have been well enough known to
prevent such a request being made to him in good faith (and there is no sign
that it was made in any other spirit); and at any rate, after his reply to them
already recorded, such a repetition of the question in public is absurd.
Fabricius, who does not think the account is true, says that, if it is, the Jews
seem to have asked him a second time, thinking that they could either flatter or
frighten him into denying Christ.

269: Cf. Matt. xxii. 16.

270: epi to pterunion tou naou . Some mss. read tou ierou , and in the preceding
paragraph that phrase occurs, which is identical with the phrase used in Matt.
iv. 5, where the devil places Christ on a pinnacle of the temple. ieroj is the
general name for the temple buildings as a whole, while naoj is a specific name
for the temple proper.

271: Some mss., with Rufinus and the editions of Valesius and Heinichen, add
staurwqentoj , "who was crucified," and Stroth, Closs, and Crusé follow this
reading in their translations. But many of the best mss. omit the words, as do
also Nicephorus, Burton, Routh, Schwegler, Laemmer, and Stigloher, and I prefer
to follow their example, as the words seem to be an addition from the previous
line.

272: Cf. Matt. xxvi. 64 and Mark xiv. 62.

273: Isa. iii. 10. Jess (p. 50) says, "Auch darin ist Hegesipp nur ein Kind
seiner Zeit, dass er in ausgedehntem Masse im Alten Testamente Weissagungen
auffindet. Abet mit Bezug darauf darf man niche vergessen,- dass dergleichen
mehr oratorische Benutzung als exegetische Erklärungen sein sollen." Cf. the
writer's Dialogue between a Christian and a Jew ( Papiscus and Philo ), chap. 1.

274: arwmen . The LXX, as we have it to-day, reads dhswmen arwmen (though in
chaps. 17 and 133 it reads dhswmen arwmen 275: Kurie qee pater .

276: Luke xxiii. 34.

277: 'Paxabeim , which is simply the reproduction in Greek letters of the Hebrew
plural, and is equivalent to "the Rechabites." But Hegesippus uses it without
any article as if it were the name of an individual, just as he uses the name
'Phxab 278: See Jer. xxxv.

279: In Epiphanius, Haer. LXXVIII. 14, these words are put into the mouth of
Simeon, the son of Clopas; from which some have concluded that Simeon had joined
the order of the Rechabites; but there is no ground for such an assumption. The
Simeon of Epiphanius and the Rechabite of Hegesippus are not necessarily
identical. They represent simply varieties of the original account, and
Epiphanius', as the more exact, was undoubtedly the later tradition, and an
intentional improvement upon the vagueness of the original.

280: Clement (in chap. 5, §4, above), who undoubtedly used the account of
Hegesippus as his source, describes the death of James as taking place in the
same way, but omits the stoning which preceded. Josephus, on the other hand
(quoted below), mentions only the stoning. But Hegesippus' account, which is the
fullest that we have gives us the means of reconciling the briefer accounts of
Cement and of Josephus, and we have no reason to think either account incorrect.

281: Valesius remarks that the monument ( sthlh 282: See below, note 40.

283: See above, chap. I. §4. His agreement with Clement is not very surprising,
inasmuch as the latter probably drew his knowledge from the account of the
former.

284: This passage is not found in our existing mss. of Josephus, but is given by
Origen ( Contra Celsum, I. 47), which shows at any rate that Eusebius did not
invent the words. It is probable therefore, that the copies of Josephus used by
Origen and Eusebius contained this interpolation, while the copies from which
our existing mss. drew were without it. It is of course possible, especially
since he dues not mention the reference in Josephus, that Eusebius quoted these
words from Origen. But this does not help matters any, as it still remains as
difficult to account for the occurrence of the words in Origen, and even if
Eusebius did take the passage from Origen instead of from Josephus himself, we
still have no right with Jachmann ( ib. p. 40) to accuse him of wilful
deception. For with his great confidence in Origen, and his unbounded admiration
for him, and with his naturally uncritical spirit, he would readily accept as
true in all good faith a quotation given by Origen and purporting to be taken
from Josephus, even though he could not find it in his own copy of the latter's
works.

285: Ant. XX. 9. 1.

286: Albinus succeeded Festus in 61 or 62 a.d. He was a very corrupt governor
and was in turn succeeded by Gessius Florus in 64 a.d. See Wieseler, Chron. d.
Ap. Zeitalters, p. 89.

287: Ananus was the fifth son of the high priest Annas mentioned in the N.T. His
father and his four brothers had been high priests before him, as Josephus tells
us in this same paragraph. He was appointed high priest by Agrippa II. in 61 or
62 a.d., and held the office but three months.

288: Ananus' accession is recorded by Josephus in a sentence immediately
preceding, which Eusebius, who abridges Josephus' account somewhat, has omitted
in this quotation.

289: I can find no previous mention in Josephus of the hardness of the
Sadducees; but see Reland's note upon this passage in Josephus. It may be that
we have lost a part of the account of the Sadducees and Pharisees.

290: kai paragagwn eij auto !ton adelfon =Ihsou tou xristou legomenou, =Iakwboj
onoma autw, kai@ tinaj !eterouj@, k.t.l

291: The date of the martyrdom of James, given here by Josephus, is 61 or 62
a.d. (at the time of the Passover, according to Hegesippus, §10, above). There
is no reason for doubting this date which is given with such exactness by
Josephus, and it is further confirmed by Eusebius in his Chron., who puts
James's martyrdom in the seventh year of Nero, i.e. 61 a.d., while Jerome puts
it in the eighth year of Nero. The Clementines and the Chronicon Paschale, which
state that James survived Peter, and are therefore cited in support of a later
date, are too late to be of any weight over against such an exact statement as
that of Josephus, especially since Peter and James died at such a distance from
one another. Hegesippus has been cited over and over again by historians as
assigning the date of the martyrdom to 69 a.d., and as thus being in direct
conflict with Josephus; as a consequence some follow his supposed date, others
that of Josephus. But I can find no reason for asserting that Hegesippus assigns
the martyrdom to 69. Certainly his words in this chapter, which are referred to,
by no means necessitate such an assumption. He concludes his account with the
words kai euquj Ouespasianoj poliorkei autouj . The poliorkei autouj is
certainly to be referred to the commencement of the war (not to the siege of the
city of Jerusalem, which was undertaken by Titus, not by Vespasian), i.e. to the
year 67 a.d., and in such an account as this, in which the overthrow of the Jews
is designedly presented in connection with the death of James, it is
hyper-criticism to insist that the word euquj 292: Agrippa II.

293: wj ouk econ hn =Ananw xwrij thj autou gnwmhj kaqisai sunedrion . Jost reads
ekeinou (referring to Agrippa) instead of autou (referring to Albinus), and
consequently draws the conclusion that the Sanhedrim could be called only with
the consent of Agrippa, and that therefore Ananus had acted contrary to the
rights of Agrippa, but not contrary to the rights of Albinus. But the reading
autou is supported by overwhelming ms. authority and must be regarded as
undoubtedty correct. Jost's conclusion, therefore, which his acceptance of the
ekeinou

294: Agrippa, as remarked above, chap. 19, note 4 exercised government over the
temple, and enjoyed the power of appointing and removing the high priests.

295: Of Jesus, the son of Damnaeus, nothing further is known. He was succeeded,
while Albinus was still procurator, by Jesus, the son of Gamaliel ( Ant. XX. 9.
4).

296: This term was applied to all or a part of these seven epistles by the
Alexandrian Clement, Origen, and Dionysius, and since the time of Eusebius has
been the common designation. The word is used in the sense of "general," to
denote that the epistles are encyclical letters addressed to no particular
persons or congregations, though this is not true of II. and III. John, which,
however, are classed with the others on account of their supposed Johannine
authorship, and consequent close connection with his first epistle. The word was
not first used, as some have held, in the sense of "canonical," to denote the
catholic or general acceptance of the epistle,-a meaning which Eusebius
contradicts in this very passage, and which the history of the epistles
themselves (five of the seven being among the antilegomena) sufficiently
refutes. See Holtzmann's Einleitung, p. 472 sqq., and Weiss, ibid. p. 89 sqq.

297: noqeuetai . It is common to translate the word noqoj , "spurious" (and the
kindred verb, "to be spurious"); but it is plain enough from this passage, as
also from others that Eusebius did not employ the word in that sense. He
commonly used it in fact, in a loose way, to mean "disputed," in the same sense
in which he often employed the word antilegomenoj . Lücke, indeed, maintained
that Eusebius always used the words noqoj and antilegomenoj as synonymous; but
in Bk. III. chap. 25, as pointed out in note 1 on that chapter, he employed the
words as respective designations of two distinct classes of books.

298: The authenticity of the Epistle of Jude (also classed among the
antilegomena by Eusebius in Bk. III. chap. 25) is about as well supported as
that of the Epistle of James. The Peshito does not contain it, and the Syrian
Church in general rejected it for a number of centuries. The Muratorian Fragment
accepts it, and Tertullian evidently considered it a work of Jude, the apostle
(see De Cultu Fem. I. 3). The first to quote from it is Clement of Alexandria
who wrote a commentary upon it in connection with the other catholic epistles
according to Eusebius, VI. 14. 1. Origen looked upon it much as he looked upon
the Epistle of James, but did not make the "Jude, the brother of James," one of
the twelve apostles. Eusebius treats it as he does James, and Luther, followed
by many modern conservative scholars (among them Neander), rejects it. Its
defenders commonly ascribe it to Jude, the brother of the Lord, in distinction
from Jude the apostle, and put its composition before the destruction of
Jerusalem. The advanced critical school unanimously deny its authenticity, and
most of them throw its composition into the second century, although some put it
back into the latter part of the first. See Holtzmann, p. 501.

299: On the Epistles of Peter, see Bk. III. chap. 3, notes 1 and 2. On the
Epistles of John, see ibid. chap. 44, notes 18 and 19.

300: en pleistaij ekklhsiaij .

301: 62 a.d. With this agrees Jerome's version of the Chron., while the Armenian
version gives the seventh year of Nero.

302: Annianus, according to Bk. III. chap. 14, below, held his office twenty-two
years. In Apost. Const. VII. 46 he is said to have been ordained by Mark as the
first bishop of Alexandria. The Chron. Orient. 89 (according to Westcott in the
Dict. of Christ. Biog. ) reports that he was appointed by Mark after he had
performed a miracle upon him. He is commemorated in the Roman martyrology with
St. Mark, on April 25.

303: Upon Mark's connection with Egypt, see above, chap. 16, note 1.

304: Tacitus ( Ann. XIII.-XVI.), Suetonius ( Nero ), and Dion Cassius
(LXI.-LXIII.).

305: Nero's mother, Agrippina the younger, daughter of Germanicus and of
Agrippina the elder, was assassinated at Nero's command in 60 a.d. in her villa
on Lake Lucrine, after an unsuccessful attempt to drown her in a boat so
constructed as to break to pieces while she was sailing in it on the lake. His
younger brother Britannicus was poisoned by his order at a banquet in 55 a.d.
His first wife Octavia was divorced in order that he might marry Poppaea, the
wife of his friend Otho, and was afterward put to death. Poppaea herself died
from the effects of a kick given her by Nero while she was with child.

306: Tertullian, Apol. V.

307: We learn from Tacitus, Ann. XV. 39, that Nero was suspected to be the
author of the great Roman conflagration, which took place in 64 a.d. (Pliny, H.
N. XVII. I, Suetonius, 38, and Dion Cassius LXII. 18, state directly that he was
the author of it), and that to avert this suspicion from himself he accused the
Christians of the deed, and the terrible Neronian persecution which Tacitus
describes so fully was the result. Gibbon, and in recent times especially
Schiller ( Geschichte der Römischen Kaiserzeit unter der Regierung des Nero, p.
584 sqq.), have maintained that Tacitus was mistaken in calling this a
persecution of Christians, which was rather a persecution of the Jews as a
whole. But we have no reason for impeaching Tacitus' accuracy in this case,
especially since we remember that the Jews enjoyed favor with Nero through his
wife Poppaea. What is very significant, Josephus is entirely silent in regard to
a persecution of his countrymen under Nero. We may assume as probable (with
Ewald and Renan) that it was through the suggestion of the Jews that Nero's
attention was drawn to the Christians, and he was led to throw the guilt upon
them, as a people whose habits would best give countenance to such a suspicion,
and most easily excite the rage of the populace against them. This was not a
persecution of the Christians in the strict sense, that is, it was not aimed
against their religion as such; and yet it assumed such proportions and was
attended with such horrors that it always lived in the memory of the Church as
the first and one of the most awful of a long line of persecutions instituted
against them by imperial Rome, and it revealed to them the essential conflict
which existed between Rome as it then was and Christianity.

308: The Greek translator of Tertullian's Apology, whoever he may have been
(certainly not Eusebius himself; see chap. 2, note 9, above), being ignorant of
the Latin idiom cum maxime, has made very bad work of this sentence, and has
utterly destroyed the sense of the original, which runs as follows: iilic
reperietis primum Neronem in hanc sectam cum maxime Romoe orientem Coesariano
gladio ferocisse ("There you will find that Nero was the first to assail with
the imperial sword the Christian sect, which was then especially flourishing in
Rome"). The Greek translation reads: ekei eurhsete prwton Nerwna touto to dogma,
hnika magista en =Pwmh thn anatoghn pasan upotacaj wmoj hn eij pantaj, diwconta
, in the rendering of which I have followed Crusè, who has reproduced the idea
of the Greek translator with as much fidelity as the sentence will allow. The
German translators, Stroth and Closs, render the sentence directly from the
original Latin, and thus preserve the meaning of Tertullian, which is, of
course, what the Greek translator intended to reproduce. I have not, however,
felt at liberty in the present case to follow their example.

309: This tradition, that Paul suffered martyrdom in Rome, is early and
universal, and disputed by no counter-tradition and may be accepted as the one
certain historical fact known about Paul outside of the New Testament accounts.
Clement ( Ad. Cor. chap. 5) is the first to mention the death of Paul, and seems
to imply, though he does not directly state, that his death took place in Rome
during the persecution of Nero. Caius (quoted below, §7), a writer of the first
quarter of the third century, is another witness to his death in Rome, as is
also Dionysius of Corinth (quoted below, §8) of the second century. Origen
(quoted by Euseb. III. 1) states that he was martyred in Rome under Nero.
Tertullian (at the end of the second century), in his De proescriptione Hoer.
chap. 36, is still more distinct, recording that Paul was beheaded in Rome.
Eusebius and Jerome accept this tradition unhesitatingly, and we may do
likewise. As a Roman citizen, we should expect him to meet death by the sword.

310: The tradition that Peter suffered martyrdom in Rome is as old and as
universal as that in regard to Paul, but owing to a great amount of falsehood
which became mixed with the original tradition by the end of the second century
the whole has been rejected as untrue by some modern critics, who go so far as
to deny that Peter was ever at Rome. (See especially Lipsius' Die Quellen der
römischen Petrus-Sage, Kiel, 1872; a summary of his view is given by Jackson in
the Presbyterian Quarterly and Princeton Review, 1876, p. 265 sq. In Lipsius'
latest work upon this subject, Die Acta Pauli und Petri, 1887, he makes
important concessions.) The tradition is, however, too strong to be set aside,
and there is absolutely no trace of any conflicting tradition. We may therefore
assume it as overwhelmingly probable that Peter was in Rome and suffered
martyrdom there. His martyrdom is plainly referred to in John xxi. 10, though
the place of it as not given. The first extra-biblical witness to it is Clement
of Rome. He also leaves the place of the martyrdom unspecified ( Ad Cor. 5), but
he evidently assumes the place as well known, and indeed it is impossible that
the early Church could have known of the death of Peter and Paul without knowing
where they died, and there is in neither case a single opposing tradition.
Ignatius ( Ad Rom. chap. 4) connects Paul and Peter in an especial way with the
Roman Church, which seems plainly to imply that Peter had been in Rome. Phlegon
(supposed to be the Emperor Hadrian writing under the name of a favorite slave)
is said by Origen ( Contra Celsum, II. 14) to have confused Jesus and Peter in
his Chronicles. This is very significant as implying that Peter must have been
well known in Rome. Dionysius, quoted below, distinctly states that Peter
labored in Rome, and Caius is a witness for it. So Irenaeus, Clement,
Tertullian, and later Fathers without a dissenting voice. The first to mention
Peter's death by crucifixion (unless John xxi. 18 be supposed to imply it) is
Tertullian ( De Proescrip. Hoer. chap. 36), but he mentions it as a fact already
known, and tradition since his time is so unanimous in regard to it that we may
consider it in the highest degree probable. On the tradition reported by Origen,
that Peter was crucified head downward, see below, Bk. III. chap. 1, where
Origen is quoted by Eusebius.

311: The history of Caius is veiled in obscurity. All that we know of him is
that he was a very learned ecclesiastical writer, who at the beginning of the
third century held a disputation with Proclus in Rome (cf. Bk. VI. chap. 20,
below). The accounts of him given by Jerome, Theodoret, and Nicephorus are drawn
from Eusebius and furnish us no new data. Photius, however ( Bibl. XLVIII.),
reports that Caius was said to have been a presbyter of the Roman Church during
the episcopates of Victor and Zephyrinus, and to have been elected "Bishop of
the Gentiles," and hence he is commonly spoken of as a presbyter of the Roman
Church, though the tradition rests certainly upon a very slender foundation, as
Photius lived some six hundred years after Caius, and is the first to mention
the fact. Photius also, although with hesitation, ascribes to Caius a work On
the Cause of the Universe, and one called The Labyrinth, and another Against the
Heresy of Artemon (see below, Bk. V. chap. 28, note 1). The first of these (and
by some the last also), is now commonly ascribed to Hippolytus. Though the
second may have been written by Caius it is no longer extant, and hence all that
we have of his writings are the fragments of the Dialogue with Proclus preserved
by Eusebius in this chapter and in Bk. III. chaps. 28, 31. The absence of any
notice of the personal activity of so distinguished a writer has led some
critics (e.g. Salmon in Smith and Wace, I. p. 386, who refers to Lightfoot,
Journal of Philology, I. 98, as holding the same view) to assume the identity of
Caius and Hippolytus, supposing that Hippolytus in the Dialogue with Proclus
styled himself simply by his praenomen Caius and that thus as the book fell into
the hands of strangers the tradition arose of a writer Caius who in reality
never had a separate existence. This theory is ingenious, and in many respects
plausible, and certainly cannot be disproved (owing chiefly to our lack of
knowledge about Caius), and yet in the absence of any proof that Hippolytus
actually bore the praenomen Caius it can be regarded as no more than a bare
hypothesis. The two are distinguished by Eusebius and by all the writers who
mention them. On Caius' attitude toward the Apocalypse, see Bk. III. chap. 28,
note 4; and on his opinion in regard to the authorship of the Epistle to the
Hebrews, see Bk. VI. chap. 20, and Bk. III. chap. 3, note 17. The fragments of
Caius (including fragments from the Little Labyrinth, mentioned above) are given
with annotations in Routh's Rel. Sacroe, II. 125-158 and in translation (with
the addition of the Muratorian Fragment, wrongly ascribed to Caius by its
discoverer) in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, V. 599-604. See also the article of
Salmon in Smith and Wace, of Harnack, in Herzog (2d ed.), and Schaff's Ch. Hist.
II. p. 775 sqq.

312: ekklhsiastikoj anhr .

313: gegonwj . Crusè translates "born"; but Eusebius cannot have meant that, for
in Bk. VI. chap. 20 he tells us that Caius' disputation with Proclus was held
during the episcopate of Zephyrinus. He used gegonwj , therefore, as to indicate
that at that time he came into public notice, as we use the word "arose."

314: On Zephyrinus, see below, Bk. V. chap. 28, §7.

315: This Proclus probably introduced Montanism into Rome at the beginning of
the third century. According to Pseudo-Tertullian ( Adv. omnes Hoer. chap. 7) he
was a leader of one division of the Montanists, the other division being
composed of followers of Aeschines. He is probably to be identified with the
Proculus noster, classed by Tertullian, in Adv. Val. chap. 5, with Justin
Martyr, Miltiades, and Irenaeus as a successful opponent of heresy.

316: The sect of the Montanists. Called the "Phrygian heresy," from the fact
that it took its rise in Phrygia. Upon Montanism, see below, Bk. IV. chap. 27,
and especially Bk. V. chap. 16 sqq.

317: The de here makes it probable that Caius, in reply to certain claims of
Proclus, was asserting over against him the ability of the Roman church to
exhibit the true trophies of the greatest of all the apostles. And what these
claims of Proclus were can perhaps be gathered from his words, quoted by
Eusebius in Bk. III. chap. 31, §4, in which Philip and his daughters are said to
have been buried in Hierapolis. That these two sentences were closely connected
in the original is quite possible.

318: According to an ancient tradition, Peter was crucified upon the hill of
Janiculum, near the Vatican, where the Church of San Pietro in Montorio now
stands, and the hole in which his cross stood is still shown to the trustful
visitor. A more probable tradition makes the scene of execution the Vatican
hill, where Nero's circus was, and where the persecution took place. Baronius
makes the whole ridge on the right bank of the Tiber one hill, and thus
reconciles the two traditions. In the fourth century the remains of Peter were
transferred from the Catacombs of San Sebastiano (where they are said to have
been interred in 258 a.d.) to the Basilica of St. Peter, which occupied the
sight of the present basilica on the Vatican.

319: Paul was beheaded, according to tradition, on the Ostian way, at the spot
now occupied by the Abbey of the Three Fountains. The fountains, which are said
to have sprung up at the spots where Paul's head struck the ground three times
after the decapitation, are still shown, as also the pillar to which he is
supposed to have been bound! In the fourth century, at the same time that
Peter's remains were transferred to the Vatican, Paul's remains are said to have
been buried in the Basilica of St. Paul, which occupied the site now marked by
the church of San Paolo fuori le mura. There is nothing improbable in the
traditions as to the spot where Paul and Peter met their death. They are as old
as the second century; and while they cannot be accepted as indisputably true
(since there is always a tendency to fix the deathplace of a great man even if
it is not known), yet on the other hand if Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome,
it is hardly possible that the place of their death and burial could have been
forgotten by the Roman church itself within a century and a half.

320: Neither Paul nor Peter founded the Roman church in the strict sense, for
there was a congregation of believers there even before Paul came to Rome, as
his Epistle to the Romans shows, and Peter cannot have reached there until some
time after Paul. It was, however, a very early fiction that Paul and Peter
together founded the church in that city.

321: On Dionysius of Corinth, see below, Bk. IV. chap. 23.

322: Another quotation from this epistle is given in Bk. IV. chap. 23.

323: Whatever may be the truth of Dionysius' report as to Peter's martyrdom at
Rome, he is almost certainly in error in speaking as he does of Peter's work in
Corinth. It is difficult, to be sure, to dispose of so direct and early a
tradition, but it is still more difficult to accept it. The statement that Paul
and Peter together planted the Corinthian church is certainly an error, as we
know that it was Paul's own church, founded by him alone. The so-called Cephas
party, mentioned in 1 Cor. i., is perhaps easiest explained by the previous
presence and activity of Peter in Corinth, but this is by no means necessary,
and the absence of any reference to the fact in the two epistles of Paul renders
it almost absolutely impossible. It is barely possible, though by no means
probable, that Peter visited Corinth on his way to Rome (assuming the Roman
journey) and that thus, although the church had already been founded many years,
he became connected in tradition with its early days, and finally with its
origination. But it is more probable that the tradition is wholly in error and
arose, as Neander suggests, partly from the mention of Peter in 1 Cor. i.,
partly from the natural desire to ascribe the origin of this great apostolic
church to the two leading apostles, to whom in like manner the founding of the
Roman church was ascribed. It is significant that this tradition is recorded
only by a Corinthian, who of course had every inducement to accept such a
report, and to repeat it in comparing his own church with the central church of
Christendom. We find no mention of the tradition in later writers, so far as I
am aware.

324: kata ton auton kairon . The kata

325: Josephus, B.F. II. 14. 9. He relates that Florus, in order to shield
himself from the consequences of his misrule and of his abominable extortions,
endeavored to inflame the Jews to rebel against Rome by acting still more
cruelly toward them. As a result many disturbances broke out, and many bitter
things were said against Florus, in consequence of which he proceeded to the
severe measures referred to here by Eusebius.

326: muriouj osouj . Josephus gives the whole number of those that were
destroyed, including women and children, as about thirty-six hundred (no doubt a
gross exaggeration, like most of his figures). He does not state the number of
noble Jews whom Florus whipped and crucified. The "myriads" of Eusebius is an
instance of the exaggerated use of language which was common to his age, and
which almost invariably marks a period of decline. In many cases "myriads" meant
to Eusebius and his contemporaries twenty, or thirty, or even less. Any number
that seemed large under the circumstances was called a "myriad."

327: Gessius Florus was a Greek whose wife, Cleopatra, was a friend of the
Empress Poppaea, through whose influence he obtained his appointment (Jos. Ant.
XX. 11. 1). He succeeded Albinus in 64 a.d. (see above, chap. 23, note 35), and
was universally hated as the most corrupt and unprincipled governor Judea had
ever endured. Josephus ( B. F. II. 14. 2 sqq. and Ant. XX. II. I) paints him in
very black colors.

328: Josephus ( B. F. II. 14. 4) puts the beginning of the war in the twelfth
ear of the reign of Nero (i.e. a.d. 66) in the month of Artemision,
corresponding to the month Iyar, the second month of the Jewish year. According
to Josephus ( Ant. XX. 11. 1) this was in the second year of Gessius Florus. The
war began at this time by repeated rebellious outbreaks among the Jews, who had
been driven to desperation by the unprincipled and tyrannical conduct of
Florus,-though Vespasian himself did not appear in Palestine until the spring of
67, when he began his operations in Galilee.

329: Jos. B. J. II. 18. 2.

330: Ibid.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 14: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 3
========================================================================

Book III.

Chapter I. The Parts of the World in Which the Apostles Preached Christ.

Chapter II. The First Ruler of the Church of Rome.

Chapter III. The Epistles of the Apostles.

Chapter IV. The First Successors of the Apostles.

Chapter V. The Last Siege of the Jews After Christ.

Chapter VI. The Famine Which Oppressed Them.

Chapter VII. The Predictions of Christ.

Chapter VIII. The Signs Which Preceded the War.

Chapter IX. Josephus and the Works Which He Has Left.

Chapter X. The Manner in Which Josephus Mentions the Divine Books.

Chapter XI. Symeon Rules the Church of Jerusalem After James.

Chapter XII. Vespasian Commands the Descendants of David to Be Sought.

Chapter XIII. Anencletus, the Second Bishop of Rome.

Chapter XIV. Abilius, the Second Bishop of Alexandria.

Chapter XV. Clement, the Third Bishop of Rome.

Chapter XVI. The Epistle of Clement.

Chapter XVII. The Persecution Under Domitian.

Chapter XVIII. The Apostle John and the Apocalypse.

Chapter XIX. Domitian Commands the Descendants of David to Be Slain.

Chapter XX. The Relatives of Our Saviour.

Chapter XXI. Cerdon Becomes the Third Ruler of the Church of Alexandria.

Chapter XXII. Ignatius, the Second Bishop of Antioch.

Chapter XXIII. Narrative Concerning John the Apostle.

Chapter XXIV. The Order of the Gospels.

Chapter XXV. The Divine Scriptures that are Accept and Those that are Not.216
Chapter XXVI. Menander the Sorcerer.

Chapter XXVII. The Heresy of the Ebionites.262 Chapter XXVIII. Cerinthus the
Heresiarch.

Chapter XXIX. Nicolaus and the Sect Named After Him.

Chapter XXX. The Apostles that Were Married.

Chapter XXXI. The Death of John and Philip.

Chapter XXXII. Symeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, Suffers Martyrdom.

Chapter XXXIII. Trajan Forbids the Christians to Be Sought After.

Chapter XXXIV. Evarestus, the Fourth Bishop of the Church of Rome.

Chapter XXXV. Justus, the Third Bishop of Jerusalem.

Chapter XXXVI. Ignatius and His Epistles.

Chapter XXXVII. The Evangelists that Were Still Eminent at that Time.

Chapter XXXVIII. The Epistle of Clement and the Writings Falsely Ascribed to
Him.

Chapter XXXIX. The Writings of Papias.

Book III.

Chapter I. The Parts of the World in Which the Apostles Preached Christ.

1 Such was the condition of the Jews. Meanwhile the holy apostles and disciples
of our Saviour were dispersed throughout the world.1 Parthia,2 according to
tradition, was allotted to Thomas as his field of labor, Scythia3 to Andrew,4
and Asia5 to John,6 who, after he had lived some time there,7 died at Ephesus.

2 Peter appears to have preached8 in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and
Asia9 to the Jews of the dispersion. And at last, having come to Rome, he was
crucified head-downwards;10 for he had requested that he might suffer in this
way. What do we need to say concerning Paul, who preached the Gospel of Christ
from Jerusalem to Illyricum,11 and afterwards suffered martyrdom in Rome under
Nero?12 These facts are related by Origen in the third volume of his Commentary
on Genesis.13 Chapter II. The First Ruler of the Church of Rome.

1 After the martyrdom of Paul and of Peter, Linus14 was the first to obtain the
episcopate of the church at Rome. Paul mentions him, when writing to Timothy
from Rome, in the salutation at the end of the epistle.15 Chapter III. The
Epistles of the Apostles.

1 One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine.16 And
this the ancient elders17 used freely in their own writings as an undisputed
work.18 But we have learned that his extant second Epistle does not belong to
the canon;19 yet, as it has appeared profitable to many, it has been used with
the other Scriptures.20

2 The so-called Acts of Peter,21 however, and the Gospel22 which bears his name,
and the Preaching23 and the Apocalypse,24 as they are called, we know have not
been universally accepted,25 because no ecclesiastical writer, ancient or
modern, has made use of testimonies drawn from them.26

3 But in the course of my history I shall be careful to show, in addition to the
official succession, what ecclesiastical writers have from time to time made use
of any of the disputed works,27 and what they have said in regard to the
canonical and accepted writings,28 as well as in regard to those which are not
of this class.

4 Such are the writings that bear the name of Peter, only one of which I know to
be genuine29 and acknowledged by the ancient elders.30

5 Paul's fourteen epistles are well known and undisputed.31 It is not indeed
right to overlook the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews,32
saying that it is disputed33 by the church of Rome, on the ground that it was
not written by Paul. But what has been said concerning this epistle by those who
lived before our time I shall quote in the proper place.34 In regard to the
so-called Acts of Paul,35 I have not found them among the undisputed writings.36

6 But as the same apostle, in the salutations at the end of the Epistle to the
Romans,37 has made mention among others of Hermas, to whom the book called The
Shepherd38 is ascribed, it should be observed that this too has been disputed by
some, and on their account cannot be placed among the acknowledged books; while
by others it is considered quite indispensable, especially to those who need
instruction in the elements of the faith. Hence, as we know, it has been
publicly read in churches, and I have found that some of the most ancient
writers used it.

7 This will serve to show the divine writings that are undisputed as well as
those that are not universally acknowledged.

Chapter IV. The First Successors of the Apostles.

1 That Paul preached to the Gentiles and laid the foundations of the churches
"from Jerusalem round about even unto Illyricum," is evident both from his own
words,39 and from theaccount which Luke has given in the Acts.40

2 And in how many provinces Peterpreached Christ and taught the doctrine of the
new covenant to those of the circumcision is clear from his own words in his
epistle already mentioned as undisputed,41 in which he writes to the Hebrews of
the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.42

3 But the number and the names of those among them that became true and zealous
followers of the apostles, and were judged worthy to tend the churches rounded
by them, it is not easy to tell, except those mentioned in the writings of Paul.

4 For he had innumerable fellow-laborers, or "fellow-soldiers," as he called
them,43 and most of them were honored by him with an imperishable memorial, for
he gave enduring testimony concerning them in his own epistles.

5 Luke also in the Acts speaks of his friends, and mentions them by name.44

6 Timothy, so it is recorded, was the first to receive the episcopate of the
parish in Ephesus,45 Titus of the churches in Crete.46

7 But Luke,47 who was of Antiochian parentage and a physician by profession,48
and who was especially intimate with Paul and well acquainted with the rest of
the apostles,49 has left us, in two inspired books, proofs of that spiritual
healing art which he learned from them. One of these books is the Gospel,50
which he testifies that he wrote as those who were from the beginning eye
witnesses and ministers of the word delivered unto him, all of whom, as he says,
he followed accurately from the first.51 The other book is the Acts of the
Apostles52 which he composed not from the accounts of others, but from what he
had seen himself.

8 And they say that Paul meant to refer to Luke's Gospel wherever, as if
speaking of some gospel of his own, he used the words, "according to my
Gospel."53

9 As to the rest of his followers, Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to
Gaul;54 but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy55 as his
companion at Rome, was Peter's successor in the episcopate of the church there,
as has already been shown.56

10 Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as
Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier.57

11 Besides these, that Areopa gite, named Dionysius, who was the first to
believe after Paul's address to the Athenians in the Areopagus (as recorded by
Luke in the Acts)58 is mentioned by another Dionysius, an ancient writer and
pastor of the parish in Corinth,59 as the first bishop of the church at Athens.

12 But the events connected with the apostolic succession we shall relate at the
proper time. Meanwhile let us continue the course of our history.

Chapter V. The Last Siege of the Jews After Christ.

1 After Nero had held the power thirteen years,60 and Galba and Otho had ruled a
year and six months,61 Vespasian, who had become distinguished in the campaigns
against the Jews, was proclaimed sovereign in Judea and received the title of
Emperor from the armies there.62 Setting out immediately, therefore, for Rome,
he entrusted the conduct of the war against the Jews to his son Titus.63

2 For the Jews after the ascension of our Saviour, in addition to their crime
against him, had been devising as many plots as they could against his apostles.
First Stephen was stoned to death by them,64 and after him James, the son of
Zebedee and the brother of John, was beheaded,65 and finally James, the first
that had obtained the episcopal seat in Jerusalem after the ascension of our
Saviour, died in the manner already described.66 But the rest of the apostles,
who had been incessantly plotted against with a view to their destruction, and
had been driven out of the land of Judea, went unto all nations to preach the
Gospel,67 relying upon the power of Christ, who had said to them, "Go ye and
make disciples of all the nations in my name."68

3 But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation,
vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell
in a certain town of Perea called Pella.69 And when those that believed in
Christ had come thither from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews
and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of
God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and
his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men.

4 But the number of calamities which everywhere fell upon the nation at that
time; the extreme misfortunes to which the inhabitants of Judea were especially
subjected, the thousands of men, as well as women and children, that perished by
the sword, by famine, and by other forms of death innumerable,-all these things,
as well as the many great sieges which were carried on against the cities of
Judea, and the excessive. sufferings endured by those that fled to Jerusalem
itself, as to a city of perfect safety, and finally the general course of the
whole war, as well as its particular occurrences in detail, and how at last the
abomination of desolation, proclaimed by the prophets,70 stood in the very
temple of God, so celebrated of old, the temple which was now awaiting its total
and final destruction by fire,- all these things any one that wishes may find
accurately described in the history written by Josephus.71

5 But it is necessary to state that this writer records that the multitude of
those who were assembled from all Judea at the time of the Passover, to the
number of three million souls,72 were shut up in Jerusalem "as in a prison," to
use his own words.

6 For it was right that in the very days in which they had inflicted suffering
upon the Saviour and the Benefactor of all, the Christ of God, that in those
days, shut up "as in a prison," they should meet with destruction at the hands
of divine justice.

7 But passing by the particular calamities which they suffered from the attempts
made upon them by the sword and by other means, I think it necessary to relate
only the misfortunes which the famine caused, that those who read this work may
have some means of knowing that God was not long in executing vengeance upon
them for their wickedness against the Christ of God.

Chapter VI. The Famine Which Oppressed Them.

1 Taking the fifth book of the History ofJosephus again in our hands, let us go
through the tragedy of events which then occurred.73

2 "For the wealthy," he says, "it was equally dangerous to remain. For under
pretense that they were going to desert men were put to death for their wealth.
The madness of the seditions increased with the famine and both the miseries
were inflamed more and more day by day.

3 Nowhere was food to be seen; but, bursting into the houses men searched them
thoroughly, and whenever they found anything to eat they tormented the owners on
the ground that they had denied that they had anything; but if they found
nothing, they tortured them on the ground that they had more carefully concealed
it.

4 The proof of their having or not having food was found in the bodies of the
poor wretches. Those of them who were still in good condition they assumed were
well supplied with food, while those who were already wasted away they passed
by, for it seemed absurd to slay those who were on the point of perishing for
want.

5 Many, indeed, secretly sold their possessions for one measure of wheat, if
they belonged to the wealthier class, of barley if they were poorer. Then
shutting themselves up in the innermost parts of their houses, some ate the
grain uncooked on account of their terrible want, while others baked it
according as necessity and6fear dictated.

6 Nowhere were tables set, but, snatching the yet uncooked food from the fire,
they tore it in pieces. Wretched was the fare, and a lamentable spectacle it was
to see the more powerful secure an abundance while the weaker mourned.

7 Of all evils, indeed, famine is the worst, and it destroys nothing so
effectively as shame. For that which under other circumstances is worthy of
respect, in the midst of famine is despised. Thus women snatched the food from
the very mouths of their husbands and children, from their fathers, and what was
most pitiable of all, mothers from their babes, And while their dearest ones
were wasting away in their arms, they Were not ashamed to take away froth them
the last drops that supported life.

8 And even while they were eating thus they did not remain undiscovered. But
everywhere the rioters appeared, to rob them even of these portions of food. For
whenever they saw a house shut up, they regarded it as a sign that those inside
were taking food. And immediately bursting open the doors they rushed in and
seized what they were eating, almost forcing it out of their very throats.

9 Old men who clung to their food were beaten, and if the women concealed it in
their hands, their hair was torn for so doing. There was pity neither for gray
hairs nor for infants, but, taking up the babes that clung to their morsels of
food, they dashed them to the ground. But to those that anticipated their
entrance and swallowed what they were about to seize, they were still more
cruel, just as if they had been wronged by them.

10 And they, devised the most terrible modes of torture to discover food,
stopping up the privy passages of the poor wretches with bitter herbs, and
piercing their seats with sharp rods. And men suffered things horrible even to
hear of, for the sake of compelling them to confess to the possession of one
loaf of bread, or in order that they might be made to disclose a single drachm
of barley which they had concealed. But the tormentors themselves did not suffer
hunger.

11 Their conduct might indeed have seemed less barbarous if they had been driven
to it by necessity; but they did it for the sake of exercising their madness and
of providing sustenance for themselves for days to come.

12 And when any one crept out of the city by night as far as the outposts of the
Romans to collect wild herbs and grass, they went to meet him; and when he
thought he had already escaped the enemy, they seized what he had brought with
him, and even though oftentimes the man would entreat them, and, calling upon
the most awful name of God, adjure them to give him a portion of what he had
obtained at the risk of his life, they would give him nothing back. Indeed, it
was fortunate if the one that was plundered was not also slain."

13 To this account Josephus, after relating other things, adds the following:74
"The possibility of going out of the city being brought to an end,75 all hope of
safety for the Jews was cut off. And the famine increased and devoured the
people by houses and families. And the rooms were filled with dead women and
children, the lanes of the city with the corpses of old men.

14 Children and youths, swollen with the famine, wandered about the
market-places like shadows, and fell down wherever the death agony overtook
them. The sick were not strong enough to bury even their own relatives, and
those who had the strength hesitated because of the multitude of the dead and
the uncertainty as to their own fate. Many, indeed, died while they were burying
others, and many betook themselves to their graves before death came upon them.

15 There was neither weeping nor lamentation under these misfortunes; but the
famine stifled the natural affections. Those that were dying a lingering death
looked with dry eyes upon those that had gone to their rest before them. Deep
silence and death-laden night encircled the city.

16 But the robbers were more terrible than these miseries; for they broke open
the houses, which were now mere sepulchres, robbed the dead and stripped the
covering from their bodies, and went away with a laugh. They tried the points of
their swords in the dead bodies, and some that were lying on the ground still
alive they thrust through in order to test their weapons. But those that prayed
that they would use their right hand and their sword upon them, they
contemptuously left to be destroyed by the famine. Every one of these died with
eyes fixed upon the temple; and they left the seditious alive.

17 These at first gave orders that thedead should be buried out of the public
treasury, for they could not endure the stench. But afterward, when they were
not able to do this, they threw the bodies from the walls into the trenches.

18 And as Titus went around and saw the trenches filled with the dead, and the
thick blood oozing out of the putrid bodies, he groaned aloud, and, raising his
hands, called God to witness that this was not his doing."

19 After speaking of some other things, Josephus proceeds as follows:76 "I
cannot hesitate to declare what my feelings compel me to. I suppose, if the
Romans had longer delayed in coming against these guilty wretches, the city
would have been swallowed up by a chasm, or overwhelmed with a flood, or struck
with such thunderbolts as destroyed Sodom. For it had brought forth a generation
of men much more godless than were those that suffered such punishment. By their
madness indeed was the whole people brought to destruction."

20 And in the sixth book he writes as follows:77 "Of those that perished by
famine in the city the number was countless, and the miseries they underwent
unspeakable. For if so much as the shadow of food appeared in any house, there
was war, and the dearest friends engaged in hand-to-hand conflict with one
another, and snatched from each other the most wretched supports of life.

21 Nor would they believe that even the dying were without food; but the robbers
would search them while they were expiring, lest any one should feign death
while concealing food in his bosom. With mouths gaping for want of food, they
stumbled and staggered along like mad dogs, and beat the doors as if they were
drunk, and in their impotence they would rush into the same houses twice or
thrice in one hour.

22 Necessity compelled them to eat anything they could find, and they gathered
and devoured things that were not fit even for the filthiest of irrational
beasts. Finally they did not abstain even from their girdles and shoes, and they
stripped the hides off their shields and devoured them. Some used even wisps of
old hay for food, and others gathered stubble and sold the smallest weight of it
for four Attic drachmae.78

23 "But why should I speak of the shamelessness which was displayed during the
famine toward inanimate things? For I am going to relate a fact such as is
recorded neither by Greeks nor Barbarians; horrible to relate, incredible to
hear. And indeed I should gladly have omitted this calamity, that I might not
seem to posterity to be a teller of fabulous tales, if I had not innumerable
witnesses to it in my own age. And besides, I should render my country poor
service if I suppressed the account of the sufferings which she endured.

24 "There was a certain woman named Mary that dwelt beyond Jordan, whose father
was Eleazer, of the village of Bathezor79 (which signifies the house of hyssop).
She was distinguished for her family and her wealth, and had fled with the rest
of the multitude to Jerusalem and was shut up there with them during the siege.

25 The tyrants had robbed her of the rest of the property which she had brought
with her into the city from Perea. And the remnants of her possessions and
whatever food was to be seen the guards rushed in daily and snatched away from
her. This made the woman terribly angry, and by her frequent reproaches and
imprecations she aroused the anger of the rapacious villains against herself.

26 But no one either through anger or pity would slay her; and she grew weary of
finding food for others to eat. The search, too, was already become everywhere
difficult, and the famine was piercing her bowels and marrow, and resentment was
raging more violently than famine. Taking, therefore, anger and necessity as her
counsellors, she proceeded to do a most unnatural thing.

27 Seizing her child, a boy which was sucking at her breast, she said, Oh,
wretched child, in war, in famine, in sedition, for what do I preserve thee?
Slaves among the Romans we shall be even if we are allowed to live by them. But
even slavery is anticipated by the famine, and the rioters are more cruel than
both. Come, be food for me, a fury for these rioters,80 and a byeword to the
world, for this is all that is wanting to complete the calamities of the Jews.

28 And when she had said this she slew her son; and having roasted him, she ate
one half herself, and covering up the remainder, she kept it. Very soon the
rioters appeared on the scene, and, smelling the nefarious odor, they threatened
to slay her immediately unless she should show them what she had prepared. She
replied that she had saved an excellent portion for them, and with that she
uncovered the remains of the child.

29 They were immediately seized with horror and amazement and stood transfixed
at the sight. But she said This is my own son, and the deed is mine. Eat for I
too have eaten. Be not more merciful than a woman, nor more compassionate than a
mother. But if you are too pious and shrink from my sacrifice, I have already81
eaten of it; let the rest also remain for me.

30 At these words the men went out trembling, in this one case being affrighted;
yet with difficulty did they yield that food to the mother. Forthwith the whole
city was filled with the awful crime, and as all pictured the terrible deed
before their own eyes, they trembled as if they had done it themselves.

31 Those that were suffering from the famine now longed for death; and blessed
were they that had died before hearing and seeing miseries like these."

32 Such was the reward which the Jews received for their wickedness and impiety,
against the Christ of God.

Chapter VII. The Predictions of Christ.

1 It is fitting to add to these accounts the true prediction of our Saviour in
which he foretold these very events.

2 His words are as follows:82 "Woe unto them that are with child, and to them
that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter,
neither on the Sabbath day; For there shall be great tribulation, such as was
not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

3 The historian, reckoning the whole number of the slain, says that eleven
hundred thousand persons perished by famine and sword,83 and that the rest of
the rioters and robbers, being betrayed by each other after the taking of the
city, were slain.84 But the tallest of the youths and those that were
distinguished for beauty were preserved for the triumph. Of the rest of the
multitude, those that were over seventeen years of age were sent as prisoners to
labor in the works of Egypt,85 while still more were scattered through the
provinces to meet their death in the theaters by the sword and by beasts. Those
under seventeen years of age were carried away to be sold as slaves, and of
these alone the number reached ninety thousand.86

4 These things took place in this manner in the second year of the reign of
Vespasian,87 in accordance with the prophecies of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ, who by divine power saw them beforehand as if they were already present,
and wept and mourned according to the statement of the holy evangelists, who
give the very words which be uttered, when, as if addressing Jerusalem herself,
he said:88

5 "If thou hadst known, even thou, in this day, the things which belong unto thy
peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee,
that thine enemies shall cast a rampart about thee, and compass thee round, and
keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee and thy children even with the
ground."

6 And then, as if speaking concerning the people, he says,89 "For there shall be
great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by
the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations. And
Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles
be fulfilled." And again:90 "When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,
then know that the desolation thereof is nigh."

7 If any one compares the words of our Saviour with the other accounts of the
historian concerning the whole war, how can one fail to wonder, and to admit
that the foreknowledge and the prophecy of our Saviour were truly divine and
marvellously strange.91

8 Concerning those calamities, then, that befell the whole Jewish nation after
the Saviour's passion and after the words which the multitude of the Jews
uttered, when they begged the release of the robber and murderer, but besought
that the Prince of Life should be taken from their midst,92 it is not necessary
to add anything to the 9 account of the historian.

9 But it may be proper to mention also those events which exhibited the
graciousness of that all-good Providence which held back their destruction full
forty years after their crime against Christ,-during which time many of the
apostles and disciples, and James himself the first bishop there, the one who is
called the brother of the Lord,93 were still alive, and dwelling in Jerusalem
itself, remained the surest bulwark of the place. Divine Providence thus still
proved itself long-suffering toward them in order to see whether by repentance
for what they had done they might obtain pardon and salvation; and in addition
to such long-suffering, Providence also furnished wonderful signs of the things
which were about to happen to them if they did not repent.

10 Since these matters have been thought worthy of mention by the historian
already cited, we cannot do better than to recount them for the benefit of the
readers of this work.

Chapter VIII. The Signs Which Preceded the War.

1 Taking, then, the work of this author,read what he records in the sixth book
of his History. His words are as follows:94 "Thus were the miserable people won
over at this time by the impostors and false prophets;95 but they did not heed
nor give credit to the visions and signs that foretold the approaching
desolation. On the contrary, as if struck by lightning, and as if possessing
neither eyes nor understanding, they slighted the proclamations of God.

2 At one time a star, in form like a sword, stood over the city, and a comet,
which lasted for a whole year; and again before the revolt and before the
disturbances that led to the war, when the people were gathered for the feast of
unleavened bread, on the eighth of the month Xanthicus,96 at the ninth hour of
the night, so great a light shone about the altar and the temple that it seemed
to be bright day; and this continued for half an hour. This seemed to the
unskillful a good sign, but was interpreted by the sacred scribes as portending
those events which very soon took place.

3 And at the same feast a cow, led by the high priest to be sacrificed, brought
forth a lamb in the midst of the temple.

4 And the eastern gate of the inner temple, which was of bronze and very
massive, and which at evening was closed with difficulty by twenty men, and
rested upon iron-bound beams, and had bars sunk deep in the ground, was seen at
the sixth hour of the night to open of itself.

5 And not many days after the feast, on the twenty-first of the month
Artemisium,97 a certain marvelous vision was seen which passes belief. The
prodigy might seem fabulous were it not related by those who saw it, and were
not the calamities which followed deserving of such signs. For before the
setting of the sun chariots and armed troops were seen throughout the whole
region in mid-air, wheeling through the clouds and encircling the cities.

6 And at the feast which is called Pentecost, when the priests entered the
temple at night, as was their custom, to perform the services, they said that at
first they perceived a movement and a noise, and afterward a voice as of a great
multitude, saying, `Let us go hence.'98

7 But what follows is still more7 terrible; for a certain Jesus, the son of
Ananias, a common countryman, four years before the war,99 when the city was
particularly prosperous and peaceful, came to the feast, at which it was
customary for all to make tents at the temple to the honor of God,100 and
suddenly began to cry out: `A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a
voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the temple, a voice
against bridegrooms and brides, a voice against all the people.' Day and night
he went 8 through all the alleys crying thus.

8 But certain of the more distinguished citizens, vexed at the ominous cry,
seized the man and beat him with many stripes. But without uttering a word in
his own behalf, or saying anything in particular to those that were present, he
continued to cry out in the same words as before.

9 And the rulers, thinking, as was true, that the man was moved by a higher
power, brought him before the Roman governor.101 And then, though he was
scourged to the bone, he neither made supplication nor shed tears, but, changing
his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, he answered each stroke with the
words, `Woe, woe unto Jerusalem.'"

10 The same historian records another fact still more wonderful than this. He
says102 that a certain oracle was found in their sacred writings which declared
that at that time a certain person should go forth from their country to rule
the world. He himself understood 11 that this was fulfilled in Vespasian.

11 But Vespasian did not rule the whole world, but only that part of it which
was subject to the Romans. With better right could it be applied to Christ; to
whom it was said by the Father, "Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen for
thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession."103 At that
very time, indeed, the voice of his holy apostles "went throughout all the
earth, and their words to the end of the world."104 Chapter IX. Josephus and the
Works Which He Has Left.

1 After all this it is fitting that we should know something in regard to the
origin and family of Josephus, who has contributed so much to the history in
hand. He himself gives us information on this point in the following words:105
"Josephus, the son of Mattathias, a priest of Jerusalem, who himself fought
against the Romans in the beginning and was compelled to be present at what
happened afterward."

2 He was the most noted of all the Jews of that day, not only among his own
people, but also among the Romans, so that he was honored by the erection of a
statue in Rome,106 and his works were deemed worthy of a place in the
library.107

3 He wrote the whole of the Antiquities of the Jews108 in twenty books, and a
history of the war with the Romans which took place in his time, in seven
books.109 He himself testifies that the latter work was not only written in
Greek, but that it was also translated by himself into his native tongue.110 He
is worthy of credit here because of his truthfulness in other matters.

4 There are extant also two other books of his which are worth reading. They
treat of the antiquity of the Jews,111 and in them he replies to Apion the
Grammarian, who had at that time written a treatise against the Jews, and also
to others who had attempted to vilify the hereditary institutions of the Jewish
people.

5 In the first of these books he gives the number of the canonical books of the
so-called Old Testament. Apparently112 drawing his information from ancient
tradition, he shows what books were accepted without dispute among the Hebrews.
His words are as follows.

Chapter X. The Manner in Which Josephus Mentions the Divine Books.

1113 "We have not, therefore, a multitude of books disagreeing and conflicting
with one another; but we have only twenty-two, which contain the record of all
time and are justly held to be divine.

2 Of these, five are by Moses, and contain the laws and the tradition respecting
the origin of man, and continue the history114 down to his own death. This
period embraces nearly three thousand years.115

3 From the death of Moses to the death of Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as
king of Persia, the prophets that followed Moses wrote the history of their own
times in thirteen books.116 The other four books contain hymns to God, and
precepts for the regulation of the life of men.

4 From the time of Artaxerxes to our own day all the events have been recorded,
but the accounts are not worthy of the same confidence that we repose in those
which preceded them, because there has not been during this time an exact
succession of prophets.117

5 How much we are attached to our own writings is shown plainly by our treatment
of them. For although so great a period has already passed by, no one has
ventured either to add to or to take from them, but it is inbred in all Jews
from their very birth to regard them as the teachings of God, and to abide by
them, and, if necessary, cheerfully to die for them."

These remarks of the historian I have thought might advantageously be introduced
in this connection.

6 Another work of no little merit has been produced by the same writer, On the
Supremacy of Reason,118 which some have called Maccabaicum,119 because it
contains an account of the struggles of those Hebrews who contended manfully for
the true religion, as is related in the books called Maccabees.

7 And at the end of the twentieth book of his Antiquities120 Josephus himself
intimates that he had purposed to write a work in four books concerning God and
his existence, according to the traditional opinions of the Jews, and also
concerning the laws, why it is that they permit some things while prohibiting
others.121 And the same writer also mentions in his own works other books
written by himself.122

8 In addition to these things it is proper to quote also the words that are
found at the close of his Antiquities,123 in confirmation of the testimony which
we have drawn from his accounts. In that place he attacks Justus of Tiberias,124
who, like himself, had attempted to write a history of contemporary events, on
the ground that he had not written truthfully. Having brought many other
accusations against the man, he continues in these words:125

9 "I indeed was not afraid in respect to my writings as you were,126 but, on the
contrary, I presented my books to the emperors themselves when the events were
almost under men's eyes. For I was conscious that I had preserved the truth in
my account, and hence was not disappointed in my expectation of obtaining their
attestation.

10 And I presented my history also to many others, some of whom were present at
the war, as, for instance, King Agrippa127 and some of his relatives.

11 For the Emperor Titus desired so much that the knowledge of the events should
be communicated to men by my history alone, that he indorsed the books with his
own hand and commanded that they should be published. And King Agrippa wrote
sixty-two epistles testifying to the truthfulness of my account." Of these
epistles Josephus subjoins two.128 But this will suffice in regard to him. Let
us now proceed with our history.

Chapter XI. Symeon Rules the Church of Jerusalem After James.

1 After the martyrdom of James129 and the conquest of Jerusalem which
immediately followed,130 it is said that those of the apostles and disciples of
the Lord that were still living came together from all directions with those
that were related to the Lord according to the flesh131 (for the majority of
them also were still alive) to take counsel as to who was worthy to succeed
James.

2 They all with one consent pronounced Symeon,132 the son of Clopas, of whom the
Gospel also makes mention;133 to be worthy of the episcopal throne of that
parish. He was a cousin, as they say, of the Saviour. For Hegesippus records
that Clopas was a brother of Joseph.134 Chapter XII. Vespasian Commands the
Descendants of David to Be Sought.

He also relates that Vespasian after the conquest of Jerusalem gave orders that
all that belonged to the lineage of David should be sought out, in order that
none of the royal race might be left among the Jews; and in consequence of this
a most terrible persecution again hung over the Jews.135 Chapter XIII.
Anencletus, the Second Bishop of Rome.

After Vespasian had reigned ten years Titus, his son, succeeded him.136 In the
second year of his reign, Linus, who had been bishop of the church of Rome for
twelve years,137 delivered his office to Anencletus.138 But Titus was succeeded
by his brother Domitian after he had reigned two years and the same number of
months.139 Chapter XIV. Abilius, the Second Bishop of Alexandria. In the fourth
year of Domitian, Annianus,140 the first bishop of the parish of Alexandria,
died after holding office twenty-two years, and was succeeded by Abilius,141 the
second bishop.

Chapter XV. Clement, the Third Bishop of Rome. In the twelfth year of the same
reign Clement succeeded Anencletus142 after the latter had been bishop of the
church of Rome for twelve years. The apostle in his Epistle to the Philippians
informs us that this Clement was his fellow-worker. His words are as follows:143
"With Clement arid the rest of my fellow-laborers whose names are in the book of
life."

Chapter XVI. The Epistle of Clement.

There is extant an epistle of this Clement144 which is acknowledged to be
genuine and is of considerable length and of remarkable merit.145 He wrote it in
the name of the church of Rome to the church of Corinth, when a sedition had
arisen in the latter church.146 We know that this epistle also has been publicly
used in a great many churches both in former times and in our own.147 And of the
fact that a sedition did take place in the church of Corinth at the time
referred to Hegesippus is a trustworthy witness.148 Chapter XVII. The
Persecution Under Domitian.

Domitian, having shown great cruelty toward many, and having unjustly put to
death no small number of well-born and notable men at Rome, and having without
cause exiled and confiscated the property of a great many other illustrious men,
finally became a successor of Nero in his. hatred and enmity toward God. He was
in fact the second that stirred up a persecution against us,149 although his
father Vespasian had undertaken nothing prejudicial to us.150 Chapter XVIII. The
Apostle John and the Apocalypse.

1 It is said that in this persecution the apostle and evangelist John, who was
still alive, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos in consequence of
his testimony to the divine word.151

2 Irenaeus, in the fifth book of his work Against Heresies, where he discusses
the number of the name of Antichrist which is given in the so-called Apocalypse
of John,152 speaks as follows concerning him:153

3 "If it were necessary for his name to be proclaimed openly at the present
time, it would have been declared by him who saw the revelation. For it was seen
not long ago, but almost in our own generation, at the end of the reign of
Domitian."

4 To such a degree, indeed, did the teaching of our faith flourish at that time
that even those writers who were far from our religion did not hesitate to
mention in their histories the persecution and the martyrdoms which took place
during it.154

5 And they, indeed, accurately indicated the time. For they recorded that in the
fifteenth year of Domitian155 Flavia Domitilla, daughter of a sister of Flavius
Clement, who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome,156 was exiled with
many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ.

Chapter XIX. Domitian Commands the Descendants of David to Be Slain. But when
this same Domitian had commanded that the descendants of David should be slain,
an ancient tradition says157 that some of the heretics brought accusation
against the descendants of Jude (said to have been a brother of the Saviour
according to the flesh), on the ground that they were of the lineage of David
and were related to Christ himself. Hegesippus relates these facts in the
following words.

Chapter XX. The Relatives of Our Saviour.

1 "Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude,
who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh.158

2 Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and they were
brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus.159 For Domitian feared the
coming ing of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And he asked them if they were
descendants of David, and they confessed that they were. Then he asked them how
much property they had, or how much money they owned. And both of them answered
that they had only nine thousand denarii,160

4 half of which belonged to each of them; and this property did not consist of
silver, but of a piece of land which contained only thirty-nine acres, and from
which they raised their taxes161 and supported themselves by their own
labor."162

5 Then they showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies and the
callousness produced upon their hands by continuous toil as evidence of their
own labor.

6 And when they were asked concerning Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it
was and where and when it was to appear, they answered that it was not a
temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and angelic one, which would
appear at the end of the world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick
and the dead, and to give unto every one according to his works.

7 Upon hearing this, Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising
them as of no account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the
persecution of the Church.

8 But when they were released they ruled the churches because they were
witnesses163 and were also relatives of the Lord.164 And peace being
established, they lived until the time of Trajan. These things are related by
Hegesippus.

9 Tertullian also has mentioned Domitian in the following words:165 "Domitian
also, who possessed a share of Nero's cruelty, attempted once to do the same
thing that the latter did. But because he had, I suppose, some intelligence,166
he very soon ceased, and even recalled those whom he had banished."

10 But after Domitian had reigned fifteen years,167 and Nerva had succeeded to
the empire, the Roman Senate, according to the writers that record the history
of those days,168 voted that Domitian's honors should be cancelled, and that
those who had been unjustly banished should return to their homes and have their
property restored to them. It was at this time 11 that the apostle John returned
from his banishment in the island and took up his abode at Ephesus, according to
an ancient Christian tradition.169 Chapter XXI. Cerdon Becomes the Third Ruler
of the Church of Alexandria.

1 After Nerva had reigned a little more than a year170 he was succeeded by
Trajan. It was during the first year of his reign that Abilius,171 who had ruled
the church of Alexandria for thirteen years, was succeeded by Cerdon.172

2 He was the third that presided over that church after Annianus,173 who was the
first. At that time Clement still ruled the church of Rome, being also the third
that held the episcopate there after Paul and Peter.

3 Linus was the first, and after him came Anencletus,174 Chapter XXII. Ignatius,
the Second Bishop of Antioch.

11 At this time Ignatius175 was known as the second bishop of Antioch, Evodius
having been the first.176 Symeon177 likewise was at that time the second ruler
of the church of Jerusalem, the brother of our Saviour having been the first.

Chapter XXIII. Narrative Concerning John the Apostle.

1 At that time the apostle and evangelist John, the one whom Jesus loved, was
still living in Asia, and governing the churches of that region, having returned
after the death of Domitian from his exile on the island.178

2 And that he was still alive at that time179 may be established by the
testimony of two witnesses. They should be trustworthy who have maintained the
orthodoxy of the Church; and such indeed were Irenaeus and Clement of
Alexandria.180

3 The former in the second book of his work Against Heresies, writes as
follows:181 "And all the elders that associated with John the disciple of the
Lord in Asia bear witness that John delivered it to them. For he remained among
them until the time of Trajan."182

4 And in the third book of the same work he attests the same thing in the
following words:183 "But the church in Ephesus also, which was founded by Paul,
and where John remained until the time of Trajan, is a faithful witness of the
apostolic tradition."

5 Clement likewise in his book entitled What Rich Man can be saved?184 indicates
the time,185 and subjoins a narrative which is most attractive to those that
enjoy hearing what is beautiful and profitable. Take and read the account which
rums as follows:186 "Listen to a tale, which is not a mere tale, but a
narrative187 concerning John the apostle, which has been handed down and
treasured up in memory. For when, after the tyrant's death,188 he returned from
the isle of Patmos to Ephesus, he went away upon their invitation to the
neighboring territories of the Gentiles, to appoint bishops in some places, in
other places to set in order whole churches, elsewhere to choose to the ministry
some one189 of those that were pointed out by the Spirit.

7 When he had come to one of the cities not far away (the name of which is given
by some190 ), and had consoled the brethren in other matters, he finally turned
to the bishop that had been appointed, and seeing a youth of powerful physique,
of pleasing appearance, and of ardent temperament, he said, `This one I commit
to thee in all earnestness in the presence of the Church and with Christ as
witness.' And when the bishop had accepted the Charge and had promised all, he
repeated the same injunction with an appeal to the same witnesses, and then
departed for Ephesus.

8 But the presbyter191 taking home the youth committed to him, reared, kept,
cherished, and finally baptized192 him. After this he relaxed his stricter care
and watchfulness, with the idea that in putting upon him the seal of the Lord193
he had given him a perfect protection.

9 But some youths of his own age, idle and dissolute, and accustomed to evil
practices, corrupted him when he was thus prematurely freed from restraint. At
first they enticed him by costly entertainments; then, when they went forth at
night for robbery, they took him with them, and finally they demanded that he
should unite with them in some greater crime.

10 He gradually became accustomed to such practices, and on account of the
positiveness of his character,194 leaving the right path, and taking the bit in
his teeth like a hard-mouthed and powerful horse, he rushed the more violently
down into the depths.

11 And finally despairing of salvation in God, he no longer meditated what was
insignificant, but having committed some great crime, since he was now lost once
for all, he expected to suffer a like fate with the rest. Taking them,
therefore, and forming a band of robbers, he became a bold bandit-chief, the
most violent, most bloody, most cruel of them all.

12 Time passed, and some necessity having arisen, they sent for John. But he,
when he had set in order the other matters on account of which he had come,
said, `Come, O bishop, restore us the deposit which both I and Christ committed
to thee, the church, over which thou presidest, being witness.'

13 But the bishop was at first confounded, thinking that he was falsely charged
in regard to money which he had not received, and he could neither believe the
accusation respecting what he had not, nor could he disbelieve John. But when he
said, `I demand the young man and the soul of the brother,' the old man,
groaning deeply and at the same time bursting into tears, said, `He is dead.'
`How and what kind of death?' `He is dead to God,' he said; `for he turned
wicked and abandoned, and at last a robber. And now, instead of the church, he
haunts the mountain with a band like himself.'

14 But the Apostle rent his clothes, and beating his head with great
lamentation, he said, `A fine guard I left for a brother's soul! But let a horse
be brought me, and let some one show me the way.' He rode away from the church
just as he was, and coming to the place, he was taken prisoner by the robbers'
outpost.

15 He, however, neither fled nor made entreaty, but cried out, `For this did I
come; lead me to your captain.'

16 The latter, meanwhile, was waiting, armed as he was. But when he recognized
John approaching, he turned in shame to flee.

17 But John, forgetting his age, pursued him with all his might, crying out,
`Why, my son, dost thou flee from me, thine own father, unarmed, aged? Pity me,
my son; fear not; thou hast still hope of life. I will give account to Christ
for thee. If need be, I will willingly endure thy death as the Lord suffered
death for us. For thee will I give up my life. Stand, believe; Christ hath sent
me.'

18 And he, when he heard, first stopped and looked down; then he threw away his
arms, and then trembled and wept bitterly. And when the old man approached, he
embraced him, making confession with lamentations as he was able, baptizing
himself a second time with tears, and concealing only his right hand.

19 But John, pledging himself, and assuring him on oath that he would find
forgiveness with the Saviour, besought him, fell upon his knees, kissed his
right hand itself as if now purified by repentance, and led him back to the
church. And making intercession for him with copious prayers, and struggling
together with him in continual fastings, and subduing his mind by various
utterances, he did not depart, as they say, until he had restored him to the
church, furnishing a great example of true repentance and a great proof of
regeneration, a trophy of a visible resurrection."

Chapter XXIV. The Order of the Gospels.

1 This extract from Clement I have inserted here for the sake of the history and
for the benefit of my readers. Let us now point out the undisputed writings of
this apostle.

2 And in the first place his Gospel, which is known to all the churches under
heaven, must be acknowledged as genuine.195 That it has with good reason been
put by the ancients in the fourth place, after the other three Gospels, may be
made evident in the following way.

3 Those great and truly divine men, I mean the apostles of Christ, were purified
in their life, and were adorned with every virtue of the soul, but were
uncultivated in speech. They were confident indeed in their trust in the divine
and wonder-working power which was granted unto them by the Saviour, but they
did not know how, nor did they attempt to proclaim the doctrines of their
teacher in studied and artistic language, but employing only the demonstration
of the divine Spirit, which worked with them, and the wonder-working power of
Christ, which was displayed through them, they published the knowledge of the
kingdom of heaven throughout the whole world, paying little attention to the
composition of written works.

4 And this they did because they were assisted in their ministry by one greater
than man. Paul, for instance, who surpassed them all in vigor of expression and
in richness of thought, committed to writing no more than the briefest
epistles,196 although he had innumerable mysterious matters to communicate, for
he had attained even unto the sights of the third heaven, had been carried to
the very paradise of God, and had been deemed worthy to hear unspeakable
utterances there.197

5 And the rest of the followers of our Saviour, the twelve apostles, the seventy
disciples, and countless others besides, were not ignorant of these things.
Nevertheless, of all the disciples198 of the Lord, only Matthew and John have
left us written memorials, and they, tradition says, were led to write only
under the pressure of necessity.

6 For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go
to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue,199 and
thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his
presence. And when Mark and Luke had already published their Gospels,200 they
say that John, who had employed all his time in proclaiming the Gospel orally,
finally proceeded to write for the following reason. The three Gospels already
mentioned having come into the hands of all and into his own too, they say that
he accepted them and bore witness to their truthfulness; but that there was
lacking in them an account of the deeds done by Christ at the beginning of his
ministry.201

8 And this indeed is true. For it is evident that the three evangelists recorded
only the deeds done by the Saviour for one year after the imprisonment of John
the Baptist,202 and indicated this in the beginning of their account.

9 For Matthew, after the forty days' fast and the temptation which followed it,
indicates the chronology of his work when he says: "Now when he heard that John
was delivered up he withdrew from Judea into Galilee."203

10 Mark likewise says: "Now after that John was delivered up Jesus came into
Galilee."204 And Luke, before commencing his account of the deeds of Jesus,
similarly marks the time, when he says that Herod, "adding to all the evil deeds
which he had done, shut up John in prison."205

11 They say, therefore, that the apostle John, being asked to do it for this
reason, gave in his Gospel an account of the period which had been omitted by
the earlier evangelists, and of the deeds done by the Saviour during that
period; that is, of those which were done before the imprisonment of the
Baptist. And this is indicated by him, they say, in the following words: "This
beginning of miracles did Jesus";206 and again when he refers to the Baptist, in
the midst of the deeds of Jesus, as still baptizing in Aenon near Salim;207
where he states the matter clearly in the words: "For John was not yet cast into
prison."208

12 John accordingly, in his Gospel, records the deeds of Christ which were
performed before the Baptist was cast into prison, but the other three
evangelists mention the events which happened after that time.

13 One who understands this can no longer think that the Gospels are at variance
with one another, inasmuch as the Gospel according to John contains the first
acts of Christ, while the others give an account of the latter part of his life.
And the genealogy of our Saviour according to the flesh John quite naturally
omitted, because it had been already given by Matthew and Luke, and began with
the doctrine of his divinity, which had, as it were, been reserved for him, as
their superior, by the divine Spirit.209

14 These things may suffice, which we have said concerning the Gospel of John.
The cause which led to the composition of the Gospel of Mark has been already
stated by us.210

15 But as for Luke, in the beginning of his Gospel, he states He states that
since many others had more rashly undertaken to compose a narrative of the
events of which he had acquired perfect knowledge, he himself, feeling the
necessity of freeing us from their uncertain opinions, delivered in his own
Gospel an accurate account of those events in regard to which he had learned the
full truth, being aided by his intimacy and his stay with Paul and by his
acquaintance with the rest of the apostles.211

16 So much for our own account of these things. But in a more fitting place we
shall attempt to show by quotations from the ancients, what others have said
concerning them.

17 But of the writings of John, not only his Gospel, but also the former of his
epistles, has been accepted without dispute both now and in ancient times.212
But the other two are disputed.213

18 In regard to the Apocalypse, the opinions of most men are still divided.214
But at the proper time this question likewise shall be decided from the
testimony of the ancients.215 Chapter XXV. The Divine Scriptures that are Accept
and Those that are Not.216

1 Since we are dealing with this subject it is proper to sum up the writings of
the New Testament which have been already mentioned. First then must be put the
holy quaternion of the Gospels;217 following them the Acts of the Apostles.218

2 After this must be reckoned the epistles of Paul;219 next in order the extant
former epistle of John,220 and likewise the epistle of Peter,221 must be
maintained.222 After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the
Apocalypse of John,223 concerning which we shall give the different opinions at
the proper time.224 These then belong among the accepted writings.225

3 Among the disputed writings,226 which are nevertheless recognized227 by many,
are extant the so-called epistle of James228 and that of Jude,229 also the
second epistle of Peter,230 and those that are called the second and third of
John,231 whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same
name.

4 Among the rejected writings232 must be reckoned also the Acts of Paul,233 and
the so-called Shepherd,234 and the Apocalypse of Peter,235 and in addition to
these the extant epistle of Barnabas,236 and the so-called Teachings of the
Apostles;237 and besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper,
which some, as I said, reject,238 but which others class with the accepted
books.239

5 And among these some have placed also the Gospel according to the Hebrews,240
with which those of the Hebrews that have accepted Christ are especially
delighted. And all these may be reckoned among the disputed books.241

6 But we have nevertheless felt compelled to give a catalogue of these also,
distinguishing those works which according to ecclesiastical tradition are true
and genuine and commonly accepted,242 from those others which, although not
canonical but disputed,243 are yet at the same time known to most ecclesiastical
writers-we have felt compelled to give this catalogue in order that we might be
able to know both these works and those that are cited by the heretics under the
name of the apostles, including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of
Peter,244 of Thomas,245 of Matthias,246 or of any others besides them, and the
Acts of Andrew247 and John248 and the other apostles, which no one belonging to
the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his
writings.

7 And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage,
and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are
so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show
themselves to be the fictions of heretics.249 Wherefore they are not to be
placed even among the rejected250 writings, but are all of them to be cast aside
as absurd and impious.

Let us now proceed with our history.

Chapter XXVI. Menander the Sorcerer.

1 Menander,251 who succeeded Simon Magus,252 showed himself in his conduct
another instrument of diabolical power,253 not inferior to the former. He also
was a Samaritan and carried his sorceries to no less an extent than his teacher
had done, and at the same time reveled in still more marvelous tales than he.

2 For he said that he was himself the Saviour, who had been sent down from
invisible aeons for the salvation of men;254 and he taught that no one could
gain the mastery over the world-creating angels themselves255 unless he had
first gone through the magical discipline imparted by him and had received
baptism from him. Those who were deemed worthy of this would partake even in the
present life of perpetual immortality, and would never die, but would remain
here forever, and without growing old become immortal.256 These facts can be
easily learned from the works of Irenaeus.257

3 And Justin, in the passage in which he mentions Simon, gives an account of
this man also, in the following words:258 "And we know that a certain Menander,
who was also a Samaritan, from the village of Capparattea,259 was a disciple of
Simon, and that he also, being driven by the demons, came to Antioch260 and
deceived many by his magical art. And he persuaded his followers that they
should not die. And there are still some of them that assert this."

4 And it was indeed an artifice of the devil to endeavor, by means of such
sorcerers, who assumed the name of Christians, to defame the great mystery of
godliness by magic art, and through them to make ridiculous the doctrines of the
Church concerning the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the
dead.261 But they that have chosen these men as their saviours have fallen away
from the true hope.

Chapter XXVII. The Heresy of the Ebionites.262

1 The evil demon, however, being unable to tear certain others from their
allegiance to the Christ of God, yet found them susceptible in a different
direction, and so brought them over to his own purposes. The ancients quite
properly called these men Ebionites, because they held poor and mean opinions
concerning Christ.263

2 For they considered him a plain and common man, who was justified only because
of his superior virtue, and who was the fruit of the intercourse of a man with
Mary. In their opinion the observance of the ceremonial law was altogether
necessary, on the ground that they could not be saved by faith in Christ alone
and by a corresponding life.264

3 There were others, however, besides them, that were of the same name,265 but
avoided the strange and absurd beliefs of the former, and did not deny that the
Lord was born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit. But nevertheless, inasmuch as
they also refused to acknowledge that he pre-existed,266 being God, Word, and
Wisdom, they turned aside into the impiety of the former, especially when they,
like them, endeavored to observe strictly the bodily worship of the law.267

4 These men, moreover, thought that it was necessary to reject all the epistles
of the apostle, whom they called an apostate from the law;268 and they used only
the so-called Gospel according to the Hebrews269 and made small account of the
rest.

5 The Sabbath and the rest of the discipline of the Jews they observed just like
them, but at the same time, like us, they celebrated the Lord's days as a
memorial of the resurrection of the Saviour.270

6 Wherefore, in consequence of such a course they received the name of
Ebionites, which signified the poverty of their understanding. For this is the
name by which a poor man is called among the Hebrews.271 Chapter XXVIII.
Cerinthus the Heresiarch.

1 We have understood that at this time Cerinthus,272 the author of another
heresy, made his appearance. Caius, whose words we quoted above,273 in the
Disputation which is ascribed to him, writes as follows concerning this man:

2 "But Cerinthus also, by means of revelations which he pretends were written by
a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things which he falsely claims were
shown him by angels; and he says that after the resurrection the kingdom of
Christ will be set up on earth, and that the flesh dwelling in Jerusalem will
again be subject to desires and pleasures. And being an enemy of the Scriptures
of God, he asserts, with the purpose of deceiving men, that there is to be a
period of a thousand years274 for marriage festivals."275

3 And Dionysius,276 who was bishop of the parish of Alexandria in our day, in
the second book of his work On the Promises, where he says some things
concerning the Apocalypse of John which he draws from tradition, mentions this
same man in the following words:277

4 "But (they say that) Cerinthus, who founded the sect which was called, after
him, the Cerinthian, desiring reputable authority for his fiction, prefixed the
name. For the doctrine which he taught was this: that the kingdom of Christ will
be an earthly one.

5 And as he was himself devoted to the pleasures of the body and altogether
sensual in his nature, he dreamed that that kingdom would consist in those
things which he desired, namely, in the delights of the belly and of sexual
passion, that is to say, in eating and drinking and marrying, and in festivals
and sacrifices and the slaying of victims, under the guise of which he thought
he could indulge his appetites with a better grace."

6 These are the words of Dionysius. But Iranaeus, in the first book of his work
Against Heresies,278 gives some more abominable false doctrines of the same man,
and in the third book relates a story which deserves to be recorded. He says, on
the authority of Polycarp, that the apostle John once entered a bath to bathe;
but, learning that Cerinthus was within, he sprang from the place and rushed out
of the door, for he could not bear to remain under the same roof with him. And
he advised those that were with him to do the same, saying, "Let us flee, lest
the bath fall; for Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within."279 Chapter
XXIX. Nicolaus and the Sect Named After Him.

1 At this time the so-called sect of the Nicolaitans made its appearance and
lasted for a very short time. Mention is made of it in the Apocalypse of
John.280 They boasted that the author of their sect was Nicolaus, one of the
deacons who, with Stephen, were appointed by the apostles for the purpose of
ministering to the poor.281 Clement of Alexandria, in the third book of his
Stromata, relates the following things concerning him.282

2 "They say that he had a beautiful wife, and after the ascension of the
Saviour, being accused by the apostles of jealousy, he led her into their midst
and gave permission to any one that wished to marry her. For they say that this
was in accord with that saying of his, that one ought to abuse the flesh. And
those that have followed his heresy, imitating blindly and foolishly that which
was done and said, commit fornication without shame.

3 But I understand that Nicolaus had to do with no other woman than her to whom
he was married, and that, so far as his children are concerned, his daughters
continued in a state of virginity until old age, and his son remained uncorrupt.
If this is so, when he brought his wife, whom he jealously loved, into the midst
of the apostles, he was evidently renouncing his passion; and when he used the
expression, `to abuse the flesh,' he was inculcating self-control in the face of
those pleasures that are eagerly pursued. For I suppose that, in accordance with
the command of the Saviour, he did not wish to serve two masters, pleasure and
the Lord.283

4 But they say that Matthias also taught in the same manner that we ought to
fight against and abuse the flesh, and not give way to it for the sake of
pleasure, but strengthen the soul by faith and knowledge."284 So much concerning
those who then attempted to pervert the truth, but in less time than it has
taken to tell it became entirely extinct.

Chapter XXX. The Apostles that Were Married.

1 Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned
facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the
apostles that had wives.285 "Or will they," says he,286 "reject even the
apostles? For Peter287 and Philip288 begat children; and Philip also gave his
daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to
greet his wife,289 whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be
inconvenienced in his ministry."

2 And since we have mentioned this subject it is not improper to subjoin another
account which is given by the same author and which is worth reading. In the
seventh book of his Stromata he writes as follows:290 "They say, accordingly,
that when the blessed Peter saw his own wife led out to die, he rejoiced because
of her summons and her return home, and called to her very encouragingly and
comfortingly, addressing her by name, and saying, `Oh thou, remember the Lord.'
Such was the marriage of the blessed, and their perfect disposition toward those
dearest to them." This account being in keeping with the subject in hand, I have
related here in its proper place.

Chapter XXXI. The Death of John and Philip.

1 The time and the manner of the death of Paul and Peter as well as their burial
places, have been already shown by us.291

2 The time of John's death has also been given in a general way,292 but his
burial place is indicated by an epistle of Polycrates293 (who was bishop of the
parish of Ephesus), addressed to Victor,294 bishop of Rome. In this epistle he
mentions him together with the apostle Philip and his daughters in the following
words:295

3 "For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on
the last day, at the coming of the Lord, when he shall come with glory from
heaven and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the
twelve apostles,296 who sleeps in Hierapolis,297 and his two aged virgin
daughters, and another daughter who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at
Ephesus;298 and moreover John, who was both a witness299 and a teacher, who
reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and being a priest wore the sacerdotal
plate.300 He also sleeps at Ephesus."301

4 So much concerning their death. And in the Dialogue of Caius which we
mentioned a little above,302 Proclus,303 against whom he directed his
disputation, in agreement with what has been quoted,304 speaks thus concerning
the death of Philip and his daughters: "After him305 there were four
prophetesses, the daughters of Philip, at Hierapolis in Asia. Their tomb is
there and the tomb of their father." Such is his statement.

5 But Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles, mentions the daughters of Philip who
were at that time at Caesarea in Judea with their father, and were honored with
the gift of prophecy. His words are as follows: "We came unto Caesarea; and
entering into the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we
abode with him. Now this man had four daughters, virgins, which did
prophesy."306

6 We have thus set forth in these pages what has come to our knowledge
concerning the apostles themselves and the apostolic age, and concerning the
sacred writings which they have left us, as well as concerning those which are
disputed, but nevertheless have been publicly used by many in a great number of
churches,307 and moreover, concerning those that are altogether rejected and are
out of harmony with apostolic orthodoxy. Having done this, let us now proceed
with our history.

Chapter XXXII. Symeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, Suffers Martyrdom.

1 It is reported that after the age of Nero and Domitian, under the emperor
whose times we are now recording,308 a persecution was stirred up against us in
certain cities in consequence of a popular uprising.309 In this persecution we
have understood that Symeon, the son of Clopas, who, as we have shown, was the
second bishop of the church of Jerusalem,310 suffered martyrdom.

2 Hegesippus, whose words we have already quoted in various places,311 is a
witness to this fact also. Speaking of certain heretics312 he adds that Symeon
was accused by them at this time; and since it was clear that he was a
Christian, he was tortured in various ways for many days, and astonished even
the judge himself and his attendants in the highest degree, and finally he
suffered a death similar to that of our Lord.313

3 But there is nothing like hearing the historian himself, who writes as
follows: "Certain of these heretics brought accusation against Symeon, the son
of Clopas, on the ground that he was a descendant of David314 and a Christian;
and thus he suffered martyrdom, at the age of one hundred and twenty years,315
while Trajan was emperor and Atticus governor."316

4 And the same writer says that his accusers also, when search was made for the
descendants of David, were arrested as belonging to that family.317 And it might
be reasonably assumed that Symeon was one of those that saw and heard the
Lord,318 judging from the length of his life, and from the fact that the Gospel
makes mention of Mary, the wife of Clopas,319 who was the father of Symeon, as
has been already shown.320

5 The same historian says that there were also others, descended from one of the
so-called brothers of the Saviour, whose name was Judas, who, after they had
borne testimony before Domitian, as has been already recorded,321 in behalf of
faith in Christ, lived until the same reign.

6 He writes as follows: "They came, therefore, and took the lead of every
church322 as witnesses323 and as relatives of the Lord. And profound peace being
established in every church, they remained until the reign of the Emperor
Trajan,324 and until the above-mentioned Symeon, son of Clopas, an uncle of the
Lord, was informed against by the heretics, and was himself in like manner
accused for the same cause325 before the governor Atticus.326 And after being
tortured for many days he suffered martyrdom, and all, including even the
proconsul, marveled that, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, he could
endure so much. And orders were given that he should be crucified."

7 In addition to these things the same man, while recounting the events of that
period, records that the Church up to that time had remained a pure and
uncorrupted virgin, since, if there were any that attempted to corrupt the sound
norm of the preaching of salvation, they lay until then concealed in obscure
darkness.

8 But when the sacred college of apostles had suffered death in various forms,
and the generation of those that had been deemed worthy to hear the inspired
wisdom with their own ears had passed away, then the league of godless error
took its rise as a result of the folly of heretical teachers,327 who, because
none of the apostles was still living, attempted henceforth, with a bold face,
to proclaim, in opposition to the preaching of the truth, the `knowledge which
is falsely so-called.'328 Chapter XXXIII. Trajan Forbids the Christians to Be
Sought After.

1 So great a persecution was at that time opened against us in many places that
Plinius Secundus, one of the most noted of governors, being disturbed by the
great number of martyrs, communicated with the emperor concerning the multitude
of those that were put to death for their faith.329 At the same time, he
informed him in his communication that he had not heard of their doing anything
profane or contrary to the laws,-except that they arose at dawn330 and sang
hymns to Christ as a God; but that they, renounced adultery and murder and like
criminal offenses, and did all things in accordance with the laws.

2 In reply to this Trajan made the following decree: that the race of Christians
should not be sought after, but when found should be punished. On account of
this the persecution which had threatened to be a most terrible one was to a
certain degree checked, but there were still left plenty of pretexts for those
who wished to do us harm. Sometimes the people, sometimes the rulers in various
places, would lay plots against us, so that, although no great persecutions took
place, local persecutions were nevertheless going on in particular provinces,331
and many of the faithful endured martyrdom in various forms.

3 We have taken our account from the Latin Apology of Tertullian which we
mentioned above.332 The translation runs as follows:333 "And indeed we have
found that search for us has been forbidden.334 For when Plinius Secundus, the
governor of a province, had condemned certain Christians and deprived them of
their dignity,335 he was confounded by the multitude, and was uncertain what
further course to pursue. He therefore communicated with Trajan the emperor,
informing him that, aside from their unwillingness to sacrifice,336 he had found
no impiety in them.

4 And he reported this also, that the Christians arose337 early in the morning
and sang hymns unto Christ as a God, and for the purpose of preserving their
discipline338 forbade murder, adultery, avarice, robbery, and the like. In reply
to this Trajan wrote that the race of Christians should not be sought after, but
when found should be punished." Such were the events which took place at that
time.

Chapter XXXIV. Evarestus, the Fourth Bishop of the Church of Rome.

1 In the third year of the reign of the emperor mentioned above,339 Clement340
committed the episcopal government of the church of Rome to Evarestus,341 and
departed this life after he had superintended the teaching of the divine word
nine years in all.

Chapter XXXV. Justus, the Third Bishop of Jerusalem.

1 But when Symeon also had died in the manner described,342 a certain Jew by the
name of Justus343 succeeded to the episcopal throne in Jerusalem. He was one of
the many thousands of the circumcision who at that time believed in Christ.

Chapter XXXVI. Ignatius and His Epistles.

1 At that time Polycarp,344 a disciple of the apostles, was a man of eminence in
Asia, having been entrusted with the episcopate of the church of Smyrna by those
who had seen and heard the Lord.

2 And at the same time Papias,345 bishop of the parish of Hierapolis,346 became
well known, as did also Ignatius, who was chosen bishop of Antioch, second in
succession to Peter, and whose fame is still celebrated by a great many.347
Report says that he was sent from Syria to Rome, and became food for wild beasts
on account of his testimony to Christ.348

4 And as he made the journey through Asia under the strictest military
surveillance, he fortified the parishes in the various cities where he stopped
by oral homilies and exhortations, and warned them above all to be especially on
their guard against the heresies that were then beginning to prevail, and
exhorted them to hold fast to the tradition of the apostles. Moreover, he
thought it necessary to attest that tradition in writing, and to give it a fixed
form for the sake of greater security.

5 So when he came to Smyrna, where Polycarp was, he wrote an epistle to the
church of Ephesus,349 in which he. mentions Onesimus, its pastor;350 and another
to the church of Magnesia, situated upon the Maeander, in which he makes mention
again of a bishop Damas; and finally one to the church of Tralles, whose bishop,
he states, was at that time Polybius.

6 In addition to these he wrote also to the church of Rome, entreating them not
to secure his release from martyrdom, and thus rob him of his earnest hope. In
confirmation of what has been said it is proper to quote briefly from this
epistle.

7 He writes as follows:351 "From Syria even unto Rome I fight with wild beasts,
by land and by sea, by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards352 that
is, a company of soldiers who only become worse when they are well treated. In
the midst of their wrongdoings, however, I am more fully learning discipleship,
but I am not thereby justified.353

8 May I have joy of the beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray that I may
find them ready; I will even coax them to devour me quickly that they may not
treat me as they have some whom they have refused to touch through fear.354 And
if they are unwilling, I will compel them. Forgive me.

9 I know what is expedient for me. Now do I begin to be a disciple. May naught
of things visible and things invisible envy me;355 that I may attain unto Jesus
Christ. Let fire and cross and attacks of wild beasts, let wrenching of bones,
cutting of limbs, crushing of the whole body, tortures of the devil,-let all
these come upon me if only I may attain unto Jesus Christ."

10 These things he wrote from the above-mentioned city to the churches referred
to. And when he had left Smyrna he wrote again from Troas356 to the
Philadelphians and to the church of Smyrna; and particularly to Polycarp, who
presided over the latter church. And since he knew him well as an apostolic man,
he commended to him, like a true and good shepherd, the flock at Antioch, and
besought him to care diligently for it.357

11 And the same man, writing to the Smyrnaeans, used the following words
concerning Christ, taken I know not whence:358 "But I know and believe that he
was in the flesh after the resurrection. And when he came to Peter and his
companions he said to them, Take, handle me, and see that I am not an
incorporeal spirit.359 And immediately they touched him and believed."360

12 Irenaeus also knew of his martyrdom and mentions his epistles in the
following words:361 "As one of our people said, when he was condemned to the
beasts on account of his testimony unto God, I am God's wheat, and by the teeth
of wild beasts am I ground, that I may be found pure bread."

13 Polycarp also mentions these letters in the epistle to the Philippians which
is ascribed to him.362 His words are as follows:363 "I exhort all of you,
therefore, to be obedient and to practice all patience such as ye saw with your
own eyes not only in the blessed Ignatius and Rufus and Zosimus,364 but also in
others from among yourselves as well as in Paul himself and the rest of the
apostles; being persuaded that all these ran not in vain, but in faith and
righteousness, and that they are gone to their rightful place beside the Lord,
with whom also they suffered. For they loved not the present world, but him that
died for our sakes and was raised by God for us."

14 And afterwards he adds:365 "You have written to me, both you and Ignatius,
that if any one go to Syria he may carry with him the letters from you. And this
I will do if I have a suitable opportunity, either I myself or one whom I send
to be an ambassador for you also.

15 The epistles of Ignatius which were sent to us by him and the others which we
had with us we sent to you as you gave charge. They are appended to this
epistle, and from them you will be able to derive great advantage. For they
comprise faith and patience, and every kind of edification that pertaineth to
our Lord." So much concerning Ignatius. But he was succeeded by Heros366 in the
episcopate of the church of Antioch.

Chapter XXXVII. The Evangelists that Were Still Eminent at that Time.

1 Among those that were celebrated at that time was Quadratus,367 who, report
says, was renowned along with the daughters of Philip for his prophetical gifts.
And there were many others besides these who were known in those days, and who
occupied the first place among the successors of the apostles. And they also,
being illustrious disciples of such great men, built up the foundations of the
churches which had been laid by the apostles in every place, and preached the
Gospel more and more widely and scattered the saving seeds of the kingdom of
heaven far and near throughout the whole world.368

2 For indeed most of the disciples of that time, animated by the divine word
with a more ardent love for philosophy,369 had already fulfilled the command of
the Saviour, and had distributed their goods to the needy.370 Then starting out
upon long journeys they performed the office of evangelists, being filled with
the desire to preach Christ to those who had not yet heard the word of faith,
and to deliver to them the divine Gospels.

3 And when they had only laid the foundations of the faith in foreign places,
they appointed others as pastors, and entrusted them with the nurture of those
that had recently been brought in, while they themselves went on again to other
countries and nations, with the grace and the co-operation of God. For a great
many wonderful works were done through them by the power of the divine Spirit,
so that at the first hearing whole multitudes of men eagerly embraced the
religion of the Creator of the universe.

4 But since it is impossible for us to enumerate the names of all that became
shepherds or evangelists in the churches throughout the world in the age
immediately succeeding the apostles, we have recorded, as was fitting, the names
of those only who have transmitted the apostolic doctrine to us in writings
still extant.

Chapter XXXVIII. The Epistle of Clement and the Writings Falsely Ascribed to
Him.

1 Thus Ignatius has done in the epistles which we have mentioned,371 and Clement
in his epistle which is accepted by all, and which he wrote in the name of the
church of Rome to the church of Corinth.372 In this epistle he gives many
thoughts drawn from the Epistle to the Hebrews, and also quotes verbally some of
its expressions, thus showing most plainly that it is not a recent production.

2 Wherefore it has seemed reasonable to reckon it with the other writings of the
apostle. For as Paul had written to the Hebrews in his native tongue, some say
that the evangelist Luke, others that this Clement himself, translated the
epistle.

3 The latter seems more probable, because the epistle of Clement and that to the
Hebrews have a similar character in regard to style, and still further because
the thoughts contained in the two works are not very different.373

4 But it must be observed also that there is said to be a second epistle of
Clement. But we do not know that this is recognized like the former, for we do
not find that the ancients have made any use of it.374

5 And certain menhave lately brought forward other wordy and lengthy writings
under his name, containing dialogues of Peter and Apion.375 But no mention has
been made of these by the ancients; for they do not even preserve the pure stamp
of apostolic orthodoxy. The acknowledged writing of Clement is well known. We
have spoken also of the works of Ignatius and Polycarp.376 Chapter XXXIX. The
Writings of Papias.

1 There are extant five books of Papias, which bear the title Expositions of
Oracles of the Lord.377 Irenaeus makes mention of these as the only works
written by him,378 in the following words:379 "These things are attested by
Papias, an ancient man who was a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp, in
his fourth book. For five books have been written by him." These are the words
of Irenaeus.

2 But Papias himself in the preface to his discourses by no means declares that
he was himself a hearer and eye-witness of the holy apostles, but he shows by
the words which he uses that he received the doctrines of the faith from those
who were their friends.380

3 He says: "But I shall not hesitate also to put down for you along with my
interpretations381 whatsoever things I have at any time learned carefully from
the elders382 and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth. For I did not,
like the multitude, take pleasure in those that speak much, but in those that
teach the truth; not in those that relate strange commandments, but in those
that deliver383 the commandments given by the Lord to faith,384 and springing
from the truth itself.

4 If, then, any one came, who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned
him in regard to the words of the elders,-what Andrew or what Peter said, or
what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew,
or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion385 and
the presbyter John,386 the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did not think that
what was to be gotten from the books387 would profit me as much as what came
from the living and abiding voice."

5 It is worth while observing here that the name John is twice enumerated by
him.388 The first one he mentions in connection with Peter and James and Matthew
and the rest of the apostles, clearly meaning the evangelist; but the other John
he mentions after an interval, and places him among others outside of the number
of the apostles, putting Aristion before him, and he distinctly calls him a
presbyter.

6 This shows that the statement of those is true, who say that there were two
persons in Asia that bore the same name, and that there were two tombs in
Ephesus, each of which, even to the present day, si called John's.389 It is
important to notice this. For it is probable that it was the second, if one is
not willing to admit that it was the first that saw the Revelation, which is
ascribed by name to John390

7 And Papias, of whom we are now speaking, confesses that he received the words
of the apostles from those that followed them, but says that he was himself a
hearer of Aristion and the presbyter John. At least he mentions them frequently
by name, and gives their traditions in his writings. These things we hope, have
not been uselessly adduced by us.

8 But it is fitting to subjoin to the words of Papias which have been quoted,
other passages from his works in which he relates some other wonderful events
which he claims to have received from tradition.

9 That Philip the apostle dwelt at Hierapolis with his daughters has been
already stated.391 But it must be noted here that Papias, their contemporary,
says that he heard a wonderful tale from the daughters of Philip. For he relates
that in his time392 one rose from the dead. And he tells another wonderful story
of Justus, surnamed Barsabbas: that he drank a deadly poison, and yet, by the
grace of the Lord, suffered no harm.

10 The Book of Acts records that the holy apostles after the ascension of the
Saviour, put forward this Justus, together with Matthias, and prayed that one
might be chosen in place of the traitor Judas, to fill up their number. The
account is as follows: "And they put forward two, Joseph, called Barsabbas, who
was surnamed Justus, and Matthias; and they prayed and said."393

11 The same writer gives also other accounts which he says came to him through
unwritten tradition, certain strange parables and teachings of the Saviour, and
some other more mythical things.394

12 To these belong his statement that there will be a period of some thousand
years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be
set up in material form on this very earth.395 I suppose he got these ideas
through a misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts, not perceiving that the
things said by them were spoken mystically in figures.

13 For he appears to have been of very limited understanding,396 as one can see
from his discourses. but it was due to him that so many of the Church Fathers
after him adopted a like opinion, urging in their own support the antiquity of
the man; as for instance Iranaeus and any one else that may have proclaimed
similar views.397

14 Papias gives also in his own work other accounts of the words of the Lord on
the authority of Aristion who was mentioned above, and traditions as handed down
by the presbyter John; to which we refer those who are fond of learning. But now
we must add to the words of his which we have already quoted the tradition which
he gives in regard to Mark, the author of the Gospel.

15 "This also the presbyter398 said: Mark having become the interpreter of
Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of
the things said or done by Christ.399 For he neither heard the Lord nor followed
him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to
the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of
the Lord's discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some
things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any
of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely." These
things are related 16 by Papias concerning Mark. 16But concerning Matthew he
writes as follows: "So then Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language,
and every one interpreted them as he was able." And the same writer uses
testimonies from the first Epistle of John and from that of Peter likewise. And
he relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the
Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. These things we
have thought it necessary to observe in addition to what has been already
stated.

1: According to Lipsius, the legends concerning the labors of the apostles in
various countries were all originally connected with that of their separation at
Jerusalem, which is as old as the second century. But this separation was put at
various dates by different traditions, varying from immediately after the
Ascension to twenty-four years later. A lost book, referred to by the Decretum
Gelasii as Liber qui appellatus sortes Apostolorurn apocryphus, very likely
contained the original tradition, and an account of the fate of the apostles,
and was probably of Gnostic or Manichean origin. The efforts to derive from the
varying traditions any trustworthy particulars as to the apostles themselves is
almost wholly vain. The various traditions not only assign different fields of
labor to the different apostles, but also give different lists of the apostles
themselves. See Lipsius' article on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles in Smith
and Wace's Dict. of Christ. Biog. I. p. 17 sqq. The extant Apocryphal Gospels,
Acts, Apocalypses, &c., are translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. VIII. p.
361 sqq. Lipsius states that, according to the oldest form of the tradition, the
apostles were divided into three groups: first, Peter and Andrew, Matthew and
Bartholomew, who were said to have preached in the region of the Black Sea;
second, Thomas, Thaddeus, and Simeon, the Canaanite, in Parthia; third, John and
Philip, in Asia Minor.

2: Parthia, in the time of the apostles, was an independent kingdom, extending
from the Indus to the Tigris, and from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf. This
is the oldest form of the tradition in regard to Thomas (see preceding note). It
is found also in the Clementine Recognitions, IX. 29, and in Socrates, H. E. I.
19. Rufinus ( H. E. II. 5) and Socrates ( H. E. IV. 18) speak of Edessa as his
burial place. Later traditions extended his labors eastward as far as India, and
made him suffer martyrdom in that land; and there his remains were exhibited
down to the sixteenth century. According to the Martyrium Romanum, however, his
remains were brought from India to Edessa, and from thence to Ortona, in Italy,
during the Crusades. The Syrian Christians in India called themselves
Thomas-Christians; but the name cannot be traced beyond the eighth century, and
is derived, probably, from a Nestorian missionary.

3: The name Scythia was commonly used by the ancients, in a very loose sense, to
denote all the region lying north of the Caspian and Black Seas. But two
Scythias were distinguished in more accurate usage: a European Scythia, lying
north of the Black Sea, between the Danube and the Tanais, and an Asiatic
Scythia, extending eastward from the Ural. The former is here meant.

4: The traditions respecting Andrew are very uncertain and contradictory,
though, as remarked above (note 1), the original form, represented here,
assigned as his field the region in the neighborhood of the Black Sea. His
traditional activity in Scythia has made him the patron saint of Russia. He is
also called the patron saint of Greece, where he is reported to have been
crucified; but his activity there rests upon a late tradition. His body is said
to have been carried to Constantinople in 357 (cf. Philostorgius, Hist. Eccles.
III. 2), and during the Crusades transferred to Amalpae in Italy, in whose
cathedral the remains are still shown. Andrew is in addition the patron saint of
Scotland; but the tradition of his activity there dates back only to the eighth
century (cf. Skene's Celtic Scotland, II. 221 sq.). Numerous other regions are
claimed, by various traditions, to have been the scene of his labors.

5: Proconsular Asia included only a narrow strip of Asia Minor, lying upon the
coast of the Mediterranean and comprising Mysia, Lydia, and Caria.

6: The universal testimony of antiquity assigns John's later life to Ephesus:
e.g. Irenaeus, Adv. Hoer. III. 1. 1 and 3. 4, etc.; Clement of Alex., Quis Dives
Salvetur, c. 42 (quoted by Eusebius, chap. 23, below); Polycrates in his Epistle
to Victor (quoted by Eusebius in chap. 31, below, and in Bk. V. chap. 24); and
many others. The testimony of Irenaeus is especially weighty, for the series:
Irenaeus, the pupil of Polycarp, the pupil of John, forms a complete chain such
as we have in no other case. Such testimony, when its force is broken by no
adverse tradition, ought to be sufficient to establish John's residence in
Ephesus beyond the shadow of a doubt, but it has been denied by many of the
critics who reject the Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel (e.g. Keim,
Holtz-mann, the author of Supernat. Religion, and others) though the denial is
much less positive now than it was a few years ago. The chief arguments urged
against the residence of John in Ephesus are two, both a silentio: first,
Clement in his first Epistle to the Corinthians speaks of the apostles in such a
way as to seem to imply that they were all dead; secondly, in the Ignatian
Epistles, Paul is mentioned, but not John, which is certainly very remarkable,
as one is addressed to Ephesus itself. In reply it may be said that such an
interpretation of Clement's words is not necessary, and that the omission of
John in the epistles of Ignatius becomes perfectly natural if the Epistles are
thrown into the time of Hadrian or into the latter part of Trajan's reign, as
they ought to be (cf. chap. 36, note 4). In the face of the strong testimony for
John's Ephesian residence these two objections must be overruled. The
traditional view is defended by all conservative critics as well as by the
majority even of those who deny the Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel
(cf. especially Hilgenfeld in his Einleitung, and Weizs,,cker in his
Apostaliches Zeitalter ). The silence of Paul's epistles and of the Acts proves
that John cannot have gone to Ephesus until after Paul had permanently left
there, and this we should naturally expect to be the case. Upon the time of
John's banishment to Patmos, see Bk. III. chap. 18, note 1. Tradition reports
that he lived until the reign of Trajan (98-117). Cf. Irenaeus, II. 22. 5 and
III. 3. 4.

7: Origen in this extract seems to be uncertain how long John remained in
Ephesus and when he died.

8: The language of Origen ( kekhruxenai eoiken , instead of logoj exei or
paradosij periexei 9: Five provinces of Asia Minor, mentioned in 1 Pet. i. 1.

10: Origen is the first to record that Peter was crucified with his head
downward, but the tradition afterward became quite common. It is of course not
impossible, but the absence of any reference to it by earlier Fathers (even by
Tertullian, who mentions the crucifixion), and its decidedly legendary
character, render it exceedingly doubtful.

11: Cf. Rom. xv. 19. Illyricum was a Roman province lying along the eastern
coast of the Adriatic.

12: See above, Bk. II. chap. 25, note 5.

13: This fragment of Origen has been preserved by no one else. It is impossible
to tell where the quotation begins-whether with the words "Thomas according to
tradition received Parthia," as I have given it, or with the words "Peter
appears to have preached," etc., as Bright gives it.

14: The actual order of the first three so-called bishops of Rome is a greatly
disputed matter. The oldest tradition is that given by Irenaeus ( Adv. Hoer.
III. 3. 3) and followed here by Eusebius, according to which the order was
Linus, Anencletus, Clement. Hippolytus gives a different order, in which he is
followed by many Fathers; and in addition to these two chief arrangements all
possible combinations of the three names, and all sorts of theories to account
for the difficulties and to reconcile the discrepancies in the earlier lists,
have been proposed. In the second chapter of the so-called Epistle of Clement to
James (a part of the Pseudo-Clementine Literature prefixed to the Homilies ) it
is said that Clement was ordained by Peter, and Salmon thinks that this caused
Hippolytus to change the order, putting Clement first. Gieseler ( Eccles. Hist.,
Eng. Trans., I. p. 107, note 10) explains the disagreements in the various
traditions by supposing that the three were presbyters together at Rome, and
that later, in the endeavor to make out a complete list of bishops, they were
each successively elevated by tradition to the episcopal chair. It is at least
certain that Rome at that early date had no monarchical bishop, and therefore
the question as to the order of these first three so-called bishops is not a
question as to a fact, but simply as to which is the oldest of various unfounded
traditions. The Roman Church gives the following order: Linus, Clement, Cletus,
Anacletus, following Hippolytus in making Cletus and Anacletus out of the single
Anencletus of the original tradition. The apocryphal martyrdoms of Peter and
Paul are falsely ascribed to Linus (see Tischendorf, Acta Apost. Apocr. p. xix.
sq.). Eusebius (chap. 13, below) says that Linus was bishop for twelve years. In
his Chron. (Armen.) he says fourteen years, while Jerome says eleven. These
dates are about as reliable as the episcopal succession itself. We have no
trustworthy information as to the personal character and history of Linus. Upon
the subjects discussed in this note see especially Salmon's articles, Clemens
Romanus, and Linus, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog.

15: 2Tim. iv. 21. The same identification is made by Irenaeus, Adv. Hoer. III.
3.3, and by Pseudo-Ignatius in the Epistle to the Trallians (longer version),
chap. 7.

16: The testimony of tradition is unanimous for the authenticity of the first
Epistle of Peter. It was known to Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Papias, Hermas, &c.
(the Muratorian Fragment, however, omits it), and was cited under the name of
Peter by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria, from whose time its
canonicity and Petrine authorship were established, so that Eusebius rightly
puts it among the hamologoumena. Semler, in 1784, was the first to deny its
direct Petrine authorship, and Cludius, in 1808, pronounced it absolutely
ungenuine. The Tübingen School followed, and at the present time the genuineness
is denied by all the negative critics, chiefly on account of the strong Pauline
character of the epistle (cf. Holtzmann, Einleitung, p. 487 sqq., also Weiss,
Einleitung, p. 428 sqq., who confines the resemblances to the Epistles to the
Romans and to the Ephesians, and denies the general Pauline character of the
epistle). The great majority of scholars, however, maintain the Petrine
authorship. A new opinion, expressed by Harnack, upon the assumption of the
distinctively Pauline character of the epistle, is that it was written during
the apostolic age by some follower of Paul, and that the name of Peter was
afterward attached to it, so that it represents no fraud on the part of the
writer, but an effort of a later age to find an author for the anonymous
epistle. In support of this is urged the fact that though the epistle is so
frequently quoted in the second century, it is never connected with Peter's name
until the time of Irenaeus. (Cf. Harnack's Lehre der Zwölf Apostel, p. 106,
note, and his Dogmengeschichte, I. p. 278, note 2.) This theory has found few
supporters.

17: oi palai presbuteroi . On the use of the term "elders" among the Fathers,
see below, chap. 39, note 6.

18: wj anamfilektw .

19: ouk endiaqhkon men einai pareilhfamen

20: Although disputed by many, as already remarked, and consequently not looked
upon as certainly canonical until the end of the fourth century, the epistle was
yet used, as Eusebius says, quite widely from the time of Origen on, e.g. by
Origen, Firmilian, Cyprian, Hippolytus, Methodius, etc. The same is true,
however, of other writings, which the Church afterward placed among the
Apocrypha.

21: These praceij (or periodoi , as they are often called) Petrou periodoi twn
apostolwn

22: This Gospel is mentioned by Serapion as in use in the church of Rhossus
(quoted by Eusebius, Bk. VI. chap. 12, below), but was rejected by him because
of the heretical doctrines which it contained. It is mentioned again by
Eusebius, III. 25, only to be rejected as heretical; also by Origen ( in Matt.
Vol. X. 17) and by Jerome ( de vir. ill. I), who follows Eusebius in pronouncing
it an heretical work employed by no early teachers of the Christian Church.
Lipsius regards it as probably a Gnostic recast of one of the Canonical Gospels.
From Serapion's account of this Gospel (see below, Bk. VI. chap. 12), we see
that it differs from the Canonical Gospels, not in denying their truth, or in
giving a contradictory account of Christ's life, but rather in adding to the
account given by them. This, of course, favors Lipsius' hypothesis; and in any
case he is certainly quite right in denying that the Gospel was an original work
made use of by Justin Martyr, and that it in any way lay at the base of our
present Gospel of Mark. The Gospel (as we learn from the same chapter) was used
by the Docetoe, but that does not imply that it contained what we call Docetic
ideas of Christ's body (cf. note 8 on that chapter). The Gospel is no longer
extant. See Lipsius, in Smith and Wace's Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. p. 712.

23: This Preaching of Peter ( Khrugma Petrou khrugmata

24: The Apocalypse of Peter enjoyed considerable favor in the early Church and
was accepted by some Fathers as a genuine work of the apostle. It is mentioned
in the Muratorian Fragment in connection with the Apocalypse of John, as a part
of the Roman Canon, and is accepted by the author of the fragment himself;
although he says that some at that time rejected it. Clement of Alexandria, in
his Hypotyposes (according to Eusebius, IV. 14, below), commented upon it, thus
showing that it belonged at that time to the Alexandrian Canon. It the third
century it was still received in the North African Church (so Harnack, who
refers to the stichometry of the Codex Claramontanus). The Eclogae or
Prophetical Selections of Clement of Alexandria give it as a genuine work of
Peter (§§41, 48, 49, p. 1000 sq., Potter's ed.), and so Methodius of Tyre (
Sympos. XI. 6, p. 16, ed. Jahn, according to Lipsius). After Eusebius time the
work seems to have been universally regarded as spurious, and thus, as its
canonicity depended upon its apostolic origin (see chap. 24, note 19), it
gradually fell out of the Canon. It nevertheless held its place for centuries
among the semi-scriptural books, and was read in many churches. According to
Sozomen, H. E. VII. 19, it was read at Easter, which shows that it was treated
with especial respect. Nicephorus in his Stichometry puts it among the
Antilegomena, in immediate connection with the Apocalypse of John. As Lipsius
remarks, its "lay-recognition in orthodox circles proves that it could not have
had a Gnostic origin, nor otherwise have contained what was offensive to
Catholic Christians" (see Lipsius, Dict. of Christ. Biog. I. p. 130 sqq.). Only
a few fragments of the work are extant, and these are given by Hilgenfeld, in
his Nov. Test. extra Can. receptum, IV. 74 sq., and by Grabe, Spic. Patr. I. 71
sqq.

25: oud/ olw/ en kaqolikaij ismen paradedomena .

26: Eusebius exaggerates in this statement. The Apocalypse of Peter was in quite
general use in the second century, as we learn from the Muratorian Fragment; and
Clement (as Eusebius himself says in VI. 14) wrote a commentary upon it in
connection with the other Antilegomena.

27: twn antilegomenwn .

28: peri twn endiaqhkwn kai omologoumenwn .

29: wn monhn mian gnhsian egnwn .

30: As above; see note 2.

31: The thirteen Pauline Epistles of our present Canon, and the Epistle to the
Hebrews. These formed for Eusebius an absolutely undisputed part of the Canon
(cf. chap. 25, below, where he speaks of them with the same complete assurance),
and were universally accepted until the present century. The external testimony
for all of them is ample, going back (the Pastoral Epistles excepted) to the
early part of the second century. The Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, and
Galatians have never been disputed (except by an individual here and there,
especially during the last few years in Holland), even the Tübingen School
accepting them as genuine works of Paul. The other epistles have not fared so
well. The genuineness of Ephesians was first questioned by Usteri in 1824 and De
Watte in 1826, and the Tübingen School rejected it. Scholars are at present
greatly divided; the majority of negative critics reject it, while many liberal
and all conservative scholars defend it. Colossians was first attacked by
Mayerhoff in 1838, followed by the whole Tübingen School. It fares to-day
somewhat better than Ephesians. It is still, however, rejected by many extreme
critics, while others leave the matter in suspense (e.g. Weizsäcker in his
Apostolisches Zeitalter ). Since 1872, when the theory was proposed by
Holtzmann, some scholars have held that our present Epistle contains a genuine
Epistle of Paul to the Colossians, of which it is a later revision and
expansion. Baur and the Tübingen School were the first to attack Philippians as
a whole, and it too is still rejected by many critics, but at the same time it
is more widely accepted than e ither Ephesians or Colossians (e.g. Weizsäcker
and even Hilgenfeld defend its genuineness). Second Thessalonians was first
attacked by Schmidt in 1801, followed by a number of scholars, until Baur
extended the attack to the first Epistle also. Second Thessalonians is still
almost unanimously rejected by negative critics, and even by some moderates,
while First Thessalonians has regained the support of many of the former (e.g.
Hilgenfeld, Weizsäcker, and even Holtzmann), and is entirely rejected by
comparatively few critics. Philemon-which was first attacked by Baur-is quite
generally accepted, but the Pastoral Epistles are almost as generally rejected,
except by the regular conservative school (upon the Pastorals, see Bk. II. chap.
22, note 8, above). For a concise account of the state of criticism upon each
epistle, see Holtzmann's Einleitung. For a defense of them all, see the
Einleitung of Weiss.

32: tinej hqethkasi antilegesqai , in the present sentence. Upon the canonicity
of the epistle, see still further chap. 25, note 1. For a discussion of the
epistle, see especially the N. T. Introductions of Weiss and Holtzmann.

33: antilegesqai .

34: See Bk. VI. chaps. 14, 20, 25.

35: These praceij are mentioned also in chap. 25, below, where they are classed
among the noqoi periodoi or praceij Paulou 36: ouoe mhn taj legomenaj autou
praceij en anamfilektoij pareihfa .

37: See Rom. xvi. 14. The greater part of this last chapter of Romans is
considered by many a separate epistle addressed to Ephesus. This has been quite
a common opinion since 1829, when it was first broached by David Schulz (
Studien und Kritiken, p. 629 sq.), and is accepted even by many conservative
scholars (e.g. Weiss), while on the other hand it is opposed by many of the
opposite school. While Aquila and Priscilla, of verse 3, and Epaenetus, of verse
5, seem to point to Ephesus, and the fact that so many personal friends are
greeted, leads us to look naturally to the East as Paul's field of labor, where
he had formed so many acquaintances, rather than to Rome, where he had not been;
yet on the other hand such names as Junias, Narcissus, Rufus, Hermas, Nereus,
Aristobulus, and Herodion point strongly to Rome. We must, however, be content
to leave the matter undecided, but may be confident that the evidence for the
Ephesian hypothesis is certainly, in the face of the Roman names mentioned, and
of universal tradition (for which as for Eusebius the epistle is a unit), not
strong enough to establish it.

38: The Shepherd of Hermas was in circulation in the latter half of the second
century, and is quoted by Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. IV. 20. 2) as Scripture,
although he omits it in his discussion of Scripture testimonies in Bk. III.
chap. 9 sqq., which shows that he considered it not quite on a level with
regular Scripture. Clement of Alexandria and Origen often quote it as an
inspired book, though the latter expressly distinguishes it from the canonical
books, admitting that it is disputed by many (cf. De Prin. IV. II). Eusebius in
chap. 25 places it among the noqoi 39: Rom. xv. 19.

40: From Acts ix. on.

41: In chap. 3, §1.

42: 1 Pet. i. 1.

43: Phil. ii. 25;Philem. 2.

44: Barnabas (Acts ix. 27, and often); John Mark (xii. 25;xiii. 13;xv. 37,39);
Silas (xv. 40); Timothy (xvi. 1 sqq. and often); Aquila and Priscilla (xviii.);
Erastus (xix. 22); Gaius of Macedonia (xix. 29); Aristarchus (xix. 29; xx. 4;
xxvii. 2); Sopater,Secundus, Gaius of Derbe (perhaps the same as the Gaius of
Macedonia?), and Tychichus (xx. 4); Trophimus (xx. 4; xxi. 29).

45: That Timothy was the first bishop of Ephesus is stated also by the Apost.
Const. (VII. 46), and by Nicephorus ( H. E. III. 11), who records (upon what
authority we do not know) that he suffered martyrdom under Domitian. Against the
tradition that he labored during his later years in Ephesus there is nothing to
be urged; though on the other hand the evidence for it amounts to little, as it
seems to be no more than a conclusion drawn from the Epistles to Timothy, though
hardly a conclusion drawn by Eusebius himself, for he uses the word istoreitai

46: Cf. Tit. i. 5. Titus is commonly connected by tradition with Crete, of which
he is supposed to have been the first bishop,-the later institution being again
pushed back into the first century. In the fragment de Vita et Actis Titi, by
the lawyer Zenas (in Fabric. Cod. Apoc. N.T. II. 831 sqq., according to Howson,
in Smith's Dict. of the Bible ), he is said to have been bishop of Gortyna, a
city of Crete (where still stand the ruins of a church which bears his name),
and of a royal Cretan family by birth. This tradition is late, and, of course,
of little authority, but at the same time, accords very well with all that we
know of Titus; and consequently there is no reason for denying it in toto.
According to 2 Tim. iv. 10, he went, or was sent, into Dalmatia; but universal
tradition ascribes his later life and his death to Crete. Candia, the modern
capital, claims the honor of being his burial place (see Cave's Apostolici, ed.
1677, p. 63). Titus is a saint, in the Roman Catholic sense, and is commemorated
January 4.

47: Of Luke personally we know very little. He is not mentioned in the Acts, and
only three times in Paul's epistles (Col. iv. 14; Philem. 24;2 Tim. iv. 11),
from which passages we learn that he was a physician, was one of Paul's
fellow-workers who was very dear to him, and was with him during his last
imprisonment. Irenaeus, who is the first to ascribe the third Gospel and the
Acts to this Luke, seems to know nothing more about him personally. Eusebius is
the first to record that he was born at Antioch; but the tradition must have
been universally accepted in his day, as he states it without any misgivings and
with no qualifying phrase. Jerome ( de vir. ill. 7 ) and many later writers
follow Eusebius in this statement. There is no intrinsic improbability in the
tradition, which seems, in fact, to be favored by certain minor notices in the
Acts (see Schaff, Ch. Hist. I. 651). Gregory Nazianzen ( Orat. 25) says that he
labored in Achaia, and in Orat. 4 he calls him a martyr. Jerome ( ibid. ) says
that he was buried in Constantinople. According to Nicephorus ( H. E. II. 43)
and later writers, Luke was a painter of great skill; but this late tradition,
of which the earlier Fathers know nothing, is quite worthless. Epiphanius (
Haer. II. 11) makes him one of the Seventy, which does not accord with Luke's
own words at the beginning of his Gospel, where he certainly implies that he
himself was not an eye-witness of the events which he records. In the same
connection, Epiphanius says that he labored in Dalmatia, Gallia, Italy, and
Macedonia,-a tradition which has about as much worth as most such traditions in
regard to the fields of labor of the various apostles and their followers.
Theophylact ( On Luke xxiv. 13-24) records that some supposed that he was one of
the disciples with whom Christ walked to Emmaus, and this ingenious but
unfounded guess has gained some modern supporters (e.g. Lange). He is a saint in
the Roman Catholic sense, and is commemorated October 18.

48: See Col. iv. 14.

49: Of Luke's acquaintance with the other apostles we know nothing, although, if
we suppose him to have been the author of the "We" sections in the Acts, he was
with Paul in Jerusalem at the time he was taken prisoner (Acts xxi.), when he
met James at least, and possibly others of the Twelve. It is not at all
improbable that in the course of his life he became acquainted with several of
the apostles.

50: The testimony to the existence of our third Gospel, although it is not so
old as that for Matthew and Mark, is still very early. It was used by Marcion,
who based upon it his own mutilated gospel, and is quoted very frequently by
Justin Martyr. The Gospel as first distinctly ascribed to Luke by Irenõus (III.
1. 1) and by the Muratorian Fragment. From that time on tradition was unanimous
both as to its authorship and its authority. The common opinion-still defended
by the great majority of conservative critics-has always been that the third
Gospel was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. The radical critics of
the present century, however, bring its composition down to a latter
date-ranging all the way from 70 to 140 (the latter is Baur's date, which is now
universally recognized as very wild). Many conservative critics put its
composition after the destruction of Jerusalem on account of the peculiar form
of its eschatological discourses-e.g. Weiss, who puts it between 70 and 80
(while putting Matthew and Mark before the destruction of Jerusalem). The
traditional and still prevalent opinion is that Luke's Gospel was written later
than those of Matthew and Mark. See the various commentaries and New Testament
Introductions, and for a clear exhibition of the synoptical problem in general,
see Schaff's Ch. Hist. I. p. 607 sqq. On Luke in particular, p. 648 sqq.

51: Luke I. 2.Luke I. 3.

52: Traces of a knowledge of the Acts are found in the Apostolic Fathers, in
Justin, and in Tatian, and before the end of the second century the book
occupied a place in the Canon undisputed except by heretics, such as the
Marcionites, Manichean's, &c. The Muratorian Fragment and Irenaeus (III. 14) are
the first to mention Luke as the author of the Acts, but from that time on
tradition has been unanimous in ascribing it to him. The only exception occurs
in the case of Photius ( ad Amphil. Quoest. 123, ed. Migne), who states that the
work was ascribed by some to Clement by others to Barnabas, and by others to
Luke; but it is probable as Weiss remarks that Photius, in this case, confuses
the Acts with the Epistle to the Hebrews. As to the date of its composition.
Irenaeus (III. I. I) seems (one cannot speak with certainty, as some have done)
to put it after the death of Peter and Paul, and therefore, necessarily, the
Acts still later. The Muratorian Fragment implies that the work was written at
least after the death of Peter. Later, however, the tradition arose that the
work was written during the lifetime of Paul (so Jerome, de vir. ill. 7), and
this has been the prevailing opinion among conservative scholars ever since,
although many put the composition between the death of Paul and the destruction
of Jerusalem; while some (e.g. Weiss) put it after the destruction of Jerusalem,
though still assigning it to Luke. The opposite school of critics deny Luke's
authorship, throwing the book into the latter part of the first century
(Scholten, Hilgenfeld, &c.), or into the times of Trajan and Hadrian (e.g.
Volkmar, Keim, Hausrath, &c.). The Tubingen School saw in the Acts a
"tendency-writing," in which the history was intentionally perverted. This
theory finds few supporters at present, even among the most extreme critics, all
of whom, however, consider the book a source of the second rank, containing much
that is legendary and distorted and irreconcilable with Paul's Epistles, which
are looked upon as the only reliable source. The question turns upon the
relation of the author of the "we" sections to the editor of the whole.
Conservative scholars agree with universal tradition in identifying them (though
this is not necessary in order to maintain the historical accuracy of the work),
while the opposite school denies the identity, considering the "we" sections
authentic historical accounts from the pen of a companion of Paul, which were
afterward incorporated into a larger work by one who was not a pupil of Paul.
The identity of the author of the third Gospel and of the Acts is now admitted
by all parties. See the various Commentaries and New Testament Introductions;
and upon the sources of the Acts, compare especially Weizsacker's Apost.
Zeitalter, p. 182 sqq., and Weiss' Einleitung, p. 569 sq.

53: Rom. ii. 16Rom. xvi. 25;2 Tim. ii. 8. Eusebius uses the expression fasi
euaggelion

54: 2 Tim. iv. 10, where the Greek word used is eporeuqh , which means simply
"went" or "is gone." That Paul had sent him as Eusebius states (using the word
steilamenoj ) is not implied in the epistle. Instead of eij taj Galliaj (or thn
Gallian ) most of the ancient mss. of the New Testament have eij Galatian ,
which is the reading of the Textus Receptus, of Tregelles, of Westcott and Hort
and others. Some mss., however (including the Sinaitic), have Gallian , which
Tischendorf adopts; and some of the mss. of Eusebius also have this form, though
the majority read taj Galliaj . Christophorsonus in his edition of Eusebius
reads epi thn Galatian Gallia and not Galatia : on gar en th Galatia wj
planhqenthj nomisonsin, alla en th Gallia . Theodoret (in 2 Tim. IV. 10) reads
Galatian , but interprets it as meaning taj Galliaj: outw gar ekalounto palai .

55: 2 Tim. iv. 21.

56: See chap. 2, note 1, above.

57: Clement is mentioned in Phil. iv. 3, but is not called a "fellow-soldier."
Eusebius was evidently thinking of Paul's references to Epaphroditus (Phil. ii.
25) and to Archippus (Philem. 2,) whom he calls his fellow-soldiers. The Clement
to whom Eusebius here refers was a very important personage in the early Roman
church, being known to tradition as one of its first three bishops. He has
played a prominent part in Church history on account of the numerous writings
which have passed under his name. We know nothing certain about his life.
Eusebius identifies him with the Philippian Clement mentioned by Paul,-an
identification apparently made first by Origen, and after him repeated by a
great many writers. But the identification is, to say the least, very doubtful,
and resting as it does upon an agreement in a very common name deserves little
consideration. It was quite customary in the early Church to find Paul's
companions, whenever possible, in responsible and influential positions during
the latter part of the first century. A more plausible theory, which, if true,
would throw an interesting light upon Clement and the Roman church of his day,
is that which identifies him with the consul Flavius Clement, a relative of the
emperor Domitian (see below, chap. 18, note 6). Some good reasons for the
identification might be urged, and his rank would then explain well Clement's
influential position in the Church. But as pointed out in chap. 18, note 6, it
is extremely improbable that the consul Flavius Clement was a Christian; and in
any case a fatal objection to the identification (which is nevertheless adopted
by Hilgenfeld and others) is the fact that Clement is nowhere spoken of as a
martyr until the time of Rufinus, and also that no ancient writer identifies him
or connects him in any way with the consul, although Eusebius' mention of the
latter in chap. 23 shows that he was a well-known person. When we remember the
tendency of the early Church to make all its heroes martyrs, and to ascribe high
birth to them, the omission in this case renders the identification, we may say,
virtually impossible. More probable is the conjecture of Lightfoot, that he was
a freedman belonging to the family of the consul Clement, whose name he bore.
This is simply conjecture, however, and is supported by no testimony. Whoever
Clement was, he occupied a very prominent position in the early Roman church,
and wrote an epistle to the Corinthians which is still extant (see below, chap.
16; and upon the works falsely ascribed to him, see chap. 38). In regard to his
place in the succession of Roman bishops, see chap. 2, note 1, above. or a full
account of Clement, see especially Harnack's Prolegomena to his edition of
Clement's Epistle ( Patrum Apost. Opera, Vol. 1.), Salmon's article, Clemens
Romanus, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog., Schaff's Ch. Hist. II. 636 sq., and
Donaldson's Hist. of Christ. Lit. and Doctrine, I. p. 90 sq.

58: Acts xvii. 34. This Dionysius has played an important part in Church
history, as the pretended author of a series of very remarkable writings, which
pass under the name of Dionysius, the Areopagite, but which in reality date from
the fifth or sixth century and probably owe their origin to the influence of
Neo-Platonism. The first mention of these writings is in the records of the
Council of Constantinople (532 a.d.); but from that time on they were constantly
used and unanimously ascribed to Dionysius, the Areopagite, until, in the
seventeenth century, their claims to so great antiquity were disputed. They are
still defended, however, in the face of the most positive evidence, by many
Roman Catholic writers. The influence of these works upon the theology of the
Middle Ages was prodigious. Scholasticism may be said to be based upon them, for
Thomas Aquinas used them, perhaps, more than any other source; so much so, that
he has been said "to have drawn his whole theological system from Dionysius."

59: Upon Dionysius of Corinth, see Bk. IV. chap. 23, below.

60: Nero was emperor from Oct. 16, 54, to June 9, 68 a.d.

61: Eusebius figures are incorrect. He omits Vitellius entirely, while he
stretches Galba's and Otho's reigns to make them cover a period of eighteen
months, instead of nine (Galba reigned from June 9, 68, to Jan. 15, 69; and Otho
from Jan. 15 to April 20, 69). The total of the three reigns of Galba, Otho, and
Vitellius was about eighteen months.

62: Vespasian was proclaimed emperor by the prefect of Egypt at Alexandria, July
I, 69, while Vitellius was the acknowledged emperor in Italy. His choice was
immediately ratified by his army in Judea, and then by all the legions in the
East. Vitellius was conquered by Vespasian's generals, and slain in Italy, Dec.
20, 69, while Vespasian himself went to Alexandria. The latter was immediately
recognized by the Senate, and reached Italy in the summer of 70. Eusebius is
thus approximately correct, though he is not exact as to details.

63: Titus undertook the prosecution of the war against the Jews after his
father's departure, and brought the siege of Jerusalem to an end, Sept. 8, 70
a.d.

64: SeeActs vii. 8 sqq.

65: SeeActs xii. 2.

66: See Bk. II. chap. 23.

67: See chap. 1, note 1.

68: SeeMatt. xxviii. 19.

69: Pella was a town situated beyond the Jordan, in the north of Perea, within
the dominions of Herod Agrippa II. The surrounding population was chiefly
Gentile. See Pliny V. I8, and Josephus, B. F. III. 3. 3, and I. 4. 8. Epiphanius
( De pond. et mens. 15) also records this flight of the Christians to Pella.

70: Dan. ix. 27.

71: Josephus, B. F. Bks. V. and VI.

72: B. F. VI. 9,§§3 and 4. Eusebius simply gives round numbers. Josephus in §3
puts the number at 2,700,000, exclusive of the "unclean and the strangers" who
were not allowed to eat the Passover. In the same work, Bk. II. chap. 14, §3,
Josephus states that when Cestius Gallus, governor of Syria, came to Jerusalem
at the time of the Passover in 65 a.d., no less than 3,000,000 persons came
about him to enter complaint against the procurator Florus. These numbers are
grossly exaggerated. Tacitus estimates the number in the city at the time of the
siege as 600,000, but this, too, is far above the truth. The writer of the
article Ferusalem, in Smith's Bible Dict., estimates that the city can never
have had a population of more than 50,000 souls, and he concludes that at the
time of the siege there cannot have been more than 60,000 or 70,000 collected
within the walls. This is probably too low an estimate, but shows how far out of
the way the figures of Josephus and Tacitus must be.

73: Josephus, B. J. Bk. V. chap. 10, §§2 and 3.

74: Ibid. chap. 12, §§3 and 4.

75: Titus had just completed the building of a wall about the city by which all
egress from the town was shut off. Josephus gives an account of the wall in the
paragraph immediately preceding.

76: Ibid. chap. 13, §6.

77: Ibid. Bk. VI. chap. 3, §§3 and 4.

78: 'Attikwn tessarwn ; the word draxmwn is to be supplied. An Attic drachm,
according to some authorities, was equal to about fifteen cents, according to
others (among them Liddell and Scott), to about nineteen cents.

79: bagezwr . Some mss. have baqexwr , and the mss. of Josephus have bhqezwb ,
which Whiston translates Bethezub.

80: "In accordance with the idea that the souls of the murdered tormented, as
furies, those who were most guilty of their death" (Stroth).

81: hdh . All the mss. of Eusebius read umwn . Some of the mss. of Josephus read
hdh hmisu , a half, and he is followed by the English and German translators.
Some change from the reading of the mss. of Eusebius is certainly necessary; and
though the alteration made by Valesius produces very good sense and seems quite
natural, I have preferred to accept the reading which is given by many of the
mss. of Josephus, and which has the support of Rufinus.

82: Matt. xxiv. 19-21.

83: Josephus, B. J. Bk. VI. chap. 9, §3. Josephus simply says that the whole
number of those that perished during the siege was 1,100,000; he does not
specify the manner of their death. On the accuracy of the numbers which he
gives, see above, chap. 5, note 13.

84: Ibid. §2.

85: eij ta kat= sAigupton erga . The works meant are the great stone quarries of
Egypt (commonly called the mines of Egypt), which furnished a considerable part
of the finest marble used for building purposes in Rome and elsewhere. The
quarries were chiefly in the hands of the Roman government, and the work of
quarrying was done largely by captives taken in war, as in the present case.

86: Josephus does not say that the number of those sold as slaves was upward of
90,000, as Eusebius asserts, but simply ( ibid. §3) that the number of captives
taken during the whole war was 97,000, a number which Eusebius, through an
error, applies to the one class of prisoners that were sold as slaves.

87: In B. J. Bk. VI. 8. 5 and 10. 1 Josephus puts the completion of the siege on
the eighth of the month Elul (September), and in the second passage he puts it
in the second year of Vespasian. Vespasian was proclaimed emperor in Egypt July
1, 69, so that Sept. 8 of his second year would be Sept. 8, a.d. 70. (Cf.
Schürer, N. T. Zeitgesch. p. 347.) 88: Luke xix. 42-44.

89: Ibid. xxi. 23, xxi. 24.

90: Ibid. verse 20.

91: It is but right to remark that not merely the negative school of critics,
but even many conservative scholars (e.g. Weiss) put the composition of the
Gospel of Luke after the year 70, because its eschatological discourses seem to
bear the mark of having been recorded after the fulfillment of the prediction,
differing as they do in many minor particulars from the accounts of the same
discourses in Matthew and Mark. To cite a single instance: in the passage quoted
just above from Luke xxi. 20, the armies encompassing Jerusalem are mentioned,
while in parallel passages in the other Gospels (Matt. xxiv. 15 and Mark xiii.
14) not armies, but "the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place"
is spoken of as the sign. Compare the various commentaries upon these passages.

92: Compare Acts iii. 14, and see Matt. xvii. 20, Mark xv. 11, Luke xxii. 18.

93: See above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 14.

94: Josephus, B. J. Bk. VI. chap. 5, §3.

95: katayeudomenoi tou qeou . In the previous paragraph Josephus says that a
great many false prophets were suborned by the tyrants to impose on the people.
It is to these false prophets therefore that he refers here, and I have
consequently felt at liberty thus to translate the Greek word given above,
instead of rendering merely "liars against God" (as Crusè does), which is
indefinite, and might have various meanings.

96: The feast referred to is the feast of the Passover. The Greek name of the
month used here is canqikoj , which was the name of a Macedonian month
corresponding to our April. According to Whiston, Josephus regularly used this
name for the Jewish month Nisan (the first month of the Jewish year), in which
case this event took place six days before the Passover, which began on the 14th
of Nisan.

97: Artemisioj . According to Liddell and Scott, this was a Spartan and
Macedonian month corresponding to a part of the ninth Attic month ( elafhboliwn
), which in turn corresponded to the latter part of our March and the early part
of April. According to Wieseler, Josephus used the word to denote the second
month of the Jewish year, the month Iyar.

98: The majority of the mss. of Eusebius read metabainomen metabainwmen , "let
us go hence," and I have followed Stephanus, Valesius, Stroth, and the English
and German translators in adopting that reading.

99: That is, in 62 a.d. for, according to Josephus, the war began in 66 a.d. A
little further on, Josephus says that he continued his cry for seven years and
five months, when he was slain during the siege of Jerusalem. This shows that he
is here, as well as elsewhere, reckoning the date of the beginning of the war as
66 a.d.

100: That is, the Feast of Tabernacles, which began on the fifteenth day of the
seventh month of the Jewish year, and continued seven days.

101: This was Albinus, as we should know from the date of the event, and as
Josephus directly states in the context. He was procurator from 61 or 62 to 64
a.d. See above, Bk. II. chap. 23, note 35, and chap. 22, note I.

102: See Josephus, B. J. VI. 5.4, and cf. ibid. III. 8. 9.

103: Ps. ii. 8.

104: Ps. xix. 4.

105: B. J., Preface, §1. We have an original source for the life of Josephus,
not only in his various works, in which he makes frequent reference to himself,
but also in his autobiography, which was written after the year 100. The work
was occasioned by the Chronicle of Justus of Tiberias, which had represented him
as more patriotic and more hostile to the Romans than he liked, and he therefore
felt impelled to paint himself in the blackest of colors, as a traitor and
renegade,-probably much blacker than he really was. It is devoted chiefly to an
account of the intrigues and plots formed against him while he was governor of
Galilee, and contains little of general biographical interest, except in the
introduction and the conclusion. Josephus was of a priestly family,-his father
Matthias belonging to the first of the twenty-four courses-and he was born in
the first year of Caius Caesar; i.e. in the year beginning March 16, 37 a.d. He
played a prominent part in the Jewish war, being entrusted with the duty, as
governor of Galilee and commander of the forces there, of meeting and opposing
Vespasian, who attacked that province first. He was, however, defeated, and gave
himself up to the victors, in the summer of 67. He was treated with honor in the
camp of the Romans, whom he served until the end of the war, and became a
favorite and flatterer of the Vespasian house, incurring thereby the everlasting
contempt of his country men. He went to Rome at the close of the war, and lived
in prosperity there until early in the second century. His works are our chief
source for a knowledge of Jewish affairs from the time of the Maccabees, and as
such are, and will always remain, indispensable, and their author immortal,
whatever his character. He was a man of learning and of talent, but of
inordinate selfishness and self-esteem. He was formerly accused of great
inaccuracy, and his works were considered a very poor historical source; but
later investigations have increased his credit, and he seems, upon the whole, to
have been a historian of unusual ability and conscientiousness.

106: Eusebius is the only one, so far as we know, to mention this statue in
Rome, and what authority there is for his statement we cannot tell.

107: In §64 of his Life Josephus tells us that Titus was so much pleased with
his accounts of the Jewish war that he subscribed his name to them, and ordered
them published (see the next chapter, §8 sqq., where the passage is quoted). The
first public library in Rome, according to Pliny, was founded by Pollio (76
b.c.-4 a.d.). The one referred to here is undoubtedly the imperial library,
which, according to Suetonius, was originally established by Augustus in the
temple of Apollo on the Palatine, and contained two sections,-one for Greek, and
the other for Latin works. It was greatly enlarged by Tiberius and Domitian.

108: 'Iondaikh 'Arxailogia 109: 9Istoria, 'Ioudaikou prolemou proj 9Rwmaiouj

110: The work, as Josephus informs us ( B. J., Preface, §1; and contra Apion. I.
9), was written originally in his own tongue,-Aramaic,-and afterwards translated
by himself into Greek, with the help of others. Eusebius inverts the fact,
making the Greek the original.

111: The full title of this work is the Apology of Flavius Josephus on the
Antiquities of the Jews against Apion ( peri arxaisthtoj 'Ioudaiwn kata 'Apiwnoj

112: wsan .

113: Against Apion, I. 8. The common Christian tradition (since the first
century, when it was stated in the fourth book of Ezra xiv. 44 sq.) is that Ezra
was the compiler of the Old Testament canon. This, however, is a mistake, for
the canon was certainly not completed before the time of Judas Maccabaeus.
Josephus is the earliest writer to give us a summary of the books of the Old
Testament; and he evidently gives not merely his own private opinion but the
commonly accepted canon of his day. He does not name the separate books, but he
tells us that they were twenty-two in number (the number of the letters of the
Hebrew alphabet), and gives us the three divisions, so that we are able to
ascertain his canon in detail. It was doubtless as follows:-

114: Literally, "the tradition respecting the origin of man ( anqrwpogoniaj )
down to his own death." I have felt it necessary to insert the words, "and
continue the history," which are not found in the Greek, but which are implied
in the words, "down to his own death."

115: Among the Jews in the time of Christ a world's era was in use, dating from
the creation of the world; and it is this era which Josephus employs here and
throughout his Antiquities. His figures are often quite inconsistent,-probably
owing, in large part, to the corrupt state of the existing text,-and the
confusion which results is considerable. See Destinon's Chronologie des
Josephus.

116: These thirteen books were:-

117: The Artaxerxes here referred to is Artaxerxes Longimanus who reigned b.c.
464 to 425. It was under him that Ezra and Nehemiah carried on their work and
that the later prophets flourished. Malachi-the last of them-uttered his
prophecies at the end of Artaxerxes' or at the beginning of Darius' reign. It
was commonly held among the Jews that with Haggai, Zachariah and Malachi the
prophetical spirit had departed from Israel, and the line was sharply drawn, as
here by Josephus, between them and the writers of the Apocrypha who followed
them.

118: eij Makkabaiouj logoj h peri autokratoroj logismou 119: Makkabaikon .

120: Ant. XX. 11. 3. See the previous chapter, note 7.

121: See the same note.

122: See the same note.

123: The passage referred to, which is quoted just below, is found in his Life,
§65, and not in the Antiquities. But we can see from the last paragraph of the
Antiquities that he wrote his Life really as an appendix to that work, and
undoubtedly as Ewald suggests, issued it with a second edition of the
Antiquities about twenty years after the first. In the mss. it is always found
with the Antiquities, and hence the whole might with justice be viewed as one
work. It will be noticed that Eusebius mentions no separate Life of Josephus,
which shows that he regarded it simply as a part of the Antiquities.

124: Justus of Tiberias was the leader of one of the factions of that city
during the troublous times before the outbreak of the war, while Josephus was
governor of Galilee, and as an opponent he caused him considerable trouble. He
is mentioned frequently in Josephus' Life, and we are thus enabled to gather a
tolerably complete idea of him-though of course the account is that of an enemy.
He wrote a work upon the Jews which was devoted chiefly to the affairs of the
Jewish war and in which he attacked Josephus very severely. This work, which is
no longer extant, was read by Photius and is described by him in his Bibl. Cod.
33, under the title, basileij 'Ioudaioi oi en toij stemmasi

125: Vita, §65.

126: Josephus has just affirmed in a previous paragraph that Justus had had his
History written for twenty years, and yet had not published it until after the
death of Vespasian, Titus, and Agrippa, and he accuses him of waiting until
after their death because he was afraid that they would contradict his
statements. Josephus then goes on to say in the passage quoted that he was not,
like Justus, afraid to publish his work during the lifetime of the chief actors
in the war.

127: Agrippa II. See above, Bk. II. chap. 19, note 3. Agrippa sided with the
Romans in the war and was with Vespasian and Titus in their camp much of the
time, and in Galilee made repeated efforts to induce the people to give up their
rebellion, that the war might be avoided.

128: These two epistles are still extant, and are given by Josephus in his Vita,
immediately after the passage just quoted by Eusebius. The first of them reads
as follows (according to Whiston's translation): "King Agrippa to Josephus, his
dear friend, sendeth greeting. I have read over thy book with great pleasure,
and it appears to me that thou hast done it much more accurately and with
greater care than have the other writers. Send me the rest of these books.
Farewell, my dear friend."

129: 61 or 62 a.d. See above, Bk. II. chap. 23.

130: See ibid. note 40. The date of Symeon's accession (assuming that he did
take charge of the Jerusalem church as James had done) cannot be fixed. Eusebius
himself, as he informs us in Bk. IV. chap. 5, although he had a list of the
Jerusalem bishops, had no information as to the dates of their accession, or the
length of their incumbency. He puts Symeon's accession after the destruction of
Jerusalem, but he evidently does that only because he supposed that it followed
immediately upon the death of James. Some (e.g. Lightfoot) think it probable
that Symeon was appointed immediately after James' death, therefore before the
destruction of Jerusalem; others (e.g. Renan) suppose that in Pella they had no
bishop and appointed Symeon only after the return of the church to Jerusalem.

131: logoj katexei . Hegesippus (quoted in Bk. IV. chap. 22, below) says that
"Symeon was appointed the second bishop, whom all proposed as the cousin of our
Lord." Upon what authority Eusebius' more definite account rests we do not know.
He introduces it with the formula logoj katexei , and we know of no other author
who has put it as he does. It may be that the simple statement of Hegesippus was
the sole ground of the more detailed tradition which Eusebius repeats in this
chapter. The reason of Symeon's appointment as given by Hegesippus is quite
significant. It was the common Oriental custom to accord the highest honors to
all the members of a prophet's or religious leader's family, and it was
undoubtedly owing chiefly to his close physical relationship to Christ that
James enjoyed such prominence and influence in the Jerusalem church, apparently
exceeding even that of the apostles themselves.

132: This Symeon is to be distinguished from the apostle Simon, the Canaanite,
and also from Simon, the brother of our Lord (mentioned in Matt. xiii. 55 and
Mark vi. 3). It is noticeable that Hegesippus nowhere calls him the "brother of
the Lord," though he does give James that title in Bk. II. chap. 23. Clopas is
mentioned in John xix. 25, as the husband of Mary, who is without doubt
identical with Mary the mother of James (the little) and of Joses; mentioned in
Matt. xxvii. 56, Mark xv. 40, &c. If Hegesippus' account be accepted as
trustworthy (and there is no reason for doubting it), Symeon was the son of
Clopas and Mary, and therefore brother of James the Little and Joses. If, then,
Alphaeus and Clopas be the same, as many claim, James the Little is to be
identified with James the son of Alphaaeus, the apostle, and hence the latter
was the brother of Symeon. This identification, however, is entirely arbitrary,
and linguistically difficult, and we shall do better therefore to keep the men
separate, as Renan does (see above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 14). Upon the
martyrdom of Symeon, see below, chap. 32.

133: In John xix. 25.

134: Hegesippus, quoted below in Bk. IV. chap. 22, calls Clopas the uncle of the
Lord, which would make him of course the brother or brother-in-law of Joseph.
Eusebius evidently considered them own brothers. Whether Hegesippus elsewhere
stated this directly, or whether Eusebius' opinion is simply an inference from
the words of Hegesippus already referred to, we do not know. There is no
objection to the conclusion that Clopas and Joseph were own brothers, although
it cannot be proved from Hegesippus' words that they were more than
brothers-in-law. From John xix. 25 it is at any rate plain that their wives
cannot have been own sisters, as was formerly maintained by so many
commentators. With the remaining possibilities of relationship we do not need to
concern ourselves.

135: It is not certain that Eusebius intends to give Hegesippus as his authority
for the statements of this chapter, inasmuch as he does not mention his name. He
gives the account, however, upon the authority of some one else, and not as a
direct historical statement, for the verb is in the infinitive, and it is much
more natural to supply 9Hghsippoj istorei , the last words of the preceding
chapter, than to supply any other phrase, such as logoj katexei , which occurs
two chapters earlier. The translators are divided as to the words that are to be
supplied, but it seems to me beyond doubt that this account rests upon the same
authority as that of the previous chapter. There is in any case nothing at all
unlikely in the report, as Vespasian and his successors kept a very close watch
upon the Jews, and this would have been a very natural method of endeavoring to
prevent future revolutions. The same course was pursued also by Domitian; see
below, chaps. 19 and 20. We hear from no other source of a persecution raised
against the Jews by Vespasian, and we may therefore conclude that it cannot have
amounted to much, if indeed it deserves to be called a persecution at all.

136: Vespasian reigned from July 1 (if his reign be dated from the time he was
proclaimed emperor in Egypt; if from the death of Vitellius, Dec. 20), 69, to
June 24, 79 a.d.

137: In his Chron. (Armenian) Eusebius gives the length of Linus' episcopate as
fourteen years, while Jerome gives it as eleven years. Both figures are about
equally reliable; see above, chap. 2, note 1.

138: Of Anencletus, or Cletus, as he is also called, we know nothing more than
that he was one of the traditional first three bishops of Rome. Hippolytus makes
two bishops, Anencletus and Cletus, out of the one man, and he is followed by
the Roman Catholic Church (see above, chap. 2, note 1). According to chap. 15,
Anencletus held office twelve years.

139: Titus died Dec. 13, a.d. 81. He therefore reigned two years and six months,
instead of two years and two months as Eusebius states.

140: 85 a.d.; on Annianus, see above, Bk. II. chap. 24, note 2.

141: 'Abilioj 142: On Anencletus, see chap. 13, note 3.

143: Phil. iv. 3. For an account of Clement, see above, chap. 4, note 19; and
upon the order of succession of the Roman bishops, see chap. 2, note 1.

144: This epistle of Clement, which is still extant in two Greek mss., and in a
Syriac version, consists of fifty-nine chapters, and is found in all editions of
the Apostolic Fathers. It purports to have been written from the church at Rome
to the church at Corinth, but bears the name of no author. Unanimons tradition,
however (beginning with Dionysius of Corinth, in Eusebius, IV. 23), ascribes it
to Clement, Bishop of Rome, and scholars, with hardly an exception, accept it as
his work. It was, in all probability, written immediately after the persecution
of Domitian, in the last years of the first century, and is one of the earliest,
perhaps the very earliest, post-biblical works which we have. It was held in
very high repute in the early Church, and in the Alexandrian Codex it stands
among the canonical books as a part of the New Testament (though this is
exceptional; cf. chap. 3, above, and chap. 25, below, in both of which this
epistle is omitted, though Eusebius is giving lists of New Testament books, both
accepted and disputed). We have had the epistle complete only since 1875, when
Bryennios discovered a ms. containing it and other valuable works. Previously a
part of the epistle had been wanting. In consequence the older editions have
been superseded by the more recent. See appendix to Lightfoot's edition (1877),
which gives the recovered portions of the text; so, also, the later editions of
Gebhardt and Harnack's, and of Hilgenfeld's Apostolic Fathers. The epistle is
translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, I. p. 5-21.

145: megalh te kai qaumasia .

146: See the epistle itself, especially chaps. 1 and 3. It was these seditions
in the church at Corinth which occasioned the epistle.

147: Compare the words of Dionysius of Corinth, in Bk. IV. chap. 23. Though the
epistle was held in high esteem, it was not looked upon as a part of the New
Testament canon.

148: Hegesippus' testimony upon this point is no longer extant.

149: The persecutions under Nero and Domitian were not undertaken by the state
as such; they were simply personal matters, and established no precedent as to
the conduct of the state toward Christianity. They were rather spasmodic
outbursts of personal enmity, but were looked upon with great horror as the
first to which the Church was subjected. There was no general persecution, which
took in all parts of the empire, until the reign of Decius (249-251), but
Domitian's cruelty and ferocity were extreme, and many persons of the highest
rank fell under his condemnation and suffered banishment and even death, not
especially on account of Christianity, though there were Christians among them,
but on account of his jealousy, and for political reasons of various sorts. That
Domitian's persecution of the Christians was not of long duration is testified
by Tertullian, Apol. 5 . Upon the persecutions of the Christians, see, among
other works, Wieseler's Die Christenverfolgungen der Cäsaren, hist. Und
chronolog. untersucht, 1878; Uhlhorn's Der Kampf des Christenthums mit dem
Heidenthum, English translation by Smyth and Ropes, 1879; and especially the
keen essay of Overbeck, Gesetze der römischen Kaiser gegen die Christen, in his
Studien zur Gesch. der alten Kirche, I. (1875).

150: The fact that the Christians were not persecuted by Vespasianis abundantly
confirmed by the absence of any tradition to the opposite effect. Compare
Tertullian's Apol. chap. 5, where the persecutions of Nero and Domitian are
recorded.

151: Unanimous tradition, beginning with Irenaaeus (V. 30. 3, quoted just below,
and again in Eusebius V. 8) assigns the banishment of John and the apocalyptic
visions to the reign of Domitian. This was formerly the common opinion, and is
still held by some respectable writers, but strong internal evidence has driven
most modern scholars to the conclusion that the Apocalypse must have been
written before the destruction of Jerusalem, the banishment therefore (upon the
assumption that John wrote the Apocalypse, upon which see chap. 24, note 19)
taking place under Nero instead of Domitian. If we accept this, we have the
remarkable phenomenon of an event taking place at an earlier date than that
assigned it by tradition, an exceptional and inexplicable thing. We have too the
difficulty of accounting for the erroneousness of so early and unanimous a
tradition. The case thus stood for years, until in 1886 Vischer published his
pamphlet Die Offenbarung des Johannes, eine jüdische Apocalypse in Christlicher
Bearbeitung (Gebhardt and Harnack's Texte und Untersuchungen, Band II. Heft. 3),
which if his theory were true, would reconcile external and internal evidence in
a most satisfactory manner, throwing the original into the reign of Nero's
successor, and the Christian recension into the reign of Domitian. Compare
especially Harnack's appendix to Vischer's pamphlet; and upon the Apocalypse
itself, see chap. 24, below.

152: Rev. xiii. 18. It will be noticed that Eusebius is careful not to commit
himself here on the question of the authorship of the Apocalypse. See below,
chap. 24, note 20.

153: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. V. 30. 3; quoted also below, in Bk. V. chap. 8.

154: Jerome, in his version of the Chron. of Eusebius (year of Abr. 2112), says
that the historian and chronographer Bruttius recorded that many of the
Christians suffered martyrdom under Domitian. Since the works of Bruttius are
not extant, we have no means of verifying the statement. Dion Cassius (LXVII.
14) relates some of the banishments which took place under Domitian, among them
that of Flavia Domitilla, who was, as we know, a Christian; But he does not
himself say that any of these people were Christians, nor does he speak of a
persecution of the Christians.

155: We learn from Suetonius ( Domit. chap. 15) that the events referred to by
Eusebius in the next sentence took place at the very end of Domitian's reign;
that is, in the year 96 a.d., the fifteenth year of his reign, as Eusebius says.
Dion Cassius also (LXVII. 14) puts these events in the same year.

156: Flavius Clemens was a cousin of Domitian, and his wife, Domitilla, a niece
of the emperor. They stood high in favor, and their two sons were designated as
heirs to the empire, while Flavius Clemens himself was made Domitian's colleague
in the consulship. But immediately afterward Clemens was put to death and
Domitilla was banished. Suetonius ( Domit, chap. 15) accuses Clemens of
contemtissimae inertiae, and Dion Cassius (LXVII. 14) of atheism ( aqethtoj

157: palaioj katexei logoj . It is noticeable that, although Eusebius has the
written authority of Hegesippus for this account, he still speaks of it as
supported by "ancient tradition." This is different from his ordinary custom,
and serves to make us careful in drawing conclusions as to the nature of
Eusebius' authority for any statement from the expression used in introducing
it.

158: This Jude was the brother of James, "the brother of the Lord," who is
mentioned in Jude 1, and is to be distinguished from Jude (Thaddeus-Lebbaeus),
one of the Twelve, whose name appears in the catalogues of Luke (Luke vi. 14 and
Acts i. 13) as the son of James (not his brother, as the A.V. translates: the
Greek words are 'Ioudaj 'Iakwbou ). For a discussion of the relationship of
these men to Christ, see above, Bk. I. chap. 12, note 14. Of the son of Jude and
father of the young men mentioned in this chapter we know nothing.

159: According to Andrew's Lexicon, "An Evocatus was a soldier who, having
served out his time, was called upon to do military duty as a volunteer."

160: A denarius was a Roman silver coin, in value about sixteen, or, according
to others, about nineteen, cents.

161: "Taxes or tributes were paid commonly in the products of the land" (Val.).

162: Most editors (including Valesius, Heinichen, Crusè, &c.) regard the
quotation from Hegesippus as extending through §8; but it really ends here, and
from this point on Eusebius reproduces the sense in his own words (and so Bright
gives it in his edition). This is perfectly clear, for in the first place, the
infinitive epideiknunai occurs in the next sentence, a form possible only in
indirect discourse: and secondly, as Lightfoot has pointed out, the statement of
§8 is repeated in chap. 32, §6, and there in the exact language of Hegesippus,
which differs enough from the language of §8 to show that the latter is a free
reproduction.

163: marturaj . On the use of this word, see chap. 32, note 15.

164: Compare Renan's Les Evangiles, p. 466.

165: Tertullian, Apol. chap. 5.

166: ti sunesewj 167: Domitian reigned from Dec. 13, 81 a.d., to Sept. 18, 96.

168: See Dion Cassius, LXVIII. 1 sq., and Suetonius' Domitian, chap. 23.

169: Literally, "the word of the ancients among us" ( o twn par hmin arxaiwn
logoj ).) On the tradition itself, see chap. 1, note 6.

170: From Sept. 18, 96, to Jan. 27, 98 a.d.

171: On Abilius, see chap. 14, note 2, above.

172: According to the legendary Acts of St. Mark, Cerdo was one of the
presbyters ordained by Mark. According to Eusebius ( H. E. IV. I and Chron. ) he
held office until the twelfth year of Trajan.

173: On Annianus, see Bk. II. chap. 24, note 2.

174: On the order of succession of the early Roman bishops, see above, chap. 2,
note 1. Paul and Peter are here placed together by Eusebius, as co-bishops of
Rome. Compare the association of the two apostles by Caius, and by Dionysius of
Corinth (quoted by Eusebius, in Bk. II. chap. 25).

175: On Ignatius' life, writings, and martyrdom, see below, chap. 36.

176: We cannot doubt that the earliest tradition made Evodius first bishop of
Antioch, for otherwise we could not explain the insertion of his name before the
great name of Ignatius. The tendency would be, of course, to connect Ignatius
directly with the apostles, and to make him the first bishop. This tendency is
seen in Athanasius and Chrysostom, who do not mention Evodius at all; also in
the Apost. Const. VII. 46, where, however, it is said that Evodius was ordained
by Peter, and Ignatius by Paul (as in the parallel case of Clement of Rome). The
fact that the name of Evodius appears here shows that the tradition that he was
the first bishop seemed to the author too old and too strong to be set aside.
Origen ( in Luc. Hom. VI.) is an indirect witness to the episcopacy of Evodius,
since he makes Ignatius the second, and not the first, bishop of Antioch. As to
the respective dates of the early bishops of Antioch, we know nothing certain.
On their chronology, see Harnack, Die Zeit des Ignatuis, and cf. Salmon's
article Evodius, in Smith and Wace's Dict. of Christ. Biog.

177: On Symeon, see above, chap. 11, note 4.

178: See chap. 1, note 6, and chap. 18, note 1.

179: That is, at the beginning of the reign of Trajan.

180: The test of a man's trustworthiness in Eusebius' mind-and not in his
alone-was his orthodoxy. Iren`us has always been looked upon as orthodox, and so
was Clement, in the early Church, which reckoned him among the saints. His name,
however, was omitted in the Martyrology issued by Clement VIII., on the ground
that his orthodoxy was open to suspicion.

181: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. II. 22. 5.

182: It is in this immediate connection that Iren`us makes the extraordinary
assertion, founding it upon the testimony of those who were with John in Asia,
that Christ lived to the age of forty or fifty years. A statement occurring in
connection with such a palpably false report might well fall under suspicion;
but the fact of John's continuance at Ephesus until the time of Trajan is
supported by other passages, and there is no reason to doubt it (cf. chap. 1,
note 6). Irenaeus himself repeats the statement as a well-known fact, in III. 3,
4 (quoted just below). It may also be said that the opinion as to Christ's age
is founded upon subjective grounds (cf. the preceding paragraph of Irenaeus) and
upon a mistaken interpretation of John viii. 56, John viii. 57, rather than upon
external testimony, and that the testimony (which itself may have been only the
result of a subjective opinion) is dragged in only for the sake of confirming a
view already adopted. Such a fact as John's own presence in Ephesus at a certain
period could hardly be subject to such uncertainty and to the influence of
dogmatic prepossessions. It is significant of Eusebius' method that he omits
entirely Irenaeus' statement as to the length of Christ's ministry, with which
he did not agree (as shown by his account in Bk. I. chap. 10), while extracting
from his statement the single fact which he wishes here to establish. The
falsity of the context he must have recognized, and yet, in his respect for
Irenaeus, the great maintainer of sound doctrine, he nowhere refers to it. The
information which John is said, in this passage, to have conveyed to the
"presbyters of Asia" is that Christ lived to old age. The whole passage affords
an instance of how much of error may be contained in what, to all appearances,
should be a very trustworthy tradition. Internal evidence must come to the
support of external, and with all its alleged uncertainty and subjectivity, must
play a great part in the determination of the truth of history.

183: Adv. Haer. III. 3, 4.

184: tij o swzomenoj plousioj

185: He indicates the time only by saying "after the tyrant was dead," which
might refer either to Domitian or to Nero. But the mention of John a little
below as "an aged man" would seem to point to the end of the century rather than
to Nero's time. At any rate, Eusebius understood Clement as referring to
Domitian, and in the presence of unanimous tradition for Domitian, and in the
absence of any counter-tradition, we can hardly understand him otherwise.

186: Quis Dives salvetur, chap. 42.

187: muqon ou muqon, alla onta logon . Clement in these words asserts the truth
of the story which he relates. We cannot regard it as very strongly
corroborated, for no one else records it, and yet we can hardly doubt that
Clement gives it in good faith. It may have been an invention of some early
Christian, but it is so fully in accord with what we know of John's character
that there exists no reason for refusing to believe that at least a groundwork
of truth underlies it, even though the story may have gained in the telling of
it. It is certainly beautiful, and fully worthy of the "beloved disciple."

188: See note 8.

189: klhrw ena ge tina klhrwswn . Compare the note of Heinichen in his edition
of Eusebius, Vol. I. p. 122. Upon the use of the word klhroj klhroj episkopoi
durch den Apostel ohne jede Methode erwähnt wird, so fällt jeder Grund hinweg,
dass bei der Wahl einzelner Beamten das Mittel des Loosens angewandt sein
sollte, zumal bei dieser Deutung ein Pleonasmus vorausgesetzt w_rde. Es ist
vielmehr zu erkl,,ren, dass Johannes an einzelnen Orten mehrere Beamte zugleich
eingesetzt, an andetch Orten wo schon ein Collegium bestand, dem Beamtenstande
je ein Mitglied eingereiht habe."

190: According to Stroth the Chronicon Paschale gives Smyrna as the name of this
city, and it has been suggested that Clement withholds the name in order to
spare the reputation of Polycarp, who, according to tradition, was appointed
bishop of that city by John.

191: The same man that is called a bishop just above is here called a presbyter.
It is such passages-and they are not uncommon in the early Fathers-that have
seemed to many to demonstrate conclusively the original identity of presbyters
and bishops, an identity which is maintained by most Presbyterians, and is
admitted by many Episcopalians (e.g. by Lightfoot in his essay on the Christian
Ministry, printed in his Commentary on Philippians). On the other hand, the
passages which reveal a distinction between presbyters and bishops are very
early, and are adduced not merely by prelatists, but by such disinterested
scholars as Harnack (in his translation of Hatch's Organization of the Early
Christian Churches ) as proving that there was from the beginning a difference
of some sort between a bishop and a presbyter. I cannot enter here into a
discussion of the various views in regard to the original relation between
bishops and presbyters. I desire simply to suggest a theory of my own, leaving
the fuller exposition of it for some future time. My theory is that the word
presbuteroj was originally employed in the most general sense to indicate any
church officer, thus practically equivalent to the hgoumenoj of Heb. xiii. 17,
and the poimhn of Eph. iv. 11. The terms episkopoj and diakonoj episkopoi (see
Hatch's discussion of the use of this word in his work already referred to). In
some churches the duties might be of such a character that the bishops would
need assistants (to whom it would be natural to give the name diakonoj episkopoj
. As the power was thus concentrated in his hands, the committee of bishops as
such would cease to be necessary, and he would require only the deacons, who
should carry out his directions in economic matters, as we find them doing in
the second century. The elevation of the bishop would of course separate him
from the other officers in such a way that although still a presbyter (i.e. an
officer), he would cease to be called longer by the general name. In the same
way the deacons obliged to devote themselves to their specific duties, would
cease to have much to do with the more general functions of the other officers,
to whom finally the name presbyter-originally a general term-would be confined,
and thus become a distinctive name for part of the officers. In their hands
would remain the general disciplinary functions which had belonged from the
beginning to the entire body of officers as such, and their rank would naturally
be second only to that of the bishop, for the deacons as assistants only, not
independent officers, could not outrank them (though they struggled hard in the
third and fourth centuries to do so). It is of course likely that in a great
many churches the simple undivided office would long remain, and that bishops
and deacons as specific officers distinguished from the general body would not
exist. But after the distinction between the three orders had been sharply drawn
in one part of Christendom, it must soon spread throughout the Church and become
established even in places where it had not been produced by a natural process
of evolution. The Church organization of the second century is thus complete,
and its further development need not concern us here, for it is not matter of
controversy. Nor is this the place to show how the local church officers
gradually assumed the spiritual functions which belonged originally to apostles,
prophets, and teachers. The Didache is the document which has shed most light
upon that process, and Hernack in his edition of it has done most to make the
matter clear.

192: efwtise : literally, "enlightened him." The verb fwtizw 193: thn sfragida
kuriou . The word sfragij 194: Literally, "greatness of his nature" ( megeqoj
fusewj ).

195: The testimony of antiquity,-both orthodox and heretical,-to the
authenticity of John's Gospel is universal, with the exception of a single
unimportant sect of the second century, the Alogi, who denied the Johanninc
authorship on account of the Logos doctrine, which they rejected, and very
absurdly ascribed the Gospel to the Gnostic Cerinthus; though its absolute
opposition to Cerinthus' views is so apparent that Irenaeus (III. 11. 1) even
supposed John to have written the Gospel against Cerinthus. The writings of the
second century are full of the spirit of John's Gospel, and exhibit frequent
parallels in language too close to be mistaken; while from the last quarter of
the second century on it is universally and expressly ascribed to John
(Theophilus of Antioch and the Muratorian Fragment being the first to name him
as its author). The Church never entertained a doubt of its authenticity until
the end of the seventeenth century, when it was first questioned by the English
Deists; but its genuineness was vindicated, and only scattering and occasional
attacks were made upon it until the rise of the Tübingen school, since which
time its authenticity has been one of the most fiercely contested points in
apostolic history. Its opponents have been obliged gradually to throw back the
date of its origin, until now no sensible critic thinks of assigning it to a
time later than the early part of the second century, which is a great gain over
the position of Baur and his immediate followers, who threw it into the latter
half of the century. See Schaff's Ch. Hist. I. 701-724 for a full defense of its
authenticity and a comprehensive account of the controversy; also p. 406-411 for
the literature of the subject. For the most complete summary of the external
evidence, see Ezra Abbott's The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, 1880. Among
recent works, compare Weiss' Leben Jesu, I. 84-124, and his N. T. Einleitung,
586-620, for a defense of the Gospel, and upon the other side Holtzmann's
Einleitung, 413-460, and Weizsäcker's Apost. Zeitalter, p. 531-558.

196: Overbeck remarks that Eusebius in this passage is the first to tell us that
Paul wrote no more than what we have in the canon. But this is a mistake, for
Origen (quoted by Eusebius in VI. 25, below) states it just as distinctly as
Eusebius does. The truth is, neither of them says it directly, and yet it is
clear enough when this passage is taken in connection with chapter 3, that it is
what Eusebius meant, and the same idea underlies the statement of the Muratorian
Fragment. Of course this does not prove that Paul wrote only the epistles which
we have (which is indeed contrary to fact), but it shows what the idea of the
early Church was.

197: See 2 Cor. xii. 2-4.

198: The majority of the mss., followed by Burton, Schwegler, and Laemmer, read
diatribwn instead of maqhtwn maqhtwn , and this is confirmed by Rufinus and
adopted by Heinichen, Closs, and Crusè.

199: That Matthew wrote a gospel in Hebrew, although denied by many, is at
present the prevailing opinion among scholars, and may be accepted as a fact
both on account of its intrinsic probability and of the testimony of the
Fathers, which begins with the statement of Papias, quoted by Eusebius in chap.
39, below, is confirmed by Irenaeus (III. 1. 1, quoted below, V. 8, §2),-whether
independently of Papias or not, we cannot say,-by Pantaenus (but see below, Bk.
V. chap. 10), by Origen (see below, VI. 25), by Jerome ( de vir. ill. 3),-who
says that a copy of it still existed in the library at Caesarea,-and by
Epiphanius ( Haer. XXIX. 9). The question as to the relation of this Hebrew
original to our present Greek Matthew is much more difficult. That our Greek
Matthew is a mere translation of the original Hebrew was once a prevailing
theory, but is now completely abandoned. That Matthew himself wrote both is a
common conservative position, but is denied by most critical scholars, many of
whom deny him the composition even of the Hebrew original. Upon the theory that
the original Hebrew Matthew was identical with the "Gospel according to the
Hebrews," see chap. 27, note 8. Upon the synoptic problem, see above, II. 15,
note 4; and see the works mentioned there for a discussion of this original
Matthew, and in addition the recent works by Gla, Original-Sprache des Matt.
Evang., 1887, and Resch, Agrapha, Leipzig, 1889.

200: Upon the date and authorship of the Gospel of Luke, see above, chap. 4,
notes 12 and 15. Upon Mark, see Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4.

201: No writer before Eusebius' time, so far as is known, assigned the reason
given by him for the composition of John's Gospel. Jerome, de vir. ill. chap. 9,
repeats the view, combining with it the anti-heretical purpose. The indefinite
expression, "they say," shows that Eusebius was recording tradition commonly
received in his time, and does not involve the authority of any particular
writer. This object-viz. the supplementing and filling out of the accounts of
the Synoptists-is assumed as the real object by some modern scholars; but it is
untenable, for though the book serves this purpose to a great extent, the
author's real aim was much higher,-viz. the establishment of belief in the
Messiahship and divinity of Christ (John xx. 31 sqq.),-and he chose his
materials accordingly. The Muratorian Fragment says, "The Fourth Gospel is that
of John, one of the disciples. When his fellow-disciples and bishops entreated
him, he said, `Fast ye now with me for the space of three days, and let us
recount to each other whatever may be revealed to us. 0' On the same night it
was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should narrate all things
in his own name as they called them to mind." Irenaeus (III. 11. 1) supposes
John to have written his Gospel as a polemic against Cerinthus. Clement of
Alexandria, in his Hypotyposes (quoted by Eusebius, VI. 14), says that John
wrote a spiritual Gospel, as a supplement to the other Gospels, which had
sufficiently described the external facts. The opinion of Eusebius is very
superficial. Upon examination of the Gospels it will be seen that, of the events
which John relates independently of the synoptists, but a small portion occurred
before the imprisonment of John the Baptist. John's Gospel certainly does
incidentally supplement the Synoptists in a remarkable manner, but not in any
such intentional and artificial way as Eusebius supposes. Compare Weiss'
Einleitung, p. 602 sqq., and Schaff's Ch. Hist. II. p. 680 sqq.

202: The Synoptic Gospels certainly give the impression that Christ's public
ministry lasted but a single year; and were it not for the additional light
which John throws upon the subject, the one year ministry would be universally
accepted, as it was by many of the early Fathers,-e.g. Clement of Alexandria,
Tertullian, Origen, Lactantius, &c. John, however, expressly mentions three,
perhaps four, passovers, so that Christ's ministry lasted either two or three
years. Upon comparison of the Synoptists with John, it will be seen that the
events which they record are not all comprised within a single year, as Eusebius
thought, but that they are scattered over the whole period of his ministry,
although confined to his work in Galilee up to the time of his last journey to
Judea, six months before his crucifixion. The distinction between John and the
Synoptists, as to the events recorded, is therefore rather that of place than of
time: but the distinction is not absolute.

203: Matt. iv. 12.

204: Mark i. 14.

205: Luke iii. 20.

206: John ii. 11. The arguments of Eusebius, whether original or borrowed from
his predecessors, are certainly very ingenious, and he makes out apparently
quite a strong case for his opinion; but a careful harmony of the four Gospels
shows that it is untenable.

207: John iii. 23.

208: Ibid. verse 24.

209: Eusebius approaches here the opinion of Clement of Alexandria. mentioned in
note 7, above, who considered John's Gospel a spiritual supplement to the
others,-a position which the Gospel certainly fills most admirably.

210: See Bk. II. chap. 15.

211: See Luke i. 1-4. Eusebius puts the case more strongly than Luke himself.
Luke does not say that others had rashly undertaken the composition of their
narratives, nor does he say that he himself writes in order to free his readers
from the uncertain suppositions of others; but at the same time the
interpretation which Eusebius gives is though not an exact, yet certainly a
natural one, and we have no right to accuse him, as has been done, of
intentional falsification of the text of the Gospel. Eusebius also augments
Luke's statement by the mention of the source from which the latter gained his
knowledge viz., "from his intimacy and stay with Paul, and from his acquaintance
with the rest of the apostles." If Eusebius intended to convey the impression
that Luke said this, he is of course inexcusable, but we have no reason to
suppose this to be the case. It is simply the explanation on the part of
Eusebius of an indefinite statement of Luke's by a fact which was universally
assumed as true. That he was adding to Luke's own account probably never
occurred to him. He does not pretend to quote Luke's exact words.

212: The testimony to the first Epistle of John goes hand in hand with that to
the fourth Gospel (cf. note 1, above). But we can find still clearer trace of
the Epistle in the early part of the second century than of the Gespel (e.g. in
Polycarp's Epistle, where traces of the Gospel are wanting; and so, too, in
Papias, according to chap. 39, below). The writings of the second century are
full of the spirit of the Epistle as well as of the Gospel and exhibit frequent
parallels in language too close to be mistaken. The first express testimony as
to its authorship occurs in the Muratorian Fragment. The first systematic attack
upon the Epistle was made by Bretschneider, in 1820, in connection with the
attack upon the Gospel. The T_bingen school likewise rejected both. Before
Bretschneider there had been a few critics (e.g. Lange, 1797) who had rejected
the Epistle while accepting the Gospel and since then a few have accepted the
Epistle while rejecting the Gospel; but these are exceptional cases. The Gospel
and Epistle have almost universally, and quite rightly, been regarded as the
work of the same author, and may be said to stand or fall together. Cf. the
works cited in note 1, and also Westcott's Epistles of St. John. (On the use of
protera instead of prwth , see p. 388, note.)

213: The Muratorian Fragment expressly ascribes two epistles to John. Citations
from the second Epistle appear first in Irenaeus, though he does not distinguish
it from the first. Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. II. 15) quotes from 1 John
under the formula "John says in his larger Epistle," showing that he knew of a
second. The lack of citations from the second and third Epistles is easily
explained by their brevity and the minor importance of their doctrinal contents.
The second and third Epistles belong to the seven Antilegomena. Origen cites the
first Epistle often, the second and third never, and of the latter he says "not
all agree that they are genuine" (quoted by Eusebius, VI. 25), and apparently he
himself did not consider them of apostolic origin (cf. Weiss' Einleitung, p.
87). Origen's treatment of the Catholic Epistles was implicitly followed by his
pupil Dionysius and by succeeding generations. Eusebius himself does not express
his own judgment in the matter, but simply records the state of tradition which
was a mere repetition of Origen's position in regard to them. Jerome ( de vir.
ill. 9 and 18) says that most writers ascribe them to the presbyter John-an
opinion which evidently arose upon the basis of the author's self-designation in
2 John 1, and 3 John 1, and some modern critics (among them Reuss and Wieseler)
have done the same. Eusebius himself in the next chapter implies that such an
opinion existed in his day, though he does not express his own view on the
matter. He placed them, however, among the Antilegomena. (On the presbyter John,
see below chap. 39, note 4.) That the two epistles fell originally into the
class of Antilegomena was due doubtless to the peculiar self-designation
mentioned, which seemed to distinguish the author from the apostle, and also to
their private and doctrinally unimportant character. But in spite of the slight
external testimony to the epistles the conclusion of Weiss seems correct, that
"inasmuch as the second and third clearly betray the same author, and inasmuch
as the second is related to the first in such a manner that they must either be
by the same author or the former be regarded as an entirely aimless imitation of
the latter, so everything favors the ascription of them both to the author of
the first, viz. to the apostle." ( ibid. p. 469.)

214: The Apocalypse is one of the best authenticated books of the New Testament.
It was used by Papias and others of the earliest Fathers, and already by Justin
Martyr was expressly ascribed to the apostle John. (Compare also the epistle of
the Churches of Lyons and Vienne, Eusebius, V. 1.) Tradition, so far as we have
it is unanimous (with the except on of the Alogi, an insignificant heretical
sect of the second century, who attributed the Apocalypse as well as the Gospel
to Cerinthus. Caius is not an exception: see below, chap. 28, note 4) in
ascribing the Apocalypse to the apostle John, until Dionysius of Alexandria, who
subjected the book to severe literary criticism (see below, Bk. VII. chap. 25),
and upon the assumption of the genuineness of the Gospel and the first Epistle,
doubted its authenticity on account of its divergence from these writings both
in spirit and in style. He says (VII. 25, §2) that some others before him had
denied the Johannine authorship and ascribed the book to Cerinthus, but the way
in which he speaks of them shows that there cannot have been a ruling tradition
to that effect. He may have referred simply to the Alogi, or he may have
included others of whom we do not know. He himself rejects this hypothesis, and
supposes the books to have been written by some John, not the apostle (by what
John he does not decide), and does not deny the inspiration and prophetic
character of the book. Dionysius was led to exercise criticism upon the
Apocalypse (which was as well supported by tradition as any book of the New
Testament) from dogmatic reasons. The supposed sensuous and materialistic
conceptions of the Apocalypse were offensive to the spiritualizing tendencies of
the Alexandrian school, and the offensiveness increased with time. Although
Dionysius held the work as inspired and authoritative, yet his position would
lead logically to the exclusion of the Apocalypse from the canon, just as Hermas
had been already excluded, although Origen held it to be inspired and
anthoritative in the same sense in which Dionysius held the Apocalypse to
be,-i.e. as composed by an apostle's pupil, not by an apostle. Apocalyptic
literature did not belong properly to the New Testament, but rather to the
prophetic portion of the Old Testament; but the number of the Old Testament
prophets was already complete (according to the Muratorian Fragment), and
therefore no prophetic writing (e.g. Hermas) could find a place there; nor, on
the other hand, could it be made a part of the New Testament, for it was not
apostolic. The same was true of the Apocalypse of Peter, and the only thing
which kept the Apocalypse of John in the canon was its supposed apostolic
authorship. It was received as a part of the New Testament not because it was
apocalyptic, but because it was apostolic, and thus the criticism of Dionysius
would lead logically to its rejection from the canon. John's Apocalypse is the
only New Testament book cited by Justin as grafh (so also by the Epistle of
Vienne and Lyons, Eusebius, V. 1), and this because of its prophetic character.
It must have been (according to their opinion) either a true prophecy (and
therefore inspired by the Holy Spirit) or a forgery. Its authenticity being
accepted, the former alternative necessarily followed, and it was placed upon a
line with the Old Testament prophets, i.e. with the grafh noqoi

215: See Bk. VII. chap. 25, where Eusebius quotes a lengthy discussion of the
Apocalypse by Dionysius of Alexandria. He also cites opinions favorable to the
authenticity of the Apocalypse from Justin (in IV. 18, below), Theophilus (IV.
24), Irenaeus (V. 8), and Origen (VI. 25), but such scattered testimonies can
hardly be regarded as the fulfillment of the definite promise which he makes in
this passage.

216:

217: On Matthew, see the previous chapter, note 5; on Mark, Bk. II. chap. 15,
note 4; on Luke, Bk. III. chap. 4, notes 12 and 15; on John, the previous
chapter, note 1.

218: See above, chap. 4, note 14.

219: See chap. 3, note 16. Ensebius evidently means to include the Epistle to
the Hebrews among Paul's epistles at this point, for he mentions it nowhere else
in this chapter (see above, note 1).

220: See the previous chapter, note 18.

221: See chap. 3, note 1.

222: kurwteon .

223: See the previous chapter, note 20. Upon Eusebius' treatment in this chapter
of the canonicity of the Apocalypse, see note 1, above.

224: Compare the previous chapter, note 21.

225: en omologoumenoij .

226: twn antilegomenwn .

227: gnwrimwn .

228: See Bk. II. chap. 23, note 46.

229: See ibid. note 47.

230: See above, chap. 3, note 4.

231: See the previous chapter, note 19.

232: en toij noqoij .

233: See above, chap. 3, note 20.

234: Ibid. note 23.

235: Ibid. note 9.

236: The author of the so-called Epistle of Barnabas is unknown. No name appears
in the epistle itself, and no hints are given which enable us to ascribe it to
any known writer. External testimony, without a dissenting voice, ascribes it to
Barnabas, the companion of Paul. But this testimony, although unanimous, is
neither very strong nor very extensive. The first to use the epistle is Clement
of Alexandria, who expressly and frequently ascribes it to Barnabas the
companion of Paul. Origen quotes from the epistle twice, calling it the Epistle
of Barnabas, but without expressing any judgment as to its authenticity, and
without defining its author more closely. Jerome ( de vir. ill. 6) evidently did
not doubt its authenticity, but placed it nevertheless among the Apocrypha, and
his opinion prevailed down to the seventeenth century. It is difficult to decide
what Eusebius thought in regard to its authorship. His putting it among the
noqoi

237: twn apostolwn ai legomenai didaxai Didaxh twn dwdeka apostolwn grafh ), but
no other writer before the time of Eusebius treats it in the same way, and yet
Eusebius' mention of it among the nofoi noqoi . Upon Eusebius' use of the plural
didaxai 238: afetousin . See the previous chapter, note 20.

239: toij omologoumenoij . See note 1, above.

240: This Gospel, probably composed in Hebrew (Aramaic), is no longer extant,
but we possess a few fragments of it in Greek and Latin which are collected by
Grabe, Spic. I. 15-31, and by Hilgenfeld, N. T. Extra Can. rec. II. The existing
material upon which to base a judgment as to the nature of the lost Gospel and
as to its relation to our canonical gospels is very limited. It is certain,
however, that it cannot in its original form have been a working over of our
canonical Matthew (as many have thought); it contains too many little marks of
originality over against our Greek Matthew to admit of such a supposition. That
it was, on the other hand, the original of which our Greek Matthew is the
translation is also impossible; a comparison of its fragments with our Matthew
is sufficient to prove this. That it was the original source from which Matthew
and Luke derived their common matter is possible-more cannot be said. Lipsius (
Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. 709-712) and Westcott ( Hist. of the Canon, p. 515
sqq.) give the various quotations which are supposed to have been made from it.
How many of them are actually to be traced back to it as their source is not
certain. It is possible, but not certain, that Papias had seen it (see chap. 39,
note 28), possible also that Ignatius had, but the passage relied on to
establish the fact fails to do so (see chap. 36, note 14). It was probably used
by Justin (see Westcott, ibid. p. 516, and Lipsius, ibid. p. 712), undoubtedly
by Hegesippus (see below, Bk. IV. chap. 22), and was perhaps known to Pantaenus
(see below, Bk. V. chap. 10, note 8). Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. II. 9) and
Origen ( in Johan. II. 6 and often) are the first to bear explicit testimony to
the existence of such a gospel. Eusebius also was personally acquainted with it,
as may be gathered from his references to it in III. 39 and IV. 22, and from his
quotation in (the Syriac version of) his Theophany, IV. 13 (Lee's trans. p.
234), and in the Greek Theophany, §22 (Migne, VI. 685). The latter also shows
the high respect in which he held the work. Jerome's testimony in regard to it
is very important, but it must be kept in mind that the gospel had undergone
extensive alterations and additions before his time, and as known to him was
very different from the original form (cf. Lipsius, ibid. p. 711), and therefore
what he predicates of it cannot be applied to the original without limitation.
Epiphanius has a good deal to say about it, but he evidently had not himself
seen it, and his reports of it are very confused and misleading. The statement
of Lipsius, that according to Eusebius the gospel was reckoned by many among the
Homologoumena, is incorrect; e/ toutoij refers rather to the noqoi 241: twn
antilegomenwn .

242: anwmologhmenaj .

243: ouk endiafhkouz men, alla kai antilegomenaj . Eusebius, in this clause,
refers to the noqoi noqoi and antilegomena interchangeably (as e.g. in chap. 31,
§6). In the present passage the noqoi , as both uncanonical and disputed, are
distinguished from the canonical writings,-including both the universally
accepted and the disputed, - which are here thrown together without distinction.
The point to be emphasized is that he is separating here the uncanonical from
the canonical, without regard to the character of the individual writings within
the latter class.

244: See chap. 3, note 5.

245: The Gospel of Thomas is of Gnostic origin and thoroughly Docetic. It was
written probably in the second century. The original Gnostic form is no longer
extant, but we have fragmentary Catholic recensions of it in both Latin and
Greek, from which heretical traits are expunged with more or less care. The
gosvel contained many very fabulous stories about the childhood of Jesus. It is
mentioned frequently by the Fathers from Origen down, but always as an heretical
work. The Greek text is given by Tischendorf, p. 36 sqq., and an English
translation is contained in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. 395-405. See Lipsius
in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. p. 703-705.

246: This gospel is mentioned by Origen ( Hom. in Lucam I. ), by Jerome (
Praaef. in Matt. ), and by other later writers. The gospel is no longer extant,
though some gragments have been preserved by Clement of Alexandria, e.g. in
Strom. II. 9, Strom. III. 4 (quoted below in chap. 30), and Strom. VII. 13,
which show that it had a high moral tone and emphasized asceticism. We know very
little about it, but Lipsius conjectures that it was "identical with the
paradoseij Matqiou

247: Eusebius so far as we know is the first writer to refer to these Acts. But
they are mentioned after him by Epiphanius, Philaster, and Augustine (see
Tischendorf's Acta Apost. Apoc. p. xl.). The Acts of Andrew ( Acta Andraeae )
were of Gnostic origin and circulated among that sect in numerous editions. The
oldest extant portions (both in Greek and somewhat fragmentary) are the Acts of
Andrew and Matthew (translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. 517-525) and
the Acts of Peter and Andrew ( ibid. 526-527). The Acts and Martyrdom of the
Holy Apostle Andrew ( ibid. 511-516), or the so-called Epistle of the Presbyters
and Deacons of Achaia concerning the Passion of Andrew, is a later work, still
extant in a Catholic recension in both Greek and Latin. The fragments of these
three are given by Tischendorf in his Acta Apost. Apoc. p. 105 sqq. and 132
sqq., and in his Apocal. Apoc. p. 161 sq. See Lipsius in the Dict. of Christ.
Biog. I. p. 30.

248: Eusebius is likewise, so far as we know, the first writer to refer to these
Acts. But they are afterward mentioned by Epiphanius, Photius, Augustine,
Philaster, &c. (see Tichendrof, ibid. p. lxxiii.). They are also of Gnostic
origin and extant in a few fragments (collected by Thilo, Fragmenta Actum S.
Johannis a Lencio Charino conscriptorum, Halle, 1847). A Catholic extract very
much abridged, but containing clear Gnostic traits, is still extant and is given
by Tischendorf, Acta Apost. Apoc. p. 266 sq. (translated in the Ante-Nicene
Fathers, VIII. 560-564).

249: airetikwn andrwn anaplasmata .

250: en nofoij .

251: Justin, in the passage quoted just below, is the first one to tell us about
Menander. According to him, he was a Samaritan and a disciple of Simon Magus,
and, like him, deceived many by the practice of magic arts. Irenaeus ( Adv.
Haer. I. 23) gives a somewhat fuller account of him, very likely Based upon
Justin's work against heresies which the latter mentions in his Apol. I. 26, and
from which Irenaeus quotes in IV. 6. 2 (at least he quotes from a Contra
Marcionem, which was in all probability a part of the same work; see Bk. IV.
chap. 11, note 22), and perhaps in V. 26. 2. From this account of Irenaeus that
of Eusebius is drawn, and no new particulars are added. Tertullian also mentions
Menander ( De Anima, 23, 50) and his resurrection doctrine, but evidently knows
only what Irenaes has already told; and so the accounts of all the early Fathers
rest wholly upon Justin and Irenaeus, and probably ultimately upon Justin alone.
See Salmon's article Menander in the Dict. of Christ. Biog.

252: Upon Simon Magus, see above, Bk. II. chap. 13, note 3.

253: "Instrument of diabolical power," is an embellishment of Eusebius' own,
quite in keeping with his usual treatment of heretics. It is evident, however,
that neither Justin nor Irenaeus looked upon Menander with any greater degree of
allowance.

254: Simon (Irenaeus, I. 23. 1) taught that he himself was the Supreme Power;
but Menander, according to Irenaeus ( ibid. §5), taught that the Supreme Power
continues unknown to all, but that he himself (as Eusebius here says) was sent
forth as a saviour for the deliverance of men.

255: He agreed with Simon in teaching that the world was formed by angels who
had taken their origin from the Ennoea of the Supreme Power, and that the
magical power which he imparted enabled is followers to overcome these creative
angels, as Simon had taught of himself before him.

256: This baptism (according to Irenaeus "into his own name"), and the promise
of the resurrection as a result, seem to have been an original addition of
Menander's. The exemption from death taught by Menander was evidently understood
by Irenaeus, Tertullian ( De Anima, 50), and Eusebius in its physical, literal
sense; but the followers of Menander must of course have put a spiritual meaning
upon it, or the sect could not have continued in existence for any length of
time. It is certain that it was flourishing at the time of Justin; how much
longer we do not know. Justin himself does not emphasize the physical element,
and he undoubtedly understood that the immortality taught was spiritual simply.
Hegesippus (quoted below, in Bk. IV. chap. 22) mentions the Menandrianists, but
this does not imply that he was himself acquainted with them, for he draws his
information largely from Justin Martyr.

257: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I. 23. 5. In III. 4. 3 he mentions Menander again,
making him the father of all the Gnostics.

258: Justin, Apol. I. 26.

259: The situation of the village of Capparattea is uncertain. See Harnack's
Quellen-Kritik des Gnosticismus, p. 84.

260: Menander's Antiochene activity is reported only by Justin. It is probable,
therefore, that Tertullian used Irenaeus alone in writing his account of
Menander, for it is unlikely that both of them would have omitted the same fact
if they drew independently from Justin.

261: Cyril of Jerusalem ( Cat. XVIII. 1) says that the denial of the
resurrection of the body was a peculiarly Samaritan heresy, and it would seem
therefore that the heresy of these Menandrianists was in that direction, i.e.
that they taught rather a spiritual immortality and denied a bodily resurrection
(as suggested in note 6); evidently, however, this was not Eusebius' idea. He
probably looked upon them as discrediting the Christian doctrine of a
resurrection by teaching a physical immortality, which of course was soon proved
contrary to truth, and which thus, being confounded by the masses with the
doctrines of the Christians, brought the latter also into contempt, and threw
discredit upon immortality and resurrection of every kind.

262:

263: The word Ebionite comes from the Hebrew wyb)

264: wj mh an dia monhj thj eij tdn xoiston pistewj kai tou kat authn biou
swfhsomenoij . The addition of the last clause reveals the difference between
the doctrine of Eusebius' time and the doctrine of Paul. Not until the
Reformation was Paul understood and the true formula, dia monhj thj eij ton
xriston pistewj , restored.

265: Eusebius clearly knew of no distinction in name between these two classes
of Ebionites such as is commonly made between Nazarenes and Ebionites,-nor did
Origen, whom he follows (see note 1, above).

266: That there were two different views among the Ebionites as to the birth of
Christ is stated frequently by Origen (cf. e.g. Contra Cels. V. 61), but there
was unanimity in the denial of his pre-existence and essential divinity, and
this constituted the essence of the heresy in the eyes of the Fathers from
Irenaeus on. Irenaeus, as remarked above (note 1), knows of no such difference
as Eusebius here mentions: and that the denial of the supernatural birth even in
the time of Origen was in fact ordinarily attributed to the Ebionites in
general, without a distinction of the two classes, is seen by Origen's words in
his Hom. in Luc. XVII.

267: There seems to have been no difference between these two classes in regard
to their relation to the law; the distinction made by Justin is no longer
noticed.

268: This is mentioned by Irenaeus (I. 26. 2) and by Origen ( Cont. Cels. V. 65
and Hom. in Jer. XVIII. 12). It was a general characteristic of the sect of the
Ebionites as known to the Fathers, from the time of Origen on, and but a
continuation of the enmity to Paul shown by the Judaizers during his lifetime.
But their relations to Paul and to the Jewish law fell more and more into the
background, as remarked above, as their Christological heresy came into greater
prominence over against the developed Christology of the Catholic Church (cf.
e.g. the accounts of Tertullian and of Hippolytus with that of Irenaeus).

269: Eusebius is the first to tell us that the Ebionites used the Gospel
according to the Hebrews. Irenaeus ( Adv. Hae. I. 26. 2, III. 11. 7) says that
they used the Gospel of Matthew, and the fact that he mentions no difference
between it and the canonical Matthew shows that, so far as he knew, they were
the same. But according to Eusebius, Jerome, and Epiphanius the Gospel according
to the Hebrews was used by the Ebionites, and, as seen above (chap. 25, note
18), this Gospel cannot have been identical with the canonical Matthew. Either,
therefore, the Gospel used by the Ebionites in the time of Irenaeus, and called
by him simply the Gospel of Matthew, was something different from the canonical
Matthew, or else the Ebionites had given up the Gospel of Matthew for another
and a different gospel (for the Gospel of the Hebrews cannot have been an
outgrowth of the canonical Matthew, as has been already seen, chap. 25, note
24). The former is much more probable, and the difficulty may be most simply
explained by supposing that the Gospel according to the Hebrews is identical
with the so-called Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (see chap. 24, note 5), or at least
that it passed among the earliest Jewish Christians under Matthew's name, and
that Irenaeus, who was personally acquainted with the sect, simply hearing that
they used a Gospel of Matthew, naturally supposed it to he identical with the
canonical Gospel. In the time of Jerome a Hebrew "Gospel according to the
Hebrews" was used by the "Nazarenes and Ebionites" as the Gospel of Matthew (cf.
in Matt. XII. 13; Contra Pelag. III. 2). Jerome refrains from expressing his own
judgment as to its authorship, but that he did not consider it in its existing
form identical with the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew is clear from his words in de
vir. ill. chap. 3, taken in connection with the fact that he himself translated
it into Greek and Latin, as he states in chap. 2. Epiphanius ( Haer. XXIX. 9)
says that the Nazarenes still preserved the original Hebrew Matthew m full,
while the Ebionites (XXX. 13) had a Gospel of Matthew "not complete, but
spurious and mutilated"; and elsewhere (XXX. 3) he says that the Ebionites used
the Gospel of Matthew and called it the "Gospel according to the Hebrews." It is
thus evident that he meant to distinguish the Gospel of the Ebionites from that
of the Nazarenes, ie. the Gospel according to the Hebrews from the original
Hebrew Matthew. So, likewise. Eusebius' treatment of the Gospel according to the
Hebrews and of the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew clearly indicates that he considered
them two different gospels (cf. e.g. his mention of the former in chap. 25 and
in Bk. IV. chap. 22, and his mention of the latter in chap. 24, and in Bk. IV.
chap. 10). Of course he knew that the former was not identical with the
canonical Matthew, and hence, naturally supposing that the Hebrew Matthew agreed
with the canonical Matthew, he could not do otherwise than make a distinction
between the Gospel according to the Hebrews and the Hebrew Matthew, and he must
therefore make the change which he did in Irenaeus' statement in mentioning the
Gospel used by the Ebionites, as he knew them. Moreover, as we learn from Bk.
VI. chap. 17, the Ebionite Symmachus had written against the Gospel of Matthew
(of course the canonical Gospel), and this fact would only confirm Eusebius in
his opinion that Irenaeus was mistaken, and that the Ebionites did not use the
Gospel of Matthew.

270: The question again arises whether Eusebius is referring here to the second
class of Ebionites only, and is contrasting their conduct in regard to Sabbath
observance with that of the first class, or whether he refers to all Ebionites,
and contrasts them with the Jews. The subject remains the same as in the
previous sentence; but the persons referred to are contrasted with ekeinoi ,
whom they resemble in their observance of the Jewish Sabbath, but from whom they
differ in their observance of the Lord's day. The most natural interpretation of
the Greek is that which makes the outoi de refer to the second class of
Ebionites, and the ekeinoi to the first; and yet we hear from no one else of two
sharply defined classes separated by religious customs, in addition to doctrinal
opinions, and it is not likely that they existed. If this interpretation,
however, seems necessary, we may conclude that some of them observed the Lord's
day, while others did not, and that Eusebius naturally identified the former
with the more, and the latter with the less, orthodox class, without any
especial information upon the subject. It is easier, too, to explain Eusebius'
suggestion of a second derivation for the name of Ebionite, if we assume that he
is distinguishing here between the two classes. Having given above a reason for
calling the first class by that name, he now gives the reason for calling the
second class by the same.

271: See note 2.

272: The earliest account which we have of Cerinthus is that of Irenaeus ( Adv.
Haer. I. 26. 1; cf. III. 3. 4, quoted at the end of this chapter, and 11. 1),
according to which Cerinthus, a man educated in the wisdom of the Egyptians,
taught that the world was not made by the supreme God, but by a certain power
distinct from him. He denied the supernatural birth of Jesus, making him the son
of Joseph and Mary, and distinguishing him from Christ, who descended upon him
at baptism and left him again at his crucifixion. He was thus Ebionitic in his
Christology, but Gnostic in his doctrine of the creation. He claimed no
supernatural power for himself as did Simon Magus and Menander, but pretended to
angelic revelations, as recorded by Caius in this paragraph. Irenaeus (who is
followed by Hippolytus, VII. 21 and X. 17) says nothing of his chiliastic views,
but these are mentioned by Caius in the present paragraph, by Dionysius (quoted
by Eusebius, VII. 25, below), by Theodoret ( Haer. Fab. II. 3), and by Augustine
( De Haer. I. 8), from which accounts we can see that those views were very
sensual. The fullest description which we have of Cerinthus and his followers is
that of Epiphanius ( Haer. XXVIII.), who records a great many traditions as to
his life (e.g. that he was one of the false apostles who opposed Paul, and one
of the circumcision who rebuked Peter for eating with Cornelius, &c.), and also
many details as to his system, some of which are quite contradictory. It is
clear, however, that he was Jewish in his training and sympathies, while at the
same time possessed of Gnostic tendencies. He represents a position of
transition from Judaistic Ebionism to Gnosticism, and may be regarded as the
earliest Judaizing Gnostic. Of his death tradition tells us nothing, and as to
his dates we can say only that he lived about the end of the first century.
Irenaeus (III. 2. 1) supposed John to have written his gospel and epistle in
opposition to Cerinthus. On the other hand, Cerinthus himself was regarded by
some as the author of the Apocalypse (see Bk. VII. chap. 25, below), and most
absurdly as the author of the Fourth Gospel also (see above, chap. 24, note 1).

273: See Bk. II. chap. 25, §7. Upon Caius, see the note given there. The
Disputation is the same that is quoted in that passage.

274: Cf. Rev. xx. 4. On chiliasm in the early Church, see below, chap. 39, note
19.

275: It is a commonly accepted opinion founded upon this passage that Caius
rejected the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse and considered it a work of
Cerinthus. But the quotation by no means implies this. Had he believed that
Cerinthus wrote the Apocalypse commonly ascribed to John, he would certainly
have said so plainly, and Eusebius would just as certainly have quoted his
opinion, prejudiced as he was himself against the Apocalypse. Caius simply means
that Cerinthus abused and misinterpreted the vision of the Apocalypse for his
own sensual purposes. That this is the meaning is plain from the words "being an
enemy to the Divine Scriptures," and especially from the fact that in the
Johannine Apocalypse itself occur no such sensual visions as Caius mentions
here. The sensuality was evidently superimposed by the interpretation of
Cerinthus. Cf. Weiss' N. T. Einleitung, p. 82.

276: Upon Dionysius and his writings, see below, Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 1.

277: The same passage is quoted with its context in Bk. VII. chap. 25, below.
The verbs in the portion of the passage quoted here are all in the infinitive,
and we see, from Bk. VII. chap. 25, that they depend upon an indefinite legousin
, "they say"; so that Eusebius is quite right here in saying that Dionysius is
drawing from tradition in making the remarks which he does. Inasmuch as the
verbs are not independent, and the statement is not, therefore, Dionysius' own,
I have inserted, at the beginning of the quotation, the words "they say that,"
which really govern all the verbs of the passage. Dionysius himself rejected the
theory of Cerinthus' authorship of the Apocalypse, as may be seen from Bk. VII.
chap. 25, §7.

278: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I. 26. 1.

279: See ibid. III. 3. 4. This story is repeated by Eusebius, in Bk. IV. chap.
14. There is nothing impossible in it. The occurrence fits well the character of
John as a "son of thunder," and shows the same spirit exhibited by Polycarp in
his encounter with Marcion (see below, Bk. IV. chap. 14). But the story is not
very well authenticated, as Irenaeus did not himself hear it from Polycarp, but
only from others to whom Polycarp had told it. The unreliability of such
second-hand tradition is illustrated abundantly in the case of Irenaeus himself,
who gives some reports, very far from true, upon the authority of certain
presbyters (e.g. that Christ lived fifty years; II. 22. 5). This same story,
with much more fullness of detail, is repeated by Epiphanius ( Haer. XXX. 24),
but of Ebion (who never existed), instead of Cerinthus. This shows that the
story was a very common one, while, at the same time, so vague in its details as
to admit of an application to any heretic who suited the purpose. That somebody
met somebody in a bath seems quite probable, and there is nothing to prevent our
accepting the story as it stands in Irenaeus, if we choose to do so. One thing,
at least, is certain, that Cerinthus is a historical character, who in all
probability was, for at least a part of his life, contemporary with John, and
thus associated with him in tradition, whether or not he ever came into personal
contact with him.

280: Rev. ii. 6, Rev. ii. 15. Salmon, in his article Nicolaitans, in the Dict.
of Christ. Biog. , states, as I think, quite correctly, that "there really is no
trustworthy evidence of the continuance of a sect so called after the death of
the apostle John"; and in this he is in agreement with many modern scholars. An
examination of extant accounts of this sect seems to show that nothing more was
known of the Nicolaitans by any of the Fathers than what is told in the
Apocalypse. Justin, whose lost work against heretics Irenaeus follows in his
description of heresies, seems to have made no mention of the Nicolaitans, for
they are dragged in by Irenaeus at the close of the text, quite out of their
chronological place. Irenaeus (I. 26. 3; III. 11. 1) seems to have made up his
account from the Apocalypse, and to have been the sole source for later writers
upon this subject. That the sect was licentious is told us by the Apocalypse.
That Nicolas, one of the Seven, was their founder is stated by Irenaeus (I. 26.
3), Hippolytus (VII. 24), Pseudo-Tertullian ( Adv. omnes Haer. chap. 1), and
Epiphanius ( Haer. 25), the last two undoubtedly drawing their account from
Hippolytus, and he in turn from Irenaeus. Jerome and the writers of his time and
later accept this view, believing that Nicolas became licentious and fell into
the greatest wickedness. Whether the sect really claimed Nicolas as their
founder, or whether the combination was made by Irenaeus in consequence of the
identity of his name with the name of a sect mentioned in the Apocalypse, we
cannot tell; nor have we any idea, in the latter case, where the sect got the
name which they bore. Clement of Alexandria, in the passage quoted just below,
gives us quite a different account of the character of Nicolas; and as be is a
more reliable writer than the ones above quoted, and as his statement explains
excellently the appeal of the sect to Nicolas' authority, without impeaching his
character, which certainly his position among the Seven would lead us to expect
was good, and good enough to warrant permanence, we feel safe in accepting his
account as the true one, and denying that Nicolas himself bore the character
which marked the sect of the Nicolaitans; though the latter may, as Clement
says, have arisen from abusing a saying of Nicolas which had been uttered with a
good motive.

281: See Acts vi.

282: Stromata, III. 4.

283: Compare Matt. vi. 24.

284: This teaching was found in the Gospel of Matthias, or the paradoseij
Matqiou , mentioned in chap. 25 (see note 30 on that chapter).

285: A chapter intervenes between the quotation given by Eusebius just above and
the one which follows. In it Clement had referred to two classes of
heretics,-without giving their names,-one of which encouraged all sorts of
license, while the other taught celibacy. Having in that place refuted the
former class, he devotes the chapter from which the following quotation is taken
to a refutation of the latter, deducing against them the fact that some of the
apostles were married. Clement here, as in his Quis dives salvetur (quoted in
chap. 23), shows his good common sense which led him to avoid the extreme of
asceticism as well as that of license. He was in this an exception to most of
the Fathers of his own and subsequent ages, who in their reaction from the
licentiousness of the times advised and often encouraged by their own example
the most rigid asceticism, and thus laid the foundation for monasticism.

286: Strom. III. 6.

287: Peter was married, as we know from Matt. viii. 14 (cf. 1 Cor. ix. 5).
Tradition also tells us of a daughter, St. Petronilla. She is first called St.
Peter's daughter in the Apocryphal Acts of SS. Nereus and Achilles, which give a
legendary account of her life and death. In the Christian cemetery of Flavia
Domitilla was buried an Aurelia Petronilla filia dulcissima, and Petronilla
being taken as a diminutive of Petrus, she was assumed to have been a daughter
of Peter. It is probable that this was the origin of the popular tradition.
Petronilla is not, however, a diminutive of Petrus, and it is probable that this
woman was one of the Aurelian gens and a relative of Flavia Domitilla. Compare
the article Petronilla in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. Petronilla has played a
prominent rôle in art. The immense painting by Guercino in the Palace of the
Conservators in Rome attracts the attention of all visitors.

288: It is probable that Clement here confounds Philip the evangelist with
Philip the apostle. See the next chapter, note 6.

289: The passage to which Clement here refers and which he quotes in this
connection is 1 Cor. ix. 5; but this by no means proves that Paul was married,
and 1 Cor. vii. 8 seems to imply the opposite, though the words might be used if
he were a widower. The words of Phil. iv. 3 are often quoted as addressed to his
wife, but there is no authority for such a reference. Clement is the only Father
who reports that Paul was married; many of them expressly deny it; e.g.
Tertullian, Hilary, Epiphanius, Jerome, &c. The authority of these later Fathers
is of course of little account. But Clement's conclusion is based solely upon
exegetical grounds, and therefore is no argument for the truth of the report.

290: Strom. VII. 11. Clement, so far as we know, is the only one to relate this
story, but he bases it upon tradition, and although its truth cannot be proved,
there is nothing intrinsically improbable in it.

291: See Bk. II. chap. 25, §§5 sqq.

292: See chap. 23, §§3, 4.

293: Upon Polycrates, see Bk. V. chap. 22, note 9.

294: Upon Victor, see ibid. note 1.

295: This epistle is the only writing of Polycrates which is preserved to us.
This passage, with considerably more of the same epistle, is quoted below in Bk.
V. chap. 24. From that chapter we see that the epistle was written in connection
with the Quarto-deciman controversy, and after saying, "We therefore observe the
genuine day," Polycrates goes on in the words quoted here to mention the "great
lights of Asia" as confirming his own practice. (See the notes upon the epistle
in Bk. V. chap. 24.) The citation here of this incidental passage from a letter
upon a wholly different subject illustrates Eusebius' great diligence in
searching out all historical notices which could in any way contribute to his
history.

296: Philip the apostle and Philip the evangelist are here confounded. That they
were really two different men is clear enough from Luke's account in the Acts
(cf. Acts vi. 2-5, Acts viii. 14-17, and Acts xxi. 8). That it was the
evangelist, and not the apostle, that was buried in Hierapolis may be assumed
upon the following grounds: (1) The evangelist (according to Acts xxi. 8) had
four daughters, who were virgins and prophetesses. Polycrates speaks here of
three daughters, at least two of whom were virgins, and Proclus, just below,
speaks of four daughters who were prophetesses. (2) Eusebius, just below,
expressly identifies the apostle and evangelist, showing that in his time there
was no separate tradition of the two men. Lightfoot ( Colossians, p. 45)
maintains that Polycrates is correct, and that it was the apostle, not the
evangelist, that was buried in Hierapolis; but the reasons which he gives are
trivial and will hardly convince scbolars in general. Certainly we need strong
grounds to justify the separation of two men so remarkably similar so far as
their families are concerned. But the truth is, there is nothing more natural
than that later generations should identify the evangelist with the apostle of
the same name, and should assume the presence of the latter wherever the former
was known to have been. This identification would in itself be a welcome one to
the inhabitants of Hierapolis, and hence it would be assumed there more readily
than anywhere else. Of course it is not impossible that Philip the apostle also
had daughters who were virgins and prophetesses, but it is far more probable
that Polycrates (and possibly Clement too; see the previous chapter) confounded
him with the evangelist,-as every one may have done for some generations before
them. Eusebius at any rate, historian though he was, saw no difficulty in making
the identification, and certainly it was just as easy for Polycrates and Clement
to do the same. Lightfoot makes something of the fact that Polycrates mentions
only three daughters, instead of four. But the latter's words by no means imply
that there had not been a fourth daughter (see note 8, below).

297: Hierapolis was a prominent city in Proconsular Asia, about five miles north
of Laodicea, in connection with which city it is mentioned in Col. iv. 13. The
ruins of this city are quite extensive, and its site is occupied by a village
called Pambouk Kelessi.

298: The fact that only three of Philip's daughters are mentioned here, when
from the Acts we know he had four, shows that the fourth had died elsewhere; and
therefore it would have been aside from Polycrates' purpose to mention her,
since, as we see from Bk. V. chap. 24, he was citing only those who had lived in
Asia (the province), and had agreed as to the date of the Passover. The separate
mention of this third daughter by Polycrates has been supposed to arise from the
fact that she was married, while the other two remained virgins. This is,
however, not at all implied, as the fact that she was buried in a different
place would be enough to cause the separate mention of her. Still, inasmuch as
Clement (see the preceding chapter) reports that Philip's daughters were
married, and inasmuch as Polycrates expressly states that two of them were
virgins, it is quite possible that she (as well as the fourth daughter, not
mentioned here) may have been a married woman, which would, perhaps, account for
her living in Ephesus and being buried there, instead of with her father and
sister in Hierapolis. It is noticeable that while two of the daughters are
expressly called virgins, the third is not.

299: martuj ; see chap. 32, note 15.

300: The Greek word is petagon 301: Upon John's Ephesian activity and his death
there, see Bk. III. chap. 1, note 6.

302: Bk. II. chap. 25, §6, and Bk. III. chap. 28, §1. Upon Caius and his
dialogue with Proclus, see the former passage, note 8.

303: Upon Proclus, a Montanistic leader, see Bk. II chap. 25, note 12.

304: The agreement of the two accounts is not perfect, as Polycrates reports
that two daughters were buried at Hierapolis and one at Ephesus, while Proclus
puts them all four at Hierapolis. But the report of Polycrates deserves our
credence rather than that of Proclus, because, in the first place, Polycrates
was earlier than Proclus; in the second place, his report is more exact, and it
is hard to imagine how, if all four were really buried in one place, the more
detailed report of Polyerates could have arisen, while on the other hand it is
quite easy to explain the rise of the more general but inexact account of
Proclus; for with the general tradition that Philip and his daughters lived and
died in Hierapolis needed only to be combined the fact that he had four
daughters, and Proclus' version was complete. In the third place, Polycrates'
report bears the stamp of truth as contrasted with mere legend, because it
accounts for only three daughters, while universal tradition speaks of four.

305: I read meta touton with the majority of the mss., with Burton, Routh,
Schwegler, Heinichen, &c., instead of meta touto , which occurs in some mss. and
in Rufinus, and is adopted by Valesius, Crusèe, and others. As Burton says, the
copyists of Eusebius, not knowing to whom Proclus here referred, changed touton
to touto ; but if we had the preceding context we should find that Proclus had
been referring to some prophetic man such as the Montanists were fond of
appealing to in support of their position. Schwegler suggests that it may have
been the Quadratus mentioned in chap. 37, but this is a mere guess. As the
sentence stands isolated from its connection, touton is the harder reading, and
could therefore have more easily been changed into touto than the latter into
touton .

306: Acts xxi. 8, Acts xxi. 9. Eusebius clearly enough considers Philip the
apostle and Philip the evangelist identical. Upon this identification, see note
6, above.

307: ierwn grammatwn, kai twn antilegomenwn men, omwj ... dedhmosieumenwn . The
classification here is not inconsistent with that given in chap. 25, but is less
complete than it, inasmuch as here Eusebius draws no distinction between
antilegomena and noqoi noqoi ) of chap. 25 (see note 27 on that chapter).

308: Trajan, who reigned from 98 to 117 a.d.

309: Upon the state of the Christians under Trajan, see the next chapter, with
the notes.

310: See chap. 11.

311: Quoted in Bk. II. chap. 23, and in Bk. III. chap. 20, and mentioned in Bk.
III. chap. 11. Upon his life and writings, see Bk. IV. chap. 8, note 1.

312: In the passage quoted in Bk. IV. chap. 22, §4, Hegesippus speaks of various
heretics, and it looks as if the passage quoted there directly preceded the
present one in the work of Hegesippus.

313: That is, by crucifixion, as stated in §6.

314: It is noticeable that Symeon was not sought out by the imperial
authorities, but was accused to them as a descendant of David and as a
Christian. The former accusation shows with what suspicion all members of the
Jewish royal family were still viewed, as possible instigators of a revolution
(cf. chap. 20, note 2); the latter shows that in the eyes of the State
Christianity was in itself a crime (see the next chapter, note 6). In the next
paragraph it is stated that search was made by the officials for members of the
Jewish royal family. This was quite natural, after the attention of the
government had been officially drawn to the family by the arrest of Symeon.

315: The date of the martyrdom of Symeon is quite uncertain. It has been
commonly ascribed (together with the martyrdom of Ignatius) to the year 106 or
107, upon the authority of Eusebius' Chron., which is supposed to connect these
events with the ninth or tenth year of Trajan's reign. But an examination of the
passage in the Chron., where Eusebius groups together these two events and the
persecutions in Bithynia, shows that he did not pretend to know the exact date
of any of them, and simply put them together as three similar events known to
have occurred during the reign of Trajan (cf. Lightfoot's Ignatius, II. p. 447
sqq.). The year of Atticus' proconsulship we unfortunately do not know, although
Wieseler, in his Christen-Verfolgungen der Caesaren, p. 126, cites Waddington as
his authority for the statement that Herodes Atticus was proconsul of Palestine
from 105 to 107; but all that Waddington says ( Fastes des prov. Asiat., p. 720)
is, that since the proconsul for the years 105 to 107 is not known, and Eusebius
puts the death of Symeon in the ninth or tenth year of Trajan, we may assume
that this was the date of Atticus' proconsulship. This, of course, furnishes no
support for the common opinion. Lightfoot, on account of the fact that Symeon
was the son of Clopas, wishes to put the martyrdom earlier in Trajan's reign,
and it is probable that it occurred earlier rather than later; more cannot be
said. The great age of Symeon and his martyrdom under Trajan are too well
authenticated to admit of doubt; at the same time, the figure 120 may well be an
exaggeration, as Lightfoot thinks. Renan ( Les Evangiles, p. 466) considers it
very improbable that Symeon could have had so long a life and episcopate, and
therefore invents a second Symeon, a great-grandson of Clopas, as fourth bishop
of Jerusalem, and makes him the martyr mentioned here. But there is nothing
improbable in the survival of a contemporary of Jesus to the time of Trajan, and
there is no warrant for rejecting the tradition, which is unanimous in calling
Symeon the son of Clopas, and also in emphasizing his great age.

316: epi Traianou kaisaroj kai upatikou 'Attikou

317: This is a peculiar statement. Members of the house of David would hardly
have ventured to accuse Symeon on the ground that he belonged to that house. The
statement is, however, quite indefinite. We are not told what happened to these
accusers, nor indeed that they really were of David's line, although the wsan
with which Eusebius introduces the charge does not imply any doubt in his own
mind, as Lightfoot quite rightly remarks. It is possible that some who were of
the line of David may have accused Symeon, not of being a member of that family,
but only of being a Christian, and that the report of the occurrence may have
become afterward confused.

318: This is certainly a reasonable supposition, and the unanimous election of
Symeon as successor of James at a time when there must have been many living who
had seen the Lord, confirms the conclusion.

319: Mary, the wife of Clopas, is mentioned in John xix. 25.

320: See above, chap. 11.

321: See above, chap. 20.

322: See p. 389, note.

323: marturej . The word is evidently used here in its earlier sense of
"witnesses," referring to those who testified to Christ even if they did not
seal their testimony with death. This was the original use of the word, and
continued very common during the first two centuries, after which it became the
technical term for persons actually martyred and was confined to them, while
omologhthj , "confessor," gradually came into use as the technical term for
those who bad borne testimony in the midst of persecution, but had not suffered
death. As early as the first century (cf. Acts xxii. 20 and Rev. ii. 13) martuj
was used of martyrs, but not as distinguishing them from other witnesses to the
truth. See the remarks of Lightfoot, in his edition of Clement of Rome, p. 46.

324: This part of the quotation has already been given in Eusebius' own words in
chap. 20, §8. See note 5 on that chapter.

325: epi tw autw logw , that is, was accused for the same reason that the
grandsons of Judas (whom Hegesippus had mentioned just before) were: namely,
because he belonged to the line of David. See chap. 20; but compare also the
remarks made in note 10, above.

326: epi 'Attikou tou upatikou . See above, note 9.

327: On the heretics mentioned by Hegesippus, see Bk. IV. chap. 22.

328: thn yeudonumon gnwsin ; 1 Tim. vi. 20. A few mss., followed by Stephanus,
Valesius (in his text), Closs, and Crusè, add the words (in substance): "Such is
the statement of Hegesippus. But let us proced with the course of our history."
The majority of the mss., however, endorsed by Valesius in his notes, and
followed by Burton, Heinichen, and most of the editors, omit the words, which
are clearly an interpolation.

329: Plinius Caecilius Secundus, commonly called "Pliny the younger" to
distinguish him from his uncle, Plinius Secundus the elder, was a man of great
literary attainments and an intimate friend of the Emperor Trajan. Of his
literary remains the most important are his epistles, collected in ten books.
The epistle of which Eusebius speaks in this chapter is No. 96 (97), and the
reply of Trajan No. 97 (98) of the tenth book. The epistle was written from
Bithynia, probably within a year after Pliny became governor there, which was in
110 or 111. It reads as follows: "It is my custom, my Lord, to refer to thee all
questions concerning which I am in doubt; for who can better direct my
hesitation or instruct my ignorance? I have never been present at judicial
examinations of the Christians; therefore I am ignorant how and to what extent
it is customary to punish or to search for them. And I have hesitated greatly as
to whether any distinction should be made on the ground of age, or whether the
weak should be treated in the same way as the strong; whether pardon should be
granted to the penitent, or he who has ever been a Christian gain nothing by
renouncing it; whether the mere name, if unaccompanied with crimes, or crimes
associated with the name, should be punished. Meanwhile, with those who have
been brought before me as Christians I have pursued the following course. I have
asked them if they were Christians, and if they have confessed, I have asked
them a second and third time, threatening them with punishment; if they have
persisted, I have commanded them to be led away to punishment. For I did not
doubt that whatever that might be which they confessed, at any rate pertinacious
and inflexible obstinacy ought to be punished. There have been others afflicted
with like insanity who as Roman citizens I have decided should be sent to Rome.
In the course of the proceedings, as commonly happens, the crime was extended,
and many varieties of cases appeared. An anonymous document was published,
containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had
been Christians I thought ought to be released, when they had followed my
example in invoking the gods and offering incense and wine to thine image,-which
I had for that purpose ordered brought with the images of the gods,-and when
they had besides cursed Christ-things which they say that those who are truly
Christians cannot be compelled to do. Others, accused by an informer, first said
that they were Christians and afterwards denied it, saying that they had indeed
been Christians, but had ceased to be, some three years, some several years, and
one even twenty years before. All adored thine image and the statues of the
gods, and cursed Christ. Moreover, they affirmed that this was the sum of their
guilt or error; that they had been accustomed to come together on a fixed day
before daylight and to sing responsively a song unto Christ as God; and to bind
themselves with an oath, not with a view to the commission of some crime, but,
on the contrary, that they would not commit theft, nor robbery, nor adultery,
that they would not break faith, nor refuse to restore a deposit when asked for
it. When they had done these things, their custom was to separate and to
assemble again to partake of a meal, common yet harmless (which is not the
characteristic of a nefarious superstition); but this they had ceased to do
after my edict, in which according to thy demands I had prohibited fraternities.
I therefore considered it the more necessary to examine, even with the use of
torture, two female slaves who were called deaconesses ( ministrae ), in order
to ascertain the truth. But I found nothing except a superstition depraved and
immoderate; and therefore, postponing further inquiry, I have turned to thee for
advice. For the matter seems to me worth consulting about, especially on account
of the number of persons involved. For many of every age and of every rank and
of both sexes have been already, and will be brought to trial. For the contagion
of this superstition has permeated not only the cities, but also the villages
and even the country districts. Yet it can apparently be arrested and corrected.
At any rate, it is certainly a fact that the temples, which were almost
deserted, are now beginning to be frequented, and the sacred rites, which were
for a long time interrupted, to be resumed, and fodder for the victims to be
sold, for which previously hardly a purchaser was to be found. From which it is
easy to gather how great a multitude of men may be reformed if there is given a
chance for repentance."

330: ama th ew diegeiromenouj . See note 9, below.

331: This is a very good statement of the case. There was nothing approaching a
universal persecution,-that is a persecution simultaneously carried on in all
parts of the empire, until the time of Decius.

332: Mentioned in Bk. II. chap. 2. On the translation of Tertullian's Apology
employed by Eusebius, see note 9 on that chapter. The present passage is
rendered, on the whole, with considerable fidelity; much more accurately than in
the two cases noticed in the previous book.

333: Apol. chap. 2.

334: The view which Tertullian here takes of Trajan's rescript is that it was,
on the whole, favorable,-that the Christians stood after it in a better state in
relation to the law than before,-and this interpretation of the edict was
adopted by all the early Fathers, and is, as we can see, accepted likewise by
Eusebius (and so he entitles this chapter, not "Trajan commands the Christians
to be punished, if they persist in their Christianity," but "Trajan forbids the
Christians to be sought after," thus implying that the rescript is favorable).
But this interpretation is a decided mistake. Trajan's rescript expressly made
Christianity a religio iilicita, and from that time on it was a crime in the
sight of the law to be a Christian; whereas, before that time, the matter had
not been finally determined, and it had been left for each ruler to act just as
he pleased. Trajan, it is true, advises moderation in the execution of the law;
but that does not alter the fact that his rescript is an unfavorable one, which
makes the profession of Christianity-what it had not been before-a direct
violation of an established law. Compare, further, Bk. IV. chap. 8, note 14.

335: katakrinaj xristianouj tinaj kai thj aciaj ekbalwn thj aciaj 336: Greek:
ecw tou mh boulesqai autouj eidwlolatrein eidwlolatrein 337: Greek: anistasqai
ewqen 338: Greek: proj to thn episthmhn autwn diafulassein episthmh 339: The
Emperor Trajan.

340: On Clement of Rome, see chap. 4, note 19.

341: In Bk. IV. chap. 1, Eusebius gives eight years as the duration of
Evarestus' episcopate; but in his Chron. he gives seven. Other catalogues differ
widely, both as to the time of his accession and the duration of his episcopate.
The truth is, as the monarchical episcopate was not yet existing in Rome, it is
useless to attempt to fix his dates, or those of any of the other so-called
bishops who lived before the second quarter of the second century.

342: See above, chap. 32.

343: Of this Justus we know no more than Eusebius tells us here. Epiphanius (
Haer. LXVI. 20) calls him Judas.

344: On Polycarp, see Bk. IV. chap. 14, note 5.

345: Of the life of Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, we know very little. He is
mentioned by Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. V. 33. 3 and 4, who informs us that he was a
companion of Polycarp and a hearer of the apostle John. The latter statement is
in all probability incorrect (see chap. 39. note 4): but there is no reason to
question the truth of the former. Papias' dates we cannot ascertain with any
great degree of accuracy. A notice in the Chron. Paschale, which makes him a
martyr and connects his death with that of Polycarp, assigning both to the year
164 a.d. has been shown by Lightfoot ( Contemp. Review, 1875, II. p. 381) to
rest upon a confusion of names, and to be, therefore, entirely untrustworthy. We
learn, however, from chap. 39, below, that Papias was acquainted with personal
followers of the Lord (e.g. with Aristion and the "presbyter John"), and also
with the daughters of Philip. He must, therefore, have reached years of maturity
before the end of the first century. On the other hand, the five books of his
Expositions cannot have been written very long before the middle of the second
century, for some of the extant fragments seem to show traces of the existence
of Gnosticism in a somewhat advanced form at the time he wrote. With these data
we shall not be far wrong in saying that he was born in the neighborhood of 70
a.d., and died before the middle of the second century. He was a pronounced
chiliast (see chap. 39, note 19), and according to Eusebius, a man of limited
understanding (see chap. 39, note 20); but the claim of the Tübingen school that
he was an Ebionite is not supported by extant evidence (see Lightfoot, ibid. p.
384). On the writings of Papias, see below, chap. 39, note 1.

346: Four mss. insert at this point the words anhr ta panta oti malista
logiwtatoj kai thj grafhj eidhmwn

347: Eusebius follows what was undoubtedly the oldest tradition in making
Evodius the first bishop of Antioch, and Ignatius the second (see above, chap.
22, note 2). Granting the genuineness of the shorter Greek recension of the
Ignatian epistles (to be mentioned below), the fact that Ignatius was bishop of
the church of Antioch in Syria is established by Ep. ad Rom. 9, compared with ad
Smyr. 11 and ad Polycarp. 7. If the genuineness of the epistles be denied, these
passages seem to prove at least his connection with the church of Antioch and
his influential position in it, for otherwise the forgery of the epistles under
his name would be inconceivable.

348: That Ignatius was on his way from Syria to Rome, under condemnation for his
testimony to Christ, and that he was expecting to be cast to the wild beasts
upon reaching Rome, appears from many passages of the epistles themselves.
Whether the tradition, as Eusebius calls it, that he actually did suffer
martyrdom at Rome was independent of the epistles, or simply grew out of the
statements made in them, we cannot tell. Whichever is the case, we may regard
the tradition as reliable. That he suffered martyrdom somewhere is too well
attested to be doubted for a moment; and there exists no tradition in favor of
any other city as the place of his martyrdom, except a late one reported by John
Malalas, which names Antioch as the place. This is accepted by Volkmar and by
the author of Supernatural Religion, but its falsity has been conclusively shown
by Zahn (see his edition of the Ignatian epistles, p. xii. 343, 381).

349: The seven genuine epistles of Ignatius (all of which are mentioned by
Eusebius in this chapter) fall into two groups, four having been written from
one place and three from another. The first four-to the Ephesians, Magnesians,
Traillians, and Romans -were written from Smyrna, while Ignatius was on his way
to Rome, as we can learn from notices in the epistles themselves, and as is
stated below by Eusebius, who probably took his information from the statements
of the epistles, as we take ours. Ephesus, Magnesia, and Tralles lay to the
south of Smyrna, on one of the great highways of Asia Minor. But Ignatius was
taken by a road which lay further north, passing through Philadelphia and Sardis
(see Lightfoot, I. 33 sq.). and thus did not visit the three cities to which he
now sends epistles from Smyrna. The four epistles written from Smyrna contain no
indication of the chronological order in which they were written, and whether
Eusebius in his enumeration followed the manuscript of the epistles which he
used (our present mss. give an entirely different order, which is not at all
chronological and does not even keep the two groups distinct), or whether he
exercised his own judgment, we do not know.

350: Of this Onesimus, and of Damas and Polybius mentioned just below, we know
nothing more.

351: Ignatius, Ep. ad Rom. chap. 5.

352: lepardoij . This is the earliest use of this word in any extant writing,
and an argument has been drawn from this fact against the authenticity of the
epistle. For a careful discussion of the matter, see Lightfoot's edition, Vol.
II. p. 212.

353: Compare 1 Cor. iv. 4.

354: Compare the instances of this mentioned by Eusebius in Bk. V. chap. I, §42,
and in Bk. VIII. chap. 7.

355: The translation of this sentence is Lightfoot's, who prefers with Rufinus
and the Syriac to read the optative zhlwsai instead of the infinitive zhlwsai ,
which is found in most of the mss. and is given by Heinichen and the majority of
the other editors. The sense seems to require, as Lightfoot asserts, the
optative rather than the infinitive.

356: That Troas was the place from which Ignatius wrote to the Philadelphians,
to the Smyrnaeans, and to Polycarp is clear from indications in the epistles
themselves. The chronological order in which the three were written is
uncertain. He had visited both churches upon his journey to Troas and had seen
Polycarp in Smyrna.

357: See Ep. ad Polycarp. chap. 7.

358: Ep. ad Smyr. chap. 3. Jerome, quoting this passage from Ignatius in his de
vir. ill. 16, refers it to the gospel which had lately been translated by him
(according to de vir. ill. 3), viz.: the Gospel of the Nazarenes (or the Gospel
according to the Hebrews ). In his Comment. in Isaiam , Bk. XVIII. introd.,
Jerome quotes the same passage again, referring it to the same gospel (
Evangelium quod Hebraeorum lectitant Nazaraei ). But in Origen de prin. praef.
8, the phrase is quoted as taken from the Teaching of Peter (" qui Petri
doctrina apellatur "). Eusebius' various references to the Gospel according to
the Hebrews show that he was personally acquainted with it (see above, chap. 25,
note 24), and knowing his great thoroughness in going through the books which he
had access to, it is impossible to suppose that if this passage quoted from
Ignatius were in the Gospel according to the Hebrews he should not have known
it. We seem then to be driven to the conclusion that the passage did not
originally stand in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, but was later
incorporated either from the Teaching of Peter, in which Origen found it, or
from some common source or oral tradition.

359: daimonion aswmaton .

360: Compare Luke xxiv. 39.

361: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. V. 28. 4.

362: On Polycarp's epistle to the Philippians, see Bk. IV. chap. 14, note 16.

363: Polycarp, Ep. ad Phil. chap. 9.

364: Of these men, Rufus and Zosimus, we know nothing.

365: Polycarp, Ep. ad Phil. chap. 13. The genuineness of this chapter, which
bears such strong testimony to the Ignatian epistles, has been questioned by
some scholars, but without good grounds. See below, Bk. IV. chap. 14, note 16.

366: According to Eusebius' Chronicle Heros became bishop of Antioch in the
tenth year of Trajan (107 a.d.), and was succeeded by Cornelius in the twelfth
year of Hadrian (128 a.d.). In the History he is mentioned only once more (Bk.
IV. chap. 20), and no dates are given. The dates found in the Chronicle are
entirely unreliable (see on the dates of all the early Antiochian bishops,
Harnack's Zeit des Ignatius ). Of Heros himself we have no trustworthy
information. His name appears in the later martyrologies, and one of the
spurious Ignatian epistles is addressed to him.

367: This Quadratus had considerable reputation as a prophet, as may be gathered
from Eusebius' mention of him here, and also from the reference to him in the
anonymous work against the Montanists (see below, Bk. V. chap. 16). We know
nothing about this Quadratus except what is told us in these two passages,
unless we identify him, as many do, with Quadratus the apologist mentioned
below, in Bk. IV. chap. 3. This identification is possible, but by no means
certain. See Bk. IV. chap. 3, note 2.

368: This rhetorical flourish arouses the suspicion that Eusebius, although he
says there were "many others" that were well known in those days, was
unacquainted with the names of such persons as we, too, are unacquainted with
them. None will deny that there may have been some men of prominence in the
Church at this time, but Eusebius apparently had no more information to impart
in regard to them than he gives us in this chapter, and he makes up for his lack
of facts in a way which is not at all uncommon.

369: That is, an ascetic mode of life. See Bk. VI. chap. 3, note 9.

370: See Matt. xix. 21. Eusebius agrees with nearly all the Fathers, and with
the Roman Catholic Church of the past and present, in his misinterpretation of
this advice given by Christ to the rich young man.

371: In chap. 36, above.

372: See above, chap. 16.

373: On the Epistle to the Hebrews and the various traditions as to its
authorship, see above, chap. 3, note 17.

374: Eusebius is the first one to mention the ascription of a second epistle to
Clement, but after the fifth century such an epistle (whether the one to which
Eusebius here refers we cannot tell) was in common circulation and was quite
widely accepted as genuine. This epistle is still extant, in a mutilated form in
the Alexandrian ms., complete in the ms. discovered by Bryennios in
Constantinople in 1875. The publication of the complete work proves, what had
long been suspected, that it is not an epistle at all, but a homily. It cannot
have been written by the author of the first epistle of Clement, nor can it
belong to the first century. It was probably written in Rome about the middle of
the second century (see Harnack's articles in the Zeitschrift für
Kirchengeschichte, Vol. I. p. 264-283 and 329-364), and is the oldest extant
homily, and as such possesses considerable interest. It has always gone by the
name of the Second Epistle of Clement, and hence continues to be so called
although the title is a misnomer, for neither is it an epistle, nor is it by
Clement. It is published in all the editions of the apostolic Fathers, but only
those editions that have appeared since the discovery of the complete homily by
Bryennios are now of value. Of these, it is necessary to mention only Gebhardt,
Harnack, and Zahn's Patrum Apost. Opera, 2d ed., 1876, in which Harnack's
prolegomena and notes are especially valuable, and the appendix to Lighffoot's
edition of Clement (1877), which contains the full text, notes, and an English
translation. English translation also in the Ante-Nicene Fathers (Am. ed.), Vol.
VII. p. 509 sq. Compare the article by Salmon in the Dict. of Christian
Biography and Harnack's articles in the Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch. referred to
above.

375: There are extant a number of Pseudo-Clementine writings of the third and
following centuries, the chief among which purports to contain a record made by
Clement of discourses of the apostle Peter, and an account of Clement's family
history and of his travels with Peter, constituting, in fact, a sort of
didactico-historical romance. This exists now in three forms (the Homilies,
Recognitions, and Epitome ), all of which are closely related; though whether
the first two (the last is simply an abridgment of the first) are drawn from a
common original, or whether one of them is the original of the other, is not
certain. The works are more or less Ebionitic in character, and play an
important part in the history of early Christian literature. For a careful
discussion of them, see Salmon's article Clementine Literature, in the Dict. of
Christian Biography; and for the literature of the subject, which is very
extensive, see especially Schaff's Church History, II. p. 435 sq.

376: In chap. 36, above.

377: logiwn kuriakwn echghseij logia , see below, note 26. As remarked there,
logia

378: wj monwn autw grafentwn . Irenaeus does not expressly say that these were
the only works written by Papias. He simply says "For five books have been
written by him" ( esti gar autw pente biblia suntetagmena ). Eusebius'
interpretation of Irenaeus' words is not, however, at all unnatural, and
probably expresses Irenaeus' meaning.

379: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. V. 33. 4.

380: The justice of this criticism, passed by Eusebius upon the statement of
Irenaeus, has been questioned by many, who have held that, in the passage quoted
just below from Papias, the same John is meant in both cases. See the note of
Schaff in his Church History, II. p. 697 sq. A careful exegesis of the passage
from Papias quoted by Eusebius seems, however, to lead necessarily to the
conclusion which Eusebius draws, that Papias refers to two different persons
bearing the same name,-John. In fact, no other conclusion can be reached, unless
we accuse Papias of the most stupid and illogical method of writing. Certainly,
if he knew of but one John, there is no possible excuse for mentioning him twice
in the one passage. On the other hand, if we accept Eusebius' interpretation, we
are met by a serious difficulty in the fact that we are obliged to assume that
there lived in Asia Minor, early in the second century a man to whom Papias
appeals as possessing exceptional authority, but who is mentioned by no other
Father; who is, in fact, otherwise an entirely unknown personage. And still
further, no reader of Papias work, before the time of Eusebius, gathered from
that work, so far as we know, a single hint that the John with whom he was
acquainted was any other than the apostle John. These difficulties are so
serious that they have led many to deny that Papias meant to refer to a second
John, in spite of his apparently clear reference to such a person. Among those
who deny this second John's existence are such scholars as Zahn and Salmon.
(Compare, for instance, the latter's able article on Joannes the Presbyter , in
the Dict. of Christian Biography. ) In reply to their arguments, it may be said
that the silence of all other early writers does not necessarily disprove the
existence of a second John; for it is quite conceivable that all trace of him
should be swallowed up in the reputation of his greater namesake who lived in
the same place. Moreover, it is quite conceivable that Papias, writing for those
who were well acquainted with both Johns, may have had no suspicion that any one
would confound the presbyter with the apostle, and would imagine that he was
referring to the latter when he was speaking of his personal friend John; and
therefore he would have no reason for stating expressly that there were two
Johns, and for expressly distinguishing the one from the other. It was, then,
quite natural that Irenaeus, a whole generation later, knowing that Polycarp was
a disciple of the apostle John, and finding constant mention of a John in
Papias' works, should simply take for granted that the same John was meant; for
by his time the lesser John may easily, in the minds of most people, have become
lost in the tradition of his greater namesake. In view of these possibilities,
it cannot be said that the silence of other Fathers in regard to this John is
fatal to his existence; and if this is so, we are hardly justified in doing such
violence to Papias' language as is required to identify the two Johns mentioned
by him in the passage quoted below. Among those who accept Eusebius' conclusion,
that Papias refers to two different persons, are such scholars as Tischendorf,
Donaldson, Westcott and Lightfoot. If Eusebius has recovered for us from the
ancient history of the Church an otherwise unknown personage, it will not be the
only time that he has corrected an error committed by all his predecessors. In
this case, as in a number of other cases, I believe Eusebius' wide information,
sharp-sightedness, and superiority to the trammels of traditionalism receive
triumphant vindication and we may accept his conclusion that Papias was
personally acquainted with a second John, who was familiarly known as "the
Presbyter," and thus distinguished from the apostle John, who could be called a
presbyter or elder only in the general sense in which all the leading men of his
generation were elders (see below, note 6), and could not be designated
emphatically as " the presbyter." In regard to the connection of this "presbyter
John" with the Apocalypse, see below, note 14. But although Papias
distinguishes, as we may conclude, between two Johns in the passage referred to,
and elsewhere, according to Eusebius, pronounces himself a hearer of the second
John, it does not necessarily follow that Irenaeus was mistaken in saying that
he was a hearer of the apostle John; for Irenaeus may have based his statement
upon information received from his teacher, Polycarp, the friend of Papias, and
not upon the passage quoted by Eusebius, and hence Papias may have been a hearer
of both Johns. At the same time, it must be said that if Papias had been a
disciple of the apostle John, he could scarcely have failed to state the fact
expressly somewhere in his works; and if he had stated it anywhere, Eusebius
could hardly have overlooked it. The conclusion, therefore, seems most probable
that Eusebius is right in correcting Irenaeus' statement, and that the latter
based his report upon a misinterpretation of Papias' own words. In that case, we
have no authority for speaking of Papias as a disciple of John the apostle.

381: This sentence gives strong support to the view that oral traditions did not
form the basis of Papias' work, but that the basis consisted of written
documents, which he interpreted, and to which he then added the oral traditions
which he refers to here. See Contemporary Review, 1885, II. p. 388 sq. The words
words taij ermhneiaij

382: As Lightfoot points out ( Contemp. Rev. ibid. p. 379 sq.), Papias uses the
term "elders" in a general sense to denote the Fathers of the Church in the
generations preceding his own. It thus includes both the apostles and their
immediate disciples. The term was thus used in a general sense by later Fathers
to denote all earlier Fathers of the Church; that is, those leaders of the
Church belonging to generations earlier than the writers themselves. The term,
therefore, cannot be confined to the apostles alone, nor can it be confined, as
some have thought (e.g. Weiffenbach in his Das Papias Fragment ), to
ecclesiastical officers, presbyters in the official sense. Where the word
presbuteroj is used in connection with the second John (at the close of this
extract from Papias), it is apparently employed in its official sense. At least
we cannot otherwise easily understand how it could be used as a peculiar
designation of this John, which should distinguish him from the other John. For
in the general sense of the word, in which Papias commonly uses it, both Johns
were elders. Compare Lightfoot's words in the passage referred to above.

383: paraginomenoij , instead of paraginomenaj , agreeing with entolaj 384: That
is, "to those that believe, to those that are possessed of faith."

385: Of this Aristion we know only what we can gather from this mention of him
by Papias.

386: See above, note 6.

387: ek twn bibliwn twn bibliwn , as Lightfoot does, to "interpretations" of the
Gospel accounts, which had been made by others, and to which Papias prefers the
interpretations or expositions which he has received from the disciples of the
apostles. This interpretation of the word alone saves us from difficulties and
Papias from self-stultification.

388: See above, note 4.

389: The existence of two tombs in Ephesus bearing the name of John is attested
also by Dionysius of Alexandria (quoted in Bk. VII. chap. 25, below) and by
Jerome ( de vir. ill. c. 9). The latter, however, says that some regard them
both as memorials of the one John, the apostle; and Zahn, in his Acta Joannis,
p. cliv. sq., endeavors to prove that a church stood outside of the walls of
Ephesus, on the spot where John was buried, and another inside of the walls, on
the site of the house in which he had resided, and that thus two spots were
consecrated to the memory of a single John. The proof which he brings in support
of this may not lead many persons to adopt his conclusions, and yet after
reading his discussion of the matter one must admit that the existence of two
memorials in Ephesus, such as Dionysius, Eusebius, and Jerome refer to, by no
means proves that more than one John was buried there.

390: A similar suggestion had been already made by Dionysius in the passage
quoted by Eusebius in Bk. VII. chap. 25, and Eusebius was undoubtedly thinking
of it when he wrote these words. The suggestion is a very clever one, and yet it
is only a guess, and does not pretend to be more. Dionysius concludes that the
Apocalypse must have been written by some person named John, because it
testifies to that fact itself; but the style, and other internal indications,
lead him to think that it cannot have been written by the author of the fourth
Gospel, whom he assumes to be John the apostle. He is therefore led to suppose
that the Apocalypse was written by some other John. He does not pretend to say
who that John was, but thinks it must have been some John that resided in Asia;
and he then adds that there were said to be two tombs in Ephesus bearing the
name of John,-evidently implying, though he does not say it, that he is inclined
to think that this second John thus commemorated was the author of the
Apocalypse. It is plain from this that he had no tradition whatever in favor of
this theory, that it was solely an hypothesis arising from critical difficulties
standing in the way of the ascription of the book to the apostle John. Eusebius
sees in this suggestion a very welcome solution of the difficulties with which
he feels the acceptance of the book to be beset, and at once states it as a
possibility that this "presbyter John," whom he has discovered in the writings
of Papias, may have been the author of the book. But the authenticity of the
Apocalypse was too firmly established to be shaken by such critical and
theological difficulties as influenced Dionysius, Eusebius, and a few others,
and in consequence nothing came of the suggestion made here by Eusebius. In the
present century, however, the "presbyter John" has again played an important
part among some critics as the possible author of certain of the Johannine
writings, though the authenticity of the Apocalypse has (until very recently)
been so commonly accepted even by the most negative critics that the "presbyter
John" has not figured at all as the author of it; nor indeed is he likely to in
the future.

391: In chap. 31, above. On the confusion of the evangelist with the apostle
Philip, see that chapter, note 6.

392: That is, in the time of Philip.

393: Acts i. 23.

394: Compare the extract from Papias given by Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. V. 32), in
which is contained a famous parable in regard to the fertility of the
millennium, which is exceedingly materialistic in its nature, and evidently
apocryphal. "The days will come when vines shall grow, each having ten thousand
branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each twig ten thousand
shoots, and in every one of the shoots ten thousand grapes, and every grape when
pressed will give five and twenty measures of wine," &c.

395: Chiliasm, or millennarianism,-that is, the belief in a visible reign of
Christ on earth for a thousand years before the general judgment, -was very
widespread in the early Church. Jewish chiliasm was very common at about the
beginning of the Christian era, and is represented in the voluminous apocalyptic
literature of that day. Christian chiliasm was an outgrowth of the Jewish, but
spiritualized it, and fixed it upon the second, instead of the first, coming of
Christ. The chief Biblical support for this doctrine is found in Rev. xx. 1-6,
and the fact that this book was appealed to so constantly by chiliasts in
support of their views was the reason why Dionysius, Eusebius, and others were
anxious to disprove its apostolic authorship. Chief among the chiliasts of the
ante-Nicene age were the author of the epistle of Barnabas, Papias, Justin
Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian; while the principal opponents of the doctrine
were Caius, Origen, Dionysius of Alexandria, and Eusebius. After the time of
Constantine, chiliasm was more and more widely regarded as a heresy, and
received its worst blow from Augustine, who framed in its stead the doctrine,
which from his time on was commonly accepted in the Church, that the millennium
is the present reign of Christ, which began with his resurrection. See Schaff's
Church History, II. p. 613 sq., for the history of the doctrine in the
ante-Nicene Church and for the literature of the subject.

396: sfodra smikroz ton noun . Eusebius' judgment of Papias may have been
unfavorably influenced by his hostility to the strongchiliasm of he latter; and
yet a perusal of the extant fagments of Papias' writings wiil lead any one to
think that Eusebius was not far wrong in his estimate of the man. On the
genuineness of the words in his praise, given by some mss., in chap. 36, §2, see
note 3 on that chapter.

397: See above, note 19.

398: We cannot, in the abscence of the context, say with certainty that the
presbyter here refered to is the "presbyter John," of whom Papias has so much to
say, and who ia mentioned in the previous paragraph, and yet this seems quite
probable. Compare Weiffenbach's Die Papias Fragmente über Marcus und Mattaeus,
p. 26 sq.

399: Papias is the first one to connect the Gospel of Mark wih Peter, but the
tradition recorded by him was universally accepted by tshose who came after him
(see above, Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4). The relation of this Gospel of Mark to
our canonical ospel has been a very sharply disputed point, but there is no good
reason for distinguishing the Gospel referred to here from our second Gospel
which corresponds excellently to the description given by Papias. Compare the
remarks of Lightfoot, ibid. p. 393 sq. We know from other sources (e.g. Justin
Martyr's Dial. c. 106) that our second Gospel was in existence in any case
before the middle of the second century, and therefore there is no reason to
suppose that Papias was thinking of any other Gospel when he spoke of the Gospel
written by Mark as the interpreter of Peter. Of course it does not follow from
this that it was actually our second Gospel which Mark wrote, and of whose
composition Papias here speaks. He may have written a Gospel which afterward
formed the basis of our present Gospel, or was one of the sources of the
synoptic tradition as a whole; that is, he may have written what is commonly
known as the "Ur-Marcus" (see above, Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4). As to that, we
cannot decide with absolute certainty, but we may say that Papias certainly
understood the tradition which he gives to refer to our Gospel of Mark. The
exact significance of the word ermhneuthj ou mentoi tacei ) have also caused
considerable controversy. But they seem to refer chiefly to a lack of
chronological arrangement, perhaps to a lack of logical arrangement also. The
implication is that Mark wrote down without regard to order of any kind the
words and deeds of Christ which he remembered. Lightfoot and most other critics
have supposed that this accusation of a "lack of order" implies the existence of
another written Gospel, exhibiting a different order, with which Papias compares
it (e.g. with the Gospel of Matthew, as Weiss, Bleck, Holtzmann, and others
think; or with John, as Light-foot, Zahn, Renan, and others suppose). This is a
natural supposition, but it is quite possible that Papias in speaking of this
lack of order is not thinking at all of another written Gospel, but merely of
the order of events which he had received from tradition as the true one.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 15: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 4
========================================================================

Book IV.

Chapter I.-The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria During the Reign of Trajan.

Chapter II.-The Calamities of the Jews During Trajan's Reign.

Chapter III.-The Apologists that Wrote in Defense of the Faith During the Reign
of Adrian.

Chapter IV.-The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria Uncle; The Same Emperor.

Chapter V.-The Bishops of Jerusalem from the Age of Our Saviour Lo the Period
Under Consideration.

Chapter VI. The Last Siege of the Jews Under Adrian.

Chapter VII. The Persons that Became at that Time Leaders of Knowledge Falsely
So-Called.11 Chapter VIII. Ecclesiastical Writers.

Chapter IX. The Epistle of Adrian, Decreeing that We Should Not Be Punished
Without a Trial.

Chapter X. The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria During the Reign of Antoninus.

Chapter XI. The Heresiarchs of that Age.

Chapter XVI. Justin the Philosopher Preaches the Word of Christ in Rome and
Suffers Martyrdom.

Chapter XVII. The Martyrs Whom Justin Mentions in His Own Work.

Chapter XVIII. The Works of Justin Which Have Come Down to Us.

Chapter XIX. The Rulers of the Churches of Rome and Alexandria During the Reign
of Verus.

Chapter XX. The Rulers of the Church of Antioch.

Chapter XXI. The Ecclesiastical Writers that Flourished in Those Days.

Chapter XXII. Hegesippus and the Events Which He Mentions.

Chapter XXIII. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, and the Epistles Which He Wrote.170
Chapter XXIV. Theophilus Bishop of Antioch.

Chapter XXV. Philip and Modestus.

Chapter XXVI. Melito and the Circumstances Which He Records.

Chapter XXVII. Apolinarius, Bishop of the Church of Hierapolis.

Chapter XXVIII. Musanus and His Writings.

Chapter XXIX. The Heresy of Tatian.248 Chapter XXX. Bardesanes the Syrian and
His Extant Works.

Book IV.

Chapter I.-The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria During the Reign of Trajan.

1 About the twelfth year of the reign of Trajan the above-mentioned bishop of
the parish of Alexandria died, and Primus, the fourth in succession from the
apostles, was chosen to the office. 2At that time also Alexander, the fifth in
the line of succession from Peter and Paul, received the episcopate at Rome,
after Evarestus had held the office eight years.

Chapter II.-The Calamities of the Jews During Trajan's Reign.

1The teaching and the Church of our Saviour flourished greatly and made progress
from day to day; but the calamities of the Jews increased, and they underwent a
constant succession of evils. In the eighteenth year of Trajan's reign there was
another disturbance of the Jews, through which a great multitude of them
perished.' 2For in Alexandria and in the rest of Egypt, and also in Cyrene, as
if incited by some terrible and factious spirit, they rushed into seditious
measures against their fellow-inhabitants, the Greeks. The insurrection
increased greatly, and in the following year, while Lupus was governor of all
Egypt, it developed into a war of no mean magnitude. 3In the first attack it
happened that they were victorious over the Greeks, who fled to Alexandria and
imprisoned and slew the Jews that were in the city. But the Jews of Cyrene,
although deprived of their aid, continued to plunder the land of Egypt and to
devastate its districts, under the leadership of Lucuas. Against them the
emperor sent Marcius Turbo with a foot and naval force and also with a force of
cavalry. 4He carried on the war against them for a long time and fought many
battles, and slew many thousands of Jews, not only of those of Cyrene, but also
of those who dwelt in Egypt and had come to the assistance of their king Lucuas.
6But the emperor, fearing that the Jews in Mesopotamia would also make an attack
upon the inhabitants of that country, commanded Lucius Quintus to clear the
province of them. And he having marched against them slew a great multitude of
those that dwelt there; and in consequence of his success he was made governor
of Judea by the emperor. These events are recorded also in these very words by
the Greek historians that have written accounts of those times.

Chapter III.-The Apologists that Wrote in Defense of the Faith During the Reign
of Adrian.

1After Trajan had reigned for nineteen and a half years Aelius Adrian became his
successor in the empire. To him Quadratus addressed a discourse containing an
apology for our religion, because certain wicked men had attempted to trouble
the Christians. The work is still in the hands of a great many of the brethren,
as also in our own, and furnishes clear proofs of the man's understanding and of
his apostolic orthodox. 2He himself reveals the early date at which he lived in
the following words: "But the works of our Saviour were always present, for they
were genuine:-those that were healed, and those that were raised from the dead,
who were seen not only when they were healed and when they were raised, but were
also always present; and not merely while the Saviour was on earth, but also
after his death, they were alive for quite a while, so that some of them lived
even to our day." Such then was Quadratus.

3Aristides also, a believer earnestly devoted to our religion, left, like
Quadratus, an apology for the faith, addressed to Adrian. His work, too, has
been preserved even to the present day by a great many persons.

Chapter IV.-The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria Uncle; The Same Emperor. In
the third year of the same reign, Alexander, bishop of Rome, died after holding
office ten years. His successor was Xystus. About the same time Primus, bishop
of Alexandria, died in the twelfth year of his episcopate, and was succeeded by
Justus.

Chapter V.-The Bishops of Jerusalem from the Age of Our Saviour Lo the Period
Under Consideration.

1The chronology of the bishops of Jerusalem I have nowhere found preserved in
writing; for tradition says that they were all short lived. 2But I have learned
this much from writings, that until the siege of the Jews, which took place
under Adrian, there were fifteen bishops in succession there. all of whom are
said to have been of Hebrew descent, and to have received the knowledge of
Christ in purity, so that they were approved by those who were able to judge of
such matters, and were deemed worthy of the episcopate. For their whole church
consisted then of believing Hebrews who continued from the days of the apostles
until the siege which took place at this time; in which siege the Jews, having
again rebelled against the Romans, were conquered after severe battles. 3But
since the bishops of the circumcision ceased at this time, it is proper to give
here a list of their names from the beginning. The first, then, was James, the
so-called brother of the Lord; the second, Symeon; the third, Justus; the
fourth, Zacchaeus; the fifth, Tobias; the sixth, Benjamin; the seventh, John;
the eighth, Matthias; the ninth, Philip; the tenth, Seneca; the eleventh,
Justus; the twelfth, Levi; the thirteenth, Ephres; the fourteenth, Joseph; and
finally, the fifteenth, Judas. 4These are the bishops ofJerusalem that lived
between the age of the apostles and the time referred to, all of them belonging
to the circumcision.

5In the twelfth year of the reign of Adrian, Xystus, having completed the tenth
year of his episcopate,1 was succeeded by Telesphorus,2 the seventh in
succession from the apostles. In the meantime, after the lapse of a year and
some months, Eumenes,3 the sixth in order, succeeded to the leadership of the
Alexandrian church, his predecessor having held office eleven years.4 Chapter
VI. The Last Siege of the Jews Under Adrian.

1 As the rebellion of the Jews at this timegrew much more serious,5 Rufus,
governor of Judea, after an auxiliary force had been sent him by the emperor,
using their madness as a pretext, proceeded against them without mercy, and
destroyed indiscriminately thousands of men and women and children, and in
accordance with the laws of war reduced their country to a state of complete
subjection.

2 The leader of the Jews at this time was a man by the name of Barcocheba6
(which signifies a star), who possessed the character of a robber and a
murderer, but nevertheless, relying upon his name, boasted to them, as if they
were slaves, that he possessed wonderful powers; and he pretended that he was a
star that had come down to them out of heaven to bring them light in the midst
of their misfortunes.

3 The war raged most fiercely in the eighteenth year of Adrian,7 at the city of
Bithara,8 which was a very secure fortress, situated not far from Jerusalem.
When the siege had lasted a long time, and the rebels had been driven to the
last extremity by hunger and thirst, and the instigator of the rebellion had
suffered his just punishment, the whole nation was prohibited from this time on
by a decree, and by the commands of Adrian, from ever going up to the country
about Jerusalem. For the emperor gave orders that they should not even see from
a distance the land of their fathers. Such is the account of Aristo of Pella.9

4 And thus, when the city had been emptied of the Jewish nation and had suffered
the total destruction of its ancient inhabitants, it was colonized by a
different race, and the Roman city which subsequently arose changed its name and
was called Aelia, in honor of the emperor Aelius Adrian. And as the church there
was now composed of Gentiles, the first one to assume the government of it after
the bishops of the circumcision was Marcus.10 Chapter VII. The Persons that
Became at that Time Leaders of Knowledge Falsely So-Called.11

1 As the churches throughout the world were now shining like the most brilliant
stars, and faith in our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ was flourishing among the
whole human race,12 the demon who hates everything that is good, and is always
hostile to the truth, and most bitterly opposed to the salvation of man,turned
all his arts against the Church.13 In the beginning he armed himself against it
with external persecutions.

2 But now, being shut off from the use of such means,14 he devised all sorts of
plans, and employed other methods in his conflict with the Church, using base
and deceitful men as instruments for the ruin of souls and as ministers of
destruction. Instigated by him, impostors and deceivers, assuming the name of
our religion, brought to the depth of ruin such of the believers as they could
win over, and at the same time, by means of the deeds which they practiced,
turned away from the path which leads to the word of salvation those who were
ignorant of the faith.

3 Accordingly there proceeded from that Menander, whom we have already mentioned
as the successor of Simon,15 a certain serpent-like power, double-tongued and
two-headed, which produced the leaders of two different heresies, Saturninus, an
Antiochian by birth,16 and Basilides, an Alexandrian.17 The former of these
established schools of godless heresy in Syria, the latter in Alexandria.

4 Irenaeus states18 that the false teaching of Saturninus agreed in most
respects with that of Menander, but that Basilides, under the pretext of
unspeakable mysteries, invented monstrous fables, and carried the fictions of
his impious heresy quite beyond bounds.

5 But as there were at that time a great many members of the Church19 who were
fighting for the truth and defending apostolic and ecclesiastical doctrine with
uncommon eloquence, so there were some also that furnished posterity through
their writings with means of defense against the heresies to which we have
referred.20

6 Of these there has come down to us a most powerful refutation of Basilides by
Agrippa Castor,21 one of the most renowned writers of that day, which shows the
terrible imposture of the man.

7 While exposing his mysteries he says that Basilides wrote twenty-four books
upon the Gospel,22 and that he invented prophets for himself named Barcabbas and
Barcoph,23 and others that had no existence, and that he gave them barbarous
names in order to amaze those who marvel at such things; that he taught also
that the eating of meat offered to idols and the unguarded renunciation of the
faith in times of persecution were matters of indifference;24 and that he
enjoined upon his followers, like Pythagoras, a silence of five years.25

8 Other similar things the above-mentioned writer has recorded concerning
Basilides, and has ably exposed the error of his heresy.

9 Irenaeus also writes26 that Carpocrates was a contemporary of these men, and
that he was the father of another heresy, called the heresy of the Gnostics,27
who did not wish to transmit any longer the magic arts of Simon, as that one28
had done, in secret, but openly.29 For they boasted - as of something great - of
love potions that were carefully prepared by them, and of certain demons that
sent them dreams and lent them their protection, and of other similar agencies;
and in accordance with these things they taught that it was necessary for those
who wished to enter fully into their mysteries, or rather into their
abominations, to practice all the worst kinds of wickedness, on the ground that
they could escape the cosmic powers, as they called them, in no other way than
by discharging their obligations to them all by infamous conduct.

10 Thus it came to pass that the malignant demon, making use of these ministers,
on the one hand enslaved those that were so pitiably led astray by them to their
own destruction, while on the other hand he furnished to the unbelieving heathen
abundant opportunities for slandering the divine word, inasmuch as the
reputation of these men brought infamy upon the whole race of Christians.

11 In this way, therefore, it came to pass that there was spread abroad in
regard to us among the unbelievers of that age, the infamous and most absurd
suspicion that we practiced unlawful commerce with mothers and sisters, and
enjoyed impious feasts.30

12 He did not, however, long succeed in these artifices, as the truth
established itself and in time shone with great brilliancy.

13 For the machinations of its enemies were refuted by its power and speedily
vanished. One new heresy arose after another, and the former ones always passed
away, and now at one time, now at another, now in one way, now in other ways,
were lost in ideas of various kinds and various forms. But the splendor of the
catholic and only true Church, which is always the same, grew in magnitude and
power, and reflected its piety and simplicity and freedom, and the modesty and
purity of its inspired life and philosophy to every nation both of Greeks and of
Barbarians.

14 At the same time the slanderous accusations which had been brought against
the whole Church31 also vanished, and there remained our teaching alone, which
has prevailed over all, and which is acknowledged to be superior to all in
dignity and temperance, and in divine and philosophical doctrines. So that none
of them now ventures to affix a base calumny upon our faith, or any such slander
as our ancient enemies formerly delighted to utter.

15 Nevertheless, in those times the truth again called forth many champions who
fought in its defense against the godless heresies, refuting them not only with
oral, but also with written arguments.32 Chapter VIII. Ecclesiastical Writers.

1 Among these Hegesippus was well known.33 We have already quoted his words a
number of times,34 relating events which happened in the time of the apostles
according to his account.

2 He records in five books the true tradition of apostolic doctrine in a most
simple style, and he indicates the time in which he flourished when he writes as
follows concerning those that first set up idols: "To whom they erected
cenotaphs and temples, as is done to the present day. Among whom is also
Antinoüs,35 a slave of the Emperor Adrian, in whose honor are celebrated also
the Antinoian games, which were instituted in our day. For he [i.e. Adrian] also
founded a city named after Antinoüs,36 and appointed prophets."

3 At the same time also Justin, a genuine lover of the true philosophy, was
still continuing to busy himself with Greek literature.37 He indicates this time
in the Apology which he addressed to Antonine, where he writes as follows:38 "We
do not think it out of place to mention here Antinoüs also, who lived in our
day, and whom all were driven by fear to worship as a god, although they knew
who he was and whence he came."

4 The same writer, speaking of the Jewish war which took place at that time,
adds the following:39 "For in the late Jewish war Barcocheba, the leader of the
Jewish rebellion, commanded that Christians alone40 should be visited with
terrible punishments unless they would deny and blaspheme Jesus Christ."

5 And in the same work he shows that his conversion from Greek philosophy to
Christianity41 was not without reason, but that it was the result of
deliberation on his part. His words are as follows:42 "For I myself, while I was
delighted with the doctrines of Plato, and heard the Christians slandered, and
saw that they were afraid neither of death nor of anything else ordinarily
looked upon as terrible, concluded that it was impossible that they could be
living in wickedness and pleasure. For what pleasure-loving or intemperate man,
or what man that counts it good to feast on human flesh, could welcome death
that he might be deprived of his enjoyments, and would not rather strive to
continue permanently his present life, and to escape the notice of the rulers,
instead of giving himself up to be put to death?"

6 The same writer, moreover, relates that Adrian having received from Serennius
Granianus,43 a most distinguished governor, a letter44 in behalf of the
Christians, in which he stated that it was not just to slay the Christians
without a regular accusation and trial, merely for the sake of gratifying the
outcries of the populace, sent a rescript45 to Minucius Fundanus,46 proconsul of
Asia, commanding him to condemn no one without an indictment and a well-grounded
accusation.

7 And he gives a copy of the epistle, preserving the original Latin in which it
was written,47 and prefacing it with the following words:48 "Although from the
epistle of the greatest and most illustrious Emperor Adrian, your father, we
have good ground to demand that you order judgment to be given as we have
desired, yet we have asked this not because it was ordered by Adrian, but rather
because we know that what we ask is just. And we have subjoined the copy of
Adrian's epistle that you may know that we are speaking the truth in this matter
also. And this is the copy."

8 After these words the author referred to gives the rescript in Latin, which we
have translated into Greek as accurately as we could.49 It reads as follows:

Chapter IX. The Epistle of Adrian, Decreeing that We Should Not Be Punished
Without a Trial.

1 "To Minucius Fundanus. I have received an epistle,50 written to me by
Serennius Granianus, a most illustrious man, whom you have succeeded. It does
not seem right to me that the matter should be passed by without examination,
lest the men51 be harassed and opportunity be given to the informers for
practicing villainy.

2 If, therefore, the inhabitants of the province can clearly sustain this
petition against the Christians so as to give answer in a court of law, let them
pursue this course alone, but let them not have resort to men's petitions and
outcries. For it is far more proper, if any one wishes to make an accusation,
that you should examine into it.

3 If any one therefore accuses them and shows that they are doing anything
contrary to the laws, do you pass judgment according to the heinousness of the
crime.52 But, by Hercules! if any one bring an accusation through mere calumny,
decide in regard to his criminality,53 and see to it that you inflict
punishment."54 Such are the contents of Adrian's rescript.

Chapter X. The Bishops of Rome and of Alexandria During the Reign of Antoninus.

Adrian having died after a reign of twenty-one years,55 was succeeded in the
government of the Romans by Antoninus, called the Pious. In the first year of
his reign Telesphorus56 died in the eleventh year of his episcopate, and Hyginus
became bishop of Rome.57 Irenaeus records that Telesphorus' death was made
glorious by martyrdom,58 and in the same connection he states that in the time
of the above-mentioned Roman bishop Hyginus, Valentinus, the founder of a sect
of his own, and Cerdon, the author of Marcion's error, were both well known at
Rome.59 He writes as follows:60 Chapter XI. The Heresiarchs of that Age.

1 "For Valentinus came to Rome under Hyginus, flourished under Pius, and
remained until Anicetus.61 Cerdon62 also, Marcion's cion's predecessor, entered
the Chruch in the time of Hyginus, the ninth bishop, and made confession, and
continued in this way, now teaching in secret, now making confession again, and
now denounced for corrupt doctrine and withdrawing from the assembly of the
brethren."

2These words are found in the third book of the work Against Heresies. And again
in the first book he speaks as follows concerning Cerdon: "A certain Cerdon, who
had taken his system fromt he followers of Simon, and had come to Rome under
Hyginus, the ninth in the episcopal succession from the apostles, taught that
the God proclaimed by the law and prophets was not the father of our Lord Jesus
Christ. For the former was known, but hte latter unknown; and the former was
just, but the latter good. Marcion of Pontus succeeded Cerdon and developed his
doctrine, uttering shameless blasphemies." 3The same Irenaeus unfolds with the
greates vigor the unfathomable abyss of Valentinus' errors in regard to matter,
and reveals his wickedness, secret and hidden like a serpent lurking in its
nest. 4And in addition ot these men he says that there was also another that
lived in that age, Marcus by name, who was remarkably skilled in magic arts. And
he describes also their unholy initiations and their abominable mysteries in the
following words: "For some of them prepare a nuptial couch an dperform a mystic
rite with certain forms of expression addressed to those who are being
initiated, and they say that it is a spiritual marriage which is celebrated by
them, after the likeness of the marriages above. but others lead them to water,
and while they baptize them they repeat the following words: Into the name of
the unknown father of the universe, into truth, the mother of all things, into
the one that descended upon Jesus. Others repeat Hebrew names in order the
better to confound those whoa re being initiated."

6But Hyginus having died at the close of the fourth year of his episcopate, Pius
succeeded him in the government of the church of Rome. In Alexandria Marcus was
appointed pastor, after Eumenes had filled the office thirteen years in all. And
Marcus having died after holding office ten years was succeeded by Celadion in
the government of the church of Alexandria. 7And in Rome Pius died in the
fifteenth year of his episcopate, and Anicetus assumed the leadership of the
Christians there. Hegesippus records that he himself was in Rome at this time,
and that he remained there until the episcopate of Eleutherus.

8But Justin was especially prominent in those days. In the guise of a philospher
he preached the divine word, and contended for the faith in his writings. He
wrote also a work against Marcion, in which he states that the latter was alive
at the time he wrote. 9He speaks as follows: "And there is a certain Marcion of
Pontus, who is even now still teaching his followers to think that there is some
other God greater than the creator. And by the aid of the demons he has
persuaded many of every race of men to utter blasphemy, and to deny that the
maker of this universe is the father of Christ, and to confess that someother,
greater than he, was the creator. And all who followed them are, as we have
said, called Christians, just as the name of philosophy is given to philosphers,
although they may have no doctrines in common." 10To this he adds: "And we have
also written a work against all the heresies that have existed, which we will
give you if you wish to read it." But this same justin contended most
successfully against the Greeks, and addressed discourses containing an apology
for our faith to the Emperor Antonius, called Pius, and to the Roman senate. For
he lived at Rome. But who and whence he was he shows in hi Apology in the
following words.Chapter Xiithe Apology of Justin addressed to Antonius

"To the Emperor Titus Aelius Adrian Antoninus Pius Caesar Augustus, and to
Verissimus his son, the philosopher, and to Lucius the philospher, own son of
Caesar and adopted son of Pius, a lover of learning, and to the sacred senate
and to the whole Roman people, I , Justin, son of Priscus and grandson of
Bacchius, of Flavia Neapolis in Palestine, Syria, present this address and
petition in behalf of those men of every nation who are unjustly hated and
persecuted, I myself being one of them." And the same emperor having learned
also from other brethren in Asia of the injuries of all kinds which they were
suffering from the inhabitants of hte province, thought it proper to address the
following ordinance to the Common Assembly of Asia.Chapter Xiiithe Epistle of
Antoninus to the Common Assembly of Asia in Regard to our Doctine.

1The Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus, Armenicus, Pontifex
Maximus, fo rthe fifteenth time Tribuine, for the third time Consul, to the
Common Assembly of Asia, Greeting. 2I know that the gods also take care that
such persons do not escape detection. For they would much rather punish those
who will not worship them than you would. 3But you throw them into confusion,
and while you accuse them of atheism you only confirm them in the opinion which
they hold. It would indeed be more desirable for them, when accused, to appear
to die for their God, than to live. Wherefore also they come off victorius when
they give up their lives rather than yield obedience to your commands. 4And in
regard to the eqrthquakes which have been and are still taking place, it is not
improper to admonish you who lose heart whenever they occur, and nevertheless
are accustomed to compare your conduct with theirs. 5They indeed become the more
confident in God, while you, during the whle time, neglect, in apparent
ignorance, the other gods and the worship of the Immortal, and oppress and
persecute even unto death the Christians who worship him. 6But in regard to
these persons, many of the governors of the provinces wrote also to our most
divine father, to whome he wrote in reply that they should not trouble these
people unless it should appear that they were attempting something affecting the
Roman government. And to me also may have sent communications concerning these
men, but I have replied to them in the same way that my father did. 7But if any
one still persists in bringing accusations against any of these people as such,
the person who is accused shall be acquitted of the charge, even if it appear
that he is one of them, but the accuser shall be punished. Published in Ephesus
in the Common Assembly of Asia." 8To these things Melito, bishop of hte church
of Sardis, and a man well known at that time, is a witness, as is clear from his
words in the Apology which he addressed to the Emperor Verus in behalf of our
doctrine. Chapter Xivthe Circumstances related of Polycarp, a Friend of the
Apostles.

1At this time, while Anicetus was at the head of the church of Rome, Irenaeus
relates that Polycarp, who was still alive, was at Rome, and that he had a
conference with Anicetus on a question concerning the day of the paschal feast.
2And the same writer gives another account of Polycarp which I feel constrained
to add to that which has been already related in regard to him. The account is
taken fromthe third book of Irenaeus' work Against Heresies, and is as follows:
3"But Polycarp also was not only instructed by the apostles, and acquainted with
many that had seen Christ, but was also appointed by apostles in Asia bishop of
the church of Smyrna. 4We too saw him in our early youth; for he lived a long
time, and died, when a very old man, a glorious and most illustrious martyr's
death,having always taught the things which he had learned form the apostles,
which the Church also hands down, and which alone are true. 5To these things all
the Asiatic churches testify, as do also those who, down to the present time,
have succeeded Polycarp, who was a much more trustworthy and certain witness of
ht truth thatn Valentinus and Marcion and the rest of the heretics. He also was
in Rome in the time of Anicetus and caused many to turn away from the
above-mentioned heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received
fromthe apostles thisone and only system of truth which has been transmittted by
the Church. 6And there are those that heard from him that John, the disciple of
the Lord, going to bathe in Ephesus and seeing Cerinthus within, ran out of the
bath-house without bathing, crying, `Let us flee, lest even the bath fall,
because Cerinthus, the enemy of hte truth, is within.' 7And Polycarp himself,
when Marcion once met him and said, `Knowest thou us?' replied, `I know the
first born of Satan.' Such caution did the apostles nd their disciples exercise
that they might not even converse with any of those who perverted the truth; as
Paul also said, `A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition,
reject; knowing he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of
himself.' 8There is also a very powerful epistle of Polycarp written to the
Philippians, from which those that wish to do so, and that are concerned for
their own salvation, may learn the character of his faith and the preaching of
the truth." Such is the account of Irenaeus. 9But Polycarp, in his
above-mentioned epistle to the Philippians, which is still extant, has made use
of certain testimonies drawn from the First Epistle of Peter.

10And when Antoninus, called Pius, had completed the twenty-second year of his
reign, Marcus Aurelius Verus, his son, who was also called Antoninus, succeeded
him, together with his brother Lucius.Chapter Xvunder Verus, Polycarp with
Others suffered Martyrdom as Smyrna.

1At this time, when the greatest persecutions were exciting Asia, Polycarp ended
his life by martyrdom. But I consider it most important that his death, a
written account of which is still extant, should be recorded in this history.
2There is a letter, written in the name of the church over which he himself
presided, to the parishes in Pontus, which relates the events that befell him,
in the following words: 3"The church of God which dwelleth in Philomelium, and
to all the parishes of the holy catholic Church in every place; mercy and peace
and love from God the Father be multiplied. We write unto you, brethren, an
account of what happened to htose that suffered martyrdom and to the blessed
Polycarp, who put an end to the persecution, having, as it were, sealed it his
martyrdom."

4 After these words, before giving the account of Polycarp, they record the
events which befell the rest of the martyrs, and describe the great firmness
which they exhibited in the midst of their pains. For they say that the
bystanders were struck with amazement when they saw them lacerated with scourges
even to the innermost veins and arteries, so that the hidden inward parts of the
body, both their bowels and their members, were exposed to view; and then laid
upon sea-shells and certain pointed spits, and subjected to every species of
punishment and of torture, and finally thrown as food to wild beasts.

5 And they record that the most noble Germanicus63 especially distinguished
himself, overcoming by the grace of God the fear of bodily death implanted by
nature. When indeed the proconsul64 wished to persuade him, and urged his youth,
and besought him, as he was very young and vigorous, to take compassion on
himself, he did not hesitate, but eagerly lured the beast toward himself, all
but compelling and irritating him, in order that he might the sooner be freed
from their unrighteous and lawless life.

6 After his glorious death the whole multitude marveling at the bravery of the
God-beloved martyr and at the fortitude of the whole race of Christians, began
to cry out suddenly, "Away with the atheists;65 let Polycarp be sought."

7 And when a very great tumult arose in consequence of the cries, a certain
Phrygian, Quintus66 by name, who was newly come from Phrygia, seeing the beasts
and the additional tortures, was smitten with cowardice and gave up the
attainment of salvation.

8 But the above-mentioned epistle shows that he, too hastily and without proper
discretion, had rushed forward with others to the tribunal, but when seized had
furnished a clear proof to all, that it is not right for such persons rashly and
recklessly to expose themselves to danger. Thus did matters turn out in
connection with them.

9 But the most admirable Polycarp, when he first heard of these things,
continued: undisturbed, preserved a quiet and unshaken mind, and determined to
remain in the city. But being persuaded by his friends who entreated and
exhorted him to retire secretly, he went out to a farm not far distant from the
city and abode there with a few companions, night and day doing nothing but
wrestle with the Lord in prayer, beseeching and imploring, and asking peace for
the churches throughout the whole world. For this was always his custom.

10 And three days before his arrest, while he was praying, he saw in a vision at
night the pillow under his head suddenly seized by fire and consumed; and upon
this awakening he immediately interpreted the vision to those that were present,
almost foretelling that which was about to happen, and declaring plainly to
those that were with him that it would be necessary for him for Christ's sake to
die by fire.

11 Then, as those who were seeking him pushed the search with vigor, they say
that he was again constrained by the solicitude and love of the brethren to go
to another farm. Thither his pursuers came after no long time, and seized two of
the servants there, and tortured one of them for the purpose of learning from
him Polycarp's hiding-place.

12 And coming late in the evening, they found him lying in an upper room, whence
he might have gone to another house, but he would not, saying, "The will of God
be done."

13 And when he learned that they were present, as the account says, he went down
and spoke to them with a very cheerful and gentle countenance, so that those who
did not already know the man thought that they beheld a miracle when they
observed his advanced age and the gravity and firmness of his bearing, and they
marveled that so much effort should be made to capture a man like him.

14 But he did not hesitate, but immediately gave orders that a table should be
spread for them. Then he invited them to partake of a bounteous meal, and asked
of them one hour that he might pray undisturbed. And when they had given
permission, he stood up and prayed, being full of the grace of the Lord, so that
those who were present and heard him praying were amazed, and many of them now
repented that such a venerable and godly old man was about to be put to death.

15 In addition to these things the narrative concerning him contains the
following account: "But when at length he had brought his prayer to an end,
after remembering all that had ever come into contact with him, small and great,
famous and obscure, and the whole catholic Church throughout the world, the hour
of departure being come, they put him upon an ass and brought him to the city,
it being a great Sabbath.67 And he was met by Herod,68 the captain of police,69
and by his father Nicetes, who took him into their carriage, and sitting beside
him endeavored to persuade him, saying, `For what harm is there in saying, Lord
Caesar, and sacrificing and saving your life?' He at first did not answer; but
when they persisted, he said, `I am not going to do what you advise me.'

16 And when they failed to persuade him, they uttered dreadful words, and thrust
him down with violence, so that as he descended from the carriage he lacerated
his shin. But without turning round, he went on his way promptly and rapidly, as
if nothing had happened to him, and was taken to the stadium.

17 But there was such a tumult in the stadium that not many heard a voice from
heaven, which came to Polycarp as he was entering the place: `Be strong,
Polycarp, and play the man.'70 And no one saw the speaker, but many of our
people heard the voice.

18 And when he was led forward, there was a great tumult, as they heard that
Polycarp was taken. Finally, when he came up, the proconsul asked if he were
Polycarp. And when he confessed that he was, he endeavored to persuade him to
deny, saying, `Have regard for thine age,' and other like things, which it is
their custom to say: `Swear by the genius of Caesar;71 repent and say, Away with
the Atheists.'

19 But Polycarp, looking with dignified countenance upon the whole crowd that
was gathered in the stadium, waved his hand to them, and groaned, and raising
his eyes toward heaven, said, `Away with the Atheists.'

20 But when the magistrate pressed him, and said, `Swear, and I will release
thee; revile Christ,' Polycarp said, `Fourscore and six years72 have I been
serving him, and he hath done me no wrong; how then can I blaspheme my king who
saved me?'

21 "But when he again persisted, and said, `Swear by the genius of Caesar,'
Polycarp replied, `If thou vainly supposest that I will swear by the genius of
Caesar, as thou sayest, feigning to be ignorant who I am, hear plainly: I am a
Christian. But if thou desirest to learn the doctrine of Christianity, assign a
day and hear.'

22 The proconsul said, `Persuade the people.' But Polycarp said, `As for thee, I
thought thee worthy of an explanation; for we have been taught to render to
princes and authorities ordained by God the honor that is due,73 so long as it
does not injure us;74 but as for these, I do not esteem them the proper persons
to whom to make my defense.'75

23 But the proconsul said, `I have wild beasts; I will throw thee to them unless
thou repent.' But he said, `Call them; for repentance from better to worse is a
change we cannot make. But it is a noble thing to turn from wickedness to
righteousness.'

24 But he again said to him, `If thou despisest the wild beasts, I will cause
thee to be consumed by fire, unless thou repent.' But Polycarp said, `Thou
threatenest a fire which burneth for an hour, and after a little is quenched;
for thou knowest not the fire of the future judgment and of the eternal
punishment which is reserved for the impious. But why dost thou delay? Do what
thou wilt.'

25 Saying these and other words besides, he was filled with courage and joy, and
his face was suffused with grace, so that not only was he not terrified and
dismayed by the words that were spoken to him, but, on the contrary, the
proconsul was amazed, and sent his herald to proclaim three times in the midst
of the stadium: `Polycarp hath confessed that he is a Christian.'

26 And when this was proclaimed by the herald, the whole multitude, both of
Gentiles and of Jews,76 who dwelt in Smyrna, cried out with ungovernable wrath
and with a great shout, `This is the teacher of Asia, the father of the
Christians, the overthrower of our gods, who teacheth many not to sacrifice nor
to worship.'

27 When they had said this, they cried out and asked the Asiarch Philip77 to let
a lion loose upon Polycarp. But he said that it was not lawful for him, since he
had closed the games. Then they thought fit to cry out with one accord that
Polycarp should be burned alive.

28 For it was necessary that the vision should be fulfilled which had been shown
him concerning his pillow, when he saw it burning while he was praying, and
turned and said prophetically to the faithful that were with him, `I must needs
be burned alive.'

29 These things were done with great speed, -more quickly than they were
said,-the crowds immediately collecting from the workshops and baths timber and
fagots, the Jews being especially zealous in the work, as is their wont.

30 But when the pile was ready, taking off all his upper garments, and loosing
his girdle, he attempted also to remove his shoes, although he had never before
done this, because of the effort which each of the faithful always made to touch
his skin first; for he had been treated with all honor on account of his
virtuous life even before his gray hairs came.

31 Forthwith then the materials prepared for the pile were placed about him; and
as they were also about to nail him to the stake,78 he said, `Leave me thus; for
he who hath given me strength to endure the fire, will also grant me strength to
remain in the fire unmoved without being secured by you with nails.' So they did
not nail him, but bound him.

32 And he, with his hands behind him, and bound like a noble ram taken from a
great flock, an acceptable burnt-offering unto God omnipotent, said, `Father of
thy beloved and blessed Son79 Jesus Christ, through whom we have received the
knowledge of thee, the God of angels and of powers and of the whole creation and
of the entire race of the righteous who live in thy presence, I bless thee that
thou hast deemed me worthy of this day and hour, that I might receive a portion
in the number of the martyrs, in the cup of Christ, unto resurrection of eternal
life,80 both of soul and of body, in the immortality of the Holy Spirit.

34 Among these may I be received before thee this day, in a rich and acceptable
sacrifice, as thou, the faithful and true God, hast beforehand prepared and
revealed, and hast fulfilled. Wherefore I praise thee also for everything; I
bless thee, I glorify thee,through the eternal high priest, Jesus Christ, thy
beloved Son, through whom, with him, in the Holy Spirit, be glory unto thee,
both now and for the ages to come, Amen.'

36 When he had offered up his Amen and had finished his prayer, the firemen
lighted the fire and as a great flame blazed out, we, to whom it was given to
see, saw a wonder, and we were preserved that we might relate what happened to
the others. For the fire presented the appearance of a vault, like the sail of a
vessel filled by the wind, and made a wall about the body of the martyr,81 and
it was in the midst not like flesh burning, but like gold and silver refined in
a furnace. For we perceived such a fragrant odor, as of the fumes of
frankincense or of some other precious spices.

38 So at length the lawless men, when they saw that the body could not be
consumed by the fire, commanded an executioner82 to approach and pierce him with
the sword. And 39 when he had done this there came forth a quantity of blood83
so that it extinguished the fire; and the whole crowd marveled that there should
be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this man
also was one, the most wonderful teacher in our times, apostolic and prophetic,
who was bishop of the catholic Church84 in Smyrna. For every word which came
from his mouth was accomplished and will be accomplished.

40 But the jealous and envious Evil One, the adversary of the race of the
righteous, when he saw the greatness of his martyrdom, and his blameless life
from the beginning, and when he saw him crowned with the crown of immortality
and bearing off an incontestable prize, took care that not even his body should
be taken away by us, although many desired to do it and to have communion with
his holy flesh.

41 Accordingly certain ones secretly suggested to Nicetes, the father of Herod
and brother of Alce,85 that he should plead with the magistrate not to give up
his body, `lest,' it was said, `they should abandon the crucified One and begin
to worship this man.'86 They said these things at the suggestion and impulse of
the Jews, who also watched as we were about to take it from the fire, not
knowing that we shall never be able either to forsake Christ, who suffered for
the salvation of the whole world of those that are saved, or to worship any
other.

42 For we worship him who is the Son of God, but the martyrs, as disciples and
imitators of the Lord, we love as they deserve on account of their matchless
affection for their own king and teacher. May we also be made partakers and
fellow-disciples with them.

43 The centurion, therefore, when he saw the contentiousness exhibited by the
Jews, placed him in the midst and burned him, as was their custom. And so we
afterwards gathered up his bones. which were more valuable than precious stones
and more to be esteemed than gold, and laid them in a suitable place.

44 There the Lord will permit us to come together as we are able, in gladness
and joy to celebrate the birthday of his martyrdom,87 for the commemoration of
those who have already fought and for the training and preparation of those who
shall hereafter do the same.

45 Such are the events that befell the blessed Polycarp, who suffered martyrdom
in Smyrna with the eleven88 from Philadelphia. This one man is remembered more
than the others by all, so that even by the heathen he is talked about in every
place."

46 Of such an end was the admirable and apostolic Polycarp deemed worthy, as
recorded by the brethren of the church of Smyrna in their epistle which we have
mentioned. In the same volume89 concerning him are subjoined also other
martyrdoms which took place in the same city, Smyrna, about the same period of
time with Polycarp's martyrdom. Among them also Metrodorus, who appears to have
been a proselyte of the Marcionitic sect, suffered death by fire.

47 A celebrated martyr of those times was a certain man named Pionius. Those who
desire to know his several confessions, and the boldness of his speech, and his
apologies in behalf of the faith before the people and the rulers, and his
instructive addresses and moreover, his greetings to those who had yielded to
temptation in the persecution, and the words of encouragement which he addressed
to the brethren who came to visit him in prison, and the tortures which he
endured in addition, and besides these the sufferings and the nailings, and his
firmness on the pile, and his death after all the extraordinary trials,90 -those
we refer to that epistle which has been given in the Martyrdoms of the
Ancients,91 collected by us, and which contains a very full account of him.

48 And there are also records extant of others that suffered martyrdom in
Pergamus, a city of Asia,-of Carpus and Papylus, and a woman named Agathonice,
who, after many and illustrious testimonies, gloriously ended their lives.92
Chapter XVI. Justin the Philosopher Preaches the Word of Christ in Rome and
Suffers Martyrdom.

1 About this time93 Justin, who was mentioned by us just above,94 after he had
addressed a second work in behalf of our doctrines to the rulers already
named,95 was crowned with divine martyrdom,96 in consequence of a plot laid
against him by Crescens,97 a philosopher who emulated the life and manners of
the Cynics, whose name he bore. After Justin had frequently refuted him in
public discussions he won by his martyrdom the prize of victory, dying in behalf
of the truth which he preached.

2 And he himself, a man most learned in the truth, in his Apology already
referred to98 clearly predicts how this was about to happen to him, although it
had not yet occurred.

3 His words are as follows:99 "I, too,100 therefore, expect to be plotted
against and put in the stocks101 by some one of those whom I have named, or
perhaps by Crescens, that unphilosophical and vainglorious man. For the man is
not worthy to be called a philosopher who publicly bears witness against those
concerning whom he knows nothing, declaring, for the sake of captivating and
pleasing the multitude, that the Christians are atheistical and impious.102

4 Doing this he errs greatly. For if he assails us without having read the
teachings of Christ, he is thoroughly depraved, and is much worse than the
illiterate, who often guard against discussing and bearing false witness about
matters which they do not understand. And if he has read them and does not
understand the majesty that is in them, or, understanding it, does these things
in order that he may not be suspected of being an adherent, he is far more base
and totally depraved, being enslaved to vulgar applause and irrational fear.

5 For I would have you know that when I proposed certain questions of the sort
and asked him in regard to them, I learned and proved that he indeed knows
nothing. And to show that I speak the truth I am ready, if these disputations
have not been reported to you, to discuss the questions again in your presence.
And this indeed would be an act worthy of an emperor.

6 But if my questions and his answers have been made known to you, it is obvious
to you that he knows nothing about our affairs; or if he knows, but does not
dare to speak because of those who hear him, he shows himself to be, as I have
already said,103 not a philosopher, but a vainglorious man, who indeed does not
even regard that most admirable saying of Socrates."104 These are the words of
Justin.

7 And that he met his death as he had predicted that he would, in consequence of
the machinations of Crescens, is stated by Tatian,105 a man who early in life
lectured upon the sciences of the Greeks and won no little fame in them, and who
has left a great many monuments of himself in his writings. He records this fact
in his work against the Greeks, where he writes as follows:106 "And that most
admirable Justin declared with truth that the aforesaid persons were like
robbers."

8 Then, after making some remarks about the philosophers, he continues as
follows:107 "Crescens, indeed, who made his nest in the great city, surpassed
all in his unnatural lust, and was wholly devoted to the love of money.

9 And he who taught that death should be despised, was himself so greatly in
fear of it that he endeavored to inflict death, as if it were a great evil, upon
Justin, because the latter, when preaching the truth, had proved that the
philosophers were gluttons and impostors." And such was the cause of Justin's
martyrdom.

Chapter XVII. The Martyrs Whom Justin Mentions in His Own Work.

1 The same man, before his conflict, mentions in his first Apology108 others
that suffered martyrdom before him, and most fittingly records the following
events.

2 He writes thus:109 "A certain woman lived with a dissolute husband; she
herself, too, having formerly been of the same character. But when she came to
the knowledge of the teachings of Christ, she became temperate, and endeavored
to persuade her husband likewise to be temperate, repeating the teachings, and
declaring the punishment in eternal fire which shall come upon those who do not
live temperately and conformably to right reason.

3 But he, continuing in the same excesses, alienated his wife by his conduct.
For she finally, thinking it wrong to live as a wife with a man who, contrary to
the law of nature and right, sought every possible means of pleasure, desired to
be divorced from him.

4 And when she was earnestly entreated by her friends, who counseled her still
to remain with him, on the ground that her husband might some time give hope of
amendment, she did violence to herself and remained.

5 But when her husband had gone to Alexandria, and was reported to be conducting
himself still worse, she-in order that she might not, by continuing in wedlock,
and by sharing his board and bed, become a partaker in his lawlessness and
impiety-gave him what we110 call a bill of divorce and left him.

6 But her noble and excellent husband,-instead of rejoicing, as he ought to have
done, that she had given up those actions which she had formerly recklessly
committed with the servants and hirelings, when she delighted in drunkenness and
in every vice, and that she desired him likewise to give them up,-when she had
gone from him contrary to his wish, brought an accusation concerning her,
declaring that she was a Christian.

7 And she petitioned you, the emperor, that she might be permitted first to set
her affairs in order, and afterwards, after the settlement of her affairs, to
make her defense against the accusation. And this you granted.

8 But he who had once been her husband, being no longer able to prosecute her,
directed his attacks against a certain Ptolemaeus,111 who had been her teacher
in the doctrines of Christianity, and whom Urbicius112 had punished. Against him
he proceeded in the following manner:

9 "He persuaded a centurion who was his friend to cast Ptolemaeus into prison,
and to take him and ask him this only: whether he were a Christian? And when
Ptolemaeus, who was a lover of truth, and not of a deceitful and false
disposition, confessed that he was a Christian, the centurion bound him and
punished him for a long time in the prison.

10 And finally, when the man was brought before Urbicius he was likewise asked
this question only: whether he were a Christian? And again, conscious of the
benefits which he enjoyed through the teaching of Christ, he confessed his
schooling in divine virtue.

11 For whoever denies that he is a Christian, either denies because he despises
Christianity, or he avoids confession because he is conscious that he is
unworthy and an alien to it; neither of which is the case with the true
Christian.

12 And when Urbicius commanded that he be led away to punishment, a certain
Lucius,113 who was also a Christian, seeing judgment so unjustly passed, said to
Urbicius, `Why have you punished this man who is not an adulterer, nor a
fornicator, nor a murderer, nor a thief, nor a robber, nor has been convicted of
committing any crime at all, but has confessed that he bears the name of
Christian? You do not judge, O Urbicius, in a manner befitting the Emperor Pius,
or the philosophical son114 of Caesar, or the sacred senate.' And without making
any other reply, he said to Lucius, `Thou also seemest to me to be such an one.'
And when Lucius said, `Certainly,' he again commanded that he too should be led
away to punishment. But he professed his thanks, for he was liberated, he added,
from such wicked rulers and was going to the good Father and King, God. And
still a third having come forward was condemned to be punished."

14 To this, Justin fittingly and consistently adds the words which we quoted
above,115 saying, "I, too, therefore expect to be plotted against by some one of
those whom I have named," &c.116 Chapter XVIII. The Works of Justin Which Have
Come Down to Us.

1 This writer has left us a great many monuments of a mind educated and
practiced in divine things, which are replete with profitable matter of every
kind. To them we shall refer the studious, noting as we proceed those that have
come to our knowledge.117

2 There is a certain discourse118 of his in defense of our doctrine addressed to
Antoninus surnamed the Pious, and to his sons, and to the Roman senate. Another
work contains his second Apology119 in behalf of our faith, which he offered to
him who was the successor of the emperor mentioned and who bore the same name,
Antoninus Verus, the one whose times we are now recording.

3 Also another work against the Greeks,120 in which he discourses at length upon
most of the questions at issue between us and the Greek philosophers, and
discusses the nature of demons. It is not necessary for me to add any of these
things here.

4 And still another work of his against the Greeks has come down to us, to which
he gave the title Refutation. And besides these another, On the Sovereignty of
God,121 which he establishes not only from our Scriptures, but also from the
books of the Greeks. Still further, a work entitled Psaltes,122 and another
disputation On the Soul, in which, after propounding various questions
concerning the problem under discussion, he gives the opinions of the Greek
philosophers, promising to refute it, and to present his own view in another
work.

6 He composed also a dialogue against the Jews,123 which he held in the city of
Ephesus with Trypho, a most distinguished man among the Hebrews of that day. In
it he shows how the divine grace urged him on to the doctrine of the faith, and
with what earnestness he had formerly pursued philosophical studies, and how
ardent a search he had made for the truth.124

7 And he records of the Jews in the same work, that they were plotting against
the teaching of Christ, asserting the same things against Trypho: "Not only did
you not repent of the wickedness which you had committed, but you selected at
that time chosen men, and you sent them out from Jerusalem through all the land,
to announce that the godless heresy of the Christians had made its appearance,
and to accuse them of those things which all that are ignorant of us say against
us, so that you become the causes not only of your own injustice, but also of
all other men's."125

8 He writes also that even down to his time prophetic gifts shone in the
Church.126 And he mentions the Apocalypse of John, saying distinctly that it was
the apostle's.127 He also refers to certain prophetic declarations, and accuses
Trypho on the ground that the Jews had cut them out of the Scripture.128 A great
many other works of his are still in the hands of many of the brethren.129

9 And the discourses of the man were thought so worthy of study even by the
ancients, that Irenaeus quotes his words: for instance, in the fourth book of
his work Against Heresies, where he writes as follows:130 "And Justin well says
in his work against Marcion, that he would not have believed the Lord himself if
he had preached another God besides the Creator"; and again in the fifth book of
the same work he says:131 "And Justin well said that before the coming of the
Lord Satan never dared to blaspheme God,132 because he did not yet know his
condemnation."

10 These things I have deemed it necessary to say for the sake of stimulating
the studious to peruse his works with diligence. So much concerning him.

Chapter XIX. The Rulers of the Churches of Rome and Alexandria During the Reign
of Verus.

1 In the eighth year of the above-mentioned reign133 Soter134 succeeded
Anicetus135 as bishop of the church of Rome, after the latter had held office
eleven years in all. But when Celadion136 had presided over the church of
Alexandria for fourteen years he was succeeded by Agrippinus.137 Chapter XX. The
Rulers of the Church of Antioch.

1 At that time also in the church of Antioch, Theophilus138 was well known as
the sixth from the apostles. For Cornelius,139 who succeeded Hero,140 was the
fourth, and after him Eros,141 the fifth in order, had held the office of
bishop.

Chapter XXI. The Ecclesiastical Writers that Flourished in Those Days.

1 At that time there flourished in the Church Hegesippus, whom we know from what
has gone before,142 and Dionysius,143 bishop of Corinth, and another bishop,
Pinytus of Crete,144 and besides these, Philip,145 and Apolinarius,146 and
Melito,147 and Musanus,148 and Modestus,149 and finally, Irenaeus.150 From them
has come down to us in writing, the sound and orthodox faith received from
apostolic tradition.151 Chapter XXII. Hegesippus and the Events Which He
Mentions.

1 Hegesippus in the five books of Memoirs152 which have come down to us has left
a most complete record of his own views. In them he states that on a journey to
Rome he met a great many bishops, and that he received the same doctrine from
all. It is fitting to hear what he says after making some remarks about the
epistle of Clement to the Corinthians.

2 His words are as follows: "And the church of Corinth continued in the true
faith until Primus153 was bishop in Corinth. I conversed with them on my way to
Rome, and abode with the Corinthians many days, during which we were mutually
refreshed in the true doctrine.

3 And when I had come to Rome I remained a there until Anicetus,154 whose deacon
was Eleutherus. And Anicetus was succeeded by Soter, and he by Eleutherus. In
every succession, and in every city that is held which is preached by the law
and the prophets and the Lord."

4 The same author also describes the beginnings of the heresies which arose in
his time, in the following words: "And after James the Just had suffered
martyrdom, as the Lord had also on the same account, Symeon, the son of the
Lord's uncle, Clopas,155 was appointed the next bishop. All proposed him as
second bishop because he was a cousin of the Lord. "Therefore,156 they called
the Church a virgin, for it was not yet corrupted by vain discourses.

5 But Thebuthis,157 because he was not made bishop, began to corrupt it. He also
was sprung from the seven sects158 among the people, like Simon,159 from whom
came the Simonians, and Cleobius,160 from whom came the Cleobians, and
Dositheus,161 from whom came the Dositheans, and Gorthaeus,162 from whom came
the Goratheni, and Masbotheus,163 from whom came the Masbothaeans. From them
sprang the Menandrianists,164 and Marcionists,165 and Carpocratians, and
Valentinians, and Basilidians, and Saturnilians. Each introduced privately and
separately his own peculiar opinion. From them came false Christs, false
prophets, false apostles, who divided the unity of the Church by corrupt
doctrines uttered against God and against his Christ."

6 The same writer also records the ancient heresies which arose among the Jews,
in the following words: "There were, moreover, various opinions in the
circumcision, among the children of Israel. The following were those that were
opposed to the tribe of Judah and the Christ: Essenes, Galileans,
Hemerobaptists, Masbothaeans, Samaritans, Sadducees, Pharisees."166

7 And he wrote of many other matters, which we have in part already mentioned,
introducing the accounts in their appropriate places. And from the Syriac Gospel
according to the Hebrews he quotes some passages in the Hebrew tongue,167
showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews,168 and he mentions other matters
as taken from the unwritten tradition of the Jews.

8 And not only he, but also Irenaeus and the whole company of the ancients,
called the Proverbs of Solomon All-virtuous Wisdom.169 And when speaking of the
books called Apocrypha, he records that some of them were composed in his day by
certain heretics. But let us now pass on to another.

Chapter XXIII. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, and the Epistles Which He Wrote.170

1 And first we must speak of Dionysius, who was appointed bishop of the church
in Corinth, and communicated freely of his inspired labors not only to his own
people, but also to those in foreign lands, and rendered the greatest service to
all in the catholic epistles which he wrote to the churches.

2 Among these is the one addressed to the Lacedaemonians,171 containing
instruction in the orthodox faith and an admonition to peace and unity; the one
also addressed to the Athenians, exciting them to faith and to the life
prescribed by the Gospel, which he accuses them of esteeming lightly, as if they
had almost apostatized from the faith since the martyrdom of their ruler
Publius,172 which had taken place during the persecutions of those days.

3 He mentions Quadratus173 also, stating that he was appointed their bishop
after the martyrdom of Publius, and testifying that through his zeal they were
brought together again and their faith revived. He records, moreover, that
Dionysius the Areopagite,174 who was converted to the faith by the apostle Paul,
according to the statement in the Acts of the Apostles,175 first obtained the
episcopate of the church at Athens.

4 And there is extant another epistle of his addressed to the Nicomedians,176 in
which he attacks the heresy of Marcion, and stands fast by the canon of the
truth.

5 Writing also to the church that is in Gortyna,177 together with the other
parishes in Crete, he commends their bishop Philip,178 because of the many acts
of fortitude which are testified to as performed by the church under him, and he
warns them to be on their guard against the aberrations of the heretics.

6 And writing to the church that is in Amastris,179 together with those in
Pontus, he refers to Bacchylides180 and Elpistus, as having urged him to write,
and he adds explanations of passages of the divine Scriptures, and mentions
their bishop Palmas181 by name. He gives them much advice also in regard to
marriage and chastity, and commands them to receive those who come back again
after any fall, whether it be delinquency or heresy.182

7 Among these is inserted also another epistle addressed to the Cnosians,183 in
which he exhorts Pinytus, bishop of the parish, not to lay upon the brethren a
grievous and compulsory burden in regard to chastity, but to have regard to the
weakness of the multitude.

8 Pinytus, replying to this epistle, admires and commends Dionysius, but exhorts
him in turn to impart some time more solid food, and to feed the people under
him, when he wrote again, with more advanced teaching, that they might not be
fed continually on these milky doctrines and imperceptibly grow old under a
training calculated for children. In this epistle also Pinytus' orthodoxy in the
faith and his care for the welfare of those placed under him, his learning and
his comprehension of divine things, are revealed as in a most perfect image.

9 There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and
addressed to Soter,184 who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to
subjoin some passages from this epistle, in which he commends the practice of
the Romans which has been retained down to the persecution in our own days. His
words are as follows:

10 "For from the beginning it has been your practice to do good to all the
brethren in various ways, and to send contributions to many churches in every
city. Thus relieving the want of the needy, and making provision for the
brethren in the mines by the gifts which you have sent from the beginning, you
Romans keep up the hereditary customs of the Romans, which your blessed bishop
Soter has not only maintained, but also added to, furnishing an abundance of
supplies to the saints, and encouraging the brethren from abroad with blessed
words, as a loving father his children."

11 In this same epistle he makes mention also of Clement's epistle to the
Corinthians,185 showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read
it in the church. His words are as follows: "To-day we have passed the Lord's
holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we
shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was
written to us through Clement."

12 The same writer also speaks as follows concerning his own epistles, alleging
that they had been mutilated: "As the brethren desired me to write epistles, I
wrote. And these epistles the apostles of the devil have filled with tares,
cutting out some things and adding others.186 For them a woe is reserved.187 It
is, therefore, not to be wondered at if some have attempted to adulterate the
Lord's writings also,188 since they have formed designs even against writings
which are of less accounts."189

There is extant, in addition to these, another epistle of Dionysius, written to
Chrysophora,190 a most faithful sister. In it he writes what is suitable, and
imparts to her also the proper spiritual food. So much concerning Dionysius.

Chapter XXIV. Theophilus Bishop of Antioch.

1 Of Theophilus,191 whom we have mentioned as bishop of the church of
Antioch,192 three elementary works addressed to Autolycus are extant; also
another writing entitled Against the Heresy of Hermogenes,193 in which he makes
use of testimonies from the Apocalypse of John, and finally certain other
catechetical books.194

2 And as the heretics, no less then than at other times, were like tares,
destroying the pure harvest of apostolic teaching, the pastors of the churches
everywhere hastened to restrain them as wild beasts from the fold of Christ, at
one time by admonitions and exhortations to the brethren, at another time by
contending more openly against them in oral discussions and refutations, and
again by correcting their opinions with most accurate proofs in written works.

3 And that Theophilus also, with the others, contended against them, is manifest
from a certain discourse of no common merit written by him against Marcion.195
This work too, with the others of which we have spoken, has been preserved to
the present day.

Maximinus,196 the seventh from the apostles, succeeded him as bishop of the
church of Antioch.

Chapter XXV. Philip and Modestus.

1 Philip who, as we learn from the words of Dionysius,197 was bishop of the
parish of Gortyna, likewise wrote a most elaborate work against Marcion,198 as
did also Irenaeus199 and Modestus.200 The last named has exposed the error of
the man more clearly than the rest to the view of all. There are a number of
others also whose works are still presented by a great many of the brethren.

Chapter XXVI. Melito and the Circumstances Which He Records.

1 In those days also Melito,201 bishop of the parish in Sardis, and
Apolinarius,202 bishop of Hierapolis, enjoyed great distinction. Each of them on
his own part addressed apologies in behalf of the faith to the above-mentioned
emperor203 of the Romans who was reigning at that time.

2 The following works of these writers have come to our knowledge. Of Melito,204
the two books On the Passover,205 and one On the Conduct of Life and the
Prophets,206 the discourse On the Church,207 and one On the Lord's Day,208 still
further one On the Faith of Man,209 and one On his Creation,210 another also On
the Obedience of Faith, and one On the Senses;211 besides these the work On the
Soul and Body,212 and that On Baptism,213 and the one On Truth,214 and On the
Creation and Generation of Christ;215 his discourse also On Prophecy,216 and
that On Hospitality;217 still further, The Key,218 and the books On the Devil
and the Apocalypse of John,219 and the work On the Corporeality of God,220 and
finally the book addressed to Antoninus.221

3 In the books On the Passover he indicates the time at which he wrote,
beginning with these words: "While Servilius Paulus was proconsul of Asia, at
the time when Sagaris suffered martyrdom, there arose in Laodicea a great strife
concerning the Passover, which fell according to rule in those days; and these
were written."222

4 And Clement of Alexandria refers to this work in his own discourse On the
Passover,223 which, he says, he wrote on occasion of Melito's work.

5 But in his book addressed to the emperor he records that the following events
happened to us under him: "For, what never before happened,224 the race of the
pious is now suffering persecution, being driven about in Asia by new decrees.
For the shameless informers and coveters of the property of others, taking
occasion from the decrees, openly carry on robbery night and day, despoiling
those who are guilty of no wrong." And a little further on he says: "If these
things are done by thy command, well and good. For a just ruler will never take
unjust measures; and we indeed gladly accept the honor of such a death.

6 But this request alone we present to thee, that thou wouldst thyself first
examine the authors of such strife, and justly judge whether they be worthy of
death and punishment, or of safety and quiet. But if, on the other hand, this
counsel and this new decree, which is not fit to be executed even against
barbarian enemies, be not from thee, much more do we beseech thee not to leave
us exposed to such lawless plundering by the populace."

7 Again he adds the following:225 "For our philosophy formerly flourished among
the Barbarians; but having sprung up among the nations under thy rule, during
the great reign of thy ancestor Augustus, it became to thine empire especially a
blessing of auspicious omen. For from that time the power of the Romans has
grown in greatness and splendor. To this power thou hast succeeded, as the
desired possessor,226 and such shalt thou continue with thy son, if thou
guardest the philosophy which grew up with the empire and which came into
existence with Augustus; that philosophy which thy ancestors also honored along
with the other religions.

8 And a most convincing proof that our doctrine flourished for the good of an
empire happily begun, is this-that there has no evil happened since Augustus'
reign, but that, on the contrary, all things have been splendid and glorious, in
accordance with the prayers of all.

9 Nero and Domitian, alone, persuaded by certain calumniators, have wished to
slander our doctrine, and from them it has come to pass that the falsehood227
has been handed down, in consequence of an unreasonable practice which prevails
of bringing slanderous accusations against the Christians.228

10 But thy pious fathers corrected their ignorance, having frequently rebuked in
writing229 many who dared to attempt new measures against them. Among them thy
grandfather Adrian appears to have written to many others, and also to
Fundanus,230 the proconsul and governor of Asia. And thy father, when thou also
wast ruling with him, wrote to the cities, forbidding them to take any new
measures against us; among the rest to the Larissaeans, to the Thessalonians, to
the Athenians, and to all the Greeks.231

11 And as for thee,-since thy opinions respecting the Christians232 are the same
as theirs, and indeed much more benevolent and philosophic,-we are the more
persuaded that thou wilt do all that we ask of thee." These words are found in
the above-mentioned work.

12 But in the Extracts233 made by him the same writer gives at the beginning of
the introduction a catalogue of the acknowledged books of the Old Testament,
which it is necessary to quote at this point. He writes as follows:

13 "Melito to his brother Onesimus,234 greeting: Since thou hast often, in thy
zeal for the word, expressed a wish to have extracts made from the Law and the
Prophets concerning the Saviour and concerning our entire faith, and hast also
desired to have an accurate statement of the ancient book, as regards their
number and theirorder, I have endeavored to perform the task, knowing thy zeal
for the faith, and thy desire to gain information in regard to the word, and
knowing that thou, in thy yearning after God, esteemest these things above all
else, struggling to attain eternal salvation.

14 Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were
preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send
them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books:
Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus,235 Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth;
of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David,236 the Proverbs
of Solomon, Wisdom also,237 Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets,
Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book238 ; Daniel, Ezekiel,
Esdras.239 From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six
books." Such are the words of Melito.

Chapter XXVII. Apolinarius, Bishop of the Church of Hierapolis.

1 A Number of works of Apolinarius240 have been preserved by many, and the
following have reached us: the Discourse addressed to the above-mentioned
emperor,241 five books Against the Greeks,242 On Truth, a first and second
book,243 and those which he subsequently wrote against the heresy of the
Phrygians,244 which not long afterwards came out with its innovations,245 but at
that time was, as it were, in its incipiency, since Montanus, with his false
prophetesses, was then laying the foundations of his error.

Chapter XXVIII. Musanus and His Writings.

1 And as for Musanus,246 whom we have mentione among the foregoing writers, a
certain very elegant discourse is extant, which was written by him against some
brethren that had gone over to the heresy of the so-called Encratites,247 which
had recently sprung up, and which introduced a strange and pernicious error. It
is said that Tatian was the author of this false doctrine.

Chapter XXIX. The Heresy of Tatian.248

1 He is the one whose words we quoted a little above249 in regard to that
admirable man, Justin, and whom we stated to have been a disciple of the martyr.
Irenaeus declares this in the first book of his work Against Heresies, where he
writes as follows concerning both him and his heresy:250

2 "Those who are called Encratites,251 and who sprung from Saturninus252 and
Marcion, preached celibacy, setting aside the original arrangement of God and
tacitly censuring him who made male and female for the propagation of the human
race. They introduced also abstinence from the things called by them animate,253
thus showing ingratitude to the God who made all things. And they deny the
salvation of the first man.254

3 But this has been only recently discovered by them, a certain Tatian being the
first to introduce this blasphemy. He was a hearer of Justin, and expressed no
such opinion while he was with him, but after the martyrdom of the latter he
left the Church, and becoming exalted with the thought of being a teacher, and
puffed up with the idea that he was superior to others, he established a
peculiar type of doctrine of his own, inventing certain invisible aeons like the
followers of Valentinus,255 while, like Marcion and Saturninus, he pronounced
marriage to be corruption and fornication. His argument against the salvation of
Adam, however, he devised for himself." Irenaeus at that time wrote thus.

4 But a little later a certain man named Severus256 put new strength into the
aforesaid heresy, and thus brought it about that those who took their origin
from it were called, after him, Severians.

5 They, indeed, use the Law and Prophets and Gospels, but interpret in their own
way the utterances of the Sacred Scriptures. And they abuse Paul the apostle and
reject his epistles, and do not accept even the Acts of the Apostles.

6 But their original founder, Tatian, formed a certain combination and
collection of the Gospels, I know not how,257 to which he gave the title
Diatessaron,258 and which is still in the l hands of some. But they say that he
ventured to paraphrase certain words of the apostle,259 in order to improve
their style.

7 He has left a great many writings. Of these the one most in use among many
persons is his celebrated Address to the Greeks,260 which also appears to be the
best and most useful of all his works. In it he deals with the most ancient
times, and shows that Moses and the Hebrew prophets were older than all the
celebrated men among the Greeks.261 So much in regard to these men.

Chapter XXX. Bardesanes the Syrian and His Extant Works.

1 In the same reign, as heresies were abounding in the region between the
rivers,262 a certain Bardesanes,263 a most able man and a most skillful
disputant in the Syriac tongue, having composed dialogues against Marcion's
followers and against certain others who were authors of various opinions,
committed them to writing in his own language, together with many other works.
His pupils,264 of whom he had very many (for he was a powerful defender of the
faith), translated these productions from the Syriac into Greek.

2 Among them there is also his most able dialogue On Fate,265 addressed to
Antoninus, and other works which they say he wrote on occasion of the
persecution which arose at that time.266

3 He indeed was at first a follower of Valentinus,267 but afterward, having
rejected his teaching and having refuted most of his fictions, he fancied that
he had come over to the more correct opinion. Nevertheless he did not entirely
wash off the filth of the old heresy.268 About this time also Soter,269 bishop
of the church of Rome, departed this life.

1: On Xystus, see chap. 4, note 3.

2: Telesphorus was a martyr, according to Irenaeus, III. 3. 3 (compare below,
chap. 10, and Bk. V. chap. 6), and the tradition is too old to be doubted.
Eusebius here agrees with Jerome's version of the Chron. in putting the date of
Telesphorus' accession in the year 128 a.d., but the Armenian version puts it in
124; and Lipsius, with whom Overbeck agrees, puts it between 124 and 126. Since
he held office eleven years (according to Eusebius, chap. 10, below, and other
ancient catalogues), he must have died, according to Lipsius and Overbeck,
between 135 and 137 a.d. (the latter being probably the correct date), and not
in the first year of Antoninus Pius (138 a.d.), as Eusebius states in chap. 10,
below. Tradition says that he fought against Marcion and Valentinus (which is
quite possible), and that he was very strict in regard to fasts, sharpening them
and increasing their number, which may or may not be true.

3: We know nothing more about Eumenes. He is said in chap. 11 to have held
office thirteen years, and this brings the date of his death into agreement with
the date given by the Armenian version of the Chron., which differs by two years
from the date given by Jerome.

4: His predecessor was Justus. See the previous chapter.

5: The rebellions of the Jews which had broken out in Cyrene and elsewhere
during the reign of Trajan only increased the cruelty of the Romans toward them,
and in Palestine, as well as elsewhere in the East, their position was growing
constantly worse. Already during the reign of Trajan Palestine itself was the
scene of many minor disturbances and of much bitter persecution. Hadrian
regarded them as a troublesome people, and showed in the beginning of his reign
that he was not very favorably disposed toward them Indeed, it seems that he
even went so far as to determine to build upon the site of Jerusalem a purely
heathen city. It was at about this time, when all the Jews were longing for the
Messiah, that a man appeared (his original name we do not know, but his coins
make it probable that it was Simon), claiming to be the Messiah, and promising
to free the Jews from the Roman yoke. He took the name Bar-Cochba, "Son of a
star," and was enthusiastically supported by Rabbi Akiba and other leading men
among the Jews, who believed him to be the promised Messiah. He soon gathered a
large force, and war finally broke out between him and Rufus, the governor of
Judea, about the year 132. Rufus was not strong enough to put down the
rebellion, and Julius Severus, Hadrian's greatest general, was therefore
summoned from Britain with a strong force. Bar-Cochba and his followers shut
themselves up in Bethar, a strong fortification, and after a long siege the
place was taken in 135 a.d., in the fourth year of the war, and Bar-Cochba was
put to death. The Romans took severe revenge upon the Jews. Hadrian built upon
the site of Jerusalem a new city, which he named Aelia Capitolina, and upon the
site of the temple a new temple to the Capitoline Jupiter, and passed a law that
no Jew should henceforth enter the place. Under Bar-Cochba the Christians, who
refused to join him in his rebellion, were very cruelly treated (cf. Justin
Martyr, Apol. I. 31, quoted in chap. 8, below). Upon this last war of the Jews,
see Dion Cassius, LXIX. 12-14, and compare Jost's Gesch. der Israeliten, III. p.
227 sq., and Münter's Füdischer Krieg.

6: Heb. )bbwb rb 7: I.e. Aug. 134 to Aug. 135.

8: Biqqhra

9: Whether the whole of the previous account, or only the close of it, was taken
by Eusebius from Aristo of Pella, we do not know. Of Aristo of Pella himself we
know very little. Eusebius is the first writer to mention him, and he and
Maximus Confessor (in his notes on the work De mystica Theol. cap. I. p. 17, ed.
Corderii) are the only ones to give us any information about him (for the
notices in Moses Chorenensis and in the Chron. Paschale -the only other places
in which Aristo is mentioned-are entirely unreliable). Maximus informs us that
Aristo was the author of a Dialogue of Papiscus and Jason, a work mentioned by
many of the Fathers, but connected by none of them with Aristo. The dialogue,
according to Maximus, was known to Clement of Alexandria and therefore must have
been written as early as, or very soon after, the middle of the second century;
and the fact that it recorded a dialogue between a Hebrew Christian and an
Alexandrian Jew (as we learn from the epistle of Celsus, De Judaica
Incredulitate, printed with the works of Cyprian, in Hartel's edition, III. p.
119-132) would lead us to expect an early date for the work. There can be found
no good reason for doubting the accuracy of Maximus' statement; and if it be
accepted, we must conclude that the writer whom Eusebius mentions here was the
author of the dialogue referred to. If this be so, it is quite possible that it
was from this dialogue that Eusebius drew the account which he here ascribes to
Aristo; for such an account might well find a place in a dialogue between two
Hebrews. It is possible, of course, that Aristo wrote some othe work in which he
discussed this subject; but if it had been an historical work, we should expect
Eusebius, according to his custom, to give its title. Harnack is quite correct
in assuming that Eusebius' silence in regard to the work itself is significant.
Doubtless the work did not please him, and hence he neither mentions it, nor
gives an account of its author. This is just what we should expect Eusebius'
attitude to be toward such a Jewish Christian work (and at the same time, such a
`simple 0' work, as Origen calls it in Contra Cels. IV. 52) as we know the
dialogue to have been. We are, of course, left largely to conjecture in this
matter; but the above conclusions seem at least probable. Compare Harnack's
Ueberlieferung der griech. Apol., p. 115 sq.; and for a discussion of the nature
of the dialogue (which is no longer extant), see his Altercatio Simonis Judaei
et Theophili Christiani ( Texte und Untersuchungen, I. 3), p. 115 sq. (Harnack
looks upon this Latin altercatio as, in part at least, a free reproduction of
the lost dialogue). See, also, the writer's Dialogue between a Christian and a
Jew ( 'Antibolh Papiskou kai filwnoj 'Ioudaiwn proj monacon tina ), p. 33.

10: Of this Marcus we know nothing more. Upon the Gentile bishops of Jerusalem,
see Bk. V. chap. 12.

11: yeudwnumou gnwsewj . Compare 1 Tim. vi. 20.

12: This statement is of course an exaggeration. See above, Bk. II. chap. 3,
note 1.

13: These two paragraphs furnish an excellent illustration of Eusebius'
dualistic and transcendental conception of history. In his opinion, heresy was
not a natural growth from within, but an external evil brought upon the Church
by the devil, when he could no longer persecute. According to this conception
the Church conquers this external enemy, heresy, and then goes on as before,
unaffected by it. In agreement with this is his conception of heretics
themselves, whom he, in common with most other Christians of that age,
considered without exception wicked and abandoned characters.

14: Eusebius' belief that persecution had ceased at the time of Hadrian is an
illusion (see below, chap. 8, note 14) which falls in with his general
conceptions upon this subject-conceptions which ruled among Christian writers
until the end of the fourth century.

15: See Bk. III. chap. 26.

16: Saturninus is called Saturnilus by Hippolytus, Epiphanius, and Theodoret,
and his followers Saturnilians by Hegesippus, quoted in chap. 22, below.
Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. I. 24) and Hippolytus (VII. 16) give accounts of the man
and his doctrine which are evidently taken from the same source, probably the
lost Syntagma of Justin Martyr. Neither of them seems to have had any
independent information, nor do any other writers know more about him than was
contained in that original source. Irenaeus was possibly Eusebius' sole
authority, although Irenaeus assigns Saturninus only to Syria, while Eusebius
makes him a native of Antioch. Hippolytus says that he "spent his time in
Antioch of Syria," which may have been the statement of the original, or may
have been a mere deduction from a more general statement such as Irenaeus gives.
In the same way Eusebius may have needed no authority for his still more exact
statement.

17: Basilides was one of the greatest and most famous of the Gnostics. Irenaeus
(I. 24) and the early Compendium of Hippolytus (now lost, but used together with
Irenaeus' work by Epiphanius in his treatise against heresies) described a form
of Basilidianism which was not the original, but a later corruption of the
system. On the other hand, Clement of Alexandria surely, and Hippolytus, in the
fuller account in his Philosoph. (VII. 2 sq.), probably drew their knowledge of
the system directly from Basilides' own work, the Exegetica, and hence represent
the form of doctrine taught by Basilides himself,-a form differing greatly from
the later corruptions of it which Irenaeus discusses. This system was very
profound, and bore in many respects a lofty character. Basilides had apparently
few followers (his son Isidore is the only prominent one known to us); and
though his system created a great impression at the start,-so much so that his
name always remained one of the most famous of Gnostic names,-it had little
vitality, and soon died out or was corrupted beyond recognition. He was
mentioned of course in all the general works against heresies written by the
Fathers, but no one seems to have composed an especial refutation of his system
except Agrippa Castor, to whom Eusebius refers. Irenaeus informs us that he
taught at Alexandria, Hippolytus (VII. 15) mentions simply Egypt, while
Epiphanius (XXI. 1) names various Egyptian cities in which he labored, but it is
evident that he is only enumerating places in which there were Basilidians in
his time. It is not certain whether he is to be identified with the Basilides
who is mentioned in the Acts of Archelaus as preaching in Persia. For an
excellent account of Basilides and his system, see the article by Hort in the
Dict. of Christ. Biog.; and in addition to the works of Neander, Baur, and
Lipsius on Gnosticism in general, see especially Uhlhorn's Das Basilidianische
System, Göttingen, 1855.

18: See Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I. 24.

19: ekklhsiastikwn andrwn .

20: The only one of these-"that furnished posterity with means of defense
against heresies"-whom Eusebius mentions is Agrippa Castor, and it is evident
that he knew of no others. Moreover, it is more than doubtful whether Agrippa
Castor belonged to that time. We do not know when he wrote, but it is hardly
possible that the Church had at that period any one capable of answering such a
work as the Commentary of Basilides, or any one who would wish to if he could.
The activity of the Church was at this early period devoted chiefly if not
wholly to the production of apologies for the defense of the Church against the
attacks of enemies from the outside, and to the composition of apocalypses.
Eusebius in the next chapter mentions Hegesippus as another of these "writers of
the time." But the passage which he quotes to prove that Hegesippus wrote then
only proves that the events mentioned took place during his lifetime, and not
necessarily within forty or fifty years of the time at which he was writing. The
fact is, that Hegesippus really wrote about 175 a.d. (later therefore than
Justin Martyr), and in chap. 21 of this book Eusebius restores him to his proper
chronological place. The general statement made here by Eusebius in regard to
the writers against heresy during the reign of Hadrian rest upon his
preconceived idea of what must have been the case. If the devil raised up
enemies against the truth, the Church must certainly have had at the same time
defenders to meet them. It is a simple example of well-meaning subjective
reconstruction. He had the work of Agrippa Castor before him, and undoubtedly
believed that he lived at the time stated (which indeed we cannot absolutely
deny), and believed, moreover, that other similar writers, whose names he did
not know, lived at the same time.

21: Of Agrippa Castor we know only what Eusebius tells us here. Jerome ( de vir.
ill. chap. 21) adds nothing new, and Theodoret's statement ( Fab. I. 4), that
Agrippa wrote against Basilides' son, Isidore, as well as against Basilides
himself, is simply an expansion of Eusebius' account, and does not imply the
existence of another work. Agrippa's production, of which we do not know even
thetitle, has entirely disappeared.

22: eij euaggelion biblia

23: According to Epiphanius, some of the Ophites appealed to a certain prophet
called Barcabbas. What his connection was with the one mentioned here we do not
know. Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. VI. 6) speaks of the Expositions af the
Prophet Parchor by Isidore, the son of Basilides. This may be another of
Basilides' prophets, but is more probably identical with the oft-mentioned
Barcoph. In the second book of these Expositions, as quoted by Clement, occurs a
reference to the prophecy of Cham or Ham. Rienstra ( De Euseb. Hist. Eccles. p.
29) thinks that Agrippa Castor was mistaken in saying that Basilides mentioned
these prophets; but there seems to be no good reason to deny the accuracy of the
report, even though we know nothing more about the prophets mentioned. Hort (
Dict. of Christ. Biog., article Barcabbas ) thinks it likely that the prophecies
current among the various Gnostic bodies belonged to the apocryphal Zoroastrian
literature.

24: This was not a doctrine of Basilides himself, but of his followers (compare
the accounts of Irenaeus and Hippolytus). If Agrippa Castor represented
Basilides' position thus, as Eusebius says he did (though Eusebius may be only
following Irenaeus), it is an evidence that he did not live at the early date to
which Eusebius assigns him, and this goes to confirm the view stated above, in
note 10. Basilides himself taught at least a moderate asceticism, while his
followers went off into crude dualism and moral license (see the excellent
account of Schaff, Ch. Hist. II. 466 sq.).

25: Exactly what is meant by this "five years of silence" is uncertain. Whether
it denoted unquestioning and silent obedience of all commands, as it meant in
the case of the Pythagoreans (if, indeed, the traditions in regard to the latter
have any basis in fact), or strict secrecy as to the doctrines taught, cannot be
decided. The report in regard to the Basilidians, in so far as it has any truth,
probably arose on the ground of some such prohibition, which may have been made
by some follower of Basilides, if not by the latter himself. A bond of secrecy
wotdd lend an air of mystery to the school, which would accord well with the
character of its later teachings. But we cannot make Basilides responsible for
such proceedings. Agrippa Castor, as reproduced here by Eusebius, is our sole
authority for the enjoinment of silence by Basilides.

26: See Irenaeeus, Adv. Haer. I. 25.

27: The date of the rise of Gnosticism cannot be fixed. Indeed, all the
requisite conditions existed from the beginning. It was the "acute
Verweltlichung" (as Harnack calls it) of Christianity, the development of it in
connection with the various ethnic philosophies, and it began as soon as
Christianity came in contact with the Greek mind. At first it was not heretical,
simply because there were no standards by which to try it. There was only the
preaching of the Christians; the canon was not yet formed; episcopacy was not
yet established; both arose as safeguards against heresy. It was in the time of
Hadrian, perhaps, that these speculations began to be regarded as heresics,
because they contradicted certain fundamental truths to which the Christians
felt that they must cling, such as the unity of God, his graciousness, his
goodness, etc.; and therefore the Christians dated Gnosticism from that time.
Gnosticism was ostensibly conquered, but victory was achieved only as the Church
itself became in a certain sense Gnostic. It followed the course of Gnosticism a
century later; that is, it wrote commentaries, systems of doctrine, &c.,
philosophizing about religious things (cf. Harnack's Dogmengeschichte, I. p. 162
sq.). It must be remembered in reading the Fathers' accounts of Gnosticism that
they took minor and ummportant details and magnified them, and treated them as
the essentials of the system or systems. In this way far greater variety appears
to have existed in Gnosticism than was the case. The essential principles were
largely the same throughout; the differences were chiefly in regard to details.
It is this conduct on the part of the Fathers that gives us such a distorted and
often ridiculous view of Gnosticism.

28: ekeinoj , referring back to Basilides.

29: Where Eusebius secured the information that the Carpocratians made the magic
rites of Simon public, instead of keeping them secret, as Basilides had done, I
cannot tell. None of our existing sources mentions this fact, and whether
Eusebius took it from some lost source, or whether it is simply a deduction of
his own, I am not certain. In other respects his account agrees closely with
that of Irenaeus. It is possible that he had seen the lost work of Hippolytus
(see below, VI. 22, note 9), and from that had picked up this item which he
states as a fact. But the omission of it in Philaster, Pseudo-Tertullian, and
Epiphanius are against this supposition. Justin's Syntagma Eusebius probably
never saw (see below, chap. 11, note 31).

30: The chief accusations urged against the early Christians by their
antagonists were atheism, cannibalism, and incest. These charges were made very
early. Justin Martyr ( Apol. 1. 26) mentions them, and Pliny in his epistle to
Trajan speaks of the innocent meals of the Christians, implying that they had
been accused of immorality in connection with them. (Compare, also, Tertullian's
Apol. 7, 8, and Ad Nationes, 7.) In fact, suspicions arose among the heathen as
soon as their love feasts became secret. The persecution in Lyons is to be
explained only by the belief of the officer, that these and similar accusations
were true. The Christians corn monly denied all such charges in toto, and
supported their denial by urging the absurdity of such conduct; but sometimes,
as in the present case, they endeavored to exonerate themselves by attributing
the crimes with which they were charged to heretics. This course, however,
helped them little with the heathen, as the latter did not distinguish between
the various parties of Christians, but treated them all as one class. The
statement of Eusebius in the present case is noteworthy. He thinks that the
crimes were really committed by heretics, and occasioned the accusations of the
heathen, and he thus admits that the charges were founded upon fact. In this
case he acts toward the heretics in the same way that the heathen acted toward
the Christians as a whole. This method of exonerating themselves appears as
early as Justin Martyr (compare his Apol. I. 26). Irenaeus also (I. 25, 3), whom
Eusebius substantially follows in this passage, and Philaster (c. 57), pursue
the same course.

31: Eusebius is correct in his statement that such accusations were no longer
made in his day. The Church had, in fact, lived them down completely. It is
noticeable that in the elaborate work of Celsus against the Christians, no such
charges are found. From Origen ( Contra Cels. VI. 27), however, we learn that
there were still in his time some who believed these reports about the
Christians, though they were no longer made the basis of serious attacks.
Whether Eusebius' synchronization of the cessation of these slanderous stories
with the cessation of the heresies of which he has been talking, is correct, is
not so Certain, as we know neither exactly when these heresies ran out, nor
precisely the time at which the accusations ceased. At any rate, we cannot fully
agree with Eusebius' explanation of the matter. The two things were hardly
connected as direct cause and effect, though it cannot be denied that the actual
immoralities of some of these antinomian sects may have had some effect in
confirming these tales, and hence that their extinction may have had some
tendency to hasten the obliteration of the vile reports.

32: See above, note 10.

33: On the life and writings of Hegesippus, see below, chap. 22, note 1.
Eusebius in this passage puts his literary activity too early (see above, chap.
7, note 10). Jerome follows Eusebius' chronological arrangement in his de vir
ill., giving an account of Hegesippus in chap. 22, between his accounts of
Agrippa Castor and Justin Martyr.

34: Already quoted in Bk. II. chap. 23, and in Bk. III. chap. 32.

35: Antinoüs, a native of Bithynia, was a beautiful page of the Emperor Hadrian,
and the object of his extravagant affections. He was probably drowned in the
Nile, in 130 a.d. After his death he was raised to the rank of the gods, and
temples were built for his worship in many parts of the empire, especially in
Egypt. In Athens too games were instituted in his honor, and games were also
celebrated every fifth year at Mantinea, in Arcadia, according to Vale. sius,
who cites Pausanias as his authority.

36: Hadrian rebuilt the city of Bess in the Thebais, in whose neighborhood
Antino_s was drowned, and called it Antinoüpolis.

37: On Justin Martyr, see chap. 16, below. We do not know the date of his
conversion, but as it did not take place until mature years, it is highly
probable that he was still a heathen during the greater part of Hadrian's reign.
There is no reason, however, to suppose that Eusebius is speaking here with more
than approximate accuracy. He may not have known any better than we the exact
time of Justin's conversion.

38: Justin, Apol. I. 29.

39: Justin, Apol. I. 31.

40: xristianouj monouj . "This `alone 0' is, as Münter remarks, not to be
understood as implying that Barcocheba did not treat the Greeks and Romans also
with cruelty, but that he persecuted the Christians especially, from religious
hate, if he could not compel them to apostatize. Moreover, he handled the
Christians so roughly because of their hesitation to take part in the rebellion"
(Closs).

41: epithn qeosbeian .

42: Justin, Apol. II. 12. Eusebius here quotes from what is now known as the
Second Apology of Justin, but identifies it with the first, from which he has
quoted just above. This implies that the two as he knew them formed but one
work, and this is confirmed by his quotations in chaps. 16 and 47, below. For a
discussion of this matter, see chap. 18, note 3.

43: The best mss. of Eusebius write the name Serennioj Granianoj 44: grammata
epistolh , as Eusebius calls it.

45: antigrayai .

46: This Minucius Fundanus is the same person that is addressed by Pliny, Ep. I.
9 (see Mommsen's note in Keil's ed. of Pliny's epistles, p. 419). He is
mentioned also by Melito (Eusebius, IV. 26) as proconsul of Asia, and it is
there said that Hadrian wrote to him concerning the Christians. The authenticity
of this rescript is a disputed point. Keim ( Theol. Jahrbücher, 1856, p. 387
sqq.) was the first to dispute its genuineness. He has been followed by many
scholars, especially Overbeck, who gives a very keen discussion of the various
edicts of the early emperors relating to the Christians in his Studien zur
Gesch. der alten Kirche, I. p. 93 sqq. The genuineness of the edict, however,
has been defended against Keim's attack by Wieseler, Renan, Lightfoot, and
others. The whole question hinges upon the interpretation of the rescript.
According to Gieseler, Neander, and some others, it is aimed only against
tumultuous proceedings, and, far from departing from the principle laid down by
Trajan, is an attempt to return to that principle and to substitute orderly
judicial processes for popular attacks. If this be the sense of the edict, there
is no reason to doubt its genuineness, but the next to the last sentence
certainly cannot be interpreted in that way: "if any one therefore brings an
accusation, and shows that they have done something contrary to the laws ( ti
para touj nomouj kata thn dunamin tou amarthmatoj ). These last words are very
significant. They certainly imply various crimes of which the prisoners are
supposed to be accused. According to the heinousness of these crimes the
punishment is to be regulated. In other words, the trial of the Christians was
to be for the purpose of ascertaining whether they were guilty of moral or
political crimes, not whether they merely professed Christianity; that is, the
profession of Christianity, according to this rescript, is not treated as a
crime in and of itself. If the edict then be genuine, Hadrian reversed
completely Trajan's principle of procedure which was to punish the profession of
Christianity in andof itself as a crime. But in the time of Antoninus Pius and
Marcus Aurelius the rescript of Trajan is seen still to be in full force. For
this and other reasons presented by Keim and Overbeck, I am constrained to class
this edict with those of Antoninus Plus and Marcus Aurelius as a forgery. It can
hardly have been composed while Hadrian was still alive, but must have been
forged before Justin wrote his Apology, for he gives it as a genuine edict, i.e.
it must belong to the early part of the reign of Antoninus Pius.

47: Our two mss. of Justin have substituted the Greek translation of Eusebius
for the Latin original given by the former. Rufinus, however, in his version of
Eusebius' History, gives a Latin translation which is very likely the original
one. Compare Kimmel's De Rufino, p. 175 sq., and Lightfoot's Ignatius, I. p. 463
sq., and see Otto's Corpus Apol. I. p. 190 sq., where the edict is given, both
in the Greek of our mss. of Justin and in the Latin of Rufinus. Keim ( Aus dean
Urchristenthum, p. 184 sq.) contends that the Latin of Rufinus is not the
original, but a translation of Eusebius' Greek. His arguments, however, do not
possess any real weight, and the majority of scholars accept Kimmel's view.

48: Justin, Apol. I. 68.

49: We cannot judge as to the faithfulness of the Greek translation which
follows, because we are not absolutely sure whether the Latin of Rufinus is its
original, or itself a translation of it. Eusebius and Rufinus, however, agree
very well, and if the Latin of Rufinus is the original of Eusebius' translation,
the latter has succeeded much better than the Greek translator of the Apology of
Tertullian referred to in Bk. II. chap. 2, above. We should expect, however,
that much greater pains would be taken with the translation of a brief official
document of this kind than with such a work as Tertullian's Apology, and
Eusebius' translation of the rescript does not by any means prove that he was a
fluent Latin scholar. As remarked above (Bk. II. chap. 5, note 9), he probably
had comparatively little acquaintance with the Latin, but enough to enable him
to translate brief passages for himself in cases of necessity.

50: Greek, epistolhn 51: Greek, oi anqrwpoi

52: This is the only really suspicious sentence in the edict. That Hadrian
should desire to protect his Christian subjects as well as others from
tumultuous and illegal proceedings, and from unfounded accusations, would be of
course qutte natural, and quite in accord with the spirit shown by Trajan in his
rescript. But in this one sentence he implies that the Christians are to be
condemned only for actual crimes, and that the mere profession of Christianity
is not in itself a punishable offense. Much, therefore, as we might otherwise be
tempted to accept the edict as genuine,-natural as the style is and the position
taken in the other portions of it,-this one sentence, considered in the light of
all that we know of the attitude of Hadrian's predecessors and successors toward
the Christians, and of all that we can gather of his own views, must, as I
believe, condemn it as a forgery.

53: Compare this sentence with the closing words of the forged edict of
Antoninus Pius quoted by Eusebius in chap. 13. Not only are the Christians to be
released, but their accusers are to be punished. Still there is a difference
between the two commands in that here only an accusation made with the purpose
of slander is to be punished, while there the accuser is to he unconditionally
held as guilty, if actual crimes are not proved against the accused Christian.
The latter command would be subversive of all justice, and brands itself as a
counterfeit on its very face; but in the present case the injunction to enforce
the law forbidding slander against those who should slanderously accuse the
Christians is not inconsistent with the principles of Trajan and Hadrian, and
hence not of itself alone an evidence of ungenuineness.

54: Greek, opwj an ekdikhseiaj 55: Hadrian reigned from Aug. 8, 117, to July to,
138 a.d.

56: On Telesphorns, see above, chap. 5, note 13. The date given here by Eusebius
(138-139 a.d.) is probably (as remarked there) at least a year too late.

57: We know very little about Hyginus. His dates can be fixed with tolerable
certainty as 137-141, the duration of his episcopate being four years, as
Eusebius states in the next chapter. See Lipsius' Chron. d. röm. Bischöfe, p.
169 and 263. The Roman martyrologies make him a martyr, but this means nothing,
as the early bishops of Rome almost without exception are called martyrs by
these documents. The forged decretals ascribe to him the introduction of a
number of ecclesiastical rites.

58: In his Adv. Haer. III. 3. 3. The testimony of Irenaeus rests upon Roman
tradition at this point, and is undoubtedly reliable. Telesphorus is the first
Roman bishop whom we know to have suffered martyrdom, although the Roman
Catholic Church celebrates as martyrs all the so-called popes down to the fourth
century.

59: On Valentinus, Cerdon, and Marcion, see the next chapter.

60: Irenaes, Adv. Haer. III. 4. 3.

61: Valentinus is the best known of the Gnostics. According to Epiphanius (
Haer. XXXI. 2) he was born on the coast of Egypt, and studied Greek literature
and science at Alexandria. The same writer, on the authority of the lost
Syntagma of Hippolytus, informs us that he taught in Cyprus, and this must have
been before he went to Rome. The direct statement of Irenaeus as to the date of
his activity there is confirmed by Tertullian, and perhaps by Clement of
Alexandria, and is not to be doubted. Since Hyginus held office in all
probability from 137-141, and Anicetus from 154 or 155 to 166 or 167, Valentinus
must have been in Rome at least thirteen years. His chronological position
between Basilides and Marcion (as given by Clement of Alexandria, Strom. VII.
17) makes it probable that he came to Rome early in Antoninus' reign and
remained there during all or the most of that reign, but not longer. Valentinus'
followers divided into two schools, an Oriental and an Italian, and constituted
by far the most numerons and influential Gnostic sect. His system is the most
profound and artistic of the Gnostic systems, and reveals great depth and power
of mind. For an excellent account of Valentinus and Valentinianism, see Lipsius'
article in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. Vol. IV. Valentinus occupies a prominent
place in all works on Gnosticism.

62: Cerdon is best known as the teacher of Marcion. Epiphanius (Haer. XLI.) and
Philaster (Haer. XLIV.) call him a native of Syria. Epiphanius speaks of a sect
of Cerdonians, but there seems never to have been such a sect, and his disciples
probably early became followers of Marcion, who joined Cerdon soon after
reaching Rome. It is not possible to distinguish his teachings from those of his
pupil, Marcion. Hippolytus (X. 15) treats Cordon and Marcion together, making no
attempt to distinguish their doctrines. Irenaeus, in the passage quoted, and the
lost Syntagma of Hippolytus (represented by Pseudo-Tertullian's Adv. Haer. and
by Epiphanius) distinguish the two, treating Cerdon separately but very briefly.
The doctrines of Cerdon, however, given by them, are identical with or at least
very similar to the known views of Marcion. If they were really Cerdon's
positions before Marcion came to him, then his influence over Marcion was most
decided.

63: Of Germanicus we know only what is told us in this epistle.

64: This proconsul was Statius Quadratus, as we are told in the latter part of
this epistle, in a passage which Eusebius does not quote. Upon his dates, see
the discussions of the date of Polycarp's martyrdom mentioned in note 2, above.

65: Compare Justin Martyr's Apol. I. 6; Tertullian's Apol. 10, &c.; and see
chap. 7, note 20, above.

66: Of Quintus we know only what is told us in this epistle. It is significant
that he was a Phrygian, for the Phrygians were proverbially excitable and
fanatical, and it was among them that Montanism took its rise. The conduct of
Polycarp, who avoided death as long as he could without dishonor, was in great
contrast to this; and it is noticeable that the Smyrnaeans condemn Quintus'
hasty and ill-considered action, and that Eusebius echoes their judgment (see
above, p. 8).

67: Sabbaton megalou to mega Sabbaton

68: Of Herod and Nicetes we know only what is told us in this epistle. The
latter was not an uncommon name in Smyrna, as we learn from inscriptions (see
Lightfoot, ibid. II. p. 958).

69: eirhnarxoj 70: Compare Joshua i. 6, Joshua i. 7, Joshua i. 9, and Deut. i.
7, Deut. i. 23.

71: thn Kaisaroj tuxhn

72: See above, chap. 14, note 5. Whether the eighty-six years are to be reckoned
from Polycarp's birth, or from the time of his conversion or baptism, we cannot
tell. At the same time, inasmuch as he speaks of serving Christ, for eighty-six
years, not God, I am inclined to think that he is reckoning from the time of his
conversion or baptism, which may well be if we suppose him to have been baptized
in early boyhood.

73: See Rom. xiii. 1 sq., 1 Pet. ii. 13 sq.

74: timhn ... thn mh blaptousan hmaj en oij akindunoj h uupotagh ).

75: The proconsul made quite a concession here. He would have been glad to have
Polycarp quiet the multitude if he could. Polycarp was not reckless and foolish
in refusing to make the attempt, for he knew it would fail, and he preferred to
retain his dignity and not compromise himself by appearing to ask for mercy.

76: The Jews appear very frequently as leading spirits in the persecution of
Christians. The persecution under Nero was doubtless due to their instigation
(see Bk. II. chap. 25, note 4). Compare also Tertullian, Scorp. 10, and
Eusebius, H. E. V. 16. That the Jews were numerous in Smyrna has been shown by
Lightfoot, ibid. p. 966.

77: "The Asiarch was the head of the Commune Asiae, the confederation of the
principal cities of the Roman province of Asia. As such, he was the `chief
priest 0' of Asia, and president of the games" (Lightfoot, ibid. p. 967; on p.
987 ff. of the same volume, Lightfoot discusses the Asiarchate at considerable
length). The Asiarch Philip mentioned here was a Trallian, as we learn from a
statement toward the close of the epistle, which Eusebius does not quote;
Lightfoot identifies him with a person named in various Trallian Inscriptions.

78: The Greek reads simply proshloun auton .

79: paidoj not uiou . paij commonly conveys the meaning of servant rather than
son, although in this passage it is evidently used in the latter sense. Its use
in connection with Christ Was in later times dropped as Arianistic in its
tendency.

80: Compare John v. 29.

81: It is not necessary to dispute the truthfulness of the report in this and
the next sentences on the ground that the events recorded are miraculous in
their nature, and therefore cannot have happened. Natural causes may easily have
produced some such phenomena as the writers describe, and which they of course
regarded as miraculous. Lightfoot refers to a number of similar cases, Vol. I.
p. 598 ff. Compare also Harnack in the Zeitschrift für Kirchengesch. II. p. 291
ff.

82: Komfektora

83: Before the words "a quantity of blood" are found in all the Greek mss. of
the epistle the words peristera kai , "a dove and." It seems probable that these
words did not belong to the original text, but that they were, as many critics
believe, an unintentional corruption of some other phrase, or that they were, as
Lightfoot thinks, a deliberate interpolation by a late editor (see Lightfoot,
II. 974 ff. and I. 627 ff.). No argument, therefore, against the honesty of
Eusebius can be drawn from his omission of the words.

84: See above, note 6. That the word kaqolikhj is used here in the later sense
of "orthodox," as opposed to heretical and schismatical bodies, can be
questioned by no one. Lightfoot, however, reads at this point agiaj instead of
kagolikhj in his edition of the epistle. It is true that he has some ms.
support, but the mss. and versions of Eusebius are unanimous in favor of the
latter word, and Lightfoot's grounds for making the change seem to be quite
insufficient. If any change is to be made, the word should be dropped out
entirely, as suggested by the note already referred to.

85: All, or nearly all, the mss. of Eusebius read Dalkhj , and that reading is
adopted by Stephanus, Valesius (in his text), Schwegler, Laemmer, Heinichen, and
Crusè. On the other hand, the mss. of the epistle itself all support the form
Alkhj (or Alkhj, Elkeij

86: This shows that the martyrs were highly venerated even at this early date,
as was indeed most natural, and as is acknowledged by the writers themselves
just below. But it does not show that the Christians already worshiped or
venerated their relics as they did in later centuries. The heathen, in their own
paganism, might easily conclude from the Christians' tender care of and
reverence for the martyrs' relics that they also worshiped them.

87: This is, so far as I am aware, the earliest notice of the annual celebration
of the day of a martyr's death, a practice which early became so common in the
Church. The next reference to the custom is in Tertullian's de Corona, 3 (cf.
also Scorp. 15). So natural a practice, however, and one which was soon
afterward universal, need not surprise us at this early date (see Ducange,
Natalis, and Bingham, Ant. XIII. 9. 5, XX. 7. 2).

88: The majority of the mss. read dwdeka tou en Emurnh marturhsantoj , which,
however, is quite ungrammatical as it stands in the sentence, and cannot be
accepted Heinichen reads dwdeka ton en k.t.l ., changing the genitive of the
majority of the mss. to an accusative, but like them, as also like Rufinus,
making twelve martyrs besides Polycarp. But the mss. of the epistle itself read
dwdekatoj Em. marturhsaj , thus making only eleven martyrs in addition to
Polycarp, and it cannot be doubted that this idiomatic Greek construction is the
original. In view of that fact, I am constrained to read with Valesius,
Schwegler, and Zahn (in his note on this passage in his edition of the epistle),
dwdekaton en Em. marturhsanta , translating literally, "suffered martyrdom with
those from Philadelphia, the twelfth"; or, as I have rendered it freely in the
text, "suffered martyrdom with the eleven from Philadelphia." It is, of course,
possible that Eusebius himself substituted the dwdeka for the dwdekatoj , but
the variations and inconsistencies in the mss. at this point make it more
probable that the change crept in later, and that Eusebius agreed with his
original in making Polycarp the twelfth martyr, not the thirteenth. Of these
eleven only Germanicus is mentioned in this epistle, and who the others were we
do not know. They cannot have been persons of prominence, or Polycarp's
martyrdom would not so completely have overshadowed theirs.

89: grafh h auth peoiodoj tou xoonou

90: This is an excellent summary of Pionius' sufferings, as recorded in the
extant Acts referred to in the previous note.

91: This is the Collection of Ancient Martyrdoms, which is no longer extant, but
which is referred to by Eusebius more than once in his History. For particulars
in regard to it, see above, p. 30 sq.

92: A detailed account of the martyrdoms of Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonice is
extant in numerous mss., and has been published more than once. It has, however,
long been recognized as spurious and entirely untrustworthy. But in 1881 Aubè
published in the Revue Archavalogique (Dec., p. 348 sq.) a shorter form of the
Acts of these martyrs, which he had discovered in a Greek ms. in the Paris
Library. There is no reason to doubt that these Acts are genuine and, in the
main, quite trustworthy. The longer Acts assign the death of these martyrs to
the reign of Decius, and they have always been regarded as suffering during that
persecution. Aubè, in publishing his newly discovered document, still accepted
the old date; but Zahn, upon the basis of the document which he had also seen,
remarked in his Tatian's Diatessaron (p. 279) that Eusebius was correct in
assigning these martyrdoms to the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and Lightfoot (I. p.
625) stated his belief that they are to be assigned either to that reign or to
the reign of Septimius Severus. In 1888 Harnack ( Texte und Unters. III. 4)
published a new edition of the Acts from the same ms. which Aubè had used,
accompanying the text with valuable notes and with a careful discussion of the
age of the document. He has proved beyond all doubt that these martyrs were put
to death during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and that the shorter document
which we have contains a genuine account related by an eye-witness. These are
evidently the Acts which Eusebius had before him. In the spurious account Carpus
is called a bishop, and Papylus a deacon. But in the shorter account they are
simply Christians, and Papylus informs the judge that he is a citizen of
Thyatira.

93: That is, during the reign of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, 161-169 a.d.
Inasmuch as Eusebius is certainly in error in ascribing the death of Polycarp,
recorded in the previous chapter, to the reign of Marcus Aurelius (see note 2 on
that chapter), the fact that he here connects Justin's death with that reign
furnishes no evidence that it really occurred then; but we have other good
reasons for supposing that it did (see below, note 4).

94: In chap. 11.

95: Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, whom he mentioned at the close of chap.
14, and the events of whose reign he is now ostensibly recording. But in regard
to this supposed second apology addressed to them, see chap. 18, note 3.

96: That Justin died a martyr's death is the universal tradition of antiquity,
which is crystallized in his name. Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. I. 28. 1) is the first
to mention it, but does so casually, as a fact well known. The only account of
his martyrdom which we have is contained in the Acta Martyrii Justini Philosophi
(Galland. I. 707 sq.), which, although belonging to a later age (probably the
third century), yet bear every evidence of containing a comparatively truthful
account of Justin's death. According to these Acts, Justin, with six companions,
was brought before Rusticus, prefect of ome, and by him condemned to death, upon
his refusal to sacrifice to the gods. The date of his martyrdom is very
difficult to determine. There are two lines of tradition, one of which puts his
death under Antoninus Pius, the other trader Marcus Aurelius. The latter has the
most in its favor; and if we are to accept the report of the Acta Justini (which
can be doubted least of all at this point), his death took place under Rusticus,
who, as we know, became prefect of Rome in 163. Upon the date of Justin's death,
see especially Holland, in Smith and Wace, III. p. 562 sq.

97: Of this cynic philosopher Crescens we know only what is told us by Justin
and Tatian, and they paint his character in the blackest colors. Doubtless there
was sufficient ground for their accusations; but we must remember that we have
his portrait only from the pen of his bitterest enemies. In the Acta Crescens is
not mentioned in connection with the death of Justin,-an omission which is
hardly, to be explained, except upon the supposition of historical truthfulness.
Eusebius' report here seems to rest solely upon the testimony of Tatian (see §§8
and 9, below), but the passage of Tatian which he cites does not prove his
point; it simply proves that Crescens plotted against Justin; whether his
plotting was successful is not stated, and the contrary seems rather to be
implied (see note 13, below).

98: Harnack thinks that Eusebius at this point wishes to convey the false
impression that he quotes from the second apology, whereas he really quotes from
what was to him the first, as can be seen from chap. 17. But such conduct upon
the part of Eusebius would be quite inexplicable (at the beginning of the very
next chapter, e.g., he refers to this same apology as the first), and it is far
better to refer the words en th dedhlwmenh apologia to chap. 13 sq., where the
apology is quoted repeatedly.

99: Justin, Apol. II. 3.

100: kagw oun . In the previous chapter (quoted by Eusebius in the next chapter)
Justin has been speaking of the martyrdom of various Christians, and now goes on
to express his expectation that he, too, will soon suffer death.

101: culw entinaghnai culin culon was a block, with holes in which the feet of
captives were put, in order that they might be kept more securely in prison, or
might be afflicted With tortures").

102: This accusation was very commonly made against the Christians in the second
century. See above, chap. 7, note 20.

103: In §3, above.

104: This saying of Socrates is given by Justin as follows: all outi ge pro thj
alhqeiaj timhteoj anhr 105: On Tatian and his writings, see below, chap. 29.

106: Tatian, Oratio ad Graecos, c. 18. It is quite probable that Tatian is here
appealing, not to a written work of Justin's, but to a statement which he had
himself heard him make. See Harnack's Ueberlieferung der griech. Apologeten, p.
130. Harnack is undoubtedly correct in maintaining that Tatian's Oratio is quite
independent of Justin's Apology and other writings.

107: Ibid. chap. 19.

108: Eusebius in this chapter quotes what we now know as Justin's, second
Apology, calling it his first. It is plain that the two were but one to him. See
chap. 18, note 3.

109: Justin, Apol. II. 2.

110: Our authorities are divided between hmin and umin , but I have followed
Heinichen in adopting the former, which has much stronger ms. support, and which
is in itself at least as natural as the latter.

111: Of this Ptolemaeus we know only what is told us here. Tillemont, Ruinart,
and others have fixed the date of his martyrdom as 166, or thereabouts. But
inasmuch as the second Apology is now commonly regarded as an appendix to, or as
a part of, the first, and was at any rate written during the reign of Antoninus
Pius, the martyrdom of Ptolemaeus must have taken place considerably earlier
than the date indicated, in fact in all probability as early as 152 (at about
which time the Apology was probably written). We learn from the opening of the
second Apology that the martyrdoms which are recorded in the second chapter, and
the account of which Eusebius here quotes, happened very shortly before the
composition of the Apology ( xqez de kai prwhn , "yesterday and the day
before").

112: 'Ourbikioj , as all the mss. of Eusebius give the name. In Justin the form
'Ourbikoj 113: Of this Lucius we know only what is told us here.

114: Marcus Aurelius. See above, chap. 12, note 2.

115: In chap. 16, §3.

116: Justin, Apol. II. 3. These words, in Justin's Apology, follow immediately
the long accotrot quoted just above.

117: Eusebius apparently cites here only the works which he had himself seen,
which accounts for his omission of the work against Marcion mentioned above, in
chap. 11.

118: This Apology is the genuine work of Justin, and is still extant in two late
and very faulty mss., in which it is divided into two, and the parts are
commonly known as Justin's First and Second Apologies, though they were
originally one. The best edition of the original is that of Otto in his Corpus
Apologetarum Christianorum; English translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.
I. p. 163 ff. Eusebius, in his Chronicle, places the date of its composition as
141, but most critics are now agreed in putting it ten or more years later; it
must, however, have been written before the death of Antoninus Pius (161). See
Schaff, Ch. Hist. II. p. 716.

119: Eusebius here, as in chap. 16 above, ascribes to Justin a second Apology,
from which, however, he nowhere quotes. From Eusebius the tradition has come
down through history that Justin wrote two apologies, and the tradition seems to
be confirmed by the existing mss. of Justin, which give two. But Eusebius' two
cannot have corresponded to the present two; for, from chap. 8, §§16 and 17, it
is plain that to Eusebius our two formed one complete work. And it is plain,
too, from internal evidence (as is now very generally admitted; Wieseler's
arguments against this, in his Christenverfolgungen, p. 104 ff., are not sound),
that the two were originally one, our second forming simply a supplement to the
first. What, then, has become of the second Apology mentioned by Eusebius? There
is much difference of opinion upon this point. But the explanation given by
Harnack (p. 171 ff.) seems the most probable one. According to his theory, the
Apology of Athenagoras (of whom none of the Fathers, except Methodius and Philip
of Side, seem to have had any knowledge) was attributed to Justin by a copyist
of the third century,-who altered the address so as to throw it into Justin's
time,-and as such it came into the hands of Eusebius, who mentions it among the
works of Justin. That he does not quote from it may be due to the fact that it
contained nothing suited to his purpose, or it is possible that he had some
suspicions about it; the last, however, is not probable, as he nowhere hints at
them. That some uncertainty, however, seemed to hang about the work is evident.
The erasure of the name of Athenagores and the substitution of Justin's name
accounts for the almost total disappearance of the former from history. This
Apology and his treatise on the resurrection first appear again under his name
in the eleventh century, and exist now in seventeen mss. (see Schaff, II. 731).
The traditional second Apology of Justin having thus after the eleventh century
disappeared, his one genuine Apology was divided by later copyists, so that we
still have apparently two separate apologies.

120: This and the following were possibly genuine works of Justin; but, as they
are no longer extant, it is impossible to speak with certainty. The two extant
works, Discourse to the Greeks (Oratio ad Graecos) and Hortatory Address to the
Greeks (Cohortatio ad Graecos), which are translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers,
I. p. 271-289, are to be regarded as the productions of later writers, and are
not to be identified with the two mentioned here (although Otto defends them
both, and Semisch defends the latter).

121: We have no reason to think that this work was not genuine, but it is no
longer extant, and therefore certainty in the matter is impossible. It is not to
be identified with the extant work upon the same subject (translated in the
Ante-Nicene Fathers, I. p. 290-293), which is the production of a later writer.

122: This work and the following have entirely disappeared, but were genuine
productions of Justin, for all that we know to the contrary.

123: This is a genuine work of Justin, and is still extant (translated in the
Ante-Nicene Fathers, I. p. 194-270). Its exact date is uncertain, but it was
written after the Apology (to which it refers in chap. 120), and during the
reign of Antoninus Pius (137-161).

124: See Dial. chap. 2 sq.

125: ibid. chap. 17.

126: ibid. chap. 82.

127: ibid. chap. 81.

128: ibid. chap. 71.

129: Of the many extant and non-extant works attributed to Justin by tradition,
all, or the most of them (except the seven mentioned by Eusebius, and the work
Against Marcion, quoted by Irenaeus,-see just below,-and the Syntagma Contra
omnes Haer. ), are the productions of later writers.

130: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. IV. 6. 2.

131: Irenaeus, V. 26. 2. Irenaeus does not name the work which he quotes here,
and the quotation occurs in none of Justin's extant works, but the context and
the sense of the quotation itself seem to point to the same work, Against
Marcion.

132: Epiphanius expresses the same thought in his Haer. XXXIX. 9.

133: The reign of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus mentioned at the end of chap.
14.

134: As was remarked in chap. 11, note 18, Anicetus held office until 165 or
167, i.e. possibly until the seventh year of Marcus Aurelius. The date therefore
given here for the accession of Soter is at least a year out of the way. The
Armenian Chron. puts his accession in the 236th Olympiad, i.e. the fourth to the
seventh year of this reign, while the version of Jerome puts it in the ninth
year. From Bk. V. chap. 1 we learn that he held office eight years, andthis is
the figure given by both versions of the Chron. In chap. 23 Eusebius quotes from
a letter of Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, addressed to Soter, in which he
remarks that the Corinthian church have been reading on the Lord's day an
epistle written to them by Soter. It was during his episcopate that Montanus
labored in Asia Minor, and the anonymous author of the work called
Praedestinatus (written in the middle of the fifth century) states that Soter
wrote a treatise against him which was answered by Tertullian, but there seems
to be no foundation for the tradition. Two spurions epistles and several
decretals have been falsely ascribed to him.

135: On Anicetus, see above, chap. 11, note 18.

136: On Celadion, see above, chap. 11, note 17.

137: Of Agrippinus we know only what Eusebius tells us here and in Bk. V. chap.
9, where he says that he held office twelve years. Jerome's version of the
Chron. agrees as to the duration of his episcopate, but puts his accession in
the sixth year of Marcus Aurelius. In the Armenian version a curious mistake
occurs in connection with his name. Under the ninth year of Marcus Aurelius are
found the words, Romanorum ecclesiae XII. episcopus constitutus est Agrippinus
annis IX., and then Eleutherus (under the thirteenth year of the same ruler) is
made the thirteenth bishop, while Victor, his successor, is not numbered, and
Zephyrinus the successor of the latter, is made number fourteen. It is of course
plain enough that the transcriber by an oversight read Romanorum ecclesiae
instead of Alexandrinae ecclesiae, and then having given Soter just above/as the
eleventh bishop he felt compelled to make Agrippinus the twelfth, and hence
reversed the two numbers, nine and twelve, given in connection with Agrippinus
and made him the twelfth bishop, ruling nine years, instead of the ninth bishop,
ruling twelve years. He then found himself obliged to make Eleutherus the
thirteenth, but brought the list back into proper shape again by omitting to
number Victor as the fourteenth. It is hard to understand how a copyist could
commit such a flagrant error and not discover it when he found himself
subsequently led into difficulty by it. It simply shows with what carelessness
the work of translation or of transcription was done. As a result of the mistake
no ninth bishop of Alexandria is mentioned, though the proper interval of twelve
years remains between the death of Celadion and the accession of Julian.

138: On Theophilus and his writings, see chap. 24.

139: Of the life and character of Cornelius and Eros we know nothing. The Chron.
of Eusebius puts the accession of Cornelins into the twelfth year of Trajan (128
a.d.), and the accession of his successor Eros into the fifth year of Antoninus
Pius (142). These dates, however, are quite unreliable, and we have no means of
correcting them (see Harnack's Zeit des Ignatius, p. 12 sqq.). Theophilus, the
successor of Eros we have reason to think became bishop about the middle of
Marcus Aurelius' reign and hence the Chron., which puts his accession into the
ninth year of that reign, (169 a.d.) cannot be far out of the way. This gives us
the approximate date for the death of Eros.

140: On Hero, see above, Bk. III. chap. 36, note 23.

141: On Eros, see note 2.

142: On Hegesippus' life and writings, see the next chapter. He has been already
mentioned in Bk. II. chap. 23; Bk. III. chaps. II, 16, 20, 32; and Bk. IV. chap.
8.

143: On the life and writings of Dionysius, see below, chap. 23.

144: On Pinytus, see below, chap, 23, note 14.

145: On Philip, see below, chap. 25.

146: On Apotinarius, see below, chap. 27.

147: On Melito, see chap. 26.

148: On Musanus, see chap. 28.

149: On Modestus, see chap. 25.

150: Irenaeus was born in Asia Minor, probably between the years 120 and 130.
There is great uncertainty as to the date of his birth, some bringing it down
almost to the middle of the second century, while Dodwell carried it back to the
year 97 or 98. But these extremes are wild; and a careful examination of all the
sources which can throw any light on the subject leads to the conclusion adopted
by Lipsius, and stated above. In Asia Minor he was a pupil of Polycarp (cf. the
fragment of Irenaeus' letter to Florinus, quoted by Eusebius, Bk. V. chap. 20).
The Moscow ms. of the Martyrium Polycarpi states that Irenaeus was in Rome at
the time of Polycarp's martyrdom (155 or 156 a.d.), and appeals for its
authority to a statement in Irenaeus' own writings, which does not exist in any
extant work, but may have been taken from an authentic work now lost (cf.
Gebhardt, in the Zeitschrift für die hist. Theologie, 1875, p. 362 sqq.). But
whatever truth there may be in the report, we find him, at the time of the great
persecution of Lyons and Vienne (described in the next book, chap. 1), a
presbyter of the church at Lyons, and carrying a letter from the confessors of
that church to the bishop Eleutherus of Rome (see Bk. V. chap. 4). After the
death of Pothinus. which took place in 177 (see Bk. V. praef. note 3, and chap.
1, §29), Irenaeus became bishop of Lyons, according to Bk. V. chap. 5. The exact
date of his accession we do not know; but as Pothinus died during the
persecution, and Irenaeus was still a presbyter after the close of the
persecution in which he met his death, he cannot have succeeded immediately.
Since Irenaeus, however, was, according to Eusebius, Pothinus' next successor,
no great length of time can have elapsed between the death of the latter and the
accession of the former. At the time of the paschal controversy, while Victor
was bishop of Rome, Irenaeus was still bishop (according to Bk. V. chap. 23).
This was toward the close of the second century. His death is ordinarily put in
the year 202 or 203, on the assumption that he suffered martyrdom under
Septimius Severus. Jerome is the first to call him a martyr, and that not in his
de vir. ill., but in his Comment. in Esaiam (chap. 64), which was written some
years later. It is quite possible that he confounded the Iren`us in question
with another of the same name, who met his death in the persecution of
Diocletian. Gregory of Tours first gives us a detailed account of the martyrdom,
and in the Middle Ages Iren`us always figured as a martyr. But all this has no
weight at all, when measured against the silence of Tertullian, Hippolytus,
Eusebius, and all the earlier Fathers. Their silence must be accepted as
conclusive evidence that he was not a martyr; and if he was not, there is no
reason for assigning his death to the year 202 or 203. As we have no trace of
him, however, subsequent to the time of the paschal controversy, it is probable
that he died, at the latest, soon after the beginning of the third century.

151: wn kai eij hmaj thj apostolikhj paradosewj, h thj ugiouj pistewj eggrafoj
kathlqrn orqodocia . Compare chap. 14, §4.

152: The five books of Hegesippus, upomnhmata

153: Of this Primus we know only what Hegesippus tells us here. We do not know
the exact date of his episcopate, but it must have been at least in part
synchronous with the episcopate of Plus of Rome (see chap. 11 note 14), for it
was while Hegesippus was on his way to Rome that he saw Primus; and since he
remained in Rome until the accession of Anicetus he must have arrived there
while Pius, Anicetus' predecessor, was bishop, for having gone to Rome on a
visit, he can hardly have remained there a number of years.

154: The interpretation of this sentence is greatly disputed. The Greek reads in
all the mss. genomenoj de en 'Rwmh diadoxhn epoihsamn mexrij 'Anikhtou diadoxhn
epoihsamhn , "I composed a catalogue of bishops," for diadoxh nowhere else, so
far as I am aware, means "catalogue," and nowhere else does the expression
diadoxhn poieisqai occur. Just below, the same word signifies "succession," and
this is its common meaning. Certainly, if Hegesippus wished to say that he had
composed a catalogue of bishops, he could not have expressed himself more
obscurely. In the second place, if Hegesippus had really composed a catalogue of
bishops and referred to it here, how does it happen that Eusebius, who is so
concerned to ascertain the succession of bishops in all the leading sees nowhere
gives that catalogue, and nowhere even refers to it. He does give Irenaens'
catalogue of the Roman bishops in Bk. V. chap. 6, but gives no hint there that
he knows anything of a similar list composed by Hegesippus. In fact, it is very
difficult to think that Hegesippus, in this passage, can have meant to say that
he had composed a catalogue of bishops, and it is practically impossible to
believe that Eusebius can have understood him to mean that.But the words
diadoxhn epoihsamhn diadoxhn the word diatribhn , probably simply as a
conjecture, but possibly upon the authority of some other ms. now lost. He has
been followed by some editors, including Heinichen, who prints the word
diatribhn in the text. Val. retains diadoxhn in his text, but accepts diatribhn
as the true reading, and so translates. This reading is now very widely adopted;
and it, or some other word with the same meaning, in all probability stood in
the original text. In my notice of Lightfoot's article, I suggested the word
diagwghn , which, while not so common as diatribhn , is yet used with poieisqai
in the same sense, and its very uncommonness would account more easily for the
change to the much commoner diadoxhn , which is epigraphically so like it.

155: See Bk. III. chap. 11, note 4.

156: Dia touto . Valesius proposes to read mexri toutou , which certainly makes
better sense and which finds some support in the statement made by Eusebius in
Bk. III. chap. 32, §7. But all the mss. have dia touto , and, as Stroth remarks,
the illogical use of "therefore" at this point need not greatly surprise us in
view of the general looseness of Hegesippus' style. The phrase is perhaps used
proleptically, with a reference to what follows.

157: Of Thebuthis we know only what is told us here. The statement that he
became a heretic because he was not chosen bishop has about as much foundation
as most reports of the kind. It was quite common for the Fathers to trace back
the origin of schisms to this cause (compare e.g. Tertullian's Adv. Val. 4, and
De Bapt. 17).

158: The seven sects are mentioned by Hegesippus just below. Harnack maintains
that Hegesippus in his treatment of heresies used two sources, one of them being
the lost Syntagma of Justin (see his Quellenkritik des Gnosticismus, p. 37
sqq.). Lipsius, who in his Quellen der Ketzergesch. combats many of Harnack's
positions, thinks it possible that Hegesippus may have had Justin's Syntagma
before him.

159: Simon Magus (see Bk. II. chap. 13, note 3).

160: Cleobius is occasionally mentioned as a heretic by ecclesiastical writers,
but none of them seems to know anything more about him than is told here by
Hegesippus (see the article Cleobius in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. ).

161: Trustworthy information in regard to Dositheus is very scanty, but it is
probable that he was one of the numerous Samaritan false messiahs, and lived at
about the time of, or possibly before, Christ. "It seems likely that the
Dositheans were a Jewish or Samaritan ascetic sect, something akin to the
Essenest existing from before our Lord's time, and that the stories connecting
their founder with Simon Magus and with John the Baptist [see the Clementine
Recognitions, II. 8 and Homilies, II. 24], may be dismissed as merely mythical"
(Salmon, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. art. Dositheus ).

162: Epiphanius and Theodoret also mention the Goratheni, but apparently knew no
more about them than Hegesippus tells us here Epiphanius classing them among the
Samaritans, and Theodoret deriving them from Simon Magus.

163: The name Masbotheus us supported by no ms. Authority, but is given by
Rufinus and by Nicephorus, and is adopted by most editors. The majority of the
mss. read simply Masbwqaioi or Masbwqeoi

164: On Menander and the Menandrianists, see Bk. II. chap. 26; on the
Carpocratians, chap. 7, note 17; on the Valentinians, see chap. 11, note 1; on
the Basilidaeans, chap. 7, note 7; on the Saturnilians, chap. 7, note 6.

165: There is some dispute about this word. The Greek is Markianisyyai , which
Harnack regards as equivalent to Markiwnisttai , or "followers of Marcion," but
which Lipsius takes to mean "followers of Marcus." The latter is clearly
epigraphically more correct, but the reasons for reading in this place
Marcionites, or followers of Marcion, are strong enough to outweigh other
considerations (see Harnack, p. 31 ff. and Lipsius, p. 29 ff.).

166: These are the seven Jewish heresies mentioned above by Hegesippus. Justin (
Dial. chap. 80) and Epiphanius ( Anaceph. ) also name seven Jewish sects, but
they_ are not the same as those mentioned here (those of Justin: Sadducees,
Genistae, Meristae, Galileans, Hellenianians, Pharisees, Baptists). Epiphanius
(Vol. I. p. 230, Dindorf's ed.,-Samaritan sects 4: Gorothenes, Sebouaioi ,
Essenes, Dositheans; Jewish 7: Scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, Hemerobaptists,
'Ossaioi

167: The exact meaning of this sentence is very difficult to determine. The
Greek reads: ek te tou kaq 'Ebraiouj euaggeliou kai tou Suriakou kai idiwj ek
thj 'Ebraidoj dialektou tina tiqhsin . It is grammatically necessary to supply
euaggeliou after Suriakou euaggelion kaq 'Ebraiouj is a Greek translation, while
the to Suriakon represents the original; so that Hegesippus is said to have used
both the original and the translation. Eusebius, however, could not have made
the discovery that he used both. unless the original and the translation
differed in their contents, of which we have no hint, and which in itself is
quite improbable. As the Greek reads, however, there is no other explanation
possible, unless the to Suriakon euaggelion be taken to represent some other
unknown Hebrew gospel, in which case the following clause refers to the
citations from both of the gospels. That such a gospel existed, however, and was
referred to by Eusebius so casually, as if it were a well-known work, is not
conceivable. The only resource left, so far as the writer can discover, is to
antend the text, with Eichhorn, Nicholson, and Handmann, by striking out the
first kai . The tou Suriakou then becomes a description of the euaggelion kaq
'Ebraiouj , "The Syriac Gospel according to the Hebrews." By the Syriac we are
to understand, of course, the vulgar dialect, which had before the time of
Christ taken the place of the Hebrew, and which is ordinarily called Aramaic.
Eusebius then, on this interpretation, first qualifies the Gospel of the Hebrews
more exactly, and then adds that Hegesippus quotes from the Hebrew original of
it ( ek thj 'Ebraidoj dialektou ), and not from a translation; e.g. from the
Greek translation, which we know existed early. There is, to be sure, no ms.
authority for the alteration of the text, and yet the sefise of the passage
seems to demand it, and I have consequently omitted the kai

168: Eusebius had abundant opportunity to learn from Hegesippus 0 works whether
or not he was a Hebrew Christian, and hence we cannot doubt that his conclusion
in regard to Hegesippus 0 nationality (whether based merely upon the premises
given here, or partly upon other facts unknown to us) is correct. His
nationality explains the fact that he deduces the Christian heresies from
Jewish, and not, like other writers, from heathen roots. There is, however, no
reason, with Baur and others, to suppose that Hegesippus was a Judaizer. In
fact, Eusebius' respectful treatment of him is in itself conclusive proof that
his writings cannot have revealed heretical notions.

169: This phrase ( panaretoj sofia ) was very frequently employed among the
Fathers as a title of the Book of Proverbs. Clement of Rome (1 Cor. lvii.) is,
so far as I know, the first so to use it. The word panaretoj sofia

170: Eusebius speaks, in this chapter, of seven Catholic epistles, and of one
addressed to an individual. None of these epistles are now extant, though
Eusebius here, and in Bk. II. chap. 25, gives us four brief but interesting
fragments from the Epistle to the Romans. We know of the other epistles only
what Eusebius tells us in this chapter. That Dionysius was held in high esteem
as a writer of epistles to the churches is clear, not only from Eusebius'
statement, but also from the fact that heretics thought it worth while to
circulate interpolated and mutilated copies of them, as stated below. The fact
that he wrote epistles to churches so widely scattered shows that he possessed
an extended reputation.

171: This is, so far as I am aware, the earliest mention of a church at
Lacedaemon or Sparta. The bishop of Sparta is mentioned in the synodical letter
of the province of Hellas to the emperor Leo (457-477 a.d.), and also still
later in the Acts of the Sixth and Eighth General Synods, according to Wiltsch's
Geography and Statistics of the Church (London ed. p. 134 and 466).

172: Of this Publius we know only what Eusebius tells us here. What particular
persecution is referred to we cannot tell, but Publius' martyrdom seems to have
occurred in the reign of Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius; for he was the
immediate predecessor of Quadratus, who was apparently bishop at the time
Dionysius was writing.

173: We know nothing more about this Quadratus, for he is to be distinguished
from the prophet and from the apologist (see chap. 3, note 2). Eusebius' words
seem to imply that he was bishop at the time Dionysius was writing.

174: On Dionysius the Areopagite, see Bk. III. chap. 4, note 20.

175: See Acts xvii. 34.

176: The extent of Dionysius' influence is shown by his writing an epistle to so
distant a church as that of Nicomedia in Bithynia, and also to the churches of
Pontus (see below). The fact that he considers it necessary to attack Marcionism
in this epistle to the Nicomedians is an indication of the wide and rapid spread
of that sect,-which indeed is known to us from many sources.

177: Gortyna was an important city in Crete, which was early the seat of a
bishop. Tradition, indeed, makes Titus the first bishop of the church there.

178: Of this Philip, bishop of Gortyna, and a contemporary of Dionysius, we know
only what Eusebius tells us here and in chap. 25.

179: Amastris was a city of Pontus, which is here mentioned for the first time
as the seat of a Christian church. Its bishop is referred to frequently in the
Acts of Councils during the next few centuries (see also note 12, below).

180: This Bacchylides is perhaps identical with the Bacchylus who was afterward
bishop of Corinth (Bk. V. chap. 22). Elpistus is another,vise unknown personage.

181: This Palmas, bishop of Amastris in Pontus, presided as senior bishop over a
council of the bishops of Pontus held toward the close of the century on the
paschal question (see Bk. V. chap. 23). Nothing more is known of him.

182: It is quite likely, as Salmon suggests (in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. ),
that Dionysius, who wrote against Marcion in this epistle to the Nicomedians,
also had Marcionism in view in writing on life and discipline to the churches of
Pontus and Crete. It was probably in consequence of reaction against their
strict discipline that he advo-cated the readmission to the Church of
excommunicated offenders, in this anticipating the later practice of the Roman
church, which was introduced by Callixtus and soon afterward became general,
though not without bitter opposition from many quarters. Harnack (
Dogmengeschichte, p. 332, note 4) throws doubt upon the correct-ness of this
report of Eusebius; but such doubt is unwarranted, for Eusebius had Dionysius'
epistle before him, and the position which he represents him as taking is quite
in accord with the mildness which he recommends to Pinytus, and is therefore
just what we should expect. The fact that Callixtusf principle is looked upon by
Terttulian and Hippolytus as an innovation does not militate at all against the
possibility that Dionysius in Corinth, or other individuals in other minor
churches, held the same principles some time before.

183: Cnossus, or Cnos, was the capital city of Crete.

184: On Soter, see chap. 19, note 2.

185: On Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, see Bk. III. chap. 16.

186: See above, note 1.

187: Compare Rev. xxii. 18.

188: A probable, though not exclusive, reference to Marcion, for he was by no
means the only one of that age that interpolated and mutilated the works of the
apostles to fit his theories. Apostolic works true and false-circulated in great
numbers, and were made the basis for the speculations and moral requirements of
many of the heretical schools of the second century.

189: ou toiautaij .

190: Chrysophora is an otherwise unknown person.

191: Eusebius is the only Eastern writer of the early centuries to mention
Theophilus and his writings. Among the Latin Fathers, Lactantius and Gennadius
refer to his work, ad Autolycum; and Jerome devotes chap. 25 of his de vir. ill.
to him. Beyond this there is no direct mention of Theophilus, or of his works,
during the early centuries (except that of Malalas, which will be referred to
below). Eusebius here calls Theophilus bishop of Antioch, and in chap. 20 makes
him the sixth bishop, as does also Jerome in his de vir. ill. chap. 25. But in
his epistle, ad Algas. (Migne, Ep. 121), Jerome calls him the seventh bishop of
Antioch, beginning his reckoning with the apostle Peter. Eusebius, in his
Chron., puts the accession of Theophilus into the ninth year of Marcus Aurelius
(169); and this may be at least approximately correct. The accession of his
successor Maximus is put into the seventeenth year (177); but this date is at
least four years too early, for his work, ad Autolycum, quotes from a work in
which the death of Marcus Aurelius (who died in 180) was mentioned, and hence
cannot have been written before 181 or 182. We know that his successor, Maximus,
became bishop sometime between 189 and 192, and hence Theophilus died between
181 and that time. We have only Eusebius' words (Jerome simply repeats Eusebius'
statement) for the fact that Theophilus was bishop of Antioch (his extant works
do not mention the fact, nor do those who quote from his writings), but there is
no good ground for doubting the truth of the report. We know nothing more about
his life.

192: In chap. 20, above.

193: This work against Hermogenes is no longer extant. Harnack (p. 294 ff.)
gives strong grounds for supposing that it was the common source from which
Tertullian, in his work ad Hermogenem, Hippolytus, in his Phil. VIII. 10 and X.
24, and Clement of Alexandria, in his Proph. Selections, 56, all drew. If this
be true, as seems probable, the Hermogenes attacked by these various writers. is
one man, and his chief heresy, as we learn from Tertullian and Hippolytus, was
that God did not create the world out of nothing, but only formed it out of
matter which, like himself, was eternally existent.

194: These catechetical works ( tina kathxhtika biblia

195: This work, which is also now lost, is mentioned by no other Father except
Jerome, who puts it first in his list of Theophilus' writings, but does not
characterize it in any way, though he says it was extant in his time. Irenaeus,
in four passages of his great work, exhibits striking parallels to Bk. II. chap.
25 of Theophilus' ad Autol., which have led to the assumption that he knew the
latter work. Harnack, however, on account of the shortness of time which elapsed
between the composition of the ad Autol. and Irenaeus' work, and also on account
of the nature of the resemblances between the parallel passages, thinks it
improbable that Iren`us used the ad Autol., and concludes that hew as acquainted
rather with Theophilus' work against Marcion, a conclusion which accords best
with the facts known to us.

196: Here, and in Bk. V. chap. 19, §1, Eusebius gives this hishop's name as
Maximinus. In the Chron. we find Macimoj 197: See above, chap. 23, §5.

198: Philip's work against Marcion which Eusebius mentions here is no longer
extant, and, so far as the writer knows, is mentioned by no other Father except
Jerome ( de vir. ill. 30 ), who tells us only what Eusebius records here, using,
however, the adjective praeclarum for Eusebius' dpondaiotaton .

199: On Irenaeus, see above, chap. 21, note 9.

200: Modestus, also, is a writer known to us only from Eusebius (here, and in
chap. 21) and from Jerome ( de vir. ill. 32 ). According to the latter, the work
against Marcion was still extant in his day, but he gives us no description of
it. He adds, however, that a number of spurious works ascribed to Modestus were
in circulation at that time ( Feruntur sub nomine ejus et alia syntagmata, sed
ab eruditis quasi yeudografa

201: The first extant notice of Melito, bishop of Sardis, is found in the letter
addressed by Polycrates to Bishop Victor of Rome (c. 190-202 a.d.) in support of
the Quartodeciman practice of the Asia Minor churches. A fragment of this letter
is given by Eusebius in Bk. V. chap. 24, and from it we learn that Melito also
favored the Quartodeciman practice, that he was a man whose walk and
conversation were altogether under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and that he
was buried at Sardis. Polycrates in this fragment calls Melito a eunuch. Whether
the word is to be understood in its literal sense or is to be taken as meaning
simply that Melito lived in "virgin continence" is disputed. In favor of the
latter interpretation may be urged the fact that the Greek word and its Latin
equivalent were very commonly used by the Fathers in this figurative sense, e.g.
by Athenagores, by Tertullian, by Clement of Alexandria, by Cassianus (whose
work on continence bore the title peri egkrateiaj, h peri eunouxiaj 202: On
Apolinarius and his writings, see chap. 27.

203: Marcus Aurelius.

204: The following list of Melito's works is at many points very uncertain,
owing to the various readings of the mss. and versions. We have as authorities
for the text, the Greek mss. of Eusebius, the History of Nicephorus, the
translation of Rufinus, chap. 24 of Jerome's de vir. ill., and the Syriac
version of this passage of Eusebius' History, which has been printed by Cureton,
in his Spic. Syr. p. 56 ff.

205: The quotation from this work given by Eusebius in §7, perhaps enables us to
fix approximately the date at which it was written. Rufinus reads Sergius
Paulus, instead of Servilius Paulus, which is found in all the Greek mss.
Sergius Paulus is known to have had his second consulship in 168, and it is
inferred by Wad-dington that he was proconsul about 164 to 166 (see Fastes des
provinces Asiatiques, chap. 2, §148). No Servilius Paulus is known in connection
with the province of Asia, and hence it seems probable that Rufinus is correct;
and if so, the work on the Passover was written early in the sixties. The
fragment which Eusebius gives in this chapter is the only part of his work that
is extant. It was undoubtedly in favor of the Quartodeciman practice, for
Polycrates, who was a decided Quartodeciman, cites Melito in support of his
position.

206: The exact reading at this point is disputed. I read, with a number of mss.
to peri politeiaj kai profhtwn ta instead of to kai peri politeiaj kai peri
profhtwn twn profhtwn instead of kai profhtwn . But this is supported by no ms.
authority, and cannot be accepted.

207: o peri ekklhsiaj 208: o peri kuriakhj logoj

209: Valesius, Otto, Heinichen, and other editors, following the majority of the
mss., read peri fusewj anqrwpou peri pistewj anqrwpou peri pistewj anqrwpou .
The text of Jerome is unfortunately very corrupt at this point. In the present
passage pistewj is better supported by tradition than fusewj , and at the same
time is the more difficult reading, and hence I have adopted it as more probably
representing the original.

210: o peri plasewj

211: All the Greek mss. combine these two titles into one, reading o peri
upakohj pistewj aisqhthriwn o peri upakohj pistewj, kai o peri aisqhthriwn o
peri upakohj (or akohj ) pistewj , omitting the second clause. Christophorsonus,
Stroth, Zimmermann, Burton, and Harnack consequently read o peri upakohj
pistewj, o peri aisqhthriwn , concluding that the words o peri after pistewj
have fallen out of the Greek text. I have adopted this reading in my
translation.

212: A serious difficulty arises in connection with this title from the fact
that most of the Greek mss. read o peri yuxhj kai swmatoj h nooj , while the
Syriac, Rufinus, and Jerome omit the h nooj entirely. Nicephorus and two of the
Greek mss. meanwhile read hn en oij , which is evidently simply a corruption of
h nooj , so that the Greek mss. are unanimous for this reading. Otto, Crusè, and
Salmon read kai nooj , but there is no authority for kai instead of h , and the
change cannot be admitted. The explanation which Otto gives (p. 376) of the
change of h to kai will not hold, as Harnack shows on p. 247, note 346. It seems
to me certain that the words h nooj did not stand in the original, but that the
word nooj , (either alone or preceded by h or kai ) was written upon the margin
by some scribe perhaps as an alternative to yuxhj , perhaps as an addition in
the interest of trichotomy, and was later inserted in the text after yuxhj and
swmatoj , under the impression that it was an alternative title of the book. My
reasons for this opinion are the agreement of the versions in the omission of
nooj , the impossibility of explaining the h before nooj in the original text,
the fact that in the Greek mss., in Rufinus, and in the Syriac, the words kai
peri yuxhj kai swmatoj are repeated further down in the list,-a repetition which
Harnack thinks was made inadvertently by Eusebius himself, and which in omitting
nooj confirms the omission of it in the present case,-and finally, a fact which
seems to me decisive, but which has apparently hitherto escaped notice, that the
nooj , follows instead of precedes the swmatoj , and thus breaks the logical
order, which would certainly have been preserved in the title of a book.

213: o peri loutrou

214: Apolinarius (according to chap. 27) also wrote a work On Truth, and the
place which it holds in that list, between an apologetical work addressed to the
Greeks and one addressed to the Jews, makes it probable that it too bore an
apologetic character, being perhaps devoted to showing that Christianity is
pre-eminently the truth. Melitos work on the same subject very likely bore a
similar character, as suggested by Salmon.

215: Six mss., with Nicephorus, read ktisewj , "creation," but five mss., with
the Syriac and Rufinus, and possibly Jerome, read pistewj . The latter reading
therefore has the strongest external testimony in its favor, but must be
rejected (with Stroth, Otto, Heinichen, Harnack, etc.) as evidently a dogmatic
correction of the fourth century, when there was an objection to the use of the
word ktisij pistewj instead of ktisewj , and like Rufinus divides the one work
of Ensebius into two.

216: All the Greek mss. read kai logoj autou peri profhteiaj peri logou tnj
profhteiaj autou . All three therefore connect the autou with the profhteiaj
instead of with the logoj , which of course is much more natural, since the
autou with the logoj seems quite unnecessary at this point. The translation of
the Syriac, Rufinus, and Jerome, however, would require peri profhteiaj autou or
peri thj autou profhteiaj , and there is no sign that the autou originally stood
in such connection with the profhteiaj . We must, therefore, reject the
rendering of these three versions as incorrect.

217: peri filoceniaj . After this title a few of the mss., with Rufinus and the
Syriac, add the words kai peri yuxhj kai swmatoj , a repetition of a title
already given (see above, note 12).

218: h kleij kleij 219: All the Greek mss. read kai ta peri tou diabolou, kai
tnj apokaluyewj 'Iwannou 220: o peri enswmatou qeou peri enswmatwewj feou , or
rather logou peri tou enswmaton einai ton qeon 221: epi pasi kai to proj
'Antwninon biblision . biblision

222: A Sagaris, bishop and martyr, and probably the same man, is mentioned by
Polycrates in his epistle to Victor (Euseb. V. 24) as buried in Laodicea. This
is all we know of him. The date of his martyrdom, and of the composition of the
work On the Passover, depends upon the date of the proconsulship of Servilius
(or Sergius) Paulus (see above, note 5). The words empesontoj kata kairon have
unnecessarily caused Salmon considerable trouble. The words kata kairon mean no
more than "properly, regularly, according to appointment or rule," and do not
render ekeinaij taij hmeraij superfluous, as he thinks. The clause kai egrafh
tauta ("and these were written") expresses result,-it was in consequence of the
passover strife that Melito wrote this work.

223: This work of Clement's, On the Passover, which he says he wrote on occasion
of Melito's work, was clearly written in reply to and therefore against the work
of Melito, not as a supplement to it, as Hefele supposes ( Conciliengesch. I.
299). The work of Clement (which is mentioned by Eusebius, VI. 13, in his list
of Clement's writings) is no longer extant, but some brief fragments of it have
been preserved (see Bk. VI. chap. 13, note 8).

224: This statement of Melito's is a very remarkable one. See chap. 8, note 14.

225: The resemblance between this extract from Melito's Apology and the fifth
chapter of Tertullian's Apology is close enough to tie striking, and too close
to be accidental. Tertullian's chapter is quite different from this, so far as
its arrangement and language are concerned, but the same thought underlies both:
That the emperors in general have protected Christianity; only Nero and
Domitian, the most wicked of them, have persecuted it; and that Christianity has
been a blessing to the reigns of all the better emperors. We cannot doubt that
Tertullian was acquainted with Melito's Apology, as well as with others of his
works.

226: euktaioj .

227: The reference here seems to be to the common belief that the Christians
were responsible for all the evils which at any time happened, such as
earthquakes, floods, famines, etc.

228: af wn kai to thj sukofantiaj alogw sunhqeia peri touj toioutouj ruhnai
sumbebhke yeudoj . The sentence is a difficult one and has been interpreted in
various ways, but the translation given in the text seems to me best to express
the writer's meaning.

229: ellrafwj 230: This epistle to Fundanus is given in chap. 9, above. Upon its
genuineness, see chap. 8, note 14.

231: On these epistles of Antoninus Pius, see chap. 13, note 9. These ordinances
to the Larisseans, Thessalonians, Athenians, and all the Greeks, are no longer
extant. What their character must have been is explained in the note just
referred to.

232: peri toutwn .

233: en dh taij grafeisaij autw eklogaij . Jerome speaks of this work as Eklogwn
'Antibolh Papisou kai filwnoj , New York, 1889).

234: This Onesimus is an otherwse unknown person.

235: Some mss., with Rufinus, place Leviticus before Numbers, but the best mss.,
followed by Heinichen, Burton, and others, give the opposite order.

236: yalmwn Dabid . Literally, "of the Psalms of David" [one book].

237: h kai Sofia : i.e. the Book of Proverbs (see above, p. 200).

238: Literally, "in one book" ( twn dwdeka en monobiblw ).

239: 'Esdraj : the Greek form of the Hebrew name )rz; Melito refers here to the
canonical Book of Ezra, which, among the Jews, commonly included our Ezra and
Nehemiah (see Bk. III. chap. 10, note 1).

240: The first extant notice of Apolinarius is that of Serapion, bishop of
Antioch from about 192 to 209 (see Harnack, Zeit des Ignatius, p. 46), in the
epistle quoted by Eusebius in V. 19. We learn from this notice that Apolinarius
was already dead when Serapion wrote (he calls him "most blessed bishop";
makariwtatoj emyuxon ton enanmqrwphsanta peri tou pasxa proj Ellhnaj, peri
eusebeiaj , and peri alhqeiaj . The first and last are mentioned by Eusebius,
but the second is a work otherwise unknown to us. There is no reason to suppose,
as some have done, that the peri eusebeiaj kai proj 'Ioudaiouj prwton kai
deuteron ). The words are found in manyof our editions, but are omitted by the
majority of the best Greek mss., and also by Rufinus and Jerome, and therefore
must be regarded as an interpolation; and so they are viewed by Heinichen,
Laemmer, Otto, Harnack, and others. Harnack suggests that they were inserted
under the influence of Bk. V. chap. 17, §5, where the works of Miltiades are
given. We thus have knowledge of six, and only six, distinct works of
Apolinarius, though, since no writer has pretended to give a complete list, it
is quite probable that he wrote many others.

241: On the approximate date of this Apology, see the previous note. No
fragments of the work are now extant, unless the account of the thundering
legion mentioned by Eusebius in Bk. V. chap. 5 belong to it (see the previous
note). Jerome speaks of the work as an insigne volumen pro fide Christianorum,
and in chap. 26, §1, Eusebius speaks of it as logoj uper thj mistewj . This has
given rise to the idea that the peri eusebeiaj

242: No fragments of this work are known to us. Nicephorus ( H. E. IV. 11) says
that it was in the form of a dialogue, and it is quite possible that he speaks
in this case from personal knowledge, for the work was still extant in the time
of Photius, who mentions it in Cod. 14 (see Harnack, p. 236).

243: No fragments of this work are extant, and its nature is unknown to us. It
may have resembled the work of Melito upon the same subject (see the previous
chapter). The work is mentioned by Photius as one of three, which he had himself
seen.

244: Eusebius states here that the works against the Montanists were written
later than the other works mentioned. Where he got this information we do not
know; it is possible, as Harnack suggests, that he saw from the writings
themselves that Marcus Aurelius was no longer alive when they were composed.
Eusebius speaks very highly of these Anti-Montanistic works, and in Bk. V. chap.
16, §1, he speaks of Apolinarius as a "powerful weapon and antagonist" of the
Montanists. And yet it is a remarkable fact that he does not take his account of
the Montanists from the works of Apolinarius, but from later writings. This fact
can be explained only as Harnack explains it by supposing that Apolinarius was
not decided and clear enough in his opposition to the sect. The writer from whom
Eusebius quotes is certainly strong enough in his denunciations to suit Eusebius
or any one else. Eusebius' statement, that the Montanistic movement was only
beginning at the time Apolinarius wrote against it (i.e. according to him
between 175 and 180), is far from the truth (see on this subject, Bk. V. chap.
16, note 12). How many of these works Apolinarius wrote, and whether they were
books, or merely letters, we do not know. Eusebius says simply kai a meta tauta
sunegraye . Serapion (in Eusebius, Bk. V. chap. 19) calls them grammata grammata
are taken as "letters" by Valesius, Stroth, Danz, and Salmon; but Otto contends
that the word grammata 245: kainotomqeishj .

246: Of this Musanus, we know only what Eusebius tells us here, for Jerome ( de
vir. ill. 31) and Theodoret ( Haer. Fab. I. 21) simply repeat the account of
Eusebius. It is clear from Eusebius' language, that he had not himself seen this
work of Musanus; he had simply heard of it. Here, and in chap. 21, Eusebius
assigns the activity of Musanus to the reign of Marcus Aurelius, making him a
contemporary of Melito, Apolinarius, Irenaeus, &c. But in the Chron. he is put
much later. The Armenian version, under the year of Abr. 2220 (the eleventh year
of Septimius), has the entry Musanus noster scriptor cognoscebatur. Jerome,
under the same year (2220 of Abr., but twelfth year of Severus) has Musanus
nostrae filosofiae scriptor agnoscitur; while Syncellus, under the year of Abr.
2231 (fourth year of Caracalla) has Mousianoj ekklhsiastikoj suggrafeuj
egnwrizeto 247: On Tattan and the Encratites, see the next chapter.

248:

249: In chap. 16.

250: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I. 28. 1.

251: 'Egkrateij egkratitai egkrathtai

252: On Saturninus and on Marcion, see chap. 7, note 6, and 11, note 15. On
their asceticism, see especially Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I. 24.

253: twn legomenwn emyuxwn : i.e. animal food in general.

254: Cf. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. III. 23, where this opinion of Tatian's is refuted
at considerable length. The opinion seems a little peculiar, but was a not
unnatural consequence of Tatian's strong dualism, and of his doctrine of a
conditional immortality for those who have been reunited with the Holy Spirit
who took his departure at the time of the fall (cf. especially his Oratio, chap.
15). That Adam, who, by his fall, brought about this separation, which has been
of such direful consequence to the race, should be saved, was naturally to
Tation a very repugnant thought. He seems, moreover, to have based his opinion,
as Donaldson remarks, npon exegetical grounds interpreting the passage in regard
to Adam (1 Cor. xv. 22) as meaning that Adam is and remains the principle of
death, and as such, of course, cannot himself enjoy life (see Irenaeus, ibid. ).
This is quite in accord with the distinction between the psychical and physical
man which he draws in his Oratio. It is quite possible that he was moved in part
also by the same motive which led Marcion to deny the salvation of Abraham and
the other patriarchs (see Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I. 27 and IV. 8), namely, the
opposition between the God of the Old Testament and the Christ of the New
Testament, which led him to assert that those who depended on the former were
lost. We learn from Clement ( Strom. III. 12) and from Origen ( de Orat. chap.
24) that among Tatian's heretical works was one in which he discussed the early
chapters of Genesis and perhaps it was in this work that he developed his
peculiar views' in regard to Adam.

255: On Valentinus, see chap. 11, note 1. That Tatian was Gnostic in many of his
tendencies is plain enough not only from these words of Irenaeus, but also from
the notices of him in other writers (cf. especially Hippolytus, Phil. VIII. 9).
To what extent he carried his Gnosticism, however, and exactly in what it
consisted, we cannot tell. He can hardly have been a pronounced follower of
Valentinus and a zealous defender of the doctrine of Aeons, or we should find
him connected more prominently with that school. He was, in fact, a decided
eclectic, and a follower of no one school, and doubtless this subject, like many
others, occupied but a subordinate place ia his speculations.

256: That the Severians, whoever they were, were Encratites in the wide sense,
that is, strict abstainers from flesh, wine, and marriage, cannot be denied
(compare with this description of Eusebius that of Epiphanius in Haer. XLV.,
also Theodoret's Haer. Fab. I. 21, who says that Apolinarius wrote against the
Severinn Encratites,-a sign that the Severians and the Encratites were in some
way connected in tradition even though Theodoret's statement may be unreliable).
But that they were connected with Tattan and the Encratitic sect to which he
belonged, as Eusebius states, is quite out of the question. Tatian was a decided
Paulinist (almost as much so as Marcion himself). He cannot, therefore, have had
anything to do with this Ebionitic, anti-Pauline sect, known as the Severtans.
Whether there was ever such a person as Severus, or whether the name arose later
to explain the name of the sect (possibly taken from the Latin severus,
"severe," as Salmon suggests), as the name Ebion was invented to explain the
term Ebionites, we do not know. We are ignorant also of the source from which
Eusebius took his description of the Severians, as we do not find them mentioned
in anyof the earlier anti-heretical works. Ensebius must have heard, as
Epiphanius did, that they were extreme ascetics, and this must have led him, in
the absence of specific information as to their exact position, to join them
with Tartan and the Encratites,-a connection which can be justified on no other
ground.

257: ouk oid opwj 258: to dia tessarwn

259: i.e. of Paul, who was quite commonly called simply o apostoloj . This seems
to imply that Tartan wrote a work on Paul's epistles (see note 1, above).

260: logoj o proj Ellhnaj

261: Tatian devotes a number of chapters to this subject (XXXI., XXXV.-XLI).
Eusebius mentions him, with Clement, Africanus, Josephus, and Justus, in the
preface to his Chron. (Schöne, II. p. 4), as a witness to the antiquity of
Moses, and it is probable that Julius. Africanns drew from him in the
composition of his chronological work (cf. Harnack, ibid. p. 224). Clement of
Alexandria likewise made large Use of his chronological results (see especially
his Strom. I. 21), and Origen refers to them in his Contra Cels. I. 16. It was
largely on account of these chapters on the antiquity of Moses that Tatian's
Oratio was held in such high esteem, while his other works disappeared.

262: i.e. Mesopotamia: epi thj meshj twn potamwn .

263: Bardesanes or Bardaisan (Greek, Bardhsanhj

264: gnwrimoi .

265: See note 2.

266: Hort conjectures that Caracalla, who spent the winter of 216 in Edessa, and
threw the Prince Bar-Manu into captivity, may have allied himself with a party
which was discontented with the rule of that prince, and which instituted a
heathen reaction, and that this was the occasion of the persecution referred to
here, in which Bardesanes proved his firmness in the faith as recorded by
Epiphanius.

267: See note 2.

268: It is undoubtedly quite true, as remarked in note 2, that Bardesanes, after
leaving Valentianism, still retained views acquired under its influence, and
that these colored all his subsequent thinking. This fact may have been manifest
to Eusebius, who had evidently read many of Bardesanes' works, and who speaks
here as if from personal knowledge.

269: On Soter, see chap. 19 note 2.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 16: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 5
========================================================================

Book V.

Introduction.

Chapter I. The Number of Those Who Fought for Religion in Gaul Under Verus and
the Nature of Their Conflicts.

Chapter II. The Martyrs, Beloved of God, Kindly Ministered Unto Those Who Fell
in the Persecution.

Chapter III. The Vision Which Appeared in a Dream to the Witness Attalus.

Chapter IV. Irenaeus Commended by the Witnesses in a Letter.

Chapter V. God Sent Rain from Heaven for Marcus Aurelius Caesar in Answer to the
Prayers of Our People.

Chapter VI. Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome.

Chapter VII. Even Down to Those Times Miracles Were Performed by the Faithful.

Chapter VIII. The Statements of Irenaeus in Regard to the Divine Scriptures.

Chapter IX. The Bishops Under Commodus.

Chapter X. Pantaenus the Philosopher.

Chapter XI. Clement of Alexandria.

Chapter XII. The Bishops in Jerusalem.

Chapter XIII. Rhodo and His Account of the Dissension of Marcion.

Chapter XIV. The False Prophets of the Phrygians.

Chapter XV. The Schism of Blastus at Rome.222 Chapter XVI. The Circumstances
Related of Montanus and His False Prophets.224 Chapter XVII. Miltiades and His
Works.

Chapter XVIII. The Manner in Which Apollonius Refuted the Phrygians, and the
Persons273 Whom He Mentions.

Chapter XIX. Serapion on the Heresy of the Phrygians.

Chapter XX. The Writings of Irenaeus Against the Schismatics at Rome.

Chapter XXI. How Appolonius Suffered Martyrdom at Rome.

Chapter XXII. The Bishops that Were Well Known at This Time.

Chapter XXIII. The Question Then Agitated Concerning the Passover.

Chapter XXIV. The Disagreement in Asia.

Chapter XXV. How All Came to an Agreement Respecting the Passover.

Chapter XXVI. The Elegant Works of Irenaeus Which Have Come Down to Us.

Chapter XXVII. The Works of Others that Flourished at that Time.

Chapter XXVIII. Those Who First Advanced the Heresy of Artemon; Their Manner of
Life, and How They Dared to Corrupt the Sacred Scriptures.

Book V.

Introduction.

1 Soter,1 bishop of the church of Rome, died after an episcopate of eight years,
and was succeeded by Eleutherus,2 the twelfth from the apostles. In the
seventeenth year of the Emperor Antoninus Verus,3 the persecution of our people
was rekindled more fiercely in certain districts on account of an insurrection
of the masses in the cities; and judging by the number in a single nation,
myriads suffered martyrdom throughout the world. A record of this was written
for posterity, and in truth it is worthy of perpetual remembrance.

2 A full account, containing the most reliable information on the subject, is
given in our Collection of Martyrdoms,4 which constitutes a narrative
instructive as well as historical. I will repeat here such portions of this
account as may be needful for the present purpose.

3 Other writers of history record the victories of war and trophies won from
enemies, the skill of generals, and the manly bravery of soldiers, defiled with
blood and with innumerable slaughters for the sake of children and country and
other possessions.

4 But our narrative of the government of God5 will record in ineffaceable
letters the most peaceful wars waged in behalf of the peace of the soul, and
will tell of men doing brave deeds for truth rather than country, and for piety
rather than dearest friends. It will hand down to imperishable remembrance the
discipline and the much-tried fortitude of the athletes of religion, the
trophies won from demons, the victories over invisible enemies, and the crowns
placed upon all their heads.

Chapter I. The Number of Those Who Fought for Religion in Gaul Under Verus and
the Nature of Their Conflicts.

1 The country in which the arena was prepared for them was Gaul, of which Lyons
and Vienne6 are the principal and most celebrated cities. The Rhone passes
through both of them, flowing in a broad stream through the entire region.

2 The most celebrated churches in that country sent an account of the witnesses7
to the churches in Asia and Phrygia, relating in the following manner what was
done among them.

I will give their own words.8

3 "The servants of Christ residing at Vienne and Lyons, in Gaul, to the brethren
through out Asia and Phrygia, who hold the same faith and hope of redemption,
peace and grace and glory from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord."

4 Then, having related some other matters, they begin their account in this
manner: "The greatness of the tribulation in this region, and the fury of the
heathen against the saints, and the sufferings of the blessed witnesses, we
cannot recount accurately, nor indeed could they possibly be recorded.

5 For with all his might the adversary fell upon us, giving us a foretaste of
his unbridled activity at his future coming. He endeavored in every manner to
practice and exercise his servants against the servants of God, not only
shutting us out from houses and baths and markets, but forbidding any of us to
be seen in any place whatever.

6 But the grace of God led the conflict against him, and delivered the weak, and
set them as firm pillars, able through patience to endure all the wrath of the
Evil One. And they joined battle with him, undergoing all kinds of shame and
injury; and regarding their great sufferings as little, they hastened to Christ,
manifesting truly that `the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be
compared with the glory which shall be revealed to us-ward.'9

7 First of all, they endured nobly the injuries heaped upon them by the
populace; clamors and blows and draggings and robberies and stonings and
imprisonments,10 and all things which an infuriated mob delight in inflicting on
enemies and adversaries.

8 Then, being taken to the forum by the chiliarch11 and the authorities of the
city, they were examined in the presence of the whole multitude, and having
confessed, they were imprisoned until the arrival of the governor.

9 When, afterwards, they were brought before him, and he treated us with the
utmost cruelty, Vettius Epagathus,12 one of the brethren, and a man filled with
love for God and his neighbor, interfered. His life was so consistent that,
although young, he had attained a reputation equal to that of the elder
Zacharias: for he `walked in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord
blameless,'13 and was untiring in every good work for his neighbor, zealous for
God and fervent in spirit. Such being his character, he could not endure the
unreasonable judgment against us, but was filled with indignation, and asked to
be permitted to testify in behalf of his brethren, that there is among us
nothing ungodly or impious.

10 But those about the judgment seat cried out against him, for he was a man of
distinction; and the governor refused to grant his just request, and merely
asked if he also were a Christian. And he, confessing this with a loud voice,
was himself taken into the order14 of the witnesses, being called the Advocate
of the Christians, but having the Advocate15 in himself, the Spirit16 more
abundantly than Zacharias.17 He showed this by the fullness of his love, being
well pleased even to lay down his life18 in defense of the brethren. For he was
and is a true disciple of Christ, `following the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.'19

11 "Then the others were divided,20 and the proto-witnesses were manifestly
ready, and finished their confession with all eagerness. But some appeared
unprepared and untrained, weak as yet, and unable to endure so great a conflict.
About ten of these proved abortions,21 causing us great grief and sorrow beyond
measure, and impairing the zeal of the others who had not yet been seized, but
who, though suffering all kinds of affliction, continued constantly with the
witnesses and did not forsake them.

12 Then all of us feared greatly on account of uncertainty as to their
confession; not because we dreaded the sufferings to be endured, but because we
looked to the end, and were afraid that some of them might fall away.

13 But those who were worthy were seized day by day, filling up their number, so
that all the zealous persons, and those through whom especially our affairs had
been established, were collected together out of the two churches.

14 And some of our heathen servants also were seized, as the governor had
commanded that all of us should be examined publicly. These, being ensnared by
Satan, and fearing for themselves the tortures which they beheld the saints
endure,22 and being also urged on by the soldiers, accused us falsely of
Thyestean banquets and Oedipodean intercourse,23 and of deeds which are not only
unlawful for us to speak of or to think, but which we cannot believe were ever
done by men.

15 When these accusations were reported, all the people raged like wild beasts
against us, so that even if any had before been moderate on account of
friendship, they were now exceedingly furious and gnashed their teeth against
us. And that which was spoken by our Lord was fulfilled: `The time will come
when whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.'24

16 Then finally the holy witnesses endured sufferings beyond description, Satan
striving earnestly that some of the slanders might be uttered by them also?25

17 "But the whole wrath of the populace, and governor, and soldiers was aroused
exceedingly against Sanctus, the deacon from Vienne,26 and Maturus, a late
convert, yet a noble combatant, and against Attalus, a native of Pergamos27
where he had always been a pillar and foundation, and Blandina, through whom
Christ showed that things which appear mean and obscure and despicable to men
are with God of great glory,28 through love toward him manifested in power, and
not boasting in appearance.

18 For while we all trembled, and her earthly mistress, who was herself also one
of the witnesses, feared that on account of the weakness of her body, she would
be unable to make bold confession, Blandina was filled with such power as to be
delivered and raised above those who were torturing her by turns from morning
till evening in every manner, so that they acknowledged that they were
conquered, and could do nothing more to her. And they were astonished at her
endurance, as her entire body was mangled and broken; and they testified that
one of these forms of torture was sufficient to destroy life, not to speak of so
many and so great sufferings.

19 But the blessed woman, like a noble athlete, renewed her strength in her
confession; and her comfort and recreation and relief from the pain of her
sufferings was in exclaiming, `I am a Christian, and there is nothing vile done
by us.'

20 "But Sanctus also endured marvelously and superhumanly29 all the outrages
which he suffered. While the wicked men hoped, by the continuance and severity
of his tortures to wring something from him which he ought not to say, he girded
himself against them with such firmness that he would not even tell his name, or
the nation or city to which he belonged, or whether he was bond or free, but
answered in the Roman tongue to all their questions, `I am a Christian.' He
confessed this instead of name and city and race and everything besides, and the
people heard from him no other word.

21 There arose therefore on the part of the governor and his tormentors a great
desire to conquer him; but having nothing more that they could do to him, they
finally fastened red-hot brazen plates to the most tender parts of his body.

22 And these indeed were burned, but he continued unbending and unyielding, firm
in his confession, and refreshed and strengthened by the heavenly fountain of
the water of life, flowing from the bowels of Christ.

23 And his body was a witness of his sufferings, being one complete wound and
bruise, drawn out of shape, and altogether unlike a human form. Christ,
suffering in him, manifested his glory, delivering him from his adversary, and
making him an ensample for the others, showing that nothing is fearful where the
love of the Father is, and nothing painful where there is the glory of Christ.

24 For when the wicked men tortured him a second time after some days, supposing
that with his body swollen and inflamed to such a degree that he could not bear
the touch of a hand, if they should again apply the same instruments, they would
overcome him, or at least by his death under his sufferings others would be made
afraid, not only did not this occur, but, contrary to all human expectation, his
body arose and stood erect in the midst of the subsequent torments, and resumed
its original appearance and the use of its limbs, so that, through the grace of
Christ, these second sufferings became to him, not torture, but healing.

25 "But the devil, thinking that he had already consumed Biblias, who was one of
those who had denied Christ, desiring to increase her condemnation through the
utterance of blasphemy,30 brought her again to the torture, to compel her, as
already feeble and weak, to report impious things concerning us.

26 But she recovered herself under the suffering, and as if awaking from a deep
sleep, and reminded by the present anguish of the eternal punishment in hell,
she contradicted the blasphemers. `How,' she said, `could those eat children who
do not think it lawful to taste the blood even of irrational animals?' And
thenceforward she confessed herself a Christian, and was given a place in the
order of the witnesses.

27"But as the tyrannical tortures were made by Christ of none effect through the
patience of the blessed, the devil invented other contrivances,-confinement in
the dark and most loathsome parts of the prison, stretching of the feet to the
fifth hole in the stocks,31 and the other outrages which his servants are
accustomed to inflict upon the prisoners when furious and filled with the devil.
A great many were suffocated in prison, being chosen by the Lord for this manner
of death, that he might manifest in them his glory.

28 For some, though they had been tortured so cruelly that it seemed impossible
that they could live, even with the most careful nursing, yet, destitute of
human attention, remained in the prison, being strengthened by the Lord, and
invigorated both in body and soul; and they exhorted and encouraged the rest.
But such as were young, and arrested recently, so that their bodies had not
become accustomed to torture, were unable to endure the severity of their
confinement, and died in prison. 29 "The blessed Pothinus, who had been
entrusted with the bishopric of Lyons, was dragged to the judgment seat. He was
more than ninety years of age, and very infirm, scarcely indeed able to breathe
because of physical weakness; but he was strengthened by spiritual zeal through
his earnest desire for martyrdom. Though his body was worn out by old age and
disease, his life was preserved that Christ might triumph in it.

30 When he was brought by the soldiers to the tribunal, accompanied by the civil
magistrates and a multitude who shouted against him in every manner as if he
were Christ himself, he bore noble witness.

31 Being asked by the governor, Who was the God of the Christians, he replied,
`If thou art worthy, thou shalt know.' Then he was dragged away harshly, and
received blows of every kind. Those near him struck him with their hands and
feet, regardless of his age; and those at a distance hurled at him whatever they
could seize; all of them thinking that they would be guilty of great wickedness
and impiety if any possible abuse were omitted. For thus they thought to avenge
their own deities. Scarcely able to breathe, he was cast into prison and died
after two days.

32 "Then a certain great dispensation of God occurred, and the compassion of
Jesus appeared beyond measure,32 in a manner rarely seen among the brotherhood,
but not beyond the power of Christ.

33 For those who had recanted at their first arrest were imprisoned with the
others, and endured terrible sufferings, so that their denial was of no profit
to them even for the present. But those who confessed what they were were
imprisoned as Christians, no other accusation being brought against them. But
the first were treated afterwards as murderers and defiled, and were punished
twice as severely as the others.

34 For the joy of martyrdom, and the hope of the promises, and love for Christ,
and the Spirit of the Father supported the latter; but their consciences so
greatly distressed the former that they were easily distinguishable from all the
rest by their very countenances when they were led forth.

35 For the first went out rejoicing, glory and grace being blended in their
faces, so that even their bonds seemed like beautiful ornaments, as those of a
bride adorned with variegated golden fringes; and they were perfumed with the
sweet savor of Christ,33 so that some supposed they had been anointed with
earthly ointment. But the others were downcast and humble and dejected and
filled with every kind of disgrace, and they were reproached by the heathen as
ignoble and weak, bearing the accusation of murderers, and having lost the one
honorable and glorious and life-giving Name. The rest, beholding this, were
strengthened, and when apprehended, they confessed without hesitation, paying no
attention to the persuasions of the devil."

36 After certain other words they continue:

"After these things, finally, their martyrdoms (were divided into every form.34
For plaiting a crown of various colors and of all kinds of flowers, they
presented it to the Father. It was proper therefore that the noble athletes,
having endured a manifold strife, and conquered grandly, should receive the
crown, great and incorruptible.

37 "Maturus, therefore, and Sanctus and Blandina and Attalus were led to the
amphitheater to be exposed to the wild beasts, and to give to the heathen public
a spectacle of cruelty, a day for fighting with wild beasts being specially
appointed on account of our people.

38 Both Maturus and Sanctus passed again through every torment in the
amphitheater, as if they had suffered nothing before, or rather, as if, having
already conquered their antagonist in many contests,35 they were now striving
for the crown itself. They endured again the customary running of the gauntlet36
and the violence of the wild beasts, and everything which the furious people
called for or desired, and at last, the iron chair in which their bodies being
roasted, tormented them with the fumes.

39 And not with this did the persecutors cease, but were yet more mad against
them, determined to overcome their patience. But even thus they did not hear a
word from Sanctus except the confession which he had uttered from the beginning.

40 These, then, after their life had continued for a long time through the great
conflict, were at last sacrificed, having been made throughout that day a
spectacle to the world, in place of the usual variety of combats.

41 "But Blandina was suspended on a stake, and exposed to be devoured by the
wild beasts who should attack her.37 And because she appeared as if hanging on a
cross, and because of her earnest prayers, she inspired the combatants with
great zeal. For they looked on her in her conflict, and beheld with their
outward eyes, in the form of their sister, him who was crucified for them, that
he might persuade those who believe on him, that every one who suffers for the
glory of Christ has fellowship always with the living God.

42 As none of the wild beasts at that time touched her, she was taken down from
the stake, and cast again into prison. She was preserved thus for another
contest, that, being victorious in more conflicts, she might make the punishment
of the crooked serpent irrevocable;38 and, though small and weak and despised,
yet clothed with Christ the mighty and conquering Athlete, she might arouse the
zeal of the brethren, and, having overcome the adversary many times might
receive, through her conflict, the crown incorruptible.

43 "But Attalus was called for loudly by the people, because he was a person of
distinction. He entered the contest readily on account of a good conscience and
his genuine practice in Christian discipline, and as he had always been a
witness for the truth among us.

44 He was led around the amphitheater, a tablet being carried before him on
which was written in the Roman language `This is Attalus the Christian,' and the
people were filled with indignation against him. But when the governor learned
that he was a Roman, he commanded him to be taken back with the rest of those
who were in prison concerning whom he had written to Caear, and whose answer he
was awaiting.

45 "But the intervening time was not wasted nor fruitless to them; for by their
patience the measureless compassion of Christ was manifested. For through their
continued life the dead were made alive, and the witnesses showed favor to those
who had failed to witness. And the virgin mother had much joy in receiving alive
those whom she had brought forth as dead.39

46 For through their influence many who had denied were restored, and
re-begotten, and rekindled with life, and learned to confess. And being made
alive and strengthened, they went to the judgment seat to be again interrogated
by the governor; God, who desires not the death of the sinner,40 but mercifully
invites to repentance, treating them with kindness.

47 For Caesar commanded that they should be put to death,41 but that any who
might deny should be set free. Therefore, at the beginning of the public
festival42 which took place there, and which was attended by crowds of men from
all nations, the governor brought the blessed ones to the judgment seat, to make
of them a show and spectacle for the multitude. Wherefore also he examined them
again, and beheaded those who appeared to possess Roman citizenship, but he sent
the others to the wild beasts.

48 "And Christ was glorified greatly in those who had formerly denied him, for,
contrary to the expectation of the heathen, they confessed. For they were
examined by themselves, as about to be set free; but confessing, they were added
to the order of the witnesses. But some continued without, who had never
possessed a trace of faith, nor any apprehension of the wedding garment,43 nor
an understanding of the fear of God; but, as sons of perdition, they blasphemed
the Way through their apostasy.

49 But all the others were added to the Church. While these were being examined,
a certain Alexander, a Phrygian by birth, and physician by profession, who had
resided in Gaul for many years, and was well known to all on account of his love
to God and boldness of speech (for he was not without a share of apostolic
grace), standing before the judgment seat, and by signs encouraging them to
confess, appeared to those standing by as if in travail.

50 But the people being enraged because those who formerly denied now confessed,
cried out against Alexander as if he were the cause of this. Then the governor
summoned him and inquired who he was. And when he answered that he was a
Christian, being very angry he condemned him to the wild beasts. And on the next
day he entered along with Attalus. For to please the people, the governor had
ordered Attalus again to the wild beasts.

51 And they were tortured in the amphitheater with all the instruments contrived
for that purpose, and having endured a very great conflict, were at last
sacrificed. Alexander neither groaned nor murmured in any manner, but communed
in his heart with God.

52 But when Attalus was placed in the iron seat, and the fumes arose from his
burning body, he said to the people in the Roman language: `Lo! this which ye do
is devouring men; but we do not devour men; nor do any other wicked thing.' And
being asked, what name God has, he replied, `God has not a name as man has.'

53 "After all these, on the last day of the contests, Blandina was again brought
in, with Ponticus, a boy about fifteen years old. They had been brought every
day to witness the sufferings of the others, and had been pressed to swear by
the idols. But because they remained steadfast and despised them, the multitude
became furious, so that they had no compassion for the youth of the boy nor
respect for the sex of the woman.

54 Therefore they exposed them to all the terrible sufferings and took them
through the entire round of torture, repeatedly urging them to swear, but being
unable to effect this; for Ponticus, encouraged by his sister so that even the
heathen could see that she was confirming and strengthening him, having nobly
endured every torture, gave up the ghost.

55 But the blessed Blandina, last of all, having, as a noble mother, encouraged
her children and sent them before her victorious to the King, endured herself
all their conflicts and hastened after them, glad and rejoicing in her departure
as if called to a marriage supper, rather than cast to wild beasts.

56 And, after the scourging, after the wild beasts, after the roasting seat,44
she was finally enclosed in a net, and thrown before a bull. And having been
tossed about by the animal, but feeling none of the things which were happening
to her, on account of her hope and firm hold upon what had been entrusted to
her, and her communion with Christ, she also was sacrificed. And the heathen
themselves confessed that never among them had a woman endured so many and such
terrible tortures.

57 "But not even thus was their madness and cruelty toward the saints satisfied.
For, incited by the Wild Beast, wild and barbarous tribes were not easily
appeased, and their violence found another peculiar opportunity in the dead
bodies45

58 For, through their lack of manly reason, the fact that they had been
conquered did not put them to shame, but rather the more enkindled their wrath
as that of a wild beast, and aroused alike the hatred of governor and people to
treat us unjustly; that the Scripture might be fulfilled: `He that is lawless,
let him be lawless still, and he that is righteous, let him be righteous
still.'46

59 For they cast to the dogs those who had died of suffocation in the prison,
carefully guarding them by night and day, lest any one should be buried by us.
And they exposed the remains left by the wild beasts and by fire, mangled and
charred, and placed the heads of the others by their bodies, and guarded them in
like manner from burial by a watch of soldiers for many days.

60 And some raged and gnashed their teeth against them, desiring to execute more
severe vengeance upon them; but others laughed and mocked at them, magnifying
their own idols, and imputed to them the punishment of the Christians. Even the
more reasonable, and those who had seemed to sympathize somewhat, reproached
them often, saying, `Where is their God, and what has their religion, which they
have chosen rather than life, profited them?'

61 So various was their conduct toward us; but we were in deep affliction
because we could not bury the bodies. For neither did night avail us for this
purpose, nor did money persuade, nor entreaty move to compassion; but they kept
watch in every way, as if the prevention of the burial would be of some great
advantage to them." In addition, they say after other things:

62 "The bodies of the martyrs, having thus in every manner been exhibited and
exposed for six days, were afterward burned and reduced to ashes, and swept into
the Rhone by the wicked men, so that no trace of them might appear on the earth.

63 And this they did, as if able to conquer God, and prevent their new birth;
`that,' as they said, `they may have no hope of a resurrection,47 through trust
in which they bring to us this foreign and new religion, and despise terrible
things, and are ready even to go to death with joy. Now let us see if they will
rise again, and if their God is able to help them, and to deliver them out of
our hands.'"

Chapter II. The Martyrs, Beloved of God, Kindly Ministered Unto Those Who Fell
in the Persecution.

1 Such things happened to the churches of Christ under the above-mentioned
emperor,48 from which we may reasonably conjecture the occurrences in the other
provinces. It is proper to add other selections from the same letter, in which
the moderation and compassion of these witnesses is recorded in the following
words:

2 "They were also so zealous in their imitation of Christ,-`who, being in the
form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God,'49 -that,
though they had attained such honor, and had borne witness, not once or twice,
but many times,-having been brought back to prison from the wild beasts, covered
with burns and scars and wounds,-yet they did not proclaim themselves witnesses,
nor did they suffer us to address them by this name. If any one of us, in letter
or conversation, spoke of them as witnesses, they rebuked him sharply.

3 For they conceded cheerfully the appellation of Witness to Christ `the
faithful and true Witness,'50 and `firstborn of the dead,'51 and prince of the
life of God;52 and they reminded us of the witnesses who had already departed,
and said, `They are already witnesses whom Christ has deemed worthy to be taken
up in their confession, having sealed their testimony by their departure; but we
are lowly and humble confessors.'53 And they besought the brethren with tears
that earnest prayers should be offered that they might be made perfect.54

4 They showed in their deeds the power of `testimony,' manifesting great
boldness toward all the brethren, and they made plain their nobility through
patience and fearlessness and courage, but they refused the title of Witnesses
as distinguishing them from their brethren,55 being filled with the fear of
God."

5 A little further on they say: "They humbled themselves under the mighty hand,
by which they are now greatly exalted.56 They defended all,57 but accused none.
They absolved all, but bound none.58 And they prayed for those who had inflicted
cruelties upon them, even as Stephen, the perfect witness, `Lord, lay not this
sin to their charge.'59 But if he prayed for those who stoned him, how much more
for the brethren!"

6 And again after mentioning other matters, they say:

"For, through the genuineness of their love, their greatest contest with him was
that the Beast, being choked, might cast out alive those whom he supposed he had
swallowed. For they did not boast over the fallen, but helped them in their need
with those things in which they themselves abounded, having the compassion of a
mother, and shedding many tears on their account before the Father.

7 They asked for life, and he gave it to them, and they shared it with their
neighbors. Victorious over everything, they departed to God. Having always loved
peace, and having commended peace to us60 they went in peace to God, leaving no
sorrow to their mother, nor division or strife to the brethren, but joy and
peace and concord and love."

8 This record of the affection of those blessed ones toward the brethren that
had fallen may be profitably added on account of the inhuman and unmerciful
disposition of those who, after these events, acted unsparingly toward the
members of Christ.61 Chapter III. The Vision Which Appeared in a Dream to the
Witness Attalus.

1 The same letter of the above-mentioned witnesses contains another account
worthy of remembrance. No one will object to our bringing it to the knowledge of
our readers. It runs as follows: "For a certain Alcibiades,62 who was one of
them, led a very austere life, partaking of nothing whatever but bread and
water. When he endeavored to continue this same sort of life in prison, it was
revealed to Attalus after his first conflict in the amphitheater that Alcibiades
was not doing well in refusing the creatures of God and placing a
stumbling-block before others.

3 And Alcibiades obeyed, and partook of all things without restraint, giving
thanks to God. For they were not deprived of the grace of God, but the Holy
Ghost was their counselor." Let this suffice for these matters.

4 The followers of Montanus,63 Alcibiades64 and Theodotus65 in Phrygia were now
first giving wide circulation to their assumption in regard to prophecy,-for the
many other miracles that, through the gift of God, were still wrought in the
different churches caused their prophesying to be readily credited by many,-and
as dissension arose concerning them, the brethren in Gaul set forth their own
prudent and most orthodox judgment in the matter, and published also several
epistles from the witnesses that had been put to death among them. These they
sent, while they were still in prison, to the brethren throughout Asia and
Phrygia, and also to Eleutherus,66 who was then bishop of Rome, negotiating for
the peace of the churches.67 Chapter IV. Irenaeus Commended by the Witnesses in
a Letter.

1 The same witnesses also recommended Irenaeus,68 who was already at that time a
presbyter of the parish of Lyons, to the above-mentioned bishop of Rome, saying
many favorable things in regard to him, as the following extract shows:

2 "We pray, father Eleutherus, that you may rejoice in God in all things and
always. We have requested our brother and comrade Irenaeus to carry this letter
to you, and we ask you to hold him in esteem, as zealous for the covenant of
Christ. For if we thought that office could confer righteousness upon any one,
we should commend him among the first as a presbyter of the church, which is his
position."

3 Why should we transcribe the catalogue of the witnesses given in the letter
already mentioned, of whom some were beheaded, others cast to the wild beasts,
and others fell asleep in prison, or give the number of confessors69 still
surviving at that time? For whoever desires can readily find the full account by
consulting the letter itself, which, as I have said, is recorded in our
Collection of Martyrdoms.70 Such were the events which happened under
Antoninus.71 Chapter V. God Sent Rain from Heaven for Marcus Aurelius Caesar in
Answer to the Prayers of Our People.

1 It is reported72 that Marcus Aurelius Caesar, brother of Antoninus,73 being
about to engage in battle with the Germans and Sarmatians, was in great trouble
on account of his army suffering from thirst.74 But the soldiers of the
so-called Melitene legion,75 through the faith which has given strength from
that time to the present, when they were drawn up before the enemy, kneeled on
the ground, as is our custom in prayer,76 and engaged in supplications to God.

2 This was indeed a strange sight to the enemy, but it is reported77 that a
stranger thing immediately followed. The lightning drove the enemy to flight and
destruction, but a shower refreshed the army of those who had called on God, all
of whom had been on the point of perishing with thirst.

3 This story is related by non-Christian writers who have been pleased to treat
the times referred to, and it has also been recorded by our own people.78 By
those historians who were strangers to the faith, the marvel is mentioned, but
it is not acknowledged as an answer to our prayers. But by our own people, as
friends of the truth, the occurrence is related in a simple and artless manner.

4 Among these is Apolinarius,79 who says that from that time the legion through
whose prayers the wonder took place received from the emperor a title
appropriate to the event, being called in the language of the Romans the
Thundering Legion.

5 Tertullian is a trustworthy witness of these things. In the Apology for the
Faith, which he addressed to the Roman Senate, and which work we have already
mentioned,80 he confirms the history with greater and stronger proofs.

6 He writes81 that there are still extant letters82 of the most intelligent
Emperor Marcus in which he testifies that his army, being on the point of
perishing with thirst in Germany, was saved by the prayers of the Christians.
And he says also that this emperor threatened death83 to those who brought
accusation against us.

7 He adds further:84

"What kind of laws are those which impious, unjust, and cruel persons use
against us alone? which Vespasian, though he had conquered the Jews, did not
regard;85 which Trajan partially annulled, forbidding Christians to be sought
after;86 which neither Adrian,87 though inquisitive in all matters, nor he who
was called Pius88 sanctioned." But let any one treat these things as he
chooses;89 we must pass on to what followed.

8 Pothinus having died with the other martyrs in Gaul at ninety years of age,90
Irenaeus succeeded him in the episcopate of the church at Lyons.91 We have
learned that, in his youth, he was a hearer of Polycarp.92

9 In the third book of his work Against Heresies he has inserted a list of the
bishops of Rome, bringing it down as far as Eleutherus (whose times we are now
considering), under whom he composed his work. He writes as follows:93 Chapter
VI. Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome.

1 "The blessed apostles94 having founded and established the church, entrusted
the office of the episcopate to Linus.95 Paul speaks of this Linus in his
Epistles to Timothy.96

2 Anencletus97 succeeded him, and after Anencletus, in the third place from the
apostles, Clement98 received the episcopate. He had seen and conversed with the
blessed apostles,99 and their preaching was still sounding in his ears, and
their tradition was still before his eyes. Nor was he alone in this, for many
who had been taught by the apostles yet survived.

3 In the times of Clement, a serious dissension having arisen among the brethren
in Corinth,100 the church of Rome sent a most suitable letter to the
Corinthians,101 reconciling them in peace, renewing their faith, and
proclaiming102 the doctrine lately received from the apostles."103 4 A little
farther on he says:104

"Evarestus105 succeeded Clement, and Alexander,106 Evarestus. Then Xystus,107
the sixth from the apostles, was appointed. After him Telesphorus,108 who
suffered martyrdom gloriously; then Hyginus;109 then Pius;110 and after him
Anicetus;111 Soter112 succeeded Anicetus; and now, in the twelfth place from the
apostles, Eleutherus113 holds the office of bishop.

5 In the same order and succession114 the tradition in the Church and the
preaching of the truth has descended from the apostles unto us."

Chapter VII. Even Down to Those Times Miracles Were Performed by the Faithful.

1 These things Irenaeus, in agreement with the accounts already given by us,115
records in the work which comprises five books, and to which he gave the title
Refutation and Overthrow of the Knowledge Falsely So-called.116 In the second
book of the same treatise he shows that manifestations of divine and miraculous
power continued to his time in some of the churches.

2 He says:117

"But so far do they come short of raising the dead, as the Lord raised them, and
the apostles through prayer. And oftentimes in the brotherhood, when, on account
of some necessity, our entire Church has besought with fasting and much
supplication, the spirit of the dead has returned,118 and the man has been
restored through the prayers of the saints."

3 And again, after other remarks, he says:119

"If they will say that even the Lord did these things in mere appearance, we
will refer them to the prophetic writings, and show from them that all things
were beforehand spoken of him in this manner, and were strictly fulfilled; and
that he alone is the Son of God. Wherefore his true disciples, receiving grace
from him, perform such works in his Name for the benefit of other men, as each
has received the gift from him.

4 For some of them drive out demons effectually and truly, so that those who
have been cleansed from evil spirits frequently believe and unite with the
Church. Others have a foreknowledge of future events, and visions, and prophetic
revelations. Still others heal the sick by the laying on of hands, and restore
them to health. And, as we have said, even dead persons have been raised, and
remained with us many years.

5 But why should we say more? It is not possible to recount the number of gifts
which the Church, throughout all the world, has received from God in the name of
Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and exercises every day
for the benefit of the heathen, never deceiving any nor doing it for money. For
as she has received freely from God, freely also does she minister."120 6 And in
another place the same author writes:121

"As also we hear that many brethren in the Church possess prophetic gifts, and
speak, through the Spirit, with all kinds of tongues, and bring to light the
secret things of men for their good, and declare the mysteries of God." So much
in regard to the fact that various gifts remained among those who were worthy
even until that time.

Chapter VIII. The Statements of Irenaeus in Regard to the Divine Scriptures.

1 Since, in the beginning of this work,122 we promised to give, when needful,
the words of the ancient presbyters and writers of the Church, in which they
have declared those traditions which came down to them concerning the canonical
books, and since Irenaeus was one of them, we will now give his words and,
first, what he says of the sacred Gospels:123

2 "Matthew published his Gospel among the Hebrews in their own language,124
while Peter and Paul were preaching and founding the churchin Rome.125

3 After their departure Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also
transmitted to us in writing those things which Peter had preached;126 and Luke,
the attendant of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel which Paul had declared.127

4 Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also reclined on his bosom,
published his Gospel, while staying at Ephesus in Asia."128

5 He states these things in the third book of his above-mentioned work. In the
fifth book he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John, and the
number of the name of Antichrist:129

"As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and
ancient copies,130 and those who saw John face to face confirm it, and reason
teaches us that the number of the name of the beast, according to the mode of
calculation among the Greeks, appears in its letters. ..."131 6 And farther on
he says concerning the same:132

"We are not bold enough to speak confidently of the name of Antichrist. For if
it were necessary that his name should be declared clearly at the present time,
it would have been announced by him who saw the revelation. For it was seen, not
long ago, but almost in our generation, toward the end of the reign of
Domitian."133

7 He states these things concerning the Apocalypse134 in the work referred to.
He also mentions the first Epistle of John,135 taking many proofs from it, and
likewise the first Epistle of Peter.136 And he not only knows, but also
receives, The Shepherd,137 writing as follows:138

"Well did the Scripture139 speak, saying,140 `First of all believe that God is
one, who has created and completed all things,'" &c.

8 And he uses almost the precise words of the Wisdom of Solomon, saying:141 "The
vision of God produces immortality, but immortality renders us near to God." He
mentions also the memoirs142 of a certain apostolic presbyter,143 whose name he
passes by in silence, and gives his expositions of the sacred Scriptures.

9 And he refers to Justin the Martyr,144 and to Ignatius,145 using testimonies
also from their writings. Moreover, he promises to refute Marcion from his own
writings, in a special work.146 10 Concerning the translation of the inspired147
Scriptures by the Seventy, hear the very words which he writes:148

"God in truth became man, and the Lord himself saved us, giving the sign of the
virgin; but not as some say, who now venture to translate the Scripture,
`Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bring forth a son,'149 as Theodotion
of Ephesus and Aquila of Pontus,150 both of them Jewish proselytes, interpreted;
following whom, the Ebionites say151 that he was begotten by Joseph."

11 Shortly after he adds:

"For before the Romans had established their empire, while the Macedonians were
still holding Asia, Ptolemy, the son of Lagus,152 being desirous of adorning the
library which he had founded in Alexandria with the meritorious writings of all
men, requested the people of Jerusalem to have their Scriptures translated into
the Greek language.

12 But, as they were then subject to the Macedonians, they sent to Ptolemy
seventy elders, who were the most skilled among them in the Scriptures and in
both languages. Thus God accomplished his purpose.153

13 But wishing to try them individually, as he feared lest, by taking counsel
together, they might conceal the truth of the Scriptures by their
interpretation, he separated them from one another, and commanded all of them to
write the same translation.154 He did this for all the books.

14 But when they came together in the presence of Ptolemy, and compared their
several translations, God was glorified, and the Scriptures were recognized as
truly divine. For all of them had rendered the same things in the same words and
with the same names from beginning to end, so that the heathen perceived that
the Scriptures had been translated by the inspiration155 of God.

15 And this was nothing wonderful for God to do, who, in the captivity of the
people under Nebuchadnezzar, when the Scriptures had been destroyed, and the
Jews had returned to their own country after seventy years, afterwards,in the
time of Artaxerxes, king of the Persians, inspired Ezra the priest, of the tribe
of Levi, to relate all the words of the former prophets, and to restore to the
people the legislation of Moses."156 Such are the words of Irenaeus.

Chapter IX. The Bishops Under Commodus.

1 After Antoninus157 had been emperor for nineteen years, Commodus received the
government.158 In his first year Julian159 became bishop of the Alexandrian
churches, after Agrippinus160 had held the office for twelve years.

Chapter X. Pantaenus the Philosopher.

1 About that time, Pantaenus,161 a man highly distinguished for his learning,
had charge of the school of the faithful in Alexandria.162 A school of sacred
learning, which continues to our day, was established there in ancient times,163
and as we have been informed,164 was managed by men of great ability and zeal
for divine things. Among these it is reported165 that Pantaenus was at that time
especially conspicuous, as he had been educated in the philosophical system of
those called Stoics.

2 They say that he displayed such zeal for the divine Word, that he was
appointed as a herald of the Gospel of Christ to the nations in the East, and
was sent as far as India.166 For indeed167 there were still many evangelists of
the Word who sought earnestly to use their inspired zeal, after the examples of
the apostles, for the increase and building up of the Divine Word.

3 Pantaenus was one of these, and is said to have gone to India. It is reported
that among persons there who knew of Christ, he found the Gospel according to
Matthew, which had anticipated his own arrival. For Bartholomew,168 one of the
apostles, had preached to them, and left with them the writing of Matthew in the
Hebrew language,169 which they had preserved till that time.

4 After many good deeds, Pantaenus finally became the head of the school at
Alexandria,170 and expounded the treasures of divine doctrine both orally and in
writing.171 Chapter XI. Clement of Alexandria.

1 At this time Clement,172 being trained with him173 in the divine Scriptures at
Alexandria, became well known. He had the same name as the one who anciently was
at the head of the Roman church, and who was a disciple of the apostles.174

2 In his Hypotyposes175 he speaks of Pantaenus by name as his teacher. It seems
to me that he alludes to the same person also in the first book of his Stromata,
when, referring to the more conspicuous of the successors of the apostles whom
he had met,176 he says:177

3 "This work178 is not a writing artfully constructed for display; but my notes
are stored up for old age, as a remedy against forgetfulness; an image without
art, and a rough sketch of those powerful and animated words which it was my
privilege to hear, as well as of blessed and truly remarkable men.

4 Of these the one-the Ionian179 -was in Greece, the other in Magna Graecia;180
the one of them was from Coele-Syria,181 the other from Egypt. There were others
in the East, one of them an Assyrian,182 the other a Hebrew in Palestine.183 But
when I met with the last,184 -in ability truly he was first,-having hunted him
out in his concealment in Egypt, I found rest.

5 These men, preserving the true tradition of the blessed doctrine, directly
from the holy apostles, Peter and James and John and Paul, the son receiving it
from the father (but few were like the fathers), have come by God's will even to
us to deposit those ancestral and apostolic seeds."185 Chapter XII. The Bishops
in Jerusalem.

1 At this time Narcissus186 was the bishop of the church at Jerusalem, and he is
celebrated by many to this day. He was the fifteenth in succession from the
siege of the Jews under Adrian. We have shown that from that time first the
church in Jerusalem was composed of Gentiles, after those of the circumcision,
and that Marcus was the first Gentile bishop that presided over them.187

2 After him the succession in the episcopate was: first Cassianus; after him
Publius; then Maximus;188 following them Julian; then Gaius;189 after him
Symmachus and another Gaius, and again another Julian; after these Capito190 and
Valens and Dolichianus; and after all of them Narcissus, the thirtieth in
regular succession from the apostles.

Chapter XIII. Rhodo and His Account of the Dissension of Marcion.

1 At this time Rhodo,191 a native of Asia, who had been instructed, as he
himself states, by Tatian, with whom we have already become acquainted,192
having written several books, published among the rest one against the heresy of
Marcion.193 He says that this heresy was divided in his time into various
opinions;194 and while describing those who occasioned the division, he refutes
accurately the falsehoods devised by each of them.

2 But hear what he writes:195

"Therefore also they disagree among themselves, maintaining an inconsistent
opinion.196 For Apelles,197 one of the herd, priding himself on his manner of
life198 and his age, acknowledges one principle,199 but says that the
prophecies200 are from an opposing spirit, being led to this view by the
responses of a maiden by name Philumene,201 who was possessed by a demon.

3 But others, among whom are Potitus and Basilicus,202 hold to two
principles,203 as does the mariner204 Marcion himself.

4 These following the wolf205 of Pontus, and, like him, unable to fathom the
division of things, became reckless, and without giving any proof asserted two
principles. Others, again, drifting into a worse error, consider that there are
not only two, but three natures.206 Of these, Syneros207 is the leader and
chief, as those who defend his teaching208 say."

5 The same author writes that he engaged in conversation with Apelles. He speaks
as follows:

"For the old man Apelles, when conversing with us,209 was refuted in many things
which he spoke falsely; whence also he said that it was not at all necessary to
examine one's doctrine,210 but that each one should continue to hold what he
believed. For he asserted that those who trusted in the Crucified would be
saved, if only they were found doing good works.211 But as we have said before,
his opinion concerning God was the most obscure of all. For he spoke of one
principle, as also our doctrine does."

6 Then, after stating fully his own opinion, he adds:

"When I said to him, Tell me how you know this or how can you assert that there
is one principle, he replied that the prophecies refuted themselves, because
they have said nothing true;212 for they are inconsistent, and false, and
self-contradictory. But how there is one principle he said that he did not know,
but that he was thus persuaded.

7 As I then adjured him to speak the truth, he swore that he did so when he said
that he did not know how there is one unbegotten God, but that he believed it.
Thereupon I laughed and reproved him because, though calling himself a teacher,
he knew not how to confirm what he taught."213

8 In the same work, addressing Callistio,214 the same writer acknowledges that
he had been instructed at Rome by Tatian.215 And he says that a book of
Problems216 had been prepared by Tatian, in which he promised to explain the
obscure and hidden parts of the divine Scriptures. Rhodo himself promises to
give in a work of his own solutions of Tatian's problems.217 There is also
extant a Commentary of his on the Hexaemeron.218

9 But this Apelles wrote many things, an impious manner, of the law of Moses,
blaspheming the divine words in many of his works, being, as it seemed, very
zealous for their refutation and overthrow?219 So much concerning these.

Chapter XIV. The False Prophets of the Phrygians.

1 The enemy of God's Church, who is emphatically a hater of good and a lover of
evil, and leaves untried no manner of craft against men, was again active in
causing strange heresies to spring up against the Church.220 For some persons,
like venomous reptiles, crawled over Asia and Phrygia, boasting that Montanus
was the Paraclete, and that the women that followed him, Priscilla and
Maximilla, were prophetesses of Montanus.221 Chapter XV. The Schism of Blastus
at Rome.222

Others, of whom Florinus223 was chief, flourished at Rome. He fell from the
presbyterate of the Church, and Blastus was involved in a similar fall. They
also drew away many of the Church to their opinion, each striving to introduce
his own innovations in respect to the truth.

Chapter XVI. The Circumstances Related of Montanus and His False Prophets.224

1 Against the so-called Phrygian225 heresy, the power which always contends for
the truth raised up a strong and invincible weapon, Apolinarius of Hierapolis,
whom we have mentioned before,226 and with him many other men of ability, by
whom abundant material for our history has been left.

2 A certain one of these, in the beginning of his work against them,227 first
intimates that he had contended with them in oral controversies. He commences
his work in this manner:228

"Having for a very long and sufficient time, O beloved Avircius Marcellus,229
been urged by you to write a treatise against the heresy of those who are called
after Miltiades,230 I have hesitated till the present time, not through lack of
ability to refute the falsehood or bear testimony for the truth, but from fear
and apprehension that I might seem to some to be making additions to the
doctrines or precepts of the Gospel of the New Testament, which it is impossible
for one who has chosen to live according to the Gospel, either to increase or to
diminish. But being recently in Ancyra231 in Galatia, I found the church
there232 greatly agitated by this novelty, not prophecy, as they call it, but
rather false prophecy, as will be shown. Therefore, to the best of our ability,
with the Lord's help, we disputed in the church many days concerning these and
other matters separately brought forward by them, so that the church rejoiced
and was strengthened in the truth, and those of the opposite side were for the
time confounded, and the adversaries were grieved.

5 The presbyters in the place, our fellow-presbyter Zoticus233 of Otrous also
being present, requested us to leave a record of what had been said against the
opposers of the truth. We did not do this, but we promised to write it out as
soon as the Lord permitted us, and to send it to them speedily."

6 Having said this with other things, in the beginning of his work, he proceeds
to state the cause of the above-mentioned heresy as follows:

"Their opposition and their recent heresy which has separated them from the
Church arose on the following account.

7 There is said to be a certain village called Ardabau in that part of Mysia,
which borders upon Phrygia.234 There first, they say, when Gratus was proconsul
of Asia,235 a recent convert, Montanus by name, through his unquenchable desire
for leadership,236 gave the adversary opportunity against him. And he became
beside himself, and being suddenly in a sort of frenzy and ecstasy, he raved,
and began to babble and utter strange things, prophesying in a manner contrary
to the constant custom of the Church handed down by tradition from the
beginning.237

8 Some of those who heard his spurious utterances at that time were indignant,
and they rebuked him as one that was possessed, and that was under the control
of a demon, and was led by a deceitful spirit, and was distracting the
multitude; and they forbade him to talk, remembering the distinction238 drawn by
the Lord and his warning to guard watchfully against the coming of false
prophets?239 But others imagining themselves possessed of the Holy Spirit and of
a prophetic gift,240 were elated and not a little puffed up; and forgetting the
distinction of the Lord, they challenged the mad and insidious and seducing
spirit, and were cheated and deceived by him. In consequence of this, he could
no longer be held in check, so as to keep silence.

9 Thus by artifice, or rather by such a system of wicked craft, the devil,
devising destruction for the disobedient, and being unworthily honored by them,
secretly excited and inflamed their understandings which had already become
estranged from the true faith. And he stirred up besides two women,241 and
filled them with the false spirit, so that they talked wildly and unreasonably
and strangely, like the person already mentioned.242 And the spirit pronounced
them blessed as they rejoiced and gloried in him, and puffed them up by the
magnitude of his promises. But sometimes he rebuked them openly in a wise and
faithful manner, that he might seem to be a reprover. But those of the Phrygians
that were deceived were few in number.

"And the arrogant spirit taught them to revile the entire universal Church under
heaven, because the spirit of false prophecy received neither honor from it nor
entrance into it.

10 For the faithful in Asia met often in many places throughout Asia to consider
this matter,243 and examined the novel utterances and pronounced them profane,
and rejected the heresy, and thus these persons were expelled from the Church
and debarred from communion."

11 Having related these things at the outset, and continued the refutation of
their delusion through his entire work, in the second book he speaks as follows
of their end:

12 "Since, therefore, they called us slayers of the prophets244 because we did
not receive their loquacious prophets, who, they say, are those that the Lord
promised to send to the people,245 let them answer as in God's presence: Who is
there, O friends, of these who began to talk, from Montanus and the women down,
that was persecuted by the Jews, or slain by lawless men? None. Or has any of
them been seized and crucified for the Name? Truly not. Or has one of these
women ever been scourged in the synagogues of the Jews, or stoned? No; never
anywhere.246

13 But by another kind of death Montanus and Maximilla are said to have died.
For the report is that, incited by the spirit of frenzy, they both hung
themselves;247 not at the same time, but at the time which common report gives
for the death of each. And thus they died, and ended their lives like the
traitor Judas.

14 So also, as general report says, that remarkable person, the first
steward,248 as it were, of their so-called prophecy, one Theodotus-who, as if at
sometime taken up and received into heaven, fell into trances, and entrusted
himself to the deceitful spirit-was pitched like a quoit, and died miserably?249

15 They say that these things happened in this manner. But as we did not see
them, O friend, we do not pretend to know. Perhaps in such a manner, perhaps
not, Montanus and Theodotus and the above-mentioned woman died."

16 He says again in the same book that the holy bishops of that time attempted
to refute the spirit in Maximilla, but were prevented by others who plainly
co-operated with the spirit.

17 He writes as follows:

"And let not the spirit, in the same work of Asterius Urbanus,250 say through
Maximilla, `I am driven away from the sheep like a wolf.251 I am not a wolf. I
am word and spirit and power.' But let him show clearly and prove the power in
the spirit. And by the spirit let him compel those to confess him who were then
present for the purpose of proving and reasoning with the talkative
spirit,-those eminent men and bishops, Zoticus,252 from the village Comana, and
Julian,253 from Apamea, whose mouths the followers of Themiso254 muzzled,
refusing to permit the false and seductive spirit to be refuted by them."

18 Again in the same work, after saying other things in refutation of the false
prophecies of Maximilla, he indicates the time when he wrote these accounts, and
mentions her predictions in which she prophesied wars and anarchy. Their
falsehood he censures in the following manner:

19 "And has not this been shown clearly to be false? For it is to-day more than
thirteen years since the woman died, and there has been neither a partial nor
general war in the world; but rather, through the mercy of God, continued peace
even to the Christians."255 These things are taken from the second book.

20 I will add also short extracts from the third book, in which he speaks thus
against their boasts that many of them had suffered, martyrdom:

"When therefore they are at a loss, being refuted in all that they say, they try
to take refuge in their martyrs, alleging that they have many martyrs, and that
this is sure evidence of the power of the so-called prophetic spirit that is
with them. But this, as it appears, is entirely fallacious.256

21 For some of the heresies have a great many martyrs; but surely we shall not
on that account agree with them or confess that they hold the truth. And first,
indeed, those called Marcionites, from the heresy of Marcion, say that they have
a multitude of martyrs for Christ; yet they do not confess Christ himself in
truth." A little farther on he continues:

22 "When those called to martyrdom from the Church for the truth of the faith
have met with any of the so-called martyrs of the Phrygian heresy, they have
separated from them, and died without any fellowship with them,257 because they
did not wish to give their assent to the spirit of Montanus and the women. And
that this is true and took place in our own time in Apamea on the Maeander,258
among those who suffered martyrdom with Gaius and Alexander of Eumenia, is well
known."

Chapter XVII. Miltiades and His Works.

1 In this work he mentions a writer, Miltiades,259 stating that he also wrote a
certain book against the above-mentioned heresy. After quoting some of their
words, he adds:

"Having found these things in a certain work of theirs in opposition to the work
of the brother Alcibiades,260 in which he shows that a prophet ought not to
speak in ecstasy,261 I made an abridgment."

2 A little further on in the same work he gives a list of those who prophesied
under the new covenant, among whom he enumerates a certain Ammia262 and
Quadratus,263 saying:

"But the false prophet falls into an ecstasy, in which he is without shame or
fear. Beginning with purposed ignorance, he passes on, as has been stated, to
involuntary madness of soul.

3 They cannot show that one of the old or one of the new prophets was thus
carried away in spirit. Neither can they boast of Agabus,264 or Judas,265 or
Silas,266 or the daughters of Philip,267 or Ammia in Philadelphia, or Quadratus,
or any others not belonging to them."

4 And again after a little he says: "For if after Quadratus and Ammia in
Philadelphia, as they assert, the women with Montanus received the prophetic
gift, let them show who among them received it from Montanus and the women. For
the apostle thought it necessary that the prophetic gift should continue in all
the Church until the final coming. But they cannot show it, though this is the
fourteenth year since the death of Maximilla."268

5 He writes thus. But the Miltiades to whom he refers has left other monuments
of his own zeal for the Divine Scriptures,269 in the discourses which he
composed against the Greeks and against the Jews,270 answering each of them
separately in two books.271 And in addition he addresses an apology to the
earthly rulers,272 in behalf of the philosophy which he embraced.

Chapter XVIII. The Manner in Which Apollonius Refuted the Phrygians, and the
Persons273 Whom He Mentions.

1 As the so-called Phrygian heresy274 was still flourishing in Phrygia in his
time, Apollonius275 also, an ecclesiastical writer, undertook its refutation,
and wrote a special work against it, correcting in detail the false prophecies
current among them and reproving the life of the founders of the heresy. But
hear his own words respecting Montanus:

2 "His actions and his teaching show who this new teacher is. This is he who
taught the dissolution of marriage;276 who made laws for fasting;277 who named
Pepuza and Tymion,278 small towns in Phrygia, Jerusalem, wishing to gather
people to them from all directions; who appointed collectors of money;279 who
contrived the receiving of gifts under the name of offerings; who provided
salaries for those who preached his doctrine, that its teaching might prevail
through gluttony."280

3 He writes thus concerning Montanus; and a little farther on he writes as
follows concerning his prophetesses: "We show that these first prophetesses
themselves, as soon as they were filled with the Spirit, abandoned their
husbands. How falsely therefore they speak who call Prisca a virgin."281

4 Afterwards he says: "Does not all Scripture seem to you to forbid a prophet to
receive gifts and money?282 When therefore I see the prophetess receiving gold
and silver and costly garments, how can I avoid reproving her?"

5 And again a little farther on he speaks thus concerning one of their
confessors:

"So also Themiso,283 who was clothed with plausible covetousness, could not
endure the sign of confession, but threw aside bonds for an abundance of
possessions. Yet, though he should have been humble on this account, he dared to
boast as a martyr, and in imitation of the apostle, he wrote a certain
catholic284 epistle, to instruct those whose faith was better than his own,
contending for words of empty sound, and blaspheming against the Lord and the
apostles and the holy Church." And again concerning others of those honored
among them as martyrs, he writes as follows:

"Not to speak of many, let the prophetess herself tell us of Alexander,285 who
called himself a martyr, with whom she is in the habit of banqueting, and who is
worshiped286 by many. We need not mention his robberies and other daring deeds
for which he was punished, but the archives287 contain them. Which of these
forgives the sins of the other? Does the prophet the robberies of the martyr, or
the martyr the covetousness of the prophet? For although the Lord said, `Provide
neither gold, nor silver, neither two coats,'288 these men, in complete
opposition, transgress in respect to the possession of the forbidden things. For
we will show that those whom they call prophets and martyrs gather their gain
not only from rich men, but also from the poor, and orphans, and widows.

8 But if they are confident, let them stand up and discuss these matters, that
if convicted they may hereafter cease transgressing. For the fruits of the
prophet must be tried; `for the tree is known by its fruit.'289

9 But that those who wish may know concerning Alexander, he was tried by
Aemilius Frontinus,290 proconsul at Ephesus; not on account of the Name,291 but
for the robberies which he had committed, being already an apostate.292
Afterwards, having falsely declared for the name of the Lord, he was released,
having deceived the faithful that were there.293 And his own parish, from which
he came, did not receive him, because he was a robber.294 Those who wish to
learn about him have the public records295 of Asia. And yet the prophet with
whom he spent many years knows nothing about him!296

10 Exposing him, through him we expose also the pretense297 of the prophet. We
could show the same thing of many others. But if they are confident, let them
endure the test."

11 Again, in another part of his work he speaks as follows of the prophets of
whom they boast:

"If they deny that their prophets have received gifts, let them acknowledge
this: that if they are convicted of receiving them, they are not prophets. And
we will bring a multitude of proofs of this. But it is necessary that all the
fruits of a prophet should be examined. Tell me, does a prophet dye his hair?298
Does a prophet stain his eyelids?299 Does a prophet delight in adornment? Does a
prophet play with tables and dice? Does a prophet lend on usury? Let them
confess whether these things are lawful or not; but I will show that they have
been done by them."300

12 This same Apollonius states in the same work that, at the time of his
writing, it was the fortieth year since Montanus had begun his pretended
prophecy.301

13 And he says also that Zoticus, who was mentioned by the former writer,302
when Maximilla was pretending to prophesy in Pepuza, resisted her and endeavored
to refute the spirit that was working in her; but was prevented by those who
agreed with her. He mentions also a certain Thraseas303 among the martyrs of
that time.

He speaks, moreover, of a tradition that the Saviour commanded his apostles not
to depart from Jerusalem for twelve years.304 He uses testimonies also from the
Revelation of John,305 and he relates that a dead man had, through the Divine
power, been raised by John himself in Ephesus.306 He also adds other things by
which he fully and abundantly exposes the error of the heresy of which we have
been speaking. These are the matters recorded by Apollonius.

Chapter XIX. Serapion on the Heresy of the Phrygians.

1 Serapion,307 who, as report says, succeeded Maximinus308 at that time as
bishop of the church of Antioch, mentions the works of Apolinarius309 against
the above-mentioned heresy. And he alludes to him in a private letter to Caricus
and Pontius,310 in which he himself exposes the same heresy, and adds the
following words:311

2 "That you may see that the doings of this lying band of the new prophecy, so
called, are an abomination to all the brotherhood throughout the world, I have
sent you writings312 of the most blessed Claudius Apolinarius, bishop of
Hierapolis in Asia."

3 In the same letter of Serapion the signatures of several bishops are found,313
one of whom subscribes himself as follows:

"I, Aurelius Cyrenius, a witness,314 pray for your health." And another in this
manner:

"Aelius Publius Julius,315 bishop of Debeltum, a colony of Thrace. As God liveth
in the heavens, the blessed Sotas in Anchialus desired to cast the demon out of
Priscilla, but the hypocrites did not permit him."316 4 And the autograph
signatures of many other bishops who agreed with them are contained in the same
letter. So much for these persons.

Chapter XX. The Writings of Irenaeus Against the Schismatics at Rome.

1 Irenaeus317 wrote several letters against those who were disturbing the sound
ordinance of the Church at Rome. One of them was to Blastus On Schism;318
another to Florinus On Monarchy,319 or That God is not the Author of Evil. For
Florinus seemed to be defending this opinion. And because he was being drawn
away by the error of Valentinus, Irenaeus wrote his work On the Ogdoad,320 in
which he shows that he himself had been acquainted with the first successors of
the apostles.321

2 At the close of the treatise we have found a most beautiful note which we are
constrained to insert in this work.322 It runs as follows:

"I adjure thee who mayest copy this book, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by his
glorious advent when he comes to judge the living and the dead, to compare what
thou shalt write, and correct it carefully by this manuscript, and also to write
this adjuration, and place it in the copy."

3 These things may be profitably read in his work, and related by us, that we
may have those ancient and truly holy men as the best example of painstaking
carefulness.

4 In the letter to Florinus, of which we have spoken,323 Irenaeus mentions again
his intimacy with Polycarp, saying:

"These doctrines, O Florinus, to speak mildly, are not of sound judgment. These
doctrines disagree with the Church, and drive into the greatest impiety those
who accept them. These doctrines, not even the heretics outside of the Church,
have ever dared to publish. These doctrines, the presbyters who were before us,
and who were companions of the apostles, did not deliver to thee.

5 "For when I was a boy, I saw thee in lower Asia with Polycarp, moving in
splendor in the royal court,324 and endeavoring to gain his approbation.

6 I remember the events of that time more clearly than those of recent years.
For what boys learn, growing with their mind, becomes joined with it; so that I
am able to describe the very place in which the blessed Polycarp sat as he
discoursed, and his goings out and his comings in, and the manner ner of his
life, and his physical appearance, and his discourses to the people, and the
accounts which he gave of his intercourse with John and with the others who had
seen the Lord. And as he remembered their words, and what he heard from them
concerning the Lord, and concerning his miracles and his teaching, having
received them from eyewitnesses of the `Word of life,'325 Polycarp related all
things in harmony with the Scriptures.

7 These things being told me by the mercy of God, I listened to them
attentively, noting them down, not on paper, but in my heart. And continually,
through God's grace, I recall them faithfully. And I am able to bear witness
before God thatif that blessed and apostolic presbyter had heard any such thing,
he would have cried out, and stopped his ears, and as was his custom, would have
exclaimed, O good God, unto what times hast thou spared me that I should endure
these things? And he would have fled from the place where, sitting or standing,
he had heard such words.326

8 And this can be shown plainly from the letters327 which he sent, either to the
neighboring churches for their confirmation, or to some of the brethren,
admonishing and exhorting them." Thus far Irenaeus.

Chapter XXI. How Appolonius Suffered Martyrdom at Rome.

1 About the same time, in the reign of Commodus, our condition became more
favorable, and through the grace of God the churches throughout the entire world
enjoyed peace,328 and the word of salvation was leading every soul, from every
race of man to the devout worship of the God of the universe. So that now at
Rome many who were highly distinguished for wealth and family turned with all
their household and relatives unto their salvation.

2 But the demon who hates what is good, being malignant in his nature, could not
endure this, but prepared himself again for conflict, contriving many devices
against us. And he brought to the judgment seat Apollonius,329 of the city of
Rome, a man renowned among the faithful for learning and philosophy, having
stirred up one of his servants, who was well fitted for such a purpose, to
accuse him.330

3 But this wretched man made the charge unseasonably, because by a royal decree
it was unlawful that informers of such things should live. And his legs were
broken immediately, Perennius the judge having pronounced this sentence upon
him.331

4 But the martyr, highly beloved of God, being earnestly entreated and requested
by the judge to give an account of himself before the Senate, made in the
presence of all an eloquent defense of the faith for which he was witnessing.
And as if by decree of the Senate he was put to death by decapitation; an
ancient law requiring that those who were brought to the judgment seat and
refused to recant should not be liberated,332 Whoever desires to know his
arguments before the judge and his answers to the questions of Perennius, and
his entire defense before the Senate will find them in the records of the
ancient martyrdoms which we have collected.333 Chapter XXII. The Bishops that
Were Well Known at This Time. In the tenth year of the reign of Commodus,
Victor334 succeeded Eleutherus,335 the latter havingheld the episcopate for
thirteen years. In the same year, after Julian336 a had completed his tenth
year, Demetrius337 received the charge of the parishes at Alexandria. At this
time the above-mentioned Serapion,338 the eighth from the apostles, was still
well known as bishop of the church at Antioch. Theophilus339 presided at
Caesarea in Palestine; and Narcissus,340 whom we have mentioned before, still
had charge of the church at Jerusalem. Bacchylus341 at the same time was bishop
of Corinth in Greece, and Polycrates342 of the parish of Ephesus. And besides
these a multitude of others, as is likely, were then prominent. But we have
given the names of those alone, the soundness of whose faith has come down to us
in writing.

Chapter XXIII. The Question Then Agitated Concerning the Passover.

1 A Question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all
Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on
which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as
the feast of the Saviour's passover.343 It was therefore necessary to end their
fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was
not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time,
as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to
the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the
resurrection of our Saviour.

2 Synods and assemblies of bishops were held on this account,344 and all, with
one consent, through mutual correspondence drew. up an ecclesiastical decree,
that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be celebrated on no
other but the Lord's day, and that we should observe the close of the paschal
fast on this day only. There is still extant a writing of those who were then
assembled in Palestine, over whom Theophilus,345 bishop of Caesarea, and
Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, presided. And there is also another writing
extant of those who were assembled at Rome to consider the same question, which
bears the name of Bishop Victor;346 also of the bishops in Pontus over whom
Palmas,347 as the oldest, presided; and of the parishes in Gaul of which
Irenaeus was bishop, and of those in Osrhoëne348 and the cities there; and a
personal letter of Bacchylus,349 bishop of the church at Corinth, and of a great
many others, who uttered the same opinion and judgment, and cast the same vote.

3 And that which has been given above was their unanimous decision.350 Chapter
XXIV. The Disagreement in Asia.

1 But the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom
handed down to them.351 He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and
the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had
come down to him:352

2 "We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also
great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord's
coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the
saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in
Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived
in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus; and, moreover, John,who was both a
witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and, being a
priest, wore the sacerdotal plate.

3 He fell asleep at Ephesus.

4 And Polycarp353 in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr; and Thraseas,354
bishop and martyr from Eumenia, who fell asleep in Smyrna.

5 Why need I mention the bishop and martyr Sagaris355 who fell asleep in
Laodicea, or the blessed Papirius,356 or Melito,357 the Eunuch who lived
altogether in the Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate
from heaven, when he shall rise from the dead?

6 All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel,
deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith.358 And I also,
Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives,
some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops;
and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people359
put away the leaven.

7 I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have
met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy
Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have
said `We ought to obey God rather than man.'"360 8 He then writes of all the
bishops who were present with him and thought as he did. His words are as
follows:

"I could mention the bishops who were present, whom I summoned at your
desire;361 whose names, should I write them, would constitute a great multitude.
And they, beholding my littleness, gave their consent to the letter, knowing
that I did not bear my gray hairs in vain, but had always governed my life by
the Lord Jesus."

9 Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted
to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches
that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the
brethren there wholly excommunicate.362

10 But this did not please all the bishops. And they besought him to consider
the things of peace, and of neighborly unity and love. Words of theirs are
extant, sharply rebuking Victor.

11 Among them was Irenaeus, who, sending letters in the name of the brethren in
Gaul over whom he presided, maintained that the mystery of the resurrection of
the Lord should be observed only on the Lord's day. He fittingly admonishes
Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God which observed the
tradition of an ancient custom and after many other words he proceeds as
follows:363

12 "For the controversy is not only concerning the day, but also concerning the
very manner of the fast. For some think that they should fast one day, others
two, yet others more; some, moreover, count their day as consisting of forty
hours day and night.364

13 And this variety in its observance has not originated in our time; but long
before in that of our ancestors.365 It is likely that they did not hold to
strict accuracy, and thus formed a custom for their posterity according to their
own simplicity and peculiar mode. Yet all of these lived none the less in peace,
and we also live in peace with one another; and the disagreement in regard to
the fast confirms the agreement in the faith."

14 He adds to this the following account, which I may properly insert:

"Among these were the presbyters before Soter, who presided over the church
which thou now rulest. We mean Anicetus, and Plus, and Hyginus, and Telesphorus,
and Xystus. They neither observed it366 themselves, nor did they permit those
after them to do so. And yet though not observing it, they were none the less at
peace with those who came to them from the parishes in which it was observed;
although this observance was more opposed to those who did not observe it.367

15 But none were ever cast out on account of this form; but the presbyters
before thee who did not observe it, sent the eucharist to those of other
parishes who observed it.368

16 And when the blessed Polycarp was at Rome369 in the time of Anicetus, and
they disagreed a little about certain other things, they immediately made peace
with one another, not caring to quarrel over this matter. For neither could
Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John
the disciple of our Lord, and the other apostles with whom he had associated;
neither could Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it as he said that he ought
to follow the customs of the presbyters that had preceded him.

17 But though matters were in this shape, they communed together, and Anicetus
conceded the administration of the eucharist in the church to Polycarp,
manifestly as a mark of respect.370 And they parted from each other in peace,
both those who observed, and those who did not, maintaining the peace of the
whole church."

18 Thus Irenaeus, who truly was well named,371 became a peacemaker in this
matter, exhorting and negotiating in this way in behalf of the peace of the
churches. And he conferred by letter about this mooted question, not only with
Victor, but also with most of the other rulers of the churches.372 Chapter XXV.
How All Came to an Agreement Respecting the Passover.

1 Those in Palestine whom we have recently mentioned, Narcissus and
Theophilus,373 and with them Cassius,374 bishop of the church of Tyre, and
Clarus of the church of Ptolemais, and those who met with them,375 having stated
many things respecting the tradition concerning the passover which had come to
them in succession from the apostles, at the close of their writing add these
words:376

2 "Endeavor to send copies of our letter to every church, that we may not
furnish occasion to those who easily deceive their souls. We show you indeed
that also in Alexandria they keep it on the same day that we do. For letters are
carried from us to them and from them to us, so that in the same manner and at
the same time we keep the sacred day."377 Chapter XXVI. The Elegant Works of
Irenaeus Which Have Come Down to Us.

Besides the works and letters of Irenaeus which we have mentioned,378 a certain
book of his On Knowledge, written against the Greeks,379 very concise and
remarkably forcible, is extant; and another, which he dedicated to a brother
Martian, In Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching;380 and a volume containing
various Dissertations,381 in which he mentions the Epistle to the Hebrews and
the so-called Wisdom of Solomon, making quotations from them. These are the
works of Irenaeus which have come to our knowledge.

Commodus having ended his reign after thirteen years, Severus became emperor in
less than six months after his death, Pertinax having reigned during the
intervening time.382 Chapter XXVII. The Works of Others that Flourished at that
Time.

Numerous memorials of the faithful zeal of the ancient ecclesiastical men of
that time are still preserved by many. Of these we would note particularly the
writings of Heraclitus On the Apostle, and those of Maximus on the question so
much discussed among heretics, the Origin of Evil, and on the Creation of
Matter.383 Also those of Candidus on the Hexaemeron,384 and of Apion385 on the
same subject; likewise of Sextus386 on the Resurrection, and another treatise of
Arabianus,387 and writings of a multitude of others, in regard to whom, because
we have no data, it is impossible to state in our work when they lived, or to
give any account of their history.388 And works of many others have come down to
us whose names we are unable to give, orthodox and ecclesiastical, as their
interpretations of the Divine Scriptures show, but unknown to us, because their
names are not stated in their writings.389

Chapter XXVIII. Those Who First Advanced the Heresy of Artemon; Their Manner of
Life, and How They Dared to Corrupt the Sacred Scriptures.

1 In a laborious work by one of thesewriters against the heresy of Artemon,390
which Paul of Samosata391 attempted to revive again in our day, there is an
account appropriate to the history which we are now examining.

2 For he criticises, as a late innovation, the above-mentioned heresy which
teaches that the Saviour was a mere man, because they were attempting to magnify
it as ancient392 Having given in his work many other arguments in refutation of
their blasphemous falsehood, he adds the following words:

3 "For they say that all the early teachers and the apostles received and taught
what they now declare, and that the truth of the Gospel was preserved until the
times of Victor, who was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter,393 but that
from his successor, Zephyrinus,394 the truth had been corrupted.

4 And what they say might be plausible, if first of all the Divine Scriptures
did not contradict them. And there are writings of certain brethren older than
the times of Victor, which they wrote in behalf of the truth against the
heathen, and against the heresies which existed in their day. I refer to
Justin395 and Miltiades396 and Tatian397 and Clement398 and many others, in all
of whose 5 works Christ is spoken of as God.399

5 For who does not know the works of Irenaeus400 and of Melito401 and of others
which teach that Christ is God and man?402 And how many psalms and hymns,403
written by the faithful brethren from the beginning, celebrate Christ the Word
of God, speaking of him as Divine.

6 How then since the opinion held by the Church has been preached for so many
years, can its preaching have been delayed as they affirm, until the times of
Victor? And how is it that they are not ashamed to speak thus falsely of Victor,
knowing well that he cut off from communion Theodotus, the cobbler,404 the
leader and father of this God-denying apostasy, and the first to declare that
Christ is mere man? For if Victor agreed with their opinions, as their slander
affirms, how came he to cast out Theodotus, the inventor of this heresy?"

7 So much in regard to Victor. His bishopric lasted ten years, and Zephyrinus
was appointed his successor about the ninth year of the reign of Severus.405 The
author of the above-mentioned book, concerning the founder of this heresy,
narrates another event which occurred in the time of Zephyrinus, using these
words:

8 "I will remind many of the brethren of a fact which took place in our time,
which, had it happened in Sodom, might, I think, have proved a warning to them.
There was a certain confessor, Natalius,406 not long ago, but in our own day.

9 This man was deceived at one time by Asclepiodotus407 and another
Theodotus,408 a money-changer. Both of them were disciples of Theodotus, the
cobbler, who, as I have said, was the first person excommunicated by Victor,
bishop at that time, on account of this sentiment, or rather senselessness.409

10 Natalius was persuaded by them to allow himself to be chosen bishop of this
heresy with a salary, to be paid by them, of one hundred and fifty denarii a
month.410 When 11 he had thus connected himself with them, he was warned
oftentimes by the Lord through visions.

12 For the compassionate God and our Lord Jesus Christ was not willing that a
witness of his own sufferings, being cast out of the Church, should perish. But
as he paid little regard to the visions, because he was ensnared by the first
position among them and by that shameful covetousness which destroys a great
many, he was scourged by holy angels, and punished severely through the entire
night.411 Thereupon having risen in the morning, he put on sackcloth and covered
himself with ashes, and with great haste and tears he fell down before
Zephyrinus, the bishop, rolling at the feet not only of the clergy, but also of
the laity; and he moved with his tears the compassionate Church of the merciful
Christ. And though he used much supplication, and showed the welts of the
stripes which he had received, yet scarcely was he taken back into communion."

13 We will add from the same writer some other extracts concerning them, which
run as follows:412

"They have treated the Divine Scriptures recklessly and without fear. They have
set aside the rule of ancient faith; and Christ they have not known. They do not
endeavor to learn what the Divine Scriptures declare, but strive laboriously
after any form of syllogism which may be devised to sustain their impiety. And
if any one brings before them a passage of Divine Scripture, they see whether a
conjunctive or disjunctive form of syllogism can be made from it.

14 And as being of the earth and speaking of the earth, and as ignorant of him
who cometh from above, they forsake the holy writings of God to devote
themselves to geometry.413 Euclid is laboriously measured414 by some of them;
and Aristotle and Theophrastus are admired; and Galen, perhaps, by some is even
worshiped.

15 But that those who use the arts of unbelievers for their heretical opinions
and adulterate the simple faith of the Divine Scriptures by the craft of the
godless, are far from the faith, what need is there to say? Therefore they have
laid their hands boldly upon the Divine Scriptures, alleging that they have
corrected them.

16 That I am not speaking falsely of them in this matter, whoever wishes may
learn. For if any one will collect their respective copies, and compare them one
with another, he will find that they differ greatly.

17 Those of Asclepiades,415 for example, do not agree with those of Theodotus.
And many of these can be obtained, because their disciples have assiduously
written the corrections, as they call them, that is the corruptions,416 of each
of them. Again, those of Hermophilus417 do not agree with these, and those of
Apollonides418 are not consistent with themselves. For you can compare those
prepared by them at an earlier date with those which they corrupted later, and
you will find them widely different.

18 But how daring this offense is, it is not likely that they themselves are
ignorant. For either they do not believe that the Divine Scriptures were spoken
by the Holy Spirit, and thus are unbelievers, or else they think themselves
wiser than the Holy Spirit, and in that case what else are they than demoniacs?
For they cannot deny the commission of the crime, since the copies have been
written by their own hands. For they did not receive such Scriptures from their
instructors, nor can they produce any copies from which they were transcribed.

19 But some of them have not thought it worth while to corrupt them, but simply
deny the law and the prophets,419 and thus through their lawless and impious
teaching under pretense of grace, have sunk to the lowest depths of perdition."

Let this suffice for these things.

1: On Soter, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 19, note 2.

2: Eusebius in his Chronicle gives the date of Eleutherus' accession as the
seventeenth year of Marcus Aurelius (177 a.d.), and puts his death into the
reign of Pertinax (192), while in chap. 22 of the present book he places his
death in the tenth year of Commodus (189). Most of our authorities agree in
assigning fifteen years to his episcopate, and this may be accepted as
undoubtedly correct, Most of them, moreover, agree with chap. 22 of this book,
in assigning his death to the tenth year of Commodus, and this too may be
accepted as accurate. But with these two data we are obliged to push his
accession back into the year 174 (or 175), which is accepted by Lipsius (see his
Chron. der röom. Bischöfe, p. 184 sq.). We must therefore suppose that he became
bishop some two years before the outbreak of the persecution referred to just
below, in the fourteenth or fifteenth year of Marcus Aurelius. In the Armenian
version of the Chron. Eleutherus is called the thirteenth bishop of Rome (see
above, Bk. IV. chap. 19, note 5), but this is a mistake, as pointed out in the
note referred to. Eleutherus is mentioned in Bk. IV, chap. 11, in connection
with Hegesippus, and also in Bk. IV. chap. 22, by Hegesippus himself. He is
chiefly interesting because of his connection with Irenaeus and the Gallican
martyrs (see chap. 4, below), and his relation to the Montanistic controversy
(see chap. 3). Bede, in his Hist. Eccles., chap. 4, connects Eleutherus with the
origin of British Christianity, but the tradition is quite groundless. One of
the decretals and a spurious epistle are falsely ascribed to him.

3: i.e., the seventeenth year of the reign of Marcus Aurelius, a.d. 177 (upon
Eusebius' confusion of Marcus Aurelius with Lucius Verus, see below, p. 390,
note). In the Chron. the persecution at Lyons and Vienne is associated with the
seventh year of Marcus Aurelius (167), and consequently some (e.g. Blondellus,
Stroth, and Jachmann), have maintained that the notice in the present passage is
incorrect, and Jachmann has attacked Eusebius very severely for the supposed
error. The truth is, however, that the notice in the Chron. (in the Armenian,
which represents the original form more closely than Jenner's version does) is
not placed opposite the seventh year of Marcus Aurelius (as the notices in the
Chron. commonly are), but is placed after it, and grouped with the notice of
Polycarp's martyrdom, which occurred, not in 167, but in 155 or 156 (see above,
Bk. IV. chap. 15, note 2). It would seem, as remarked by Lightfoot ( Ignatius,
I. p. 630), that Eusebius simply connected together the martyrdoms which he
supposed occurred about this time, without intending to imply that they all took
place in the same year. Similar groupings of kindred events which occurred at
various times during the reign of an emperor are quite common in the Chron. (cf.
the notices of martyrdoms under Trajan and of apologies and rescripts under
Hadrian). Over against the distinct statement of the history, therefore, in the
present instance, the notice in the Chron. is of no weight. Moreover, it is
clear from the present passage that Eusebius had strong grounds for putting the
persecution into the time of Eleutherus, and the letter sent by the confessors
to Eleutherus (as recorded below in chap. 4) gives us also good reason for
putting the persecution into the time of his episcopate. But Eleutherus cannot
have become bishop before 174 (see Lipsius' Chron. der röm. 'Bischöfe, p. 184
sq., and note 2, above). There is no reason, therefore, for doubting the date
given here by Eusebius.

4: All the mss. read marturwn , but I have followed Valesius (in his notes) and
Heinichen in reading marturiwn sunagwgh , "collection." We speak correctly of a
"collection of martyrdoms," not of a "collection of martyrs," and I cannot
believe that Eusebius, in referring to a work of his own, used the wrong word in
the present case. Upon the work itself, see the Prolegomena, p. 30, of this
volume.

5: tou kata qeon politeumatoj , with the majority of the mss. supported by
Rufinus. Some mss., followed by Stroth, Burton, and Schwegler, read kaq= hmaj
instead of kata qeon politeuma 6: Lougdounoj kai Bienna , the ancient Lugdunum
and Vienna, the modern Lyons and Vienne in southeastern France.

7: marturwn . This word is used in this and the following chapters of all those
that suffered in the persecution, whether they lost their lives or not, and
therefore in a broader sense than our word "martyr." In order, therefore, to
avoid all ambiguity I have translated the word in every case "witness," its
original significance. Upon the use of the words martur and martuj in the early
Church, see Bk. III. chap. 32, note 15.

8: The fragments of this epistle, preserved by Eusebius in this and the next
chapter, are printed with a commentary by Routh, in his Rel. Sacrae. I. p. 285
sq., and an English translation is given in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. p.
778 sq. There can be no doubt as to the early date and reliability of the
epistle. It bears no traces of a later age, and contains little of the
marvelous, which entered so largely into the spurious martyrologies of a later
day. Its genuineness is in fact questioned by no one so far as I am aware. It is
one of the most beautiful works of the kind which we have, and well deserves the
place in his History which Eusebius has accorded it. We may assume that we have
the greater part of the epistle in so far as it related to the martyrdoms. Ado,
in his Mart., asserts that forty-eight suffered martyrdom, and even gives a list
of their names. It is possible that he gained his information from the epistle
itself, as given in its complete form in Eusebius' Collection of Martyrdoms; but
I am inclined to think rather that Eusebius has mentioned if not all, at least
the majority of the martyrs referred to in the epistle, and that therefore Ado's
list is largely imaginary. Eusebius' statement, that a "multitude" suffered
signifies nothing, for muria 9: Rom. viii. 18.

10: Of course official imprisonment cannot be referred to here. It may be that
the mob did actually shut Christians up in one or another place, or it may mean
simply that their treatment was such that the Christians were obliged to avoid
places of public resort and were perhaps even compelled to remain somewhat
closely at home, and were thus in a sense "imprisoned."

11: xiliarxhj

12: Of the various witnesses mentioned in this chapter (Vettius Epagathus,
Sanctus, Attalus, Blandina, Biblias, Pothinus, Maturus, Alexander, Ponticus) we
know only what this epistle tells us. The question has arisen whether Vettius
Epagathus really was a martyr. Renan ( Marc Auréle, p. 307) thinks that he was
not even arrested, but that the words "taken into the number of martyrs" (§10,
below) imply simply that he enjoyed all the merit of martyrdom without actually
undergoing any suffering. He bases his opinion upon the fact that Vettius is not
mentioned again among the martyrs whose sufferings are recorded, and also upon
the use of the words, "He was and is a true disciple" (§10, below). It is quite
possible, however, that Vettius, who is said to have been a man of high station,
was simply beheaded as a Roman citizen, and therefore there was no reason for
giving a description of his death; and still further the words, "taken into the
order of witnesses," and also the words used in §10, "being well pleased to lay
down his life," while they do not prove that he suffered martyrdom, yet seem
very strongly to imply that he did, and the quotation from the Apocalypse in the
same paragraph would seem to indicate that he was dead, not alive, at the time
the epistle was written. On the whole, it may be regarded as probable, though
not certain, that Vettius was one of the martyrs. Valesius refers to Gregory of
Tours ( H. E. chaps. 29, 31) as mentioning a certain senator who was "of the
lineage of Vettius Epagathus, who suffered for the name of Christ at Lyons."
Gregory's authority is not very great, and he may in this case have known no
more about the death of Vettius than is told in the fragment which we still
possess, so that his statement can hardly be urged as proof that Vettius did
suffer martyrdom. But it may be used as indicating that the latter was of a
noble family, a fact which is confirmed in §10, below, where he is spoken of as
a man of distinction.

13: Luke i. 6.

14: klhron , employed in the sense of "order," "class," "category." Upon the
significance of the word klhroj 15: paraklhton ; cf. John xiv. 16.

16: pneuma is omitted by three important mss. followed by Laemmer and Heinichen.
Burton retains the word in his text, but rejects it in a note. They are possibly
correct, but I have preferred to follow the majority of the codices, thinking it
quite natural that Eusebius should introduce the pneuma in connection with
Zacharias, who is said to have been filled with the "Spirit," not with the
"Advocate," and thinking the omission of the word by a copyist, to whom it might
seem quite superfluous after paraklhton , much easier than its insertion.

17: See Luke i. 67.

18: Compare John xv. 13.

19: Rev. xiv. 4.

20: diekrinonto . Valesius finds in this word a figure taken from the athletic
combats; for before the contests began the combatants were examined, and those
found eligible were admitted ( eiskrinesqai ), while the others were rejected (
ekkrinesqai ).

21: ecetrwsan , with Stroth, Zimmermann, Schwegler, Burton, and Heinichen.
ecepeson has perhaps a little stronger ms. support, and was read by Rufinus, but
the former word, as Valesius remarks, being more unusual than the latter, could
much more easily be changed into the latter by a copyist than the latter into
the former.

22: Gieseler ( Ecclesiastical History, Harper's edition, I. p. 127) speaks of
this as a violation of the ancient law that slaves could not be compelled to
testify against their masters; but it is to be noticed that it is not said in
the present case that they were called upon to testify against their masters,
but only that through fear of what might come upon them they yielded to the
solicitation of the soldiers and uttered falsehoods against their masters. It is
not implied therefore that any illegal methods were employed in this respect by
the officials in connection with the trials.

23: i.e. of cannibalism and incest; for according to classic legend Thyestes had
unwittingly eaten his own sons served to him at a banquet by an enemy, and
Oedipus had unknowingly married his own mother. Upon the terrible accusations
brought against the Christians by their heathen enemies, see above, Bk. IV.
chap. 7, note 20.

24: John xvi. 2.

25: kai di ekeinwn rhqhnai ti twn blasfhmwn . The word blasfhmwn evidently
refers here to the slanderous reports against the Christians such as had been
uttered by those mentioned just above. This is made clear, as Valesius remarks,
by the kai di ekeinwn

26: Valesius maintains that Sanctus was a deacon of the church of Lyons, and
that the words apo Biennhj signify only that he was a native of Vienne, but it
is certainly more natural to understand the words as implying that he was a
deacon of the church of Vienne, and it is not at all difficult to account for
his presence in Lyons and his martyrdom there. Indeed, it is evident that the
church of Vienne was personally involved in the persecution as well as that of
Lyons. Cf. §13, above.

27: Pergamos in Asia Minor (mentioned in Rev. ii. 12, and the seat of a
Christian church for a number of centuries) is apparently meant here. As already
remarked, the connection between the inhabitants of Gaul and of Asia Minor was
very close.

28: Cf. 1 Cor. i. 27, 1 Cor. i. 28.

29: uper panta anqrwpon .

30: Blasphemy against Christianity, not against God or Christ; that is, slanders
against the Christians (cf. §14, above), as is indicated by the words that
follow (so Valesius also).

31: See Bk. IV. chap. 16, note 9.

32: The compassion of Jesus appeared not in the fact that those who denied
suffered such terrible punishments, but that the difference between their misery
in their sufferings and the joy of the faithful in theirs became a means of
strength and encouragement to the other Christians. Compare the note of
Heinichen (III. p. 180).

33: Cf. 2 Cor. ii, 15. Cf. also Bk. IV. chap. 15, §37, above.

34: meta tauta dh loipon eij pan eidoj dihreito ta marturia thj ecodou autwn .

35: dia pleionwn klhrwn 36: taj diecodouj twn mastigwn taj ekeise eiqismenaj

37: Among the Romans crucifixion was the mode of punishment commonly inflicted
upon slaves and the worst criminals. Roman citizens were exempt from this
indignity. See Lipsius' De Cruce and the various commentaries upon the Gospel
narratives of the crucifixion of Christ.

38: Compare Isa. xxvii. 1, which is possibly referred to here.

39: wj nekrouj ecetrwse . Compare §11, above.

40: Ezek. xxxiii. 11.

41: apotumpanisqhnai . The word means literally "beaten to death," but it is
plain that it is used in a general sense here, from the fact that some were
beheaded and some sent to the wild beasts, as we are told just below.

42: Renan ( Marc Auréle, p. 329) identifies this with the meeting of the general
assembly of the Gallic nations, which took place annually in the month of August
for the celebration of the worship of Augustus, and was attended with imposing
ceremonies, games, contests, &c. The identification is not at all improbable.

43: as Cf. Matt. xxii. 11.

44: thganon : literally, "frying-pan," by which, however, is evidently meant the
instrument of torture spoken of already more than once in this chapter as an
iron seat or chair.

45: The Christians were very solicitous about the bodies of the martyrs, and
were especially anxious to give them decent burial, and to preserve the memory
of their graves as places of peculiar religious interest and sanctity. They
sometimes went even to the length of bribing the officials to give them the dead
bodies (cf. §61, below).

46: Rev. xxii. 11. The citation of the Apocalypse at this date as Scripture (
ina h grafh plhrwqh ) is noteworthy.

47: These words show us how much emphasis the Christians of that day must have
laid upon the resurrection of the body (an emphasis which is abundantly evident
from other sources), and in what a sensuous and material way they must have
taught the doctrine, or at least how unguarded their teaching must have been,
which could lead the heathen to think that they could in the slightest impede
the resurrection by such methods as they pursued. The Christians, in so far as
they laid so much emphasis as they did upon the material side of the doctrine,
and were so solicitous about the burial of their brethren, undoubtedly were in
large part responsible for this gross misunderstanding on the part of the
heathen.

48: Namely, Antoninus Verus (in reality Marcus Aurelius, but wrongly
distinguished by Eusebius from him), mentioned above in the Introduction. Upon
Eusebius' separation of Marcus Aurelius and Antoninus Verus, see below, p. 390,
note.

49: Phil. ii. 6.

50: Rev. iii. 14.

51: Rev. i. 5.

52: arxhgw thj zwhj tou qeou . Cf. Rev. iii. 14.

53: omologoi . The regular technical term for "confessor," which later came into
general use, was omologhthj .

54: teleiwqhnai ; i.e be made perfect by martyrdom. For this use of teleiow 55:
proj touj adelfouj .

56: Compare 1 Pet. v. 6.

57: pasi men apologounto pasi apologounto uper apologeomai ). At the same time,
though it may not be possible to produce any other examples of the use of the
dative, instead of uper with the genitive, after apologeomai , it is clear from
the context that it must be accepted in the present case.

58: The question of the readmission of the lapsed had not yet become a burning
one. The conduct of the martyrs here in absolving ( eluon ) those who had shown
weakness under persecution is similar to that which caused so much dispute in
the Church during and after the persecution of Decius. See below, Bk. VI. chap.
43, note 1.

59: Acts vii. 60.

60: hmin , which is found in four important mss. and in Nicephorus, and is
supported by Rufinus and adopted by Stephanus, Stroth, Burton, and Zimmermann.
The majority of the mss., followed by all the other editors, including
Heinichen, read aei .

61: Eusebius refers here to the Novatians, who were so severe in their treatment
of the lapsed, and who in his day were spread very widely and formed an
aggressive and compact organization (see below, Bk. VI. chap. 43, note 1).

62: Of this Alcibiades we know only what is told us in this connection.
Doubtless Eusebius found this extract very much to his taste, for we know that
he was not inclined to asceticism. The enthusiastic spirit of the Lyons
Christians comes out strongly in the extract, and considerable light is thrown
by it upon the state of the Church there. Imprisoned confessors were never
permitted to suffer for want of food and the other comforts of life so long as
their brethren were allowed access to them. Compare e.g. Lucian's Peregrinus
Proteus.

63: On Montanus and the Montanists, see below, chap. 16 sq.

64: Of this Montanist Alcibiades we know nothing. He is, of course, to be
distinguished from the confessor mentioned just above. The majority of the
editors of Eusebius substitute his name for that of Miltiades in chap. 16,
below, but the mss. all read Miltiadhn , and the emendation is unwarranted (see
chap. 16, note 7). Salmon suggests that we should read Miltiades instead of
Alcibiades in the present passage, supposing that the latter may have crept in
through a copyist's error, under the influence of the name Alcibiades mentioned
just above. Such an error is possible, but not probable (see chap. 16, note 7).

65: Of the Montanist Theodotus we know only what is told us here and in chap.
16, below (see that chapter, note 25).

66: On Eleutherus, see above, Bk. V. Introd. note 2.

67: It is commonly assumed that the Gallic martyrs favored the Montanists and
exhorted Eleutherus to be mild in his judgment of them, and to preserve the
peace of the Church by permitting them to remain within it and enjoy fellowship
with other Christians. But Salmon (in the Dict. of Christian Biog. III. p. 937)
has shown, in my opinion conclusively, that the Gallic confessors took the
opposite side, and exhorted Eleutherus to confirm the Eastern Church in its
condemnation of the Montanists, representing to him that he would threaten the
peace of the Church by refusing to recognize the justice of the decision of the
bishops of the East and by setting himself in opposition to them. Certainly,
with their close connection with Asia Minor, we should expect the Gallic
Christians to be early informed of the state of affairs in the East, and it is
not difficult to think that they may have formed the same opinion in regard to
the new prophecy which the majority of their brethren there had formed. The
decisive argument for Salmon's opinion is the fact that Eusebius calls the
letter of the Lyons confessors to Eleutherus "pious and most orthodox."
Certainly, looking upon Montanism as one of the most execrable of heresies and
as the work of Satan himself (cf. his words in chap. 16, below), it is very
difficult to suppose that he can have spoken of a letter written expressly in
favor of the Montanists in any such terms of respect. Salmon says: "It is
monstrous to imagine that Eusebius, thinking thus of Montanism, could praise as
pious or orthodox the opinion of men who, ignorant of Satan's devices, should
take the devil's work for God's. The way in which we ourselves read the history
is that the Montanists had appealed to Rome; that the Church party solicited the
good offices of their countrymen settled in Gaul, who wrote to Eleutherus
representing the disturbance to the peace of the churches (a phrase probably
preserved by Eusebius from the letter itself) which would ensue if the Roman
Church should approve what the Church on the spot had condemned. ...To avert,
then, the possibility of the calamity of a breach between the Eastern and
Western churches, the Gallic churches, it would appear, not only wrote, but sent
Irenaeus to Rome at the end of 177 or the beginning of 178. The hypothesis here
made relieves us from the necessity of supposing this presbeia to have been
unsuccessful, while it fully accounts for the necessity of sending it."

68: On Irenaeus, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 21, note 9.

69: omologhtwn . Eusebius here uses the common technical term for confessors;
i.e. for those who had beefi faithful and had suffered in persecution, but had
not lost their lives. In the epistle of the churches of Lyons and Vienne, the
word omologoi is used to denote the same persons (see above, chap. 2, note 6).

70: Cf. §2 of the Introduction to this book (Bk. V.). On Eusebius' Collection of
Martyrdoms, see above, p. 30.

71: i.e. Antoninus Verus, whom Eusebius expressly distinguishes from Marcus
Aurelius at the beginning of the next chapter. See below, p. 390, note.

72: The expression logoj exei , employed here by Eusebius, is ordinarily used by
him to denote that the account which he subjoins rests simply upon verbal
testimony. But in the present instance he has written authority, which he
mentions below. He seems, therefore, in the indefinite phrase logoj exei , to
express doubts which he himself feels as to the trustworthiness of the account
which he is about to give. The story was widely known in his time, and the
Christians' version of it undoubtedly accepted by the Christians themselves with
little misgiving, and yet he is too well informed upon this subject to be
ignorant of the fact that the common version rests upon a rather slender
foundation. He may have known of the coins and monuments upon which the emperor
had commemorated his own view of the matter,-at any rate he was familiar with
the fact that all the heathen historians contradicted the claims of the
Christians, and hence he could not but consider it a questionable matter. At the
same time, the Christian version of the story was supported by strong names and
was widely accepted, and he, as a good Christian, of course wished to accept it,
if possible, and to report it for the edification of posterity.

73: toutou de adelfon : the toutou referring to the Antoninus mentioned at the
close of the previous chapter. Upon Eusebius' confusion of the successors of
Antoninus Pius, see below, p. 390, note.

74: It is an historical fact that, in 174 a.d., the Roman army in Hungary was
relieved from a very dangerous predicament by the sudden occurrence of a
thunder-storm, which quenched their thirst and frightened the barbarians, and
thus gave the Romans the victory. By heathen writers this event (quite naturally
considered miraculous) was held to have taken place in answer to prayer, but by
no means in answer to the prayers of the Christians. Dion Cassius (LXXI. 8)
ascribes the supposed miracle to the conjurations of the Egyptian magician
Arnuphis; Capitolinus ( Vita Marc. Aurelii, chap. 24, and Vita Heliogabali,
chap. 9), to the prayer of Marcus Aurelius. The emperor himself expresses his
view upon a coin which represents Jupiter as hurling lightning against the
barbarians (see Eckhel. Numism. III. 61).

75: This legion was called the Melitene from the place where it was regularly
stationed,-Melitene, a city in Eastern Cappadocia, or Armenia.

76: Kneeling was the common posture of offering prayer in the early Church, but
the standing posture was by no means uncommon, especially in the offering of
thanksgiving. Upon Sunday and during the whole period from Easter to Pentecost
all prayers were regularly offered in a standing position, as a symbolical
expression of joy (cf. Tertullian, de Corona, chap. 3; de Oratione, chap. 23,
&c.). The practice, however, was not universal, and was therefore decreed by the
Nicene Council in its twentieth canon (Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. 430). See
Kraus' Real-Encyclopädie der Christlichen Alterthümer, Bd. I. p. 551 sqq.

77: logoj exei . See above, note 1.

78: Dion Cassius and Capitolinus record the occurrence (as mentioned above, note
2). It is recorded also by other writers after Eusebius' time, such as Claudian
and Zonaras. None of them, however, attribute the occurrence to the prayers of
the Christians, but all claim it for the heathen gods. The only pre-Eusebian
Christian accounts of this event still extant are those contained in the forged
edict of Marcus Aurelius and in the Apology of Tertullian, quoted just below
(cf. also his de Orat. 29). Cyprian also probably refers to the same event in
his Tractat. ad Demetriadem, 20. Eusebius, in referring to Apolinarius and
Tertullian, very likely mentions all the accounts with which he was acquainted.
Gregory Nyssa, Jerome, and other later Christian writers refer to the event.

79: i.e. Claudius Apolinarius, bishop of Hierapolis. Upon him and his writings,
see above, Bk. IV. chap. 27, note 1. This reference is in all probability to the
Apology of Apolinarius, as this is the only work known to us which would have
been likely to contain an account of such an event. The fact that in the reign
of the very emperor under whom the occurrence took place, and in an Apology
addressed to him, the Christians could be indicated as the source øf the
miracle, shows the firmness of this belief among the Christians themselves, and
also proves that they must have been so numerous in the army as to justify them
in setting up a counter-claim over against the heathen soldiers.Apolinarius is
very far from the truth in his statement as to the name of the legion. From Dion
Cassius, LV. 23, it would seem that the legion bore this name even in the time
of Augustus; but if this be uncertain, at any rate it bore it as early as the
time of Nero (as we learn from an inscription of his eleventh year, Corp. Ins.
Lat. III. 30). Neander thinks it improbable that Apolinarius, a contemporary who
lived in the neighborhood of the legion's winter quarters, could have committed
such a mistake. He prefers to think that the error is Eusebius', and resulted
from a too rapid perusal of the passage in Apolinarius, where there must have
stood some such words as, "Now the emperor could with right call the legion the
Thundering Legion." His opinion is at least plausible. Tertullian certainly knew
nothing of the naming of the legion at this time, or if he had heard the report,
rejected it.

80: In Bk. II. chap. 2, §4, and Bk. III. chap. 33, §3 (quoted also in Bk. III.
chap. 20, §9).

81: Apol. chap. 5.

82: A pretended epistle of Marcus Aurelius, addressed to the Senate, in which he
describes the miraculous deliverance of his army through the prayers of the
Christians, is still extant, and stands at the close of Justin Martyr's first
Apology. It is manifestly the work of a Christian, and no one now thinks of
accepting it as genuine. It is in all probability the same epistle to which
Tertullian refers, and therefore must have been forged before the end of the
second century, although its exact date cannot be determined. See Overbeck,
Studien zur Gesch. d. alten Kirche, I.

83: The epistle says that the accuser is to be burned alive ( zwnta kaiesqai
qanatoj .

84: Apol. ibid.

85: See Bk. III. chap. 12, note 1.

86: Upon Trajan's rescript, and the universal misunderstanding of it in the
early Church, see above, Bk. III. chap. 33 (notes).

87: Upon Hadrian's treatment of the Christians, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 9.

88: Upon Antoninus Pius' relation to them, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 13.

89: Whether Eusebius refers in this remark only to the report of Tertullian, or
to the entire account of the miracle, we do not know. The remark certainly has
reference at least to the words of Tertullian. Eusebius had apparently not
himself seen the epistle of Marcus Aurelius; for in the first place, he does not
cite it; secondly, he does not rest his account upon it, but upon Apolinarius
and Tertullian; and thirdly, in his Chron. both the Armenian and Greek say, " it
is said that there are epistles of Marcus Aurelius extant," while Jerome says
directly, " there are letters extant."

90: See above, chap. 1, §29.

91: Upon Irenaeus, see Bk. IV. chap. 21, note 9.

92: Cf. Adv. Haer. II. 3. 4, &c., and Eusebius, chap. 20, below.

93: Adv. Haer. III. 3. 3.

94: Namely, Peter and Paul; but neither of them founded the Roman church. See
above, Bk. II. chap. 25, note 17.

95: On Linus, see above, Bk. III. chap. 2, note 1; and for the succession of the
early Roman bishops, see the same note.

96: 2 Tim. iv. 21.

97: On Anencletus, see above, Bk. III. chap. 13, note 3.

98: On Clement, see above, Bk. III. chap. 4, note 19.

99: Although the identification of this Clement with the one mentioned in Phil.
iv. 3 is more than doubtful, yet there is no reason to doubt that, living as he
did in the first century at Rome, he was personally acquainted at least with the
apostles Peter and Paul.

100: See the Epistle of Clement itself, especially chaps. 1 and 3.

101: Upon the epistle, see above, Bk. III. chap. 16, note 1.

102: aneousa thn pistin autwn kai hn newsti apo twn apostolwn paradotin eilhfei
. The last word being in the singular, the tradition must be that received by
the Roman, not by the Corinthian church (as it is commonly understood), and
hence it is necessary to supply some verb which shall govern paradosin
kataggelousa kataggelousa stood in the original text of Eusebius.

103: It is interesting to notice how strictly Eusebius carries out his principle
of taking historical matter wherever he can find it, but of omitting all
doctrinal statements and discussions. The few sentences which follow in Irenaeus
are of a doctrinal nature, and in the form of a brief polemic against
Gnosticism.

104: Ibid.

105: Upon Evarestus, see above, Bk. III. chap. 34, note 3.

106: Upon Alexander, see Bk. IV. chap. 1, note 4.

107: Upon Xystus, see IV. 4, note 3.

108: Upon Telesphorus, see IV. 5, note 13.

109: Upon Hyginus, see IV. 10, note 3.

110: Upon Pius, see IV. 11, note 14.

111: Upon Anicetus, see IV. 11, note 18.

112: Upon Soter, see IV. 19, note 2.

113: Upon Eleutherus, see Introd. to this book, note 2.

114: diadoxh didaxh 115: In the various passages referred to in the notes on the
previous chapter.

116: elegxou kai anatrophj thj yeudwnumou gnwsewj

117: Adv. Haer. II. 31. 2. The sentence as it stands in Eusebius is incomplete.
Irenaeus is refuting the pretended miracles of Simon and Carpocrates. The
passage runs as follows: "So far are they [i.e. Simon and Carpocrates] from
being able to raise the dead as the Lord raised them and as the apostles did by
means of prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on account
of some necessity-the entire Church in that locality entreating with much
fasting and prayer [so that] the spirit of the dead man has returned, and he has
been bestowed in answer to the prayer of the saints-that they do not even
believe this can possibly be done, [and hold] that the resurrection from the
dead is simply an acquaintance with that truth which they proclaim."This
resurrection of the dead recorded by Irenaeus is very difficult to explain, as
he is a truth-loving man, and we can hardly conceive of his uttering a direct
falsehood. Even Augustine, "the iron man of truth," records such miracles, and
so the early centuries are full of accounts of them. The Protestant method of
drawing a line between the apostolic and post-apostolic ages in this matter of
miracles is arbitrary, and based upon dogmatic, not historical grounds. The
truth is, that no one can fix the point of time at which miracles ceased; at the
same time it is easy to appreciate the difference between the apostolic age and
the third, fourth, and following centuries in this regard. That they did cease
at an early date in the history of the Church is clear enough. Upon
post-apostolic miracles, see Schaff, Ch. Hist. II. p. 116 ff., J. H. Newman's
Two Essays on Biblical and Eccles. Miracles, and J. B. Mozley's Bampton lectures
On Miracles.

118: See the previous note.

119: Adv. Haer. II. 32. 4.

120: Cf. Matt. x. 8.

121: Adv. Haer. V. 6. 1.

122: Eusebius is apparently thinking of the preface to his work contained in Bk.
I. chap. 1, but there he makes no such promise as he refers to here. He speaks
only of his general purpose to mention those men who preached the divine word
either orally or in writing. In Bk. III. chap. 3, however, he distinctly
promises to do what he here speaks of doing, and perhaps remembered only that he
had made such a promise without recalling where he had made it.

123: Adv. Haer. III. 1. 1.

124: See above, Bk. III. chap. 24, note 5. Irenaeus, in this chapter traces the
four Gospels back to the apostles themselves, but he is unable to say that
Matthew translated his Gospel into Greek, which is of course bad for his theory,
as the Matthew Gospel which the Church of his time had was in Greek, not in
Hebrew. He puts the Hebrew Gospel, however, upon a par with the three Greek
ones, and thus, although he does not say it directly, endeavors to convey the
impression that the apostolicity of the Hebrew Matthew is a guarantee for the
Greek Matthew also. Of Papias' statement, "Each one translated the Hebrew Gospel
of Matthew as he was able," he could of course make no use even if he was
acquainted with it. Whether his account was dependent upon Papias' or not we
cannot tell.

125: See above, Bk. II. chap. 25, note 17.

126: See above, Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4.

127: See above, Bk. III. chap. 4, note 15.

128: See above, Bk. III. chap. 24, note 1.

129: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. V. 30. 1.

130: Rev. xiii. 18. Already in Irenaeus' time there was a variation in the
copies of the Apocalypse. This is interesting as showing the existence of old
copies of the Apocalypse even in his time, and also as showing how early works
became corrupted in the course of transmission. We learn from his words, too,
that textual criticism had already begun.

131: The sentence as Eusebius quotes it here is incomplete; he repeats only so
much of it as suits his purpose. Irenaeus completes his sentence, after a few
more dependent clauses, by saying, "I do not know how it is that some have
erred, following the ordinary mode of speech, and have vitiated the middle
number in the name," &c. This shows that even in Irenaeus' time there was as
much controversy about the interpretation of the Apocalypse as there has always
been, and that at that day exegetes were as a rule in no better position than we
are. Irenaeus refers in this sentence to the fact that the Greek numerals were
indicated by the letters of the alphabet: Alpha, "one," Beta, "two," &c.

132: i.e. concerning the Beast or Antichrist. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. V. 30. 3;
quoted also in Bk. III. chap. 18, above.

133: See above, Bk. III. chap. 18, note 1.

134: Upon the Apocalypse, see Bk. III. chap. 24, note 20.

135: In Adv. Haer. III. 16. 5, 8. Irenaeus also quotes from the second Epistle
of John, without distinguishing it from the first, in III. 16. 8, and I. 16. 3.
Upon John's epistles, see Bk. III. chap. 24, notes 18 and 19.

136: In Adv. Haer. IV. 9. 2. In IV. 16. 5 and V. 7. 2 he quotes from the first
Epistle of Peter, with the formula "Peter says." He is the first one to connect
the epistle with Peter. See above, Bk. III. chap. 3, note 1.

137: i.e. the Shepherd of Hermas; see above, Bk. III. chap. 3, note 23.

138: Adv. Haer. IV. 20. 2.

139: h grafh , the regular word used in quoting Scripture. Many of the Fathers
of the second and third centuries used this word in referring to Clement,
Hermas, Barnabas, and other works of the kind (compare especially Clement of
Alexandria's use of the word).

140: The Shepherd of Hermas, II. 1.

141: Adv. Haer. IV. 38. 3. Irenaeus in this passage quotes freely from the
apocryphal Book of Wisdom, VI. 19, without mentioning the source of his
quotation, and indeed without in any way indicating the fact that he is quoting.

142: apomnhmoneumatwn . Written memoirs are hardly referred to here, but rather
oral comments, expositions, or accounts of the interpretations of the apostles
and others of the first generation of Christians.

143: Adv. Haer. IV. 27. 1, where Irenaeus mentions a "certain presbyter who had
heard it from those who had seen the apostles," &c. Who this presbyter was
cannot be determined. Polycarp, Papias, and others have been suggested, but we
have no grounds upon which to base a decision, though we may perhaps safely
conclude that so prominent a man as Polycarp would hardly have been referred to
in such an indefinite way; and Papias seems ruled out by the fact that the
presbyter is here not made a hearer of the apostles themselves, while in V. 33.
4 Papias is expressly stated to have been a hearer of John,-undoubtedly in
Irenaeus' mind the evangelist John (see above, Bk. III. chap. 39, note 4). Other
anonymous authorities under the titles, "One superior to us," "One before us,"
&c., are quoted by Irenaeus in Praef. ç2, I. 13. 3, III. 17. 4, etc. See Routh,
Rel. Sacrae, I. 45-68.

144: In Adv. Haer. IV. 6. 2, where he mentions Justin Martyr and quotes from his
work Against Marcion (see Eusebius, Bk. IV. chap. 18), and also in Adv. Haer. V.
26. 2, where he mentions him again by name and quotes from some unknown work
(but see above, ibid. note 15).

145: Irenaeus nowhere mentions Ignatius by name, but in V. 28. 4 he quotes from
his epistle to the Romans, chap. 4, under the formula, "A certain one of our
people said, when he was condemned to the wild beasts." It is interesting to
note how diligently Eusebius had read the works of Irenaeus, and extracted from
them all that could contribute to his History. Upon Ignatius, see above, III.
36.

146: Adv. Haer. I. 27. 4, III. 12. 12. This promise was apparently never
fulfilled, as we hear nothing of the work from any of Irenaeus' successors. But
in Bk. IV. chap. 25 Eusebius speaks of Irenaeus as one of those who had written
against Marcion, whether in this referring to his special work promised here, or
only to his general work Adv. Haer., we cannot tell.

147: qeopneustwn .

148: Adv. Haer. III. 21. 1.

149: Isa. vii. 14. The original Hebrew has hml//

150: This is the earliest direct reference to the translations of Aquila and
Theodotion, though Hermas used the version of the latter, as pointed out by Hort
(see above, Bk. III. chap. 3, note 23). Upon the two versions, see Bk. VI. chap.
16, notes 3 and 5.

151: Upon the Ebionites and their doctrines, see Bk. III. chap. 27.

152: Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, or Ptolemy Soter (the Preserver), was king of
Egypt from 323-285 (283) b.c.

153: poihsantoj tou qeou oper hbouleto poihsontaj touto oper hbouleto ), "to
carry out what he [viz. Ptolemy] had desired." Heinichen modifies the text of
Eusebius somewhat, substituting poihsontaj ta for poihsantoj tou qeou gar hn
boulhma ), I am inclined to think that the text of Eusebius represents the
original more closely than the text of the Latin translation of Irenaeus does.
Most of the editors, however, both of Eusebius and of Irenaeus, take the other
view (cf. Harvey's note in his edition of Irenaeus, Vol. II. p. 113).

154: thn authn ermhneian grafein , as the majority of the mss., followed by
Burton and most other editors, read. Stroth Zimmermann, and Heinichen, on the
authority of Rufinus and of the Latin version of Irenaeus, read, thn authhn
ermhneuein grafhn .

155: kat epipnoian .

156: This tradition, which was commonly accepted until the time of the
Reformation, dates from the first Christian century, for it is found in the
fourth book of Ezra (xiv. 44): It is there said that Ezra was inspired to
dictate to five men, during forty days, ninety-four books, of which twenty-four
(the canonical books) were to be published. The tradition is repeated quite
frequently by the Fathers, but that Ezra formed the Old Testament canon is
impossible, for some of the books were not written until after his day. The
truth is, it was a gradual growth and was not completed until the second century
b.c. See above, Bk. III. chap. 10, note 1.

157: i.e. Marcus Aurelius. See below, p. 390, note.

158: March 17, 180a.d.

159: Of this Julian we know nothing except what is told us by Eusebius here and
in chap. 22, below, where he is said to have held office ten years. In the
Chron. he is also said to have been bishop for ten years, but his accession is
put in the nineteenth year of Marcus Aurelius (by Jerome), or in the second year
of Commodus (by the Armenian version).

160: Upon Agrippinus, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 19, note 5.

161: Pantaenus is the first teacher of the Alexandrian school that is known to
us, and even his life is involved in obscurity. His chief significance for us
lies in the fact that he was the teacher of Clement, with whom the Alexandrian
school first steps out into the full light of history, and makes itself felt as
a power in Christendom. Another prominent pupil of Pantaenus was Alexander,
bishop of Jerusalem (see below, Bk. VI. chap. 14). Pantaenus was originally a
Stoic philosopher, and must have discussed philosophy in his school in
connection with theology, for Origen appeals to him as his example in this
respect (see below, Bk. VI. chap. 19). His abilities are testified to by Clement
(in his Hypotyposes ; see the next chapter, §4), who speaks of him always in
terms of the deepest respect and affection. Of his birth and death we know
nothing. Clement, Strom. I. 1, calls him a "Sicilian bee," which may, perhaps,
have reference to his birthplace. The statement of Philip of Side, that he was
an Athenian, is worthless. We do not know when he began his work in Alexandria,
nor when he finished it. But from Bk. VI. chap. 6 we learn that Clement had
succeeded Pantaenus, and was in charge of the school in the time of Septimius
Severus. This probably means not merely that Pantaenus had left Egypt, but that
he was already dead; and if that be the case, the statement of Jerome ( de vir.
ill. 36 ), that Pantaenus was in charge of the school during the reigns of
Septimius Severus and Caracalla, is erroneous (Jerome himself expressly says, in
ibid . chap. 38, that Clement succeeded Pantaenus upon the death of the latter).
Jerome's statement, however, that Pantaenus was sent to India by Demetrius,
bishop of Alexandria, is not necessarily in conflict with the indefinite account
of Eusebius, who gives no dates. What authority Jerome has for his account we do
not know. If his statement be correct, the journey must have taken place after
190; and thus after, or in the midst or, his Alexandrian activity. Eusebius
apparently accepted the latter opinion, though his statement at the end of this
chapter is dark, and evidently implies that he was very uncertain in regard to
the matter. His whole account rests simply on hearsay, and therefore too much
weight must not be laid upon its accuracy. After Clement comes upon the scene
(which was at least some years before the outbreak of the persecution of
Severus, 200a.d.-when he left the city) we hear nothing more of Pantaenus. Some
have put his journey to India in this later period; but this is contrary to the
report of Eusebius, and there is no authority for the opinion. Photius ( Cod.
118) records a tradition that Pantaenus had himself heard some of the apostles;
but this is impossible, and is asserted by no one else. According to Jerome,
numerous commentaries of Pantaenus were extant in his time. Eusebius, at the
close of this chapter, speaks of his expounding the Scriptures "both orally and
in writing," but he does not enumerate his works, and apparently had never seen
them. No traces of them are now extant, unless some brief reminiscences of his
teaching, which we have, are supposed to be drawn from his works, and not merely
from his lectures or conversations (see Routh, Rel. Sac. I. p. 375-383).

162: The origin of this school of the faithful, or "catechetical school," in
Alexandria is involved in obscurity. Philip of Side names Athenagoras as the
founder of the school, but his account is full of inconsistencies and
contradictions, and deserves no credence. The school first comes out into the
light of history at this time with Pantaenus at its head, and plays a prominent
part in Church history. under Clement, Origen, Heraclas, Dionysius, Didymus,
&c., until the end of the fourth century, when it sinks out of sight in the
midst of the dissensions of the Alexandrian church, and its end like its
beginning is involved in obscurity. It probably owed its origin to no particular
individual, but arose naturally as an outgrowth from the practice which
flourished in the early Church of instructing catechumens in the elements of
Christianity before admitting them to baptism. In such a philosophical
metropolis as Alexandria, a school, though intended only for catechumens, would
very naturally soon assume a learned character, and it had already in the time
of Pantaenus at least become a regular theological school for the preparation
especially of teachers and preachers. It exercised a great influence upon
theological science, and numbered among its pupils many celebrated theologians
and bishops. See the article by Redepenning in Herzog, 2d ed. I. 290-292, and
Schaff's Ch. Hist. II. 777-781, where the literature of the subject is given.

163: Jerome ( de vir. ill. c. 36) states that there had always been
ecclesiastical teachers in Alexandria from the time of Mark. He is evidently,
however, giving no independent tradition, but merely draws his conclusion from
the words of Eusebius who simply says "from ancient times." The date of the
origin of the school is in fact entirely unknown, though there is nothing
improbable in the statement of Jerome that ecclesiastical teachers were always
there. It must, however, have been some years before a school could be developed
or the need of it be felt.

164: pareilhfamen .

165: logoj exei .

166: Jerome ( de vir. ill. 36) says that he was sent to India by the bishop
Demetrius at the request of the Indians themselves,-a statement more exact than
that of Eusebius, whether resting upon tradition merely, or upon more accurate
information, or whether it is simply a combination of Jerome's, we do not know.
It is at any rate not at all improbable (see above, note 1). A little farther on
Eusebius indicates that Pantaenus preached in the same country in which the
apostle Bartholomew had done missionary work. But according to Lipsius ( Dict.
of Christ. Biog. I. p. 22) Bartholomew's traditional field of labor was the
region of the Bosphorus. He follows Gutschmid therefore in claiming that the
Indians here are confounded with the Sindians, over whom the Bosphorian kings of
the house of Polemo ruled. Jerome ( Ep. ad Magnum; Migne, Ep. 70) evidently
regards the India where Pantaenus preached as India proper ( Pantaenus Stoicae
sectae philosophus, ob pracipue eruditionis gloriam, a Demetrio Alexandriae
episcopo missus est in Indiam, ut Christum apud Brachmanas, et illius gentis
philosophos praedicaret ). Whether the original tradition was that Pantaenus
went to India, and his connection with Bartholomew (who was wrongly supposed to
have preached to the Indians) was a later combination, or whether, on the other
hand, the tradition that he preached in Bartholomew's field of labor was the
original and the mission to India a later combination, we cannot tell. It is
probable that Eusebius meant India proper, as Jerome certainly did, but both of
them may have been mistaken.

167: hsan gar, hsan eiseti 168: See note 6.

169: If the truth of this account be accepted, Pantaenus is a witness to the
existence of a Hebrew Matthew. See above, Bk. III. chap. 24, note 5. It has been
assumed by some that this Gospel was the Gospel according to the Hebrews (see
Bk. III. chap. 25, note 24). This is possible; but even if Pantaenus really did
find a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew as Eusebius says (and which, according to
Jerome, de vir. ill. 36, he brought back to Alexandria with him), we have no
grounds upon which to base a conclusion as to its nature, or its relation to our
Greek Matthew.

170: Eusebius apparently puts the journey of Pantaenus in the middle of his
Alexandrian activity, and makes him return again and teach there until his
death. Jerome also agrees in putting the journey in the middle and not at the
beginning or close of his Alexandrian activity. It must be confessed, however,
that Eusebius'language is very vague, and of such a nature as perhaps to imply
that he really had no idea when the mission took place.

171: See above, note 1.

172: Of the place and time of Titus Flavius Clement's birth we have no certain
knowledge, though it is probable that he was an Athenian by training at least,
if not by birth, and he must have been born about the middle of the second
century. He received a very extensive education, and became a Christian in adult
years, after he had, tried various systems of philosophy, much as Justin Martyr
had. He had a great thirst for knowledge, and names six different teachers under
whom he studied Christianity (see below, §4). Finally he became a pupil of
Pantaenus in Alexandria, whom he afterward succeeded as the head of the
catechetical school there. It is at this time (about 190 a.d.) that he comes out
clearly into the light of history, and to this period (190-202) belongs his
greatest literary activity. He was at the head of the school probably until 202,
when the persecution of Severus having broken out, he left Alexandria, and we
nave no notice that he ever returned. That he did not leave Alexandria
dishonorably, through fear, may be gathered from his presence with Alexander
during his imprisonment, and from the letters of the latter (see below, Bk. VI.
chaps. 11 and 14, and cf. Bk. VI. chap. 6, notes). This is the last notice that
we have of him (a.d. 212); and of the place and time of his death we know
nothing, though he cannot have lived many years after this. He was never a
bishop, but was a presbyter of the Alexandrian church, and was in ancient times
commemorated as a saint, but his name was dropped from the roll by Clement VIII.
on account of suspected heterodoxy. He lived in an age of transition, and his
great importance lies in the fact that he completed the bond between Hellenism
and Christianity, and as a follower of the apologists established Christianity
as a philosophy, and yet not as they had done in an apologetic sense. He was the
teacher of Origen, and the real father of Greek theology. He published no
system, as did Origen; his works were rather desultory and fragmentary, but full
of wide and varied learning, and exhibit a truly broad and catholic spirit. Upon
his works, see Bk. VI. chap. 13. Upon Clement, see especially Westcott's article
in Smith and Wace, I. 559-567, and Schaff, II. 781-785, where the literature is
given with considerable fullness. For an able and popular presentation of his
theology, see Allen's Continuity of Christian Thought , p. 38-70.

173: sunaskoumenoj .

174: Upon Clement of Rome and his relation to the apostles, see Bk. III. chap.
4, note 19.

175: On Clement's Hypotyposes , see Bk. VI. chap. 13, note 3. The passage in
which he mentions Pantaenus by name has not been preserved. Eusebius repeats the
same statement in Bk. VI. chap. 13, §1.

176: touj emfanesterouj hj kateilhfen apostolikhj diadoxhj epishmainomenoj
didaxhj instead of diadoxhj , and translate doctrinae. But diadoxhj is too well
supported by ms. authority to be rejected; and though the use of the abstract
"succession," instead of the concrete "successors," seems harsh, it is employed
elsewhere in the same sense by Eusebius (see Bk. I. chap. 1, §1).

177: Strom. I. 1.

178: i.e. his Stromata .

179: This is hardly a proper name, although many have so considered it, for
Clement gives no other proper name in this connection, and it is much more
natural to translate "the Ionian." Various conjectures have been made as to who
these teachers were, but none are more than mere guesses. Philip of Side tells
us that Athenagoras was a teacher of Clement, but, as we have seen, no
confidence can be placed in his statement. It has been conjectured also that
Melito may be the person referred to as "the Ionian," for Clement mentions his
works, and wrote a book on the paschal question in reply to Melito's work on the
same subject (see above, Bk. IV. chap. 26, note 23). This too, however, is mere
conjecture.

180: The lower part of the peninsula of Italy was called Magna Graecia, because
it contained so many Greek colonies.

181: Coele-Syria was the valley lying between the eastern and western ranges of
Lebanon.

182: This has been conjectured to be Tatian. But in the first place, Clement, in
Strom. III. 12, calls Tatian a Syrian instead of an Assyrian (the terms are
indeed often used interchangeably, but we should nevertheless hardly expect
Clement to call his own teacher in one place a Syrian, in another an Assyrian).
And again, in II. 12, he speaks very harshly of Tatian, and could hardly have
referred to him in this place in such terms of respect and affection.

183: Various conjectures have been made as to the identity of this teacher,-for
instance, Theophilus of Caesarea (who, however, was never called a Hebrew,
according to Valesius), and Theodotus (so Valesius).

184: Pantaenus. There can be no doubt as to his identity, for Clement says that
he remained with him and sought no further. Eusebius omits a sentence here in
which Clement calls Pantaenus the "Sicilian bee," from which it is generally
concluded that he was a native of Sicily (see the previous chapter, note 1).

185: This entire passage is very important, as showing not only the
extensiveness of Clement's own acquaintance with Christians, but also the close
intercourse of Christians in general, both East and West. Clement's statement in
regard to the directness with which he received apostolic tradition is not
definite, and he by no means asserts that his teachers were hearers of the
apostles (which in itself would not be impossible, but Clement would certainly
have spoken more clearly had it been a fact), nor indeed that they were hearers
of disciples of the apostles. But among so many teachers, so widely scattered,
he could hardly have failed to meet with some who had at least known those who
had known the apostles. In any case he considers his teachers very near the
apostles as regards the accuracy of their traditions.

186: The date of Narcissus' accession to the see of Jerusalem is not known to
us. The Chron. affords us no assistance; for although it connects him among
other bishops with the first (Armen.) or third (Jerome) year of Severus, it does
not pretend to give the date of accession, and in one place says expressly that
the dates of the Jerusalem bishops are not known ( non potuimus discernere
tempora singulorum ). But from chap. 22 we learn that he was already bishop in
the tenth year of Commodus (189 a.d.); from chap. 23, that he was one of those
that presided at a Palestinian council, called in the time of Bishop Victor, of
Rome, to discuss the paschal question (see chap. 23,§2); from Bk. VI. chap. 8,
that he was alive at the time of the persecution of Severus (202 sq.); and from
the fragment of one of Alexander's epistles given in Bk. VI. chap. 11, that he
was still alive in his 116th year, sometime after 212 a.d. (see Bk. VI. chap.
11, note 1). Epiphanius ( Haer. LXVI. 20) reports that he lived until the reign
of Alexander Severus (222 a.d.), and this in itself would not be impossible; for
the epistle of Alexander referred tomight have been written as late as 222. But
Epiphanius is a writer of no authority; and the fact is, that in connection with
Origen's visit in Palestine, in 216 (see Bk. VI. chap. 19), Alexander is
mentioned as bishop of Jerusalem; and Narcissus is not referred to. We must,
therefore, conclude that Narcissus was dead before 216. We learn from Bk. VI.
chap. 9 that Narcissus had the reputation of being a great miracle-worker, and
he was a man of such great piety and sanctity as to excite the hatred of a
number of evil-doers, who conspired against him to blacken his character. In
consequence of this he left Jerusalem, and disappeared entirely from the haunts
of men, so that it became necessary to appoint another bishop in his place.
Afterward, his slanderers having suffered the curses imprecated upon themselves
in their oaths against him, Narcissus returned, and was again made bishop, and
was given an assistant, Alexander (see Bk. VI. chaps. 10 and 11). A late
tradition makes Narcissus a martyr (see Nicephorus, H. E. IV. 19), but there is
no authority for the report.

187: Upon the so-called bishops of Jerusalem down to the destruction of the city
under Hadrian, see Bk. IV. chap. 5. Upon the destruction of Jerusalem under
Hadrian, and the founding of the Gentile Church in Aelia Capitolina, and upon
Marcus the first Gentile bishop, see Bk. IV. chap. 6.

188: Called Maximinus by the Armenian Chron., but all our other authorities call
him Maximus.

189: The name is given Gaioj in this chapter, and by Syncellus; but Jerome and
the Armenian give Gaianus, and Epiphanius Gaianoj . All the authorities agree
upon the name of the next Gaius (who is, however, omitted by Rufinus).

190: Eusebius has Kapitwn Apiwn, oi de Kapitwn .

191: We know nothing of Rhodo except what is contained in this chapter. Jerome
gives a very brief account of him in his de vir. ill. 37, but it rests solely
upon this chapter, with the single addition of the statement that Rhodo wrote a
work Against the Phrygians. It is plain enough, however, that he had for his
account no independent source, and that he in this statement simply attributed
to Rhodo the work quoted by Eusebius as an anonymous work in chap. 16. Jerome
permits himself such unwarranted combinations very frequently, and we need not
be at all surprised at it. With him a guess is often as good as knowledge, and
in this case he doubtless considered his guess a very shrewd one. There is no
warrant for supposing that he himself saw the work mentioned by Eusebius, and
thus learned its authorship. What Eusebius did not learn from it he certainly
could not, and his whole account betrays the most slavish and complete
dependence upon Eusebius as his only source. In chap. 39 Jerome mentions Rhodo
again as referring, in a book which he wrote against Montanus, Prisca, and
Maximilla, to Miltiades, who also wrote against the same heretics. This report
is plainly enough taken directly from Eusebius, chap. 17, where Eusebius quotes
from the same anonymous work. Jerome's utterly baseless combination is very
interesting, and significant of his general method.

192: See Bk. IV. chap. 29.

193: Upon Marcion and Marcionism, see Bk. IV. chap. 11, note 22.

194: It is noticeable that Rhodo says gnwmaj 195: These fragments of Rhodo are
collected and discussed by Routh in his Rel. Sacrae, I. 437-446.

196: The Fathers entirely misunderstood Marcion, and mistook the significance of
his movement. They regarded it, like Gnosticism in general, solely as a
speculative system, and entirely overlooked its practical aim. The speculative
and theological was not the chief thing with Marcion, but it is the only thing
which receives any attention from his opponents. His positions, all of which
were held only with a practical interest, were not treated by him in a
speculative manner, nor were they handled logically and systematically. As a
consequence, many contradictions occur in them. These contradictions were felt
by his followers, who laid more and more emphasis upon the speculative over
against the practical; and hence, as Rhodo reports, they fell into disagreement,
and, in their effort to remove the inconsistencies, formed various schools,
differing among themselves according to the element upon which the greatest
weight was laid. There is thus some justification for the conduct of the
Fathers, who naturally carried back and attributed to Marcion the principles of
his followers. But it is our duty to distinguish the man from his followers, and
to recognize his greatness in spite of their littleness. Not all of them,
however, fell completely away from his practical religious spirit. Apelles, as
we shall see below, was in many respects a worthy follower of his master.

197: Apelles was the greatest and most famous of Marcion's disciples. Tertullian
wrote a special work against him, which is unfortunately lost, but from his own
quotations, and from those of Pseudo-Tertullian and Hippolytus, it can be in
part restored (cf. Harnack's De Apellis Gnosis Monarchia, p. 11 sqq.). As he was
an old man (see §5, below) when Rhodo conversed with him, he must have been born
early in the second century. We know nothing definite either as to his birth or
death. The picture which we have of him in this chapter is a very pleasing one.
He was a man evidently of deep religious spirit and moral life, who laid weight
upon "trust in the crucified Christ" (see §5, below), and upon holiness in life
in distinction from doctrinal beliefs; a man who was thus thoroughly Marcionitic
in his principles, although he differed so widely with Marcion in some of his
doctrinal positions that he was said to have founded a new sect (so Origen, Hom.
in Gen. II. 2). The slightest difference, however, between his teaching and
Marcion's would have been sufficient to make him the founder of a separate
Gnostic sect in the eyes of the Fathers, and therefore this statement must be
taken with allowance (see note 4, above). The account which Hippolytus ( Phil.
X. 16) gives of the doctrinal positions of Apelles is somewhat different from
that of Rhodo, but ambiguous and less exact. The scandal in regard to him,
reported by Tertullian in his De Praescriptione, 30, is quite in accord with
Tertullian's usual conduct towards heretics, and may be set aside as not having
the slightest foundation in fact, and as absolutely contradicting what we know
of Apelles from this report of his contemporary, Rhodo. His moral character was
certainly above reproach, and the same may be said of his master, Marcion. Upon
Apelles, see especially Harnack's De Apellis Gnosis Monarchia, Lips. 1874.

198: The participle ( semnunomenoj ) carries with it the implication that
Apelles' character was affected or assumed. The implication, however, does not
lessen the value of Rhodo's testimony to his character. He could not deny its
purity, though he insinuated that it was not sincere.

199: This means that Apelles accepted only one God, and made the creator but an
angel who was completely under the power of the Supreme God. Marcion, on the
contrary, held, as said below, two principles, teaching that the world-creator
was himself a God, eternal, uncreated, and independent of the good God of the
Christians. It is true that Marcion represented the world-creator as limited in
power and knowledge, and taught that the Christian God would finally be supreme,
and the world-creator become subject to him; but this, while it involves Marcion
in self-contradiction as soon as the matter is looked at theoretically, yet does
not relieve him from the charge of actual dualism. His followers were more
consistent, and either accepted one principle, subordinating the world-creator
completely to the good God, as did Apelles, or else carried out Marcion's
dualism to its logical result and asserted the continued independence of the Old
Testament God and the world-creator, who was thus very early identified with
Satan and made the enemy of the Christian God. (Marcion's world-creator was not
the bad God, but the righteous in distinction from the good God.) Still others
held three principles: the good God of the Christians, the righteous God or
world-creator, and the bad God, Satan. The varying doctrines of these schools
explain the discrepant and often contradictory reports of the Fathers in regard
to the doctrines of Marcion. Apelles' doctrine was a decided advance upon that
of Marcion, as he rejected the dualism of the latter, which was the destructive
element in his system, and thus approached the Church, whose foundation must be
one God who rules the world for good. His position is very significant, as
remarked by Harnack, because it shows that one could hold Marcion's fundamental
principle without becoming a dualist.

200: i.e. the Old Testament prophecies. Apelles in his Syllogisms (see below,
note 28) exhibited the supposed contradictions of the Old Testament in
syllogistic form, tracing them to two adverse angels, of whom the one spoke
falsely, contradicting the truth spoken by the other. Marcion, on the other hand
(in his Antitheses ), referred all things to the same God, the world-creator,
and from the contradictions of the book endeavored to show his vacillating and
inconsistent character. He, however, accepted the Old Testament as in the main a
trustworthy book, but referred the prophecies to the Jewish Messiah in
distinction from the Christ of the New Testament. But Apelles, looking upon two
adverse angels as the authors of the book, regarded it as in great part false.
Marcion and Apelles were one, however, in looking upon it as an anti-Christian
book.

201: This virgin, Philumene, is connected with Apelles in all the reports which
we have of him (e.g. in Hippolytus, Tertullian, Jerome, &c.), and is reported to
have been looked upon by Apelles as a prophetess who received revelations from
an angel, and who worked miracles. Tertullian, De Praescriptione, 6, evidently
accepts these miracles as facts, but attributes them to the agency of a demon.
They all unite in considering her influence the cause of Apelles' heretical
opinions. Tertullian ( ibid. 30, &c.) calls her a prostitute, but the silence of
Rhodo and Hippolytus is sufficient refutation of such a charge, and it may be
rejected as a baseless slander, like the report of Apelles' immorality mentioned
in note 7. There is nothing strange in the fact that Apelles should follow the
prophecies of a virgin, and the Fathers who mention it evidently do not consider
it as anything peculiar or reprehensible in itself. It was very common in the
early Church to appeal to the relatives of virgins and widows. Cf. e.g. the
virgin daughters of Philip who prophesied (Acts xxi. 9; Eusebius, III. 31), also
the Eccles. Canons, chap. 21, where it is directed that three widows shall be
appointed, of whom two shall give themselves to prayer, waiting for revelations
in regard to any question which may arise in the Church, and the third shall
devote herself to nursing the sick. Tertullian also appeals for proof of the
materiality of the soul to a vision enjoyed by a Christian sister ( de Anima,
9). So Montanus had his prophetesses Priscilla and Maximilla (see the next
chapter).

202: Of these two men we know only what is told us here. They are not mentioned
elsewhere.

203: See note 9.

204: o nauthj

205: It was the custom of the Fathers to call the heretics hard names, and
Marcion received his full share of them from his opponents, especially from
Tertullian. He is compared to a wolf by Justin also, Apol. I. 58, on account of
his "carrying away" so many "lambs" from the truth.

206: See note 9.

207: Of Syneros we know only what is told us here. He is not mentioned
elsewhere. Had the Marcionites split into various sects, these leaders must have
been well known among the Fathers, and their names must have been frequently
referred to. As it was, they all remained Marcionites, in spite of their
differences of opinion (see above, note 4).

208: didaskalion , which is the reading of the majority of the mss., and is
adopted by Heinichen. Burton and Schwegler read didaskaleion , on the authority
of two mss.

209: Apelles was evidently like Marcion in his desire to keep within the Church
as much as possible, and to associate with Church people. He had no esoteric
doctrines to conceal from the multitude, and in this he shows the great
difference between himself and the Gnostics. Marcion did not leave the Church
until he was obliged to, and he founded his own church only under compulsion,
upon being driven out of the Catholic community.

210: ton logon .

211: This is a truly Christian sentiment, and Apelles should be honored for the
expression of it. It reveals clearly the religious character of Marcionism in
distinction from the speculative and theological character of the Gnostics, and
indeed of many of the Fathers. With Marcion and Apelles we are in a world of
sensitive moral principle and of deep religious feeling like that in which Paul
and Augustine lived, but few others in the early Church. Rhodo, in spite of his
orthodoxy, shows himself the real Gnostic over against the sincere believer,
though the latter was in the eyes of the Church a "blasphemous heretic."
Apelles' noble words do honor to the movement-however heretical it was-which in
that barren age of theology could give them birth.

212: Rhodo had probably brought forward against Apelles proof from prophecy
which led to the discussion of the Old Testament prophecies in general. Although
Apelles had rejected Marcion's dualism, and accepted the "one principle," he
still rejected the Old Testament. This is quite peculiar, and yet perfectly
comprehensible; for while Marcion was indeed the only one of that age that
understood Paul, yet as Harnack well says, even he misunderstood him; and
neither himself nor his followers were able to rise to Paul's noble conception
of the Old Testament law as a "schoolmaster to bring us to Christ," and thus a
part of the good God's general plan of salvation. It took, perhaps, a born Jew,
as Paul was, to reach that high conception of the law in those days. To Marcion
and his followers the law seemed to stand in irreconcilable conflict with the
Gospel,-Jewish law on the one side, Gospel liberty on the other,-they could not
reconcile them; they must, therefore, reject the former as from another being,
and not from the God of the Gospel. There was in that age no historical
interpretation of the Old Testament. It must either be interpreted
allegorically, and made a completely Christian book, or else it must be rejected
as opposed to Christianity. Marcion and his followers, in their conception of
law and Gospel as necessarily opposed, could follow only the latter course.
Marcion, in his rejection of the Old Testament, proceeded simply upon dogmatic
presumptions. Apelles, although his rejection of it undoubtedly originated in
the same presumptions, yet subjected it to a criticism which satisfied him of
the correctness of his position, and gave him a fair basis of attack. His
procedure was, therefore, more truly historical than that of Marcion, and
anticipated modern methods of higher criticism.

213: A true Gnostic sentiment, over against which the pious "agnosticism" of
Apelles is not altogether unrefreshing. The Church did not fully conquer
Gnosticism,-Gnosticism in some degree conquered the Church, and the
anti-Gnostics, like Apelles, were called heretics. It was the vicious error of
Gnosticism that it looked upon Christianity as knowledge, that it completely
identified the two, and our existing systems of theology, some of them, testify
to the fact that there are still Gnostics among us.

214: Of this Callistio we know nothing; but, as has been remarked by another, he
must have been a well-known man, or Eusebius would probably have said "a certain
Callistio" (see Salmon's article in Smith and Wace).

215: Upon Tatian, see Bk. IV. chap. 29, note 1.

216: Upon this work ( problhmatwn biblion

217: Whether Rhodo fulfilled this promise we do not know. The work is mentioned
by no one else, and Eusebius evidently had no knowledge of its existence, or he
would have said so.

218: eij thn ecahmeron upomnhma

219: Hippolytus (X. 16) also mentions works of Apelles against the law and the
prophets. We know of but one work of his, viz. the Syllogisms, which was devoted
to the criticism of the Old Testament, and in which he worked out the antitheses
of Marcion in a syllogistic form. The work is cited only by Origen ( in Gen. II.
2 ) and by Ambrose ( De Parad. V. 28), and they have preserved but a few brief
fragments. It must have been an extensive work, as Ambrose quotes from the 38th
book. From these fragments we can see that Apelles' criticism of the Old
Testament was very keen and sagacious. For the difference between himself and
Marcion in the treatment of the Old Testament, see above, note 9. The words of
Eusebius, "as it seemed," show that he had not himself seen the book, as might
indeed be gathered from his general account of Apelles, for which he depended
solely upon secondary sources.

220: Cf. Bk. IV. chap. 7, note 3.

221: On Montanus and the Montanists, see chap. 16.

222: The separation of chaps. 14 and 15 is unfortunate. They are closely
connected ( oi men in chap. 14 and oi de in chap. 15), and constitute together a
general introduction to the following chapters, Montanism being treated in
chaps. 16 to 19, and the schism of Florinus and Blastus in chap. 20.

223: On Florinus and Blastus, see chap. 20.

224: Montanism must not be looked upon as a heresy in the ordinary sense of the
term. The movement lay in the sphere of life and discipline rather than in that
of theology. Its fundamental proposition was the continuance of divine
revelation which was begun under the old Dispensation, was carried on in the
time of Christ and his apostles, and reached its highest development under the
dispensation of the Paraclete, which opened with the activity of Montanus. This
Montanus was a Phrygian, who, in the latter part of the second century, began to
fall into states of ecstasy and to have visions, and believed himself a divinely
inspired prophet, through whom the promised Paraclete spoke, and with whom
therefore the dispensation of that Paraclete began. Two noble ladies (Priscilla
and Maximilla) attached themselves to Montanus, and had visions and prophesied
in the same way. These constituted the three original prophets of the sect, and
all that they taught was claimed to be of binding authority on all. They were
quite orthodox, accepted fully the doctrinal teachings of the Catholic Church,
and did not pretend to alter in any way the revelation given by Christ and his
apostles. But they claimed that some things had not been revealed by them,
because at that early stage the Church was not able to bear them; but that such
additional revelations were now given, because the fullness of time had come
which was to precede the second coming of Christ. These revelations had to do
not at all with theology, but wholly with matters of life and discipline. They
taught a rigid asceticism over against the growing worldliness of the Church,
severe discipline over against its laxer methods, and finally the universal
priesthood of believers (even female), and their right to perform all the
functions of church officers, over against the growing sacerdotalism of the
Church. They were thus in a sense reformers, or perhaps reactionaries is a
better term, who wished to bring back, or to preserve against corruption, the
original principles and methods of the Church. They aimed at a puritanic
reaction against worldliness, and of a democratic reaction against growing
aristocracy in the Church. They insisted that ministers were made by God alone,
by the direct endowment of his Spirit in distinction from human ordination. They
looked upon their prophets-supernaturally called and endowed by the Spirit-as
supreme in the Church. They claimed that all gross offenders should be
excommunicated, and that neither they nor the lax should ever be re-admitted to
the Church. They encouraged celibacy, increased the number and severity of
fasts, eschewed worldly amusements, &c. This rigid asceticism was enjoined by
the revelation of the Spirit through their prophets, and was promoted by their
belief in the speedy coming of Christ to set up his kingdom on earth, which was
likewise prophesied. They were thus pre-Millenarians or Chiliasts.

225: thn legomenhn kata Frugaj airesin . The heresy of Montanus was commonly
called the Phrygian heresy because it took its rise in Phrygia. The Latins, by a
solecism, called it the Cataphrygian heresy. Its followers received other names
also, e.g. Priscillianists (from the prophetess Priscilla), and Pepuziani (from
Pepuza, their headquarters). They called themselves pneumatikoi (spiritual), and
the adherents of the Church yuxixoi (carnal).

226: In Bk. IV. chaps. 21, 26 and 27, and in Bk. V. chap. 5. See especially Bk.
IV. chap. 27, note 1.

227: The author of this work is unknown. Jerome ( de vir. ill. 37) ascribes it
to Rhodo (but see above, chap. 13, note 1). It is sometimes ascribed to Asterius
Urbanus, mentioned by Eusebius in §17 below, but he was certainly not its author
(see below, note 27). Upon the date of the work, see below, note 32.

228: The fragments of this anonymous work are given by Routh, Rel. Sac. Vol. II.
p. 183 sqq., and in English in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. VII. p. 335 sqq.

229: Aouirkie , as most of the mss. read. Others have Auirkie or ABirkie ;
Nicephorus, Aberkie

230: eij thn twn kata Miltiadhn legomenwn airesin Alkibiadhn (who is mentioned
in chap. 3 as a prominent Montanist) for Miltiadhn . The mss., however, are
unanimous in reading Miltiadhn ; and it is impossible to see how, if Alkibiadhn
had originally stood in the text, Miltiadhn could have been substituted for it.
It is not impossible that instead of Alcibiades in chap. 3 we should read, as
Salmon suggests, Miltiades. The occurrence of the name Alcibiades in the
previous sentence might explain its substitution for Miltiades immediately
afterward. It is at least easier to account for that change than for the change
of Alcibiades to Miltiades in the present chapter. Were Salmon's suggestion
accepted, the difficulty in this case would be obviated, for we should then have
a Montanist Miltiades of sufficient prominence to justify the naming of the sect
after him in some quarters. The suggestion, however, rests upon mere conjecture,
and it is safer to retain the reading of our mss. in both cases. Until we get
more light from some quarter we must be content to let the matter rest, leaving
the reason for the use of Miltiades' name in this connection unexplained. There
is, of course, nothing strange in the existence of a Montanist named Miltiades;
it is only the great prominence given him here which puzzles us. Upon the
ecclesiastical writer, Miltiades, and Eusebius' confusion of him with
Alcibiades, see chap. 17, note 1.

231: Ancyra was the metropolis and one of the three principal cities of Galatia.
Quite an important town, Angora, now occupies its site.

232: Kata topon , which is the reading of two of the mss. and Nicephorus, and is
adopted by Burton and Heinichen. The phrase seems harsh, but occurs again in the
next paragraph. The majority of the mss. read kata Ponton , which is adopted by
Valesius, Schwegler, Laemmer, and Crusè. It is grammatically the easier reading,
but the reference to Pontus is unnatural in this connection, and in view of the
occurrence of the same phrase, kata topon , in the next paragraph, it seems best
to read thus in the present case as well.

233: Of this Zoticus we know only what is told us here. He is to be
distinguished, of course, from Zoticus of Comana, mentioned in §17, below, and
in chap. 18, §13.

234: en th kata thn Frugian Musia . It is not said here that Montanus was born
in Ardabau, but it is natural to conclude that he was, and so that village is
commonly given as his birthplace. As we learn from this passage, Ardabau was not
in Phrygia, as is often said, but in Mysia. The boundary line between the two
districts was a very indefinite one, however, and the two were often confounded
by the ancients themselves; but we cannot doubt in the present instance that the
very exact statement of the anonymous writer is correct. Of the village of
Ardabau itself we know nothing.

235: The exact date of the rise of Montanism cannot be determined. The reports
which we have of the movement vary greatly in their chronology. We have no means
of fixing the date of the proconsulship of the Gratus referred to here, and thus
the most exact and reliable statement which we have does not help us. In his
Chron. Eusebius fixes the rise of the movement in the year 172, and it is
possible that this statement was based upon a knowledge of the time of Gratus'
proconsulship. If so, it possesses considerable weight. The first notice we have
of a knowledge of the movement in the West is in connection with the martyrs of
Lyons, who in the year 177 (see Introd. to this book, note 3) were solicited to
use their influence with the bishop of Rome in favor of the Montanists (see
above, chap. 3, note 6). This goes to confirm the approximate accuracy of the
date given by Eusebius, for we should expect that the movement cannot have
attracted public notice in the East very many years before it was heard of in
Gaul, the home of many Christians from Asia Minor. Epiphanius ( Haer. XLVIII.)
gives the nineteenth year of Antoninus Pius (156-157) as the date of its
beginning, but Epiphanius' figures are very confused and contradictory, and
little reliance can be placed upon them in this connection. At the same time
Montanus must have begun his prophesying some years before his teaching spread
over Asia Minor and began to agitate the churches and alarm the bishops, and
therefore it is probable that Montanism had a beginning some years before the
date given by Eusebius; in fact, it is not impossible that Montanus may have
begun his work before the end of the reign of Antoninus Pius.

236: Ambition was almost universally looked upon by the Church Fathers as the
occasion of the various heresies and schisms. Novatian, Donatus, and many others
were accused of it by their orthodox opponents. That heretics or schismatics
could be actuated by high and noble motives was to them inconceivable. We are
thus furnished another illustration of their utter misconception of the nature
of heresy so often referred to in these notes.

237: The fault found by the Church with Montanus' prophecy was rather because of
its form than because of its substance. It was admitted that the prophecies
contained much that was true, but the soberer sense of the Church at large
objected decidedly to the frenzied ecstasy in which they were delivered. That a
change had come over the Church in this respect since the apostolic age is
perfectly clear. In Paul's time the speaking with tongues, which involved a
similar kind of ecstasy, was very common; so, too, at the time the Didache was
written the prophets spoke in an ecstasy ( en pneumati 238: i.e. between true
and false prophets.

239: Cf. Matt. vii. 15.

240: wj agiw pneumati kai profhtikw xarismati .

241: Maximilla and Priscilla, or Prisca (mentioned in chap. 14). They were
married women, who left their husbands to become disciples of Montanus, were
given the rank of virgins in his church, and with him were the greatest prophets
of the sect. They were regarded with the most profound reverence by all
Montanists, who in many quarters were called after the name of the latter,
Priscillianists. It was a characteristic of the Montanists that they insisted
upon the religious equality of men and women; that they accorded just as high
honor to the women as to the men, and listened to their prophecies with the same
reverence. The human person was but an instrument of the Spirit, according to
their view, and hence a woman might be chosen by the Spirit as his instrument
just as well as a man, the ignorant just as well as the learned. Tertullian, for
instance, cites, in support of his doctrine of the materiality of the soul, a
vision seen by one of the female members of his church, whom he believed to be
in the habit of receiving revelations from God ( de anima, 9).

242: i.e. Montanus.

243: That synods should early be held to consider the subject Montanism is not
at all surprising. Doubtless our author is quite correct in asserting that many
such met during these years. They were probably all of them small, and only
local in their character. We do not know the places or the dates of any of these
synods, although the Libellus Synodicus states that one was held at Hierapolis
under Apolinarius, with twenty-six bishops in attendance, and another at
Anchialus under Sotas, with twelve bishops present. The authority for these
synods is too late to be of much weight, and the report is just such as we
should expect to have arisen upon the basis of the account of Montanism given in
this chapter. It is possible, therefore, that synods were held in those two
cities, but more than that cannot be said. Upon these synods, see Hefele (
Conciliengesch. I. p. 83 sq.), who accepts the report of the Libellus Synodicus
as trustworthy.

244: Cf. the complaint of Maximilla, quoted in §17, below. The words are
employed, of course, only in the figurative sense to indicate the hostility of
the Church toward the Montanists. The Church, of course, had at that time no
power to put heretics to death, even if it had wished to do so. The first
instance of the punishment of heresy by death occurred in 385, when the Spanish
bishop Priscillian and six companions were executed at Trêves.

245: Cf.Matt. xxiii. 34.

246: There is a flat contradiction between this passage and §21, below, where it
is admitted by this same author that the Montanists have had their martyrs. The
sweeping statements here, considered in the light of the admission made in the
other passage, furnish us with a criterion of the trustworthiness and honesty of
the reports of our anonymous author. It is plain that, in his hostility to
Montanism, he has no regard whatever for the truth; that his aim is to paint the
heretics as black as possible, even if he is obliged to misrepresent the facts.
We might, from the general tone of the fragment which Eusebius has preserved,
imagine this to be so: the present passage proves it. We know, indeed, that the
Montanists had man martyrs and that their principles were such as to lead them
to martyrdom, even when the Catholics avoided it (cf. Tertullian's De fuga in
persecutione ).

247: Whether this story is an invention of our author's, or whether it was
already in circulation, as he says, we cannot tell. Its utter worthlessness
needs no demonstration. Even our anonymous author does not venture to call it
certain.

248: epitropoj epitropoj , Theodotus. The reliability of Jerome's report is
confirmed by its agreement in this point with the account of the Anonymous. Of
Theodotus himself (to be distinguished, of course, from the two Theodoti
mentioned in chap. 28) we know only what is told us in this chapter and in chap.
3, above. It is plain that he was a prominent man among the early Montanists.

249: The reference here seems to be to a death like that recorded by a common
tradition of Simon Magus, who by the help of demons undertook to fly up to
heaven, but when in mid air fell and was killed. Whether the report in regard to
Theodotus was in any way connected with the tradition of Simon's death we cannot
tell, though our author can hardly have thought of it, or he would certainly
have likened Theodotus' fate to that of the arch-heretic Simon, as he likened
the fate of Montanus and Maximilla to that of Judas. Whatever the exact form of
death referred to, there is of course no more confidence to be placed in this
report than in the preceding one.

250: Of this Asterius Urbanus we know only what we can gather from this
reference to him. Valesius, Tillemont, and others supposed that the words en tw
autw logw tw kata Asterion Ourbanon 251: Cf. note 21, above.

252: Of this Bishop Zoticus we know only what is told us here and in chap. 18,
§13. On the proposed identification of Zoticus and Sotas, bishop of Anchialus,
see chap. 19, note 10.Comana ( Komanhj , according to most of the mss. and
editors; Koumanhj , according to a few of the mss. followed by Laemmer and
Heinichen) was a village of Pamphylia, and is to be distinguished from Comana in
Pontus and from Comana in Cappadocia (Armenia), both of which were populous and
important cities.

253: Of this Julian we know nothing more. His city was Apamea Cibotus or Ciboti,
which, according to Wiltsch, was a small town on Mount Signia in Pisidia, to be
distinguished from the important Phrygian Apamea Cibotus on the Maeander.
Whether Wiltsch has good grounds for this distinction I am unable to say. It
would certainly seem natural to think in the present case of Apamea on the
Maeander, inasmuch as it is spoken of without any qualifying phrase, as if there
could be no doubt about its identity.

254: Themiso is mentioned again in chap. 18 as a confessor, and as the author of
a catholic epistle. It is plain that he was a prominent man among the Montanists
in the time of our anonymous author, that is, after the death of Montanus
himself; and it is quite likely that he was, as Salmon suggests, the head of the
sect.

255: This gives us a clear indication of the date of the composition of this
anonymous work. The thirteen years must fall either before the wars which began
in the reign of Septimius Severus, or after their completion. The earliest
possible date in the latter case is 232, and this is certainly much too late for
the composition of this work, which speaks of Montanism more than once as a
recent thing, and which it seems clear from other indications belongs rather to
the earlier period of the movement. If we put its composition before those wars,
we cannot place it later than 192, the close of the reign of Commodus. This
would push the date of Maximilla's death back to 179, which though it seems
rather early, is not at all impossible. The period from about 179 to 192 might
very well be called a time of peace by the Christians; for no serious wars
occurred during that interval, and we know that the Christians were left
comparatively undisturbed throughout the reign of Commodus.

256: Our author tacitly admits in this paragraph, what he has denied in §12,
above, that the Montanists had martyrs among their number; and having admitted
it, he endeavors to explain away its force. In the previous paragraph he had
claimed that the lack of martyrs among them proved that they were heretics; here
he claims that the existence of such martyrs does not in any way argue for their
orthodoxy. The inconsistency is glaringly apparent (cf. the remarks made in note
23, above).

257: This shows the bitterness of the hostility of the Catholics toward the
Montanists. That even when suffering together for the one Lord they could not
recognize these brethren seems very sad, and it is not to be wondered at that
the Montanists felt themselves badly used, and looked upon the Catholics as
"slayers of the prophets," &c. More uncompromising enmity than this we can
hardly imagine. That the Catholics, however, were sincere in their treatment of
the Montanists, we cannot doubt. It is clear that they firmly believed that
association with them meant association with the devil, and hence the deeper
their devotion to Christ, the deeper must be their abhorrence of these
instruments of Satan. Compare, for instance, Polycarp's words to Marcion, quoted
in Bk. IV. chap. 14, above. The attitude of these Catholic martyrs is but of a
piece with that of nearly all the orthodox Fathers toward heresy. It only shows
itself here in its extremest form.

258: Apamea Cibotus in Eastern Phrygia, a large and important commercial center.
Of the two martyrs, Gaius and Alexander, we know only what is told us here. They
were apparently both of them from Eumenia, a Phrygian town lying a short
distance north of Apamea. We have no means of fixing the date of the martyrdoms
referred to here, but it seems natural to assign them to the reign of Marcus
Aurelius, after Montanism had become somewhat widespread, and when martyrdoms
were a common thing both in the East and West. Thraseas, bishop of Eumenia, is
referred to as a martyr by Polycrates in chap. 24, but he can hardly have
suffered with the ones referred to here, or his name would have been mentioned
instead of the more obscure names of Gaius and Alexander.

259: This Miltiades is known to us from three sources: from the present chapter,
from the Roman work quoted by Eusebius in chap. 28, and from Tertullian ( adv.
Val. chap. 5). Jerome also mentions him in two places ( de vir. ill. 39 and Ep.
ad Magnum; Migne's ed. Ep. 70, §3), but it is evident that he derived his
knowledge solely from Eusebius. That Miltiades was widely known at the end of
the second century is clear from the notices of him by an Asiatic, a Roman, and
a Carthaginian writer. The position in which he is mentioned by Tertullian and
by the anonymous Roman writer would seem to indicate that he flourished during
the reign of Marcus Aurelius. His Apology was addressed to the emperors, as we
learn from §5, below, by which might be meant either Marcus Aurelius and Lucius
Verus (161-169), or Marcus Aurelius and Commodus (177-180). Jerome states that
he flourished during the reign of Commodus ( Floruit autem M. Antonini Commodi
temporibus; Vallarsi adds a que after Commodi, thus making him flourish in the
times of M. Antoninus and Commodus, but there is no authority for such an
addition). It is quite possible that he was still alive in the time of Commodus
(though Jerome's statement is of no weight, for it rests upon no independent
authority), but he must at any rate have written his Apology before the death of
Marcus Aurelius. The only works of Miltiades named by our authorities are the
anti-Montanistic work referred to here, and the three mentioned by Eusebius at
the close of this chapter (two books Against the Greeks, two books Against the
Jews, and an Apology ). Tertullian speaks of him as an anti-Gnostic writer, so
that it is clear that he must have written another work not mentioned by
Eusebius, and it was perhaps that work that won for him the commendation of the
anonymous writer quoted in chap. 28, who ranks him with Justin, Tatian,
Irenaeus, Melito, and Clement as one who had asserted the divinity of Christ.
Eusebius appears to have seen the three works which he mentions at the close of
this chapter, but he does not quote from them, and no fragments of any of
Miltiades' writings have been preserved to us; he seems indeed to have passed
early out of the memory of the Church.

260: Alkibiadou , with all the mss. and versions, followed by Valesius (in his
text), by Burton, Laemmer, and Crusè; Nicephorus, followed by Valesius in his
notes, and by all the other editors, and by the translations of Stroth, Closs,
and Stigloher, read Miltiadou . See the previous note.

261: This was the first work, so far as we know, to denounce the practice of
prophesying in ecstasy. The practice, which had doubtless fallen almost wholly
into disuse, was brought into decided disrepute on account of the excesses of
the Montanists, and the position taken by this Alcibiades became very soon the
position of the whole Church (see the previous chapter, note 14).

262: Of this prophetess Ammia of Philadelphia, we know only what we can gather
from this chapter. She would seem to have lived early in the second century,
possibly in the latter part of the first, and to have been a prophetess of
considerable prominence. That the Montanists had good ground for appealing to
her, as well as to the other prophets mentioned as their models, cannot be
denied. These early prophets were doubtless in their enthusiasm far more like
the Montanistic prophets than like those whom the Church of the latter part of
the second century alone wished to recognize.

263: This Quadratus is to be identified with the Quadratus mentioned in Bk. III.
chap. 37, and was evidently a man of prominence in the East. He seems to have
been a contemporary of Ammia, or to have belonged at any rate to the succession
of the earliest prophets. He is to be distinguished from the bishop of Athens,
mentioned in Bk. IV. chap. 23, and also in all probability from the apologist,
mentioned in Bk. IV. chap. 3. Cf. Harnack, Texte und Unters. I. I. p. 102 and
104; and see Bk. III. chap. 37, note I, above.

264: On Agabus, see Acts xi. 28, Acts xxi. 10.

265: On Judas, see Acts xv. 22, Acts xv. 27, Acts xv. 32.

266: On Silas, see Acts xv.-Acts xviii. passim; also 2 Cor. i. 19, 1 Thess. i.
1, 2 Thess. i. 1, and 1 Pet. v. 12, where Silvanus (who is probably the same
man) is mentioned.

267: On the daughters of Philip, see Acts xxi. 9; also Bk. III. chap. 31, note
8, above.

268: On the date of Maximilla's death, see the previous chapter, note 32. To
what utterance of "the apostle" o "apostolo", which commonly means Paul) our
author is referring, I am not able to discover. I can find nothing in his
writings, nor indeed in the New Testament, which would seem to have suggested
the idea which he here attributes to the apostle. The argument is a little
obscure, but the writer apparently means to prove that the Montanists are not a
part of the true Church, because the gift of prophecy is a mark of that Church,
and the Montanists no longer possess that gift. This seems a strange accusation
to bring against the Montanists,-we might expect them to use such an argument
against the Catholics. In fact, we know that the accusation is not true, at
least not entirely so; for we know that there were Montanistic prophetesses in
Tertullian's church in Carthage later than this time, and also that there was
still a prophetess at the time Apollonius wrote (see chap. 18, §6), which was
some years later than this (see chap. 18, note 3).

269: peri ta qeia logia

270: en te oij proj Ellhnaj sunetace logoij, kai toij proj Ioudaiouj . Eusebius
is the only one to mention these works, and no fragments of either of them are
now extant. See above, note 1.

271: ekateraidiwj upoqesei en dusin upanthsaj suggrammasin .

272: Or, "to the rulers of the world" ( proj touj kosmikouj arxontaj .) Valesius
supposed these words to refer to the provincial governors, but it is far more
natural to refer them to the reigning emperors, both on account of the form of
the phrase itself and also because of the fact that it was customary with all
the apologists to address their apologies to the emperors themselves. In regard
to the particular emperors addressed, see above, note 1.

273: tinwn ).

274: On the name, see chap. 16, note 2.

275: Of this Apollonius we know little more than what Eusebius tells us in this
chapter. The author of Praedestinatus (in the fifth century) calls him bishop of
Ephesus, but his authority is of no weight. Jerome devotes chap. 40 of his de
vir. ill. to Apollonius, but it is clear that he derives his knowledge almost
exclusively from Eusebius. He adds the notice, however, that Tertullian replied
to Apollonius' work in the seventh book of his own work, de Ecstasi (now lost).
The character of Apollonius' work may be gathered from the fragments preserved
by Eusebius in this chapter. It was of the same nature as the work of the
anonymous writer quoted in chap. 16, very bitter in tone and not over-scrupulous
in its statements. Apollonius states (see in §12, below) that he wrote the work
forty years after the rise of Montanism. If we accepted the Eusebian date for
its beginning (172), this would bring us down to 212, but (as remarked above, in
chap. 16, note 12) Montanism had probably begun in a quiet way sometime before
this, and so Apollonius' forty years are perhaps to be reckoned from a somewhat
earlier date. His mention of "the prophetess" as still living (in §6, below)
might lead us to think that Maximilia was still alive when he wrote; but when
the anonymous wrote she was already dead, and the reasons for assigning the
latter to a date as early as 192 are too strong to be set aside. We must
therefore suppose Apollonius to be referring to some other prophetess well known
in his time. That there were many such prophetesses in the early part of the
third century is clear from the works of Tertullian. Jerome ( ibid. ) states
that an account of the death of Montanus and his prophetesses by hanging was
contained in Apollonius' work, but it has been justly suspected that he is
confusing the work of the anonymous, quoted in chap. 16, above, with the work of
Apollonius, quoted in this chapter. The fragments of Apollonius' work, preserved
by Eusebius, are given, with a commentary, in Routh's Rel. Sac. I. p. 467 sq.,
and an English translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. p. 775 sq.

276: We are not to gather from this that the Montanists forbade marriage. They
were, to be sure, decidedly ascetic in their tendencies, and they did teach the
unlawfulness of second marriages,-which had long been looked upon with disfavor
in many quarters, but whose lawfulness the Church had never denied,-and
magnified the blessedness of the single state; but beyond this they did not go,
so far as we are able to judge. Our chief sources for the Montanistic view of
marriage are Tertullian's works ad Uxorem, de Pudicit., de Monogamia, de Exhort.
ad castitat., and Epiphanius' Haer. XLVIII. 9.

277: One great point of dispute between the Montanists and the Catholics was the
subject of fasts (cf. Hippolytus, VIII. 12, X. 21, who makes it almost the only
ground of complaint against the Montanists). The Montanist prophetesses ordained
two new fasts of a week each in addition to the annual paschal fast of the
Church; and the regulations for these two weeks were made very severe. Still
further they extended the duration of the regular weekly (Wednesday and Friday)
fasts, making them cover the whole instead of only a part of the day. The
Catholics very strenuously opposed these ordinances, not because they were
opposed to fasting (many of them indulged extensively in the practice), but
because they objected to the imposition of such extra fasts as binding upon the
Church. They were satisfied with the traditional customs in this matter, and did
not care to have heavier burdens imposed upon the Christians in general than
their fathers had borne. Our principal sources for a knowledge of the dispute
between the Montanists and Catholics on this subject are Tertullian's de
Jejuniis; Epiphanius, Haer . XLVIII. 8; Jerome, Ep. ad Marcellam (Migne, Ep.
XLI. 3), Comment. in Matt. c. 9, vers. 15; and Theodoret, Haer. Fab. III. 2.

278: Pepuza was an obscure town in the western part of Phrygia; Tymion,
otherwise unknown, was probably situated in the same neighborhood. Pepuza was
early made, and long continued, the chief center-the Jerusalem-of the sect, and
even gave its name to the sect in many quarters. Harnack has rightly emphasized
the significance of this statement of Apollonius, and has called attention to
the fact that Montanus' original idea must have been the gathering of the chosen
people from all the world into one region, that they might form one fold, and
freed from all the political and social relations in which they had hitherto
lived might await the coming of the Lord, who would speedily descend, and set up
his kingdom in this new Jerusalem. Only after this idea had been proved
impracticable did Montanism adapt itself to circumstances and proceed to
establish itself in the midst of society as it existed in the outside world.
That Montanus built upon the Gospel of John, and especially upon chaps. x. and
xvii., in this original attempt of his, is perfectly plain (cf. Harnack's
Dogmengeschichte, I. p. 319 and 323. With this passage from Apollonius, compare
also Epiphanius, Haer. XLVIII. 14 and XLIX. I., and Jerome Ep. ad Marcellam ).

279: This appointment of economic officers and the formation of a compact
organization were a part of the one general plan, referred to in the previous
note, and must have marked the earliest years of the sect. Later, when it was
endeavoring to adapt itself to the catholic Church, and to compromise matters in
such a way as still to secure recognition from the Church, this organization
must have been looked upon as a matter of less importance, and indeed probably
never went far beyond the confines of Phrygia. That it continued long in that
region, however, is clear from Jerome's words in his Epistle to Marcella already
referred to. Compare also chap 16, note 25.

280: There can be little doubt that the Church teachers and other officers were
still supported by voluntary contributions, and hence Apollonius was really
scandalized at what he considered making merchandise of spiritual things (cf.
the Didache, chaps. XI. and XII.; but even in the Didache we find already a sort
of stated salary provided for the prophets; cf. chap. XII.). For him to
conclude, however, from the practice instituted by the Montanists in accordance
with their other provisions for the formation of a compact organization, that
they were avaricious and gluttonous, is quite unjustifiable, just as much so as
if our salaried clergy to-day should be accused, as a class, of such sins.

281: See chap. 16, note 18.

282: See note 8.

283: On Themiso, see chap. 16, note 31.

284: kaqoloikhn epistolhn . Catholic in the sense in which the word is used of
the epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude; that is, general, addressed to no
particular church. The epistle is no longer extant. Its "blasphemy" against the
Lord and his apostles lay undoubtedly in its statement of the fundamental
doctrine of the Montanists, that the age of revelation had not ceased, but that
through the promised Paraclete revelations were still given, which, supplemented
or superseded those granted the apostles by Christ.

285: This fragment gives us our only information in regard to this Alexander.
That there may be some truth in the story told by Apollonius cannot be denied.
It is possible that Alexander was a bad man, and that the Montanists had been
deceived in him, as often happens in all religious bodies. Such a thing might
much more easily happen after the sect had been for a number of years in a
flourishing condition than in its earlier years; and the exactness of the
account, and the challenge to disprove it, would seem to lend it some weight. At
the same time Apollonius is clearly as unprincipled and dishonest a writer as
the anonymous, and hence little reliance can be placed upon any of his reports
to the discredit of the Montanists. If the anonymous made so many accusations
out of whole cloth, Apollonius may have done the same in the present instance;
and the fact that many still "worshiped" him would seem to show that Apollonius'
accusations, if they possessed any foundation, were at any rate not proven.

286: A very common accusation brought against various sects. Upon the
significance of it, see Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, I. p. 82, note 2.

287: opisqodomoj , originally the back chamber of the old temple of Athenae on
the Acropolis at Athens, where the public treasure was kept. It then came to be
used of the inner chamber of any temple where the public treasure was kept, and
in the present instance is used of the apartment which contained the public
records or archives. Just below, Apollonius uses the phrase dhmosion arxeion ,
in referring to the same thing.

288: Matt. x. 9, Matt x. 10.

289: Matt. xii. 33.

290: We know, unfortunately, nothing about this proconsul, and hence have no
means of fixing the date of this occurrence.

291: i.e. of Christ.

292: parabathj .

293: eita epiyeusamenoj tw onomati tou kuriou apolelutai planhsaj touj ekei
pistouj . The meaning seems to be that while in prison he pretended to be a
Christian, and thus obtained the favor of the brethren, who procured his release
by using their influence with the judge.

294: We have no means of controlling the truth of this statement.

295: dhmosion arxeion .

296: on o profhthj sunonta polloij etesin agnoei , as is read by all the mss.,
followed by the majority of the editors. Heinichen reads w o profhthj sunwn
polloij etesin agnoei , but the emendation is quite unnecessary. The agnoei 297:
phn upostasin .

298: baptetai .

299: stibsetai .

300: Knowing what we do of the asceticism and the severe morality of the
Montanists, we can look upon the implications of this passage as nothing better
than baseless slanders. That there might have been an individual here and there
whose conduct justified this attack cannot be denied, but to bring such
accusations against the Montanists in general was both unwarranted and absurd,
and Apollonius cannot but have been aware of the fact. His language is rather
that of a bully or braggadocio who knows the untruthfulness of his statements,
than of a man conscious of his own honesty and of the reliability of his
account.

301: On the date of Apollonius' work, see above, note 3.

302: See chap. 16, §17.

303: This Thraseas is undoubtedly to be identified with Thraseas, "bishop and
martyr of Eumenia," mentioned by Polycrates, as quoted in chap. 24, below. We
know no more about him than is told us there.

304: Clement ( Strom. VI. 5) records the same tradition, quoting it from the
Preaching of Peter, upon which work, see Bk. III. chap. 3, note 8, above.

305: Compare Eusebius' promise in Bk. III. chap. 24, §18, and see note 21 on
that chapter.

306: No one else, so far as I am aware, records this tradition, but it is of a
piece with many others in regard to John which were afloat in the early Church.

307: Both versions of the Chron. agree in putting the accession of Serapion into
the eleventh year of Commodus (190 a.d.), and that of his successor Asclepiades
into the first year of Caracalla, which would give Serapion an episcopate of
twenty-one years (Syncellus says twenty-five years, although giving the same
dates of accession for both bishops that the other versions give). Serapion was
a well-known person, and it is not too much to think that the dates given by the
Chron. in connection with him may be more reliable than most of its dates. The
truth is, that from the present chapter we learn that he was already bishop
before the end of Commodus' reign, i.e. before the end of 192 a.d. Were the
statement of Eutychius,-that Demetrius of Alexandria wrote at the same time to
Maximus of Antioch and Victor of Rome,-to be relied upon, we could fix his
accession between 189 and 192 (see Harnack's Zeit des Ignatius, p. 45). But the
truth is little weight can be attached to his report. While we cannot therefore
reach certainty in the matter, there is no reason for doubting the approximate
accuracy of the date given by the Chron. As to the time of his death, we can fix
the date of Asclepiades' accession approximately in the year 211 (see Bk. VI.
chap. II, note 6), and from the fragment of Alexander's epistle to the
Antiochenes, quoted in that chapter, it seems probable that there had been a
vacancy in the see of Antioch for some time. But from the mention of Serapion's
epistles to Domninus (Bk. VI. chap. 12) we may gather that he lived until after
the great persecution of Severus (a.d. 202 sq.). From Bk. VI. chap. 12, we learn
that Serapion was quite a writer; and he is commemorated also by Jerome ( de
vir. ill. c. 41) and by Socrates ( H. E. III. 7). In addition to the epistle
quoted here, he addressed to Domninus, according to Bk. VI. chap. 12, a treatise
(Jerome, ad Domninum ...volumen camposuit ), or epistle (the Greek of Eusebius
reads simply ta 308: On Maximinus, see Bk. IV. chap. 24, note 6.

309: See Bk. IV. chap. 27, note 1.

310: Caricus and Pontius (called Ponticus in this passage by most of the mss. of
Eusebius, but Pontius by one of the best of them, by Nicephorus, Jerome, and
Eusebius himself in Bk. VI. chap. 12, which authorities are followed by Stroth,
Burton, Schwegler, and Heinichen) are called in Bk. VI. chap. 12,
ekklhsiastikouj andraj . They are otherwise unknown personages. In that chapter
the plural article ta is used of the writing, or writings, addressed to Caricus
and Pontius, implying that upomnhmata is to be supplied. This seems to imply
more than one writing, but it is not necessary to conclude that more than the
single epistle mentioned here is meant, for the plural upomnhmata was often used
in a sort of collective sense to signify a collection of notes, memoranda, &c.

311: This fragment is given by Routh, Rel. Sacrae, and, in English, in the
Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. p. 775.

312: See Bk. IV. chap. 27, note 5.

313: Valesius justly remarks that Eusebius does not say that these bishops
signed Serapion's epistle, but only that their signatures or notes (
uposhmeiwseij ) were contained in the epistle. He thinks it is by no means
probable that a bishop of Thrace (the nationality of the other bishops we do not
know) should have signed this epistle of Serapion's, and he therefore concludes
that Serapion simply copies from another epistle sent originally from Thrace.
This is possible; but at the end of the chapter Eusebius says that other bishops
put in their signatures or notes with their own hands ( autografoi shmeiwseij ),
which precludes the idea that Serapion simply copies their testimony from
another source, and if they signed thus it is possible that the Thracian bishop
did likewise. It may be that Serapion took pains to compose a semi-official
communication which should have the endorsement of as many anti-Montanistic
bishops as possible, and that, in order to secure their signatures he sent it
about from one to the other before forwarding it to Caricus and Pontius.

314: Of this Aurelius Cyrenius we know nothing. It is possible that he means to
call himself simply a witness ( martuj ) to the facts recorded by Serapion in
his epistle, but more probable that he uses the word to indicate that he has
"witnessed for Christ" under persecution.

315: Aelius Publius Julius is also an otherwise unknown personage. Debeltum and
Anchialus were towns of Thrace, on the western shore of the Black Sea.

316: Lightfoot ( Ignatius, II. 111) suggests that this Sotas ( Swtaj ) may be
identical with the Zoticus ( Zwtikoj ) mentioned in the preceding chapter, the
interchange of the initial S and Z being very common. But we learn from chap. 16
that Zoticus was bishop of Comana, so that he can hardly be identified with
Sotas, bishop of Anchialus.

317: On Irenaeus, see Bk. IV. chap. 21, note 9.

318: Eusebius, in chap. 15, informs us that both Blastus and Florinus drew
manyaway from the church of Rome by their heretical innovations. He does not
tell us either there or here the nature of the opinions which Blastus held, but
from Pseudo-Tertullian's Adv. omnes Haer. chap. 8, we learn that Blastus was a
Quartodeciman. ("In addition to all these, there is likewise Blastus, who would
la-tently introduce Judaism. For he says the passover is not to be kept
otherwise than according to the law of Moses, on the fourteenth of the month.")
From Pacianus' Epistola ad Sympronian. de catholico nomine, chap. 2, we learn
that he was a Montanist; and since the Montanists of Asia Minor were, like the
other Christians of that region, Quartodecimans, it is not surprising that
Blastus should be at the same time a Montanist and a Quartodeciman. Florinus, as
will be shown in the next note, taught his heresies while Victor was bishop of
Rome (189-198 or 199); and since Eusebius connects Blastus so closely with him,
we may conclude that Blastus flourished at about the same time. Irenaeus'
epistle to Blas-tus, On Schism, is no longer extant. A Syriac fragment of an
epistle of Irenaeus, addressed to "an Alexandrian," on the paschal question
(Fragment 27 in Harvey's edition) is possibly a part of this lost epistle. If
the one referred to in this fragment be Blastus he was an Alexandrian, and in
that case must have adopted the Quarto-deciman position under the influence of
the Asiatic Montanists, for the paschal calendar of the Alexandrian church was
the same as that of Rome (see the Dict. of Christ. Biog. III. p. 264). If
Blastus was a Montanist, as stated by Pacianus, his heresy was quite different
from that of Florinus (who was a Gnostic); and the fact that they were leaders
of different heresies is confirmed by the words of Eusebius in chap. 15, above:
"Each one striving to introduce his own innovations in respect to the truth."
Whether Blastus, like Florinus, was a presbyter, and like him was deposed from
his office, we do not know, but the words of Eusebius in chap. 15 seem to favor
this supposition.

319: Florinus, as we learn from chap. 15, was for a time a presbyter of the
Roman Church, but lost his office on account of heresy. From the fragment of
this epistle of Irenaeus to Florinus quoted by Eusebius just below, we learn
that Florinus was somewhat older than Irenaeus, but like him a disciple of
Polycarp. The title of this epistle shows that Florinus was already a Gnostic,
or at least inclined toward Gnostic views. Eusebius evidently had no direct
knowledge of the opinions of Florinus on the origin of evil, for he says that he
appeared to maintain ( edokei proaspisein

320: This treatise, On the Ogdoad, is no longer extant, though it is probable
that we have a few fragments of it (see Harvey, I. clxvi.). The importance which
Irenaeus attached to this work is seen from the solemn adjuration with which he
closed it. It must have been largely identical in substance with the portions of
his Adv. Haer. which deal with the aeons of the Valentinians. It may have been
little more than an enlargement of those portions of the earlier work. The
Ogdoad (Greek, ogdoaj

321: Literally, "in which he shows that he himself had seized upon (
kateilhfenai ) the first succession diadoxhn ) of the apostles." In order to
emphasize the fact that he was teaching true doctrine, he pointed out, as he did
so often elsewhere, the circumstance that he was personally acquainted with
disciples of the apostles.

322: It was not at all uncommon for copyists, both by accident and by design, to
make changes often serious, in copying books. We have an instance of intentional
alterations mentioned in Bk. IV. chap. 23. It is not at all strange, therefore,
that such an adjuration should be attached to a work which its author considered
especially liable to corruption, or whose accurate transcription. be regarded as
peculiarly important. Compare the warning given in Rev. xxii. 18, Rev. xxii. 19.
The fragments from Irenaeus' works preserved in this chapter are translated in
the Ante-Nicene Fathers, I. p. 568 sq.

323: The epistle On Monarchy mentioned at the beginning of this chapter.

324: en pn basilikh aulh . This expression is a little puzzling, as the word
bosilikh 325: 1 John i. 1.

326: This would have been quite like Polycarp, who appears to have had a special
horror of heretics. Compare his words to Marcion, quoted above, in Bk. IV. chap.
14. He seems to have inherited this horror from John the apostle, if Irenaeus'
account is to be believed; see Adv. Haer. III. 3, 4, quoted by Eusebius in Bk.
III. chap. 28, and in Bk. IV. chap. 14.

327: We know of only one epistle by Polycarp, that to the Philippians, which is
still extant. Upon his life and epistle, see Bk. IV. chap. 14, notes 5 and 16.

328: Marcia, concubine of Commodus, and possessed of great influence over him,
favored the Christians (according to Dion Cassius, LXII. 4), and as a
consequence they enjoyed comparative peace during his reign.

329: Jerome ( de vir. ill. chap. 42, and Epist. ad Magnum, 4) calls Apollonius a
Roman senator. It is possible that this is only a natural conclusion drawn by
Jerome from Eusebius' statement that he defended himself before the Senate; and
this possibility might seem to be strengthened by the fact that Eusebius does
not call him a senator here, as we should expect him to do if he knew him to be
one. On the other hand, it is highly probable (as shown in the next note) that
Jerome had read the fuller account of Apollonius' martyrdom included by Eusebius
in his Collection of Martyrdoms, and hence it seems likely that that account
contained the statement that Apollonius was a senator. Jerome makes Apollonius
the author of an insigne volumen, which he read in the Senate in defense of his
faith; but there seems to be no foundation for such a report. It is apparently
the result simply of a misunderstanding of the words of Eusebius, who states
that Apollonius delivered before the Senate a most eloquent defense of the
faith, but does not imply that he wrote an apology. The words that Eusebius uses
at the close of this chapter imply rather that the defense made by Apollonius
was recorded after its delivery, and that it is this report of it which can be
read in his Collection of Martyrdoms.

330: Jerome, followed by Sophronius, reports that the accusation against
Apollonius was brought by a slave. Jerome gives the slave's name as Severus ( a
servo Severo proditus ); while Sophronius makes Severus the name of the judge (
para tou doulou para Sebhrw prodofeij xristianoj einai ena ge tina uij tauta
epithdeiwn ), as supposed by some. Since it is thus almost certain that Jerome
had himself examined the fuller account of Apollonius' martyrdom referred to by
Eusebius, a favorable light is thrown back upon his report that Apollonius was a
senator, and it becomes probable that he obtained this statement from the same
source (see the previous note).

331: M. de Mandajors, in his Histoire de l'Acad. des Inscript. tom. 18, p. 226
(according to Gieseler's Ch. Hist., Harper's edition, I. p. 127), "thinks that
the slave was put to death as the betrayer of his master, according to an old
law renewed by Trajan; but that the occurrence had been misunderstood by the
Christians, and had given rise to the tradition, which is found in Tertullian
and in the Edictum ad Comm. A siae, that an emperor at this period had decreed
the punishment of death for denouncing a Christian." Such a law against the
denunciation of masters by slaves was passed under Nerva; but Gieseler remarks
that, in accordance with the principles of the laws upon this subject, "either
Apollonius only, or his slave only, could have been put to death, but in no case
both. Jerome does not say either that Severus was the slave of Apollonius, or
that he was executed; and since Eusebius grounds this execution expressly on a
supposititious law, it may have belonged only to the Oriental tradition, which
may have adduced this instance in support of the alleged law." It is possible
that Gieseler is right in this conclusion; but it is also quite possible that
Eusebius' statement that the slave was executed is correct. The ground of the
execution was, of course, not, as Eusebius thinks, the fact that he brought an
accusation against a Christian, but, as remarked by de Mandajors, the fact that,
being a slave, he betrayed his master. Had the informant been executed because
he brought an accusation against a Christian, the subsequent execution of the
latter would be inexplicable. But it is conceivable that the prefect Perennius
may have sentenced the informant to death, in accordance with the old law
mentioned by de Mandajors, and that then, Apollonius being a senator, he may
have requested him to appear before that body, and make his defense to them, in
order that he might pass judgment upon him in accordance with the decision of
the Senate. It is quite conceivable that, the emperor being inclined to favor
the Christians, Perennius may not have cared to pass judgment against Apollonius
until he had learned the opinion of the Senate on the matter (cf. what Neander
has to say on the subject, in his Ch. Hist. ). As remarked by Valesius, the
Senate was not a judicial court, and hence could not itself sentence Apollonius;
but it could, of course, communicate to the prefect its opinion, and he could
then pass judgment accordingly. It is significant that the Greek reads wsan apo
dogmatoj sugklhtou , inserting the particle wsan

332: Valesius thinks the reference here is to Pliny's rescript to Trajan (see
above, Bk. III. chap. 33). This is possible, though the language of Eusebius
seems to imply a more general reference to all kinds of cases, not simply to the
cases of Christians.

333: On Eusebius' great Collection of Martyrdoms, which is now lost, see above,
p. 30.

334: The dates assigned to Victor's episcopate by the ancient authorities vary
greatly. Eusebius here puts his accession in the tenth year of Commodus (i.e.
189 a.d.), and this is accepted by Lipsius as the correct date. Jerome's version
of the Chron. puts his accession in the reign of Pertinax, or the first year of
Septimius Severus (i.e. 193), while the Armenian version puts it in the seventh
year of Commodus (186). Eusebius, in his History, does not state directly the
duration of his episcopate, but in chap. 28 he says that Zephyrinus succeded him
about the ninth year of Severus, i.e. according to his erroneous reckoning (see
Bk. VI. chap. 21, note 3) about 200, which would give Victor an episcopate of
about eleven years. Jerome, in his version of the Chron. and in his de vir.
ill., assigns him ten years; the Armenian version of the Chron. twelve years.
The berian Catalogue makes his episcopate something over nine years long; the
Felician Catalogue something over ten. Lipsius, considering Victor in connection
with his successors, concludes that he held office between nine and ten years,
and therefore gives as his dates 189-198 or 199 (see p. 172 sq.). According to
an anonymous writer quoted in chap. 28, Victor excommunicated Theodotus of
Byzantium for teaching that Christ was a mere man. He is best known, however, on
account of his action in connection with the great Quartodeciman controversy
(see chap. 24). Jerome, in his version of the Chron., says of him cujus
mediocria de religione extant volumina, and in his de vir. ill. chap. 34, he
tells us that he wrote upon the passover, and also some other works ( super
quaestione Paschae, et alia quaedam scribens opuscula ). Harnack believes that
he has discovered one of these works (all of which have been supposed lost) in
the Pseudo-Cyprianic de Aleatoribus. In his Texte und Unters. Bd. V. Heft 1, he
has discussed the subject in a very learned and ingenious manner. The theory has
much to commend it, but there are difficulties in its way which have not yet
been removed; and I am inclined to think it a product of the first half of the
third century, rather than of the last quarter of the second (see the writer's
review of Harnack's discussion in the Presbyterian Review, Jan., 1889, p. 143
sqq.).

335: On Eleutherus, see the Introduction to this book, note 2. As remarked
there, Eleutherus, according to the testimony of most of our sources, held
office fifteen years. The "thirteen years" of this chapter are therefore an
error, clearly caused by the possession on the part of Eusebius of a trustworthy
tradition that he died in the tenth year of Commodus, which, since he
incorrectly put his accession into the seventeenth year of Marcus Aurelius (or
Antoninus Verus, as he calls him), made it necessary for him to draw the false
conclusion that he held office only thirteen years.

336: On Julian, bishop of Alexandria, see chap. 9, note 2.

337: The date of the accession of Demetrius, the eleventh bishop of Alexandria,
as given here and in the Chron., was 189 a.d. According to Bk. VI. chap. 26,
below, confirmed by the Chron., he held office forty-three years. There is no
reason for doubting the approximate accuracy of these dates. Demetrius is known
to us chiefly because of his relations to Origen, which were at first friendly,
but finally became hostile. He seems to have been a man of great energy,
renowned as an administrator rather than as a literary character. He was greatly
interested in the catechetical school at Alexandria, but does not seem to have
taught in it, and he left no writings, so far as we know. His relations with
Origen will come up frequently in the Sixth Book, where he is mentioned a number
of times (see especially chap. 8, note 4).

338: On Serapion, bishop of Antioch, see above, chap. 19.

339: Theophilus, bishop of Caesarea, has gained prominence chiefly on account of
his connection with the paschal controversy. He presided with Narcissus over the
council mentioned in the next chapter, which was called to consider the paschal
question, and in conjunction with the other bishops present composed an epistle,
which was still extant in Eusebius' time (according to the next chapter), and of
which he gives a fragment in chap. 25. Jerome, in his de vir. ill. c. 43, speaks
very highly of this epistle ( synodicam valde utilem composuit epistolam ); but
it seems to have been no longer extant in his time, for in mentioning it and the
epistle of Bacchylus of Corinth and others in his Chron., he says that the
memory of them still endured ( quarum memoria ad nos usque perdurat ). The dates
of Theophilus' accession to office and of his death are not known to us.

340: On Narcissus, see above, chap. 12.

341: This Bacchylus is possibly identical with the Bacchylides who is mentioned
in Bk. IV. chap. 23 as one of those who had urged Dionysius, bishop of Corinth,
to write a certain epistle. Bacchylus also is prominent solely on account of his
connection with the paschal controversy. According to the next chapter, he was
himself the author of an epistle on the subject, which he wrote, according to
Jerome ( de vir. ill. c. 44), in the name of all the bishops of Achaia ( ex
omnium qui in Achaia erant episcoporum persona ). But the words of Eusebius seem
to imply that the epistle was an individual, not a synodical one, for he does
not say, "an epistle of those in," &c., as he does in every other case. We must
conclude, therefore, that Jerome, who had not seen the epistle, was mistaken in
making it a synodical letter. Jerome characterizes it as an elegant composition
( elegantem librum ); but, like the epistle of Theophilus, mentioned in the
preceding note, it seems not to have been extant in Jerome's time. The dates of
Bacchylus' accession to office and of his death are not known to us.

342: Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, is one of the most noted men connected with
the paschal controversy, for the reason that he was the leader of the bishops of
the province of Asia, in which province alone the Quartodeciman practice was
uniformly observed. He was thus the leading opponent of Bishop Victor of Rome.
His relation to the paschal controversy is brought out more fully in chap. 24.
The dates of Polycrates' accession to office and of his death are not known to
us; though, of course, with Theophilus, Narcissus, Bacchylus, and the other
bishops concerned in the paschal controversy, he flourished during the reign of
Septimius Severus, while Victor was bishop of Rome. The only writing of
Polycrates of which we know is his epistle to Victor, a portion of which is
quoted by Eusebius, in Bk. III. chap. 31, and a still larger portion in chap. 24
of this book.

343: The great question of dispute between the church of Asia Minor and the rest
of Christendom was whether the paschal communion should be celebrated on the
fourteenth of Nisan, or on the Sunday of the resurrection festival, without
regard to Jewish chronology. The Christians of Asia Minor, appealing to the
example of the apostles, John and Philip, and to the uniform practice of the
Church, celebrated the Christian passover always on the fourteenth of Nisan,
whatever day of the week that might be, by a solemn fast, and closed the day
with the communion in commemoration of the last paschal supper of Christ. The
Roman church, on the other hand, followed by all the rest of Christendom,
celebrated the death of Christ always on Friday, and his resurrection on the
Sunday following the first full moon after the vernal equinox, and continued
their paschal fast until the latter day. It thus happened that the fast of the
Asiatic Christians, terminating, as it did, with the fourteenth of Nisan, often
closed some days before the fast of the other churches, and the lack of
uniformity occasioned great scandal. As Schaff says: "The gist of the paschal
controversy was whether the Jewish paschal day (be it a Friday or not) or the
Christian Sunday should control the idea and time of the entire festival." The
former practice emphasized Christ's death; the latter his resurrection. The
first discussion of the question took place between Polycarp and Anicetus,
bishop of Rome, when the former was on a visit to that city, between 150 and
155. Irenaeus gives an account of this which is quoted by Eusebius in chap. 25.
Polycarp clung to the Asiatic practice of observing the 14th of Nisan, but could
not persuade Anicetus to do the same, nor could Anicetus persuade him not to
observe that day. They nevertheless communed together in Rome, and separated in
peace. About 170 a.d. the controversy broke out again in Laodicea, the chief
disputants being Melito of Sardis and Apolinarius of Hierapolis (see above, Bk.
IV. chap. 26, note 1, and chap. 27, note 1). In this controversy Melito
advocated the traditional Asiatic custom of observing the fourteenth day, while
Apolinarius opposed it. To distinguish two parties of Quartodecimans,-a
Judaizing and a more orthodox,-as must be done if Apolinarius is regarded, as he
is by many, as a Quartodeciman, is, as Schaff shows entirely unwarranted. We
know only of the one party, and Apolinarius did not belong to it. The third
stage of the controversy, which took place while Victor was bishop of Rome, in
the last decade of the second century, was much more bitter and important. The
leaders of the two sides were Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, and Victor, bishop
of Rome,-the latter an overbearing man, who believed that he, as Bishop of Rome,
had a right to demand of all other churches conformity to the practices of his
own church. The controversy came to an open rupture between the churches of Asia
and that of Rome, but other churches did not sympathize with the severe measures
of Victor, and the breach was gradually healed-just how and when we do not know;
but the Roman practice gradually prevailed over the Asiatic, and finally, at the
Council of Nicaea (325), was declared binding upon the whole Church, while the
old Asiatic practice was condemned. This decision was acquiesced in by the
bishops of Asia, as well as by the rest of the world, and only scattered
churches continued to cling to the practice of the earlier Asiatics, and they
were branded as heretics, and called Quartodecimanians (from quarta decima ), a
name which we carry back and apply to all who observed the fourteenth day, even
those of the second and third centuries. This brief summary will enable us
better to understand the accounts of Eusebius, who is our chief authority on the
subject. The paschal controversy has had an important bearing upon the question
of the authenticity of the fourth Gospel, the Tübingen critics having drawn from
this controversy one of their strongest arguments against its genuineness. This
subject cannot be discussed here, but the reader is referred, for a brief
statement of the case, to Schaff's Ch. Hist. II. 219. The Johannine controversy
has given rise to an extensive literature on these paschal disputes. Among the
most important' works are Hilgenfeld's Der Paschastreit der alien Kirche nach
seiner Bedeutung fur die Kirchengesch. u. s. w.; and Schürer's Die
Paschastreitigkeiten des zweiten Fahrhunderts, in the Zeitschrift für hist.
Theologie, 1870, p. 182-284,-the latter perhaps the ablest extended discussion
of the subject extant. The reader is also referred to the article Easter, in
Smith's Dict. of Christ. Ant.; to Hefele's Conciliengesch. I. p. 86-101; and
especially to the chapter on the paschal controversies in Schaff's Ch. Hist.
Vol. II. p. 209-220. This chapter of Schaff's is the clearest, and, in the
opinion of the writer, by far the most satisfactory, brief statement of the
whole subject which we have.

344: Although other synods are mentioned by the Libellus synodicus (of the ninth
century), the only ones which we have good reason for accepting are those
mentioned by Eusebius in this chapter and the next; viz. one in Palestine (the
Libellus synodicus gives two: one at Jerusalem, presided over by Narcissus, and
another at Caesarea, presided over by Theophilus, but the report is too late to
be of authority); one in Pontus, under the presidency of Palmas; one in Gaul,
under Irenaeus; one in Osrhoëne in Mesopotamia; and one in Asia Minor, under
Polycrates. Hefele ( Conciliengesch. I. p. 101) adds one in Rome under Victor;
and although Eusebius does not distinctly mention such a synod, we are
undoubtedly to conclude that the epistle written by Victor was a synodical
epistle and hence Hefele is, in all probability, correct in assuming that some
kind of a synod, whether municipal or provincial, took place there at this time
(see note 4). From the words of Eusebius at the close of the chapter, we may
gather that still other synods than those mentioned by him were held on this
subject. The date of all of these councils is commonly given as 198 a.d., but
there is no particular authority for that year. Jerome's version of the Chron.
assigns the composition of the various epistles to the fourth year of Septimius
Severus (196-197); but it is clear that he is giving only an approximate date.
We can say only that the synods took place sometime during Victor's episcopate.
All the councils, as we learn from this chapter, except the one under Polycrates
in Asia Minor, decided against the Quartodeciman practice. Athanasius, however (
de Syn. c. 5), speaks of Christians of Syria, Cilicia, and Mesopotamia as
celebrating the paschal feast on the fourteenth day; and Jerome ( de vir. ill.
c. 35) says that many bishops of Asia and of the Orient kept up this observance.
It is possible that the practice was from the beginning more widely spread than
Eusebius supposed, or, what is more probable, that line words of Athanasius and
Jerome refer to individual churches and bishops, whose observance of the
fourteenth day was not general enough to invalidate what Eusebius says of the
common consent of the whole Church, outside of Asia Minor, against the
Quartodeciman practice, and that this individual observance, not being
officially recognized by any synod, did not seem to him to require mention.

345: On Theophilus and Narcissus, see the preceding chapter, notes 6 and 7.

346: episkopon biktora dhlousa . This and the following epistles are no longer
extant, nor have we any fragments of them. They seem to have disappeared, even
before Jerome's time; at least, he speaks only of the memory of them as
remaining to his day (see chap. 22, note 6). Heinichen is certainly wrong in
making this epistle an individual letter from Victor alone, for Eusebius
expressly says that the epistle was from "those at Rome" ( twn epi Rwmhj ),
which seems to imply a council, as in the other cases. The grammatical
construction naturally leads us to supply with the twn the word used with it in
the previous sentence, sugkekrothmenwn ,-"those who were assembled." Valesius,
Hefele, and others are, therefore, quite justified in assuming that, according
to Eusebius, a synod met at Rome, also, at this time.

347: Palmas, bishop of Amastris, in Pontus, mentioned by Dionysius, in Bk. IV.
chap. 23, above.

348: Osrhoëne was a region of country in northwestern Mesopotamia.

349: This epistle of Bacchylus is distinguished from the preceding ones by the
fact that it is not a synodical or collective epistle but the independent
production of one man, if Eusebius' report is correct (see the preceding
chapter, note 8). The epistles "of many others," mentioned in the next sentence,
may have been of the same kind.

350: Namely, against the observance of the fourteenth day.

351: For a general account of the paschal controversy, see the preceding
chapter, note 1. On Polycrates, see chap. 22, note 9.

352: A part of this passage from Polycrates' epistle is quoted in Bk. III. chap.
31. The extract given there begins with the second sentence of the fragment
("For in Asia great lights," &c.), and extends to the report of John's burial at
Ephesus. For comments upon this portion of the fragment, see the notes given
there.

353: On Polycarp, see Bk. IV. chap. 14, note 5.

354: This Thraseas, said by Polycrates to have been bishop of Eumenia (a city in
the southern part of Phrygia), was mentioned also by Apollonius in his work
against the Montanists (according to Eusebius, chap. 18, §13, of this book). He
is called by Polycrates a martyr, and by Eusebius, in reference to Apollonius'
mention of him, "one of the martyrs of that time." There is no reason to doubt
that he was a martyr, in the full sense, as Polycarp was; but upon the more
general use of the word martuj as, e.g., in connection with John just above, see
Bk. III. chap. 32, note 15. We know nothing more about this bishop Thraseas.

355: On Sagaris, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 26, note 22.

356: Polycrates does not call Papirius a bishop or a martyr, and we know nothing
about him. Simeon Metaphrastes, upon whose reports little reliance can be
placed, in his life of Polycarp (according to Valesius), makes Papirius a
successor of Polycarp as bishop of Smyrna.

357: On Melito, see Bk. IV. chap. 26, note 1.

358: A careful exegesis of the passages in John's Gospel, which are supposed by
some to contradict the synoptic account, and to put Christ's death on the
fourteenth day of Nisan instead of on the fifteenth, shows that John agrees with
the Synoptists in putting the passover meal on the fourteenth and the death of
Christ on the fifteenth (see Schaff's Ch. Hist. Vol. I. p. 133 ff., and the
authorities referred to by him). The Asiatic churches, in observing the
fourteenth of Nisan, were commemorating the last passover feast and the death of
the paschal Lamb. Their practice did not imply that they believed that Christ
died on the fourteenth (as can be seen from fragments of Apolinarius' work
quoted in the Chron. Paschale, and referred to above; see, also, Schaff, Vol.
II. p. 214). They were in full agreement with all four Gospels in putting his
death on the fifteenth. But the paschal controversy did not hinge on the day of
the month on which Christ died,-in regard to which there was no widespread
disagreement,-but on the question as to whether a particular day of the week or
of the month was to be celebrated.

359: i.e. the Jews. The passover feast among the Jews took place on the evening
of the fourteenth of Nisan, and was eaten with unleavened bread (Ex. xii. 6 et
passim). It was on the fourteenth of Nisan, therefore, that the Jews "threw
away" the leaven, and until the evening of the twenty-first, when the seven
days' feast of unleavened bread closed, they used no leaven.

360: Acts v. 29.

361: According to this, the Asiatic Council was summoned at the request of
Victor of Rome, and in all probability this was the case with all the councils
referred to in the last chapter.

362: There has been considerable discussion as to whether Victor actually
excommunicated the Asiatic churches or only threatened to do so. Socrates ( H.
E. V. 22) says directly that he excommunicated them, but many have thought that
Eusebius does not say it. For my part, I cannot understand that Eusebius' words
mean anything else than that he did actually cut off communion with them. The
Greek reads akoinwnhtouj pantaj ardhn touj ekeise anakhrutitn adelfouj . This
seems to me decisive.

363: This epistle is no longer extant, but in addition to the fragments given in
this chapter by Eusebius, a few other extracts from it are found in other
writers; thus, in the Pseudo-Justinian Quaestiones et responsa ad orthodoxos
occurs a quotation from Irenaeus' work On Easter ( peri tou pasxa

364: The punctuation of this sentence is a disputed matter. Some editors omit
the semicolon after the words "yet others more," translating. "For some think
that they should fast one day, others two, yet others more, and some forty; and
they count the hours of the day and night together as their day." The sense is
thus materially changed, but the Greek seems to necessitate rather the
punctuation which I have followed in my translation, and so that punctuation is
adopted by Valesius, Zimmermann, Burton, Schwegler, Laemmer, Heinichen, Closs,
Crusè, and others. We should expect, moreover, that the forty hours' fast should
be mentioned in this connection by Irenaeus, as we learn from Tertullian that it
was very common; whereas we have no other trace of the forty days' fast at so
early a date (cf. the next note).

365: The fast preceding the celebration of the paschal supper, which has grown
gradually into our Lent of forty days preceding Easter, is, we are told here by
Irenaeus, much older than his day. It is thus carried back at least close to
apostolic times, and there is no reason to think that it was not observed about
as soon as the celebration of the paschal supper itself was established.
Tertullian also mentions the fast, which continued, according to him ( de
Fejunio, chap. 2), during the period "in which the bridegroom was taken away,"
i.e. in which Jesus was under the power of death.

366: i.e. the fourteenth day.

367: The Greek reads: kai toi mallon enantion hn to threin toij mh y0rousi . The
meaning is, that the observance of the fourteenth day by these strangers in Rome
itself, among those who did not observe that day, would be noticeable and more
distasteful than the mere report that the day was so observed in Asia could be.
If Victor's predecessor, therefore, allowed such persons to observe that day
even in Rome, how much more should he allow the Asiatics to observe it in their
own land.

368: Valesius, followed by others, interprets this sentence as meaning that the
presbyters of Rome sent the eucharist to other parishes where the paschal
festival was observed on the fourteenth of the month. The council of Laodicea
(Can. 14) forbade the sending of the eucharist to other parishes, which shows
that the custom must have been widespread before the end of the fourth century,
and it is therefore quite possible that the bishops of Rome, even as early as
the time of Irenaeus, pursued the same practice. But in regard to the statement
made here by Irenaeus, it must be said that, so far as we are able to ascertain,
only the churches of Asia Minor observed the fourteenth day at that early date,
and it is difficult to imagine that the presbyters of Rome before Victor's time
had been in the habit of sending the eucharist all the way from Rome to Asia
Minor. Moreover, this is the only passage in which we have notice, before the
fourth century, of the existence of the general practice condemned by the
council of Laodicea. The Greek reads oi pro sou presbuteroi toij apo twn
paroiklwn throusin epeuton euxaristia 369: epidhmhj th Rwmh

370: The meaning of this passage has been disputed. The Greek reads: kai en th
ekklhsia parexwrhsen o Anikhtoj thn euxaristian tw Polukarpw kat entrophn
dhlonoti . Valesius understands Irenaeus' meaning to be that Anicetus invited
Polycarp to administer the eucharist in Rome; and this is the common
interpretation of the passage. Heinichen objects, however, that parexwrhsen thn
euxaristian cannot refer to the administration of the sacrament, and hence
concludes that Irenaeus means simply to say that Anicetus permitted Polycarp to
partake of the eucharist in his church, thereby proclaiming publicly their
fraternal fellowship, in spite of their differences on the paschal question. The
common interpretation, however, seems to the writer better than Heinichen's; for
if the latter be adopted, the sentence in question says no more than the one
which precedes it,-"they communed with each other" ( ekoinwnhsan eautoij ). And
moreover, as Valesius remarks, Anicetus would in that case have shown Polycarp
no more honor than any other Christian pilgrim who might happen to be in Rome.
Irenaeus seems to intend to say that Anicetus showed Polycarp especial honor,
and that in spite of their difference of opinion on the paschal question. But
simply to have allowed Polycarp to partake of the eucharist in the church would
certainly have been no honor, and, on the other hand, not to invite him to
assist in the administration of the sacrament might have seemed a sign of
disrespect, and have emphasized their differences. The old interpretation,
therefore, must be followed, and so far as the Greek is concerned, there is no
difficulty about the construction. In the parexwrhsen resides the idea of
"yielding," "giving place to"; and so Anicetus yielded to Polycarp the
eucharist, or gave place to him in the matter of the eucharist. This in fact
brings out the force of the parexwrhsen better than Heinichen's interpretation.

371: The Greek form of the name is Eirhnaioj , from Eirhnaioj , which means
"peace."

372: None of these epistles are extant; but it is possible that some of the
fragments commonly assigned to Irenaeus' epistle to Victor may belong to one or
more of them (see the Dict. of Christ. Biog. III. p. 265). We do not know to
what bishops or churches these epistles were sent. Jerome does not mention them.

373: In chaps. 22 and 23. For particulars in regard to them, see chap. 22, notes
6 and 7.

374: Cassius and Clarus are otherwise unknown men.

375: i.e. in the Palestinian council mentioned in chap. 23. Upon this and the
other councils held at the same period, see chap. 23, note 2.

376: This fragment is given, with annotations, by Routh, Rel. Sac. II. p. 3 sq.
English translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. p. 774.

377: These epistles, like all the rest written at this time on the paschal
question, are now lost (see chap. 23, note 4).

378: For a general summary of the works of Irenaeus mentioned by Eusebius, see
Bk. IV. chap. 21, note 9.

379: proj Ellhnaj logoj ... peri episthmhj alloj te . Unfortunately, Harvey did
not name the Syriac fragment which contains the statement referred to, and it is
not to be found among those collected in his edition (Venables, in Smith and
Wace, states that he could find no such fragment, and I have also searched in
vain for it). Evidently some blunder has been committed, and it looks as if
Harvey's statement were unverifiable. Meanwhile, Jerome's testimony alone is
certainly not enough to warrant an emendation of the text in opposition to all
the mss. and versions. We must therefore conclude, with our present light, that
the treatise peri episthmhj

380: eij epideicin tou apostolikou khrugmatoj . This work, too, has perished,
though possibly a few of the fragments published by Harvey are to be referred to
it (see Harvey, I. p. clxvii.). Harvey conjectures that the work discussed the
articles of the early Rule of faith, which is quite possible. Of the "brother
Marcian" to whom it was addressed, we know nothing.

381: biblion ti dialecewn diaforwn . This work (no longer extant) was probably,
as Harvey remarks, "a collection of sermons and expositions of various texts and
passages of Scripture." To it are undoubtedly to be referred a great many of the
fragments in which passages of Scripture are discussed (see Harvey, I. p.
clxvii.).

382: Commodus was strangled on the 31st of December, 192, and Pertinax, who
immediately succeeded him, was murdered, on March 28, 193, by the Praetorian
guard, which then sold the imperial power to Didius Julianus, who, at the
approach of Septimius Severus, who had been proclaimed emperor by the Pannonian
legions, was declared a public enemy by the Senate, and beheaded after a reign
of only sixty-six days.

383: The Greek reads kai ta Macimou peri rou poluqrulhtou para toij airesiwtaij
zhthmatoj, tou poqwn h kakia, kai peri tou genhthn uparxein thn ulhn . The
plural ta upomnhmata peri thj ulhj thj xristou diatribhj ouk ashmoj anhr 384:
eij thn ecahmeron kosmopoiian or dhmiourgian ). The adjective ecahmeroj ta
omiliaj

385: Apion's work is mentioned also by Jerome ( de vir. ill. chap. 4), but
nothing is added to the statement of Eusebius. We know nothing more about him or
his work.

386: Sextus also is mentioned by Jerome, in his de vir. ill. chap. 50, but we
know nothing about him or his work, except what Eusebius tells us here.

387: Nothing more is known of this Arabianus, and Eusebius doesnot even tell us
the name of his work. His silence is difficult to explain. We can hardly imagine
that the title was intentionally omitted; for had there been a reason for such a
course, there must have been as much reason for omitting the writer's name also.
It does not seem probable that he had never known the title of the book, for he
was not in the habit of mentioning works which he had not seen, except with the
formula logoj exei , or something of the kind, to indicate that he makes his
statement only on the authority of others. It is possible that he had seen this,
with the other works mentioned (perhaps all bound in ·ne volume), at sometime in
the past, but that the title of Arabianus' work had escaped him, and hence he
simply mentioned the work along with the others, without considering the title a
matter of great importance. He speaks of but a single work,- allh tij upoqesij
tij upoqesij

388: Eusebius does not imply, in this sentence, that he is not acquainted with
these works to which he refers. As the words are commonly translated, we might
imagine that he was not familiar with them, for all the translators make him
speak of not being able to draw any extracts from them for his own history. Thus
Valesius: nec narrationem ullam libris nostris intexere possumus; Stroth: "noch
etwas darauserzählen kann"; Closs: "noch etwas daraus anführen können"; Crusè:
"we can neither insert the time nor any extracts in our History." The Greek of
the whole sentence reads, wn dia to mhdemian exein aformhn oux oion te oute touj
xronouj paradounai grafh, ouq= istoriaj hnhmhn uposhmhnasqai , which seems to
mean simply that their works contain no information which enables him to give
the dates of the authors, or to recount anything about their lives; that is,
they contain no personal allusions. This is quite different from saying that he
was not acquainted with the works; in fact, had he not been quite familiar with
them, he could not have made such a broad statement. He seems to have searched
them for personal notices, and to have failed in the search. Whether these words
of Eusebius apply to all the works already mentioned, or only to the muriwn
allwn just referred to, cannot be certainly determined. The latter seems most
natural; but even if the reference be only to those last mentioned, there is
every reason to think that the words are just as true of the writings of
Heraclitus, Maximus, and the others, for he tells us nothing about their lives,
nor the time in which they lived, but introduces them in the most general terms,
as "ancient ecclesiastical men." There seems, therefore, no good reason for
connecting these writers with the reign of Cornmodus, rather than with any other
reign of the late second or of the third century. It must be noticed that
Eusebius does not say that "these men lived at this time"; he simply mentions
them in this connection because it is a convenient place, and perhaps because
there were indications which led him to think they could not have lived early in
the second or late in the third century. It is quite possible, as suggested in
the previous note, that the works of the writers whose names are mentioned in
this chapter were collected in a single volume, and that thus Eusebius was led
to class them all together, although the subjects of their works were by no
means the same, and their dates may have been widely different.

389: Eusebius mentioned first those works whose authors' names were known to
him, but now adds that he is acquainted with many other writings which bear the
name of no author. He claims, however, that the works testify to their authors'
orthodoxy, and he seems to imply, by this statement, that he has convinced
himself of their orthodoxy by a personal examination of them.

390: This anonymous work against the heresy of Artemon is no longer extant, and
the only fragments of it which we have are those preserved by Eusebius in this
chapter. Theodoret ( Haer. Fab. II. 5) mentions the work, and says that it was
directed against the heresies of Theodotus and Artemon, and that it bore the
name Little Labyrinth. It is plain, from the fragments which Eusebius gives,
that it was written in Rome some little time before the middle of the third
century, probably not far from 230 or 240 a.d. The work is commonly ascribed to
Hippolytus, in favor of which may be urged both the time and the place of its
composition as well as some internal resemblance between it and the
Philosophumena. On the other hand, Photius ( Cod. 48 ) ascribes to Caius of Rome
a work against Artemon, which may well be identical with the anonymous work
quoted in the present chapter. It is therefore contended by some (e.g. by
Salmon) that Caius was the author of the work. It must be noted, however, that
in the same connection Photius ascribes another work to Caius which we know to
have been written by Hippolytus, and hence his testimony is rather in favor of
Hippolytus than Caius as the author of the work. On the other hand several
objections have been urged by Salmon against the Hippolytine authorship, which,
while not decisive, yet make it extremely doubtful. In view of these facts, we
must conclude that it is possible, but very improbable, that Hippolytus wrote
the work; that it is not impossible, though we are quite without evidence for
the supposition, that Caius wrote it; that it is more likely that a work which
even to Eusebius was anonymous, was written by an unknown man, who must remain
unknown to us also. The extant fragments of the work are given, with notes, by
Routh in his Rel. Sac., and an English translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers,
Vol. V. p. 601 sq., among the works of Caius. Although the work is said by
Eusebius to have been directed against the heresy of Artemon, he has preserved
only extracts relating to the Theodoti and their heresy. They are described also
by Hippolytus, both in his lost Syntagma (as we can learn from
Pseudo-Tertullian, Epiphanius, and Philaster) and in his Philosophumena (VII.
23-24, and X. 19). Other ancient writers that mention him know only what our
anonymous author or Hippolytus reports. It seems that the older Theodotus, a
native of Byzantium, came to Rome in the time of Eleutherus or Victor, and
taught a species of adoptionism, which reminds us somewhat of the Asia Minor
Alogi, in whose circle he may have been trained. Hippolytus informs us that he
was orthodox in his theology and cosmology, but that he was heretical in his
Christology. He did not deny Christ's birth from a virgin (as the Ebionites had
done), but he did deny his divinity, teaching that he was a mere man ( yiloj
anqrwpoj ), upon whom the Holy Spirit descended at the time of his baptism, in
consequence of which he became the Christ, received power to fulfill his special
mission and by his righteousness was raised above all other men. The descent of
the Holy Spirit, however, although raising him to a very exalted position, did
not make him divine; some of Theodotus' followers denying that he ever acquired
divinity, others believing that he acquired it by his resurrection. Theodotus
was excommunicated by Victor on account of his heretical Christology, but gained
a number of followers, and after his excommunication founded a schismatical
sect, which had bishop Natalius, to whom a regular salary was paid (see below,
§10), and which continued under the leadership of another Theodotus, a banker,
and a certain Asclepiodotus, both of them disciples of the first Theodotus,
during the episcopate of Zephyrinus, but seems soon to have disappeared, and to
have exerted comparatively little influence during its brief existence.
Theodotus, the banker, appears to have agreed substantially with the older
Theodotus, but to have indulged himself in speculations concerning Melchizedek,
pronouncing him to be a heavenly power still higher than Christ. Epiphanius
makes the second Theodotus the founder of a second party, and gives his school
the name of Melchizedekians, which appears in later works on heresy, but there
is no reason to suppose that there were two separate parties.

391: On Paul of Samosata, see below, Bk. VII. chap. 27, note 4.

392: The Artemonites were certainly correct in maintaining that the adoptionism
which they held was, at least in its essential principles, an ancient thing, and
their opponents were wrong in trying to deny it. It is the Christology which
Hermas represents, and early in the second century it was undoubtedly a
widespread popular belief. No one thought of questioning the orthodoxy of
Hermas. The Christology of the Theodotians and of Artemon was an innovation,
however, in so far as it attempted to formulate in scientific terms and to treat
philosophically what had hitherto been only a popular belief. So soon as the
logical conclusions were drawn, and its consequences to the divinity of the Son
were perceived, it began to be felt as heresy, but not until then.

393: On Victor, see above, chap. 22, note 1. Victor is the thirteenth bishop if
Cletus and Anencletus be reckoned as one, otherwise the fourteenth. This is used
by Salmon as an argument against the Hippolytine authorship of the Little
Labyrinth, for Hippolytus reckoned Cletus and Anencletus as two bishops, and
therefore made Victor the fourteenth (see above, Bk. III. chap. 13, note 3).

394: The dates of Zephyrinus' episcopate are to be gained by reckoning backward
from that of Callistus, which is shown in Bk. VI. chap. 21, note 3, to have
begun in the year 217. A comparison of the various sources shows that Zephyrinus
was bishop eighteen or nineteen years, which brings us back to the year 198 or
199 as the date of his accession. Eusebius says "about the ninth year of the
reign of Severus," which according to the correct reckoning would be the year
201, but according to his erroneous reckoning of the dates of the emperors'
reigns (see the note already referred to) gives the year 200, so that the
agreement is reasonably close (see Lipsius' Chron. der röm. Bischöfe, p. 172
sq., and see above, Bk. V. chap. 22, note 1). In Bk. IX. of his great work
Hippolytus gives quite an account of Zephyrinus and his successor, Callistus.
The former is described as ignorant and illiterate, a taker of bribes, an
uninformed and shamefully corrupt man, &c. How much of this is true and how much
is due to prejudice, we cannot tell. But it seems at least to be a fact that
Zephyrthus was completely under the influence of Callistus, as Hippolytus
states. We learn from the latter that Zephyrthus at least countenanced the
heresy of Patripassianism (at the opposite extreme from that of the Theodotians
and Artemon), if he did not directly teach it.

395: On Justin Martyr, see Bk. IV. chap. 11, note 20.

396: On Miltiades, see above, chap. 17, note 1.

397: On Tattan, see Bk. III. chap. 29. The fact that Tartan is here spoken of
with respect is urged by Salmon as an argument against the Hippolytine
authorship of this work, for Hippolytus devotes two chapters of his
Philosophumena (VIII. 9, X. 14) to the heresy of Tatian.

398: On Clement of Alexandria, see above, chap. 11, note 1.

399: qeologeitai o xristoj . Our author is quite correct in making this
statement. The apologists are agreed in their acceptance of the Logos
Christology of which they are the earliest patristic exponents, and in the time
of Clement of Alexandria it had become, as yet in an undeveloped form, the
commonly accepted doctrine of the orthodox Church.

400: On Irenaeus, see Bk. IV. chap. 21, note 9.

401: On Melito, see Bk. IV. chap. 26, note 1.

402: Irenaeus' utterances on this subject were epoch-making in the history of
doctrine. No one before him bad emphasized so energetically and brought out so
clearly the God-manhood of Christ. His great significance in Christology is the
emphasis which he laid upon the unity of God and man in Christ,-a unity in which
the integrity both of the divine and of the human was preserved. Our author is
also doubtless correct in saying that Melito called Christ God and man. If the
two fragments from the Discourse on the Soul and Body , and from the Discourse
on the Cross (printed from the Syriac by Cureton, in his Spic. Syr. p. 52 sq.),
be genuine, as is quite probable (see above, Bk. IV. chap. 26, note 1), we have
clear indications that Melito taught both the humanity and the deity of Christ
("when He was become incarnate through the womb of the Virgin, and was born
man." "Inasmuch as He was man, He needed food; still, inasmuch as He was God, He
ceased not to feed the universe").

403: This passage is sometimes interpreted as indicating that hymns written by
the Christians themselves were sung in the church of Rome at this time. But this
is by no means implied. So far as we are able to gather from our sources,
nothing, except the Psalms and New Testament hymns (such as the "Gloria in
Excelsis," the "Magnificat," the "Nunc Dimittis," &c.), was as a rule, sung in
public worship before the fourth century (the practice which had sprung up in
the church of Antioch seems to have been exceptional; see Kraus, p. 673). Before
the end of that century, however, the practice of singing other hymns in the
service of the Church had become common, both in the East and West. On the other
hand, the private use of hymns among the Christians began very early. We need
refer here only to Pliny's epistle to Trajan (translated above, in Bk. III.
chap. 33, note 1); Clement of Alexandria, Strom. VII. 7; Tertullian, ad Uxor.
II. 8; Origen, Contra Cels. VIII. 67; the epistle of Dionysius quoted below, in
Bk. VII. chap. 24, &c. Compare the article Hymnen in Kraus' Real-Encyclopädie
der Christl. Alterthümer, and the article Hymns in Smith and Cheetham's Dict. of
Christ. Antiquities.

404: ton skutea 405: See above, note 5.

406: Of Natalius, we know only what is told us in this passage. The suggestion
of Valesius that he might be identified with C`cilius Natalis, the heathen who
is represented as converted by Octavius, in the Octavius of Minucius Felix, is
quite baseless.

407: 'Asklhpiodotou , according to all the mss. except one, which reads
'Asklhpiadou , and with which Nicephorus and Theodoret agree. He is undoubtedly
the same man that is referred to in §17, below, where all the mss. unite in
reading 'Asklhpiadou 408: On this second Theodotus, a money-changer or banker (
trapezithj 409: The Greek contains a play of words at this point: epi tauthth
fronhsei, mallon de afrosunh .

410: This is the earliest instance we have of a salaried clergyman. The practice
of paying salaries was followed also by the Montanists, and brought great
reproach upon them (see above, chap. 18, note 8). A Roman denarius was equal to
about seventeen cents. so that Natalius' monthly salary was a little over
twenty-five dollars.

411: It is not necessary to doubt the truth of this report, if we substitute
"muscular Christians" for "holy angels." As Stroth dryly remarks: "Eben kein
löblich Geschäft für die heiligen Engel; es werden aber ohne zweifel Engel reit
guten starken Knochen und Nerven gewesen sein."

412: The information which is given us here in regard to the methods of the
Theodotians is very interesting. What is said in regard to their philosophical
principles makes it evident that they used the grammatical and critical mode of
exegesis as opposed to the prevalent allegorical mode. Nothing could seem more
irreverent and irreligious to the Church of that age than such a method of
interpretation, the method which we now recognize as the only true one. They
were, moreover, textual critics. They may have been rash in their methods, but
it is not necessary to suppose them dishonest in their purposes. They seem to
have looked upon the Scriptures as inspired as truly as their opponents did, but
they believed that radical criticism was needed if the true reading of the
originals was to be reached, while their opponents were shocked at anything of
the kind. That textual criticism was necessary, even at that earl day, is clear
enough from the words of Irenaeus (quoted in chap. 20, above), and from the
words of Dionysius (quoted in Bk. IV. chap. 23), as well as from many other
sources. Finally, these men seem to have offended their opponents by the use of
dialectical methods in their treatment of theology. This is very significant at
that early date. It is indeed the earliest instance known to us of that method
which seemed entirely irreligious to the author of the Little Labyrinth, but
which less than a century later prevailed in the Antiochian school, and for a
large part of the Middle Ages ruled the whole Church.

413: The author makes a play here upon the word earth, which cannot be
reproduced in a translation. gewmetrian epithdeuousi/, wsan ek thj ghj ontej kai
ek thj ghj lalountej .

414: 'Eukleidhj ... gewmtreitai

415: All the mss. read 'Asklhpiadou , which is adopted by most of the editors.
Rufinus and Nicephorus, however, followed by a few editors, among them
Heinichen, read 'Asklhpiodotou (see above, note 18).

416: katwrqwmena, toutestin hfanismena .

417: Of this Hermophilus we know nothing more.

418: 'Apollwnidou , which is the reading of one ancient ms., of Rufinus,
Theodoret, and Nicephorus, and which is adopted by Stroth, Burton, Heinichen,
and Closs. The majority of the mss. read 'Apollwniou , while a few read
'Apollwniadou .

419: These persons can hardly have rejected the Law and the Prophets utterly,-at
least, no hint is given us that they maintained a fundamental difference between
the God of the Old and the God of the New Testament, as Marcion did,-nor would
such wholesale rejection be natural for critics such as they were. It is more
likely that they simply, as many of the Gnostics did, emphasized the merely
relative authority of the Old Testament, and that they applied historical
criticism to it, distinguishing between its various parts in the matter of
authority. Such action is just what we should expect from members of a critical
school like that of Theodotus, and such criticism in its extremest form would
naturally seem to an orthodox Catholic the same as throwing over the whole book.
Cf. Harnack, Dogmeschicte, p. 579 and p. 488 sqq.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 17: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 6
========================================================================

Book VI.

Chapter I. The Persecution Under Severus.

Chapter II. The Training of Origen from Childhood.3 Chapter III. While Still
Very Young, He Taught Diligently the Word of Christ.

Chapter IV. The pupils of Origen that became Martyrs.

Chapter V. Potamiaena.35 Chapter VI. Clement of Alexandria.

Chapter VII. The Writer, Judas.43 Chapter VIII. Origen's Daring Deed.

Chapter IX. The Miracles of Narcissus.

Chapter X. The Bishops of Jerusalem.

Chapter XI. Alexander.

Chapter XII. Serapion and His Extant Works.

Chapter XIII. The Writings of Clement.76 Chapter XIV. The Scriptures Mentioned
by Him.

Chapter XV. Heraclas.119 Chapter XVI. Origen's Earnest Study of the Divine
Scriptures.

Chapter XVII. The Translator Symmachus.130 Chapter XVIII. Ambrose.

Chapter XIX. Circumstances Related of Origen.

Chapter XX. The Extant Works of the Writers of that Age.

Chapter XXI. The Bishops that Were Well Known at that Time.

Chapter XXII. The Works of Hippolytus Which Have Reached Us.

Chapter XXIII. Origen's Zeal and His Elevation to the Presbyterate.

Chapter XXIV. The Commentaries Which He Prepared at Alexandria.

Chapter XXV. His Review of the Canonical Scriptures.

Chapter XXVI. Heraclas Becomes Bishop of Alexandria.

Chapter XXVII. How the Bishops Regarded Origen.

Chapter XXVIII. The Persecution Under Maximinus.

Chapter XXIX. Fabianus, Who Was Wonderfully Designated Bishop of Rome by God.

Chapter XXX. The Pupils of Origen.

Chapter XXXI. Africanus.

Chapter XXXII. The Commentaries Which Origen Composed in Caesarea in Palestine.

Chapter XXXIII. The Error of Beryllus.

Chapter XXXIV. Philip Caesar.

Chapter XXXV. Dionysius Succeeds Heraclas in the Episcopate.

Chapter XXXVI. Other Works of Origen.

Chapter XXXVII. The Dissension of the Arabians.290 Chapter XXXVIII. The Heresy
of the Elkesites.

Chapter XXXIX. The Persecution Under Decius, and the Sufferings of Origen.

Chapter XL. The Events Which Happened to Dionysius.305 Chapter XLI. The Martyrs
in Alexandria.

Chapter XLII. Others of Whom Dionysius Gives an Account.

Chapter XLIII. Novatus,341 His Manner of Life and His Heresy.

Chapter XLIV. Dionysius' Account of Serapion.

Chapter XLV. An Epistle of Dionysius to Novatus.

Chapter XLVI. Other Epistles of Dionysius.

Book VI.

Chapter I. The Persecution Under Severus.

1 When Severus began to persecute the churches,1 glorious testimonies were given
everywhere by the athletes of religion. This was especially the case in
Alexandria, to which city, as to a most prominent theater, athletes of God were
brought from Egypt and all Thebais according to their merit, and won crowns from
God through their great patience under many tortures and every mode of death.
Among these was Leonides, who was called the father of Origen,2 and who was
beheaded while his son was still young. How remarkable the predilection of this
son was for the Divine Word, in consequence of his father's instruction, it will
not be amiss to state briefly, as his fame has been very greatly celebrated by
many.

Chapter II. The Training of Origen from Childhood.3

1 Many things might be said in attempting to describe the life of the man while
in school; but this subject alone would require a separate treatise.
Nevertheless, for the present, abridging most things, we shall state a few facts
concerning him as briefly as possible, gathering them from certain letters, and
from the statement of persons still living who were acquainted with him.

2 What they report of Origen seems to me worthy of mention, even, so to speak,
from his swathing-bands.

It was the tenth year of the reign of Severus, while Laetus4 was governor of
Alexandria and the rest of Egypt, and Demetrius5 had lately received the
episcopate of the parishes there, as successor of Julian.6

3 As the flame of persecution had been kindled greatly,7 and multitudes had
gained the crown of martyrdom, such desire for martyrdom seized the soul of
Origen, although yet a boy, that he went close to danger, springing forward and
rushing to the conflict in his eagerness.

4 And truly the termination of his life had been very near had not the divine
and heavenly Providence, for the benefit of many, prevented his desire through
the agency of his mother.

5 For, at first, entreating him, she begged him to have compassion on her
motherly feelings toward him; but finding, that when he had learned that his
father had been seized and imprisoned, he was set the more resolutely, and
completely carried away with his zeal for martyrdom, she hid all his clothing,
and thus compelled him to remain at home.

6 But, as there was nothing else that he could do, and his zeal beyond his age
would not suffer him to be quiet, he sent to his father an encouraging letter on
martyrdom,8 in which he exhorted him, saying, "Take heed not to change your mind
on our account." This may be recorded as the first evidence of Origen's youthful
wisdom and of his genuine love for piety.

7 For even then he had stored up no small resources in the words of the faith,
having been trained in the Divine Scriptures from childhood. And he had not
studied them with indifference, for his father, besides giving him the usual
liberal education,9 had made them a matter of no secondary importance.

8 First of all, before inducting him into the Greek sciences, he drilled him in
sacred studies, requiring him to learn and recite every day. Nor was this
irksome to the boy, but he was eager and diligent in these studies. And he was
not satisfied with learning what was simple and obvious in the sacred words, but
sought for something more, and even at that age busied himself with deeper
speculations. So that he puzzled his father with inquiries for the true meaning
of the inspired Scriptures.

10 And his father rebuked him seemingly to his face, telling him not to search
beyond his age, or further than the manifest meaning. But by himself he rejoiced
greatly and thanked God, the author of all good, that he had deemed him worthy
to be the father of such a child.

11 And they say that often, standing by the boy when asleep, he uncovered his
breast as if the Divine Spirit were enshrined within it, and kissed it
reverently; considering himself blessed in his goodly offspring. These and other
things like them are related to Origen when a boy.

12 But when his father ended his life in martyrdom, he was left with his mother
and six younger brothers when he was not quite seventeen years old.10

13 And the poverty of his father being confiscated to the royal treasury, he and
his family were in want of the necessaries of life. But he was deemed worthy of
Divine care. And he found welcome and rest with a woman of great wealth, and
distinguished in her manner of life and in other respects. She was treating with
great honor a famous heretic then in Alexandria;11 who, however, was born in
Antioch. He was with her as an adopted son, and she treated him with the
greatest kindness.

14 But although Origen was under the necessity of associating with him, he
nevertheless gave from this time on strong evidences of his orthodoxy in the
faith. For when on account of the apparent skill in argument12 of Paul, - for
this was the man's name, - a great multitude came to him, not only of heretics
but also of our people, Origen could never be induced to join with him in
prayer;13 for he held, although a boy, the rule of the Church,14 and abominated,
as he somewhere expresses it, heretical teachings.15 Having been instructed in
the sciences of the Greeks by his father, he devoted him after his death more
assiduously and exclusively to the study of literature, so that he obtained
considerable preparation in philology16 and was able not long after the death of
his father, by devoting himself to that subject, to earn a compensation amply
sufficient for his needs at his age.17 Chapter III. While Still Very Young, He
Taught Diligently the Word of Christ.

1 But while he was lecturing in the school, as he tells us himself, and there
was no one at Alexandria to give instruction in the faith, as all were driven
away by the threat of persecution, some of the heathen came to him to hear the
word of God.

2 The first of them, he says, was Plutarch,18 who after living well, was honored
with divine martyrdom. The second was Heracles,19 a brother of Plutarch; who
after he too had given with him abundant evidence of a philosophic and ascetic
life, was esteemed worthy to succeed Demetrius in the bishopric of Alexandria.

3 He was in his eighteenth year when he took charge of the catechetical
school.20 He was prominent also at this time, during the persecution under
Aquila,21 the governor of Alexandria, when his name became celebrated among the
leaders in the faith, through the kindness and goodwill which he manifested
toward all the holy martyrs, whether known to him or strangers.

4 For not only was he with them while in bonds, and until their final
condemnation, but when the holy martyrs were led to death, he was very bold and
went with them into danger. So that as he acted bravely, and with great boldness
saluted the martyrs with a kiss, oftentimes the heathen multitude round about
them became infuriated, and were on the point of rushing upon him.

5 But through the helping hand of God, he escaped absolutely and marvelously.
And this same divine and heavenly power, again and again, it is impossible to
say how often, on account of his great zeal and boldness for the words of
Christ, guarded him when thus endangered.22 So great was the enmity of the
unbelievers toward him, on account of the multitude that were instructed by him
in the sacred faith, that they placed bands of soldiers around the house where
he abode.

6 Thus day by day the persecution burned against him, so that the whole city
could no longer contain him; but he removed from house to house and was driven
in every direction because of the multitude who attended upon the divine
instruction which he gave. For his life also exhibited right and admirable
conduct according to the practice of genuine philosophy.

7 For they say that his manner of life was as his doctrine, and his doctrine as
his life.23 Therefore, by the divine Power working with him he aroused a great
many to his own zeal.

8 But when he saw yet more coming to him for instruction, and the catechetical
school had been entrusted to him alone by Demetrius, who presided over the
church, he considered the teaching of grammatical science inconsistent with
training in divine subjects,24 and forthwith he gave up his grammatical school
as unprofitable and a hindrance to sacred learning.

9 Then, with becoming consideration, that he might not need aid from others, he
disposed of whatever valuable books of ancient literature he possessed, being
satisfied with receiving from the purchaser four aboli a day.25 For many years
he lived philosophically26 in this manner, putting away all the incentives of
youthful desires. Through the entire day he endured no small amount of
discipline; and for the greater part of the night he gave himself to the study
of the Divine Scriptures. He restrained himself as much as possible by a most
philosophic life; sometimes by the discipline of fasting, again by limited time
for sleep. And in his zeal he never lay upon a bed, but upon the ground.

10 Most of all, he thought that the words of the Saviour in the Gospel should be
observed, in which he exhorts not to have two coats nor to use shoes,27 nor to
occupy oneself with cares for the future.28

11 With a zeal beyond his age he continued in cold and nakedness; and, going to
the very extreme of poverty, he greatly astonished those about him. And indeed
he grieved many of his friends who desired to share their possessions with him,
on account of the wearisome toil which they saw him enduring in the teaching of
divine things.

12 But he did not relax his perseverance. He is said to have walked for a number
of years never wearing a shoe, and, for a great many years, to have abstained
from the use of wine, and of all other things beyond his necessary food; so that
he was in danger of breaking down and destroying his constitution.29

13 By giving such evidences of a philosophic life to those who saw him, he
aroused many of his pupils to similar zeal; so that prominent men even of the
unbelieving heathen and men that followed learning and philosophy were led to
his instruction. Some of them having received from him into the depth of their
souls faith in the Divine Word, became prominent in the persecution then
prevailing; and some of them were seized and suffered martyrdom.

Chapter IV. The pupils of Origen that became Martyrs.

1 The first of these was Plutarch, who was mentioned just above.30 As he was led
to death the man of whom we are speaking being with him at the end of his life,
came near being slain by his fellow-citizens, as if he were the cause of his
death. But the providence of God preserved him at this time also.

2 After Plutarch, the second martyr among the pupils of Origen was Serenus,31
who gave through fire a proof of the faith which he had received.

3 The third martyr from the same school was Heraclides,32 and after him the
fourth was Hero.33 The former of these was as yet a catechumen, and the latter
had but recently been baptized. Both of them were beheaded. After them, the
fifth from the same school proclaimed as an athlete of piety was another
Serenus, who, it is reported, was beheaded, after a long endurance of tortures.
And of women, Herais34 died while yet a catechumen, receiving baptism by fire,
as Origen himself somewhere says.

Chapter V. Potamiaena.35

1 Basilides36 may be counted the seventh of these. He led to martyrdom the
celebrated Potamiaena, who is still famous among the people of the country for
the many things which she endured for the preservation of her chastity and
virginity. For she was blooming in the perfection of her mind and her physical
graces. Having suffered much for the faith of Christ, finally after tortures
dreadful and terrible to speak of, she with her mother, Marcella,37 was put to
death by fire.

2 They say that the judge, Aquila by name, having inflicted severe tortures upon
her entire body, at last threatened to hand her over to the gladiators for
bodily abuse. After a little consideration, being asked for her decision, she
made a reply which was regarded as impious.

3 Thereupon she received sentence immediately, and Basilides, one of the
officers of the army, led her to death. But as the people attempted to annoy and
insult her with abusive words, he drove back her insulters, showing her much
pity and kindness. And perceiving the man's sympathy for her, she exhorted him
to be of good courage, for she would supplicate her Lord for him after her
departure, and he would soon receive a reward for the kindness he had shown her.

4 Having said this, she nobly sustained the issue, burning pitch being poured
little by little, over various parts of her body, from the sole of her feet to
the crown of her head. Such was the conflict endured by this famous maiden.

5 Not long after this Basilides, being asked by his fellow-soldiers to swear for
a certain reason, declared that it was not lawful for him to swear at all, for
he was a Christian, and he confessed this openly. At first they thought that he
was jesting, but when he continued to affirm it, he was led to the judge, and,
acknowledging his conviction before him, he was imprisoned. But the brethren in
God coming to him and inquiring the reason of this sudden and remarkable
resolution, he is reported to have said that Potamiaena, for three days after
her martyrdom, stood beside him by night and placed a crown on his head and said
that she had besought the Lord for him and had obtained what she asked, and that
soon she would take him with her.

6 Thereupon the brethren gave him the seal38 of the Lord; and on the next day,
after giving glorious testimony for the Lord, he was beheaded. And many others
in Alexandria are recorded to have accepted speedily the word of Christ in those
times.

7 For Potamiaena appeared to them in their dreams and exhorted them. But let
this suffice in regard to this matter.

Chapter VI. Clement of Alexandria.

1 Clement39 having succeeded Pantaenus,40 had charge at that time of the
catechetical instruction in Alexandria, so that Origen also, while still a
boy,41 was one of his pupils. In the first book of the work called Stromata,
which Clement wrote, he gives a chronological table,42 bringing events down to
the death of Commodus. So it is evident that that work was written during the
reign of Severus, whose times we are now recording.

Chapter VII. The Writer, Judas.43 At this time another writer, Judas,
discoursing about the seventy weeks in Daniel, brings down the chronology to the
tenth year of the reign of Severus. He thought that the coming of Antichrist,
which was much talked about, was then near.44 So greatly did the agitation
caused by the persecution of our people at this time disturb the minds of many.

Chapter VIII. Origen's Daring Deed.

1At this time while Origen was conducting catechetical instruction at
Alexandria, a deed was done by him which evidenced an immature and youthful
mind, but at the same time gave the highest proof of faith and continence.45 For
he took the words, "There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven's sake,"46 in too literal ad extreme a sense. And in order to
fulfill the Saviour's word, and at the same time to take away from the
unbelievers all opportunity for scandal,-for, although young, he met for the
study of divine things with women as well as men,-he carried out in action the
word of the Saviour.

2 He thought that this would not be known by many of his acquaintances. But it
was impossible for him, though desiring to do so, to keep such an action secret.

3 When Demetrius, who presided over that parish, at last learned of this, he
admired greatly the daring nature of the act, and as he perceived his zeal and
the genuineness of his faith, he immediately exhorted him to courage, and urged
him the more to continue his work of catechetical instruction.

4 Such was he at that time. But soon afterward, seeing that he was prospering,
and becoming great and distinguished among all men, the same Demetrius, overcome
by human weakness, wrote of his deed as most foolish to the bishops throughout
the world. But the bishops of Cesarea and Jerusalem, who were especially notable
and distinguished among the bishops of Palestine, considering

5 Origen worthy in the highest degree of the honor, ordained him a presbyter.47
Thereupon his fame increased greatly, and his name became renowned everywhere,
and he obtained no small reputation for virtue and wisdom. But Demetrius, having
nothing else that he could say against him, save this deed of his boyhood,
accused him bitterly,48 and dared to include with him in these accusations those
who had raised him to the presbyterate.

6 These things, however, took place a little later. But at this time Origen
continued fearlessly the instruction in divine things at Alexandria by day and
night to all who came to him; devoting his entire leisure without cessation to
divine studies and to his pupils.

7 Severus, having held the government for eighteen years, was succeeded by his
son, Antoninus.49 Among those who had endured courageously the persecution of
that time, and had been preserved by the Providence of God through the conflicts
of confession, was Alexander, of whom we have spoken already50 as bishop of the
church in Jerusalem. On account of his pre-eminence in the confession of Christ
he was thought worthy of that bishopric, while Narcissus,51 his predecessor, was
still living.

Chapter IX. The Miracles of Narcissus.

1 The citizens of that parish mention many other miracles of Narcissus, on the
tradition of the brethren who succeeded him; among which they relate the
following wonder as performed by him.

2 They say that the oil once failed while the deacons were watching through the
night at the great paschal vigil. Thereupon the whole multitude being dismayed,
Narcissus directed those who attended to the lights, to draw water and bring it
to him.

3 This being immediately done he prayed over the water, and with firm faith in
the Lord, commanded them to pour it into the lamps. And when they had done so,
contrary to all expectation by a wonderful and divine power, the nature of the
water was changed into that of oil. A small portion of it has been preserved
even to our day by many of the brethren there as a memento of the wonder.52

4 They tell many other things worthy to be noted of the life of this man, among
which is this. Certain base men being unable to endure the strength and firmness
of his life, and fearing punishment for the many evil deeds of which they were
conscious, sought by plotting to anticipate him, and circulated a terrible
slander against him.

5 And to persuade those who heard of it, they confirmed their accusations with
oaths: one invoked upon himself destruction by fire; another the wasting of his
body by a foul disease; the third the loss of his eyes. But though they swore in
this manner, they could not affect the mind of the believers; because the
continence and virtuous life of Narcissus were well known to all.

6 But he could not in any wise endure the wickedness of these men; and as he had
followed a philosophic53 life for a long time, he fled from the whole body of
the Church, and hid himself in desert and secret places, and remained there many
years.54

7 But the great eye of judgment was not unmoved by these things, but soon looked
down upon these impious men, and brought on them the curses with which they had
bound themselves. The residence of the first, from nothing but a little spark
falling upon it, was entirely consumed by night, and he perished with all his
family. The second was speedily covered with the disease which he had imprecated
upon himself, from the sole of his feet to his head.

8 But the third, perceiving what had happened to the others, and fearing the
inevitable judgment of God, the ruler of all, confessed publicly what they had
plotted together. And in his repentance he became so wasted by his great
lamentations, and continued weeping to such an extent, that both his eyes were
destroyed. Such were the punishments which these men received for their
falsehood.

Chapter X. The Bishops of Jerusalem.

1 Narcissus having departed, and no one knowing where he was, those presiding
over the neighboring churches thought it best to ordain another bishop. His name
was Dius.55 He presided but a short time, and Germanio succeeded him. He was
followed by Gordius,56 in whose time Narcissus appeared again, as if raised from
the dead.57 And immediately the brethren besought him to take the episcopate, as
all admired him the more on account of his retirement and philosophy, and
especially because of the punishment with which God had avenged him.

Chapter XI. Alexander.

1 But as on account of his great age Narcissus was no longer able to perform his
official duties,58 the Providence of God called to the office with him, by a
revelation given him in a night vision, the above-mentioned Alexander, who was
then bishop of another parish.59

2 Thereupon, as by Divine direction, he journeyed from the land of Cappadocia,
where he first held the episcopate, to Jerusalem, in consequence of a vow and
for the sake of information in regard to its places.60 They received, him there
with great cordiality, and would not permit him to return, because of another
revelation seen by them at night, which uttered the clearest message to the most
zealous among them. For it made known that if they would go outside the gates,
they would receive the bishop foreordained for them by God. And having done
this, with the unanimous consent of the bishops of the neighboring churches,
they constrained him to remain.

3 Alexander, himself, in private letters to the Antinoites,61 which are still
preserved among us, mentions the joint episcopate of Narcissus and himself,
writing in these words at the end of the epistle:

4 "Narcissus salutes you, who held the episcopate here before me, and is now
associated with me in prayers, being one hundred and sixteen years of age; and
he exhorts you, as I do, to be of one mind."

These things took place in this manner. But, on the death of Serapion,62
Asclepiades,63 who had been himself distinguished among the confessors64 during
the persecution, succeeded to the episcopate of the church at Antioch. Alexander
alludes to his appointment, writing thus to the church at Antioch:

5 "Alexander, a servant and prisoner of Jesus Christ, to the blessed church of
Antioch, greeting in the Lord. The Lord hath made my bonds during the time of my
imprisonment light and easy, since I learned that, by the Divine Providence,
Asclepiades, who in regard to the true faith is eminently qualified, has
undertaken the bishopric of your holy church at Antioch."

6 He indicates that he sent this epistle by Clement,65 writing toward its close
as follows:

"My honored brethren,66 I have sent this letter to you by Clement, the blessed
presbyter, a man virtuous and approved, whom ye yourselves also know and will
recognize. Being here, in the providence and oversight of the Master, he has
strengthened and built up the Church of the Lord."

Chapter XII. Serapion and His Extant Works.

1 It is probable that others have preserved other memorials of Serapion's67
literary industry,68 but there have reached us only those addressed to a certain
Domninus, who, in the time of persecution, fell away from faith in Christ to the
Jewish will-worship;69 and those addressed to Pontius and Caricus,70
ecclesiastical men, and other letters to different persons, and still another
work composed by him on the so-called Gospel of Peter.71

2 He wrote this last to refute the falsehoods which that Gospel contained, on
account of some in the parish of Rhossus72 who had been led astray by it into
heterodox notions. It may be well to give some brief extracts from his work,
showing his opinion of the book. He writes as follows:

3 "For we, brethren, receive both Peter and the other apostles as Christ; but we
reject intelligently the writings falsely ascribed to them, knowing that such
were not handed down to us.

4 When I visited you I supposed that all of you held the true faith, and as I
had not read the Gospel which they put forward under the name of Peter, I said,
If This is the Only Thing Which Occasions Dispute Among You, Let It Be Read. But
now having learned, from what has been told me, that their mind was involved in
some heresy, I will hasten to come to you again.

5 Therefore, brethren, expect me shortly. But you will learn, brethren, from
what has been written to you, that we perceived the nature of the heresy of
Marcianus,73 and that, not understanding, what he was saying, he contradicted
himself.

6 For having obtained this Gospel from others who had studied it diligently,
namely, from the successors of those who first used it, whom we call Docet74
(for most of their opinions are connected with the teaching of that school75 )
we have been able to read it through, and we find many things in accordance with
the true doctrine of the Saviour, but some things added to that doctrine, which
we have pointed out for you farther on." So much in regard to Serapion.

Chapter XIII. The Writings of Clement.76

1 All the eight Stromata of Clement are preserved among us, and have been given
by him the following title: "Titus Flavius Clement's

2 Stromata of Gnostic Notes on the True Philosophy."77 The books entitled
Hypotyposes78 are of the same number. In them he mentions Pantaenus79 by name as
his teacher, and gives his opinions and traditions.

3 Besides these there is his Hortatory Discourse addressed to the Greeks;80
three books of a work entitled the Instructor;81 another with the title What
Rich Man is Saved?82 the work on the Passover;83 discussions on Fasting and on
Evil Speaking;84 the Hortatory Discourse on Patience, or To Those Recently
Baptized;85 and the one bearing the title Ecclesiastical Canon, or Against the
Judaizers,86 which he dedicated to Alexander, the bishop mentioned above.

4 In the Stromata, he has not only treated extensively87 of the Divine
Scripture, but he also quotes from the Greek writers whenever anything that they
have said seems to him profitable.

5 He elucidates the opinions of many, both Greeks and barbarians. He also
refutes the false doctrines of the heresiarchs, and besides this, reviews a
large portion of history, giving us specimens of very various learning; with all
the rest he mingles the views of philosophers. It is likely that on this account
he gave his work the appropriate title of Stromata.88

6 He makes use also in these works of testimonies from the disputed
Scriptures,89 the so-called Wisdom of Solomon,90 and of Jesus, the son of
Sirach, and the Epistle to the Hebrews,91 and those of Barnabas,92 and Clement93
and Jude.94 He mentions also Tatian's95

7 Discourse to the Greeks, and speaks of Cassianus96 as the author of a
chronological work. He refers to the Jewish authors Philo,97 Aristobulus,98
Josephus,99 Demetrius,100 and Eupolemus,101 as showing, all of them, in their
works, that Moses and the Jewish race existed before the earliest origin of the
Greeks.

8 These books abound also in much other learning. In the first of them102 the
author speaks of himself as next after the successors of the apostles.

9 In them he promises also to write a commentary on Genesis.103 In his book on
the Passover104 he acknowledges that he had been urged by his friends to commit
to writing, for posterity, the traditions which he had heard from the ancient
presbyters; and in the same work he mentions Melito and Irenaeus, and certain
others, and gives extracts from their writings.

Chapter XIV. The Scriptures Mentioned by Him.

1 To sum up briefly, he has given in the Hypotyposes105 abridged accounts of all
canonical Scripture, not omitting the disputed books,106 -I refer to Jude and
the other Catholic epistles, and Barnabas107 and the so-called Apocalypse of
Peter.108

2 He says that the Epistle to the Hebrews109 is the work of Paul, and that it
was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language; but that Luke translated it
carefully and published it for the Greeks, and hence the same style of
expression is found in this epistle and in the Acts.

3 But he says that the words, Paul the Apostle, were probably not prefixed,
because, in sending it to the Hebrews, who were prejudiced and suspicious of
him, he wisely did not wish to repel them at the very beginning by giving his
name.

4 Farther on he says: "But now, as the blessed presbyter said, since the Lord
being the apostle of the Almighty, was sent to the Hebrews, Paul, as sent to the
Gentiles, on account of his modesty did not subscribe himself an apostle of the
Hebrews, through respect for the Lord, and because being a herald and apostle of
the Gentiles he wrote to the Hebrews out of his superabundance."

5 Again, in the same books, Clement gives the tradition of the earliest
presbyters, as to the order of the Gospels, in the following manner:

6 The Gospels containing the genealogies, he says, were written first. The
Gospel according to Mark110 had this occasion. As Peter had preached the Word
publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present
requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his
sayings, should write them out. And having composed the Gospel he gave it to
those who had requested it.

7 When Peter learned of this, he neither directly forbade nor encouraged it.
But, last of all, John, perceiving that the external111 facts had been made
plain in the Gospel, being urged by his friends, and inspired by the Spirit,
composed a spiritual Gospel.112 This is the account of Clement.

8 Again the above-mentioned Alexander,113 in a certain letter to Origen, refers
to Clement, and at the same time to Pantaenus, as being among his familiar
acquaintances. He writes as follows:

"For this, as thou knowest, was the will of God, that the ancestral friendship
existing between us should remain unshaken; nay, rather should be warmer and
stronger.

9 For we know well those blessed fathers who have trodden the way before us,
with whom we shall soon be;114 Pantaenus, the truly blessed man and master, and
the holy Clement, my master and benefactor, and if there is any other like them,
through whom I became acquainted with thee, the best in everything, my master
and brother."115

10 So much for these matters. But Adamantius,116 -for this also was a name of
Origen,- when Zephyrinus117 was bishop of Rome, visited Rome, "desiring," as he
himself somewhere says, "to see the most ancient church of Rome."

11 After a short stay there he returned to Alexandria. And he performed the
duties of catechetical instruction there with great zeal; Demetrius, who was
bishop there at that time, urging and even entreating him to work diligently for
the benefit of the brethren.118 Chapter XV. Heraclas.119

1 But when he saw that he had not time for the deeper study of divine things,
and for the investigation and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures, and also
for the instruction of those who came to him,- for coming, one after another,
from morning till evening to be taught by him, they scarcely gave him time to
breathe,-he divided the multitude. And from those whom he knew well, he selected
Heraclas, who was a zealous student of divine things, and in other respects a
very learned man, not ignorant of philosophy, and made him his associate in the
work of instruction. He entrusted to him the elementary training of beginners,
but reserved for himself the teaching of those who were farther advanced.

Chapter XVI. Origen's Earnest Study of the Divine Scriptures.

1 So earnest and assiduous was Origen's research into the divine words that he
learned the Hebrew language,120 and procured as his own the original Hebrew
Scriptures which were in the hands of the Jews. He investigated also the works
of other translators of the Sacred Scriptures besides the Seventy.121 And in
addition to the well-known translations of Aquila,122 Symmachus,123 and
Theodotion,124 he discovered certain others which had been concealed from remote
times,- in what out-of-the-way corners I know not,-and by his search he brought
them to light.125

2 Since he did not know the authors, he simply stated that he had found this one
in Nicopolis near Actium126 and that one in some other place.

3 In the Hexapla127 of the Psalms, after the four prominent translations, he
adds not only a fifth, but also a sixth and seventh.128 He states of one of
these that he found it in a jar in Jericho in the time of Antoninus, the son of
Severus.

4 Having collected all of these, he divided them into sections, and placed them
opposite each other, with the Hebrew text itself. He thus left us the copies of
the so-called Hexapla. He arranged also separately an edition of Aquila and
Symmachus and Theodotion with the Septuagint, in the Tetrapla.129 Chapter XVII.
The Translator Symmachus.130

1 As to these translators it should be stated that Symmachus was an Ebionite.
But the heresy of the Ebionites, as it is called, asserts that Christ was the
son of Joseph and Mary, considering him a mere man, and insists strongly on
keeping the law in a Jewish manner, as we have seen already in this history.131
Commentaries of Symmachus are still extant in which he appears to support this
heresy by attacking the Gospel of Matthew.132 Origen states that he obtained
these and other commentaries of Symmachus on the Scriptures from a certain
Juliana,133 who, he says, received the books by inheritance from Symmachus
himself.

Chapter XVIII. Ambrose.

1 About this time Ambrose,134 who held the heresy of Valentinus,135 was
convinced by Origen's presentation of the truth, and, as if hismind were
illumined by light, he accepted the orthodox doctrine of the Church.

2 Many others also, drawn by the fame of Origen's learning, which resounded
everywhere, came to him to make trial of his skill in sacred literature. And a
great many heretics, and not a few of the most distinguished philosophers,
studied under him diligently, receiving instruction from him not only in divine
things, but also in secular philosophy.

3 For when he perceived that any persons had superior intelligence he instructed
them also in philosophic branches-in geometry, arithmetic, and other preparatory
studies-and then advanced to the systems136 of the philosophers and explained
their writings. And he made observations and comments upon each of them, so that
he became celebrated as a great philosopher even among the Greeks themselves.

4 And he instructed many of the less learned in the common school branches,137
saying that these would be no small help to them in the study and understanding
of the Divine Scriptures. On this account he considered it especially necessary
for himself to be skilled in secular and philosophic learning.138 Chapter XIX.
Circumstances Related of Origen.

1 The Greek philosophers of his age are witnesses to his proficiency in these
subjects. We find frequent mention of him in their writings. Sometimes they
dedicated their own works to him; again, they submitted their labors to him as a
teacher for his judgment.

2 Why need we say these things when even Porphyry,139 who lived in Sicily in our
own times and wrote books against us, attempting to traduce the Divine
Scriptures by them, mentions those who have interpreted them; and being unable
in any way to find a base accusation against the doctrines, for lack of
arguments turns to reviling and calumniating their interpreters, attempting
especially to slander Origen, whom he says he knew in his youth.

3 But truly, without knowing it, he commends the man; telling the truth about
him in some cases where he could not do otherwise; but uttering falsehoods where
he thinks he will not be detected. Sometimes he accuses him as a Christian;
again he describes his proficiency in philosophic learning. But hear his own
words:

4 "Some persons, desiring to find a solution of the baseness of the Jewish
Scriptures rather than abandon them, have had recourse to explanations
inconsistent and incongruous with the words written, which explanations, instead
of supplying a defense of the foreigners, contain rather approval and praise of
themselves. For they boast that the plain words of Moses are enigmas, and regard
them as oracles full of hidden mysteries; and having bewildered the mental
judgment by folly, they make their explanations." Farther on he says:

5 "As an example of this absurdity take a man whom I met when I was young, and
who was then greatly celebrated and still is, on account of the writings which
he has left. I refer to Origen, who is highly honored by the teachers of these
doctrines.

6 For this man, having been a hearer of Ammonius,140 who had attained the
greatest proficiency in philosophy of any in our day, derived much benefit from
his teacher in the knowledge of the sciences; but as to the correct choice of
life, he pursued a course opposite to his.

7 For Ammonius, being a Christian, and brought up by Christian parents, when he
gave himself to study and to philosophy straightway conformed to the life
required by the laws. But Origen, having been educated as a Greek in Greek
literature, went over to the barbarian recklessness.141 And carrying over the
learning which he had obtained, he hawked it about, in his life conducting
himself as a Christian and contrary to the laws, but in his opinions of material
things and of the Deity being like a Greek, and mingling Grecian teachings with
foreign fables.142

8 For he was continually studying Plato, and he busied himself with the writings
of Numenius143 and Cronius,144 Apollophanes,145 Longinus,146 Moderatus,147 and
Nicomachus,148 and those famous among the Pythagoreans. And he used the books of
Chaeremon149 the Stoic, and of Cornutus.150 Becoming acquainted through them
with the figurative interpretation of the Grecian mysteries, he applied it to
the Jewish Scriptures."151

9 These things are said by Porphyry in the third book of his work against the
Christians.152 He speaks truly of the industry and learning of the man, but
plainly utters a falsehood (for what will not an opposer of Christians do?) when
he says that he went over from the Greeks,153 and that Ammonius fell from a life
of piety into heathen customs.

10 For the doctrine of Christ was taught to Origen by his parents, as we have
shown above. And Ammonius held the divine philosophy unshaken and unadulterated
to the end of his life.154 His works yet extant show this, as he is celebrated
among many for the writings which he has left. For example, the work entitled
The Harmony of Moses and Jesus, and such others as are in the possession of the
learned.

11 These things are sufficient to evince the slander of the false accuser, and
also the proficiency of Origen in Grecian learning. He defends his diligence in
this direction against some who blamed him for it, in a certain epistle,155
where he writes as follows:

12 "When I devoted myself to the word, and the fame of my proficiency went
abroad, and when heretics and persons conversant with Grecian learning, and
particularly with philosophy, came to me, it seemed necessary that I should
examine the doctrines of the heretics, and what the philosophers say concerning
the truth.

13 And in this we have followed Pantaenus,156 who benefited many before our time
by his thorough preparation in such things, and also Heraclas,157 who is now a
member of the presbytery of Alexandria. I found him with the teacher of
philosophic learning, with whom he had already continued five years before I
began to hear lectures on those subjects.158

14 And though he had formerly worn the common dress, he laid it aside and
assumed and still wears the philosopher's garment;159 and he continues the
earnest investigation of Greek works."

He says these things in defending himself for his study of Grecian literature.

15 About this time, while he was still at Alexandria, a soldier came and
delivered a letter from the governor of Arabia160 to Demetrius, bishop of the
parish, and to the prefect of Egypt who was in office at that time, requesting
that they would with all speed send Origen to him for an interview. Being sent
by them, he went to Arabia. And having in a short time accomplished the object
of his visit, he returned to Alexandria.

16 But sometime after a considerable war broke out in the city,161 and he
departed from Alexandria. And thinking that it would be unsafe for him to remain
in Egypt, he went to Palestine and abode in Caesarea. While there the bishops of
the church in that country162 requested him to preach and expound the Scriptures
publicly, although he had not yet been ordained as presbyter.163

17 This is evident from what Alexander,164 bishop of Jerusalem and
Theoctistus165 of Caesarea, wrote to Demetrius166 in regard to the matter,
defending themselves thus:

"He has stated in his letter that such a thing was never heard of before,
neither has hitherto taken place, that laymen should preach in the presence of
bishops. I know not how he comes to say what is plainly untrue.

18 For whenever persons able to instruct the brethren are found, they are
exhorted by the holy bishops to preach to the people. Thus in Laranda, Euelpis
by Neon; and in Iconium, Paulinus by Celsus; and in Synada, Theodorus by
Atticus, our blessed brethren.167 And probably this has been done in other
places unknown to us."

He was honored in this manner while yet a young man, not only by his countrymen,
but also by foreign bishops.168

19 But Demetrius sent for him by letter, and urged him through members and
deacons of the church to return to Alexandria. So he returned and resumed his
accustomed duties.

Chapter XX. The Extant Works of the Writers of that Age.

1 There flourished many learned men in the Church at that time, whose letters to
each other have been preserved and are easily accessible. They have been kept
until our time in the library at Aelia,169 which was established by Alexander,
who at that time presided over that church. We have been able to gather from
that library material for our present work.

2 Among these Beryllus170 has left us, besides letters and treatises, various
elegant works. He was bishop of Bostra in Arabia. Likewise also Hippolytus,171
who presided over another church, has left writings.

3 There has reached us also a dialogue of Caius,172 a very learned man, which
was held at Rome under Zephyrinus,173 with Proclus, who contended for the
Phrygian heresy. In this he curbs the rashness and boldness of his opponents in
setting forth new Scriptures. He mentions only thirteen epistles of the holy
apostle, not counting that to the Hebrews174 with the others. And unto our day
there are some among the Romans who do not consider this a work of the apostle.

Chapter XXI. The Bishops that Were Well Known at that Time.

1 After Antoninus175 had reigned seven years and six months, Macrinus succeeded
him. He held the government but a year, and was succeeded by another Antoninus.
During his first year the Roman bishop, Zephyrinus,176 having held his office
for eighteen years, died, and Callistus177 received the episcopate.

2 He continued for five years, and was succeeded by Urbanus.178 After this,
Alexander became Roman emperor, Antoninus having reigned but four years.179 At
this time Philetus180 also succeeded Asclepiades181 in the church of Antioch.

3 The mother of the emperor, Mammaea182 by name, was a most pious woman, if
there ever was one, and of religious life. When the fame of Origen had extended
everywhere and had come even to her ears, she desired greatly to see the man,
and above all things to make trial of his celebrated understanding of divine
things.

4 Staying for a time in Antioch, she sent for him with a military escort. Having
remained with her a while and shown her many things which were for the glory of
the Lord and of the excellence of the divine teaching, he hastened back to his
accustomed work.

Chapter XXII. The Works of Hippolytus Which Have Reached Us.

1 At that time Hippolytus,183 besides many other treatises, wrote a work on the
passover.184 He gives in this a chronological table, and presents a certain
paschal canon of sixteen years, bringing the time down to the first year of the
Emperor Alexander.

2 Of his other writings the following have reached us: On the Hexaemeron,185 On
the Works after the Hexaemeron,186 Against Marcion,187 On the Song of Songs,188
On Portions of Ezekiel,189 On the Passover,190 Against All the Heresies;191 and
you can find many other works preserved by many.

Chapter XXIII. Origen's Zeal and His Elevation to the Presbyterate.

1 At that time Origen began his commentaries on the Divine Scriptures, being
urged thereto by Ambrose,192 who employed innumerable incentives, not only
exhorting him by word, but also furnishing abundant means.

2 For he dictated to more than seven amanuenses, who relieved each other at
appointed times. And he employed no fewer copyists, besides girls who were
skilled in elegant writing. For all these Ambrose furnished the necessary
expense in abundance, manifesting himself an inexpressible earnestness in
diligence and zeal for the divine oracles, by which he especially pressed him on
to the preparation of his commentaries.

3 While these things were in progress, Urbanus,193 who had been for eight years
bishop of the Roman church, was succeeded by Pontianus,194 and Zebinus195
succeeded Philetus196 in Antioch.

4 At this time Origen was sent to Greece on account of a pressing necessity in
connection with ecclesiastical affairs,197 and went through Palestine, and was
ordained as presbyter in Caesarea by the bishops of that country. The matters
that were agitated concerning him on this account, and the decisions on these
matters by those who presided over the churches, besides the other works
concerning the divine word which he published while in his prime, demand a
separate treatise. We have written of them to some extent in the second book of
the Defense which we have composed in his behalf.198 Chapter XXIV. The
Commentaries Which He Prepared at Alexandria.

1 It may be well to add that in the sixth book of his exposition of the Gospel
of John199 he states that he prepared the first five while in Alexandria. Of his
work on the entire Gospel only twenty-two volumes have come down to us.

2 In the ninth of those on Genesis,200 of which there are twelve in all, he
states that not only the preceding eight had been composed at Alexandria, but
also those on the first twenty-five Psalms201 and on Lamentations.202 Of these
last five volumes have reached us.

3 In them he mentions also his books On the Resurrection,203 of which there are
two. He wrote also the books De Principiis204 before leaving Alexandria; and the
discourses entitled Stromata,205 ten in number, he composed in the same city
during the reign of Alexander, as the notes by his own hand preceding the
volumes indicate.

Chapter XXV. His Review of the Canonical Scriptures.

1 When expounding the first Psalm,206 he gives a catalogue of the sacred
Scriptures of the Old Testament207 as follows:

"It should be stated that the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them
down, are twenty-two; corresponding with the number of their letters." Farther
on he says:

2 "The twenty-two books of the Hebrews are the following: That which is called
by us Genesis, but by the Hebrews, from the beginning of the book, Bresith,208
which means, `In the beginning'; Exodus, Welesmoth,209 that is, `These are the
names'; Leviticus, Wikra, `And he called`; Numbers, Ammesphekodeim; Deuteronomy,
Eleaddebareim, `These are the words'; Jesus, the son of Nave, Josoue ben Noun;
Judges and Ruth, among them in one book, Saphateim; the First and Second of
Kings, among them one, Samouel, that is, `The called of God'; the Third and
Fourth of Kings in one, Wammelch David, that is, `The kingdom of David'; of the
Chronicles, the First and Second in one, Dabreïamein, that is, `Records of
days'; Esdras,210 First and Second in one, Ezra, that is, `An assistant'; the
book of Psalms, Spharthelleim; the Proverbs of Solomon, Meloth; Ecclesiastes,
Koelth; the Song of Songs (not, as some suppose, Songs of Songs), Sir Hassirim;
Isaiah, Jessia; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and the epistle in one, Jeremia;
Daniel, Daniel; Ezekiel, Jezekiel; Job, Job; Esther, Esther. And besides these
there are the Maccabees, which are entitled Sarbeth Sabanaiel.211 He gives these
in the above-mentioned work.

3 In his first book on Matthew's Gospel,212 maintaining the Canon of the Church,
hetestifies that he knows only four Gospels, writing as follows:

4 "Among the four Gospels,213 which are the only indisputable ones in the Church
of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by
Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and
it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in the Hebrew
language.214

5 The second is by Mark, who composed it according to the instructions of
Peter,215 who in his Catholic epistle acknowledges him as a son, saying, `The
church that is at Babylon elected together with you, saluteth you, and so doth
Marcus, my son.'216

6 And the third by Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul,217 and composed for
Gentile converts. Last of all that by John."218

7 In the fifth book of his Expositions of John's Gospel, he speaks thus
concerning the epistles of the apostles:219 "But he who was `made sufficient to
be a minister of the New Testament, not of the letter, but of the Spirit,'220
that is, Paul, who `fully preached the Gospel from Jerusalem and round about
even unto Illyricum,'221 did not write to all the churches which he had
instructed and to those to which he wrote he sent but few lines.222

8 And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, `against which the gates of
hell shall not prevail,'223 has left one acknowledged epistle; perhaps also a
second, but this is doubtful.224

9 Why need we speak of him who reclined upon the bosom of Jesus,225 John, who
has left us one Gospel,226 though he confessed that he might write so many that
the world could not contain them?227 And he wrote also the Apocalypse, but was
commanded to keep silence and not to write the words of the seven thunders.228

10 He has left also an epistle of very few lines; perhaps also a second and
third; but not all consider them genuine, and together they do not contain
hundred lines."

11 In addition he makes the following statements 11 in regard to the Epistle to
the Hebrews229 in his Homilies upon it: "That the verbal style of the epistle
entitled `To the Hebrews,' is not rude like the language of the apostle, who
acknowledged himself `rude in speech`230 that is, in expression; but that its
diction is purer Greek, any one who has the power to discern differences of
phraseology will acknowledge.

12 Moreover, that the thoughts of the epistle are admirable, and not inferior to
the acknowledged apostolic writings, any one who carefully examines the
apostolic text231 will admit.'

13 Farther on he adds: "If I gave my opinion, I should say that the thoughts are
those of the apostle, but the diction and phraseology are those of some one who
remembered the apostolic teachings, and wrote down at his leisure what had been
said by his teacher. Therefore if any church holds that this epistle is by Paul,
let it be commended for this. For not without reason have the ancients handed it
down as Paul's.

14 But who wrote the epistle, in truth, God knows. The statement of some who
have gone before us is that Clement, bishop of the Romans, wrote the epistle,
and of others that Luke, the author of the Gospel and the Acts, wrote it." But
let this suffice on these matters.

Chapter XXVI. Heraclas Becomes Bishop of Alexandria.

It was in the tenth year of the above-mentioned reign that Origen removed from
Alexandria to Caesarea,232 leaving the charge of the catechetical school in that
city to Heraclas. Not long afterward Demetrius, bishop of the church of
Alexandria, died, having held the office for forty-three full years,233 and
Heraclas succeeded him. At this time Firmilianus,234 bishop of Caesarea in
Cappadocia, was conspicuous.

Chapter XXVII. How the Bishops Regarded Origen.

1 He was so earnestly affected toward Origen, that he urged him to come to that
country for the benefit of the churches, and moreover he visited him in Judea,
remaining with him for some time, for the sake of improvement in divine things.
And Alexander,235 bishop of Jerusalem, and Theoctistus,236 bishop of Caesarea,
attended on him constantly,237 as their only teacher, and allowed238 him to
expound the Divine Scriptures, and to perform the other duties pertaining to
ecclesiastical discourse.239 Chapter XXVIII. The Persecution Under Maximinus.

1 The Roman emperor, Alexander, having finished his reign in thirteen years, was
succeeded by Maximinus Caesar.240 On account of his hatred toward the household
of Alexander,241 which contained many believers, he began a persecution,
commanding that only the rulers of the churches should be put to death, as
responsible for the Gospel teaching. Thereupon Origen composed his work On
Martyrdom,242 and dedicated it to Ambrose and Protoctetus,243 a presbyter of the
parish of Caesarea, because in the persecution there had come upon them both
unusual hardships, in which it is reported that they were eminent in confession
during the reign of Maximinus, which lasted but three years. Origen has noted
this as the time of the persecution in the twenty-second book of his
Commentaries on John, and in several epistles.244 Chapter XXIX. Fabianus, Who
Was Wonderfully Designated Bishop of Rome by God.

1 Gordianus succeeded Maximinus as Roman emperor;245 and Pontianus,246 who had
been bishop of the church at Rome for six years, was succeeded by Anteros.247
After he had held the office for a month, Fabianus248 succeeded him.

2 They say249 that Fabianus having come, after the death of Anteros, with others
from the country, was staying at Rome, and that while there he was chosen to the
office through a most wonderful manifestation of divine and heavenly grace.

3 For when all the brethren had assembled to select by vote him who should
succeed to the episcopate of the church, several renowned and honorable men were
in the minds of many, but Fabianus, although present, was in the mind of none.
But they relate that suddenly a dove flying down lighted on his head, resembling
the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Saviour in the form of a dove.

4 Thereupon all the people, as if moved by one Divine Spirit, with all eagerness
and unanimity cried out that he was worthy, and without delay they took him and
placed him upon the episcopal seat.250

5 About that time Zebinus,251 bishop of Antioch died, and Babylas252 succeeded
him. And in Alexandria Heraclas,253 having received the episcopal office after
Demetrius,254 was succeeded in the charge of the catechetical school by
Dionysius,255 who had also been one of Origen's pupils.

Chapter XXX. The Pupils of Origen.

While Origen was carrying on his customary duties in Caesarea, many pupils came
to him not only from the vicinity, but also from other countries. Among these
Theodorus, the same that was distinguished among the bishops of our day under
the name of Gregory,256 and his brother Athenodorus,257 we know to have been
especially celebrated. Finding them deeply interested in Greek and Roman
learning, he infused into them a love of philosophy, and led them to exchange
their old zeal for the study of divinity. Remaining with him five years, they
made such progress in divine things, that although they were still young, both
of them were honored with a bishopric in the churches of Pontus.

Chapter XXXI. Africanus.

1 At this time also Africanus,258 the writer of the books entitled Cesti, was
well known. There is extant an epistle of his to Origen,expressing doubts259 of
the story of Susannah in Daniel, as being spurious and fictitious. Origen
answered this very fully. Other works of the same Africanus which have reached
us are his five books on Chronology, a work accurately and laboriously prepared.
He says in this that he went to Alexandria on account of the great fame of
Heraclas,260 who excelled especially in philosophic studies and other Greek
learning, and whose appointment to the bishopric of the church there we have

3 already mentioned. There is extant also another epistle from the same
Africanus to Aristides on the supposed discrepancy between Matthew and Luke in
the Genealogies of Christ. In this he shows clearly the agreement of the
evangelists, from an account which had come down to him, which we have already
given in its proper place in the first book of this work.261 Chapter XXXII. The
Commentaries Which Origen Composed in Caesarea in Palestine.

1 About this time Origen prepared his Commentaries on Isaiah262 and on
Ezekiel.263 Of the former there have come down to us thirty books, as far as the
third part of Isaiah, to the vision of the beasts in the desert;264 on Ezekiel
twenty-five books, which are all that he wrote on the whole prophet. Being at
that time in Athens,265 he finished his work on Ezekiel and commenced his
Commentaries on the Song of Songs,266 which he carried forward to the fifth
book. After his return to Caesarea, he completed these also, ten books in
number.

3 But why should we give in this history an accurate catalogue of the man's
works, which would require a separate treatise?267 we have furnished this also
in our narrative of the life of Pamphilus,268 a holy martyr of our own time.
After showing how great the diligence of Pamphilus was in divine things, we give
in that a catalogue of the library which he collected of the works of Origen and
of other ecclesiastical writers, Whoever desires may learn readily from this
which of Origen's works have reached us. But we must proceed now with our
history.

Chapter XXXIII. The Error of Beryllus.

1 Beryllus,269 whom we mentioned recently as bishop of Bostra in Arabia, turned
aside from the ecclesiastical standard270 and attempted to introduce ideas
foreign to the faith. He dared to assert that our Saviour and Lord did not
pre-exist in a distinct form of being of his own271 before his abode among men,
and that he does not possess a divinity of his own,272 but only that of the
Father dwelling in him.

2 Many bishops carried on investigations and discussions with him on this
matter, and Origen having been invited with the others, went down at first for a
conference with him to ascertain his real opinion. But when he understood his
views, and perceived that they were erroneous, having persuaded him by argument,
and convinced him by demonstration, he brought him back to the true doctrine,
and restored him to his former sound opinion.

3 There are still extant writings of Beryllus and of the synod held on his
account, which contain the questions put to him by Origen, and the discussions
which were carried on in his parish, as well as all the things done at that
time.

4 The elder brethren among us273 have handed down many other facts respecting
Origen which I think proper to omit, as not pertaining to this work. But
whatever it has seemed necessary to record about him can be found in the Apology
in his behalf written by us and Pamphilus, the holy martyr of our day. We
prepared this carefully and did the work jointly on account of faultfinders.274
Chapter XXXIV. Philip Caesar.

1 Gordianus had been Roman emperor for six years when Philip, with his son
Philip, succeeded him.275 It is reported that he, being a Christian desired, on
the day of the last paschal vigil, to share with the multitude in the prayers of
the Church,276 but that he was not permitted to enter, by him who then
presided,277 until he had made confession and had numbered himself among those
who were reckoned as transgressors and who occupied the place of penance.278 For
if he had not done this, he would never have been received by him, on account of
the many crimes which he had committed. It is said that he obeyed readily,
manifesting in his conduct a genuine and pious fear of God.

Chapter XXXV. Dionysius Succeeds Heraclas in the Episcopate.

1 In the third year of this emperor, Heraclas279 died, having held his office
for sixteen years, and Dionysius280 received the episcopate of the churches of
Alexandria.

Chapter XXXVI. Other Works of Origen.

1 At this time, as the faith extended and our doctrine was proclaimed boldly
before all,281 Origen, being, as they say, over sixty years old,282 and having
gained great facility by his long practice, very properly permitted his public
discourses to be taken down by stenographers, a thing which he had never before
allowed. He also at this time composed a work of eight books in answer to that
entitled True Discourse, which had been written against us by Celsus283 the
Epicurean, and the twenty-five books on the Gospel of Matthew,284 besides those
on the Twelve Prophets, of which we have found only twenty-five.285

3 There is extant also an epistle286 of his to the Emperor Philip, and another
to Severa his wife, with several others to different persons. We have arranged
in distinct books to the number of one hundred, so that they might be no longer
scattered, as many of these as we have been able to collect,287 which have been
preserved here and there by different persons.

4 He wrote also to Fabianus,288 bishop of Rome, and to many other rulers of the
churches concerning his orthodoxy. You have examples of these in the eighth book
of the Apology289 which we have written in his behalf.

Chapter XXXVII. The Dissension of the Arabians.290

1 Aboutsame time others arose in Arabia, putting forward a doctrine foreign to
the truth. They said that during the present time the human soul dies and
perishes with the body, but that at the time of the resurrection they will be
renewed together. And at that time also a synod of considerable size assembled,
and Origen, being again invited thither, spoke publicly on the question with
such effect that the opinions of those who had formerly fallen were changed.

Chapter XXXVIII. The Heresy of the Elkesites.

1 Another error also arose at this time, called the heresy of the Elkesites,291
which was extinguished in the very beginning. Origen speaks of it in this manner
in a public homily on the eighty-second Psalm:292

"A certain man293 came just now, puffed up greatly with his own ability,
proclaiming that godless and impious opinion which has appeared lately in the
churches, styled `of the Elkesites.' I will show you what evil things that
opinion teaches, that you may not be carried away by it. It rejects certain
parts of every scripture. Again it uses portions of the Old Testament and the
Gospel, but rejects the apostle294 altogether. It says that to deny Christ is an
indifferent matter, and that he who understands will, under necessity, deny with
his mouth, but not in his heart. They produce a certain book which they say fell
from heaven. They hold that whoever hears and believes295 this shall receive
remission of sins, another remission than that which Jesus Christ has given."
Such is the account of these persons.

Chapter XXXIX. The Persecution Under Decius, and the Sufferings of Origen.

1 After a reign of seven years Philip was succeeded by Decius.296 On account of
his hatred of Philip, he commenced a persecution of the churches, in which
Fabianus297 suffered martyrdom at Rome, and Cornelius succeeded him in the
episcopate.298

2 In Palestine, Alexander,299 bishop of the church of Jerusalem, was brought
again on Christ's account before the governor's judgment seat in Caesarea, and
having acquitted himself nobly in a second confession was cast into prison,
crowned

3 with the hoary locks of venerable age. And after his honorable and illustrious
confession at the tribunal of the governor, he fell asleep in prison, and
Mazabanes300 became his successor

4 in the bishopric of Jerusalem. Babylas301 in Antioch, having like Alexander
passed away in prison after his confession, was succeeded by Fabius302 in the
episcopate of that church.

5 But how many and how great things came upon Origen in the persecution, and
what was their final result,-as the demon of evil marshaled all his forces, and
fought against the man with his utmost craft and power, assaulting him beyond
all others against whom he contended at that time,-and what and how many things
he endured for the word of Christ, bondsand bodily tortures and torments under
the iron collar and in the dungeon; and how for many days with his feet
stretched four spaces in the stocks303 he bore patiently the threats of fire and
whatever other things were inflicted by his enemies; and how his sufferings
terminated, as his judge strove eagerly with all his might not to end his life;
and what words he left after these things, full of comfort to those needing aid,
a great many of his epistles show with truth and accuracy.304 Chapter XL. The
Events Which Happened to Dionysius.305

1 I Shall quote from the epistle of Dionysius to Germanus306 an account of what
befell the former. Speaking of himself, he writes as follows: "I speak before
God, and he knows that I do not lie. I did not flee on my own impulse nor
without divine direction.

2 But even before this, at the very hour when the Decian persecution was
commanded, Sabinus307 sent a frumentarius308 to search for me, and I remained at
home four days awaiting his arrival.

3 But he went about examining all places,-roads, rivers, and fields,-where he
thought I might be concealed or on the way. But he was smitten with blindness,
and did not find the house,309 for he did not suppose, that being pursued, I
would remain at home. And after the fourth day God commanded me to depart, and
made a way for me in a wonderful manner; and I and my attendants310 and many of
the brethren went away together. And that this occurred through the providence
of God was made manifest by what followed, in which perhaps we were useful to
some."

4 Farther on he relates in this manner what happened to him after his flight:

"For about sunset, having been seized with those that were with me, I was taken
by the soldiers to Taposiris,311 but in the providence of God, Timothy312 was
not present and was not captured. But coming later, he found the house deserted
and guarded by soldiers, and ourselves reduced to slavery."313

5 After a little he says: "And what was the manner of his admirable management?
for the truth shall be told. One of the country people met Timothy fleeing and
disturbed, and inquired the cause of his haste. And he told him the truth. And 6
when the man heard it (he was on his way to a marriage feast, for it was
customary to spend the entire night in such gatherings), he entered and
announced it to those at the table. And they, as if on a preconcerted signal,
arose with one impulse, and rushed out quickly and came and burst in upon us
with a shout. Immediately the soldiers who were guarding us fled, and they came
to us lying as we were upon the bare couches. But I, God knows, thought 7 at
first that they were robbers who had come for spoil and plunder. So I remained
upon the bed on which I was, clothed only in a linen garment, and offered them
the rest of my clothing which was lying beside me. But they directed me to rise
and come away quickly. Then I understood why they were come,8 and I cried out,
beseeching and entreating them to depart and leave us alone. And I requested
them, if they desired to benefit me in any way, to anticipate those who were
carrying me off, and cut off my head themselves. And when I had cried out in
this manner, as my companions and partners in everything know, they raised me by
force. But I threw myself on my back on the ground; and they seized me by the
hands and feet and dragged me away. And the witnesses of all these occurrences 9
followed: Gaius, Faustus, Peter, and Paul.314 But they who had seized me carried
me out of the village hastily, and placing me on an ass without a saddle, bore
me away."315 Dionysius relates these things respecting himself.

Chapter XLI. The Martyrs in Alexandria.

1 The same writer, in an epistle to Fabius,316 bishop of Antioch, relates as
follows the sufferings of the martyrs in Alexandria under Decius:

"The persecution among us did not begin with the royal decree, but preceded it
an entire year.317 The prophet and author of evils318 to this city, whoever he
was, previously moved and aroused against us the masses of the heathen,
rekindling among them the superstition of their country.

2 And being thus excited by him and finding full opportunity for any wickedness,
they considered this the only pious service of their demons, that they should
slay us.

3 "They seized first an old man named Metras,319 and commanded him to utter
impious words. But as he would not obey, they beat him with clubs, and tore his
face and eyes with sharp sticks, and dragged him out of the city and stoned him.

4 Then they carried to their idol temple a faithful woman, named Quinta, that
they might force her to worship. And as she turned away in detestation, they
bound her feet and dragged her through the entire city over the stone-paved
streets, and dashed her against the millstones, and at the same time scourged
her; then, taking her to the same place, they stoned her to death.

5 Then all with one impulse rushed to the homes of the pious, and they dragged
forth whomsoever any one knew as a neighbor, and despoiled and plundered them.
They took for themselves the more valuable property; but the poorer articles and
those made of wood they scattered about and burned in the streets, so that the
city appeared as if taken by an enemy.

6 But the brethren withdrew and went away, and `took joyfully the spoiling of
their goods,'320 like those to whom Paul bore witness. I know of no one unless
possibly some one who fell into their hands, who, up to this time, denied the
Lord.

7 Then they seized also that most admirable virgin, Apollonia, an old woman,
and, smiting her on the jaws, broke out all her teeth. And they made a fire
outside the city and threatened to burn her alive if she would not join with
them in their impious cries. And she, supplicating a little, was released, when
she leaped eagerly into the fire and was consumed.

8 Then they seized Serapion in his own house, and tortured him with harsh
cruelties, and having broken all his limbs, they threw him headlong from an
upper story. And there was no street, nor public road, nor lane open to us, by
night or day; for always and everywhere, all of them cried out that if any one
would not repeat their impious words, he should immediately be dragged away and
burned.

9 And matters continued thus for a considerable time. But a sedition and civil
war came upon the wretched people and turned their cruelty toward us against one
another.321 So we breathed for a little while as they ceased from their rage
against us. But presently the change from that milder reign was announced to
us,322 and great fear

10 of what was threatened seized us. For the decree arrived, almost like unto
that most terrible time foretold by our Lord, which if it were possible would
offend even the elect.323

11 All truly were affrighted. And many of the more eminent in their fear came
forward immediately;324 others who were in the public service were drawn on by
their official duties;325 others were urged on by their acquaintances. And as
their names were called they approached the impure and impious sacrifices. Some
of them were pale and trembled as if they were not about to sacrifice, but to be
themselves sacrifices and offerings to the idols; so that they were jeered at by
the multitude who stood around, as it was plain to every one that they were
afraid either to die or to sacrifice.

12 But some advanced to the altars more readily, declaring boldly that they had
never been Christians. Of these the prediction of our Lord is most true that
they shall `hardly'326 be saved. Of the rest some followed the one, others the
other of these classes, some fled and some were seized.

13 And of the latter some continued faithful until bonds and imprisonment, and
some who had even been imprisoned for many days yet abjured the faith before
they were brought to trial. Others having for a time endured great tortures
finally retracted.

14 But the firm and blessed pillars of the Lord being strengthened by him, and
having received vigor and might suitable and appropriate to the strong faith
which they possessed, became admirable witnesses of his kingdom.

15 The first of these was Julian, a man who suffered so much with the gout that
he was unable to stand or walk. They brought him forward with two others who
carried him. One of these immediately denied. But the other, whose name was
Cronion, and whose surname was Eunus, and the old man Julian himself, both of
them having confessed the Lord, were carried on camels through the entire city,
which, as you know, is a very large one, and in this elevated position were
beaten and finally burned in a fierce fire,327 surrounded by all the populace.

16 But a soldier, named Besas, who stood by16 them as they were led away rebuked
those who insulted them. And they cried out against him, and this most manly
warrior of God was arraigned, and having done nobly in the great contest for
piety, was beheaded.

17 A certain other one, a Libyan by birth, but in name and blessedness a true
Macar,328 was strongly urged by the judge to recant; but as he would not yield
he was burned alive. After them Epimachus and Alexander, having remained in
bonds for a long time, and endured countless agonies from scrapers329 and
scourges, were also consumed in a fierce fire.330 And with them there were four
women.

18 Ammonarium, a holy virgin, the judge tortured relentlessly and excessively,
because she declared from the first that she would utter none of those things
which he commanded; and having kept her promise truly, she was dragged away. The
others were Mercuria, a very remarkable old woman, and Dionysia, the mother of
many children, who did not love her own children above the Lord.331 As the
governor was ashamed of torturing thus ineffectually, and being always defeated
by women, they were put to death by the sword, without the trial of tortures.
For the champion, Ammonarium, endured these in behalf of all.

19 The Egyptians, Heron and Ater and Isidorus, and with them Dioscorus,332 a boy
about fifteen years old, were delivered up. At first the judge attempted to
deceive the lad by fair words, as if he could be brought over easily, and then
to force him by tortures, as one who would readily yield. But Dioscorus was
neither persuaded nor constrained.

20 As the others remained firm, he scourged them cruelly and then delivered them
to the fire. But admiring the manner in which Dioscorus had distinguished
himself publicly, and his wise answers to his persuasions, he dismissed him,
saying that on account of his youth he would give him time for repentance. And
this most godly Dioscorus is among us now, awaiting a longer conflict and more
severe contest.

21 But a certain Nemesion, who also was an Egyptian, was accused as an associate
of robbers; but when he had cleared himself before the centurion of this charge
most foreign to the truth, he was informed against as a Christian, and taken in
bonds before the governor. And the most unrighteous magistrate inflicted on him
tortures and scourgings double those which he executed on the robbers, and then
burned him between the robbers, thus honoring the blessed man by the likeness to
Christ.

22 A band of soldiers, Ammon and Zeno and Ptolemy and Ingenes, and with them an
old man, Theophilus, were standing close together before the tribunal. And as a
certain person who was being tried as a Christian, seemed inclined to deny, they
standing by gnashed their teeth, and made signs with their faces and stretched
out their hands, and gestured with their bodies. And when the attention of all
was turned to them, before any one else could seize them, they rushed up to the
tribunal saying that they were Christians, so that the governor and his council
were affrighted. And those who were on trial appeared most courageous in
prospect of their sufferings, while their judges trembled. And they went
exultingly from the tribunal rejoicing in their testimony;333 God himself having
caused them to triumph gloriously."

Chapter XLII. Others of Whom Dionysius Gives an Account.

1 "Many others, in cities and villages, were torn asunder by the heathen, of
whom I will mention one as an illustration. Ischyrion334 was employed as a
steward by one of the rulers. His employer commanded him to sacrifice, and on
his refusal insulted him, and as he remained firm, abused him. And as he still
held out he seized a long staff and thrust it through his bowels335 and slew
him.

2 "Why need I speak of the multitude that wandered in the deserts and mountains,
and perished by hunger, and thirst, and cold, and sickness, and robbers, and
wild beasts? Those of them who survived are witnesses of their election and
victory.

3 But I will relate one occurrence as an example. Chaeremon,336 who was very
old, was bishop of the city called Nilus. He fled with his wife337 to the
Arabian mountain338 and did not return. And though the brethren searched
diligently they could not find either them or their bodies. And many who fled to
the same

4 Arabian mountain were carried into slavery by the barbarian Saracens. Some of
them were ransomed with difficulty and at a large price others have not been to
the present time. I have related these things, my brother, not without an
object, but that you may understand how many and great distresses came upon us.
Those indeed will understand them the best who have had the largest experience
of them."

5 A little further on he adds: "These divine martyrs among us, who now are
seated with Christ, and are sharers in his kingdom, partakers of his judgment
and judges with him, received some of the brethren who had fallen away and
become chargeable with the guilt of sacrificing. When they perceived that their
conversion and repentance were sufficient to be acceptable with him who by no
means desires the death of the sinner, but his repentance, having proved them
they received them back and brought them together, and met with them and had
fellowship with them in prayers and feasts.339

6 What counsel then, brethren, do you give us concerning such persons? What
should we do? Shall we have the same judgment and rule as theirs, and observe
their decision and charity, and show mercy to those whom they pitied? Or, shall
we declare their decision unrighteous, and set ourselves as judges of their
opinion, and grieve mercy and overturn order?"340 These words Dionysius very
properly added when making mention of those who had been weak in the time of
persecution.

Chapter XLIII. Novatus,341 His Manner of Life and His Heresy.

1 After this, Novatus, a presbyter of the church at Rome, being lifted up with
arrogance against these persons, as if there was no longer for them a hope of
salvation, not even if they should do all things pertaining to a genuine and
pure conversion, became leader of the heresy of those who, in the pride of their
imagination, call themselves Cathari.342

2 There upon a very large synod assembled at Rome,343 of bishops in number
sixty, and a great many more presbyters and deacons; while the pastors of the
remaining provinces deliberated in their places privately concerning what ought
to be done. A decree was confirmed by all, that Novatus and those who joined
with him, and those who adopted his brother-hating and inhuman opinion, should
be considered by the church as strangers; but that they should heal such of the
brethren as had fallen into misfortune,344 and should minister to them with the
medicines of repentance.

3 There have reached us epistles345 of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, to Fabius, of
the church at Antioch, which show what was done at the synod at Rome, and what
seemed best to all those in Italy and Africa and the regions thereabout.346 Also
other epistles, written in the Latin language, of Cyprian and those with him in
Africa,347 which show that they agreed as to the necessity of succoring those
who had been tempted, and of cutting off from the Catholic Church the leader of
the heresy and all that joined with him.

4 Another epistle of Cornelius, concerning the resolutions of the synod, is
attached to these; and yet others,348 on the conduct of Novatus, from which it
is proper for us to make selections, that any one who 5 sees this work may know
about him. Cornelius informs Fabius what sort of a man Novatus was, in the
following words:

"But that you may know that a long time ago this remarkable man desired the
episcopate, but kept this ambitious desire to himself and concealed it,-using as
a cloak for his rebellion those confessors who had adhered to him from the
beginning,-I desire to speak.

6 Maximus,349 one of our presbyters, and Urbanus,350 who twice gained the
highest honor by confession, with Sidonius,351 and Celerinus,352 a man who by
the grace of God most heroically endured all kinds of torture, and by the
strength of his faith overcame the weakness of the flesh, and mightily conquered
the adversary,-these men found him out and detected his craft and duplicity, his
perjuries and falsehoods, his un-sociability and cruel friendship. And they
returned to the holy church and proclaimed in the presence of many, both bishops
and presbyters and a large number of the laity, all his craft and wickedness,
which for a long time he had concealed. And this they did with lamentations and
repentance, because through the persuasions of the crafty and malicious beast
they had left the church for the time." A little farther on he says:

7 "How remarkable, beloved brother, the change and transformation which we have
seen take place in him in a short time. For this most illustrious man, who bound
himself with terrible oaths in nowise to seek the bishopric,353 suddenly appears
a bishop as if thrown among us by some machine.354

8 For this dogmatist, this defender of the doctrine of the Church,355 attempting
to grasp and seize the episcopate, which had not been given him from above,
chose two of his companions who had given up their own salvation. And he sent
them to a small and insignificant corner of Italy, that there by some
counterfeit argument he might deceive three bishops, who were rustic and very
simple men. And they asserted positively and strongly that it was necessary that
they should come quickly to Rome, in order that all the dissension which had
arisen there might be appeased through their mediation, jointly with other
bishops.

9 When they had come, being, as we have stated, very simple in the craft and
artifice of the wicked, they were shut up with certain selected men like
himself. And by the tenth hour, when they had become drunk and sick, he
compelled them by force to confer on him the episcopate through a counterfeit
and vain imposition of hands. Because it had not come to him, he avenged himself
by craft

10 and treachery. One of these bishops shortly after came back to the church,
lamenting and confessing his transgression. And we communed with him as with a
layman, all the people present interceding for him. And we ordained successors
of the other bishops, and sent 11 them to the places where they were.

11 This avenger of the Gospel356 then did not know that there should be one
bishop in a catholic church;357 yet he was not ignorant (for how could he be?)
that in it there were forty-six presbyters, seven358 deacons, seven
sub-deacons,359 forty-two acolyths,360 fifty-two exorcists,361 readers,362 and
janitors,363 and over fifteen hundred widows and persons in distress, all of
whom the grace and kindness of the Master nourish.

12 But not even this great multitude, so necessary in the church, nor those who,
through God's providence, were rich and full, together with the very many, even
innumerable people, could turn him from such desperation and presumption and
recall him to the Church."

13 Again, farther on, he adds these words: "Permit us to say further: On account
of what works or conduct had he the assurance to contend for the episcopate? Was
it that he had been brought up in the Church from the beginning, and had endured
many conflicts in her behalf, and had passed through many and greatdangers for
religion? Truly this is not the fact.

14 But Satan, who entered and dwelt in him for a long time, became the occasion
of his believing. Being delivered by the exorcists, he fell into a severe
sickness; and as he seemed about to die, he received baptism by affusion, on the
bed where he lay;364 if indeed we

15 can say that such a one did receive it. And when he was healed of his
sickness he did not receive the other things which it is necessary to have
according to the canon of the Church, even the being sealed by the bishop.365
And as he did not receive this,366 how could he receive 16 the Holy Spirit?"
Shortly after he says again:

"In the time of persecution, through cowardice and love of life, he denied that
he was a presbyter. For when he was requested and entreated by the deacons to
come out of the chamber in which he had imprisoned himself and give aid to the
brethren as far as was lawful and possible for a presbyter to assist those of
the brethren who were in danger and needed help, he paid so little respect to
the entreaties of the deacons that he went away and departed in anger. For he
said that he no longer desired to be a presbyter, as he was an admirer 17of
another philosophy."367 17 Passing by a few things, he adds the following:

"For this illustrious man forsook the Church of God, in which, when he believed,
he was judged worthy of the presbyterate through the favor of the bishop who
ordained him to the presbyterial office. This had been resisted by all the
clergy and many of the laity; because it was unlawful that one who had been
affused on his bed on account of sickness as he had been should enter into any
clerical office;368 but the bishop requested that he might be permitted to
ordain this one only."

18 He adds to these yet another, the worst of all the man's offenses, as
follows:

"For when he has made the offerings, and distributed a part to each man, as he
gives it he compels the wretched man to swear in place of the blessing. Holding
his hands in both of his own, he will not release him until he has sworn in this
manner (for I will give his own words):

Swear to me by the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ that you will never
forsake me and turn to Cornelius.'

19 And the unhappy man does not taste until he has called down imprecations on
himself; and instead of saying Amen, as he takes the bread, he says, I will
never return to Cornelius." Farther on he says again:

20 "But know that he has now been made bare and desolate; as the brethren leave
him every day and return to the church. Moses369 also, the blessed martyr, who
lately suffered among us a glorious and admirable martyrdom, while he was yet
alive, beholding his boldness and folly, refused to commune with him and with
the five presbyters who with him had separated themselves from the church."

21 At the close of his letter he gives a list of the bishops who had come to
Rome and condemned the silliness of Novatus, with their names and the parish
over which each of them presided.

22 He mentions also those who did not come to Rome, but who expressed by letters
their agreement with the vote of these bishops, giving their names and the
cities from which they severally sent them.370 Cornelius wrote these things to
Fabius, bishop of Antioch.

Chapter XLIV. Dionysius' Account of Serapion.

1 To this same Fabius, who seemed to lean somewhat toward this schism,371
Dionysius of Alexandria also wrote an epistle.372 He writes in this many other
things concerning repentance, and relates the conflicts of those who had lately
suffered martyrdom at Alexandria. After the other account he mentions a certain
wonderful fact, which deserves a place in this work. It is as follows:

2 "I will give thee this one example which occurred among us. There was with us
a certain Serapion,373 an aged believer who had lived for a long time
blamelessly, but had fallen in the trial. He besought often, but no one gave
heed to him, because he had sacrificed. But he became sick, and for three
successive days continued speechless and senseless.

3 Having recovered somewhat on the fourth day he sent for his daughter's son,
and said, How Long Do You Detain Me, My Child? I Beseech You, Make Haste, and
Absolve Me Speedily. Call One of the Presbyters to Me. And when he had said
this, he became again speechless. And the boy ran to the presbyter. But it was
night and he was sick, and therefore unable to come.

4 But as I had commanded that persons at the point of death, if they requested
it, and especially if they had asked for it previously, should receive
remission, that they might depart with a good hope, he gave the boy a small
portion of the eucharist, telling him to soak374 it and let the drops fall into
the old man's mouth.375

5 The boy returned with it, and as he drew near, before he entered, Serapion
again arousing, said, `Thou art come, my child, and the presbyter could not
come; but do quickly what he directed, and let me depart.' Then the boy soaked
it and dropped it into his mouth. And when he had swallowed a little,
immediately he gave up the ghost.

6 Is it not evident that he was6 preserved and his life continued till he was
absolved, and, his sin having been blotted out, he could be acknowledged376 for
the many good deeds which he had done?"

Dionysius relates these things.

Chapter XLV. An Epistle of Dionysius to Novatus.

1 But let us see how the same man addressed Novatus377 when he was disturbing
the Roman brotherhood. As he pretended that some of the brethren were the
occasion of his apostasy and schism, as if he had been forced by them to proceed
as he had,378 observe the manner in which he writes to him:

2"Dionysius to his brother Novatus, greeting. If, as thou sayest, thou hast been
led on unwillingly, thou wilt prove this if thou retirest willingly. For it were
better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even
martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than
for refusing to worship idols. Nay, to me it seems greater. For in the one case
a man suffers martyrdom for the sake of his own soul; in the other case in
behalf of the entire Church. And now if thou canst persuade or induce the
brethren to come to unanimity, thy righteousness will be greater than thine
error, and this will not be counted, but that will be praised. But if thou canst
not prevail with the disobedient, at least save thine own soul. I pray that thou
mayst fare well, maintaining peace in the Lord." This he wrote to Novatus.

Chapter XLVI. Other Epistles of Dionysius.

1 He wrote also an epistle to the brethren in Egypt on Repentance.379 In this he
sets forth what seemed proper to him in regard to those who had fallen, and he
describes the classes of transgressions.

2 There is extant also a private letter on Repentance, which he wrote to
Conon,380 bishop of the parish of Hermopolis, and another of an admonitory381
character, to his flock at Alexandria. Among them also is the one written to
Origen on Martyrdom382 and to the brethren at Laodicea,383 of whom Thelymidres
was bishop. He likewise sent one on Repentance to the brethren in Armenia,384 of
whom Merozanes was bishop.

3 Besides all these, he wrote to Cornelius of Rome, when he had received from
him an epistle against Novatus.385 He states in this that he had been invited by
Helenus,386 bishop of Tarsus, in Cilicia, and the others who were with him,
Firmilianus,387 bishop in Cappadocia, and Theoctistus,388 of Palestine, to meet
them at the synod in Antioch, where some persons were endeavoring to establish
the schism of Novatus.

4 Besides this he writes that he had been informed that Fabius389 had fallen
asleep, and that Demetrianus390 had been appointed his successor in the
episcopate of Antioch. He writes also in these words concerning the bishop of
Jerusalem: "For the blessed Alexander391 having been confined in prison, passed
away happily."

5 In addition to this there is extant also a certain other diaconal epistle of
Dionysius, sent to those in Rome through Hippolytus.392 And he wrote another to
them on Peace, and likewise on Repentance;393 and yet another to the confessors
there who still held to the opinion of Novatus.394 He sent two more to the same
persons after they had returned to the Church. And he communicated with many
others by letters, which he has left behind him as a benefit in various ways to
those who now diligently study his writings.395

1: During the early years of the reign of Septimius Severus the Christians
enjoyed comparative peace, and Severus himself showed them considerable favor.
Early in the third century a change set in, and in 202 the emperor issued an
edict forbidding conversions to Christianity and to Judaism (Spartianus, in
Severo, c. 16; cf. Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. III. p. 58). The cause of this
radical change of conduct we do not know, but it is possible that the excesses
of the Montanists produced a reaction in the emperor's mind against the
Christians, or that the rapidity with which Christianity was spreading caused
him to fear that the old Roman institutions would be overturned, and hence
produced a reaction against it. Why the Jews, too, should have been attacked, it
is hard to say,-possibly because of a new attempt on their part to throw off the
Roman yoke (see Spartianus, in Severo, c. 16); or perhaps there underlay the
whole movement a reaction in the emperor's mind toward the old Roman paganism
(he was always superstitious), and Judaism and Christianity being looked upon as
alike opposed to it, were alike to be held in check. The edict was aimed, not
against those already Christians, but only against new converts, the idea being
to prevent the further spread of Christianity. But the change in the emperor's
attitude, thus published abroad, at once intensified all the elements which were
hostile to Christianity; and the popular disfavor, which continued widespread
and was continually venting itself in local persecutions, now allowed itself
freer rein, and the result was that severe persecutions broke out, which were
confined, however, almost wholly to Egypt and North Africa. Our principal
authorities for these persecutions (which went on intermittently, during the
rest of Severus' reign) are the first twelve chapters of this book of Eusebius'
History, and a number of Tertullian's works, especially his De corona milites,
Ad Scap., and De fuga in persecutione.

2: We know very little about Origen's father. The fame of the son overshadowed
that of the father, even though the latter was a martyr. The phrase used in this
passage to describe him has caused some trouble. Lewnidmj o legomenoj Wrigenouj
pathr

3:

4: This Laetus is to be distinguished from Q. Aemilius Laetus, praetorian
prefect under Commodus, who was put to death by the Emperor Didius Julianus, in
193; and from Julius Laetus, minister of Severus, who was executed in 199 (see
Dion Cassius, Bk. LXXIII. chap. 16, and LXXV. chap. 10; cf. Tillemont, Hist. des
emp. III. p. 21, 55, and 58). The dates of Laetus' rule in Egypt are unknown to
us.

5: On the dates of Demetrius' episcopacy, see Bk. V. chap. 22, note 4.

6: On Julian, see Bk. V. chap. 9, note 2.

7: On the persecution, see more particularly chap. 1, note 1.

8: This epistle which was apparently extant in the time of Eusebius, and may
have been contained in the collection made by him (see chap. 36), is now lost,
and we possess only this sentence from it.

9: th twn egkuklliwn paideia . According to Liddell and Scott, egk. paideia egk.
maqhmata 10: On the date of Origen's birth, see note 1.

11: Of this Antiochene heretic Paul we know only what Eusebius tells us here.
His patroness seems to have been a Christian, and in good standing in the
Alexandrian church, or Origen would hardly have made his home with her.

12: dia to dokoun ikanon en logw .

13: Redepenning (p. 189) refers to Origen's In Matt. Comment. Series, sec. 89,
where it is said, melius est cunt nullo orare, quart cum malis orare.

14: fulattwn eceti paidoj kanona [two mss. kanonaj ] ekklhsiaj

15: Redepenning (p. 190) refers to the remarks of Origen upon the nature and
destructivenes of heresy collected by Pamphilus ( Fragm. Apol. Parmph. Opp.
Origen, IV. 694 [ed. Delarue]).

16: epi ta grammataika .

17: See below, p. 392.

18: Of this Plutarch we know only what Eusebius tells us here, and in chap. 4,
where he says that he was the first of Origen'pupils to suffer martyrdom. (On
the date of the persecution in which he suffered, see note 4).

19: Heraclas, brother of Plutarch, proved himself so good a pupil that, when
Origen later found the work of teaching too great for him to manage alone, he
made him his assistant, and committed the elementary instruction to him (chap.
15). From chap. 19 we learn that he was for years a diligent student of Greek
philosophy (chap. 15 implies his proficiency in it), and that he even went so
far as to wear the philosopher's cloak all the time, although he was a presbyter
in the Alexandrian church. His reputation for learning became so great, as we
learn from chap. 31, that Julius Africanus went to Alexandria to see him. In
231, when Origen took his departure from Alexandria, he left the catechetical
school in the charge of Heraclas (chap. 26), and in 231 or 232, upon the death
of Demetrius (see Bk. V. chap. 22, note 4), Heraclas became the latter's
successor as bishop of Alexandria (chaps. 26 and 29), and was succeeded in the
presidency of the catechetical school by Dionysius (chap. 29). According to
chap. 35 he was bishop for sixteen years and with this both versions of the
Chron. agree, though Jerome puts his accession two years too early-into the
ninth year of Alexander Severus instead of the eleventh-while giving at the same
time, quite inconsistently, the proper date for his death. Heraclas' later
relations to Origen are not quite clear. He was evidently, in earlier years, one
of his best friends, and there is no adequate ground for the assumption, which
is quite common, that he was one of those who united with Bishop Demetrius in
condemning him. It is true, no attempt seems to have been made after he became
bishop to reverse the sentence against Origen, and to invite him back to
Alexandria; but this does not prove that Heraclas did not remain friendly to
him; for even when Dionysius (who kept up his relations with Origen, as we know
from chap. 46) became bishop (a.d. 248), no such attempt seems to have been
made, although Origen was still alive and at the height of his power. The fact
that the greater part of the clergy of Alexandria and Egypt were unfavorable to
Origen, as shown by their condemnation of him, does not imply that Heraclas
could not have been elected unless he too showed hostility to Origen; for
Dionysius, who we know was not hostile, was appointed at that time head of the
catechetical school, and sixteen years later bishop. It is true that Heraclas
may not have sympathized with all of Origen's views, and may have thought some
of them heretical (his strict judgment of heretics is seen from Bk. VII. chap.
7), but many even of the best of Origen's friends and followers did likewise, so
that among his most devoted adherents were some of the most orthodox Fathers of
the Church (e.g. the two Gregories and Basil). That Heraclas did not agree with
Origen in all his opinions (if he did not, he may not have cared to press his
return to Alexandria) does not prove therefore that he took part in the
condemnatory action of the synod, and that he was himself in later life hostile
to Origen.

20: See below, p. 392.

21: It is not clear from Eusebius' language whether Aquila was successor of
Laetus as viceroy of Egypt (as Redepenning assumes apparently quite without
misgiving), or simply governor of Alexandria. He calls Laetus (in chap. 2)
governor of Alexandria and of all Egypt, while Aquila is called simply governor
of Alexandria. If this difference were insisted on as marking a real
distinction, then Aquila would have to be regarded as the chief officer of
Alexandria only, and hence subordinate in dignity to the viceroy of Egypt. The
term used to describe his position ( hgoumeno/

22: How it happened that Origen escaped the persecution, when, according to
Eusebius, he exposed himself so continually, and was so hated by the heathen
populace, we cannot tell. Eusebius ascribes it solely to the grace of God here,
and in chap. 4.

23: oioj o logoj toioj o bioj

24: This does not mean that he considered the study of grammar and literature
injurious to the Christian, or detrimental to his theological studies. His
opinion on that subject is clear enough from all his writings and from his
conduct as pictured in chaps. 18 and 19. Nor does it on the other hand imply, as
Cruseè supposes, that up to this time he had been teaching secular branches
exclusively; but it means simply that the demands upon him for instruction in
the faith were so great, now that the catechetical school had been officially
entrusted to him by Demetrius, that he felt that he could no longer continue to
teach secular literature as he had been doing, but must give up that part of his
work, and devote himself exclusively to instruction in sacred things.

25: The obolus was a small Greek coin, equivalent to about three and a half
cents of our money. Four oboli a day could have been sufficient, even in that
age, only for the barest necessities of life. But with his ascetic tendencies,
these were all that Origen wished.

26: It was very common from the fourth century on (the writer knows of no
instances earlier than Eusebius) to call an ascetic mode of life
"philosophical," or "the life of a philosopher" (see §2 of this chapter, and
compare Chrysostom's works, where the word occurs very frequently in this
sense). Origen, in his ascetic practices, was quite in accord with the
prevailing Christian sentiment of his own and subsequent centuries, which looked
upon bodily discipline of an ascetic kind, not indeed as required, but as
commended by Christ. The growing sentiment had its roots partly in the
prevailing ideas of contemporary philosophy, which instinctively emphasized
strongly the dualism of spirit and matter, and the necessity of subduing the
latter to the former, and partly in the increasing moral corruptness of society,
which caused those who wished to lead holy lives to feel that only by eschewing
the things of sense could the soul attain purity. Under pressure from without
and within, it became very easy to misinterpret various sayings of Christ, and
thus to find in the Gospels ringing exhortations to a life of the most rigid
asceticism. Clement of Alexandria was almost the only one of the great Christian
writers after the middle of the second century who distinguished between the
true and the false in this matter. Compare his admirable tract, Quis dives
salvetur, and contrast the position taken there with the foolish extreme pursued
by Origen, as recorded in this chapter.

27: See Matt. x. 11.

28: See Matt. vi. 34.

29: Greek: qwrac qwrac , so far as I can ascertain. The proper Greek term for
stomach is stomaxoj , which is uniformly employed by Galen and other medical
writers.

30: See the previous chapter, §2. The martyrdom of these disciples of Origen
took place under Aquila, and hence the date depends on the date of his rule,
which cannot be fixed with exactness, as remarked in note 4 on the previous
chapter.

31: These two persons named Serenus, the first of whom was burned, the second
beheaded, are known to us only from this chapter.

32: Of this Heraclides, we know only what is told us in this chapter. He, with
the other martyrs mentioned in this connection, is commemorated in the medivael
martyrologies, but our authentic information is limited to what Eusebius tells
us here.

33: Our authentic information of Hero is likewise limited to this account of
Eusebius.

34: Herais likewise is known to us from this chapter alone. It is interesting to
note that Origen's pupils were not confined to the male sex. His association
with female catechumens, which his office of instructor entailed upon him,
formed one reason for the act of self-mutilation which he committed (see chap.
8, §2).

35:

36: Basilides is clearly reckoned here among the disciples of Origen. The
correctness of Eusebius' statement has been doubted, but there is no ground for
such doubt, for there is no reason to suppose that all of Origen's pupils became
converted under his instruction.

37: Of Marcella, we know only that she was the mother of the more celebrated
Potamiaena, and suffered martyrdom by fire.

38: The word sfragij

39: This chapter has no connection with the preceding, and its insertion at this
point has no good ground, for Clement has been already handled in the fifth
book; and if Eusebius wished to refer to him again in connection with Origen, he
should have done so in chap. 3, where Origen's appointment as head of the
catechetical school is mentioned. (Redepenning, however, approves the present
order; vol. I. p. 431 sqq.) Rufinus felt the inconsistency, and hence inserted
chaps. 6 and 7 in the middle of chap. 3, where the account of Origen's
appointment by Demetrius is given. Valesius considers the occurrence of this
mention of Clement at this point a sign that Eusebius did not give his work a
final revision. Chap. 13 is inserted in the same abrupt way, quite out of
harmony with the context. Upon the life of Clement of Alexandria, see Bk. V.
chap. 11, note 1. The catechetical school was vacant, as we learn from chap. 2,
in the year 203, and was then taken in charge by Origen, so that the "that time"
referred to by Eusebius in this sentence must be carried back of the events
related in the previous chapters. The cause of Clement's leaving the school was
probably the persecution begun by Severus in 202 ("all were driven away by the
threatening aspect of persecution," according to chap. 3, §1); for since Origen
was one of his pupils he can hardly have left long before that time. That it was
not unworthy cowardice which led Clement to take his departure is clear enough
from the words of Alexander in chaps. 11 and 14, from the high reputation which
he continued to enjoy throughout the Church, and from his own utterances on the
subject of martyrdom scattered through his works.

40: On Pantaenus, see Bk. V. chap. 10, note 2.

41: Stephanus, Stroth, Burton, Schwegler, Laemmer, and Heinichen, following two
important mss. and the translation of Rufinus, omit the words paida onta "while
a boy." But the words are found in all the other codices (the chief witnesses of
two of the three great families of mss. being for them) and in Nicephorus. The
manuscript authority is therefore overwhelmingly in favor of the words, and they
are adopted by Valesius, Zimmermann, and Crusè. Rufinus is a strong witness
against the words but, as Redepenning justly remarks, having inserted this
chapter, as he did, in the midst of the description of Origen's early years (see
note 1), the words paida onta would be quite superfluous and even out of place,
and hence he would natnrally omit them. So far as the probabilities of the
insertion or omission of the words in the present passage are concerned, it
seems to me more natural to suppose that a copyist, finding the words at this
late stage in the account of Origen's life, would be inclined to omit them, than
that not finding them there he should, upon historical grounds (which he could
have reached only after some reflection), think that they ought to be inserted.
The latter would be not only a more difficult but also a much graver step than
the former. There seems, then, to be no good warrant for omitting these words.
We learn from chap. 3 that he took charge of the catechetical school when he was
in his eighteenth year, within a year therefore after the death of his father.
And we learn that before he took charge of the school, all who had given
instruction there had been driven away by the persecution. Clement, therefore,
must have left before Origen's eighteenth year, and hence the latter must have
studied with him before the persecution had broken up the school, and in all
probability before the death of Leonides. In any case, therefore, he was still a
boy when under Clement, and even if we omit the words-"while a boy"-here, we
shall not be warranted in putting his student days into the period of his
maturity, as some would do. Upon this subject, see Redepenning, I. p. 431 sqq.,
who adduces still other arguments for the position taken in this note which it
is not necessary to repeat here.

42: In Stromata, Bk. I. chap. 21. On this and the other works of Clement, see
chap. 13.

43: The mention of the writer Judas at this point seems, at first sight, as
illogical as the reference to Clement in the preceding chapter. But it does not
violate chronology as that did; and hence, if the account of Origen's life was
to he broken anywhere for such an insertion, there was perhaps no better place.
We cannot conclude, therefore, that Eusebius, had he revised his work, would
have changed the position of this chapter, as Valesius suggests (see the
previous chapter, note 1).

44: It was the common belief in the Church, from the time of the apostles until
the time of Constantine, that the second coming of Christ would very speedily
take place. This belief was especially pronounced among the Montanists, Montanus
having proclaimed that the parousia would occur before his death, and even
having gone so far as to attempt to collect all the faithful (Montanists) in one
place in Phrygia, where they were to await that event and where the new
Jerusalem was to be set up (see above, Bk. V. chap. 18, note 6). There is
nothing surprising in Judas' idea that this severe persecution must be the
beginning of the end, for all through the earlier centuries of the Church (and
even to some extent in later centuries) there were never wanting those who
interpreted similar catastrophes in the same way; although after the third
century the belief that the end was at hand grew constantly weaker.

45: This act of Origen's has been greatly discussed, and some have even gone so
far as to believe that he never committed the act, but that the report of it
arose from a misunderstanding of certain figurative expressions used by him (so,
e.g., Boehringer, Schnitzer, and Baur). There is no reason, however, to doubt
the report, for which we have unimpeachable testimony, and which is in itself
not at all surprising (see the arguments of Redepenning, I. p. 444 sqq.). The
act was contrary to the civil law (see Suetonius, Domitian, c. 7; and cf. Justin
Martyr, Apol. I. 29), and yet was a very common one; the existence of the law
itself would alone prove what we know from many sources to have been the fact.
Nor was Origen alone among the Christians (cf. e.g. Origen, In Matt., XV. 1, the
passage of Justin Martyr referred to above, and also the first canon of the
Council of Nicaea, the very existence of which proves the necessity of it). It
was natural that Christians, seeking purity of life, and strongly ascetic in
their tendencies, should be influenced by the actions of those about them, who
sought thus to be freed from the domination of the passions, and should
interpret certain passages of the Bible as commending the act. Knowing it to be
so common, and knowing Origen's character, as revealed to us in chap. 3, above
(to say nothing of his own writings), we can hardly be surprised that he
performed the act. His chief motive was undoubtedly the same as that which
actuated him in all his ascetic practices, the attainment of higher holiness
through the subjugation of his passions, and the desire to sacrifice everything
fleshly for the sake of Christ. Of course this could not have led him to perform
the act he did, unless he had entirely misunderstood, as Eusebius says he did,
the words of Christ quoted below. But he was by no means the only one to
misunderstand them (see Suicer's Thesaurus, I. 1255 sq.). Eusebius says that the
requirements of his position also had something to do with his resolve. He was
obliged to teach both men and women, and both day and night (as we learn from
§7), and Eusebius thinks he would naturally desire to avoid scandal. At the same
time, this motive can hardly have weighed very heavily, if at all, with him; for
had his giving instruction in this way been in danger of causing serious
scandal, other easier methods of avoiding such scandal might have been devised,
and undoubtedly would have been, by the bishop. And the fact is, he seems to
have wished to conceal the act, which is inconsistent with the idea that he
performed it for the sake of avoiding scandal. It is quite likely that his
intimate association with women may have had considerable to do with his
resolve, because he may have found that such association aroused his unsubdued
passions, and therefore felt that they must be eradicated, if he was to go about
his duties with a pure and single heart. That he afterward repented his youthful
act, and judged the words of Christ more wisely, is clear from what he says in
his Comment. in Matt. XV. 1. And yet he never outgrew his false notions of the
superior virtue of an ascetic life. His act seems to have caused a reaction in
his mind which led him into doubt and despondency for a time; for Demetrius
found it necessary to exhort him to cherish confidence, and to urge him to
continue his work of instruction. Eusebius, while not approving Origen's act,
yet evidently admired him the more for the boldness and for the spirit of
self-sacrifice shown in its performance.

46: Matt. xix. 12.

47: See chap. 23.

48: On the relations existing between Demetrius and Origen, see below, p. 394.

49: Septimius Severus died on February 4, 211, after a reign of a little more
than seventeen years and eight months, and was succeeded by his two sons, Marcus
Aurelius Severus Antoninus Bassianus (commonly known by his nickname Caracalla,
which, however, was never used in official documents or inscriptions), and
Lucius, or Publius, Septimius Geta. Eusebius mentions here only the former,
giving him his official name, Antoninus.

50: Eusebius makes a slip here, as this is the first time he has mentioned
Alexander in his Church History. He was very likely under the impression that he
had mentioned him just above, where he referred to the bishops of Caesarea and
Jerusalem. He does refer to him in his Chron., putting his appointment as
assistant bishop into the second year of Caracalla ( Armen. fourth year), and
calling him the thirty-fifth bishop of Jerusalem ( Armen. thirty-sixth). In Bk.
V. chap. 12 of the History (also in the Chron. ) we are told that Narcissus was
the thirtieth bishop of Jerusalem. The number thirty-five for Alexander (the
number thirty-six of the Armen. is a mistake, and is set right in connection
with Alexander's successor, who is also called the thirty-sixth) is made out by
counting the three bishops mentioned in chap. 10, and then reckoning the second
episcopate of Narcissus (see the same chapter) as the thirty-fourth. We learn
from chap. 14 that Alexander was an early friend of Origen's, and a fellow-pupil
in the school of Clement. We know him next as bishop of some church in
Cappadocia (chap. 11; see note 2 on that chapter), whence he was called to be
assistant bishop of Jerusalem (see the same chapter). From this passage,
compared with chap. 11, we learn that Alexander was imprisoned during the
persecutions, and the Chron. gives the year of his "confession" as 203 a.d. But
from chap. 11 we learn that he wrote while still in prison to the church of
Antioch on occasion of the appointment of Asclepiades to the episcopate there.
According to the Chron. Asclepiades did not become bishop until 211; and though
this may not be the exact date, yet it cannot be far out of the way (see chap.
11, note 6); and hence, if Alexander was a confessor in 203, he must have
remained in prison a number of years, or else have undergone a second
persecution. It is probable either that the date 203 is quite wrong, or else
that he suffered a second time toward the close of Severus' reign; for the
persecution, so far as we know, was not so continuous during that reign as to
keep one man confined for eight years. Our knowledge of the persecutions in Asia
Minor at this time is very limited, but they do not seem to have been of great
severity or of long duration. The date of Alexander's episcopate in Cappadocia
it is impossible to determine, though as he was a fellow-pupil of Origen's in
Alexandria, it cannot have begun much, if any, before 202. The date of his
translation to the see of Jerusalem is likewise uncertain. The Chron. gives the
second year of Caracalla ( Armen. fourth). The connection in which Eusebius
mentions it in chap. 11 makes it look as if it took place before Asclepiades'
accession to the see of Antioch; but this is hardly possible, for it was his
firmness under persecution which elevated him to the see of Jerusalem (according
to this passage), and it is apparently that persecution which he is enduring
when Asclepiades becomes bishop. We find no reason, then, for correcting the
date of his translation to Jerusalem given by the Chron. At any rate, he was
bishop of Jerusalem when Origen visited Palestine in 216 (see chap. 19, §17). In
231 he assisted at the ordination of Origen (see chap. 23, note 6), and finally
perished in prison during the Decian perscution (see chaps. 39 and 46). His
friendship for Origen was warm and steadfast (cf., besides the other passages
referred to, chap. 27). The latter commemorates the loveliness and gentleness of
his character in his first Homily on 1 Samuel, §1. He collected a valuable
library in Jerusalem, which Eusebius made use of in the composition of his
History (see chap. 20). This act shows the literary tastes of the man. Of his
epistles only the five fragments preserved by Eusebius (chaps. 11, 14, and 19)
are now extant. Jerome ( de vir. ill. 62) says that other epistles were extant
in his day; and he relates, on the authority of an epistle written pro Origene
contra Demetrium, that Alexander had ordained Origen juxta testimonium Demetri.
This epistle is not mentioned by Eusebius, but in spite of Jerome's usual
dependence upon the latter, there is no good reason to doubt the truth of his
statement in this case (see below, p. 396).

51: On Narcissus, see the next three chapters, and also Bk. V. chap. 12, note 1.

52: This miracle is related by Eusebius upon the testimony, not of documents,
but of those who had shown him the oil, which was preserved in Jerusalem down to
that time; oi thj paroikiaj politai ... istoronsi , he says. His travels had
evidently not taught him to disbelieve every wonderful tale that was told him.

53: See above, chap. 3, note 9.

54: The date of Narcissus' retirement we have no means of ascertaining.

55: Of these three bishops, Dius, Germanio, and Gordius, we know nothing more
than is told us here. Syncellus assigns eight years to Dius, four to Germanio,
and five to Sardianus, whom he names instead of Gordius. Epiphanius reports that
Dius was bishop until Severus (193 a.d.), and Gordius until Antonine (i.e.
Caracalla, 211 a.d.). But no reliance is to be placed upon these figures or
dates, as remarked above, Bk. V. chap. 12, note 2.

56: Eusebius and Epiphanius give Tordianj , and Jerome, Gordius; but the
Armenian has Gordianus, and Syncellus, Sardianj . What became of Gordius when
Narcissus reappeared we do not know. He must have died very speedily, or some
compromise would have been made, as it seems, which would have rendered the
appointment of Alexander as assistant bishop unnecessary.

57: Literally, "as if from a resurrection" ( wsper ec anabiwsewj ).

58: The extreme age of Narcissus at this time is evident from the fact that
Alexander, writing before the year 216 (see note 4), says that Narcissus is
already in his 116th year. The translation of Alexander to Jerusalem must have
taken place about 212 (see chap. 8, note 6), and hence Narcissus was now more
than 110 years old. The appointment of Alexander as Narcissus' assistant
involved two acts which were even at that time not common, and which were later
forbidden by canon; first the translation of a bishop from one see to another,
and secondly the appointment of an assistant bishop, which made two bishops in
one city. The Apost. Canons (No. 14) ordain that "a bishop ought not to leave
his own parish and leap to another, although the multitude should compel him,
unless there be some good reason forcing him to do this, as that he can
contribute much greater profit to the people of the new parish by the word of
piety; but this is not to be settled by himself, but by the judgment of many
bishops and very great supplication." It has been disputed whether this canon is
older or younger than the fifteenth canon of Nicaea, which forbids
unconditionally the practice of translation from one see to another. Whichever
may be the older, it is certain that even the Council of Nicaea considered its
own canon as liable to exceptions in certain cases, for it translated Eustathius
from Beraea to Antioch (see Sozomen, H. E. I. 2). The truth is, the rule was
established-whether before or for the first time at the Council of
Nicaea-chiefly in order to guard against the ambition of aspiring men who might
wish to go from a smaller to a greater parish, and to prevent, as the Nicene
Canon says, the many disorders and quarrels which the custom of translation
caused; and a rule formed on such grounds of expediency was of course liable to
exception whenever the good of the Church seemed to demand it, and therefore,
whether the fourteenth Apostolic Canon is more ancient than the Nicene Council
or not, it certainly embodies a principle which must long have been in force,
and which we find in fact acted upon in the present case; for the translation of
Alexander takes place "with the common consent of the bishops of the neighboring
churches," or, as Jerome puts it, cunctis in Palestina episcopis in unum
congregatis, which is quite in accord with the provision of the Apostolic
Canons. There were some in the early Church who thought it absolutely unlawful
under any circumstances for a bishop to be translated (cf. Jerome's Ep. ad
Oceanum; Migne, Ep. 69, §5), but this was not the common view, as Bingham (
Antiq. VI. 4. 6) well observes, and instances of translation from one see to
another were during all these centuries common (cf. e.g. Socrates, H. E. VII.
36), although always of course exceptional, and considered lawful only when made
for good and sufficient reasons. To say, therefore, with Valesius that these
Palestinian bishops violated a rule of the Church in translating Alexander is
too strong. They were evidently unconscious of anything uncanonical, or even
irregular in their action, though it is clear that they regarded the step as too
important to be taken without the approval of all the bishops of the
neighborhood. In regard to assistant bishops, Valesius correctly remarks that
this is the first instance of the kind known to us, but it is by no means the
only one, for the following centuries furnish numerous examples; e.g. Theotecnus
and Anatolius in Caesarea (see below, Bk. VII. chap. 32), Maximus and Macarius
in Jerusalem (see Sozomen, H. E. II. 20); and so in Africa Valerius of Hippo had
Augustine as his coadjutor (Possidius, Vita. Aug. chap. 8; see Bingham's Antiq.
II. 13. 4 for other instances and for a discussion of the whole subject). The
principle was in force from as early as the third century (see Cyprian to
Cornelius, Ep. 40, al. 44 and to Antonianus, Ep. 51, al. 55) that there should
be only one bishop in a city, and we see from the works of various Fathers that
this rule was universally accepted at an early date. The eighth canon of Nicaea
refers to this principle in passing as if it were already firmly established,
and the council evidently did not think it necessary to promulgate a special
canon on the subject. Because of this principle, Augustine hesitated to allow
himself to be ordained assistant bishop of Hippo; and although his scruples were
overcome at the time, he afterward, upon learning of the Nicene Canon,
considered the practice of having a coadjutor illegal and refused to ordain one
for himself. But, as the instances referred to above and many others show, not
all the Church interpreted the principle as rigidly as Augustine did, and hence
under certain circumstances exceptions were made to the rule, and were looked
upon throughout the Church as quite lawful. The existence of two bishops in one
city as a matter of compromise, for the sake of healing a schism, formed one
common exception to the general principle (see Bingham, II. 13. 2), and the
appointment of coadjutors, as in the present case, formed another.

59: Of what city in Cappadocia Alexander was bishop we are not told by Eusebius,
nor by our other ancient authorities. Valesius (note on this passage) and
Tillemont ( Hist. eccles. III. p. 415) give Flaviopolis or Flaviadis as the name
of the city (upon the authority of Basilicon, Fur. Graeco-Rom. Tom. I. p. 295,
according to Tillemont). But Flaviopolis was a city of Cilicia, and hence
Tillemont conjectures that it had once been taken from Cappadocia and attached
to Cilicia, and that its inhabitants retained the memory of Alexander, their
early bishop. The report seems to rest upon a very slender foundation; but not
having access to the authority cited, I am unable to form an opinion as to the
worth of the tradition.

60: euxh kai twn topwn istoria eneken .

61: 'Antinoeia 62: On Serapion, see Bk. V. chap. 19, note 1.

63: The Chron. puts the accession of Asclepiades in the first year of Caracalla
(211 a.d.). Harnack ( Zeit des Ignatius, p. 47) believes that this notice rests
upon better knowledge than the notices of most of the Antiochian bishops,
because in this case the author departs from the artificial scheme which he
follows in the main. But Harnack contends that the date is not quite correct,
because Alexander, who suffered under Severus, was still in prison when
Asclepiades became bishop, and therefore the latter's accession must be put back
into Severus' reign. He would fix, therefore, upon about 209 as the date of it,
rightly perceiving that there is good reason for thinking the Chron. at least
nearly correct in its report, and that in any case his accession cannot be
carried back much beyond that, because it is quite probable (from the
congratulations which Alexander extends to the church of Antioch) that there had
been a vacancy in that church for some time after the death of Serapion (a thing
not at all unnatural in the midst of the persecutions of the time), while
Serapion was still alive as late as 203 (see Bk. V. chap. 19, note 1). But it
seems to me that there is no good ground for making any alteration in the date
given by the Chron., for we know that at the very end of Severus' reign the
persecution broke out again with considerable severity, and that it continued,
at least in Africa, for some time after Caracalla's accession (see Tertullian's
ad Scap. ). The general amnesty issued by Caracalla after the murder of his
brother Geta in 212 (see Dion Cassius, LXXVII. 3) seems first to have put a
definitive end to the persecutions. There is therefore no ground for confining
Alexander's imprisonment to the reign of Severus. It may well have run into the
time of Caracalla, and hence it is quite possible that Asclepiades did not
become bishop until after the latter became emperor, so that it is not necessary
to correct the date of the Chron. It is impossible to determine with certainty
the length of Asclepiades' episcopate (see chap. 21, note 6). Of Asclepiades
himself we know no more than is told us in this chapter. He seems to have been a
man of most excellent character, to judge from Alexander's epistle. That
epistle, of course, was written immediately after Asclepiades' appointment.

64: Literally "confessions" ( omolgiai ).

65: On Clement of Alexandria, see above, Bk. V. chap. 11.

66: kurioi mou adelfoi .

67: On Serapion, see Bk. V. chap. 19, note 1.

68: The Greek reads: tou de Sarpiwno thj peri logouj askhsewj kai alla men eikoj
swzesqai par eteroij upomnhmata .

69: Of this Domninus we know only what is told us here. It is suggested by
Daniell (in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. IV. 630) that this shows that the
prohibition uttered by Severus against the Jews "must have been soon relaxed, if
it ever was enforced." But in regard to this it must be said, in the first
place, that Severus' decree was not levelled against the Jews, but only against
conversion to Judaism,-against the fieri, not the esse, Fudaeos. The object of
the edict was not to disturb the Jews in the exercise of their national faith,
but to prevent their proselyting among the non-Jewish residents of the empire.
If Domninus, therefore, fell from Christianity into Judaism on account of the
persecution, it seems highly probable that he was simply a converted Jew, who
gave up now, in order to avoid persecution, his new faith, and again practised
the religion of his fathers. Nothing, therefore, can be concluded from Domninus'
case as to the strictness with which Severus' law was carried out, even if we
suppose Domninus to have fallen from Christianity into Judaism. But it must be
remarked, in the second place, that it is by no means certain that Eusebius
means to say that Domninus fell into Judaism, or became a Jew. He is said to
have fallen into "ewish will-worship" ( ekpeptwkota epi todaikhn efelofrhskeian
). The word efelofrhskeia 70: See Bk. V. chap. 19, note 4.

71: On the so-called "Gospel of Peter," see Bk. III. chap. 3, note 7.

72: Rhossus, or Rhosus, was a city of Syria, lying on the Gulf of Issus, a
little to the northwest of Antioch.

73: This Marcianus is an otherwise unknown personage, unless we are to identify
him, as Salmon suggests is possible, with Marcion. The suggestion is attractive,
and the reference to Docetae gives it a show of probability. But there are
serious objections to be urged against it. In the first place, the form of the
name, Markianoi instead of Markiwn . The two names are by no means identical
Still, according to Harnack, we have more than once Markianoi and Markianistai
for Makiwn

74: By Docetism we understand the doctrine that Christ had no true body, but
only an apparent one. The word is derived from dokew

75: The interpretation of these last two clauses is beset with difficulty. The
Greek reads twn diadoxwn twn katacamenwn autou, ouj Dokhtaj kaloumen, (ta gar
fronhmata ta pleiona ekeinwn esti thj didaskaliaj), k.t.l . The words twn
katarcamenwn autou are usually translated "who preceded him," or "who led the
way before him"; but the phrase hardly seems to admit of this interpretation,
and moreover the autou seems to refer not to Marcianus, whose name occurs some
lines back, but to the gospel which has just been mentioned. There is a
difficulty also in regard to the reference of the ekeinwn , which is commonly
connected with the words thj didaskaliaj , but which seems to belong rather with
the fronhmata and to refer to the diadocwn twj katarcamenwn . It thus seems
necessary to define the thj didaskaliaj

76: peri proniaj . There are also extant two fragments of a work peri yuxhj o
peri egkrateiaj gamikoj logoj ). It has been thought possible that he may have
referred here to his discussion of the same subject in Bk. II. chap. 10 of the
same work (see the Bishop of Lincoln's work on Clement, p. 7), but it seems more
probable that he referred to a separate work now lost. Potter, p. 1022, gives a
fragment which is possibly from this work.

77: Clement's three principal works, the Exhortation to the Greeks (see below,
note 5), the Instructor (note 6), and the Stromata, form a connected series of
works, related to one another (as Schaff says) very much as apologetics, ethics,
and dogmatics. The three works were composed in the order named. The Stromata (
Strwmateij twn kata thn alhqh filosofian gnwstikwn upomnhmatwn strwmateij
Strwmateij , "patchwork," sufficiently indicates the character of the work. It
is without methodical arrangement, containing a heterogeneous mixture of
science, philosophy, poetry, and theology, and yet is animated by one idea
throughout,-that Christianity satisfies the highest intellectual desires of
man,-and hence the work is intended in some sense as a guide to the deeper
knowledge of Christianity, the knowledge to be sought after by the "true
Gnostic." It is full of rich thoughts mingled with worthless crudities, and,
like nearly all of Clement's works, abounds in wide and varied learning, not
always fully digested. The date at which the work was composed may be gathered
from a passage in Bk. I. chap. 21, where a list of the Roman emperors is closed
with a mention of Commodus, the exact length of whose reign is given, showing
that he was already dead, but also showing apparently that his successor was
still living. This would lead us to put the composition at least of the first
book in the first quarter of the year x93. It might of course be said that
Pertinax and Didins Julianus are omitted in this list because of the brevity of
their reigns, and this is possible, since in his own list he gives the reigns of
the emperors simply by years, omitting Otho and Vitellius. The other list which
he quotes, however, gives every emperor, with the number of years, months, and
even days of each reign,so that there is no reason, at least in that list, for
the omission of Pertinax and Didius Julianus. It seems probable that, under the
influence of that exact list, and of the recentness of the reigns of the two
emperors named, Clement can hardly have omitted them if they had already ruled.
We can say with absolute certainty, however, only that the work was written
after 192. Clement left Alexandria in 202. or before, and this, as well as me
rest of his works, was written in all probability before that time at the
latest.

78: The Hypatyposes ( upotupwseij oi epigegrammenoi o de oloj skopoj wsanei
ermhneiai tugxanousi thj Tegesewj k.t.l 79: Pantaenus, see above, Bk. V. chap.
10, note 1.

80: The Exhortation to the Greeks ( o logoj portreptikoj 55 Ellhnaj 81: The
Instructor ( o paisagwgoj , or, as Eusebius calls it here, treij te oi toy
epigegrammenou paidagwgou

82: The Quis Dives Salvetur? as it is called ( tij o swzomenoj plousioj ), is a
brief tract, discussing the words of Christ in Mark x. 17 sqq. It is still
extant, and contains the beautiful story of John and the robber, quoted by
Eusebius in Bk. III. chap. 23. It is an eloquent and able work; and when
compared with the prevailing notions of the Church of his day, its teaching is
remarkably wise and temperate. It is moderately ascetic, but goes to no
extremes, and in this furnishes a pleasing contrast to the writings of most of
the Fathers of Clement's time.

83: to peri tou pasdj suggramma 84: dialezeij peri nhsteiaj . Photius knew both
these works by report (the second under the title peri kakologiaj

85: o protreptikoj eij upomonhn h pouj touj newoti bebaptismenouj . This work is
mentioned neither by Jerome nor by Photius, nor has any vestige of it been
preserved, so far as we know.

86: o epigegrammenoj kanwn ekklhsiastikoj, h proj touj 'Ioudaizontaj peri
kanonwn ekklhsiastikikwn , but he had not himself seen it. It is no longer
extant, but a few fragments have been preserved, and are given by Potter.

87: Literally, "made a spreading" ( katastrwsin pepoihtai ). Eusebius here plays
upon the title of the work ( Strwmateij ).

88: See note 2.

89: antilegomenwn grafwn

90: The Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Sirach were two Old Testament
apocryphal books. The Church of the first three centuries made, on the whole, no
essential difference between the books of the Hebrew canon and the Apocrypha. We
find the Fathers, almost without exception, quoting from both indiscriminately.
It is true that catalogues were made by Melito, Origen, Athanasius, and others,
which separated the Apocrypha fro.m the books of the He: brew canon; but this
represented theory simply, not practice, and did not prevent even themselves
from using both classes as Scripture. Augustine went so far as to obliterate
completely all distinction between the two, in theory as well as in practice.
The only one of the early Fathers to make a decided stand against the Apocrypha
was Jerome; but he was not able to change the common view, and the Church
continued (as the Catholic Church continues still) to use them all (with a few
minor exceptions) as Holy Scripture.

91: On the Epistle to the Hebrews, see Bk. III. chap. 3, note 17.

92: On the Epistle of Barnabas, see Bk. III. chap. 25, note 20.

93: The Epistle of Clement, see Bk. III. chap. 16, note 1.

94: On the Epistle of Jude, see Bk. II. chap. 23, note .

95: On Tatian and his works, see Bk. IV. chap. 29, note 1.

96: This Cassianus is mentioned twice by Clement: once in Strom. I. 21, where
Clement engages in a chronological study for the purpose of showing that the
wisdom of the Hebrews is older than that of the Greeks, and refers to Cassian's
Exegetica and Tatian's Address to the Greeks as containing discussions of the
same subject; again in Strom. III. 13 sqq., where he is said to have been the
founder of the sect of the Dacetae, and to have written a work, De continentia
or De castitate ( peri egkrateiaj h peri eunouxiaj 'Echghtikoi xronografia
xronografia is quite legitimate.

97: On Philo and his works, see Bk. II. chaps. 4, 5, 17 and 18.

98: The Aristobulus referred to here was an Alexandrian Jew and Peripatetic
philosopher (see the passages in Clement and Eusebius referred to below), who
lived in the second century b.c., and was the author of Commentaries upon the
Mosaic Law, the chief object of which was to prove that Greek philosophy was
borrowed from the books of Moses (see Clement, Strom. V. 14, who refers only to
Peripatetic philosophy, which is too narrow). The work is referred to by Clement
of Alexandria (in his Stromata, I. 15; V. 14; VI. 3, &c.), by Eusebius (in his
Praep. Evang. VII. 14; VIII. 9, 10; XIII. 12, &c.) by Anatolius (as quoted by
Eusebius below, in Bk. VII. chap. 32), and by other Fathers. The work is no
longer extant, but Eusebius gives two considerable fragments of it in his Praep.
Evang. VIII. 10, and XIII. 12. See Schürer's Gesch. d. jüdischen Volkes im
Zeitalter Jesu, II. p. 760 sq. Schürer maintains the authenticity of the work
against the attacks of many modem critics.

99: On Josephus and his works, see Bk. III. chap. 9.

100: Demetrius was a Grecian Jew, who wrote, toward the close of the third
century b.c., a History of Israel, based upon the Scripture records, and with
especial reference to chronology. Demetrius is mentioned by Josephus (who,
however, wrongly makes him a heathen; contra Apionem, I. 23), by Clement of
Alexandria, and by Eusebius. His work is no longer extant, but fragments of it
are preserved by Clement ( Strom. I. 21) and by Eusebius ( Praep. Evang. IX. 21
and 29). See Schürer, ibid. p. 730 sq.

101: Eupolymus was also a Jewish historian, who wrote about the middle of the
second century b.c., and is possibly to be identified with the Eupolymus
mentioned in 1. Macc. viii. 17. He wrote a History of the Jews, which is
referred to under various titles by those that mention it, and which has
consequently been resolvent into three separate works by many scholars, but
without warrant, as Schürer has shown. The work, like that of Aristobulus, was
clearly designed to show the dependence of Greek philosophy upon Hebrew wisdom
(see Clement's Strom. I. 23). It is no longer extant, but fragments have been
preserved by Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. I. 21, which gives us data for
reckoning the time at which Eupolymus wrote, and I. 23) and by Eusebius ( Praep.
Evang. IX. 17, 26, 30-34, and probably 39). See Schürer ibid. p. 732 sq.

102: Eusebius is apparently still referring to Clement's Stromata. In saying
that Clement wn en tw prwtw peri eautou dhloi wj eggista thj twn apostotolwn
genomenou diadochj

103: In his Stromata (VI. 18) Clement refers to a work on the origin of the
world, which was probably to form a part of his work On Principles. This is
perhaps the reference of which Eusebius is thinking when he says that Clement in
the Stromata promises eij thn Tenesin upomnmatiesqein . If so, Eusebius' words,
which imply that Clement promised to write a commentary on Genesis, are
misleading.

104: On this work, see note 8.

105: See the previous chapter, note 3.

106: On the Antilegomena of Eusebius, and on the New Testament canon in general,
see Bk. III. chap. 25, note 1.

107: On the Epistle of Barnabas, see Bk. III. chap. 25, note 20.

108: On the Apocalypse of Peter, see Bk. III. chap. 3, note 9.

109: On the Epistle to the Hebrews, see above0, Bk. III. chap. 3, note 17.

110: On the composition of the Gospel of Mark, see Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4, and
with this statement of Clement as to Peter's attitude toward its composition,
compare the words of Eusebius in ç2 of that chapter, and see the note upon the
passage (note 5).

111: ta swmatika .

112: See Bk. IlI. chap. 24, note 7.

113: Mentioned already in chaps. 8 and 11.

114: We see from this sentence that at the time of the writing of this epistle
both Pantaenus and Clement were dead. The latter was still alive when Alexander
wrote to the Antiochenes (see chap. 11), i.e. about the year 211 (see note 5 on
that chapter). How much longer he lived we cannot tell. The epistle referred to
here must of course have been written at any rate subsequent to the year 211,
and hence while Alexander was bishop of Jerusalem. The expression "with whom we
shall soon be" ( proj ouj met' oligou esomeqa ) seems to imply that the epistle
was written when Alexander and Origen were advanced in life, but this cannot be
pressed.

115: It is from this passage that we gather that Alexander was a student of
Clement's and a fellow-pupil of Origen's (see chap. 8, note 6, and chap. 2, note
1). The epistle does not state this directly, but the conclusion seems
sufficiently obvious.

116: The name Adamantius ( 'Adamantioj from adamaj

117: On Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome, see Bk. V. chap. 28, note 5. He was bishop
from about 198, or 199, to 217. This gives considerable range for the date of
Origen's visit to Rome, which we have no means of fixing with exactness. There
is no reason for supposing that Eusebius is incorrect in putting it among the
events occurring during Caracalla's reign (211-217). On the other hand, it must
have taken place before the year 216, for in that year Origen went to Palestine
(see chap. 19, note 23) and remained there some time. Whether Origen's visit was
undertaken simply from the desire to see the church of Rome, as Eusebius says,
or in connection with matters of business, we cannot tell.

118: On Demetrius' relations to Origen, see chap. 8, note 4.

119: On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2.

120: Origen's stndy of the Hebrew, which, according to Jerome ( de vir. ill.
chap. 54), was "contrary to the custom of his day and race," is not at all
surprising. He felt that he needed some knowledge o it as a basis for his study
of the Scriptures to which he had devotee himself, and also as a means of
comparing the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old Testament, a labor which he
regarded as very important for polemical purposes. As to his familiarity with
the Hebrew it is now universally conceded that it was by no means so great as
was formerly supposed. He seems to have learned only about enough to enable him
to identify the Hebrew which corresponded with the Greek texts which he used,
and even in this he often makes mistakes. He sometimes confesses openly his lack
of critical and independent knowledge of the Hebrew (e.g. Hom. in Num. XIV. 1;
XVI. 4). He often makes blunders which seem absurd, and yet in many cases he
shows considerable knowledge in regard to peculiar forms and idioms. His Hebrew
learning was clearly fragmentary and acquired from various sources. Cf.
Redepenning, I. p. 365 sq.

121: On the LXX, see Bk. V. chap. 8, note 31.

122: Aquila is first mentioned by Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. III. 21. 1, quoted by
Eusebius, Bk. V. chap. 8, above), who calls him a Jewish proselyte of Pontus;
Epiphanius says of Sinope in Pontus. Tradition is uniform that he was a Jewish
proselyte, and that he lived in the time of Hadrian, or in the early part of the
second century according to Rabbinic tradition. lie produced a Greek translation
of the Old Testament, which was very slavish in its adherence to the original,
sacrificing the Greek idiom to the Hebrew without mercy, and even violating the
grammatical structure of the former for the sake of reproducing the exact form
of the latter. Because of its faithfulness to the original, it was highly prized
by the Rabbinic authorities, and became more popular among the Jews in general
than the LXX. (On the causes of the waning popularity of the latter, see note 8,
below.) Neither Aquila's version, nor the two following, are now extant; but
numerous fragments have been preserved by those Fathers who saw and used
Origen's Hexapla.

123: Symmachus is said by Eusebius, in the next chapter, to have been an
Ebionite; and Jerome agrees with him ( Comment. in Hab., lib. II. c. 3), though
the testimony of the latter is weakened by the fact that he wrongly makes
Theodotion also an Ebionite (see next note). It has been claimed that Symmachus
was a Jew, not a Christian; but Eusebius' direct statement is too strong to be
set aside, and is corroborated by certain indications in the version itself e.g.
in Dan ix. 26, where the word xristoj

124: It has been disputed whether Theodotion was a Jew or a Christian. Jerome (
de vir. ill. 54, and elsewhere) calls him an Ebionite; in his Ep. ad Augustin.
c. 19 (Migne's ed. Ep. 112), a Jew; while in the preface to his commentary on
Daniel he says that some called him an Ebionite, qui altero genere Judaeus est.
Irenaeus ( Adv. Haer. III. 21. 1) and Epiphanius ( de mens. et pond. 17) say
that he was a Jewish proselyte, which is probably true. The reports in regard to
his nationality are conflicting. The time at which he lived is disputed. The
Chron. paschale assigns him to the reign of Commodus, and Epiphanius may also be
urged in support of that date, though he commits a serious blunder in making a
second Commodus, and is thus led into great confusion. But Theodotion, as well
as Aquila, is mentioned by Irenaeus, and hence must be pushed back well into the
second century. It has been discovered, too, that Hermas used his version (see
Hort's article in the Johns Hopkins University Circular, December, 1884), which
obliges us to throw it back still further, and Sch_rer has adduced some very
strong reasons for believing it older than Aquila's version (see Schürer's
Gesch. d. Juden im Zeitalter Jesu, II. p. 709). Theodotion's version, like
Aquila's, was intended to reproduce the Hebrew more exactly than the LXX did. It
is based upon the LXX, however, which it corrects by the Hebrew, and therefore
resembles the former much more closely than Theodotion's does. We have no
notices of the use of this version by the Jews. Aquila's version (supposing it
younger than Theodotion's) seems to have superseded it entirely. Theodotion's
translation of Daniel, however, was accepted by the Christians, instead of the
LXX Daniel, and replacing the latter in all the mss. of the LXX, has been
preserved entire. Aside from this we have only such fragments as have been
preserved by the Fathers that saw and used the Hexapla. It will be seen that the
order in which Eusebius mentions the three versions here is not chronological.
He simply follows the order in which they stand in Origen's Hexapla (see below,
note 8). Epiphanius is led by that order to make Theodotion's version later than
the other, which is quite a mistake, as has been seen.

125: We know very little about these anonymous Greek versions of the Old
Testament. Eusebius' words ("which had been concealed from remote times, " ton
palai lanqanousaj xronon echlqej tou swsai ton laon sou dia 'Ihsou tou xristou

126: Nicopolis near Actium, so designated to distinguish it from a number of
other cities bearing the same name, was a city of Epirus, lying on the northern
shore of the Ambracian gulf, opposite the promontory of Actium.

127: Origen's Hexapla ( ta ecapla, to ecaploun, to ecaselidon

128: Valesius remarks that there is an inconsistency here, and that it should be
said "not only a fifth and sixth, but also a seventh." All the mss. and
versions, however, support the reading of the text, and we must therefore
suppose the inconsistency (if there is one, which is doubtful) to be Eusebius'
own, not that of a scribe.

129: Greek: en toij tetraploij epikataskeuasaj 130: On Symmachus, see the
previous chapter, note 4.

131: In Bk. III. chap. 27. For a discussion of Ebionism, see the notes on that
chapter.

132: On the attitude of the Ebionites toward the Canonical Gospel of Matthew (to
which of course Eusebius here refers), see ibid. note 8. All traces of thais
work and of Symmachus' "other interpretations of Scripture" ( allwn ei= ta=
grafa= ermhneiwn ), mentioned just below, have vanished. We must not include
Symmachus) translation of the Old Testament in these other works (as has been
done by Huet and others), for there is no hint either in this passage or in that
of Palladius (see next note) of a reference to that version, which was, like
those of Aquila and Theodotion, well known in Origen's time (see the previous
chapter).

133: This Juliana is known to us only from this passage and from Palladius,
Hist. Laus. 147. Palladius reports, on the authority of an entry written by
Origen himself, which he says he found in an ancient book ( en palaiotatw bibgiw
stixhrw ), that Juliana was a virgin of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and that she
gave refuge to Origen in the time of some persecution. If this account is to be
relied upon, Origen's sojourn in the lady's house is doubtless to be assigned,
with Huet, to the persecution of Maximinus (235-238; see below, chap. 28, note
2). It must be confessed, however, that in the face of the absolute silence of
Eusebius and others, the story has a suspicious look.

134: Of the early life of Ambrose the friend of Origen, we know nothing. We
learn from Origen's Exhortatio ad Martyr. c. 14, and Jerome's de vir. ill. c.
56, that he was of a wealthy and noble family (cf. chap. 23 of this book), and
from the Exhort. ad Mart. c. 36, that he probably held some high
official/position. Eusebius says here that he was for some time a Valentinian,
Jerome that he was a Marcionite, others give still different reports. However
that was, the authorities all agree that he was converted to the orthodox faith
by Origen, and that he remained devoted to him for the rest of his life. From
chap. 23 we learn that he urged Origen to undertake the composition of
commentaries on the Scriptures, and that he furnished ample pecuniary means for
the prosecution of the work. He was also himself a diligent student, as we
gather from that chapter (cf. also Jerome, de vir. ill. c. 56). From chap. 28 we
learn that he was a confessor in the persecution of Maximinus (Jerome calls him
also a deacon), and it seems to have been in Caesarea or its neighborhood that
he suffered, whither he had gone undoubtedly on account of his affection for
Origen, who was at that time there (cr. the Exhort. c. 41). He is mentioned for
the last time in the dedication and conclusion of Origen's Contra Celsum, which
was written between 246 and 250 (see chap. 36, below). Jerome ( l.c. ) states
that he died before Origen, so that he cannot have lived long after this. He
left no writings, except some epistles which are no longer extant. Jerome,
however, in his Ep. ad Marcellam, §1 (Migne's ed., Ep. 43), attributes to
Ambrose an epistle, a fragment of which is extant under the name of Origen (to
whom it doubtless belongs) and which is printed in Lommatzsch's edition of
Origen's works, Vol. XVII. p. 5. Origen speaks of him frequently as a man of
education and of literary tastes and devoted to the study of the Scriptures, and
Jerome says of him non inelegantis ingenti fuit, sicut ejus ad Origenen
epistolae indicio aunt (l.c.). The affection which Origen felt for him is
evinced by many notices in his works and by the fact that he dedicated to him
the Exhortatio ad Martyr., on the occasion of his suffering under Maximinus. It
was also at Ambrose's solicitation that he wrote his great work against Celsus,
which he likewise tedicated to him.

135: On Valentinus, see above, Bk. IV. chap. 11, note 1.

136: Greek, airesei= .

137: egkuklia grammata ; "the circle of those arts and sciences which every
free-born youth in Greece was obliged to go through before applying to any
professional studies" (Liddell and Scott, defining egk. paideia ).

138: On Origen's education, see p. 392, below.

139: Porphyry, one of. the most distinguished of the Neo-Platonists, disciple,
biographer, and expounder of Plotinus, was born in 232 or 233 in the Orient
(perhaps at Tyre), and at the age of thirty went to Rome, where he came into
connection with Plotinus, and spent a large part of his life. He was a man of
wide and varied learning; and though not an original thinker, he was a clear and
vigorous writer and expounder of the philosophy of Plotinus. It may be well, at
this point, to say a word about that remarkable school or system of philosophy,
of which Plotinus was the greatest master and Porphyry the chief expounder.
Neo-Platonism was the most prominent phenomenon of the age in the philosophic
world. The object of the Neo-Platonists was both speculative and practical: on
the one side to elaborate an eclectic system of philosophy which should
reconcile Platonism and Aristotelianism, and at the same time do justice to
elements of truth in other schools of thought; on the other side, to revivify
and strengthen the old paganism by idealizing and purifying it for the sake of
the philosophers, and at the same time by giving it a firmer philosophic basis
than it had hitherto possessed. Neo-Platonism, taken as a whole, has therefore
both a philosophic and a religious motive. It may be defined in the briefest
terms, in its philosophic aspect, as an eclectic revival of Greek metaphysics
(especially Platonic-Aristotelian), modified by the influence of Oriental
philosophy and of Christianity; in its religious aspect, as an attempt to
restore and regenerate paganism by means of philosophy. In its earlier and
better days, the philosophic element greatly predominated,-in fact) the
religious element may be said to have been, in large part, a later growth; but
gradually the latter came more and more into the foreground, until, under
Jamblichus (d. 330 a.d.), the chief master of the Syrian school, Neo-Platonism
degenerated into a system of religious mysteries, in which theurgic practices
played a prominent part. Under Proclus (d. 485), the great master of the
Athenian school, the philosophic element was again emphasized; but
Aristotelianism now gained the predominance, and the system became a sort of
scholastic art, and gradually degenerated into pure formalism, until it finally
lost all influence. The extent of the influence which Christianity exerted upon
Neo-Platon-ism is a greatly disputed point. We shall, perhaps, come nearest the
truth if we say that its Influence was in the main not direct, but that it was
nevertheless real, inasmuch as it had introduced problems up to that time
undiscussed, with which Neo-Platonism busied itself; in fact, it may almost be
said that Neo-Platonism was at first little more than (Aristotelian-) Platonism
busying itself with the new problems of salvation and redemption which
Christianity had thrown into the world of thought. It was un-Christian at first
(it became under Porphyry and later Neo-Platonists anti-Christian), because it
solved these problems in a way different from the Christian way. This will
explain the fact that all through, whether in the more strictly philosophic
system of Plotinus, or in the more markedly religious and theurgic system of
Jamblichus, there ran a vein of mysticism, the conception of an intimate union
with the supreme God as the highest state to which man can attain.

140: Of the life of Ammonius Saccas, the "father of Neo-Platonism" very little
is known. He is said by Suidas ( s. v. Origenes ) and by Ammianus Marcellinus to
have been a porter in his youth and to have gained his second name from his
occupation. That he was of Christian parents and afterward embraced paganism is
stated in this passage by Porphyry, though Eusebius (§10, below) and Jerome
assert that he remained a Christian. From all that we know of the teachings of
Ammonius Saccas as reported to us by Plotinus and other Neo-Platonists, we
cannot imagine him to have remained a Christian. The only solution of the
difficulty then is to suppose Eusebius (whom Jerome follows) to have confounded
him with a Christian of the same name who wrote the works which Eusebius
mentions (see note 16). Ammonius was an Alexandrian by birth and residence, and
died in 243. His teaching was of a lofty and noble character, to judge from
Plotinus' descriptions, and as a teacher he was wonderfully fascinating. He
numbered among his pupils Herennius, Longinus, the pagan Origen, and Plotinus.
The Christian Origen also studied under him for a time, according to this
passage. He wrote nothing (according to the Vita Plot, c. 20), and hence we have
to rely solely upon the reports of his disciples and successors for our
knowledge of his system. It is difficult in the absence of all direct testimony
to ascertain his teaching with exactness. Plotinus claims to give only what he
learned from Ammonius, but it is evident, from his disagreement in many points
with others of Ammonius' disciples, that the system taught by him was largely
modified by his own thinking. It is clear that Ammonius, who undoubtedly took
much from his great master, Numenius, endeavored to reconcile Plato and
Aristotle, thus laying the basis for the speculative eclecticism of
Neo-Platonism, while at the same time there must have been already in his
teaching the same religious and mystical element which was present to some
extent in all his disciples, and which played so large a part in Neo-Platonism.

141: to barbaron tolmhma . Porphyry means to say that Origen was originally a
heathen, and was afterward converted to Christianity; but this is refuted by the
universal tradition of antiquity, and is clearly a mistake, as Eusebius (who
calls it a "falsehood") remarks below. Porphyry's supposition, in the absence of
definite knowledge, is not at all surprising, for Origen's attainments in
secular learning were such as apparently only a pagan youth could or would have
acquired.

142: On Origen's Greek culture, see p. 392, and also his own words quoted below
in §12 sq.

143: Numenius was a philosopher of Syria, who lived about the middle of the
second century, and who exerted great influence over Plotinus and others of the
Neo-Platonists. He was, perhaps, the earliest of the Orientalizing Greek
philosophers whose thinking was affected by the influence of Christian ideas,
and as such occupies an important place in the development of philosophy, which
prepared the way for Neo-Platonism. His object seems to have been to reconcile
Pythagoras and Plato by tracing the doctrines of the latter back to the former,
and also to exhibit their agreement with Jewish and other Oriental forms of
thought. It is significant that he was called by the Church Fathers a
Pythagorean, and that he himself called Plato a Greek-speaking Moses (cf.
Erdmann's Hist. of Phil. I. p. 236). He was a prolific writer, but only
fragments of his works are extant. Numerous extracts from the chief of them (
peri tagaqou

144: Of Cronius, a celebrated Pythagorean philosopher, apparently a contemporary
of Numenius, and closely related to him in his thinking, we know very little. A
brief account of him is given by Porphyry in his Vita Plot. 20.

145: The Apollophanes referred to here was a Stoic philosopher of Antioch who
lived in the third century b.c., and was a disciple of Ariston of Chios. None of
his writings are extant.

146: Longinus was a celebrated philosopher and rhetorician of Athens, who was
born about 213 and died in 273 a.d. He traveled widely in his youth, and was for
a time a pupil of Ammonius Saccas at Alexandria; but he remained a genuine
Platonist, and seems not to have been influenced by the eclecticism of the
Neo-Platonists. He was a man of marked ability, of the broadest culture, and a
thorough master of Greek style. Of his numerous writings we possess a large part
of one beautiful work entitled peri uyouj

147: Moderatus was a distinguished Pythagorean philosopher of the first century
after Christ, whose works (no longer extant) were not without influence over
some of the Neo-Platonists.

148: Nicomachus was a Pythagorean of the first (or second?) century after
Christ, who gained great fame as a mathematician and exerted considerable
influence upon European studies in the fifteenth century. Two of his works, one
on arithmetic and the other on music, are extant, and have been published.

149: Chaeremon was a Stoic philosopher and historian of Alexandria who lived
during the first century after Christ. He was for a time librarian at the
Serapeum in, Alexandria, and afterward went to Rome to become a tutor of Nero.
His chief writings were a history of Egypt, a work on Hieroglyphics, and another
on Comets (mentioned by Origen in his Contra Cels. I. 59). He also wrote on
grammatical subjects. His works, with the exception of a fragment of the first,
are no longer extant. Cf. Eusebius' Praef. Evang. V. 10, and Suidas, j./.
Wrigenhj .

150: Cornutus a distinguished Stoic philosopher, lived and taught in Rome during
the reign of Nero, and numbered among his pupils and friends the poet Persius.
Most of his numerous works have perished, but one on the Nature of the Gods is
still extant in a mutilated form (see Gall's Opuscula ). See Suidas ( s.v.
Kornoutoj ) and Dion Cassius, XLII. 29.

151: Origen was not the first to interpret the Scriptures allegorically. The
method began among the Alexandrian Jews some time before the Christian era, the
effort being made to reconcile the Mosaic revelation with Greek philosophy, and
to find in the former the teachings of the latter. This effort appears in many
of the apocryphal books, but the great exponent of the method was the
Alexandrian Philo. It was natural that the early Christians, especially in
Alexandria, should be influenced by this already existing method of
interpretation, which enabled them to make of the Old Testament a Christian
book, and to find in it all the teachings of the Gospel. Undoubtedly the Old
Testament owes partly to this principle of interpretation its adoption by the
Christian Church. Had it been looked upon as the Jewish Scriptures only,
containing Jewish national history, and in large part Jewish national prophecy,
it could never have retained its hold upon the early Church, which was so
bitterly hostile to all that savored of Judaism. The early Gentile Christians
were taught from the beginning by Jewish Christians who could not do otherwise
than look upon their national Scriptures as divine, that those Scriptures
contained prophecies of Jesus Christ, and hence those Gentile Christians
accepted them as divine. But it must be remembered that they could of course
have no meaning to these Gentile Christians except as they did prophesy of
Christian things or contain Christian teaching. They could not be content to
find Christian prophecy in one part and only Jewish history or Jewish prophecy
in another part. It must all be Christian if it was to have any meaning to them.
In this emergency the allegorical method of interpretation, already practiced
upon the Old Testament by the Alexandrian Jews, came to their assistance and was
eagerly adopted. The so-called epistle of Barnabus is an early and most
significant instance of its use. With Clement of Alexandria the matter first
took scientific shape. He taught that two senses are everywhere to be assumed;
that the verbal sense is only for babes in the faith, and that the allegorical
sense alone leads to true spiritual knowledge. With Origen allegorical
interpretation reached its height. He taught a threefold sense of Scripture,
corresponding to body, soul, and spirit. Many voices were raised against his
interpretation, but they were directed against his particular explanations of
the meaning of passages, seldom against his method. In the early centuries
Alexandria remained the chief center of this kind of exegesis, while Antioch
became in the fifth century the seat of a school of exegetes who emphasized
rather the grammatical and historical interpretation of Scripture over against
the extremes of the Alexandrian teachers. And yet even they were not entirely
free from the vicious methods of the age, and, moreover, errors of various kinds
crept in to lessen their influence, and the allegorical method finally prevailed
almost universally; and it has not even yet fully lost its hold. This method of
Scripture interpretation has, as Porphyry says, its analogy in the methods of
the Greek philosophers during the centuries immediately preceding the Christian
era. It became early the custom for philosophers, scandalized by the licentious
stories of their gods, to interpret the current myths allegorically and refer
them to the processes of nature. Homer and others of the ancient poets were thus
made by these later philosophers to teach philosophies of nature of which they
had never dreamed. With the Neo-Platonists this method reached its highest
perfection, and while the Christian teachers were allegorizing the Old Testament
Scriptures, these philosophers were transforming the popular myths into records
of the profoundest physical and spiritual processes. Porphyry saw that the
method of pagans and Christians was the same in this respect, and he may be
correct in assigning some influence to these writings in the shaping of Origen's
thinking, but the latter was an allegorist before he studied the philosophers to
whom Porphyry refers (cf. chap. 2, §9, above), and would have been an allegorist
had he never studied them. Allegory was in that age in the atmosphere of the
Church as well as of the philosophical school.

152: On this great work of Porphyry, see note 1.

153: See note 3.

154: This is certainly a mistake on Eusebius' part (see above, note 2), in which
he is followed by Jerome ( de vir. ill. c. 55). Against the identification of
the Christian Ammonius, whose works are mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome, with
Ammonius Saccas, may be urged first the fact that the teaching of Ammonius
Saccas, as known to us from Porphyry's Vita Plotini and from other Neo-Platonic
sources, is not such as could have emanated from a Christian; and, in the second
place, the fact that the Christian Ammonius, according to Eusebius, was the
author of more than one important work, while Longinus (as quoted by Porphyry in
the Vita Plot. c. 20) says explicitly that Ammonius Saccas wrote nothing. It is
clear from Eusebius' words that his sole reason for supposing that Ammonius
Saccas remained a Christian is the existence of the writings to which he refers;
and it is quite natural that he and others should erroneously attribute the
works of an unknown Christian of Alexandria, named Ammonius, to the celebrated
Alexandrian philosopher of the same name, especially since it was known that the
latter had been a Christian in his youth, and that he had been Origen's teacher
in his mature years. We know nothing about the life of the Christian Ammonius,
unless he be identified with the presbyter Ammonius of Alexandria, who is said
by Eusebius to have perished in the persecution of Diocletian. The
identification is possible; but even if it be accepted, we are helped very
little, for is only the death, not the life, of the presbyter Ammonius with
which Eusebius acquaints us. Ammonius' writings, whoever he may have been, were
well known in the Church. Eusebius mentions here his work On the Harmony of
Moses and Jesus ( peri thj Mwusewj kai =Ihsou sumfwniaj to dia tessarw/
euaggelion

155: The names of the persons to whom this epistle was addressed we do not know,
nor can we ascertain the exact time when it was composed, though it must have
been written before Heraclas became bishop of Alexandria, and indeed, we may
assume, while Origen was in Alexandria, and still engaged in the study which he
defends in the epistle, i.e., if Eusebius is correct in the order of events,
before 216 a.d. (see note 23).

156: On Pantaenus, see Bk. V. chap. 10, note 1.

157: On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2.

158: ekeinwn twn logwn .

159: See above, Bk. IV. chap. 11, note 21.

160: The words used to designate the official who sent for Origen ( o ths
=Arabiaj hgoumenoj ) lead us to think him a Roman, and governor of the Roman
province of Arabia, which was formed by the Emperor Trajan in the year 106, and
which comprised only the northern part of the peninsula. We know no particulars
of this visit of Origen to that province, but that he was remembered and held in
honor by the people is proved by chaps. 33 and 37, which record that he was
summoned thither twice to assist in settling doctrinal difficulties.

161: In the sixth year of his reign (216 a.d.) Caracalla visited Alexandria, and
improved the occasion to take bloody vengeance upon the inhabitants of the city,
from whom had emanated a number of satirical and cutting comments upon the
murder of his brother Geta. He instituted a horrible butchery, in which young
and old, guilty and innocent, perished, and in which scholars were objects of
especial fury. (See Herodian, IV. 8, 9, and Dion Cassius, LXXVII. 22-24, and cf.
Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. III. p. 115 sq.) This was undoubtedly the occasion,
referred to here, which caused Origen to flee from the city and retire to
Palestine.

162: oi thde episkopoi . The thde must refer to Palestine, not to Caesarea, for
"bishops" are spoken of, not "bishop."

163: In the apostolic age, and the generations immediately succeeding, it was
the privilege of every Christian to take part in the public meetings of the
Church in the way of teaching or prophesying, the only condition being the
consciousness of guidance by the Spirit (see 1 Cor. xiii.). We cannot call this
teaching and prophesying preaching in our sense of the term. The services seem
rather to have resembled our "open prayer-meetings." Gradually, as the services
became more formal and stereotyped, a stated address by the "president" (as
Justin calls him) became a regular part of the service (see Justin's Apol. I.
67), and we may assume that the liberty of teaching or prophesying in the public
meetings did not now belong to all the members as it had in the beginning. The
sermon, in our sense of the word, seems to have been a slow growth, but a direct
development from this exhortation of the president mentioned by Justin. The
confinement of the speaking (or preaching) to a single individual,-the
leader,-which we see in Justin, is what we find in subsequent generations quite
generally established. It becomes, in time, the prerogative of the bishop to
preach, and this prerogative he confers upon his presbyters also (not
universally, but in most cases), while deacons and laymen are almost everywhere
excluded from the right. We see from the present chapter, however, that the
custom was not the same in all parts of the Church in the time of Origen. The
principle had evidently before this become firmly established in Alexandria that
only bishops and presbyters should preach. But in Palestine no such rule was
recognized as binding. At the same time, it is clear enough that it was
exceptional even there for laymen to preach (in the presence of their bishops),
for Alexander in his epistle, instead of saying that laymen preach everywhere
and of right, cites particular instances of their preaching, and says that where
they are qualified they are especially requested by the bishops to use their
gifts; so that the theory that the prerogative belonged of right to the bishop
existed there just as truly as in Alexandria. Origen of course knew that he was
acting contrary to the custom (if not the canon) of his own church in thus
preaching publicly, and yet undoubtedly he took it for granted that he was
perfectly right in doing what these bishops requested him to do in their own
dioceses. They were supreme in their own churches, and he knew of nothing,
apparently, which should hinder him from doing what they approved of, while in
those churches. Demetrius, however, thought otherwise, and considered the public
preaching of an unordained man irregular, in any place and at any time. Whether
jealousy of Origen's growing power had anything to do with his action it is
difficult to say with certainty. He seems to have treated Origen in a perfectly
friendly way after his return; and yet it is possible that the difference of
opinion on this point, and the reproof given by Demetrius, may not have been
wholly without influence upon their subsequent relations, which became in the
end so painful (see chap. 8, note 4).

164: On Alexander, see chap. 8, note 6.

165: Theoctistus, bishop of Caesarea, seems to have been one of the most
influential bishops of the East in his day, and played a prominent part in the
controversy which arose in regard to Novatus, as we learn from chap. 46 of this
book and from chap. 5 of the next. He was also a firm friend of Origen's for
many years (see chap. 27), probably until the latter's death. We do not know the
dates of his accession and of his death, but we find him already bishop in the
year 216, and still bishop at the time of the episcopate of Stephen of Rome
(254-257; see Bk. VII. chap. 5), but already succeeded by Domnus, when Xystus
was bishop of Rome ((257-258; see Bk. VII. chap. 14). We must, therefore, put
his death between 255 and 258.

166: Eusebius is apparently mistaken in stating that this epistle was addressed
to Demetrius, for the latter is spoken of throughout the epistle in the third
person. It seems probable that Eusebius has made a slip and said "to Demetrius"
when he meant to say "concerning Demetrius."

167: Of the persons mentioned here by the Palestinian bishops in support of
their conduct, Neon, bishop of Laranda in Lycaonia, Celsus, bishop of Iconium,
and Atticus, bishop of Synada in Phrygia, together with the laymen Euelpis,
Paulinus, and Theodore, we know only the names.

168: ou proj monwn twn sunhqwn, alla kai twn epi cenhj episkopwn. sunhqwn seems
here to have the sense of "countrymen" or (bishops) "of his own country" over
against the epi cenhj , rather' than the meaning "friends" or "acquaintances,"
which is more common.

169: Aelia, the city built by Hadrian upon the site of Jerusalem (see Bk. IV.
chap. 6). We do not know the subsequent history of this library of Alexander,
but it had already been in existence nearly a hundred years when Eusebius
examined it.

170: On Beryllus, bishop of Bostra in Arabia, see chap. 33.

171: On Hippolytus, see chap. 22.

172: On Caius and his discussion with Proclus, see Bk. II. chap. 25, notes 7 and
8.

173: Zephyrinus was bishop of Rome from 198 or 199 to 217. See Bk. V. chap. 28,
note 5.

174: On the Epistle to the Hebrews and the opinions of the early Church in
regard to its authorship, see Bk. III. chap. 3, note 17.

175: i.e. Caracalla, who was slain on the 8th of April, 217. Four days later,
Marcus Opilius Macrinus, prefect of the praetorians, was proclaimed emperor.
After a reign of fourteen months, he was defeated and succeeded by Varius Avitus
Bassianus, a cousin of Caracalla, and priest of the Phoenician Sun-god, from
which fact is derived the name by which he is commonly known,-Elagabalus, or
Heliogabalus. Upon his accession to the imperial power, he took the name Marcus
Aurelius Antoninus, which became his official designation.

176: On Zephyrinus, see Bk. V. chap. 28, note 5.

177: As shown in the next note, a comparison of our best sources leads us to the
year 222 as the date of the accession of Urban, and consequently of the death of
Callistus. A careful comparison of the various sources, which differ in regard
to the years of the several episcopates of Victor, Zephyrinus, and Callistus,
but agree as to the sum of the three, leads to the result that Callistus was
bishop for five years, and therefore his accession is to be put into the year
217, and the reign of Macrinus (see Lipsius, Chron. d. röm. Bischöfe, p. 171
sq.). This agrees, so far as the years of our era are concerned, with the
statement of Eusebius in this chapter; but he wrongly puts Callistus' accession
into the first year of Alexander, which is a result of an error of a year in his
reckoning of the dates of the emperors, which runs back to Pertinax (see
Lipsius, p. 7 sq.). He does not assign Callistus' accession to the first year of
Heliogabalus because of a tradition connecting the two, but simply because his
reckoning of the lengths of the various episcopates, which were given in the
source used by him, led him to the year 217 for Callistus' accession, and this,
according to his erroneous table of the reigns of the emperors, was the first
year of Heliogabalus. We thus see that Eusebius is in real, though not in
apparent, agreement with the Liberian catalogue in regard to the date of
Callistus' accession, which may, therefore, be accepted as certain.

178: Lipsius, in his Chron. d. röm. Bischöfe, p. 170 sq., shows that the only
fixed point for a calculation of the dates of Urban and the three bishops
preceding him, is the banishment by the Emperor Maximinus of Pontianus to
Sardinia, which took place, according to the Liberian catalogue, while Severus
and Quintinus were consuls; that is, in the year 235. The duration of Pontianus'
episcopate is shown by a comparison of the best sources to have been a little
over five years (see chap. 23, note 3). This brings us to the year 230 as the
date of Urban's death. According to chap. 23, Urban was bishop eight years, and
with this the Liberian catalogue agrees, so that this figure is far better
supported than the figure nine given by the Chron. Accepting eight years as the
duration of Urban's episcopate, we are brought back to 222 as the date of his
accession, which agrees with Eusebius' statement in this chapter (see the
previous note). There are extant Acta S. Urbani, which are accepted as genuine
by the Bollandists, and assigned to the second century, but they cannot have
been written before the fifth, and are historically quite worthless. For a good
discussion of his supposed connection with St. Cecilia, which has played such an
important part in ecclesiastical legend, see the article Urbanus in the Dict. of
Christ. Biog. We have no certain knowledge of his life and character.

179: Elagabalus was slain in March, 222, after a reign of three years and nine
months, and was succeeded by his cousin, Alexianus Bassianus, who assumed the
names Marcus Aurelius Alexander Severus, by the last two of which he is commonly
known.

180: Philetus, according to the Chron. (Armenian), became bishop in the sixth
year of Caracalla (216), and was succeeded by Zebinus in the sixth year of
Alexander Severus (227). Jerome puts his accession into the reign of Macrinus
(217-218), and the accession of Zebinus into the seventh year of Alexander
(228). The accession of Zebinus must have taken place at least as early as 231
(see chap. 23, note 4), and there remains therefore no reason to doubt the
approximate accuracy of the latter dates. If the dates given for Philetus'
accession (216-218) be approximately correct, we must understand the words "at
this time" of the present chapter, to refer back to the reign of Macrinus, or
the accession of Alexander Severus, mentioned at the beginning of this chapter.
This does not seem natural, but we cannot say it is impossible. Knowing the
unreliability of the dates given in the Chron. , we are compelled to leave the
matter undecided. He is called by the Armen. Philip, by Syncellus filhtoj h
filippoj 181: On Asclepiades, see chap. 11, note 6.

182: Julia Mamaea or Mammaea (Eusebius, Mammaia qeosebestath and eulabhj

183: Hippolytus (mentioned above in chap. 20) was one of the most learned men
and celebrated writers of his age, and yet his personal history is involved in
the deepest obscurity. The earliest mention of him is by Eusebius in this
passage and in chap. 20, above. But Eusebius tells us there only that he was a
bishop of "some other church" ( eteraj pou ekklhsiaj

184: This chronological work on the passover, which contained a cycle for the
purpose of determining the date of the festival, is mentioned also by Jerome,
and is given in the list on the statue, on which the cycle itself is also
engraved. Jerome says that this work was the occasion of Eusebius' work upon the
same subject in which a nineteen-year cycle was substituted for that of
Hippolytus. The latter was a sixteen-year cycle and was formed by putting
together two of the eight-year cycles of the Greek astronomers,-according to
whose calculation the full moon fell on the same day of the month once in eight
years,-in order to exhibit also the day of the week on which it fell; for he
noticed that after sixteen years the full moon moved one day backward (if on
Saturday at the beginning of the cycle, it fell on Friday after the sixteen
years were past). He therefore put together seven sixteen-year cycles, assuming
that after they had passed the full moon would return again to the same day of
the week, as well as month. This cycle is astronomically incorrect, the fact
being that after sixteen years the full moon falls not on the same day of the
week, but three days later. Hippolytus, however, was not aware of this, and
published his cycle in perfect good faith. The work referred to seems to have
contained an explanation of the cycle, together with a computation by means of
it of the dates of the Old and New Testament passovers. It is no longer extant,
but the cycle itself, which was the chief thing, is preserved on the statue,
evidently in the form in which it was drawn up by Hippolytus himself.

185: This treatise on the Hexaemeron, or six days' work, is mentioned also by
Jerome, but is not in the list on the statue. It is no longer extant; but
according to Jerome ( Ep. ad Pammachium et Oceanum, c. 7; Migne's ed. Ep. 84),
was used by Ambrose in the composition of his own work upon the same subject,
which is still preserved (cf. also Bk. V. chap. 27, note 3, above).

186: Greek, eij ta meta thn ecahmeron

187: This work is mentioned also by Jerome, but is not in the list on the
statue. The last work, however, mentioned in that list bears the title peri
tagaqou kai poqen to kakon 188: Eusebius has simply to asma

189: This commentary on portions of Ezekiel is mentioned by no one else. A
supposed fragment of it is given by Lagarde, Anal. Syr., p. 90.

190: Jerome agrees with Eusebius in mentioning a work On the Passover, in
addition to the chronological one already referred to. The list on the statue,
however, mentions but one work on the passover, and that the one containing the
paschal cycle. Fragments are extant of Hippolytus' work On the Passover, -one
from his echghsij eij to pasxa (see Lagarde's edition of Hippolytus p. 213), and
another from "the first book of the treatise on the holy paschal feast" ( tou
peri tou agiou pasxa suggrammatoj , Lagarde, p. 92). These fragments are of a
dogmatic character, and can hardly have occurred in the chronological work,
except in a separate section or book; but the last is taken from "the first
book" of the treatise, and hence we are safe in concluding that Eusebius and
Jerome are correct in enumerating two separate works upon the same subject,-the
one chronological, the other dogmatic, or polemical.

191: This work, Against All the Heresies, is mentioned both by Eusebius ( proj
apasaj taj aireseij biblidarion palai 192: On Ambrose and his relation to
Origen, see chap. 18, note 1.

193: On Urbanus, bishop of Rome, see chap. 21, note 4.

194: For the dates of the first group of Roman bishops, from Peter to Urbanus,
the best source we have is Eusebius' Church History; but for the second group,
from Pontianus to Liberius, the notices of the History are very unreliable,
while the Liberian catalogue rests upon very trustworthy data (see Lipsius,
Chron. d. röm. Bischöfe, p. 39 and p. 142 sq.). We must therefore turn to the
latter for the most accurate information in regard to the remaining Roman
bishops mentioned by Eusebius, although an occasional mistake in the catalogue
must be corrected by our other sources, as Lipsius points out. The notice of
Eusebius at this point would throw the accession of Pontianus into the year 231,
but this is a year too late, as seen in chap. 21, note 4. According to chap. 29,
he was bishop six years, and was succeeded by Anteros at about the same time
that Gordian became emperor; that is, in 238. But this is wide of the truth. The
Liberian catalogue, which is supported by the best of the other sources, gives a
little over five years for his episcopate, and puts his banishment to Sardinia,
with which his episcopate ended, on the 28th of September, 235. According to the
Felician catalogue, which may be trusted at this point, he was brought to Rome
and buried there during the episcopate of Fabian, which began in 236 (see also
the preceding chapter, note 1). We know nothing about the life and character of
Pontianus.

195: The notices of the Chronicle in connection with Zebinus are especially
unreliable. The Armen. puts his accession into the sixth (227), Jerome into the
seventh year of Alexander (228). Jerome makes no attempt to fix the date of his
death, while the Armen. puts it in the first year of Gallus (251-252). Syncellus
assigns him but six years. In the midst of such confusion we are obliged to rely
solely upon the History. The only reliable data we have are Origen's ordination
to the priesthood, which took place in 231 (see below, p. 392) and apparently,
according to this chapter, while Zebinus was bishop of Antioch. If Eusebius is
correct in this synchronization, Zebinus became bishop before 231, and therefore
the statements of the Chron. as to his accession may be approximately correct.
As to the time of his death, we know that his successor, Babylas, died in the
Decian persecution (see chap. 39), and hence Zebinus must have died some years
before that. In chap. 29, Eusebius puts his death in the reign of Gordian
(238-244), and this may be accepted as at least approximately correct, for we
have reason to think that Babylas was already bishop in the time of Philip (see
chap. 29, note 8). This proves the utter incorrectness of the notice of the
Armen. We know nothing about the person and life of Zebinus. Harnack concludes
from his name that he was a Syrian by birth. Most of the mss. of Eusebius give
his name as Zebinoj ; one ms. and Nicephorus, as Zebenoj ; Syncellus as Zebennoj
196: On Philetus, see chap. 21, note 6.

197: See the note on p. 395, below.

198: Eusebius refers here to the Defense of Origen, composed by himself and
Pamphilus, which is unfortunately now lost (see above, chap. 2, note 1, and the
Prolegomena, p. 36 sq.).

199: Origen's commentary upon the Gospel of John was the "first fruits of his
labors at Alexandria," as he informs us in Tom. I. §4. It must have been
commenced, therefore, soon after he formed the connection with Ambrose mentioned
in the previous chapter, and that it was one of the fruits of this connection is
proved by the way in which Ambrose is addressed in the commentary itself (Tom.
I. §3). The date at which the work was begun cannot be determined; bnt if
Eusebius follows the chronological order of events, it cannot have been before
218 (see chap. 21, note 8). Eusebius speaks as if Origen had expounded the
entire Gospel ( thj d= eij to pan euaggelion auto de touto pragmateiaj

200: Of the commentary on Genesis, only some fragments from the first and third
books are extant, together with some extracts ( eklogai

201: Origen's writings on the Psalms comprised a complete commentary (cf.
Jerome's Ep. ad Augustinum, §20; Migne's ed.; Ep. 112), brief notes ("quod
Enchiridion ille vocabat," see Migne's edition of Jerome's works, Vol. VIII.
821, and compare the entire Breviarium in Psalmos which follows, and which
doubtless contains much of Origen's work; see Smith and Wace, IV. p. 108) and
homilies. Of these there are still extant numerous fragments in Greek, and nine
complete homilies in the Latin version of Rufinus (printed by Lommatzsch in
Vols. XI.-XIII.). The catalogue of Jerome mentions forty-six books of notes on
the Psalms and 118 homilies. The commentary on the 26th and following Psalms
seem to have been written after leaving Alexandria (to judge from Eusebius'
statement here).

202: There are extant some extracts ( eklogai ) of Origen's expositions of the
book of Lamentations, which are printed by Lommatzsch, XIII. 167-218. They are
probably from the commentary which Eusebius tells us was written before Origen
left Alexandria, and five books of which were extant in his time. The catalogue
of Jerome also mentions five books.

203: Jerome (in the catalogue and in the passage quoted by Rufinus, Apol. II.
20) mentions two books and two dialogues on the Resurrection ( De Resurrectione
libros duos. Et alios de Resurrectione dialogos duos ). Whether the dialogues
formed an independent work we do not know. We hear of them from no other source.
The work was bitterly attacked by Methodius, but there are no traces of heresy
in the extant fragments.

204: Of Origen's De Principiis ( peri arxwn

205: In his catalogue, Jerome gives among the commentaries on the Old Testament
the simple title Stromatum, without any description of the work. But in his Ep.
ad Magnum, §4 (Migne's ed., Ep. 70), he says that Origen wrote ten books of
Stromata in imitation of Clement's work, and in it compared the opinions of
Christians and philosophers, and confirmed the dogmas of Christianity by appeals
to Plato and other Greek philosophers ( Hunc imitatus Origines, decem scripsit
Stromateas, Christianorum et philasophorum inter se sententias comparans: et
omnia nostrae religionis dogmata de Platone et Aristotele, Numenio, Cornutoque
confirmans ). Only three brief fragments of a Latin translation of the work are
now extant (printed in Lommatzsch's ed., XVII. 69-78). These fragments are
sufficient to show us that the work was exegetical as well as doctrinal, and
discussed topics of various kinds in the light of Scripture as well as in the
light of philosophy.

206: On Origen's commentary on Psalms, see the previous chapter, note 3. The
first fragment given here by Eusebius is found also in the Philocalia, chap. 3,
where it forms part of a somewhat longer extract. The second fragment is extant
only in this chapter of Eusebius' History.

207: On the Hebrew canon of the Old Testament, see Bk. III. chap. 10, note 1.
Upon Origen's omission of the twelve minor prophets and the insertion of the
apocryphal epistle of Jeremiah, see the same note.

208: I have reproduced Origen's Greek transliteration of this and the following
Hebrew words letter by letter. It will be seen by a comparison of the words with
the Hebrew titles of the books, as we now have them, that Origen's pronunciation
of Hebrew, even after making all due allowance for a difference in the
pronunciation of the Greek and for changes in the Hebrew text, must have been,
in many respects, quite different from ours.

209: Ouelesmwq . I represent the diphthong ou at the beginning of a word by "w."

210: The first and second books of Esdras here referred to are not the
apocryphal books known by that name, but Ezra and Nehemiah, which in the Hebrew
canon formed but one book, as Origen says here, but which in the LXX were
separated (see above, Bk. III. chap. 10, note 4). Esdras is simply the form
which the word Ezra assumes in Greek.

211: Whether this sentence closed Origen's discussion of the Hebrew canon, or
whether he went on to mention the other apocryphal books, we cannot tell. The
latter seems intrinsically much more probable, for it is difficult to understand
the insertion of the Maccabees in this connection, and the omission of all the
others; for the Maccabees, as is clear from the words ecw de toutwn esti ta
Makkabaika

212: On Origen's Commentary on Matthew, see chap. 36, note 4. The fragment given
here by Eusebius is all that is extant of the first book of the commentary.

213: Compare Origen's Hom. I. in Lucam: Ecclesia quatuor habet evangelia,
haeresea plurima; and multi conati sunt scribere, sed et multi conati sunt
ordinare: quatuor tantum evangelia sunt probata, &c. Compare also Irenaeeus,
Adv. Haer. III. 11, 8, where the attempt is made to show that it is impossible
for the Gospels to be either more or fewer in number than four; and the
Muratorian Fragment where the four Gospels are named, but the number four is not
represented as in itself the necessary number; also Tertullian's Adv. Marc. IV.
2, and elsewhere.

214: See Bk. III. chap. 24, note 5.

215: See Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4.

216: 1 Pet. v. 13.

217: See Bk. III. chap. 4, notes 12 and 15. Origen refers here to 2 Cor. viii.
18, where, however, it is clear that the reference is not to any specific Gospel
any more than in the passages referred to above, III. 4, note 15.

218: See Bk. III. chap. 24.

219: This fragment from the fifth book of Origen's commentary on John is extant
only in this chapter. The context is not preserved.

220: 2 Cor. iii. 6.

221: Rom. xv. 19.

222: See Bk. III. chap. 24, note 2.

223: Matt. xvi. 18.

224: On the first and second Epistles of Peter, see Bk. III. chap. 3, notes 1
and 4.

225: See John xiii. 23.

226: On John's Gospel, see Bk. III. chap. 24, note 1; on the Apocalypse, note
20; and on the epistles, notes 18 and 19 of the same chapter.

227: See John xxi, 25.

228: See Rev. x. 4.

229: Upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, and Origen's treatment of it, see Bk. III.
chap. 3, note 17. The two extracts given here by Eusebius are the only fragments
of Origen's Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews now extant. Four brief Latin
fragments of his commentary upon that epistle are preserved in the first book of
Pamphilus' Defense of Origen, and are printed by Lommatzsch in Vol. V. p. 297
sq. The commentaries (or "books," as they are called) are mentioned only in that
Defense. The catalogue of Jerome speaks only of "eighteen homilies." We know
nothing about the extent or the date of composition of these homilies and
commentaries.

230: 2 Cor. xi. 6.

231: prosexwn, th anagnwsei th apostolikh. anagnwsij meant originally the act of
reading, then also that which is read. It thus came to be used (like anagnwsma

232: The tenth year of Alexander Severus, 231 a.d. On Origen's departure from
Alexandria at this time, see below, p. 396. On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2.

233: On the episcopacy of Demetrius, see Bk. V. chap. 22, note 4. Forty-three
years, beginning with 189 a.d., bring us down to 232 as the date of his death,
and this agrees excellently with the statements of this chapter.

234: Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea, the capital of Cappadocia (to be
distinguished from Caesarea in Palestine), was one of the most famous prelates
of his day in the Eastern Church. He was a friend of Origen, as we learn from
the next chapter, and took part in a council called on account of the schism of
Novarian (see chap. 46), and also in councils called to consider the case of
Paul of Samosata (see Bk. VII. chaps. 28 and 30). He was one of the bishops whom
Stephen excommunicated because they rebaptized heretics (see Bk. VII. chap. 2,
note 3, and chap. 5, note 4), and he wrote an epistle upon this subject to
Cyprian, which is extant in a Latin translation made by Cyprian himself ( Ep.
74, al. 75, in the collection of Cyprian's epistles. See Dict. of Christ. Biog.
I. 751, note). Basil ( de Spiritu Sancto, 29) refers to works ( logoi 235: On
Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, see chap. 8, note 6.

236: On Theoctistus, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, see chap. 19, note 27.

237: A number of mss., followed by Heinichen and some others, insert at this
point wj epoj eipein ("so to speak").

238: The presbyter derived his authority to preach and teach only from the
bishop, and hence these bishops extended to Origen, whom they had ordained a
presbyter, full liberty to preach and teach within their dioceses.

239: ta loira tou ekklhsiastikou logou .

240: Alexander Severus was murdered early in the year 235, and was succeeded at
once by his commanding general the Thracian Maximinus, or Caius Julius Verus
Maximinus, as he called himself.

241: The reference here is not to the immediate family of Alexander, but to the
court as a whole, his family in the widest sense including court officials,
servants, &c. The favor which Alexander had shown to the Christians (see chap.
21, note 8) is clearly seen in the fact that there were so many Christians at
court, as Eusebius informs us here. This persecution was at first directed,
Eusebius tells us, solely against the heads of the churches ( touj twn ekklhsiwn
arxontaj 242: This work on martyrdom ( eij marturion protreptikoj logoj

243: On Ambrose, see chap. 18, note 1. Protoctetus, a presbyter of the church of
Caesarea (apparently Palestinian Caesarea), is known to us only from this
passage.

244: On Origen's Commentary on John's Gospel, see chap. 24, note 1. No fragments
of the twenty-second book are extant, nor any of the epistles in which reference
is made to this persecution.

245: Gordianus the younger, grandson of Gordianus I., and nephew (or son?) of
Gordianus II., became emperor after the murder of Balbinus and Pupienus, in
July, 238, at the age of fifteen years, and reigned until early in the year 244,
when he was murdered by the soldiers and succeeded by Philip. He is made by
Eusebius (both here and in the Chron. ) the direct successor of Maximinus,
simply because only two or three months elapsed between the death of the latter
and his own accession.

246: On Pontianus, see chap. 23, note 3.

247: Both here and in the Chron. the accession of Anteros is synchronized with
the accession of Gordianus, but as seen in chap. 23, note 3, Pontianus was
succeeded by Anteros in the first year of Maximinus, i.e. in 235,-three years
earlier, therefore, than the date given by Eusebius. All the authorities agree
in assigning only one month and a few days to the episcopate of Anteros, and
this is to be accepted as correct. Of the life and character of Anteros we know
nothing.

248: Greek Fabianoj , though some mss. read Fla/ianoj

249: fasi . Eusebius is our only authority for the following story. Rufinus (VI.
21) tells a similar tale in connection with Zephyrinus.

250: ton qronon thj episkophj .

251: On Zebinus, see chap. 23, note 4.

252: Babylas occupies an illustrious place in the list of ancient martyrs (cf.
Tillemont, Mem. III. 400-409). Chrysostom devoted a festal oration to his memory
( In sanctum Babylam contra Julianum et contra Gentiles ); while Jerome,
Epiphanius, Sozomen, Theodoret, and others make honorable mention of him. There
are extant the Acta Babylae (spurious), which, however, confound him with a
martyr who suffered under Numerian. The legends in regard to Babylas and to the
miracles performed by his bones are very numerous (see Tillemont, l.c. ). He is
identified by Chrysostom and others with the bishop mentioned by Eusebius in
chap. 34, and there is no good reason to doubt the identification (see Harnack,
Zeit des Ignatius, p. 48). The fact of his martyrdom under Decius (see chap. 39)
is too well attested to admit of doubt; though upon the manner of it, not all
the traditions are agreed, Eusebius reporting that he died in prison, Chrysostom
that he died by violence. The account of Eusebius seems the most reliable. The
date of his accession is unknown, but there is no reason to doubt that it took
place during the reign of Gordian (238-244), as Eusebius here seems to imply;
though it is true that he connects it closely with the death of Demetrius, which
certainly took place not later than 232 (see above, Bk. V. chap. 22, note 4).
There is no warrant for carrying the accession of Babylas back so far as that.

253: On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2.

254: On the episcopate of Demetrius, see Bk. V. chap. 22, note 4.

255: On Dionysius, see chap. 40, note 1.

256: Our sources for a knowledge of the life of Gregory, who is known as Gregory
Thaumaturgus ("wonder-worker"), are numerous, but not all of them reliable. He
is mentioned by Eusebius here and in Bk. VII. chaps. 14 and 28, and a brief
account of his life and writings is given by Jerome (de vir. ill. chap. 65), who
adds some particulars not mentioned by Eusebius. There is also extant Gregory's
Panegyrical Oration in praise of Origen, which contains an outline of the
earlier years of his life. Gregory of Nyssa about a century later wrote a life
of Gregory Thaumaturgus, which is still extant, but which is full of marvelous
stories, and contains little that is trustworthy. Gregory's fame was very great
amonghis contemporaries and succeeding generations, and many of the Fathers have
left brief accounts of him, or references to him which it is not necessary to
mention here. He was a native of Neo-Caesarea in Pontus (according to Gregory
Nyssa), the same city of which he was afterward bishop, was of wealthy
parentage, and began the study of law when quite young (see his own Orat. Paneg.
chap. 5). Coming to Caesarea, in Palestine, on his way to Berytus, where he and
his brother Athenodorus were to attend a school of law, he met Origen, and was
so attracted by him that he and his brother remained in Caesarea five years
(according to Eusebius and Jerome) and studied logic, physics, mathematics,
ethics, Greek philosophy, and theology with him (see his Orat ). At the end of
this time the brothers returned to Pontus, and afterwards were made bishops,
Gregory of Neo-Caesarea, his native place; Athenodorus of some unknown city
(Eusebius here and in VIL 14 and 28 says only that they were both bishops of
churches in Pontus). Of the remarkable events connected with the ordination of
Gregory, which are told by Gregory of Nyssa, it is not necessary to speak here.
He was a prominent scholar and writer, and a man universally beloved and
respected for his deep piety and his commanding ability, but his fame rested
chiefly upon the reports of his miracle-working, which were widespread. The
prodigies told of him are numerous and marvelous. Eusebius is silent about this
side of his career (whether because of ignorance or incredulity we cannot tell,
but the latter seems most probable), but Jerome refers to his fame as a
miracle-worker, Gregory of Nyssa's Vita, is full of it, and Basil and other
later writers dwell upon it. What the foundation for all these traditions was we
do not know. He was a famous missionary, and seems to have been remarkably
successful in converting the pagans of his diocese, which was almost wholly
heathen when he became bishop. This great missionary success may have given rise
to the tales of supernatural power, some cause above the ordinary being assumed
by the common people as necessary to account for such results. Miracles and
other supernatural phenomena were quite commonly assumed in those days as causes
of conversions-especially if the conversions themselves were in any way
remarkable (cf. e.g. the close of the anonymous Dialogue with Herbanus, a Jew ).
Not only the miracles, but also many other events reported in Gregory of Nyssa's
Vita, must be regarded as unfounded; e.g. the account of a long period of study
in Alexandria of which our more reliable sources contain no trace. The
veneration in which Gregory held Origen is clear enough from his panegyric, and
the great regard which Origen cherished for Gregory is revealed in his epistle
to the latter, written soon after Gregory's arrival in Neo-Caesarea, and still
preserved in the Philocalia, chap. 13. The works of Gregory known to us are his
Panegyrical Oration in praise of Origen, delivered in the presence of the latter
and of a great multitude before Gregory's departure from Caesarea, and still
extant; a paraphrase of the book of Ecclesiastes, mentioned by Jerome ( l.c. ),
and likewise extant; several epistles referred to by Jerome ( l.c. ), only one
of which, his so-called Canonical Epistle, addressed to an anonymous bishop of
Pontus, is still preserved; and finally a trinitarian creed, or confession of
faith, which is given by Gregory of Nyssa in his Vita, and whose genuineness has
been warmly disputed (e.g. by Lardner, Works, II. p. 634 sq.); but since
Caspari's defense of it in his Gesch. d. Tauf-symbols und der Glaubensregel, its
authenticity may be regarded as established. These four writings, together with
some works falsely ascribed to Gregory, are translated in The Ante-Nicene
Fathers, Am. ed., Vol. VI. p. 1-80. Original Greek in Migne's Patr. Gr. X.
983-1343. See also Ryssel's Gregorius Thaumaturgus. Sein Leben und seine
Schriften; Leipzig, 1880. Ryssel gives (p. 65-79) a German translation of two
hitherto unknown Syriac writings of Gregory, one on the equality of Father, Son,
and Spirit, and the other on the possibility and impassibility of God. Gregory's
dates cannot be fixed with exactness; but ashe cannot have seen Origen in
Caesarea until after 231, and was very young when he met him there, he must have
been born as late as the second decade of the third century. As he was with
Origen at least five years, he can hardly have taken his farewell of him until
after the persecution of Maximinus (i.e. after 238), for we cannot suppose that
he pronounced his panegyrical oration during that persecution. He speaks in the
first chapter of that oration of not having delivered an oration for eight
years, and this is commonly supposed to imply that it was eight years since he
had begun to study with Origen, in which case the oration must be put as late as
239, and it must be assumed, if Eusebius' five years are accepted as accurate,
that he was absent for some three years during that period (perhaps while the
persecution was going on). But the eight years cannot be pressed in this
connection, for it is quite possible that they may have been reckoned from an
earlier time, perhaps from the time when he began the study of law, which was
before he met Origin (see Panegyr. chaps. 1 and 5). If we were to suppose the
order followed by Eusebius strictly chronological, we should have to put
Gregory's acquaintance with Origen into the reign of Gordian (238-244). The
truth is, the matter cannot be decided. He is said by Gregory of Nyssa to have
retired into concealment during the persecution of Decius, and to have returned
to his charge again after its close. He was present with his brother Athenodorus
at one of the councils called to consider the case of Paul of Samosata (see Bk.
VII. chap. 28), but was not present at the final one at which Paul was condemned
(see ibid. chaps. 29 and 30, and note 2 on the latter chapter). This one was
held about 265 (see ibid. chap. 29, note 1), and hence it is likely that Gregory
was dead before that date.

257: Athenodorus is known to us only as the brother of Gregory and bishop of
some church or churches in Pontus (see Bk. VII. chaps. 14 and 28).

258: Julius Africanus (as he is called by Jerome) was one of the most learned
men of the Ante-Nicene age. Not much is known of his life, though he seems to
have resided, at least for a time, in Emmaus, a town of Palestine, something
over twenty miles from Jerusalem (not the Emmaus of Luke xxiv. 13, which was but
seven or eight miles from the city), for we hear in the Chron., and in Jerome's
de vir. ill. c. 63, of his going on an embassy to the Emperor Heliogabalus, and
securing the rebuilding of the ruined city Emmaus under the name of Nicopolis,
which it henceforth bore. He does not appear to have been a clergyman, or at any
rate not a bishop; for he is spoken of as such by no early authority, anti he is
addressed by Origen in an extant epistle, which must have been written toward
the close of his life, simply as "brother." His dates cannot be fixed with any
exactness. He must have been already a prominent man when he went on an embassy
to the emperor (between 218 and 222). He must have been considerably older than
Origen, for in his epistle to him he calls him "son," and that although Origen
was at the time beyond middle life himself. Unless Eusebius is mistaken, he was
still alive and active in the time of Gordian (238-244). But if he was enough
older than Origen to address him as "son," he can hardly have lived much beyond
that reign. He seems to have been a Christian philosopher and scholar rather
than an ecclesiastic, and took no such part in the church affairs of the time as
to leave mention of his name in the accounts of the synods of his day. He was
quite a traveler, as we learn from his own writings, and had the well-deserved
reputation of being one of the greatest scholars of the age. Eusebius mentions
four works left by him, the Cesti, the Chronicon, and the epistles to Origen and
to Aristides. Jerome ( l.c. ) mentions only the last three, but Photius ( Cod.
34) refers to all four. The Cesti ( kestoi 259: aporountoj . A very mild way of
putting his complete rejection of the story!

260: On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2.

261: In Bk. I. chap. 7.

262: "About this time" refers us still to the reign of Gordian (238-244).
Eusebius mentions only the commentaries on Isaiah, but Jerome refers also to
homilies and notes. The thirty books which were extant in Eusebius' time
extended to XXX. 6, as we are informed here. Whether the commentary originally
went beyond this point we do not know. There are extant only two brief Latin
fragments from the first and eighth books of the commentary, and nine homilies
(the last incomplete) in a Latin version by Jerome; printed by Lommatzsch, XIII.
235-301.

263: Eusebius records that Origen wrote only twenty-five books of a commentary
on Ezekiel. The form of expression would seem to imply that these did not cover
the whole of Ezekiel, but a fragment of the twentieth book, extant in the
eleventh chapter of the Philocalia, deals with the thirty-fourth chapter of the
prophecy, so that the twenty-five books must have covered at any rate most of
the ground. The catalogue of Jerome mentions twenty-nine books and twelve
homilies, but the former number must be a mistake, for Eusebius' explicit
statement that Origen wrote but twenty-five books can hardly be doubted. There
are extant only the Greek fragment of the twentieth book referred to above,
fourteen homilies in the Latin version of Jerome, and a few extracts; all
printed by Lommatzsch, XIV. 1-232.

264: i.e. to Isa. xxx. 6, where the LXX reads h orasij twn tetrapodwn twn en th
ethmw , which are the exact words used by Eusebius. Our English versions; both
the authorized and revised, read, "The burden of the beasts of the South." The
Hebrew will bear either rendering.

265: The cause of this second visit to Athens we do not know, nor the date of
it; although if Eusebius is to be relied upon, it took place during the reign of
Gordian (238-244). He must have remained some time in Athens and have had
leisure for study, for he finished his commentary on Ezekiel and wrote five
books of his commentary on Canticles. This visit to Athens is to be
distinguished from the one referred to in chap. 23, because it is probable that
Origen found the Nicopotis copy of the Old Testament (mentioned in chap. 16) on
the occasion of a visit to Achaia, and this visit is apparently too late, for he
seems to have finished his Hexapla before this time; and still further, the
epistle in which he refers to spurious accounts of his disputation at Athens
(see Jerome's Apol. adv. Ruf. II. 18) complains also of Demetrius and of his own
excommunication, which, as Redepenning remarks, points to a date soon after that
excommunication took place, and not a number of years later, when Demetrius had
been long dead.

266: From the seventh chapter of the Philocalia we learn that Origen, in his
youth, wrote a small book ( mikroj tomoj ) upon Canticles, of which a single
brief fragment is preserved in that chapter. The catalogue of Jerome mentions
ten books, two books written early, and two homilies. Eusebius mentions only the
commentary, of which, he says, five books were written in Athens, and five more
in Caesarea. The prologue and four books are extant in a Latin translation by
Rufinus, and two homilies in a translation by Jerome; besides these, some Greek
extracts made by Procopius,-all printed by Lommatzsch, XIV. 233; XV. 108.

267: idiaj deomenon sxolhj .

268: On Pamphilus, see Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 40. On Eusebius' Life of
Pamphilus, see the Prolegomena, p. 28, above.

269: Beryllus, bishop of Bostra in Arabia (mentioned above, in chap. 20) is
chiefly noted on account of the heresy into which he fell, and from which Origen
won him back, by convincing him of his error. According to chap. 20, he was a
learned and cultured man, and Jerome ( de vir. ill. c. 60) says of him, gloriose
rexisset ecclesiam. We do not know his dates, but we may gather from this
chapter that the synod which was called on his account convened during the reign
of Gordian (238-244), and apparently toward the close of the reign. Our sources
for a knowledge of the heresy of Beryllus are very meager. We have only the
brief passage in this chapter; a fragment of Origen's commentary on Titus
(Lommatzsch, V. 287), which undoubtedly refers to Beryllus' error, though he is
not mentioned by name; and finally, a single sentence in Jerome's de vir. ill.
c. 60 ( Christum ante incarnationem regat ), which, however, is apparently no
more than his own interpretation of Eusebius' words. Our sources have been
interpreted very differently, some holding Beryllus to have been a Patripassian,
others classing him with the Artemonites (see above, Bk. V. chap. 28). He was,
at any rate, a Monarchion, and his position, not to enter here into details,
seems to have been that our Lord did not pre-exist as an independent being; but
that, with the incarnation, he, who had previously been identified with the
patrikh qeothj 270: ton ekklhsiastikon kanona : i.e. the rule of faith.

271: mh ptoufestanai kat idian ousiaj petigafhn .

272: qeothta idian .

273: twn kaq hmaj oi presbuteroi . It seems necessary here to take the word
presbuteroj in an unofficial sense, which is, to say the least, exceptional at
this late date.

274: On this Defense of Origen, written jointly by Pamphilus and Eusebius, see
above, p. 36.

275: The younger Gordian reigned from the summer of 238 until early in the year
244, when he was murdered by the soldiers, and succeeded by his praetorian
prefect, Philip of Arabia, who took the name Marcus Julius Philippus, and
reigned until 249, when he was conquered and succeeded by Decius. His son
Philip, who was seven years old at the time of his father's accession, was
immediately proclaimed Caesar and afterward given the title of Augustus. He bore
the name Marcus Julius Philippus Severus, and was slain at the time of his
father's death.

276: There has been much dispute as to Philip's relation to Christianity.
Eusebius is the first one known to us to represent him as a Christian, and he
gives the report only upon the authority of oral tradition ( touton katexei
logoj xristianon onta

277: Chrysostom ( De St. Bab. c. Gentes. Tom. I.) and Leontius of Antioch
(quoted in the Chron. pasch. ) identify the bishop referred to here with
Babylas, bishop of Antioch (see above, chap. 29, note 8). Eusebius' silence as
to the name of the bishop looks as if he were ignorant on the matter, but there
is nothing inherently improbable in the identification, which may therefore be
looked upon as very likely correct.

278: That is, the place assigned to penitents: metanoiaj xwran

279: On Heraclas, see chap. 3, note 2. The third year of Philip's reign extended
from the summer of 246 to the summer of 247, so that if Heraclas became bishop
in 232, he cannot have held office fully sixteen years. The agreement, however,
is so close as to occasion no difficulty.

280: On Dionysius, see chap. 40, note 1.

281: tou kaq/ hmaj para pasi logou .

282: Since Origen was born in the year 185 or 186 this must have been as late as
245. Most if not all of the homilies of Origen, which are now preserved, were
probably delivered after this time, and reported, as Eusebius says, by
stenographers. The increasing boldness of the Christians referred to here was
apparently due to their uncommonly comfortable condition under Philip.

283: Of the personal history of Celsus, the first great literary opponent of
Christianity, we know nothing with certainty, nor did Origen know any more. He
had heard that there were two persons of the same name, the one living in the
time of Nero, the other, whom he identifies with his opponent. in the time of
Hadrian and later, and both of them Epicurean philosophers (see contra Cels. I.
8). The work of Celsus, however, was clearly the work, not of an Epicurean, but
of a Platonist, or at least of an eclectic philosopher, with a strong leaning
toward Platonism. The author wrote about the middle of the second century,
probably in the reign of Marcus Aurelius (Keim fixes the date of the work at 178
a.d.). The True Discourse ( alhqhj logoj

284: The commentary on Matthew was written toward the close of Origen's life, as
Eusebius informs us here, a fact which is confirmed by references in the work
itself to many of his earlier commentaries. There are extant a single fragment
from the first book (quoted in chap. 25, above), one from the second book
(quoted in the Philocalia, chap. 6), and Books X.-XVII. entire in the original
Greek, covering Matt. xiii. 36-xxii. 33. There are also extant numerous notes,
which may have been taken, some of them from the commentary, and others from the
homilies; and a Latin version of the commentary covering Matt. xvi. 13-xxvii.
(See Lommatzsch, Vols. III.-V.). The catalogue of Jerome mentions twenty-five
books and twenty-five homilies, and in the preface to his commentary on Matthew,
Jerome states that he had read the twenty-five books, but elsewhere (in the
prologue to his translation of Origen's homilies on Luke; Migne, VII. 219) he
speaks of thirty-six (or twenty-six) books of the commentary, but this is
doubtless a mistake (and so Vallarsi reads viginti quinque in the text). There
is no reason to think that Origen wrote more than twenty-five books, which must
have covered the whole Gospel (to judge from the portions extant). The books
which are preserved contain much that is interesting and suggestive.

285: Jerome also mentions twenty-five books upon the twelve prophets ( in
duodecim Prophetas viginti quinque echghsewn

286: These epistles to Philip and his wife Severa are no longer extant, nor can
we form an accurate idea of their contents. We are reminded of Origen's
interview with Mammaea, the mother of Alexander Severus, mentioned in chap. 21.
Whether he wrote in response to a request from Philip is uncertain, but is not
likely in view of the silence of Eusebius. It is possible that the favor shown
by the emperor and his wife had led Origen to believe that they might be won for
the faith, and there is nothing surprising in his addressing epistles to them
with this idea. On Philip's relations to Christianity, see chap. 34, note 2.

287: This collection of Origen's epistles made by Eusebius is no longer extant.
The catalogue of Jerome mentions "eleven books of letters in all; two books in
defense of his works." Only two epistles are preserved entire,-the one to Julius
Africanus (see chap. 31, note 1); the other to Gregory Thaumaturgus, written,
apparently, soon after the departure of the latter from Caesarea (see chap. 30,
note 1), for Gregory was, at the time it was written, still undecided as to the
profession which he should follow. In addition to these two complete epistles,
there are extant a sentence from a letter to his father (quoted in chap. 2);
also a fragment of an epistle to some unknown person, describing the great zeal
of his friend Ambrose (see chap. 18 note 1. The fragment is preserved by Suidas
s. v. Wrigenhj

288: On Fabian, see chap. 29, note 4. We do not know when this letter to Fabian
was written; but it been written in cannot have consequence of Origen's
condemnation by the Alexandrian synods called by Demetrius, for they were held
in 231 or 232, and Fabian did not become bishop until 236. There must have been
some later cause,-perhaps a condemnation by a later synod of Alexandria, perhaps
only the prevalence of a report that Origen was heterodox, which was causing
serious suspicions in Rome and elsewhere. We know that the controversies which
raged so fiercely about his memory began even before his death.

289: On this Defense, see above, p. 36.

290: The exact nature of the heresy which is here described by Eusebius is
somewhat difficult to determine. It is disputed whether these heretics are to be
reckoned with the qnhtopsuxitai upnoyuxitai , who taught that the soul slept
between the death and the resurrection of the body. Redepenning, in a very
thorough discussion of the matter (II. 105 sq.), concludes that the heresy to
which Eusebius refers grew up under Jewish influence, which was very strong in
Arabia, and that it did not teach the death (as Eusebius asserts), but only the
slumber of the soul. He reckons them therefore with the second, not the first,
class mentioned. But it seems to me that Redepenning is almost hypercritical in
maintaining that it is impossible that these heretics can have taught that the
soul died and afterward was raised again; for it is no more impossible that they
should have taught it than that Eusebius and others should have supposed that
they did. In fact, there does not seem to be adequate ground for correcting
Eusebius' statement, which describes heretics who must distinctly be classed
with the qnhtopsuxitai mentioned later by John of Damascus. We do not know the
date at which the synod referred to in this chapter was held. We only know that
it was subsequent to the one which dealt with Beryllus, and therefore it must
have been toward the close of Philip's reign.

291: The Elkesites ( 'Elkesaitai 'Hlxasai

292: On Origen's writings on the Psalms, see chap. 24, note 3. This fragment is
the only portion of his homily on the eighty-second Psalm extant.

293: Alciabades, according to Hippolytus (see above, note 1).

294: The apostle Paul (see note 1).

295: Origen does not mention the baptism of the Elkesites, which is described at
length by Hippolytus. It seems that both belief in the teachings of the book and
baptism were necessary. It may be that in Origen's opinion the receiving of the
book itself involved the peculiar baptism which it taught, and that, therefore,
he thought it unnecessary to mention the latter.

296: Philip was defeated and slain near Verona, on June 17, 249 by the Pannonian
legions who had compelled Decius, the envoy sent by Philip to quell a mutiny
among them, to accept the title of Augustus. Philip's death made Decius emperor;
and he reigned for a little over two years, when he perished in a campaign
against the Goths. The cause given by Eusebius for the terrible persecution of
Decius is quite incorrect. The emperor, who before his elevation was one of the
most highly respected senators, seems to have been a man of noble character and
of high aims. He was a thoroughgoing patriot and a staunch believer in the
religion and laws of Rome. He saw the terrible state of corruption and decay
into which the empire had fallen; and he made up his mind that it could be
arrested only by restoring the ancient Roman customs, and by strengthening the
ancient religion. He therefore revived the old censorship, hoping that the moral
and social habits of the people might be improved under its influence; and he
endeavored to exterminate the Christians, believing that thus the ancient purity
of the state religion might be restored. It was no low motive of personal
revenge or of caprice which prompted the persecution. We must recognize the fact
that Decius was one of the best and noblest of the Roman emperors, and that he
persecuted as a patriot and a believer in the religion of his fathers. He was
the first one that aimed at the complete extermination of the Christians. He
went systematically to work to put the religion out of existence; and the
persecution was consequently both universal and of terrible severity, far more
terrible than any that had preceded it. The edicts published by Decius early in.
the year 250 are no longer extant; but we can gather from the notices,
especially of Cyprian and Dionysius, that the effort was first made to induce
Christians throughout the empire to deny their faith and return to the religion
of the state, and only when large numbers of them remained obstinate did the
persecution itself begin.

297: On Fabianus, bishop of Rome, see chap. 29, note 4.

298: After the martyrdom of Fabianus the church of Rome was without a bishop for
about fourteen months. The bishopric of that church was naturally under Decius a
place of the greatest danger. Cornelius became bishop in 251, probably in March,
while Decius was away from the city. After the emperor's death, which took place
in the following winter, Gallus renewed the persecution, and Cornelius with a
large part of the church fled to Cività Vecchia, where he died in the summer of
253, according to Lipsius (the Liberian catalogue says 252, which is the
commonly accepted date, but is clearly incorrect, as Lipsius has shown). Both
versions of the Chron. are greatly confused at this point, and their statements
are very faulty (Jerome's version assigning a reign of only fifteen months to
Decius and two years and four months to Gallus). Eusebius, in Bk. VII. chap. 2,
says that Cornelius held office "about three years," which is reasonably
accurate, for he was actually bishop nearly two years and a half. It was during
the episcopate of Cornelius that the Novatian schism took place (see chap. 43).
Eight epistles from Cyprian to Cornelius are extant, and two from Cornelius to
Cyprian. In chap. 43 Eusebius makes extended quotations from an epistle written
by Cornelius to Fabius of Antioch, and mentions still others which are not
preserved. In chap. 46 he refers to one against Novatian addressed to Dionysius
of Alexandria, which is likewise lost.

299: On Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, see chap. 8, note 6.

300: The time of Mazabanes' accession is fixed approximately by the fact that
Alexander's death took place in the persecution of Decius. His death is put by
Eusebius (Bk. VII. chap. 14) in the reign of Gallienus (260-268), and with this
the notice in the Chron. agrees, which assigns it to the year 265. Since his
successor, Hymenaeus, was present at the council of Antioch, in which the case
of Paul of Samosata was considered (see below, Bk. VII. chaps. 29 and 30), it
will not do to put Mazabanes' death later than 265.

301: On Babylas, see chap. 29, note 8.

302: Eusebius gives the name of this bishop as Babioj , Jerome as Fabianus, and
Syncellus as ylabianoj

303: touj podaj upo tessara tou kolasthriou culou parathqeij diasthmata culon
culon was a block, with holes in which the feet of captives were put, in order
that they might be kept more securely in prison, or might be afflicted with
tortures"). The farther apart the feet were stretched, the greater of course was
the torture. Four spaces seems to have been the outside limit. Compare Bk. VIII.
chap. 10, §8.

304: A tradition arose in later centuries that Origen died in the persecution of
Decius (see Photius, Cod. 118); but this is certainly an error, for Eusebius
cannot have been mistaken when he cites Origen's own letters as describing his
sufferings during the persecution. e epistles referred to here are no longer
extant. On Origen's epistles in general, see chap. 36, note 7.

305: Dionysius the Great (Eusebius in the preface to Bk. VII. calls him o megaj
'Alecandrewn episkopoj

306: This Germanus, as we learn from Bk. VII. chap. 11, was a bishop of some
see, unknown to us, who had accused Dionysius of cowardice in the face of
persecution. In the present instance Dionysius undertakes to refute his
calumnies, by recounting accurately his conduct during the persecutions. It must
be remembered that the letter is a defense against accusations actually made, or
we shall misunderstand it, and misinterpret Dionysius' motives in dwelling at
such length upon the details of his own sufferings. The epistle, a part of which
is quoted in this chapter, and a part in Bk. VII. chap. 11, was written, as we
learn from the latter chapter, §18, while the persecution of Valerian was still
in progress, and recounts his experiences during the persecutions of Decfus and
of Valerian. The fragment quoted in the present chapter is devoted to the
persecution of Decius, the other fragment to the persecution of Valerian. The
letter is said to have been written proj Germanon proj one or another person,
and it is natural, of course, to expect the name of the person addressed to be
given. I have therefore translated the word thus, as is done in all the
versions. At the same time it must be noticed that Germanus is spoken of in the
epistle (especially in §18 sq. of the other chapter) not as if he were the
person addressed, but as he were the person complained of to others; and,
moreover, a letter of defense sent to him alone would probably have little
effect, and would fail to put an end to the calumnies which must have found many
ready ears. It seems, in fact, quite probable that the epistle was rather a
public than a private one, and that while it was nominally addressed to
Germanus, it was yet intended for a larger public, and was written with that
public in view. This will explain the h eculiar manner in which Germanus is
referred to. Certainly it is ard to think he would have been thus mentioned in a
personal letter.

307: Sabinus, an otherwise unknown personage, seems to have been prefect of
Egypt at this time, as Aemilianus was during the persecution of Valerian,
according to Bk. VII. chap. 11.

308: One of the frumentarii milites, or military commissaries, who were employed
for various kinds of business, and under the emperors especially as detectives
or secret spies.

309: mh euriskwn . It is not meant that the frumentarius could not find the
house, but that he did not think to go to the house at all, through an error of
judgment ("being smitten with blindness"), supposing that Dionysius would
certainly be elsewhere.

310: oi paidej . This is taken by many scholars to mean "children," and the
conclusion is drawn by them that Dionysius was a married man. Dittrich
translates it "pupils," supposing that Dionysius was still at the head of the
catechetical school, and that some of his scholars lived with him, as was quite
common. Others translate "servants," or "domestics." I have used the indefinite
word" attendants" simply, because the paidej may well have included children,
scholars, servants, and others who made up his family and constituted, any or
all of them, his attendants. As shown in note 8, the word at any rate cannot be
confined in the present case to servants.

311: Strabo (Bk. XVII. chap. 1) mentions a small town called Taposiris, situated
in the neighborhood of Alexandria.

312: We know nothing about this Timothy, except that Dionysius addressed to him
his work On Nature, as reported by Eusebius in VII. 26. He is there called T
imwqeoj o paij . Dionysius can hardly have addressed a book to one of his
servants, and hence we may conclude that Timothy was either Dionysius' son (as
Westcott holds) or scholar (as 'Dittrich believes). It is reasonable to think
him one of the paidej , with others of whom Dionysius was arrested, as recorded
just above. It is in that case of course necessary to give the word as used
there some other, or at least some broader sense than "servants."

313: Greek echndrapodismenouj , meaning literally "reduced to slavery." The
context, however, does not seem to justify such a rendering, for the reference
is apparently only to the fact that they were captured. Their capture, had they
not been released, would have resulted probably in death rather than in slavery.

314: These four men are known to us only as companions of Dionysius during the
persecution of Decius, as recorded here and in Bk. VII. chap. 11. From that
chapter, §23, we learn that Caius and Peter were alone with Dionysius in a
desert place in Libya, after being carried away by the rescuing party mentioned
here. From §3 of the same chapter we learn that Faustus was a deacon, and that
he was with Dionysius also during the persecution of Valerian, and from §26 that
he suffered martyrdom at a great age in the Diocletian persecution. See also Bk.
VIII. chap. 13, note 11.

315: As we learn from Bk. VII. chap. 11, §23, this rescuing party carried
Dionysius to a desert place in Libya, where he was left with only two companions
until the persecution ceased.

316: I read fabion with the majority of the mss., and with Valesius, Stroth,
Burton, Closs, and Crusae, preferring to adopt the same spelling here that is
used in the other passages in which the same bishop is mentioned. A number of
mss. read fabianon , which is supported by Rufinus, and adopted by Schwegler,
Laemmer, and Heinichen. On Fabius, bishop of Antioch, see chap. 39, note 7. The
time of his episcopate stated in that note fixes the date of this epistle within
narrow limits, viz. between 250 and the spring of 253. The whole tone of the
letter and the discussion of the readmission of the lapsed would lead us to
think that the epistle was written after the close of the persecution, but in
§20, Dioscorus is said to be still among them, waiting for "a longer and more
severe conflict," which seems to imply that the persecution, if not raging at
the time, was at least expected to break out again soon. This would lead us to
think of the closing months of Decius' reign, i.e. late in the year 251, and
this date finds confirmation in the consideration that the epistle (as we learn
from chap. 44) was written after the breaking out of the Novatian schism, and
apparently after the election of Novatian as opposition bishop, for Fabius can
hardly have sided with him against his bishop, so long as he was only a
presbyter. Doubtless Novatian's official letter, announcing his election, had
influenced Fabius. But Novation was elected bishop in 251, probably in the
summer or early fall; at least, some months after Cornelius' accession which
took place in February, 251. It seems, from chap. 44, that Fabius was inclined
to side with Novatian, and to favor his rigoristic principles. This epistle was
written (as we learn from chap. 42, §6) with the express purpose of leading him
to change his position and to adopt more lenient principles in his treatment of
the lapsed. It is with this end in view that Dionysius details at such length in
this chapter the sufferings of the martyrs. He wishes to impress upon Fabius
their piety and steadfastness, in order to beget greater respect for their
opinions. Having done this, he states that they who best understood the
temptations to which the persecuted were exposed, had received the lapsed, when
repentant, into fellowship as before (see chap. 42, note 6). Dionysius' own
position in the matter comes out very clearly in this epistle. He was in full
sympathy with the milder treatment of the lapsed advocated in Rome and in
Carthage by Cornelius and Cyprian.

317: The edict of Decius was published early in the year 250, and therefore the
persecution in Alexandria, according to Dionysius, began in 249, while Philip
was still emperor. Although the latter showed the Christians favor, yet it is
not at all surprising that this local persecution should break out during his
reign. The peace which the Christians were enjoying naturally fostered the
growth of the Church, and the more patriotic and pious of the heathen citizens
of the empire must necessarily have felt great solicitude at its constant
increase, and the same spirit which led Decius to persecute would lead many such
persons to desire to persecute when the opportunity offered itself; and the
closing months of Philip's reign were so troubled with rebellions and
revolutions that he had little time, and perhaps less inclination, to interfere
in such a minor matter as a local persecution of Christians. The common people
of Alexandria were of an excitable and riotous disposition, and it was always
easy there to stir up a tumult at short notice and upon slight pretexts.

318: o kakwn th polei tanth mantiz kai poihthz The last word is rendered "poet"
by most translators, and the rendering is quite possible; but it is difficult to
understand why Dionysius should speak of this person's being a poet, which could
have no possible connection with the matter in hand. It seems better to take
poihthj in its common sense of "maker," or "author," and to suppose Dionysius to
be thinking of this man, not simply as the prophet of evils to the city, but
also as their author, in that he "moved and aroused against us the masses of the
heathen."

319: Of the various martyrs and confessors mentioned in this chapter, we know
only what is told us by Dionysius in this epistle.

320: Heb. x. 34. Upon the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, see Bk. III.
chap. 3, note 17; and upon Eusebius' opinion in the matter, see Bk. III. chap.
25, note 1.

321: We know that the closing months of Philip's reign were troubled with
seditions in various quarters; but Dionysius is our only authority for this
particular one, unless it be connected, as some think, with the revolt which
Zosimus describes as aroused in the Orient by the bad government of Philip's
brother, who was governor there, and by excessive taxation (see Tillemont, Hist.
des Emp. III. p. 272).

322: This refers to the death of Philip and the accession of Decius. The hostile
edicts of the latter seem not to have been published until some months after his
accession, i.e. early in 250. But his hostility to Christianity might have been
known from the start, and it might have been understood that he would persecute
as soon as he had attended to the other more important matters connected with
his accession.

323: Matt. xxiv. 24. Eusebius reads skandalisai ; Matthew, plansqai or planhsai
.

324: i.e. to sacrifice.

325: oi dhmsosieuontej upo twn pracewn hgonto

326: Cf. Matt. xix. 23. This sentence shows that Dionysius did not consider it
impossible even for those to be saved who denied Christ before enduring any
suffering at all. He was clearly willing to leave a possibility of salvation
even to the worst offenders, and in this agreed perfectly with Cornelius,
Cyprian, and the body of the Roman and Carthaginian churches.

327: asbestw puri .

328: The Greek word makar means "blessed."

329: custhraj "The instrument of torture here mentioned was an iron scraper,
calculated to wound and tear the flesh as it passed over it" (Crusè).

330: puri asbestw .

331: Rufinus adds at this point the words et alia Ammonaria ("and another
Ammonaria"). Valesius therefore conjectures that the words kai 'Ammonarion etera
must have stood in the original text, and he is followed by Stroth and
Heinichen. The mss., however, are unanimous in their omission of the words, and
the second sentence below, which speaks of only a single Ammonarium, as if there
were no other, certainly argues against their insertion. It is possible that
Rufinus, finding only three women mentioned after Dionysius had referred to
four, ventured to insert the "other Ammonaria."

332: It has been suggested (by Birks in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. ) that this
Dioscorus may be identical with the presbyter of the same name mentioned in Bk.
VII. chap. 11, §24. But this is quite impossible, for Dioscorus, as we learn
from this passage, was but fifteen years old at the time of the Decian
persecution, and Dionysius is still speaking of the same persecution when he
mentions the presbyter Dioscorus in the chapter referred to (see note 31 on that
chapter).

333: marturia . It is difficult to ascertain from Dionysius' language whether
these five soldiers suffered martyrdom or whether they were released. The
language admits either interpretation, and some have supposed that the
magistrate was so alarmed at what he feared might be a general defection among
the troops that he dismissed these men without punishing them. At the same time
it seems as if Dionysius would have stated this directly if it were a fact.
There is nothing in the narrative to imply that their fate was different from
that of the others; and moreover, it hardly seems probable that the defection of
five soldiers should so terrify the judge as to cause him to cease executing the
imperial decree, and of course if he did not execute it in the case of the
soldiers, he could hardly do it in the case of others.

334: Ischyrion is known to us only from this passage.

335: enterwn 0ai splagxnwn .

336: Of the bishop Chaeremon of Nilus we know only what is told us here. The
city Nilus or Nilopolis was situated on an island in the Nile, in middle Egypt,
some distance south of Memphis.

337: th sumbiw eautou . The word sumbioj , which means a "companion" or
"partner," can signify nothing else than "wife" as used here in the feminine.

338: to 'Arabion to 'Arabion ouroj 339: eisedecanto kai sunhgagon kai sunesthsan
kai proseuxwn autoij kai estiasewn ekinwnhsan 340: The object of the letter is
clearly revealed in these sentences (see chap. 41, note 1).

341: Eusebius, and the Greeks in general, write the name Noouatoj (though in Bk.
VII. chap. 8, below, Dionysius writes Noouatianoj ). Socrates has the form
Nauatoj Noouatianoi 342: kaqaroi , "pure."

343: This council is undoubtedly identical with the one mentioned in Cyprian's
epistle to Antonianus ( Ep. 51, §6; al. 55). It was held, according to Cyprian,
soon after the Carthaginian synod, in which the treatment of the lapsi was first
discussed, and accepted the decisions of that council. The Carthaginian synod
met in the spring of 251 (see Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. p. 112). The Roman
synod must, therefore, have been held before the end of the same year; Hefele
thinks about October ( ibid. p. 114). Cornelius would not, of course, have
waited long before procuring the official condemnation of the opposition bishop.
We know nothing more about the constitution of the council than is told us here.
It was, of course, only a local synod. The pastors of the remaining provinces
were the other Italian bishops who could not be present at the council.
Cornelius solicits their opinion, in order that the decree passed by the council
may represent as large a number of bishops as possible.

344: touj de th sumfora peripeptokotaj . The Carthaginian synod had decided that
no offenses are beyond the regular power of the Church to remit.

345: Jerome ( de vir. ill. chap. 66) gives the singular instead of the plural (
epistolam ad Fabium ); so also Rufinus; but there is no reason for doubting the
integrity of the Greek text of Eusebius, which runs, hlqon d oun eij hmaj
epistolai Kornhliou 346: Eusebius says, ta peri thj 'Rwmaiwn sunodon kai ta
docanta pasi toiz kata th/ 'Italian k.t.l

347: These epistles from Cyprian and the African bishops Jerome transforms into
a single epistle from Cornelius to Fabius, de Novatiano, et de his qui lapsi
sunt. At least, it seems impossible to explain this epistle mentioned by Jerome
in any other way. Knowing the slovenly way in which he put his work together, it
is not surprising that he should attribute these epistles to the same person who
wrote the ones mentioned just before and after. Since the first epistles
mentioned are said to have been addressed to Fabius and also the last one, from
which Eusebius quotes, it is reasonable to conclude that all mentioned in this
connection were addressed to him; and it would of course be quite natural for
Cyprian, too, to write to Fabius (who was known to be inclined to favor
Novatian), in order to confirm the account of Cornelius, and to announce that he
agreed with the latter in regard to the treatment of the lapsed. No epistle,
however, of Cyprian or of other African bishops to Fabius are extant, though the
same subject is discussed in many epistles of Cyprian addressed to the people.

348: Rufinus mentions only two epistles of Cornelius in this connection,
apparently confounding this one on the deeds of the Novatians with the one
mentioned just before on the Decrees of the Council. Jerome, on the other hand,
making Cornelius, as already mentioned, the author of the epistles of Cyprian
and the African bishops, assigns four epistles to Cornelius. None of the
epistles mentioned in this section are extant, except the long fragment of the
last one quoted just below. As mentioned in the next chapter, Fabius inclined to
take the side of Novatian over against the laxer party; and it was on this
account that Cornelius wrote him so many epistles (compare also the epistle of
Dionysius of Alexandria, quoted in chaps. 41 and 42, and see note 1 on the
former chapter), and endeavored to blacken the character of Novatian as he does
in the passages quoted.

349: This Maximus was a presbyter, and one of a party of Roman confessors who
played a prominent part in the controversy about the lapsed. He and his
companions were imprisoned at the very beginning of the Decian persecution
(Cyprian, Ep. 24; al. 28), i.e. early in the year 250, and while in prison they
adopted rigoristic views and wrote to some Carthaginian confessors, urging
strict methods in dealing with the lapsed (see Cyprian, Ep. 22; al. 27). Early
in the year 251, after eleven months m prison, the presbyter Moses, the leading
spirit of the party, died, and Maximus became the chief one among them. Moses
before his death, in spite of his rigoristic principles, refused to commune with
Novatian and his five presbyters (as we learn from §20 of this chapter),
apparently because he saw that his insistence upon strict discipline was tending
toward schism, and that such discipline could not be maintained without
sacrificing the Church. But Maximus and those mentioned with him here, together
with some others (see Cyprian, Ep. 45; al. 49), became even stricter than at
first, and finally went over to the party of Novatian (which took its rise after
the election of Cornelius in 251), but were at length reconciled to Cornelius
and the rest of the Church, and received back with rejoicing (see Cyprian, Ep.
43, 45, 46, 49, 50; al. 46, 49, 51, 53, 54). The notices of Maximus and Urbanus
in Cyprian's epistles, which with the epistle of Cornelius constitute our only
source for a knowledge of their lives, do not mention a second confession made
by these two men, so that we cannot tell when it took place, but it must of
course have been during the persecution of Decius.

350: Urbanus was a confessor only, not a presbyter or deacon as we learn from
the notices of him in Cyprian's epistles, in connection with the party referred
to in the previous note.

351: Sidonius likewise was a confessor simply, and is mentioned with the others
in the epistles of Cornelius and Cyprian.

352: Celerinus was also one of this party of Roman confessors (as we learn from
Cyprian, Ep. 15, al. 87), who, upon his release from prison, went to Carthage,
and was there ordained a reader by Cyprian ( Ep. 33, al. 39). His release from
prison and departure for Carthage took place before the release of the others
and before the death of Moses (as we learn from Ep. 15), that is, before the end
of the year 250. He was still in Rome, however, at Easter of that year, as we
learn from his epistle to Lucian, mentioned below. He came of a family of
martyrs ( Ep. 33), and was himself one of the most celebrated confessors of his
time. There is extant an epistle written by him to Lucian, the Carthaginian
confessor (Cyprian, Ep. 21), in which he begs absolution for his sisters, who
had denied the faith. The epistle (as we learn from its own statements) was
written at Easter time and in the year 250, for there was no bishop of Rome at
the time of its composition. As we learn from this passage, Celerinus went over
with these other Roman confessors to the party of Novatian, and returned with
them to the Church. He is, however, mentioned neither by Cyprian nor by
Cornelius (in his epistle to Cyprian) in connection with the schism of these
confessors. This is very remarkable, especially since Celerinus was quite a
prominent character. It is possible that he was in Carthage the greater part of
the time, and did not return to Rome until shortly before the confessors
returned to the Church. He might then have thrown in his lot with them, and have
returned with them to the orthodox church; and yet, not having been mentioned by
Cornelius' earlier epistle to Cyprian, announcing the schismatic position of the
confessors, he was omitted also in the later letters announcing their return
(which in fact only mentions the three leaders), and in Cyprian's reply, which
of course would only mention those of whom he had been told in Cornelius' first
epistle. Of the subsequent career of Celerinus and of these other confessors we
know nothing.

353: There is no reason to doubt, as Cornelius does, Novatian's sincerity in
declaring that he did not seek the office of bishop. Both Cornelius and Cyprian
make his ambition and his jealousy of Cornelius, the successful candidate, the
cause of his schism. But such an accusation was made against every schismatic,
even when there was not a shadow of support for it, and there is no reason to
suppose it nearer the truth in this than in other cases. In fact, his own
protestation, as recorded here by Cornelius, and as testified to by Dionysius in
chap. 45, as well as the character of the man as revealed in his life previous
to his episcopal ordination (as certified to even by his enemies), and in his
writings, are entirely opposed to the supposition that he sought the episcopal
office and that his schism was a result of his defeat. We shall do much better
to reject entirely this exceedingly hostile and slanderous account of his enemy
Cornelius, and to accept his own account of the matter as reported by Dionysius
in chap. 25. He was the natural head of the rigoristic party, made such by his
commanding ability, his deep piety, and his ascetic principles of living; and
when Cornelius, the head of the lax party, was made bishop (in March, 251), the
strict party revolted, and it could not be otherwise than that Novatian should
be elected bishop, and that even if reluctant he should feel compelled to accept
the office in order to assert the principles which he believed vital, and to
prevent the complete ruin of the Church. Cornelius gives a sad story of his
ordination to the episcopate. But one thing as certain, he had with him for some
time a large portion of the best people in the Roman church, among them Maximus
and others of the most influential confessors, who seem at length to have
returned to the Church only because they saw that the schism was injuring it.
Certainly if Novatian had been a self-seeker, as Cornelius describes him, and if
his ordination had been of such a nature as Cornelius reports, he could never
have had the support of so many earnest and prominent men. It is doubtless true,
as Cornelius states, that Novatian was ordained by three Italian bishops, very
likely bishops of rural and comparatively insignificant sees, and it is quite
possible that one of them, as he also records, afterwards repented of his act as
schismatic, and returned to the Church and received absolution. But all this
does not imply that these three bishops were deceived by false pretenses on the
part of Novatian, or that they were intoxicated when they performed the service.
This, in fact, may be looked upon as baseless calumny. Novatus, the Carthaginian
agitator who had caused Cyprian so much trouble, took a prominent part in the
Novatian schism, though to make him the author of it, as Cyprian does, is
undoubtedly incorrect (see Lardner, Works, III. p. 94 sq.; London ed. 1829). It
was perhaps he (as reported by Eulogius, according to Photius, Cod. 182, and by
Theodoret, Haer. Fab. III. 5) that found these three bishops to ordain Novatian.
It is not at all improbable, when so many prominent men in the Roman church
favored the stricter principles and supported Novatian, that bishops could be
found in Italy who held the same principles and would be glad to ordain Novatian
as bishop of Rome.

354: magganon .

355: As Closs remarks, these words are evidently an allusion to Novatian's work,
de Trinitate.

356: ekdikhthj tou euaggeliou . Possibly another sarcastic reference to
Novatian's work in defense of the doctrine of the Church possibly only an
allusion to the fact that he prided himself on his orthodoxy.

357: The principle, that there should be only one bishop in a city, was not
clearly enunciated and forcibly emphasized until the third century. Cyprian's
writings are full of it (cf. his treatise On the Unity of the Church ), and in
connection with this Novatian schism, which showed so plainly the disintegrating
effects of a division of the church under two bishops, the principle was
established so firmly as never again to be questioned. I do not mean to assert
here that the principle so clearly and conclusively established at this time was
a new principle. We find it enunciated even by Ignatius at the beginning of the
second century, and it was the common opinion of Christendom, or otherwise
Cyprian could not have appealed to universal custom as he does in discussing the
matter. I mean simply that the principle had never before been brought to such a
test as to require its formal enunciation and public recognition by the clergy
and the Church at large. The emergency which now arose compelled such formal
statement of it; and the Council of Nicaea made it canon law (cf. Bingham's
Antiquities, I. p. 160 sq.).

358: The limitation of the deacons to seven in number was due to the fact that
the appointment of the Seven by the apostles (Acts vi.) was commonly looked upon
as the institution of the office of the diaconate. But upon this matter, see
above, Bk II. chap. 1, note 2 a . The practice of limiting the number of the
deacons to seven was quite a common one, and was enacted as a law in the
fifteenth canon of the Council of Neo-Caesarea (held early in the third
century). The practice, however, was by no means universal, as we are informed
by Sozomen ( H. E. VII. 19). Indeed, at least in Alexandria and in
Constantinople, their number was much greater (see Bingham's Ant. I. p. 286).

359: The sub-deacons (the highest of the inferior orders of the clergy) are
first mentioned in this epistle of Cornelius and in various epistles of Cyprian.
At what time they arose we cannot tell, but they seem to have appeared in the
East later than in the West, at least the first references we have to them in
the Orient are in the fourth century, e.g. in the Apost. Const. VIII. 21. They
acted as deacons' assistants, preparing the sacred vessels for use at the altar,
attended the doors during communion service, and were often employed by the
bishops for the conveyance of letters or messages to distant churches. See
Bingham's Ant. Bk. III. chap. 2.

360: The Acolyths ( akolouqoi

361: The Exorcists likewise constituted one of the inferior orders of the
clergy; but although we find exorcism very frequently referred to by the Fathers
of the second century, there seems to have been no such office until the third
century, the present being the earliest distinct reference to it. In the fourth
century we find the office in all parts of the Church East and West. Their duty
was to take charge of those supposed to be possessed of an evil spirit; to pray
with them, care for them, and exorcise the demon when possible. See Bingham,
ibid. chap. 4.

362: The Readers, or Lectors (Greek, anagnwstai 363: The Janitors, or
Doorkeepers (Greek, pulwroi or qurwroi

364: There is no reason to doubt that Novatian received clinical baptism, as
here stated by Cornelius. This does not imply, as is commonly supposed, that he
was of heathen parentage, for many Christians postponed baptism as long as
possible, in order not to sacrifice baptismal race by sins committed after
baptism. We do not know whether his parents were heathen or Christians. Upon the
objection to Novatian's ordination, based upon his irregular baptism, see below,
¥17.

365: tou te sfragisqhnai upo tou episkopou . sfragisqhnai

366: The majority of the mss., followed by Schwegler, Laemmer, and Heinichen,
read toutwn . But some of the best mss., followed by all the other editors, read
toutou .

367: This is certainly a calumny. It is possible, as Neander suggests, that
Novatian, although a presbyter, withdrew somewhat from active duty and lived the
life of an ascetic, and that it is this to which Cornelius refers in speaking of
his admiration for "another philosophy." But however that may be, Cornelius'
interpretation of his conduct as cowardly or unworthy is quite false. See above,
note 1.

368: Clinic baptism (so-called from klinh 369: On Moses (or Moyses, as he is
called by Cyprian), see note 9, above.

370: These lists of the bishops present at the council, and of those who
expressed their agreement with the decision of the synod, are no longer extant.

371: See above, chap. 39, note 7.

372: This epistle, as we may gather from the description of its contents in the
next sentence, is without doubt the same from which Eusebius has quoted at such
length in chaps. 41 and 42. Upon the date and purpose of it, see chap. 41, note
1. We possess only the fragments quoted by Eusebius in these three chapters.

373: Of this Serapion we know only what is told us in this chapter.

374: apobrecai 375: kata tou stomatoj epistacai .

376: omologhqhnai . The meaning is apparently "acknowledged or confessed by
Christ," and Valesius is doubtless correct in remarking that Dionysius was
alluding to the words of Matt. x. 32.

377: This epistle to Novatian was doubtless written in reply to a letter from
him announcing his election to the episcopate of Rome, for we know that Novatian
sent such letters, as was customary, to all the prominent bishops of the Church.
Dionysius' epistle, therefore, must have been written soon after the election of
Novatian, which took place in the year 251. We have only the fragment quoted in
this chapter.

378: Novatian may well have been urged against his will to permit himself to be
made opposition bishop; but of course, once having taken the step, so long as he
believed an the justice of the cause for which he was contending, he could not
turn back, but must maintain his position with vigor and firmness. This, of
course, would lead his enemies to believe that he had himself sought the
position, as Dionysius evidently believed that he had.

379: This epistle on the subject of repentance or penance, which was the burning
one just at this time in connection with the lapsed, was doubtless written at
about the same time with those to Fabius and Novatian, already referred to. No
fragments of it have been preserved.

380: This work ( proj Konwna idia tij peri metanoiaj grafh 381: epistreptikh

382: This epistle was doubtless written while Origen was suffering imprisonment
in the persecution of Decius (see above, chap. 39, and below, p. 394), and was
for the purpose of comforting and encouraging him (cf. Origen's own work on
martyrdom, referred to in chap. 28, above). The epistle is no longer extant.
Numerous fragments are given by Gallandi, Migne, and others, which they assign
to this work; but Dittrich has shown (p. 35 sq.) that they are to be ascribed to
some one else, perhaps to another Dionysius who lived much later than the great
bishop.

383: This epistle to the Laodiceans, which is no longer extant very likely
dealt, like so many of the others, with the question of discipline. Of
Thelymidres, bishop of Laodicea, we know nothing.

384: We know no more about this epistle to the Armenians than is told us here.
The character of the letter must have been similar to the two upon the same
subject mentioned above. Of the bishop Merozanes nothing is known.

385: On Cornelius, see above, chap. 39, note. 3. His epistle to Dionysius is no
longer extant. Dionysius' epistle to him is likewise lost, and is known to us
only from what Eusebius tells us here. It was written after the death of Fabius
of Antioch (see below, §4), and therefore probably in 253 (see above, chap. 39,
note 7). It has been questioned whether this synod of Antioch to which,
according to Eusebius, Dionysius referred, was really held, or only projected.
The Libellus Synodicus records it as an actual synod, but its authority is of no
weight. On the other hand, Eusebius' words seem plainly to indicate that he
believed that the council was really held, for he speaks of it as " the synod at
Antioch"; had he thought of it only as projected, he could hardly have referred
to it in such definite terms. In spite, therefore, of the doubts of Dittrich,
Hefele, and others, I am inclined to believe that Eusebius supposed that the
synod had actually been held in Antioch. Whether the epistle of Dionysius
warranted him in drawing that conclusion is another question, which cannot be
decided. I look upon it, however, as probable that, had the synod been simply
projected and failed to convene, some indication of that fact would have been
given by Dionysius, and would have caused a modification of Eusebius' statement.

386: Helenus, bishop of Tarsus, played a prominent part in the controversy
concerning the re-baptism of heretics, maintaining, like most of the Oriental
bishops, the necessity of re-baptizing them (see below, Bk. VII. chap. 5), and
also in the controversy which arose about Paul of Samosata (see Bk. VII. chaps.
28 and 30). From the latter chapter we should gather that he presided at the
final council in Antioch, which passed condemnation upon Paul, Firmilian, who
seems to have presided at the previous councils, having died on his way to the
last one. Of Helenus' dates we know only what we can gather from the facts here
stated. He must have been bishop as early as 252; and he cannot have died until
after 265 (on the date of the Antiochian synod at which Paul was condemned, see
Bk. VII. chap. 29, note 1).

387: On Firmilian, see above, chap. 26, note 3.

388: On Theoctistus, see above, chap. 19, note 27.

389: On Fabius, bishop of Antioch, see above, chap. 39, note 7.

390: Demetrianus, the successor of Fabius, and predecessor of Paul in the
bishopric of Antioch, is mentioned also in Bk. VII. chaps. 5, 14, 27, and 30.
The date of his accession is uncertain; but as Fabius died probably in 253
(possibly in 252), we can fix approximately the beginning of his episcopate. In
Bk. VII. chaps. 5 and 14, he is said to have survived Gallienus' edict of
toleration (260 a.d.); but as Harnack has shown ( Zeit des Ignatius, p. 51),
this notice is quite unreliable, as are also the notices in the Chronicle. We
can only say that his successor, Paul, became bishop between the years 257 and
260.

391: On Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, see above, chap. 8, note 6.

392: The interpretation of this sentence is very difficult. The Greek runs echj
tauth kai etera tij epistolh toij en 'Rwmh tou Dionusiou feretai diakonikh dia
'Ippolutou . The feretai , according to the usage of Eusebius, must mean "is
extant," and some participle (e.g. "written" or "sent") must then be supplied
before dia 'Ippolutou . Whether Eusebius means that the letter was written by
Hippolytus or was carried by him to Rome cannot be determined. The latter is
more probable and is the commonly accepted interpretation. That Eusebius should
name a messenger in this particular case and in no other seems peculiar, unless
it be supposed that Hippolytus was so prominent a character as to merit especial
mention. Who he was we do not know, for chronology will not permit us (as was
formerly done by some scholars) to identify him with the great writer of the
Roman church (see above, chaps. 20 and 22), and no other Hippolytus of
prominence is known to us. In view of Eusebius' mention of the name at this
point, I am inclined, however, to think that he, knowing so little about the
Roman Hippolytus, fancied that this was the same man. If he did, he had good
reason to mention him. The word "diaconal" ( diakonikh eirhnika 393: Of these
two epistles to the Romans we know only the titles, as given here by Eusebius.

394: On these confessors, and their return to the Church, see above, chap. 43,
note 9. Dionysius' epistles to them are known to us only from Eusebius'
reference to them in this passage.

395: Besides the epistles mentioned by Eusebius in this and the previous chapter
we know at least the titles of a number of others. In Bk. VII. many are referred
to, and extracts from some are quoted by Eusebius. See especially Bk. VII. chap.
26, where another partial list of them is given. Eusebius does not pretend to
mention all of Dionysius' epistles; indeed, he states that he wrote many besides
those mentioned. For further particulars in regard to all the epistles known to
us, see Dittrich's monograph.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 18: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 7
========================================================================

Book VII.

Introduction.

Chapter I. The Wickedness of Decius and Gallus.

Chapter II. The Bishops of Rome in Those Times.

Chapter III. Cyprian, and the Bishops with Him, First Taught that It Was
Necessary to Purify by Baptism Those Converted from Heresy.

Chapter IV. The Epistles Which Dionysius Wrote an This Subject.

Chapter V. The Peace Following the Persecution.

Chapter VI. The Heresy of Sabellius.

Chapter VII. The Abominable Error of the Heretics; The Divine Vision of
Dianysius; And the Ecclesiastical Canon Which He Received.

Chapter VIII. The Heterodoxy of Navatus.

Chapter IX. The Ungodly Baptism of the Heretics.

Chapter X. Valerian and the Persecution Under Him.

Chapter XI. The Events Which Happened at This Time to Dionysius and Those in
Egypt.

Chapter XII. The Martyrs in Caesarea in Palestine.

Chapter XIII. The Peace Under Gallienus.

Chapter XIV. The Bishops that Flourished at that Time.

Chapter XV. The Martyrdom of Marinus at Caesarea.

Chapter XVI. Story in Regard to Astyrius.

Chapter XVII. The Signs at Paneas of the Great Might of Our Saviour.

Chapter XVIII. The Statue Which the Woman with an Issue of Blood Erected.137
Chapter XIX. The Episcopal Chair of James.

Chapter XX. The Festal Epistles of Dionysius, in Which He Also Gives a Paschal
Canon.

Chapter XXI. The Occurrences at Alexandria.

Chapter XXII. The Pestilence Which Came Upon Them.

Chapter XXIII. The Reign of Gallienus.

Chapter XXIV. Nepos and His Schism.173 Chapter XXV. The Apocalypse of John.181
Chapter XXVI. The Epistles of Dionysius.

Chapter XXVII. Paul of Samosata, and the Heresy Introduced by Hint at Antioch.

Chapter XXVIII. The Illustrious Bishops of that Time.

Chapter XXIX. Paul, Having Been Refuted by Malchion, a Presbyter from the
Sophists, Was Excommunicated.

Chapter XXX. The Epistle of the Bishops Against Paul.

Chapter XXXI. The Perversive Heresy of the Manicheans Which Began at This Time.

Chapter XXXII. The Distinguished Ecclesiastics276 Of Our Day, and Which of Them
Survived Until the Destruction of the Churches.

Book VII.

Introduction. In this seventh book of the Church History, the great bishop of
Alexandria, Dionysius,1 shall again assist us by his own words; relating the
several affairs of his time in the epistles which he has left. I will begin with
them.

Chapter I. The Wickedness of Decius and Gallus. When Decius had reigned not
quite two years,2 he was slain with his children, and Gallus succeeded him. At
this time Origen died, being sixty-nine years of age.3 Dionysius, writing to
Hermammon,4 speaks as follows of Gallus:5

"Gallus neither recognized the wickedness of Decius, nor considered what had
destroyed him; but stumbled on the same stone, though it lay before his eyes.
For when his reign was prosperous and affairs were proceeding according to his
mind, he attacked the holy men who were interceding with God for his peace and
welfare. Therefore with them he persecuted also their prayers in his behalf." So
much concerning him.

Chapter II. The Bishops of Rome in Those Times.

Cornelius,6 having held the episcopate in the city of Rome about three years,
was succeeded by Lucius.7 He died in less than eight months, and transmitted his
office to Stephen.8 Dionysius wrote to him the first of his letters on baptism,9
as no small controversy had arisen as to whether those who had turned from any
heresy should be purified by baptism. For the ancient custom prevailed in regard
to such, that they should receive only the laying on of hands with prayers.10

Chapter III. Cyprian, and the Bishops with Him, First Taught that It Was
Necessary to Purify by Baptism Those Converted from Heresy.

First of all, Cyprian, pastor of the parish of Carthage,11 maintained that they
should not be received except they had been purified from their error by
baptism. But Stephen considering it unnecessary to add any innovation contrary
to the tradition which had been held from the beginning, was very indignant at
this.12 Chapter IV. The Epistles Which Dionysius Wrote an This Subject.

Dionysius, therefore, having communicated with him extensively on this question
by letter,13 finally showed him that since the persecution had abated,14 the
churches everywhere had rejected the novelty of Novatus, and were at peace among
themselves. He writes as follows:

Chapter V. The Peace Following the Persecution.

1 "But know now, my brethren, that all the churches throughout the East and
beyond, which formerly were divided, have become united. And all the bishops
everywhere are of one mind, and rejoice greatly in the peace which has come
beyond expectation. Thus Demetrianus in Antioch,15 Theoctistus in Caesarea,
Mazabanes in Aelia, Marinus in Tyre (Alexander having fallen asleep),16
Heliodorus in Laodicea (Thelymidres being dead), Helenus in Tarsus, and all the
churches of Cilicia, Firmilianus, and all Cappadocia. I have named only the more
illustrious bishops, that I may not make my epistle too long and my words too
burdensome.

2 And all Syria, and Arabia to which you send help when needed,17 and whither
you have just written,18 Mesopotamia, Pontus, Bithynia, and in short all
everywhere are rejoicing and glorifying God for the unanimity and brotherly
love." Thus far Dionysius.

3 But Stephen, having filled his office two years, was succeeded by Xystus.19
Dionysius wrote him a second epistle on baptism,20 in which he shows him at the
same time the opinion and judgment of Stephen and the other bishops, and speaks
in this manner of Stephen:

4 "He therefore had written previously concerning Helenus and Firmilianus, and
all those in Cilicia and Cappadocia and Galatia and the neighboring nations,
saying that he would not commune with them for this same cause; namely, that
they re-baptized heretics. But consider the importance of the matter.

5 For truly in the largest synods of the bishops, as I learn, decrees have been
passed on this subject, that those coming over from heresies should be
instructed, and then should be washed21 and cleansed from the filth of the old
and impure leaven. And I wrote entreating him concerning all these things."
Further on he says:

6 "I wrote also, at first in few words, recently in many, to our beloved
fellow-presbyters, Dionysius22 and Philemon,23 who formerly had held the same
opinion as Stephen, and had written to me on the same matters." So much in
regard to the above-mentioned controversy.

Chapter VI. The Heresy of Sabellius.

He refers also in the same letter to the heretical teachings of Sabellius,24
which were in his time becoming prominent, and says:

"For concerning the doctrine now agitated in Ptolemais of Pentapolis,-which is
impious and marked by great blasphemy against the Almighty God, the Father, and
our Lord Jesus Christ, and contains much unbelief respecting his Only Begotten
Son and the first-born of every creature, the Word which became man, and a want
of perception of the Holy Spirit,-as there came to me communications from both
sides and brethren discussing the matter, I wrote certain letters treating the
subject as instructively as, by the help. of God, I was able.25 Of these I
send26 thee copies."

Chapter VII. The Abominable Error of the Heretics; The Divine Vision of
Dianysius; And the Ecclesiastical Canon Which He Received.

1 In the third epistle on baptism which this same Dionysius wrote to Philemon,27
the Roman presbyter, he relates the following: "But I examined the works and
traditions of the heretics, defiling my mind for a little time with their
abominable opinions, but receiving this benefit from them, that I refuted them
by myself, and detested them all the more.

2 And when a certain brother among the presbyters restrained me, fearing that I
should be carried away with the filth of their wickedness (for it would defile
my soul), - in which also, as I perceived, he spoke the truth,-a vision sent
from God came and strengthened me.

3 And the word which came to me commanded me, saying distinctly, `Read
everything which thou canst take in hand,28 for thou art able to correct and
prove all; and this has been to thee from the beginning the cause of thy faith.'
I received the vision as agreeing with the apostolic word, which says to them
that are stronger, `Be skillful money-changers.'"29

4 Then after saying some things concerning all the heresies he adds: "I received
this rule and ordinance from our blessed father,30 Heraclas.31 For those who
came over from heresies, although they had apostatized from the Church,-or
rather had not apostatized, but seemed to meet with them, yet were charged with
resorting to some false teacher,- when he, had expelled them from the Church he
did not receive them back, though they entreated for it, until they had publicly
reported all things which they had heard from their adversaries; but then he
received them without requiring of them another baptism.32 For they had formerly
received the Holy Spirit from him." Again, after treating the question
thoroughly, he adds: "I have learned also that this33 is not a novel practice
introduced in Africa alone, but that even long ago in the times of the bishops
before us this opinion has been adopted in the most populous churches, and in
synods of the brethren in Iconium and Synnada,34 and by many others. To overturn
their counsels and throw them into strife and contention, I cannot endure. For
it is said,35 `Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor's landmark, which thy fathers
have set.'"36

6 His fourth epistle on baptism37 was written to Dionysius38 of Rome, who was
then a presbyter, but not long after received the episcopate of that church. It
is evident from what is stated of him by Dionysius of Alexandria, that he also
was a learned and admirable man. Among other things he writes to him as follows
concerning Novatus:

Chapter VIII. The Heterodoxy of Navatus.

"For with good reason do we feel hatred toward Novatian,39 who has sundered the
Church and drawn some of the brethren into impiety and blasphemy, and has
introduced impious teaching concerning God, and has calumniated our most
compassionate Lord Jesus Christ as unmerciful. And besides all this he rejects
the holy baptism,40 and overturns the faith and confession which precede it,41
and entirely banishes from them the Holy Ghost, if indeed there was any hope
that he would remain or return to them."42 Chapter IX. The Ungodly Baptism of
the Heretics.

1 His fifth epistle43 was written to Xystus,44 bishop of Rome. In this, after
saying much against the heretics, he relates a certain occurrence of his time as
follows: "For truly, brother, I am in need of counsel, and I ask thy judgment
concerning a certain matter which has come to me, fearing that I may be in
error.

2 For one of the brethren that assemble, who has long been considered a
believer, and who, before my ordination, and I think before the appointment of
the blessed Heraclas,45 was a member of the congregation, was present with those
who were recently baptized. And when he heard the questions and answers,46 he
came to me weeping, and bewailing himself; and falling at my feet he
acknowledged and protested that the baptism with which he had been baptized
among the heretics was not of this character, nor in any respect like this,
because it was full of impiety and blasphemy.47

3 And he said that his soul was now pierced with sorrow, and that he had not
confidence to lift his eyes to God, because he had set out from those impious
words and deeds. And on this account he besought that he might receive this most
perfect purification, and reception and grace.

4 But I did not dare to do this; and said that his long communion was sufficient
for this. For I should not dare to renew from the beginning one who had heard
the giving of thanks and joined in repeating the Amen; who had stood by the
table and had stretched forth his hands to receive the blessed food; and who had
received it, and partaken for a long while of the body and blood of our Lord
Jesus Christ. But I exhorted him to be of good courage, and to approach the
partaking of the saints with firm faith and good hope.

5 But he does not cease lamenting, and he shudders to approach the table, and
scarcely, though entreated, does he dare to be present at the prayers."48

6 Besides these there is also extant another epistle of the same man on baptism,
addressed by him and his parish to Xystus and the church at Rome. In this he
considers the question then agitated with extended argument. And there is extant
yet another after these, addressed to Dionysius of Rome,49 concerning Lucian.50
So much with reference to these.

Chapter X. Valerian and the Persecution Under Him.

1 Gallus and the other rulers,51 having held the government less than two years,
were overthrown, and Valerian, with his son Gallienus, received the empire. The
circumstances which Dionysius relates of him we may learn from his epistle to
Hermammon,52 in which he gives the following account:

2 "And in like manner it is revealed to John; `For there was given to him,' he
says, `a mouth speaking great things and blasphemy; and there was given unto him
authority and forty and two months.'53

3 It is wonderful that both of these things occurred under Valerian; and it is
the more remarkable in this case when we consider his previous conduct, for he
had been mild and friendly toward the men of God, for none of the emperors
before him had treated them so kindly and favorably; and not even those who were
said openly to be Christians54 received them with such manifest hospitality and
friendliness as he did at the beginning of his reign. For his entire house was
filled with

4 pious persons and was a church of God. But the teacher and ruler of the
synagogue of the Magi from Egypt55 persuaded him to change his course, urging
him to slay and persecute pure and holy men56 because they opposed and hindered
the corrupt and abominable incantations. For there are and there were men who,
being present and being seen, though they only breathed and spoke, were able to
scatter the counsels of the sinful demons. And he induced him to practice
initiations and abominable sorceries and to offer unacceptable sacrifices; to
slay innumerable children and to sacrifice the offspring of unhappy fathers; to
divide the bowels of new-born babes and to mutilate and cut to pieces the
creatures of God, as if by such practices they could attain happiness."

5 He adds to this the following: "Splendid indeed were the thank-offerings which
Macrianus brought them57 for the empire which was the object of his hopes. He is
said to have been formerly the emperor's general finance minister58 ; yet he did
nothing praiseworthy or of general benefit,59 but fell under the prophetic

6 saying, `Woe unto those who prophesy from their own heart and do not consider
the general good.'60 For he did not perceive the general Providence, nor did he
look for the judgment of Him who is before all, and through all, and over all.
Wherefore he became an enemy of his Catholic61 Church, and alienatedand
estranged himself from the compassion of God, and fled as far as possible from
his salvation. In this he showed the truth of his own name."62

7 And again, farther on he says: "For Valerian, being instigated to such acts by
this man, was given over to insults and reproaches, according to what was said
by Isaiah: `They have chosen their own ways and their abominations in which
their soul delighted; I also will choose their delusions and will render unto
them their sins.'63

8 But this man64 madly desired the kingdom though unworthy of it, and being
unable to put the royal garment on his crippled body, set forward his two sons
to bear their father's sins.65 For concerning them the declaration which God
spoke was plain, `Visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children unto
the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.'66

9 For heaping on the heads of his sons his own evil desires, in which he had met
with success,67 he wiped off upon them his own wickedness and hatred toward
God."

Dionysius relates these things concerning Valerian.

Chapter XI. The Events Which Happened at This Time to Dionysius and Those in
Egypt.

1 But as regards the persecution which prevailed so fiercely in his reign, and
the sufferings which Dionysius with others endured on account of piety toward
the God of the universe, his own words shall show, which he wrote in answer to
Germanus,68 a contemporary bishop who was endeavoring to slander him. His
statement is as follows:

2 "Truly I am in danger of falling into great folly and stupidity through being
forced to relate the wonderful providence of God toward us. But since it is
said69 that `it is good to keep close the secret of a king, but it is honorable
to reveal the works of God,'70 I will join issue with the violence of Germanus.

3 I went not alone to Aemilianus;71 but my fellow-presbyter, Maximus,72 and the
deacons Faustus,73 Eusebius,74 and Chaeremon,75 and a brother who was present
from Rome, went with me.

4 But Aemilianus did not at first say to me: `Hold no assemblies;'76 for this
was superfluous to him, and the last thing to one who was seeking to accomplish
the first. For he was not concerned about our assembling, but that we ourselves
should not be Christians. And he commanded me to give this up; supposing if I
turned from it, the others also would follow me.

5 But I answered him, neither unsuitably nor in many words: `We must obey God
rather than men.'77 And I testified openly that I worshiped the one only God,
and no other; and that I would not turn from this nor would I ever cease to be a
Christian. Thereupon he commanded us to go to a village near the desert, called
Cephro.78

6 But listen to the very words which were spoken on both sides, as they were
recorded: "Dionysius, Faustus, Maximus, Marcellus,79 and Chaeremon being
arraigned, Aemilianus the prefect said:

7 `I have reasoned verbally with you concerning the clemency which our rulers
have shown to you; for they have given you the opportunity to save yourselves,
if you will turn to that which is according to nature, and worship the gods that
preserve theirempire, and forget those that are contrary to nature.80 What then
do you say to this? For I do not think that you will be ungrateful for their
kindness, since they would turn you to a better course.'

8 Dionysius replied: `Not all people worship all gods; but each one those whom
he approves. We therefore reverence and worship the one God, the Maker of all;
who hath given the empire to the divinely favored and august Valerian and
Gallienus; and we pray to him continually for their empire that it may remain
unshaken.'

9 Aemilianus, the prefect, said to them: `But who forbids you to worship him, if
he is a god, together with those who are gods by nature. For ye have been
commanded to reverence the gods, and the gods whom all know.' Dionysius
answered:

10 `We worship no other.' Aemilianus, the prefect, said to them: `I see that you
are at once ungrateful, and insensible to the kindness of our sovereigns.
Wherefore ye shall not remain in this city. But ye shall be sent into the
regions of Libya, to a place called Cephro. For I have chosen this place at the
command of our sovereigns, and it shall by no means be permitted you or any
others, either to hold assemblies, or to enter into the so called cemeteries.81

11 But if any one shall be seen without the place which I have commanded, or be
found in any assembly, he will bring peril on himself. For suitable punishment
shall not fail. Go, therefore where ye have been ordered.'

"And he hastened me away, though I was sick, not granting even a day's respite.
What opportunity then did I have, either to hold assemblies, or not to hold
them?"82 Farther on he says: "But through the

12 help of the Lord we did not give up the open assembly. But I called together
the more diligently those who were in the city, as if I were with them; being,
so to speak,83 `absent in body but present in spirit.'84 But in Cephro a large
church gathered with us of the brethren that followed us from the city, and
those that joined us from Egypt; and there `God opened unto us a door for the
Word.'85

13 At first we were persecuted and stoned; but afterwards not a few of the
heathen forsook the idols and turned to God. For until this time they had not
heard the Word, since it was then first sown by us.

14 And as if God had brought us to them for this purpose, when we had performed
this ministry he transferred us to another place. For Aemilianus, as it
appeared, desired to transport us to rougher and more Libyan-like places;86 so
he commanded them to assemble from all quarters in Mareotis,87 and assigned to
them different villages throughout the country. But he ordered us to be placed
nearer the highway that we might be seized first.88 For evidently he arranged
and prepared matters so that whenever he wished to seize us he could take all of
us without difficulty.

15 When I was first ordered to go to Cephro I did not know where the place was,
and had scarcely ever heard the name; yet I went readily and cheerfully. But
when I was told that I was to remove to the district of Colluthion,89 those who
were present know how I was affected.

16 For here I will accuse myself. At first I was grieved and greatly disturbed;
for though these places were better known and more familiar to us, yet the
country was said to be destitute of brethren and of men of character, and to be
exposed to the annoyances of travelers and incursions of robbers.

17 But I was comforted when the brethren reminded me that it was nearer the
city, and that while Cephro afforded us much intercourse with the brethren from
Egypt, so that we were able to extend the Church more widely, as this place was
nearer the city we should enjoy more frequently the sight of those who were
truly beloved and most closely related and dearest to us. For they would come
and remain, and special meetings90 could be held, as in the more remote suburbs.
And thus it turned out." After other matters he writes again as follows of the
things which happened to him

18 "Germanus indeed boasts of many confessions. He can speak forsooth of many
adversities which he himself has endured. But is he able to reckon up as many as
we can, of sentences, confiscations, proscriptions, plundering of goods, loss of
dignities, contempt of worldly glory, disregard for the flatteries of governors
and of councilors, and patient endurance of the threats of opponents, of
outcries, of perils and persecutions, and wandering and distress, and all kinds
of tribulation, such as came upon me under Decius and Sabinus,91 and such as
continue even now under Aemilianus? But where has Germanus been seen? And what

19 account is there of him? But I turn from this great folly into which I am
falling on account of Germanus. And for the same reason I desist from giving to
the brethren who know it an account of everything which took place."

20 The same writer also in the epistle to! Domitius and Didymus92 mentions some
particulars of the persecution as follows: "As our people are many and unknown
to you, it would be superfluous to give their names; but understand that men and
women, young and old, maidens and matrons, soldiers and civilians, of every race
and age, some by scourging and fire, others by the sword, have conquered in the
strife and received their crowns.

21 But in the case of some a very long time wasnot sufficient to make them
appear acceptable to the Lord; as, indeed, it seems also in my own case, that
sufficient time has not yet elapsed. Wherefore he has retained me for the time
which he knows to be fitting, saying, `In an acceptable time have I heard thee,
and in a day of salvation have I helped thee.'93 For as you

22 have inquired of our affairs and desire us to tell you how we are situated,
you have heard fully that when we - that is, myself and Gaius and Faustus and
Peter and Paul94 - were led away as prisoners by a centurion and magistrates,
with their soldiers and servants, certain persons from Mareotis came and dragged
us away by force, as we were unwilling to follow them.95 But

23 now I and Gaius and Peter are alone, deprived of the other brethren, and shut
up in a desert and dry place in Libya, three days' journey from Paraetonium."96

24 He says farther on: "The presbyters, 24 Maximus,97 Dioscorus,98 Demetrius,
and Lucius99 concealed themselves in the city, and visited the brethren
secretly; for Faustinus and Aquila,100 who are more prominent in the world, are
wandering in Egypt. But the deacons, Faustus, Eusebius, and Chaeremon,101 have
survived those who died in the pestilence. Eusebius is one whom God has
strengthened. and endowed from the first to fulfill energetically the
ministrations for the imprisoned confessors, and to attend to the dangerous task
of preparing for burial the bodies of the perfected and blessed martyrs

25 For as I have said before, unto the present time the governor continues to
put to death in a cruel manner those who are brought to trial. And he destroys
some with tortures, and wastes others away with imprisonment and bonds; and he
suffers no one to go near them, and investigates whether any one does so.
Nevertheless God gives relief to the afflicted through the zeal and persistence
of the brethren."

26 Thus far Dionysius. But it should be known that Eusebius, whom he calls a
deacon, shortly afterward became bishop of the church of Laodicea in Syria;102
and Maximus, of whom he speaks as being then a presbyter, succeeded Dionysius
himself as bishop of Alexandria.103 But the Faustus who was with him, and who at
that time was distinguished for his confession, was preserved until the
persecution in our day,104 when being very old and full of days, he closed his
life by martyrdom, being beheaded. But such are the things which happened at
that time105 to Dionysius.

Chapter XII. The Martyrs in Caesarea in Palestine.

1 During the above-mentioned persecution under Valerian, three men in Caesarea
in Palestine, being conspicuous in their confession of Christ, were adorned with
divine martyrdom, becoming food for wild beasts. One of them was called Priscus,
another Malchus, and the name of the third was Alexander.106 They say that these
men, who lived in the country, acted at first in a cowardly manner, as if they
were careless and thoughtless. For when the opportunity was given to those who
longed for the prize with heavenly desire, they treated it lightly, lest they
should seize the Crown of martyrdom prematurely. But having deliberated on the
matter, they hastened to Caesarea, and went before the judge and met the end we
have mentioned. They relate that besides these, in the same persecution and the
same city, a certain woman endured a similar conflict. But it is reported that
she belonged to the sect of Marcion.107 Chapter XIII. The Peace Under Gallienus.

1 Shortly after this Valerian was reduced to slavery by the barbarians,108 and
his son having become sole ruler, conducted the government more prudently. He
immediately restrained the persecution against us by public proclamations,109
and directed the bishops to perform in freedom their customary duties, in a
rescript110 which ran as follows: "The Emperor Caesar Publius Licinius

2 Gallienus, Pius, Felix, Augustus,111 to Dionysius, Pinnas, Demetrius,112 and
the other bishops. I have ordered the bounty of my gift to be declared through
all the world, that they may depart from the places of religious worship.113 And
for this purpose you may use this copy of my rescript, that no one may molest
you. And this which you are now enabled lawfully to do, has already for a long
time been conceded by me.114 Therefore Aurelius Cyrenius,115 who is the chief
administrator of affairs,116 will observe this ordinance which I have given." I
have given this in a translation from the Latin, that it may be more readily
understood. Another decree of his is extant addressed to other bishops,
permitting them to take possession again of the so-called cemeteries.117 Chapter
XIV. The Bishops that Flourished at that Time.

1 At that time Xystus118 was still presiding over the church of Rome, and
Demetrianus,119 successor of Fabius,120 over the church of Antioch, and
Firmilianus121 over that of Caesarea in Cappadocia; and besides these,
Gregory122 and his brother Athenodorus,123 friends of Origen, were presiding
over the churches in Pontus; and Theoctistus124 of Caesarea in Palestine having
died, Domnus125 received the episcopate there. He held it but a short time, and
Theotecnus,126 our contemporary, succeeded him. He also was a member of Origen's
school. But in Jerusalem, after the death of Mazabanes,127 Hymenaeus,128 who has
been celebrated among us for a great many years, succeeded to his seat.

Chapter XV. The Martyrdom of Marinus at Caesarea.

1 At this time, when the peace of the 1 churches had been everywhere129
restored, Marinus in Caesarea in Palestine, who was honored for his military
deeds, and illustrious by virtue of family and wealth, was beheaded for his
testimony to Christ, on the following account. The vine-branch130 is a certain

2 mark of honor among the Romans, and those who obtain it become, they say,
centurions. A place being vacated, the order of succession called Marinus to
this position. But when he was about to receive the honor, another person came
before the tribunal and claimed that it was not legal, according to the ancient
laws, for him to receive the Roman dignity, as he was a Christian and did not
sacrifice to the emperors; but that the office belonged rather to him. Thereupon
the judge, whose name was

3 Achaeus,131 being disturbed, first asked what opinion Marinus held. And when
he perceived that he continually confessed himself a Christian, he gave him
three hours for reflection. When he came out from the tribunal, Theotecnus

4132 the bishop there, took him aside and conversed with him, and taking his
hand led him into the church. And standing with him within, in the sanctuary, he
raised his cloak a little, and pointed to the sword that hung by his side; and
at the same time he placed before him the Scripture of the divine Gospels, and
told him to choose which of the two he wished. And without hesitation he reached
forth his right hand, and took the divine Scripture. "Hold fast then," says
Theotecnus to him, "hold fast to God, and strengthened by him mayest thou obtain
what thou hast chosen, and go inpeace." Immediately on his return the

5 herald cried out calling him to the tribunal, for the appointed time was
already completed. And standing before the tribunal, and manifesting greater
zeal for the faith, immediately, as he was, he was led away and finished his
course by death.

Chapter XVI. Story in Regard to Astyrius.

1 Astyrius133 also is commemorated on account of his pious boldness in
connection with this affair. He was a Roman of senatorial rank, and in favor
with the emperors, and well known to all on account of his noble birth and
wealth. Being present at the martyr's death, he took his body away on his
shoulder, and arraying him in a splendid and costly garment, prepared him for
the grave in a magnificent manner, and gave him fitting burial.134 The friends
of this man, that remain to our day, relate many other facts, concerning him.

Chapter XVII. The Signs at Paneas of the Great Might of Our Saviour.

1 Among these is also the following wonder. At Caesarea Philippi, which the
Phoenicians call Paneas,135 springs are shown at the foot of the Mountain
Panius, out of which the Jordan flows. They say that on a certain feast day, a
victim was thrown in,136 and that through the power of the demon it marvelously
disappeared and that which happened was a famous wonder to those who were
present. Astyrius was once there when these things were done, and seeing the
multitude astonished at the affair, he pitied their delusion; and looking up to
heaven he supplicated the God over all through Christ, that he would rebuke the
demon who deceived the people, and bring the men's delusion to an end. And they
say that when he had prayed thus, immediately the sacrifice floated on the
surface of the fountain. And thus the miracle departed; and no wonder was ever
afterward performed at the place.

Chapter XVIII. The Statue Which the Woman with an Issue of Blood Erected.137

1 Since I have mentioned this city I do not think it proper to omit an
accountwhich is worthy of record for posterity. For they say that the woman with
an issue of blood, who, as we learn from the sacred Gospel,138 received from our
Saviour deliverance from her affliction, came from this place, and that her
house is shown in the city, and that remarkable memorials of the kindness of the
Saviour to her remain there. For there stands upon

2 an elevated stone, by the gates of her house, a brazen image of a woman
kneeling, with her hands stretched out, as if she were praying. Opposite this is
another upright image of a man, made of the same material, clothed decently in a
double cloak, and extending his hand toward the woman. At his feet, beside the
statue itself,139 is a certain strange plant, which climbs up to the hem of the
brazen cloak, and is a remedy for all kinds of diseases. They say that this
statue is an image of

3 Jesus. It has remained to our day, so that we ourselves also saw it when we
were staying in the city. Nor is it strange that those

4 of the Gentiles who, of old, were benefited by our Saviour, should have done
such things, since we have learned also that the likenesses of his apostles Paul
and Peter, and of Christ himself, are preserved in paintings,140 the ancients
being accustomed, as it is likely, according to a habit of the Gentiles, to pay
this kind of honor indiscriminately to those regarded by them as deliverers.

Chapter XIX. The Episcopal Chair of James.

1 The chair of James, who first received the episcopate of the church at
Jerusalem from the Saviour himself141 and the apostles, and who, as the divine
records show,142 was called a brother of Christ, has been preserved until
now,143 the brethren who have followed him in succession there exhibiting
clearly to all the reverence which both those of old times and those of our own
day maintained and do maintain for holy men on account of their piety. So much
as to this matter.

Chapter XX. The Festal Epistles of Dionysius, in Which He Also Gives a Paschal
Canon.

1 Dionysius, besides his epistles already mentioned,144 wrote at that time145
also his extant Festal Epistles,146 in which he uses words of panegyric
respecting the passover feast. He addressed one of these to Flavius,147 and
another to Domitius and Didymus,148 in which he sets forth a canon of eight
years,149 maintaining that it is not proper to observe the paschal feast until
after the vernal equinox. Besides these he sent another epistle to his
fellow-presbyters in Alexandria, as well as various others to different persons
while the persecution was still prevailing.150 Chapter XXI. The Occurrences at
Alexandria.

1 Peace had but just been restored when he returned to Alexandria;151 but as
sedition and war broke out again, rendering it impossible for him to oversee all
the brethren, separated in different places by the insurrection, at the feast of
the passover, as if he were still an exile from Alexandria, he addressed them
again by letter.152

2 And in another festal epistle written later to Hierax,153 a bishop in Egypt,
he mentions the sedition then prevailing in Alexandria, as follows:

"What wonder is it that it is difficult for me to communicate by letters with
those who live far away, when it is beyond my power even to reason with myself,
or to take counsel for my own life?

3 Truly I need to send letters to those who are as my own bowels,154 dwelling in
one home, and brethren of one soul, and citizens of the same church; but how to
send them I cannot tell. For it would be easier for one to go, not only beyond
the limits of the province, but even from the East to the West, than from
Alexandria to Alexandria itself.

4 For the very heart of the city is more intricate and impassable than that
great and trackless desert which Israel traversed for two generations. And our
smooth and waveless harbors have become like the sea, divided and walled up,
through which Israel drove and in whose highway the Egyptians were overwhelmed.
For often from the slaughters there committed they appear like the Red Sea.

5 And the river which flows by the city has sometimes seemed drier than the
waterless desert, and more parched than that in which Israel, as they passed
through it, so suffered for thirst, that they cried out against Moses, and the
water flowed for them from the steep rock,155 through him who alone doeth
wonders.

6 Again it has overflowed so greatly as to flood all the surrounding country,
and the roads and the fields; threatening to bring back the deluge of water that
occurred in the days of Noah. And it flows along, polluted always with blood and
slaughter and drownings, as it became for Pharaoh through the agency of Moses,
when he changed it into blood, and it stank.156

7 And what other water could purify the water which purifies everything? How
could the ocean, so great and impassable for men, if poured into it, cleanse
this bitter sea? Or how could the great river which flowed out of Eden, if it
poured the four heads into which it is divided into the one of Geon,157 wash
away this pollution?

8 Or when can the air poisoned by these noxious exhalations become pure? For
such vapors arise from the earth, and winds from the sea, and breezes from the
river, and mists from the harbors, that the dews are, as it were, discharges
from dead bodies putrefying in all the elements around us.

9 Yet men wonder and cannot understand whence these continuous pestilences;
whence these severe sicknesses; whence these deadly diseases of all kinds;
whence this various and vast human destruction; why this great city no longer
contains as many inhabitants, from tender infants to those most advanced in
life, as it formerly contained of those whom it called hearty old men. But the
men from forty to seventy years of age were then so much more numerous that
their number cannot now be filled out, even when those from fourteen to eighty
years are enrolled and registered for the public allowance of food.

10 And the youngest in appearance have become, as it were, of equal age with
those who formerly were the oldest. But though they see the race of men thus
constantly diminishing and wasting away, and though their complete destruction
is increasing and advancing, they do not tremble."

Chapter XXII. The Pestilence Which Came Upon Them.

1 After these events a pestilential disease followed the war, and at the
approach of the feast he wrote again to the brethren, describing the sufferings
consequent upon this calamity.158

2 "To other men159 the present might not seem to be a suitable time for a
festival. Nor indeed is this or any other time suitable for them; neither
sorrowful times, nor even such as might be thought especially cheerful.160 Now,
indeed, everything is tears and every one is mourning, and wailings resound
daily through the city because of the multitude of the dead and dying.

3 For as it was written of the firstborn of the Egyptians, so now `there has
arisen a great cry, for there is not a house where there is not one dead.'161
And would that this were all!162

4 For many terrible things have happened already. First, they drove us out; and
when alone, and persecuted, and put to death by all, even then we kept the
feast. And every place of affliction was to us a place of festival: field,
desert, ship, inn, prison; but the perfected martyrs kept the most joyous
festival of all, feasting in heaven.

5 After these things war and famine followed, which we endured in common with
the heathen. But we bore alone those things with which they afflicted us, and at
the same time we experienced also the effects of what they inflicted upon and
suffered from one another; and again, we rejoiced in the peace of Christ, which
he gave to us alone.

6 "But after both we and they had enjoyed a very brief season of rest this
pestilence assailed us; to them more dreadful than any dread, and more
intolerable than any other calamity; and, as one of their own writers has said,
the only thing which prevails over all hope. But to us this was not so, but no
less than the other things was it an exercise and probation. For it did not keep
aloof even from us, but the heathen it assailed more severely."

7 Farther on he adds:

"The most of our brethren were unsparing in their exceeding love and brotherly
kindness. They held fast to each other and visited the sick fearlessly, and
ministered to them continually, serving them in Christ. And they died with them
most joyfully, taking the affliction of others, and drawing the sickness from
their neighbors to themselves and willingly receiving their pains. And many who
cared for the sick and gave strength to others died themselves having
transferred to themselves their death. And the popular saying which always seems
a mere expression of courtesy, they then made real in action, taking their
departure as the others"`offscouring.'163

8 "Truly the best of our brethren departed from life in this manner, including
some presbyters and deacons and those of the people who had the highest
reputation; so that this form of death, through the great piety and strong faith
it exhibited, seemed to lack nothing of martyrdom.

9 And they took the bodies of the saints in their open hands and in their
bosoms, and closed their eyes and their mouths; and they bore them away on their
shoulders and laid them out; and they clung to them and embraced them; and they
prepared them suitably with washings and garments. And after a little they
received like treatment themselves, for the survivors were continually following
those who had gone before them.

10 "But with the heathen everything was quite otherwise. They deserted those who
began to be sick, and fled from their dearest friends. And they cast them out
into the streets when they were half dead, and left the dead like refuse,
unburied. They shunned any participation or fellowship with death; which yet,
with all their precautions, it was not easy for them to escape."

11 After this epistle, when peace had been restored to the city, he wrote
another festal letter164 to the brethren in Egypt, and again several others
besides this. And there is also a certain one extant On the Sabbath,165 and
another On Exercise.

12 Moreover, he wrote again an epistle to Hermammon166 and the brethren in
Egypt, describing at length the wickedness of Decius and his successors, and
mentioning the peace under Gallienus.

Chapter XXIII. The Reign of Gallienus.

1 But there is nothing like hearing his own words, which are as follows:

"Then he,167 having betrayed one of the emperors that preceded him, and made war
on the other,168 perished with his whole family speedily and utterly. But
Gallienus was proclaimed and universally acknowledged at once an old emperor and
a new, being before them and continuing after them.

2 For according to the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah, `Behold the things
from the beginning have come to pass, and new things shall now arise.'169 For as
a cloud passing over the sun's rays and obscuring them for a little time hides
it and appears in its place; but when the cloud has passed by or is dissipated,
the sun which had risen before appears again; so Macrianus who put himself
forward and approached the existing empire of Gallienus, is not, since he never
was. But the other is just as he was.

3 And his kingdom, as if it had cast aside old age, and had been purified from
the former wickedness, now blossoms out more vigorously, and is seen and heard
farther, and extends in all directions."170 4 He then indicates the time at
which he wrote this in the following words:

"It occurs to me again to review the days of the imperial years. For I perceive
that those most impious men, though they have been famous, yet in a short time
have become nameless. But the holier and more godly prince,171 having passed the
seventh year, is now completing the ninth,172 in which we shall keep the feast."

Chapter XXIV. Nepos and His Schism.173

1 Besides all these the two books on the Promises174 were prepared by him. The
occasion of these was Nepos, a bishop in Egypt, who taught that the promises to
the holy men in the Divine Scriptures should be understood in a more Jewish
manner, and that there would be a certain millennium of bodily luxury upon this
earth.

2 As he thought that he could establish his private opinion by the Revelation of
John, he wrote a book on this subject, entitled Refutation of Allegorists.175

3 Dionysius opposes this in his books on the Promises. In the first he gives his
own opinion of the dogma; and in the second he treats of the Revelation of John,
and mentioning Nepos at the beginning, writes of him in this manner:

4 "But since they bring forward a certain work of Nepos, on which they rely
confidently, as if it proved beyond dispute that there will be a reign of Christ
upon earth, I confess that176 in many other respects I approve and love Nepos,
for his faith and industry and diligence in the Scriptures, and for his
extensive psalmody,177 with which many of the brethren are still delighted; and
I hold him in the more reverence because he has gone to rest before us. But the
truth should be loved and honored most of all. And while we should praise and
approve ungrudgingly what is said aright, we ought to examine and correct what
does not seem to have been written soundly.

5 Were he present to state his opinion orally, mere unwritten discussion,
persuading and reconciling those who are opposed by question and answer, would
be sufficient. But as some think his work very plausible, and as certain
teachers regard the law and prophets as of no consequence, and do not follow the
Gospels, and treat lightly the apostolic epistles, while they make promises178
as to the teaching of this work as if it were some great hidden mystery, and do
not permit our simpler brethren to have any sublime and lofty thoughts
concerning the glorious and truly divine appearing of our Lord, and our
resurrection from the dead, and our being gathered together unto him, and made
like him, but on the contrary lead them to hope for small and mortal things in
the kingdom of God, and for things such as exist now,- since this is the case,
it is necessary that we should dispute with our brother Nepos as if he were
present." Farther on he says:

6 "When I was in the district of Arsinoë,179 where, as you know, this doctrine
has prevailed for a long time, so that schisms and apostasies of entire churches
have resulted, I called together the presbyters and teachers of the brethren in
the villages,-such brethren as wished being also present,-and I exhorted them to
make a public examination of this question.

7 Accordingly when they brought me this book, as if it were a weapon and
fortress impregnable, sitting with them from morning till evening for three
successive days, I endeavored to correct what was written in it.

8 And I rejoiced over the constancy, sincerity, docility, and intelligence of
the brethren, as we considered in order and with moderation the questions and
the difficulties and the points of agreement. And we abstained from defending in
every manner and contentiously the opinions which we had once held, unless they
appeared to be correct. Nor did we evade objections, but we endeavored as far as
possible to hold to and confirm the things which lay before us, and if the
reason given satisfied us, we were not ashamed to change our opinions and agree
with others; but on the contrary, conscientiously and sincerely, and with hearts
laid open before God, we accepted whatever was established by the proofs and
teachings of the Holy Scriptures.

9 And finally the author and mover of this teaching, who was called Coracion,180
in the hearing of all the brethren that were present, acknowledged and testified
to us that he would no longer hold this opinion, nor discuss it, nor mention nor
teach it, as he was fully convinced by the arguments against it. And some of the
other brethren expressed their gratification at the conference, and at the
spirit of conciliation and harmony which all had manifested."

Chapter XXV. The Apocalypse of John.181 1 Afterward he speaks in this manner of
the Apocalypse of John.

"Some before us have set aside and rejected the book altogether, criticising it
chapter by chapter, and pronouncing it without sense or argument, and
maintaining that the title is fraudulent.

2 For they say that it is not the work of John, nor is it a revelation, because
it is covered thickly and densely by a vail of obscurity. And they affirm that
none of the apostles, rend none of the saints, nor any one in the Church is its
author, but that Cerinthus, who founded the sect which was called after him the
Cerinthian, desiring reputable authority for his fiction, prefixed the name.

3 For the doctrine which he taught was this: that the kingdom of Christ will be
an earthly one. And as he was himself devoted to the pleasures of the body and
altogether sensual in his nature, he dreamed that that kingdom would consist in
those things which he desired, namely, in the delights of the belly and of
sexual passion; that is to say, in eating and drinking and marrying, and in
festivals and sacrifices and the slaying of victims, under the guise of which he
thought he could indulge his appetites with a better grace.182

4 "But I could not venture to reject the book, as many brethren hold it in high
esteem. But I suppose that it is beyond my comprehension, and that there is a
certain concealed and more wonderful meaning in every part. For if I do not
understand I suspect that a deeper sense lies beneath the words

5 I do not measure and judge them by my own reason, but leaving the more to
faith I regard them as too high for me to grasp. And I do not reject what I
cannot comprehend, but rather wonder because I do not understand it."

6 After this he examines the entire Book of Revelation, and having proved that
it is impossible to understand it according to the literal sense, proceeds as
follows:

"Having finished all the prophecy, so to speak, the prophet pronounces those
blessed who shall observe it, and also himself. For he says, `Blessed is he that
keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book, and I, John, who saw and heard
these things.'183

7 Therefore that he was called John, and that this book is the work of one John,
I do not deny. And I agree also that it is the work of a holy and inspired man.
But I cannot readily admit that he was the apostle, the son of Zebedee, the
brother of James, by whom the Gospel of John and the Catholic Epistle184 were
written.

8 For I judge from the character of both, and the forms of expression, and the
entire execution of the book,185 that it is not his. For the evangelist nowhere
gives his name, or proclaims himself, either in the Gospel or Epistle."

9 Farther on he adds:

"But John never speaks as if referring to himself, or as if referring to another
person.186 But the author of the Apocalypse introduces himself at the very
beginning: `The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which he gave him to show unto his
servants quickly; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant
John, who bare witness of the word of God and of his testimony, even of all
things that he saw.'187

10 Then he writes also an epistle: `John to the seven churches which are in
Asia, grace be with you, and peace.'188 But the evangelist did not prefix his
name even to the Catholic Epistle; but without introduction he begins with the
mystery of the divine revelation itself: `That which was from the beginning,
which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes.'189 For because of such a
revelation the Lord also blessed Peter, saying, `Blessed art thou, Simon
Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my heavenly
Father.'190

11 But neither in the reputed second or third epistle of John, though they are
very short, does the name John appear; but there is written the anonymous
phrase, `the elder.'191 But this author did not consider it sufficient to give
his name once and to proceed with his work; but he takes it up again: `I, John,
who also am your brother and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and in
the patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos for the Word
of God and the testimony of Jesus.'192 And toward the close he speaks thus:
`Blessed is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book, and I, John,
who saw and heard these things.'193

12 "But that he who wrote these things was called John must be believed, as he
says it; but who he was does not appear. For he did not say, as often in the
Gospel, that he was the beloved disciple of the Lord,194 or the one who lay on
his breast,195 or the brother of James, or the eyewitness and hearer of the
Lord.

13 For he would have spoken of these things if he had wished to show himself
plainly. But he says none of them; but speaks of himself as our brother and
companion, and a witness of Jesus, and blessed because he had seen and heard the
revelations.

14 But I am of the opinion that there were many with the same name as the
apostle John, who, on account of their love for him, and because they admired
and emulated him, and desired to be loved by the Lord as he was, took to
themselves the same surname, as many of the children of the faithful are called
Paul or Peter.

15 For example, there is also another John, surnamed Mark, mentioned in the Acts
of the Apostles,196 whom Barnabas and Paul took with them; of whom also it is
said, `And they had also John as their attendant.'197 But that it is he who
wrote this, I would not say. For it not written that he went with them into
Asia, but, `Now when Paul and his company set sail from Paphos, they came to
Perga in Pamphylia and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem.'198

16 But I think that he was some other one of those in Asia; as they say that
there are two monuments in Ephesus, each bearing the name of John.199

17 "And from the ideas, and from the words and their arrangement, it may be
reasonably conjectured that this one is different from that one.200

18 For the Gospel and Epistle agree with each other and begin in the same
manner. The one says, `In the beginning was the Word';201 the other, `That which
was from the beginning.'202 The one: `And the Word was made flesh and dwelt
among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the
Father';203 the other says the same things slightly altered: `Which we have
heard, which we have seen with our eyes; which we have looked upon and our hands
have handled of the Word of life,-and the life was manifested.'204

19 For he introduces these things at the beginning, maintaining them, as is
evident from what follows, in opposition to those who said that the Lord had not
come in the flesh. Wherefore also he carefully adds, `And we have seen and bear
witness, and declare unto you the eternal life which was with the Father and was
manifested unto us. That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you
also.'205

20 He holds to this and does not digress from his subject, but discusses
everything under the same heads and names 21 some of which we will briefly
mention. Any one who examines carefully will find the phrases, `the life,' `the
light,' `turning from darkness,' frequently occurring in both; also continually,
`truth,' `grace,' `joy,' `the flesh and blood of the Lord,' `the judgment,' `the
forgiveness of sins,' `the love of God toward us,' the `commandment that we love
one another,' that we should `keep all the commandments'; the `conviction of the
world, of the Devil, of Anti-Christ,' the `promise of the Holy Spirit,' the
`adoption of God,' the `faith continually required of us,` `the Father and the
Son,' occur everywhere. In fact, it is plainly to be seen that one and the same
character marks the Gospel and the Epistle throughout.

22 But the Apocalypse is different from these writings and foreign to them; not
touching, nor in the least bordering upon them; almost, so to speak, without
even a syllable in common with them.

23 Nay more, the Epistle-for I pass by the Gospel - does not mention nor does it
contain any intimation of the Apocalypse, nor does the Apocalypse of the
Epistle. But Paul, in his epistles, gives some indication of his revelations,206
though he has not written them out by themselves.

24 "Moreover, it can also be shown that the, diction of the Gospel and Epistle
differs from that of the Apocalypse.

25 For they were written not only without error as regards the Greek language,
but also with elegance in their expression, in their reasonings, and in their
entire structure. They are far indeed from betraying any barbarism or solecism,
or any vulgarism whatever. For the writer had, as it seems, both the requisites
of discourse,-that is, the gift of knowledge and the gift of expression,-as the
Lord had bestowed them both upon him.

26 I do not deny that the other writer saw a revelation and received knowledge
and prophecy. I perceive, however, that his dialect and language are not
accurate Greek, but that he uses barbarous idioms, and, in some places,
solecisms.

27 It is unnecessary to point these out here, for I would not have any one think
that I have said these things in a spirit of ridicule, for I have said what I
have only with the purpose of showing dearly the difference between the
writings."

Chapter XXVI. The Epistles of Dionysius.

1 Besides these, many other epistles of Dionysius are extant, as those against
Sabellius,207 addressed to Ammon,208 bishop of the church of Bernice, and one to
Telesphorus,209 and one to Euphranor, and again another to Ammon and Euporus. He
wrote also four other books on the same subject, which he addressed to his
namesake Dionysius, in Rome.210

2 Besides these many of his epistles are with us, and large books written in
epistolary form, as those on Nature,211 addressed to the young man Timothy, and
one on Temptations,212 which he also dedicated to Euphranor.

3 Moreover, in a letter to Basilides,213 bishop of the parishes in Pentapolis,
he says that he had written an exposition of the beginning of Ecclesiastes.214
And he has left us also various letters addressed to this same person. Thus much
Dionysius. But our account of these matters being now completed, permit us to
show to posterity the character of our own age.215 Chapter XXVII. Paul of
Samosata, and the Heresy Introduced by Hint at Antioch.

1 After Xystus had presided over the church of Rome for eleven years,216
Dionysius,217 namesake of him of Alexandria, succeeded him. About the same time
Demetrianus218 died in Antioch, and Paul of Samosata219 received that
episcopate.

2 As he held, contrary to the teaching of the Church, low and degraded views of
Christ, namely, that in his nature he was a common man, Dionysius of Alexandria
was entreated to come to the synod.220 But being unable to come on account of
age and physical weakness, he gave his opinion on the subject under
consideration by letter.221 But all the other pastors of the churches from all
directions, made haste to assemble at Antioch, as against a despoiler of the
flock of Christ.

Chapter XXVIII. The Illustrious Bishops of that Time.

1 Of these, the most eminent were Firmilianus,222 bishop of Caesarea in
Cappadocia; the brothers Gregory223 and Athenodorus, pastors of the churches in
Pontus; Helenus224 of the parish of Tarsus, and Nicomas225 of Iconium moreover,
Hymenaeus,226 of the church of Jerusalem, and Theotecnus227 of the neighboring
church of Caesarea; and besides these Maximus,228 who presided in a
distinguished manner over the brethren in Bostra. If any should count them up he
could not fail to note a great many others, besides presbyters and deacons, who
were at that time assembled for the same cause in the above-mentioned city.229
But these were the most illustrious.

2 When all of these assembled at different times and frequently to consider
these matters, the arguments and questions were discussed at every meeting; the
adherents of the Samosatian endeavoring to cover and conceal his heterodoxy, and
the others striving zealously to lay bare and make manifest his heresy and
blasphemy against Christ.

3 Meanwhile, Dionysius died in the twelfth year of the reign of Gallienus,230
having held the episcopate of Alexandria for seventeen years, and Maximus231
succeeded him.

4 Gallienus after a reign of fifteen years232 was succeeded by Claudius,233 who
in two years delivered the government to Aurelian.

Chapter XXIX. Paul, Having Been Refuted by Malchion, a Presbyter from the
Sophists, Was Excommunicated.

1 During his reign a final synod234 composed of a great many bishops was held,
and the leader of heresy235 in Antioch was detected, and his false doctrine
clearly shown before all, and he was excommunicated from the Catholic Church
under heaven.236

2 Malchion especially drew him out of his hiding-place and refuted him. He was a
man learned in other respects, and principal of the sophist school of Grecian
learning in Antioch; yet on account of the superior nobility of his faith in
Christ he had been made a presbyter of that parish. This man, having conducted a
discussion with him, which was taken down by stenographers and which we know is
still extant, was alone able to detect the man who dissembled and deceived the
others.

Chapter XXX. The Epistle of the Bishops Against Paul.

1 The pastors who had assembled about this matter, prepared by common consent an
epistle addressed to Dionysius,237 bishop of Rome, and Maximus238 of Alexandria,
and sent it to all the provinces. In this they make manifest to all their own
zeal and the perverse error of Paul, and the arguments and discussions which
they had with him, and show the entire life and conduct of the man. It may be
well to put on record at the present time the following extracts from their
writing:

2 "To Dionysius and Maximus, and to all our fellow-ministers throughout the
world, bishops, presbyters, and deacons, and to the whole Catholic Church under
heaven,239 Helenus,240 Hymenaeus, Theophilus, Theotecnus, Maximus, Proclus,
Nicomas, Aelianus, Paul, Bolanus, Protogenes, Hierax, Eutychius, Theodorus,241
Malchion, and Lucius, and all the others who dwell with us in the neighboring
cities and nations, bishops, presbyters, and deacons, and the churches of God,
greeting to the beloved brethren in the Lord."

3 A little farther on they proceed thus: "We sent for and called many of the
bishops from a distance to relieve us from this deadly doctrine; as Dionysius of
Alexandria242 and Firmilianus243 of Cappadocia, those blessed men. The first of
these not considering the author of this delusion worthy to be addressed, sent a
letter to Antioch,244 not written to him, but to the entire parish, of which we
give a copy below.

4 But Firmilianus came twice245 and condemned his innovations, as we who were
present know and testify, and many others understand. But as he promised to
change his opinions, he believed him and hoped that without any reproach to the
Word what was necessary would be done. So he delayed the matter, being deceived
by him who denied even his own God and Lord,246 and had not kept the faith which
he formerly held.

5 And now Firmilianus was again on his way to Antioch, and had come as far as
Tarsus because he had learned by experience his God-denying wickedness. But
while we, having come together, were calling for him and awaiting his arrival,
he died."247 6 After other things they describe as follows the manner of life
which he248 led:

7 "Whereas he has departed from the rule of faith,249 and has turned aside after
base and spurious teachings, it is not necessary,-since he is without,-that we
should pass judgment upon his practices: as for instance in that although
formerly destitute and poor, and having received no wealth from his fathers, nor
made anything by trade or business, he now possesses abundant wealth through his
iniquities and sacrilegious acts, and through those things which he extorts from
the brethren,250 depriving the injured of their rights and promising to assist
them for reward, yet deceiving them, and plundering those who in their trouble
are ready to give that they may obtain reconciliation with their oppressors,

8 `supposing that gain is godliness';251 -or in that he is haughty, and is
puffed up, and assumes worldly dignities, preferring to be called ducenarius252
rather than bishop; and struts in the market-places, reading letters and
reciting them as he walks in public, attended by a body-guard, with a multitude
preceding and following him, so that the faith is envied and hated on account of
his pride and haughtiness of heart;

9 -or in that he practices chicanery in ecclesiastical assemblies, contrives to
glorify himself, and deceive with appearances, and astonish the minds of the
simple, preparing for himself a tribunal and lofty throne,253 -not like a
disciple of Christ,-and possessing a `secretum,'254 -like the rulers of the
world,-and so calling it, and striking his thigh with his hand, and stamping on
the tribunal with his feet;-or in that he rebukes and insults those who do not
applaud, and shake their handkerchiefs as in the theaters, and shout and leap
about like the men and women that are stationed around him, and hear him in this
unbecoming manner, but who listen reverently and orderly as in the house of
God;-or in that he violently and coarsely assails in public the expounders of
the Word that have departed this life, and magnifies himself, not as a bishop,
but as a sophist and juggler,

10 and stops the psalms to our Lord Jesus Christ, as being the modern
productions of modern men, and trains women to sing psalms to himself in the
midst of the church on the great day of the passover, which any one might
shudder to hear, and persuades the bishops and presbyters of the neighboring
districts and cities who fawn upon him, to advance the same ideas in their
discourses to the people.

11 For to anticipate something of what we shall presently write, he is unwilling
to acknowledge that the Son of God has come down from heaven. And this is not a
mere assertion, but it is abundantly proved from the records which we have sent
you; and not least where he says `Jesus Christ is from below.'255 But those
singing to him and extolling him among the people say that their impious teacher
has come down an angel from heaven.256 And he does not forbid such things; but
the arrogant man is even present when they are uttered.

12 And there are the women, the `subintroductae,'257 as the people of Antioch
call them, belonging to him and to the presbyters and deacons that are with him.
Although he knows and has convicted these men, yet he connives at this and their
other incurable sins, in order that they may be bound to him, and through fear
for themselves may not dare to accuse him for his wicked words and deeds.258 But
he has also made them rich; on which account he is loved and admired by those
who covet such things.

13 We know, beloved, that the bishop and all the clergy should be an example to
the people of all good works. And we are not ignorant how many have fallen or
incurred suspicion, through the women whom they have thus brought in. So that
even if we should allow that he commits no sinful act, yet he ought to avoid the
suspicion which arises from such a thing, lest he scandalize some one, or lead
others to imitate him.

14 For how can he reprove or admonish another not to be too familiar with
women,-lest he fall, as it is written,259 -when he has himself sent one away
already, and now has two with him, blooming and beautiful, and takes them with
him wherever he goes, and at the same time lives in luxury and surfeiting?

15 Because of these things all mourn and lament by themselves; but they so fear
his tyranny and power, that they dare not accuse him.

16 But as we have said, while one might call the man to account for this
conduct, if he held the Catholic doctrine and was numbered with us,260 since he
has scorned the mystery and struts about in the abominable heresy of Artemas261
(for why should we not mention his father?), we think it unnecessary to demand
of him an explanation of these things."

17 Afterwards, at the close of the epistle, they add these words:

"Therefore we have been compelled to excommunicate him, since he sets himself
against God, and refuses to obey; and to appoint in his place another bishop for
the Catholic Church. By divine direction, as we believe, we have appointed
Domnus,262 who is adorned with all the qualities becoming in a bishop, and who
is a son of the blessed Demetrianus,263 who formerly presided in a distinguished
manner over the same parish. We have informed you of this that you may write to
him, and may receive letters of communion264 from him. But let this man write to
Artemas; and let those who think as Artemas does, communicate with him."265

18 As Paul had fallen from the episcopate, as well as from the orthodox faith,
Domnus, as has been said, became bishop of the church at Antioch.

19 But as Paul refused to surrender the church building, the Emperor Aurelian
was petitioned; and he decided the matter most equitably, ordering the building
to be given to those to whom the bishops of Italy and of the city of Rome should
adjudge it.266 Thus this man was driven out of the church, with extreme
disgrace, by the worldly power.

20 Such was Aurelian's treatment of us at that time; but in the course of his
reign he changed his mind in regard to us, and was moved by certain advisers to
institute a persecution against us.267 And there was great talk about this on
every side.

21 But as he was about to do it, and was, so to speak, in the very act of
signing the decrees against us, the divine judgment came upon him and restrained
him at the very verge268 of his undertaking, showing in a manner that all could
see clearly, that the rulers of this world can never find an opportunity against
the churches of Christ, except the hand, that defends them permits it, in divine
and heavenly judgment, for the sake of discipline and correction, at such times
as it sees best.

22 After a reign of six years,269 Aurelian was succeeded by Probus. He reigned
for the same number of years, and Carus, with his sons, Carinus and Numerianus,
succeeded him. After they had reigned less than three years the government
devolved on Diocletian, and those associated with him.270 Under them took place
the persecution of our time, and the destruction of the churches connected with
it.

23 Shortly before this, Dionysius,271 bishop of Rome, after holding office for
nine years, died, and was succeeded by Felix.272 Chapter XXXI. The Perversive
Heresy of the Manicheans Which Began at This Time.

1 At this time, the madman,273 named from his demoniacal heresy, armed himself
in the perversion of his reason, as the devil, Satan, who himself fights against
God, put him forward to the destruction of many. He was a barbarian in life,
both in word and deed; and in his nature demoniacal and insane. In consequence
of this he sought to pose as Christ, and being puffed up in his madness, he
proclaimed himself the Paraclete and the very Holy Spirit;274 and afterwards,
like Christ, he chose twelve disciples as partners of his new doctrine.

2 And he patched together false and godless doctrines collected from a multitude
of long-extinct impieties, and swept them, like a deadly poison, from Persia to
our part of the world. From him the impious name of the Manicheans is still
prevalent among many. Such was the foundation of this "knowledge falsely
so-called,"275 which sprang up in those times.

Chapter XXXII. The Distinguished Ecclesiastics276 Of Our Day, and Which of Them
Survived Until the Destruction of the Churches.

1 At this time, Felix,277 having presided over the church of Rome for five
years, was succeeded by Eutychianus,278 but he in less than ten months left the
position to Caius,279 who lived in our day. He held it about fifteen years, and
was in turn succeeded by Marcellinus,280 who was overtaken by the persecution.

2 About the same time Timaeus281 received the episcopate of Antioch after
Domnus,282 and Cyril,283 who lived in our day, succeeded him. In his time we
became acquainted with Dorotheus,284 a man of learning among those of his day,
who was honored with the office of presbyter in Antioch. He was a lover of the
beautiful in divine things, and devoted himself to the Hebrew language, so that
he read the Hebrew Scriptures with facility.285

3 He belonged to those who were especially liberal, and was not unacquainted
with Grecian propaedeutics.286 Besides this he was a eunuch,287 having been so
from his very birth. On this account, as if it were a miracle, the emperor288
took him into his family, and honored him by placing him over the purple
dye-works at Tyre. We have heard him expound the Scriptures wisely in the
Church.

4 After Cyril, Tyrannus289 received the episcopate of the parish of Antioch. In
his time occurred the destruction of the churches.

5 Eusebius,290 who had come from the city of Alexandria, ruled the parishes of
Laodicea after Socrates.291 The occasion of his removal thither was the affair
of Paul. He went on this account to Syria, and was restrained from returning
home by those there who were zealous in divine things. Among our contemporaries
he was a beautiful example of religion, as is readily seen from the words of
Dionysius which we have quoted.292 Anatolius293 was appointed his successor; one
good man, as they say, following another. He also was an Alexandrian by birth.
In learning and skill in Greek philosophy, such as arithmetic and geometry,
astronomy, and dialectics in general, as well as in the theory of physics, he
stood first among the ablest men of our time, and he was also at the head in
rhetorical science. It is reported that for this reason he was requested by the
citizens of Alexandria to establish there a school of Aristotelian
philosophy.294

7 They relate of him many other eminent deeds during the siege of the
Pyrucheium295 in Alexandria, on account of which he was especially honored by
all those in high office; but I will give the following only as an example.

8 They say that bread had failed the besieged, so that it was more difficult to
withstand the famine than the enemy outside; but he being present provided for
them in this manner. As the other part of the city was allied with the Roman
army, and therefore was not under siege, Anatolius sent for Eusebius,-for he was
still there before his transfer to Syria, and was among those who were not
besieged, and possessed, moreover, a great reputation and a renowned name which
had reached even the Roman general,-and he informed him of those who were
perishing in the siege from famine.

9 When he learned this he requested the Roman commander as the greatest possible
favor, to grant safety to deserters from the enemy. Having obtained his request,
he communicated it to Anatolius. As soon as he received the message he convened
the senate of Alexandria, and at first proposed that all should come to a
reconciliation with the Romans. But when he perceived that they were angered by
this advice, he said, "But I do not think you will oppose me, if I counsel you
to send the supernumeraries and those who are in nowise useful to us, as old
women and children and old men, outside the gates, to go wherever they may
please. For why should we retain for no purpose these who must at any rate soon
die? and why should we destroy with hunger those who are crippled and maimed in
body, when we ought to provide only for men and youth, and to distribute the
necessary bread among those who are needed for the garrison of the city?"

10 With such arguments he persuaded the assembly, and rising first he gave his
vote that the entire multitude, whether of men or women, who were not needful
for the army, should depart from the city, because if they remained and
unnecessarily continued in the city, there would be for them no hope of safety,
but they would perish with famine.

11 As all the others in the senate agreed to this, he saved almost all the
besieged. He provided that first, those belonging to the church, and afterwards,
of the others in the city, those of every age should escape, not only the
classes included in the decree, but, under cover of these, a multitude of
others, secretly clothed in women's garments; and through his management they
went out of the gates by night and escaped to the Roman camp. There Eusebius,
like a father and physician, received all of them, wasted away through the long
siege, and restored them by every kind of prudence and care.

12 The church of Laodicea was honored by two such pastors in succession, who, in
the providence of God, came after the aforesaid war from Alexandria to that
city.

13 Anatolius did not write very many works; but in such as have come down to us
we can discern his eloquence and erudition. In these he states particularly his
opinions on the passover. It seems important to give here the following extracts
from them.296

14 From the Paschal Canons of Anatolius. "There is then in the first year the
new moon of the first month, which is the beginning of every cycle of nineteen
years,297 on the twenty-sixth day of the Egyptian Phamenoth;298 but according to
the months of the Macedonians, the twenty-second day of Dystrus,299 or, as the
Romans would say, the eleventh before the Kalends of April.

15 On the said twenty-sixth of Phamenoth, the sun is found not only entered on
the first segment,300 but already passing through the fourth day in it. They are
accustomed to call this segment the first dodecatomorion,301 and the equinox,
and the beginning of months, and the head of the cycle, and the starting-point
of the planetary circuit. But they call the one preceding this the last of
months, and the twelfth segment, and the final dodecatomorion, and the end of
the planetary circuit. Wherefore we maintain that those who place the first
month in it, and determine by it the fourteenth of the passover, commit no
slight or common blunder.

16 And this is not an opinion of our own; but it was known to the Jews of old,
even before Christ, and was carefully observed by them. This may be learned from
what is said by Philo, Josephus, and Musaeus;302 and not only by them, but also
by those yet more ancient, the two Agathobuli,303 surnamed `Masters,` and the
famous Aristobulus,304 who was chosen among the seventy interpreters of the
sacred and divine Hebrew Scriptures305 by Ptolemy Philadelphus and his father,
and who also dedicated his exegetical books on the law of Moses to the same
kings.

17 These writers, explaining questions in regard to the Exodus, say that all
alike should sacrifice the passover offerings after the vernal equinox, in the
middle of the first month. But this occurs while the sun is passing through the
first segment of the solar, or as some of them have styled it, the zodiacal
circle. Aristobulus adds that it is necessary for the feast of the passover,
that not only the sun should pass through the equinoctial segment, but the moon
also.

18 For as there are two equinoctial segments, the vernal and the autumnal,
directly opposite each other, and as the day of the passover was appointed on
the fourteenth of the month, beginning with the evening, the moon will hold a
position diametrically opposite the sun, as may be seen in full moons; and the
sun will be in the segment of the vernal equinox, and of necessity the moon in
that of the autumnal.

19 I know that many other things have been said by them, some of them probable,
and some approaching absolute demonstration, by which they endeavor to prove
that it is altogether necessary to keep the passover and the feast of unleavened
bread after the equinox. But I refrain from demanding this sort of demonstration
for matters from which the veil of the Mosaic law has been removed, so that now
at length with uncovered face we continually behold as in a glass Christ and the
teachings and sufferings of Christ.306 But that with the Hebrews the first month
was near the equinox, the teachings also of the Book of Enoch show.'307

20 The same writer has also left the Institutes of Arithmetic, in ten books,308
and other evidences of his experience and proficiency in divine things.

21 Theotecnus,309 bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, first ordained him as bishop,
designing to make him his successor in his own parish after his death. And for a
short time both of them presided over the same church.310 But the synod which
was held to consider Paul's case311 called him to Antioch, and as he passed
through the city of Laodicea, Eusebius being dead, he was detained by the
brethren there.

22 And after Anatolius had departed this life, the last bishop of that parish
before the persecution was Stephen,312 who was admired by many for his knowledge
of philosophy and other Greek learning. But he was not equally devoted to the
divine faith, as the progress of the persecution manifested; for it showed that
he was a cowardly and unmanly dissembler rather than a true philosopher.

23 But this did not seriously injure the church, for Theodotus313 restored their
affairs, being straightway made bishop of that parish by God himself, the
Saviour of all. He justified by his deeds both his lordly name314 and his office
of bishop. For he excelled in the medical art for bodies, and in the healing art
for souls. Nor did any other man equal him in kindness, sincerity, sympathy, and
zeal in helping such as needed his aid. He was also greatly devoted to divine
learning. Such an one was he.

24 In Caesarea in Palestine, Agapius315 succeeded Theotecnus, who had most
zealously performed the duties of his episcopate. Him too we know to have
labored diligently, and to have manifested most genuine providence in his
oversight of the people, particularly caring for all the poor with liberal hand.

25 In his time we became acquainted with Pamphilus,316 that most eloquent man,
of truly philosophical life, who was esteemed worthy of the office of presbyter
in that parish. It would be no small matter to show what sort of a man he was
and whence he came. But we have described, in our special work concerning
him,317 all the particulars of his life, and of the school which he established,
and the trials which he endured in many confessions during the persecution, and
the crown of martyrdom with which he was finally honored. But of all that were
there he was indeed the most admirable.

26 Among those nearest our times, we have known Pierius,318 of the presbyters in
Alexandria, and Meletius,319 bishop of the churches in Pontus, - rarest of men.

27 The first was distinguished for his life of extreme poverty and his
philosophic learning, and was exceedingly diligent in the contemplation and
exposition of divine things, and in public discourses in the church. Meletius,
whom the learned called the "honey of Attica,"320 was a man whom every one would
describe as most accomplished in all kinds of learning; and it would be
impossible to admire sufficiently his rhetorical skill. It might be said that he
possessed this by nature; but who could surpass the excellence of his great
experience and erudition in other respects?

28 For in all branches of knowledge had you undertaken to try him even once, you
would have said that he was the most skillful and learned. Moreover, the virtues
of his life were not less remarkable. We observed him well in the time of the
persecution, when for seven full years he was escaping from its fury in the
regions of Palestine.

29 Zambdas321 received the episcopate of the church of Jerusalem after the
bishop Hymenaeus, whom we mentioned a little above.322 He died in a short time,
and Hermon,323 the last before the persecution in our day, succeeded to the
apostolic chair, which has been preserved there until the present time.324

30 In Alexandria, Maximus,325 who, after the death of Dionysius,326 had been
bishop for eighteen years, was succeeded by Theonas.327 In his time Achillas,328
who had been appointed a presbyter in Alexandria at the same time with Pierius,
became celebrated. He was placed over the school of the sacred faith,329 and
exhibited fruits of philosophy most rare and inferior to none, and conduct
genuinely evangelical.

31 After Theonas had held the office for nineteen years, Peter330 received the
episcopate in Alexandria, and was very eminent among them for twelve entire
years. Of these he governed the church less than three years before the
persecution, and for the remainder of his life he subjected himself to a more
rigid discipline and cared in no secret manner for the general interest of the
churches. On this account he was beheaded in the ninth year of the persecution,
and was adorned with the crown of martyrdom.

32 Having written out these books the account of the successions from the birth
of our Saviour to the destruction of the places of worship, - a period of three
hundred and five years,331 - permit me to pass on to the contests of those who,
in our day, have heroically fought for religion, and to leave in writing, for
the information of posterity, the extent and the magnitude of those conflicts.

1: On Dionysius, see especially Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 1.

2: Decius reigned about thirty months, from the summer of 249 until almost the
close of the year 251 (see Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. III. p. 285). His son
Herennius Etruscus was slain with his father in a battle fought against the
Goths in Thrace; another son, Hostilianus, was associated in the purple with
Decius' successor, Gallus, but died soon afterwards, probably by the plague,
which was at that time raging; possibly, as was suspected, by the treachery of
Gallus. There has been some controversy as to whether Hostilianus was a son, or
only a nephew, or a son-in-law of Decius. Eusebius in speaking of more than one
son becomes an independent witness to the former alternative, and there is
really little reason to doubt it, for Zosimus' statements are explicit (see
Zosimus, I. 25, and cf. Tillemont, ibid. p. 506). Two other sons are mentioned
in one inscription but its genuineness is doubtful. Eusebius, however, may be
urged as a witness that he had more than two (cf. Tillemont, ibid. ).

3: enoj deonta thj zwhj ebdomhkonta apoplhsaj eth teleuta . Upon the date of
Origen's birth and upon his life in general, see above, Bk. VI. chap. 2, note 1,
and below, p. 391 sq.

4: Of this Hermammon we know nothing. The words of Eusebius at the close of
chap. 22, below, lead us to think that he was probably a bishop of some church
in Egypt. Fragments of the epistle addressed to him are preserved in this
chapter and in chapters 10 and 23, below. It is possible that Dionysius wrote
more than one epistle to Hermammon and that the fragments which we have are from
different letters. This, however, is not probable, for Eusebius gives no hint
that he is quoting from more than one epistle, and, moreover, the three extracts
which we have correspond excellently with one another, seeming to be drawn from
a single epistle which contained a description of the conduct of successive
emperors toward the Christians. The date of the epistle is given at the close of
chap. 23; namely, the ninth year of the Emperor Gallienus (i.e. August,
261-August, 262), reckoning from the time of his association with his father
Valerian in the purple.

5: Gallus succeeded Decius toward the close of the year 251 and reigned until
the summer of 253 (some with less ground say 254), when he was slain, with his
son, by his own soldiers. His persecution of the Christians (under him, for
instance, Cornelius, bishop of Rome, was banished, see above, Bk. VI. chap. 39,
note 3), seems to have been less the result of a deeply rooted religious
conviction and a fixed political principle (such as Decius possessed) than of
the terrible plague which had begun during the reign of Decius and was ravaging
the empire during the early part of Gallus' reign (see Tillemont's Hist. des
Emp. III. p. 288). He persecuted, therefore, not so much as a matter of
principle as because he desired either to appease the populace or to propitiate
the Gods, whom he superstitiously believed, as the people did, to be the authors
of the terrible scourge.

6: On Cornelius, see Bk. VI. chap. 39, note 3.

7: Eusebius makes Cornelius' episcopate a year too long (see Bk. VI. chap. 39,
note 3), and hence puts the accession of Julius too late. Jerome puts him in the
second year of Gallus (see the same note) and gives the duration of his
episcopate as eight months, agreeing with Eusebius in the present passage. The
Armenian Chron. puts Lucius in the seventh year of Philip, and assigns only two
months to his episcopate. But it is far out of the way, as also in regard to
Cornelius. The Liberian catalogue assigns three years and eight months to
Lucius' episcopate, putting his death in 255; but Lipsius has shown conclusively
that this must be incorrect, and concludes that he held office eight months,
from June, 253, to March, 254. He was banished while bishop of Rome, but
returned very soon, and died in a short time, probably a natural death. The
strife in regard to the lapsed, begun while Cornelius was bishop, continued
under him, and he followed the liberal policy of his predecessor. One letter of
Cyprian addressed to him is extant ( Ep. 57; al. 61).

8: Lipsius puts the accession of Stephen on the twelfth of May, 254, and his
death on the second of August, 257, assigning him an episcopate of three years,
two months and twenty-one days. The dates given by the chief authorities vary
greatly. The Liberian catalogue gives four years, two months and twenty-one
days, which Lipsius corrects simply by reading three instead of four years, for
the latter figure is impossible (see chap. 5, note 5). Eusebius, in chap. 5,
tells us that Stephen held office two years. Jerome's version of the Chron. says
three years, but puts his accession in the second year of Gallus, which is
inconsistent with his own statement that Cornelius became bishop in the first
year of Gallus. The Armenian Chron. agrees with Eusebius' statement in chap. 5,
below, in assigning two years to the episcopate of Stephen, but puts his
accession in the seventh year of Philip, which, like his notices of Cornelius
and Lucius is far out of the way.

9: Six epistles by Dionysius on the subject of baptism are mentioned by Eusebius
(see below, chap. 5, note 6). It is clear that Dionysius, so far as Eusebius
knew, wrote but one to Stephen on this subject, for he calls the one which he
wrote to Xystus the second (in chap. 5). Dionysius' own opinion on the subject
of re-baptism is plain enough from Eusebius' words in this chapter, and also
from Dionysius' own words in chap. 5, below. He sided with the entire Eastern
and African church in refusing to admit the validity of heretical baptism, and
in requiring a convert from the heretics to be "washed and cleansed from the
filth of the old and impure leaven" (see chap. 5, §5).

10: See note 3.

11: From 247 or 248 to 258, when he suffered martyrdom.

12: See the previous chapter, note 3.

13: dia grammatwn , which might mean "letters," but in the present case must
refer apparently to a single letter (the plural, grammata peri toutou referring
evidently to the subject spoken of in the previous chapter). But Eusebius quite
irrelevantly quotes from the epistle a passage not upon the subject in hand, but
upon an entirely different one, viz. upon the peace which had been established
in the Eastern churches, after the disturbances caused by the schism of Novatian
(see Bk. VI. chap. 43 sq.). That the peace spoken of in this epistle cannot
mean, as Baronius held, that the Eastern churches had come over to Stephen's
opinion in regard to the subject of baptism is clear enough from the fact that
Dionysius wrote another epistle to Stephen's successor (see the next chapter) in
which he still defended the practice of re-baptism. In fact, the passage quoted
by Eusebius from Dionysius' epistle to Stephen has no reference to the subject
of baptism.

14: The persecution referred to is that of Decius.

15: On Demetrianus, Thelymidres, and Helenus, see Bk. VI. chap. 46. On
Theoctistus, see ibid. chap. 19, note 27; on Firmilian, ibid. chap. 26, note 3;
on Mazabanes, ibid. chap. 39, note 5.

16: This clause ( koimhqentoj 'Alecandrou ) is placed by Rufinus, followed by
Stroth, Zimmermann, Valesius (in his notes), Closs, and Crusè, immediately after
the words "Mazabanes in Aelia." But all the mss.; followed by all the other
editors give the clause in the position which it occupies above in my
translation. It is natural, of course, to think of the famous Alexander of
Jerusalem as referred to here (Bk. VI. chap. 8, note 6), but it is difficult to
see how, if he were referred to, the words could stand in the position which
they occupy in the text. It is not impossible, however, to assume simple
carelessness on Dionysius' part to explain the peculiar order, and thus hold
that Alexander of Jerusalem is here referred to. Nor is it, on the other hand,
impossible (though certainly difficult) to suppose that Dionysius is referring
to a bishop of Tyre named Alexander, whom we hear of from no other source.

17: The church of Rome had been from an early date very liberal in assisting the
needy in every quarter. See the epistle of Dionysius of Corinth to Soter, bishop
of Rome, quoted above in Bk. IV. chap. 23.

18: Dionysius speaks just below (§6) of epistles or an epistle of Stephen upon
the subject of baptism, in which he had announced that he would no longer
commune with the Oriental bishops, who held to the custom of baptizing heretics.
And it is this epistle which must have stirred up the rage of Firmilian, which
shows itself in his epistle to Cyprian, already mentioned. The epistle of
Stephen referred to here, however, cannot be identical with that one, or
Dionysius would not speak of it in such a pleasant tone. It very likely had
something to do with the heresy of Novatian, of which Dionysius is writing. It
is no longer extant, and we know only what Dionysius tells us about it in this
passage.

19: Known as Sixtus II. in the list of Roman bishops. On Sixtus I. see above,
Bk. IV. chap. 4, note 3. That Xystus (or Sixtus) was martyred under Valerian we
are told not only by the Liberian catalogue, but also by Cyprian, in an epistle
written shortly before his own death, in 258 (No. 81, al. 80), in which he gives
a detailed account of it. There is no reason to doubt the date given by the
Liberian catalogue (Aug. 6, 258); for the epistle of Cyprian shows that it must
have taken place just about that time, Valerian having sent a very severe
rescript to the Senate in the summer of 258. This fixed point for the martyrdom
of Xystus enables us to rectify all the dates of the bishops of this period (cf.
Lipsius, l.c. ). As to the duration of his episcopate, the ancient authorities
differ greatly. The Liberian catalogue assigns to it two years eleven months and
six days, but this is impossible, as can be gathered from Cyprian's epistle.
Lipsius retains the months and days (twelve or six days), rejecting the two
years as an interpolation, and thus putting his accession on Aug. 24 (or 31),
257. According to Eusebius, chap. 27, and the Armenian Chron., he held office
eleven years, which is quite impossible, and which, as Lipsius remarks, is due
to the eleven months which stood in the original source from which the notice
was taken, and which appears in the Liberian catalogue. Jerome's version of the
Chron. ascribes eight years to his episcopate, but this, too, is quite
impossible, and the date given for his accession (the first year of Valerian) is
inconsistent with the notice which he gives in regard to Stephen. Xystus upheld
the Roman practice of accepting heretics and schismatics without re-baptism, but
he seems to have adopted a more conciliatory tone toward those who held the
opposite view than his predecessor Stephen had done (cf. Pontius' Vita Cypriani,
chap. 14).

20: The first of Dionysius' epistles on baptism was written to Stephen of Rome,
as we learn from chap. 2, above. Four others are mentioned by Eusebius,
addressed respectively to Philemon, a Roman presbyter (chap. 7, §1), to
Dionysius of Rome ( ibid. §6), to Xystus of Rome (chap. 9, §1), and to Xystus
and the church of Rome ( ibid. §6).

21: apolousasqai .

22: Dionysius afterward became Xystus' successor as bishop of Rome. See below,
chap. 27, note 2.

23: Of this Philemon we know only that he was a presbyter of Rome at this time
(see below, chap. 7, §1). A fragment from Dionysius' epistle to him on the
subject of baptism is quoted in that chapter.

24: Of the life of Sabellius we know very little. He was at the head of the
Monarchian (modalistic) party in Rome during the episcopate of Zephyrinus
(198-217), and was there perhaps even earlier. He is, and was already in the
fourth century, commonly called a native of Africa, but the first one directly
to state this is Basil, and the opinion seems to rest upon the fact that his
views were especially popular in Pentapolis as early as the middle of the third
century, as Dionysius says here. Hippolytus in speaking of him does not mention
his birthplace, which causes Stokes to incline to the opinion that he was a
native of Rome. The matter, in fact, cannot be decided. We are told by
Hippolytus that Callistus led Sabellius into heresy, but that after he became
pope he excommunicated him in order to gain a reputation for orthodoxy. Of the
later life of Sabellius we know nothing. His writings are no longer extant,
though there are apparently quotations from some of them in Epiphanius, Haer.
62, and Athanasius, Contra Arian. Oratio 4.

25: epesteila tina wj edunhqhn, parasxontoj tou qeou, didaskalikwteron
ufhgoumenoj, wn ta antigrafa epemya soi . Of these letters no fragments are
extant. They are not to be confounded with the four books against Sabellius,
addressed to Dionysius of Rome, and mentioned in chap. 26, below. It is
possible, as Dittrich suggests that they included the letters on the same
subject to Ammon, Telesphorus, Euphranor, and others which Ensebius mentions in
that chapter. Upon Dionysius' attitude toward Sabellianism, see above, Bk. VI.
chap. 40, note 1.

26: epemya . The epistolary aorist as used here does not refer to a past time,
but to the time of the writing of the letter, which is past when the person to
whom the letter is sent reads the words. The same word ( epemya ) is used in
this sense in Acts xxiii. 30, 2 Cor. ix. 3, Eph. vi. 22, Col. iv. 8. Cf. the
remarks of Bishop Lightfoot in his Commentary on Galatians, VI. 11.

27: Of this Philemon we know no more than we can gather from this chapter. Upon
Dionysius' position on the re-baptism of heretics, see above, chap. 2, note 4,
and upon his other epistles on that subject, see chap. 5, note 6.

28: Dionysius, in following this vision, was but showing himself a genuine
disciple of his master Origen, and exhibiting the true spirit of the earlier
Alexandrian school.

29: wj apostolikh fwnh suntrexon ... ginesqe dokimoi trapezitai ginesqe de
dokimoi trapezitai, ta men apodokimazontej, to de kalon katexontej ), appears
very frequently in the writings of the Fathers. In some cases it is cited (in
connection with 1 Thess. v. 21, 1 Thess. v. 22) on the authority of Paul (in the
present case as an "apostolic word"), in other cases on the authority of
"Scripture" ( h grafh , or gegraptai , or qeioj logoj

30: papa 31: On Heraclas, see Bk. VI. chap. 3, note 2.

32: Compare Cyprian's epistle to Quintus concerning the baptism of heretics (
Ep. 70, al. 71). Cyprian there takes the position stated here, that those who
have been baptized in the Church and have afterward gone over to heresy and then
returned again to the Church are not to be re-baptized, but to be received with
the laying on of hands only. This of course does not at all invalidate the
position of Cyprian and the others who re-baptized heretics, for they baptized
heretics not because they had been heretics, but because they had not received
true baptism, nor indeed any baptism at all, which it was impossible, in their
view, for a heretic to give. They therefore repudiated (as Cyprian does in the
epistle referred to) the term re-baptism, denying that they re -baptized
anybody.

33: Namely the re-baptism (or, as they would say, the baptism ) of those who had
received baptism only at the hands of heretics standing without the communion of
the Church.

34: Iconium was the principal city of Lycaonia, and Synnada a city of Phrygia.
The synod of Iconium referred to here is mentioned also by Firmilian in his
epistle to Cyprian, §§7 and 19 ( Cypriani Ep. 74, al. 75). From that epistle we
learn that the synod was attended by bishops from Phrygia, Cilicia, Galatia, and
other countries, and that heretical baptism was entirely rejected by it.
Moreover, we learn that Firmilian himself was present at the synod, and that it
was held a considerable time before the writing of his epistle. This leads us to
place the synod between 230 (on Firmilian's dates, see above, Bk. VI. chap. 26,
note 3) and 240 or 250. Since it took place a considerable time before Firmilian
wrote, it can hardly have been held much later than 240. Of the synod of
Synnada, we know nothing. It very likely took place about the same time. See
Hefele's Conciliengesch. I. p. 107 sq. Dionysius was undoubtedly correct in
appealing to ancient custom for the practice which he supported (see above,
chap. 2, note 3).

35: fhsi , i.e. "The Scripture saith."

36: Deut. xix. 14.

37: On Dionysius' other epistles on baptism, see above, chap. 5, note 6.

38: On Dionysius of Rome, see below, chap. 27, note 2.

39: The majority of the mss.; have Noouatianw , a few Nauatianw

40: loutron

41: It was the custom from a very early period to cause the candidate for
baptism to go through a certain course of training of greater or less length,
and to require him to assent to a formulated statement of belief before the
administration of the sacred rite. Thus we learn from the Didache that even as
early as the very beginning of the second century the custom of pre-baptismal
training was already in vogue, and we know that by the third century the system
of catechetical instruction was a highly developed thing, extending commonly
over two to three years. Candidates for baptism were then known as catechumens.
So far as a baptismal creed or confession of faith is concerned, Caspari (see
his great work, Studien zur Gesch. des Taufsymbols ) has shown that such a creed
was in use in the Roman church before the middle of the second century, and that
it formed the basis of what we know as the Apostles' Creed, which in the form in
which we have it is a later development.

42: These last clauses are, according to Valesius, fraught with difficulty. He
interprets the autwn autwn

43: i.e. his fifth epistle on the subject of baptism (see above, chap. 5, note
6). The sixth, likewise addressed to Xystus, is mentioned below in §6.

44: On Xystus II. of Rome, see chap 5, note 5.

45: On Heraclas, see above Bk. VI. chap. 3, note 2.

46: See the previous chapter, note 3.

47: The reference here, of course, is not to the Novatians, because this old
man, who had been a regular attendant upon the orthodox Church since the time of
Heraclas, if not before, had been baptized by the heretics long before Novatian
arose. The epistle seems to contain no reference to Novatian; at least, the
fragment which we have is dealing with an entirely different subject.

48: Dittrich finds in this epistle an evidence that Dionysius was not fully
convinced of the advisability of re-baptizing converts from heretical bodies,
that he wavered in fact between the Eastern and the Roman practices, but I am
unable to see that the epistle implies anything of the kind. It is not that he
doubts the necessity of re-baptism in ordinary cases,-he is not discussing that
subject at all,-the question is, does long communion itself take the place of
baptism; does not a man, unwittingly baptized, gain through such communion the
grace from the Spirit which is ordinarily conveyed in baptism, and might not the
rite of baptism at so late a date be an insult to the Spirit, who might have
been working through the sacrament of the eucharist during all these years? It
is this question which Dionysius desires to have Xystus assist him in
answering-a question which has nothing to do, in Dionysius' mind, with the
validity or non-validity of heretical baptism, for it will be noticed that he
does not base his refusal to baptize the man upon the fact that he has already
been baptized, partially, or imperfectly, or in any other way, but solely upon
the fact that he has for so long been partaking of the eucharist.

49: On Dionysius of Rome, see chap. 27, note 2.

50: So many Lucians of this time are known to us that we cannot speak with
certainty as to the identity of the one referred to here. But it may perhaps be
suggested that the well-known Carthaginian Confessor is meant, who caused
Cyprian so much trouble by granting letters of pardon indiscriminately to the
lapsed, in defiance of regular custom and of Cyprian's authority (see Cypriani
Ep. 16, 17, 20, 21, 22; al. 23, 26, 21, 22, 27). If this be the Lucian referred
to, the epistle must have discussed the lapsi, and the conditions upon which
they were to be received again into the Church. That the epistle did not, like
the one mentioned just before, have to do with the subject of baptism, seems
clear from the fact that it is not numbered among the epistles on that subject,
as six others are.

51: oi amfi ton Gallon . Eusebius is undoubtedly referring to Gallus, Volusian,
his son and co-regent, and Aemilian, his enemy and successor. Gallus himself,
with his son Volusian, whom he made Caesar and co-regent, reigned from the
latter part of the year 251 to about the middle of the year 253, when the empire
was usurped by Aemilian, and he and his son were slain. Aemilian was recognized
by the senate as the legal emperor, but within four months Valerian, Gallus'
leading general,-who had already been proclaimed emperor by his
legions,-revenged the murder of Gallus and came to the throne. Valerian reigned
until 260, when his son Gallienus, who had been associated with him in the
government from the beginning, succeeded him and reigned until 268.

52: Upon this epistle, see above, chap. 1, note 3.

53: Rev. xiii. 5.

54: Philip was the only emperor before this time that was openly said to have
been a Christian (see above, Bk. VI. chap. 34, note 2). Alexander Severus was
very favorable to the Christians, and Eusebius may have been thinking of him
also in this connection.

55: viz. Macrianus, one of the ablest of Valerian's generals, who had acquired
great influence over him and had been raised by him to the highest position in
the army and made his chief counselor. Dionysius is the only one to tell us that
he was the chief of the Egyptian magicians. Gibbon doubts the statement, but
Macrianus may well have been an Egyptian by birth and devoted, as so many of the
Egyptians were, to arts of magic, and have gained power over Valerian in this
way which he could have gained in no other. It is not necessary of course to
understand Dionysius' words as implying that Macrianus was officially at the
head of the body of Egyptian magicians, but simply that he was the greatest, or
one of the greatest, of them. He figures in our other sources simply as a
military and political character, but it was natural for Dionysius to emphasize
his addiction to magic, though he could hardly have done it had Macrianus'
practices in this respect not been commonly known.

56: The persecution which the Christians suffered under Valerian was more
terrible than any other except that of Diocletian. Numerous calamities took
place during his reign. The barbarians were constantly invading and ravaging the
borders of the empire, and on the east the Persians did great damage. Still
worse was the terrible plague which had begun in the reign of Decius and raged
for about fifteen years. All these calamities aroused the religious fears of the
emperor. Dionysius tells us that he was induced by Macrianus to have recourse to
human sacrifices and other similar means of penetrating the events of the
future, and when these rites failed, the presence of Christians-irreligious men
hated by the gods-in the imperial family was urged as the reason for the
failure, and thus the hostility of the emperor was aroused against all
Christians. As a consequence an edict was published in 257 requiring all persons
to conform at least outwardly to the religion of Rome on the penalty of exile.
And at the same time the Christians were prohibited from holding religious
services, upon pain of death. In 258 followed a rescript of terrible severity.
Only the clergy and the higher ranks of the laity were attacked, but they were
sentenced to death if they refused to repent, and the clergy, apparently,
whether they repented or not. The persecution continued until Valerian's
captivity, which took place probably late in 260. The dates during this period
are very uncertain, but Dionysius' statement that the persecution continued
forty-two months is probably not far out of the way; from late in the year 257
to the year 261, when it was brought to an end by Gallienus. In Egypt and the
Orient the persecution seems to have continued a few months longer than
elsewhere (see chap. 13, note 3). The martyrs were very numerous during the
Valerian persecution, especially in Rome and Africa. The most noted were Cyprian
and Xystus II. On the details of the persecution, see Tillemont, H. E. IV. p. 1
sq.

57: i.e. the evil spirits. As Valesius remarks, the meaning is that since the
evil spirits had promised him power, he showed his gratitude to them by inducing
the Emperor Valerian to persecute the Christians.

58: epi twn kaqolou logwn

59: The Greek contains a play upon the words kaqolou and logoj in this sentence.
It reads oj proteron men epi twn kaqolou logwn legomenoj einai basilewj, ouden
eulogon oude kaqolikon efronhsen . The play upon the word kaqolou continues in
the next sentence, where the Greek runs to kaqolou mh blepousin , and in the
following, where it reads ou gar sunhke thn kaqolou pronoian . Again in the next
sentence the adjective kaqolikh 60: Ezek. xiii. 3.

61: kaqolikhj , "catholic" in the sense of "general" or "universal," the play
upon the word still continuing.

62: Makrianoj . The Greek word makran means "far," "at a distance."

63: Isa. lxvi. 3, Isa. lxvi. 4.

64: i.e. Macrianus.

65: Valerian reposed complete confidence in Macrianus and followed his advice in
the conduct of the wars against the Persians. The result was that by Macrianus'
"weak or wicked counsels the imperial army was betrayed into a situation where
valor and military skill were equally unavailing." (Gibbon.) Dionysius, in chap.
23, below, directly states that Macrianus betrayed Valerian, and this is the
view of the case commonly taken. Valerian fell into the hands of the Persians
(late in 260 a.d.), and Macrianus was proclaimed emperor by his troops, and on
account of his lameness (as both Dionysius and Zonaras put it) or his age,
associated with him his two sons, Quietus and Macrianus. After some months he
left his son Quietus in charge of Syria, and designing to make himself master of
the Occident, marched with his son Macrianus against Gallienus, but was met in
Illyrium by the Pretender Aureolus (262) and defeated, and both himself and son
slain. His son Quietus meanwhile was besieged in Edessa by the Pretender
Odenathus and slain. Cf. Tillemont's Histoire des Empereurs, III. p. 333 sq. and
p. 340 sq.

66: Ex. xx. 5.

67: hutuxei htuxei , "failed" ("in whose gratification he failed"). hutuxei ,
however, is supported by overwhelming ms. authority, and is adopted by Schwegler
and Heinichen, and approved by Valesius in his notes. It seems at first sight
the harder reading, and is, therefore, in itself to be preferred to the easier
reading, htuxei . Although it seems harder, it is really fully in accord with
what has preceded. Macrianus had not made himself emperor (if Dionysius is to be
believed), but he had succeeded fully in his desires, in that he had raised his
sons to the purple. If he had acquired such power as to be able to do that, he
must have given them the position, because he preferred to govern in that way;
and if that be so, be could hardly be said to have failed in his desires.

68: On Germanus, and Dionysius' epistle to him, see above, Bk. VI. chap. 40,
note 2.

69: Literally "it says" ( fhsi ), a common formula in quoting from Scripture.

70: Tob. xii. 7.

71: This Aemilianus, prefect of Egypt, under whom the persecution was carried on
in Alexandria during Valerian's reign, later, during the reign of Gallienus, was
induced (or compelled) by the troops of Alexandria to revolt against Gallienus,
and assume the purple himself. He was defeated, however, by Theodotus,
Gal-lienus' general, and was put to death in prison, in what year we do not
know. Cf. Tillemont's Hist. des Emp. III. p. 342 sq.

72: Maximus is mentioned a number of times in this chapter in connection with
the persecution. After the death of Dionysius he succeeded him as bishop of
Alexandria, and as such is referred to below, in chaps. 28, 30, and 32. For the
dates of his episcopate, see chap. 28, note 10.

73: On Faustus, see above, Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 10.

74: In regard to this deacon Eusebius, who later became bishop of Laodicea, see
chap. 32, note 12.

75: Chaeremon is mentioned three times in the present chapter, but we have no
other reliable information in regard to him.

76: We may gather from §11, below, that Germanus had accused Dionysius of
neglecting to hold the customary assemblies, and of seeking safety by flight.
Valesius, in his note ad locum, remarks, "Dionysius was accused by Germanus of
neglecting to hold the assemblies of the brethren before the beginning of the
persecution, and of providing for his own safety by flight. For as often as
persecution arose the bishops were accustomed first to convene the people, that
they might exhort them to hold fast to their faith in Christ. Then they baptized
infants and catechumens, that they might not depart this life without baptism,
and they gave the eucharist to the faithful, because they did not know how long
the persecution might last." Valesius refers for confirmation of his statements
to an epistle sent to Pope Hormisdas, by Germanus and others, in regard to
Dorotheus, bishop of Thessalonica (circa a.d. 519). I have not been able to
verify the reference. The custom mentioned by Valesius is certainly a most
natural one, and therefore Valesius' statements are very likely quite true,
though there seems to be little direct testimony upon which to rest them.

77: Acts v. 29.

78: We learn from §10, below, that Cephro was in Libya. Beyond this nothing is
known of the place so far as I am aware.

79: This Marcellus, the only one not mentioned in §3, above, is an otherwise
unknown person.

80: twn para fusin . That the twn refers to "gods" (viz. the gods of the
Christians, Aemilianus thinking of them as plural) seems clear, both on account
of the qeouj just preceding, and also in view of the fact that in §9 we have the
phrase twn kata fusin qewn . A contrast, therefore, is drawn in the present case
between the gods of the heathen and those of the Christians.

81: koimhthria kaloumena ) cemeteries."

82: See above, note 9.

83: wj eipein , a reading approved by Valesius in his notes, and adopted by
Schwegler and Heinichen. This and the readings wj eipen , "as he said" (adopted
by Stroth, Zimmermann, and Laemmer), and wj eipon , "as I said" (adopted by
Stephanus, Valesius in his text, and Burton), are about equally supported by ms.
authority, while some mss. read wj eipen o apostoloj , "as the apostle said." It
is impossible to decide with any degree of assurance between the first three
readings.

84: 1 Cor. v. 3.

85: Col. iv. 3.

86: Libukwterouj topouj . Libya was an indefinite term among the ancients for
that part of Africa which included the Great Desert and all the unexplored
country lying west and south of it. Almost nothing was known about the country,
and the desert and the regions beyond were peopled by the fancy with all sorts
of terrible monsters, and were looked upon as the theater of the most dire
forces, natural and supernatural. As a consequence, the term "Libyan" became a
synonym for all that was most disagreeable and dreadful in nature.

87: Mareotis, or Mareia, or Maria, was one of the land districts into which
Egypt was divided. A lake, a town situated on the shore of the lake, and the
district in which they lay, all bore the same name. The district Mareotis lay
just south of Alexandria, but did not include it, for Alexandria and Ptolemais
formed an independent sphere of administration sharply separated from the
thirty-six land districts of the country. Cf. Bk. II. chap. 17, notes 10 and 12,
above. Mommsen ( Roman Provinces, Scribner's ed. Vol. II. p. 255) remarks that
these land districts, like the cities, became the basis of episcopal dioceses.
This we should expect to be the case, but I am not aware that we can prove it to
have been regularly so, at any rate not during the earlier centuries. Cf. e.g.
Wiltsch's Geography and Statistics of the Church, London ed., I. p. 192 sq.

88: hmaj de mallon en odw kai prwtouj katalhfqhsomenouj etacen .

89: ta Kollouqiwnoj (sc. merh 90: kata meroj sunagwgai

91: Sabinus has been already mentioned in Bk. VI. chap. 40, §2, from which
passage we may gather that he held the same position under Decius which
Aemilianus held under Valerian (see note 3 on the chapter referred to).

92: We learn from chap. 20, below, that this epistle to Domitius and Didymus was
one of Dionysius' regular festal epistles (for there is no ground for assuming
that a different epistle is referred to in that chapter). Domitius and Didymus
are otherwise unknown personages. Eusebius evidently (as we can see both from
this chapter and from chapter 20) supposes this epistle to refer to the
persecution, of which Dionysius has been speaking in that portion of his epistle
to Germanus quoted in this chapter; namely, to the persecution of Valerian. But
he is clearly mistaken in this supposition; for, as we can see from a comparison
of §22, below, with Bk. VI. chap. 40, §6 sq., Dionysius is referring in this
epistle to the same persecution to which he referred in that chapter; namely, to
the persecution of Decius. But the present epistle was written (as we learn from
§23) while this same persecution was still going on, and, therefore, some years
before the time of Valerian's persecution, and before the writing of the epistle
to Germanus (see Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 2), with which Eusebius here associates
it. Cf. Valesius' note ad locum and Dittrich's Dionysius der Grosse, p. 40 sq.

93: Isa. xlix. 8.

94: See above, Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 10.

95: See ibid. §6 sq.

96: Paraetonium was an important town and harbor on the Mediterranean, about 150
miles west of Alexandria. A day's journey among the ancients commonly denoted
about 180 to 200 stadia (22 to 25 miles), so that Dionysius retreat must have
lain some 60 to 70 miles from Paraetonium, probably to the south of it.

97: On Maximus, see above, note 5.

98: Of Dioscorus we know only what is told us here. He is not to be identified
with the lad mentioned in Bk. VI. chap. 41, §19 (see note 17 on that chapter).

99: Of Demetrius and Lucius we know only what is recorded here.

100: Faustinus and Aquila are known to us only from this passage.

101: On these three deacons, see above, notes 6-8.

102: See below, chap. 32, §5.

103: See chap. 28, note 8.

104: That is, until the persecution of Diocletian, a.d. 303 sq.

105: That is, according to Eusebius, in the time of Valerian, but only the
events related in the first part of the chapter took place at that time; those
recorded in the epistle to Domitius and Didymus in the time of Decius. See
above, note 25.

106: Of these three men we know only what is told us in this chapter.

107: Marcionitic martyrs are mentioned by Eusebius in Bk. IV. chap. 15, and in
Martyrs of Pal. chap. 10. In H. E. V. 16, it is stated that the Marcionites as
well as the Montanists had many martyrs, but that the orthodox Christians did
not acknowledge them as Christians, and would not recognize them even when they
were martyred together. Of course they were all alike Christians in the eyes of
the state, and hence all alike subject to persecution.

108: Valerian was taken captive by Sapor, king of Persia, probably late in the
year 260 (the date is somewhat uncertain) and died in captivity. His son
Gallienus, already associated with him in the empire, became sole emperor when
his father fell into the Persians' hands.

109: Eusebius has not preserved the text of these edicts ( programmata

110: antigrafh : the technical term for an epistle containing private
instructions, in distinction from an edict or public proclamation. This rescript
was addressed to the bishops of the province of Egypt including Dionysius of
Alexandria). It was evidently issued some time after the publication of the
edicts themselves. Its exact date is uncertain, but it was probably written
immediately after the fall of the usurper Macrianus (i.e. late in 261 or early
in 262), during the time of whose usurpation the benefits of Gallienus' edicts
of toleration could of course not have been felt in Egypt and the Orient.

111: Eusebhj, Eutuxhj, Sebastoj .

112: Of Pinnas and Demetrius we know nothing. The identification of Demetrius
with the presbyter mentioned in chap. 11, §24, might be suggested as possible.
There is nothing to prevent such an identification, nor, on the other hand, is
there anything to be urged in its favor beyond mere agreement in a name which
was not an uncommon one in Egypt.

113: opwj apo twn topwn twn qrhskeusimwn apoxwrhswsi . This is commonly taken to
mean that the "Christians may come forth from their religious retreats," which,
however, does not seem to be the sense of the original. I prefer to read, with
Closs, "that the heathen may depart from the Christians' places of worship,"
from those, namely, which they had taken possession of during the persecution.

114: The reference is doubtless to the edicts, referred to above, which he had
issued immediately after his accession, but which had not been sooner put in
force in Egypt because of the usurper Macrianus (see above, note 3).

115: So far as I am aware, this man is known to us only from this passage.

116: o tou megistou pragmatoj prostateuwn . Heinichen, following Valesius,
identifies this office with the o epi twn kaqolou logwn (mentioned in chap. 10,
§5), with the o twn kaqolou logwn eparxoj

117: The use of their cemeteries, both as places of burial and as meeting-places
for religious worship, had been denied to the Christians by Valerian. On the
origin of the word koimhthria , see chap. 11, note 14.

118: On Xystus II., see chap. 5, note 5.

119: On Demetrianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 46, note 12.

120: On Fabius, see Bk. VI. chap. 39, note 7.

121: On Firmilianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 26, note 3.

122: Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of Neo-Caesarea in Pontus from about 233-270
(?). Upon Gregory, see Bk. VI. chap. 30, note 1.

123: On Athenodorus, see ibid. note 2.

124: On Theoctistus, see Bk. VI. chap. 19, note 27.

125: Of the life and character of Domnus we know nothing. So far as I am aware
he is mentioned only here. His dates are uncertain, but his predecessor,
Theoctistus, was still bishop in the time of Stephen of Rome (254-257; see
above, Bk. VI. chap. 19, note 27), while he himself became bishop before the
death of Xystus of Rome, as we may gather from this chapter, i.e. before August,
258 (see chap. 5, note 5), so that between these dates his accession must be
placed. Eusebius' words in this passage will hardly admit an episcopate of more
than one or two years; possibly he was bishop but a few months.

126: The dates of Theotecnus are likewise uncertain. Eusebius in Bk. VII. chap.
32, says that he was acquainted with Pamphilus during the episcopate of Agapius
(the successor of Theotecnus), implying that he first made his acquaintance
then. It is therefore likely that Agapius became bishop some years before the
persecution of Diocletian, for otherwise we hardly allow enough time for the
acquaintance of Pamphilus and Eusebius who did so much work together, and
apparently were friends for so long a time. Pamphilus himself suffered martyrdom
in 309 a.d. Theotecnus was quite a prominent man and was present at the two
Antiochian synods mentioned in chaps. 27 and 30, which were convened to consider
the heresy of Paul of Samosata.

127: On Mazabanes, see Bk. VI. chap. 39, note 5.

128: According to the Chron. of Eusebius, Hymenaeus was bishop of Jerusalem from
265-298. It is expressly stated in the Chron. that the dates of the earlier
Jerusalem bishops are not known (see Bk. V. chap. 12, note 1); but with the
dates of the bishops of the latter part of the third century Eusebius can hardly
have been unacquainted, and that Hymenaeus was bishop at any rate as early as
265 is proved by chaps. 27 and 30 (see the note on Mazabanes referred to just
above). The dates given in the Chron. may therefore be accepted as at least
approximately correct.

129: The martyrdom of Marinus after the promulgation of Gallienus' edict of
toleration and after peace had been, as Eusebius remarks, everywhere restored to
the churches, has caused historians some difficulty. It is maintained, however,
by Tillemont and others, and with especial force by Görres in the Fahrbücher für
prot. Theol., 1877, p. 620 sq., that the martyrdom of Marinus took place while
the usurper Macrianus, who was exceedingly hostile to the Christians, was still
in power in the East, and at a time, therefore, when the edicts of Gallienus
could have no force there. This of course explains the difficulty completely.
The martyrdom then must have taken place toward the beginning of Gallienus'
reign, for Macrianus was slain as early as 262. Of the martyr Marinus we know
only what Eusebius tells us here.

130: to klhma

131: Achaes is an otherwise unknown person. That he was governor of Palestine,
as Valesius asserts, is apparently a pure assumption, for the term used of him (
dikasthj ) is quite indefinite.

132: On Theotecnus, see above, chap. 14, note 9.

133: We know nothing more about this Astyrius than is recorded here. Rufinus, in
his H. E. VII. 13, tells us that he suffered martyrdom at about this time; but
Eusebius says nothing of the kind, and it is therefore not at all probable that
Rufinus is correct. He probably concluded, from Eusebius' account of him, that
he also suffered martyrdom.

134: Burton and Crusè close the chapter at this point, throwing the next
sentence into chap. 17. Such a transposition, however, is unnecessary, and I
have preferred to follow Valesius, Heinichen, Schwegler, and other editors, in
dividing as above.

135: Caesarea Philippi (to be distinguished from Caesarea, the chief city of
Palestine, mentioned in previous chapters) was originally called Paneas by the
Greeks,-a name which it retained even after the name Caesarea Philippi had been
given it by Philip the Tetrarch, who enlarged and beautified it. The place,
which is now a small village, is called Banias by the Arabs. It lies at the base
of Mt. Hermon, and is noted for one of the principal sources of the Jordan,
which issues from springs beneath the rocks of Mt. Hermon at this point. The
spot is said to be remarkably beautiful. See Robinson's Biblical Researches in
Palestine, Vol. III, p. 409 sq.

136: Valesius remarks that the heathen were accustomed to throw victims into
their sacred wells and fountains, and that therefore Publicola asks Augustine,
in Epistle 153, whether one ought to drink from a fountain or well whither a
portion of sacrifice had been sent.

137: swthri or qew appearing in the inscription." There can be no doubt of
Eusebius' honesty in the matter, but no less doubt that the statue commemorated
something quite different from that which Christian tradition claimed. Upon this
whole chapter, see Heinichen's Excursus, in Vol. III. p. 698 sq.

138: See Matt. ix. 20 sq.

139: ou para toij posin epi thj sthlhj authj sthlh epi

140: Eusebius himself, as we learn from his letter to the Empress Constantia
Augusta (see above, p. 44), did not approve of the use of images or
representations of Christ, on the ground that it tended to idolatry. In
consequences of this disapproval he fell into great disrepute in the later
image-worshiping Church, his epistle being cited by the iconoclasts at the
second Council of Nicaea, in 787, and his orthodoxy being in consequence
fiercely attacked by the defenders of image-worship, who dominated the council,
and won the day.

141: That James was appointed bishop of Jerusalem by Christ himself was an old
and wide-spread tradition. Compare, e.g., the Clementine Recognitions, Bk. I.
chap. 43, the Apostolic Constitutions, Bk. VIII. chap. 35, and Chrysostom's
Homily XXXVII. on First Corinthians. See Valesius' note ad locum; and on the
universal tradition that James was bishop of Jerusalem, see above, Bk. II. chap.
1, note 11.

142: See Gal. i. 19. On the actual relationship of "James, the Brother of the
Lord" to Christ, see Bk. I. chap. 12, note 14.

143: There can be no doubt that a chair ( qronoj ), said to be the episcopal
seat of James, the first bishop of Jerusalem, was shown in that church in the
time of Eusebius, but there can be no less doubt that it was not genuine. Even
had James been bishop of Jerusalem, and possessed a regular episcopal chair, or
throne (a very violent supposition, which involves a most glaring anachronism),
it was quite out of the question that it should have been preserved from
destruction at the fall of the city in 70 a.d. As Stroth drily remarks: "Man
hatte auch wohl nichts wichtigeres zu retten, als einen Stuhl!" The beginning of
that veneration of relics which later took such strong hold on the Church, and
which still flourishes within the Greek and Roman communions is clearly seen in
this case recorded by Eusebius. At the same time, we can hardly say that that
superstitious veneration with which we are acquainted appeared in this case.
There seems to be nothing more than the customary respect for an article of old
and time-honored associations which is seen everywhere and in all ages (cf.
Heinichen's Excursus on this passage, Vol. III. p. 208 sq.). Crusè has
unaccountably rendered qronoj in this passage as if it referred to the see of
Jerusalem, not to the chair of the bishop. It is plain enough that such an
interpretation is quite unwarranted.

144: Upon Dionysius of Alexandria, see Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 1, and see that
note for references to the various passages in which Eusebius mentions or quotes
from his epistles.

145: Eusebius supposes all of these epistles to have been written in the time of
Valerian or Gallienus; but he is mistaken, at least so far as the epistle to
Domitius and Didymus is concerned (see above, chap. 11, note 25), and possibly
in regard to some of the others also.

146: taj feromenaj eortastikaj eortastikoj 147: Of this Flavius we know nothing.
The epistle addressed to him is no longer extant.

148: On Domitius and Didymus, and the epistle addressed to them, see above,
chap. 11, note 25. Eusebius quotes from the epistle in that chapter.

149: That is, an eight-year cycle for the purpose of determining the time of the
full moon. Hippolytus had employed the old eight-year cycle, but had, as he
thought, improved it by combining two in a single sixteen-year cycle (see above,
Bk. VI. chap. 22), as was done also by the author of the so-called Cyprianic
Chronicle at the middle of the third century. The more accurate nineteen-year
Metonic cycle (already in use among the Greeks in the fifth century b.c.) had
not come into general use in the Church until later than this time. The Nicene
Council sanctioned it and gave it wide currency, but it had apparently not yet
come into use in the Church. In fact, the first Christian to make use of it for
the computation of Easter, so far as we know, was Anatolius of Alexandria, later
bishop of Laodicea (see below, chap. 32, §14). It was soon adopted in the
Alexandrian church, and already in the time of Athanasius had become the basis
of all Easter calculations, as we can gather from Athanasius' Festal Epistles.
From about the time of the Nicene Council on, Alexandria was commonly looked to
for the reckoning of the date of Easter, and although an older and less accurate
cycle remained in use in the West for a long time, the nineteen-year cycle
gradually won its way everywhere. See Ideler's great work on chronology, and cf.
Hefele's Conciliengesch. 2d ed. 1. p. 332, and Lightfoot in the Dict. of Christ.
Biog. 11. p. 313 sq.

150: These various epistles are no longer extant, nor do we know the names of
the persons to whom they were addressed. At least a part of them, if not all,
were very likely written during the Valerian persecution, as Eusebius states,
for the fact that he made a mistake in connection with the epistle to Domitius
and Didymus does not prove that he was in error in regard to all the others as
well.

151: This was after the fall of the usurper Macrianus, probably late in the year
261 or early in 262 (see above, chap. 13, note 3).

152: This epistle written by Dionysius during the civil war to his scattered
flock is no longer extant.

153: Of this Hierax we know no more than is told us here.

154: cf. Philemon. vers. 12.

155: ek petraj akrotomou . The adjective is an addition of Dionysius' own. The
LXX of Ex. xvii. 6 has only petra , "rock."

156: epozesaj ; the same word which is used in the LXX of Ex. vii. 21.

157: Ghwn ; LXX (Gen. ii. 13), Gewn ; Heb. Nw$xyg%

158: This letter seems to have been written shortly before Easter of the year
263; for the festal epistle to Hierax, quoted in the last chapter, was written
while the war was still in progress (i.e. in 262), this one after its close. It
does not seem to have been a regular festal epistle so-called, for in §11,
below, we are told that Dionysius wrote a regular festal letter ( eortastikhn
grafhn ) to the brethren in Egypt, and that apparently in connection with this
same Easter of the year 263.

159: i.e. to the heathen.

160: i.e. there is no time when heathen can fitly rejoice.

161: Ex. xii. 30.

162: kai ofelon ge , with the majority of the mss., followed by Valesius,
Schwegler, and Heinichen. Stroth, Burton, and Zimmermann, upon the authority of
two mss., read kai ofelon ge eij ("and would that there were but one !"), a
reading which Valesius approves in his notes. The weight of ms. authority,
however, is with the former, and it alone justifies the gar of the following
sentence.

163: periyhma ; cf. 1 Cor. iv. 13. Valesius suggests that this may have been a
humble and complimentary form of salutation among the Alexandrians: egw eimi
periyhma sou (cf. our words, "Your humble servant"); or, as he thinks more
probable, that the expression had come to be habitually applied to the
Christians by the heathen. The former interpretation seems to me the only
possible one in view of the words immediately preceding: "which always seems a
mere expression of courtesy." Certainly these words rule out the second
interpretation suggested by Valesius.

164: The connection into which this festal epistle is brought with the letter
just quoted would seem to indicate that it was written not a whole year, but
very soon after that one. We may, therefore, look upon it as Dionysius' festal
epistle of the year 263 (see above, note 1). Neither this nor the "several
others" spoken of just below is now extant.

165: This and the next epistle are no longer extant, and we know neither the
time of their composition nor the persons to whom they were addressed.

166: On Hermammon and the epistle addressed to him, see above, chap. 1, note 3.
An extract from this same epistle is given in that chapter and also in chap. 10.

167: i.e. Macrianus; see above, chap. 10, note 5.

168: He is supposed to have betrayed Valerian into the hands of the Persians, or
at least, by his treachery, to have brought about the result which took place,
and after Valerian's capture he made war upon Gallienus, the latter's son and
successor. See the note referred to just above.

169: Isa. xlii. 9.

170: Dionysius is evidently somewhat dazzled and blinded by the favor shown by
Gallienus to the Christians. For we know from the profane historians of this
period that the reign of Gallienus was one of the darkest in all the history of
the Roman Empire, on account of the numerous disasters which came upon the
empire, and the internal disturbances and calamities it was called upon to
endure.

171: Gallienus is known to us as one of the most abandoned and profligate of
emperors, though he was not without ability and courage which he displayed
occasionally. Dionysius' words at this point are not surprising, for the public
benefits conferred by Gallienus upon the Christians would far outweigh his
private vices in the minds of those who had suffered from the persecutions of
his predecessors.

172: The peculiar form of reckoning employed here (the mention of the seventh
and then the ninth year) has caused considerable perplexity. Stroth thinks that
"Dionysius speaks here of the time when Gallienus actually ruled in Egypt. For
Macrianus had ruled there for a year, and during that time the authority of
Gallienus in that country had been interrupted." The view of Pearson, however,
seems to me better. He remarks: "Whoever expressed himself thus, that one after
his seven years was passing his ninth year? This septennium ( eptaethrij ) must
designate something peculiar and different from the time following. It is
therefore the septennium of imperial power which he had held along with his
father. In the eighth year of that empire [the father, Valerian being in
captivity in Persia], Macrianus possessed himself of the imperial honor
especially in Egypt. After his assumption of the purple, however, Gallienus had
still much authority in Egypt. At length in the ninth year of Gallienus, i.e. in
261, Macrianus, the father and the two sons being slain, the sovereignty of
Gallienus was recognized also among the Egyptians." "The ninth year of
Gallienus, moreover, began about midsummer of this year; and the time at which
this letter was written by Dionysius, as Eusebius observes, may be gathered from
that, and fails consequently before the Paschal season of 262 a.d." See also
chap. 1, note 3, above.

173:

174: peri epaggeliwn

175: Evidently directed against Origen and other allegorical interpreters like
him, who avoided the materialistic conceptions deduced by so many from the
Apocalypse, by spiritualizing and allegorizing its language. This work of Nepos
has entirely perished.

176: The words "I confess that" are not in the original, but the insertion of
some clause of the kind is necessary to complete the sentence.

177: On early Christian hymnody, see above, Bk. V. chap. 28, note 14.

178: "i.e. dire ante promiitunt quam tradunt. The metaphor is taken from the
mysteries of the Greeks, who were wont to promise great and marvelous
discoveries to the initiated, and then kept them on the rack by daily
expectation in order to confirm their judgment and reverence by suspense of
knowledge, as Tertullian says in his book Against the Valentinians [chap. 1]."
Valesius.

179: en tw 'Arsinoeith . The Arsinoite nome or district (on the nomes of Egypt,
see above, Bk. II. chap. 17, note 10) was situated on the western bank of the
Nile, between the river and Lake Moeris, southwest of Memphis.

180: Of this Coracion, we know only what is told us here.

181: Upon the Apocalypse in the early Church, and especially upon Dionysius'
treatment of it, see above, Bk. III. chap. 24, note 20.

182: A portion of this extract (§§2 and 3) has been already quoted by Eusebius
in Bk. III. chap. 28.

183: Rev. xxii. 7, Rev. xxii. 8. Dionysius punctuates this passage peculiarly,
and thus interprets it quite differently from all our versions of the Book of
Revelation. The Greek text as given by him agrees with our received text of the
Apocalypse; but the words kagw 'Iwannhj o akouwn kai blepwn tauta , which
Dionysius connects with the preceding, should form an independent sentence: "And
I, John, am he that heard and saw these things."

184: On the Gospel and Epistle, see Bk. III. chap. 24, notes 1 and 18.

185: thj tou bibliou diecagwghj legomenhj . Valesius considers diecagwgh
oikonomian , "for diecagwgein is the same as dioikein

186: i.e. never speaks of himself in the first person, as "I, John"; nor in the
third person, as e.g. "his servant, John."

187: Rev. i. 1, Rev. i. 2.

188: Rev. i. 4.

189: 1 John i. 1.

190: Matt. xvi. 17.

191: See 2 John, ver. 1, and 3 John, ver. 1.

192: Rev. i. 9.

193: Rev. xxii. 7, Rev. xxii. 8. See above, note 3.

194: See John xiii. 23, John xix. 26, John xx. 2, John xxi. 7, John xxi. 20.

195: See John xiii. 23, John xiii. 25. These words, oude ton anapesonta epi to
sthqoj autou , are wanting in Heinichen's edition; but as they are found in all
the other editions and versions and Heinichen gives no reason for their
omission, it is clear that they have been omitted inadvertently.

196: In Acts xii. 12, Acts xii. 25, Acts xiii. 5, Acts xiii. 13, Acts xv. 37. On
Mark and the second Gospel, see above, Bk. II. chap. 15, note 4.

197: Acts xiii. 5.

198: Acts xiii. 13.

199: See above, Bk. III. chap. 39, note 13; and on the "presbyter John,"
mentioned by Papias, see also note 4 on the same chapter, and on his relation to
the Apocalypse, the same chapter, note 14.

200: i.e. the writer of the Apocalypse is different from the writer of the
Gospel and Epistles.

201: John i. 1.

202: 1 John i. 1.

203: John i. 14.

204: 1 John i. 1, 1 John i. 2.

205: 1 John i. 2, 1 John i. 3.

206: See 2 Cor. xii. 1 sq., Gal. ii. 2.

207: On Sabellius, and on Dionysius' attitude toward Sabellianism, see above,
chap. 6, note 1.

208: The works addressed to Ammon, Telesphorus, Euphranor, and Euporus, are no
longer extant, nor do we know anything about them (but see chap. 6, note 2,
above). It is possible that it was in these epistles that Dionysius laid himself
open in his zeal against the Sabellians to the charge of tritheism, which
aroused complaints against him, and resulted in his being obliged to defend
himself in his work addressed to Dionysius of Rome. If so, these letters must
have been written before that work, though perhaps not long before. Of Ammon
himself we know nothing. There were a number of cities in North Africa, called
Berenice (the form Bernice is exceptional), but, according to Wiltsch, Berenice,
a city of Libya Pentapolis, or Cyrenaica, is meant in the present case. This
city (whose original name was Hesperides) lay on the Mediterranean some six
hundred miles west of Alexandria.

209: Of Telesphorus, Euphranor, and Euporus, we know nothing.

210: On these books addressed to Dionysius of Rome, see below, p. 397.

211: oi peri fusewj fusij

212: This work on Temptations ( peri peirasmwn ) is no longer extant, nor do we
know anything about the time or occasion of its composition. Dittrich strangely
omits all reference to it. Of Euphranor, as remarked in note 3, we know nothing.

213: Of this Basilides we know only what Eusebius tells us here, that he was
bishop of the "parishes in Pentapolis" (or Cyrenaica, a district, and under the
Romans a province, lying west of Egypt, along the Mediterranean Sea), which
would seem to imply that he was metropolitan of that district (cf. Routh, Rel.
Sac. III. p. 235). A canonical epistle addressed to him by Dionysius is still
extant (see above, Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 1). Eusebius tells us that Dionysius
addressed "various epistles" to him, but no others are known to us.

214: It is possible that this work also, like that On Nature, was written, as
Dittrich thinks, before Dionysius became bishop. Eusebius evidently had not seen
the commentary himself, for he speaks only of Dionysius' reference to it. A few
fragments, supposed to be parts of this commentary, were published in the
appendix to the fourteenth volume of Galland's Bibliotheca Patrum Veterum, after
the latter's death, and were afterward reprinted in De Magistris' edition of
Dionysius' works, p. 1 sq. (English translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VI.
p. 111-114). The fragments, or at least a part of them, are ascribed to
Dionysius in the codex in which they are found, and are very likely genuine,
though we cannot speak with certainty. For fuller particulars, see Dittrich, p.
22 sq.

215: thn kaq hmaj genean . This seems to indicate that the events recorded by
Eusebius from this point on took place during his own lifetime. See above, p. 4.

216: Xystus II. was bishop only eleven months, not eleven years. See chap. 5,
note 5. Eusebius' chronology of the Roman bishops of this time is in
inextricable confusion.

217: After the martyrdom of Xystus II. the bishopric of Rome remained vacant for
nearly a year on account of the severe persecution of Valerian. Dionysius became
bishop on the 22d of July, 259, according to the Liberian catalogue. Lipsius
accepts this as the correct date. Jerome's version of the Chron. gives the
twelfth year of "Valerian and Gallienus" (i.e. 265-266) which is wide of the
mark. The Armenian Chron. gives the eighth year of the same reign. As to the
duration of his episcopate, authorities vary considerably. Eusebius (chap. 30,
§23, below) and Jerome's version of the Chron. say nine years; the Armenian
Chron., twelve; the Liberian catalogue, eight. Lipsius shows that nine is the
correct figure, and that five months and two days are to be read instead of the
two months and four days of the Liberian catalogue. According to Lipsius, then,
he was bishop until Dec. 27, 268. Dionysius of Alexandria addressed to Dionysius
of Rome, while the latter was still a presbyter, one of his epistles on baptism
(see above, chap. 7, §6, where the latter is called by Eusebius a "learned and
capable man"). Another epistle of the same writer addressed to him is mentioned
in chap. 9, §6. Dionysius of Alexandria's four books against the Sabellians were
likewise addressed to him (see chap. 26, above, and Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 1).
Gallienus' edict of toleration was promulgated while Dionysius was bishop (see
chap. 13, note 3).

218: On Demetrianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 46, note 12.

219: Paul of Samosata was one of the most famous heretics of the early Church.
He was bishop of Antioch and at the same time viceroy of Zenobia, Queen of
Palmyra. Both versions of Eusebius' Chron. put the date of his accession to the
see of Antioch in the seventh year of Valerian and Gallienus, the year of Abr.
2277 (2278), i.e. in a.d. 259 (260); and Jerome's version puts his deposition in
the year of Abr. 2283, i.e. a.d. 265. These dates, however, are not to be relied
upon. Harnack ( Zeit des Ignatius, p. 51) shows that he became bishop between
257 and 260. Our chief knowledge of his character and career is derived from the
encyclical letter written by the members of the council which condemned him, and
quoted in part by Eusebius in chap. 30, below. This, as will be seen, paints his
character in very black colors. It may be somewhat overdrawn, for it was written
by his enemies; at the same time, such an official communication can hardly have
falsified the facts to any great extent. We may rely then upon its general
truthfulness. Paul reproduced the heresy of Artemon (see above, Bk. V. chap.
28), teaching that Christ was a mere man, though he was filled with divine
power, and that from his birth, not merely from his baptism, as the Ebionites
had held. He admitted, too, the generation by the Holy Spirit. "He denied the
personality of the Logos and of the Holy Spirit, and considered them merely
powers of God, like reason and mind in man; but granted that the Logos dwelt in
Christ in a larger measure than in any former messenger of God, and taught, like
the Socinians in later times, a gradual elevation of Christ, determined by his
own moral development, to divine dignity. He admitted that Christ remained free
from sin, conquered the sin of our forefathers, and then became the Saviour of
the race" (Schaff). At various Antiochian synods (the exact number of them we do
not know), efforts were made to procure his condemnation, but they were not
successful. Finally one of the synods condemned and excommunicated him, and
Domnus was appointed bishop in his place. The date of this synod is ordinarily
fixed at 268 or 269, but it cannot have occurred in 269, and probably occurred
earlier than 268 (see below, chap. 29, note 1). Since Paul was in favor with
Zenobia, his deposition could not be effected until 272, when Aurelian conquered
her. Being appealed to by the Church, Aurelian left the decision between the
claims of Paul and Domnus to the bishops of Rome and Italy, who decided at once
for Domnus, and Paul was therefore deposed and driven out in disgrace.

220: This synod to which Dionysius was invited was not the last one, at which
Paul was condemned, but one of the earlier ones, at which his case was
considered. It is not probable that the synod was called especially to consider
his case, but that at two or more of the regular annual synods of Antioch the
subject was discussed without result, until finally condemnation was procured
(cf. Harnack, ibid. p. 52, and Lipsius, ibid. p. 228). Dionysius mentions the
fact that he was invited to attend this synod in an epistle addressed to
Cornelius, according to Eusebius, Bk. VI. chap. 46.

221: Jerome, de vir. ill. 69, tells us that Dionysius wrote a few days before
his death, but that is only an inference drawn from Eusebius' statement. This
epistle of Dionysius is no longer extant, although a copy of it was originally
appended to the encyclical of the Antiochian synod (as we learn from chap. 30,
§4), and hence must have been extant in the time of Eusebius, and also of
Jerome. An epistle purporting to have been written by Dionysius to Paul of
Samosata is given by Labbe, Concil. I. 850-893, but it is not authentic.

222: On Firmilianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 26, note 3.

223: Gregory Thaumaturgus. On him and his brother, Athenodorus, see Bk. VI.
chap. 30, notes 1 and 2.

224: On Helenus, see Bk. VI. chap. 46, note 8. He presided at the final council
which deposed Paul of Samosata, according to the Libellus Synodicus (see Labbe,
Concilia, I. 893, 901), and this is confirmed by the fact that in the encyclical
epistle written by this synod his name stands first (see chap. 30).

225: Of Nicomas, bishop of Iconium in Lycaonia, we know nothing. An earlier
bishop of the same city, named Celsus, is mentioned in Book VI. chap. 19, above.

226: On Hymenaeus, see chap. 14, note 11.

227: On Theotecnus, see chap. 14, note 9.

228: Of Maximus, bishop of Bostra, in Arabia, we know nothing. On Beryllus, an
earlier and more celebrated bishop of the same city, see above, Bk. VI. chap.
33.

229: i.e. Antioch.

230: In both versions of the Chron. the death of Dionysius is put in the
eleventh year of Gallienus, i.e. August, 263, to August, 264, and this, or the
date given here by Eusebius (the twelfth year, August, 264, to August, 265) is
undoubtedly correct. Upon the dates of his accession and death, see Bk. VI.
chap. 40, note 1.

231: Maximus had been a presbyter while Dionysius was bishop of Alexandria, and
had shared with him the hardships of the Decian and Valerian persecutions (see
above, chap. 11). In chap. 32, he is said to have held office eighteen years,
and with this both versions of the Chron. agree, and there is no reason to doubt
the accuracy of the report.

232: Eusebius here, as in his Chron., reckons the reign of Gallienus as
beginning with the date of his association with his father in the supreme power;
i.e. August, 253.

233: Claudius became emperor in March, 268, and died of an epidemic in Sirmium
some time in the year 270, when he was succeeded by Aurelian, whom he had
himself appointed his successor just before his death. It is, perhaps, with this
in mind that Eusebius uses the somewhat peculiar phrase, metadidwsi thn
hgemonian .

234: Eusebius puts this council in the reign of Aurelian (270-275), and in chap.
32 makes it subsequent to the siege of the Brucheium which, according to his
Chron., took place in 272. The epistle written at this council (and given in the
next chapter) is addressed to Maximus, bishop of Alexandria, and Dionysius,
bishop of Rome, so that the latter must have been alive in 272, if the council
was held as late as that. The council is ordinarily, however, assigned to the
year 269, and Dionysius' death to December of the same year; but Lipsius has
shown ( ibid. p. 226 ff.) that the synod which Eusebius mentions here was held
in all probability as early as 265 (but not earlier than 264, because Dionysius
of Alexandria was not succeeded by Maximus until that year), certainly not later
than 268, and hence it is not necessary to extend the episcopate of Dionysius of
Rome beyond 268, the date which he has shown to be most probable (see chap. 27,
note 2). Eusebius then is entirely mistaken in putting the council into the
reign of Aurelian.

235: i.e. Paul of Samosata.

236: Malchion gained such fame from his controversy with Paul that an account of
him is given by Jerome in his de vir. ill. 71. He tells us, however, nothing new
about him, except that he was the author of an epistle to the bishops of
Alexandria and Rome, referring probably to the encyclical letter given in the
next chapter. We do not know upon what authority he bases this statement; in
fact knowing the character of his work, we shall probably be safe in assuming
that the statement is no more than a guess on his part. There is nothing
improbable in the report, but we must remember that Jerome is our only authority
for it, and he is in such a case very poor authority (nevertheless, in
Fremantle's articles, Malchion, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog., the report is
repeated as a fact). Both Eusebius and Jerome tell us that the report of his
discussion with Paul was extant in their day, and a few fragments of it have
been preserved, and are given by Leontius ( de Sectis, III. p. 504, according to
Fremantle).

237: On Dionysius of Rome, see chap. 27, note 2.

238: On Maximus of Alexandria, see chap. 28, note 10.

239: This phrase differs from that used in the previous chapter by the addition
of paj .

240: On Helenus, see Bk. VI. chap. 46, note 8. On Hymenaeus and Theotecnus see
above chap. 14, notes 11 and 9. Hierax is possibly the bishop addressed by
Dionysius in the epistle quoted in chap. 21. Malchion is mentioned in the
preceding chapter; Maximus of Bostra and Nicomas of Iconium, in chap. 28, as
distinguished bishops. Of the others we know nothing.

241: It has been suggested that Theodorus may be Gregory Thaumaturgus, who was
also known by that name (see Bk. VI. chap. 30); but this is extremely improbable
for everywhere else in referring to him as bishop, Eusebius calls him Gregory,
and in chap. 31 speaks of him as one of the most celebrated bishops, and puts
him near the head of the list. Here Theodorus is placed near the end of the
list, and no prominence is given him. There is in fact no reason to identify the
two. The name Theodorus was a very common one.

242: See chap. 27.

243: On Firmilianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 26, note 3.

244: On this epistle, see chap. 27, note 6. As we see from this passage, the
epistle of Dionysius was addressed not to Paul himself, but to the council, and
hence could not be identified with the epistle given by Labbe, even were the
latter authentic.

245: It is plain from this passage that the case of Paul of Samosata had been
discussed in at least two Antiochian synods before the one which deposed him,
and not only in one as has been claimed. The passage shows, too, the way in
which Paul escaped condemnation so long. Not merely on account of his
influential position, as some have said, but also because he promised that he
would give up his heresy and conform his teaching to the orthodox faith. The
language would seem to imply that Firmilian had presided at the synod or synods,
which are referred to here; and this is assumed by most writers. On Firmilian,
see Bk. VI. chap. 26, note 3.

246: The words "and Lord" are wanting in some good mss. as well as in Rufinus,
and are consequently omitted by Schwegler and Heinichen. But I have preferred to
follow the majority of the mss. and all the other editors in retaining the words
which are really necessary to the sense; for it is not meant that Paul denied
God, but that he denied his God and Lord Jesus Christ; namely, by rejecting his
essential deity.

247: On the date of Firmilian's death, see Bk. VI. chap. 26, note 3, above.

248: i.e. Paul of Samosata.

249: tou kanonoj .

250: I follow Heinichen in reading wn eti ekseiei touj adelfouj wn eti ekseiei
touj adelqouj , which, however, is not so well supported by ms. authority.
Laemmer, on the authority of a single codex, reads wn eti kai seiei , and still
other variations occur in some mss.

251: 1 Tim. vi. 5.

252: Paul was the "Procurator Ducenarius" of Zenobia, the queen of Palmyra, an
official so-called because his salary was 200 sestertia. "The Ducenarius was an
imperial procurator, so-called from his salary of 200 sesteria, or 1600 pounds a
year. Some critics suppose that the bishop of Antioch had actually obtained such
an office from Zenobia" (Gibbon). There seems to be no reason to doubt that Paul
held such a position under Zenobia, which appears to be the implication of the
words here, and so he is commonly spoken of as a high official, even as
"Viceroy" of Zenobia. We know from Athanasius (Hist. Ar. §71, Oxf. ed. Chap.
VIII. §10), that he was a great favorite with Zenobia, and that to her he owed
the privilege of retaining his bishopric after the synod had deposed him. This
friendship shown toward him by Zenobia, who was of the strictest manners, is
much in his favor, and almost tempts us to doubt the terrible character given
him in this epistle by the members of the synod. There must have been some
palliating circumstances in the case. He can hardly have been as unqualifiedly
bad as this letter paints him.

253: Valesius says, "The Fathers do not here condemn Paul because he had a
throne; ...but because he erected a tribunal for himself in the church and
placed upon that a high throne. Rufinus, therefore, translates this passage
correctly: In ecclesia vero tribunal sibi multo altius quam fuerat exstrui, et
thronum in excelsioribus collocari jubet. Bishops did sit on a seat a little
higher than the rest of the presbyters, but they did not have a tribunal." This
has been frequently quoted, and is on the whole a true statement of facts. But
the Greek is bhma mun kai qronon uyhlon bhma as such, not upon the height of it,
while the qronoj is condemned because of its height. The translation of Rufinus
shows what was the custom in his day. He could not understand that a bhma should
be objected to as such.

254: Greek shkrhton

255: 'Ihsoun xriston katwqen . Compare, by way of contrast, the words of John
iii. 31: "He that cometh from above is above all" ( o anwqen erxomenoj epanw
pantwn estin ). The words quoted in the epistle can hardly have been used by
Paul himself. They are rather to be regarded as a logical inference from his
positions stated by the writers of the epistle in order to bring out the
blasphemous nature of his views when contrasted with the statement in John,
which was doubtless in their minds while they wrote.

256: The account seems to me without doubt overdrawn at this point. It was such
a common thing, from the time of Herod Agrippa down, to accuse a man who was
noted for his arrogance of encouraging the people to call him an angel descended
from heaven, that we should almost be surprised if the accusation were omitted
here. We have no reason to think, in spite of the report of these good Fathers,
that Paul's presumption went to such a blasphemous and at the same time absurd
length.

257: suneisaktoi

258: It is quite probable that Paul had given some ground for the suspicions
which the worthy bishops breathe here, but that is very far from saying that he
was actually guilty of immorality. In fact, just below (§13), they show that
these are nothing more than suspicions. Exactly what position the two women held
who are mentioned in §14 it is difficult to say, but Paul must of course have
given some plausible reason for their presence, and this is implied in §16,
where the writers say that were he orthodox, they would inquire his reasons for
this conduct, but since he is a heretic, it is not worth while to investigate
the matter. As remarked above, while the direct statements of the epistle can in
the main hardly be doubted, we must nevertheless remember that the prejudices of
the writers would lead them to paint the life of Paul as black as circumstances
could possibly warrant, and unfounded suspicions might therefore easily be taken
as equivalent to proved charges.

259: cf. Ecclesiasticus xxv.

260: We get a glimpse here of the relative importance of orthodoxy and morality
in the minds of these Fathers. Had Paul been orthodox, they would have asked him
to explain his course, and would have endeavored to persuade him to reform his
conduct; but since he was a heretic, it was not worth while. It is noticeable
that he is not condemned because he is immoral, but because he is heretical. The
implication is that he might have been even worse than he was in his morals and
yet no decisive steps have been taken against him, had he not deviated from the
orthodox faith. The Fathers, in fact, by their letters, put themselves in a sad
dilemma. Either Paul was not as wicked as they try to make him out, or else they
were shamefully indifferent to the moral character of their bishops, and even of
the incumbents of their most prominent sees.

261: On Artemas, or Artemon, see Bk. V. chap. 28, note 1. Paul's heresy was a
reproduction of his, as remarked above, chap. 27, note 4.

262: The action of this council in appointing Domnus was entirely irregular, as
the choice of the bishop devolved upon the clergy and the people of the diocese.
But the synod was afraid that Paul's influence would be great enough to secure
his re-election, and hence they took this summary means of disposing of him. But
it was only after the accession of Aurelian that Paul was actually removed from
his bishopric and Domnus was enabled to enter upon his office (see chap. 27,
note 4). The exact date of Domnus' appointment is uncertain, as already shown
(see the note just referred to); so also the date of his death. Both versions of
the Chron. put his accession in the year of Abr. 2283 (a.d. 265), and Jerome's
version puts the accession of his successor, Timaeus, in the year of Abr. 2288
(a.d. 270), while the Armenian omits the notice entirely. We can place no
reliance whatever upon these dates; the date of Domnus' death is certainly at
least two years too early (see the note already referred to).

263: On Demetrianus, the predecessor of Paul in the episcopate of Antioch, see
Bk. VI. chap. 46, note 12.

264: ta koinwnika grammata

265: This is a very keen bit of sarcasm. As Harnack remarks, the mention of
Artenmas in this way proves (or at least renders it very probable) that he was
still alive at this time, in which case his activity in Rome must be put
somewhat later than the commonly accepted dates, viz. the episcopate of
Zephyrinus (202-217).

266: See chap. 27, note 4. The bishop of Rome to whose judgment Aurelian
appealed was Felix, mentioned below.

267: Aurelian according to tradition was the author of the ninth of the "ten
great persecutions" against the Church. But the report is a mistake. Ensebius
apparently is the ultimate source to which the report is to be referred, but he
says expressly that he died before he was able to begin his intended
persecution, and more than that, that he was even prevented from signing the
decree, so that it is not proper to speak even of an hostile edict of Aurelian
(as many do who reject the actual persecution). It is true that in Lactantius'
De mort. persecutorum, chap. 6, it is said that Aurelian actually issued edicts
against the Christians, but that he died before they had found their way to the
most distant provinces. It seems probable, however, that Eusebius' account is
nearest the truth, and that the reports that Aurelian actually signed the edicts
as well as that he commenced the persecution are both developments from the
original and more correct version of the affair which Eusebius gives. There is
no reason to doubt the account of Eusebius. Aurelian's conduct in the case of
Paul does not imply any special friendliness on his part toward the Church. The
Christians had secured legal recognition under Gallienus; and it was a simple
act of common justice to put the valuable property of the Church in Antioch into
the hands of the rightful owners whoever they might be. His act does imply,
however, that he cannot have been in the beginning actively hostile to the
Church, for in that case he would simply have driven Paul out, and confiscated
the property.

268: mononouxi ec agkwnwn thj egxeirhsewj anton epidesmousa .

269: Aurelian reigned from 270 to 275, and was succeeded by Tacitus, who ruled
only six months, and he in turn by Probus (276 to 282), who was followed by
Carus and his sons Carinus and Numerian, and they in turn by Diocletian in 284.
Eusebius here omits Tacitus, although he mentions him in his Chron., and assigns
six months to his reign, and five years and six months to the reign of Aurelian.

270: Diocletian associated Maximian with himself in the government in 286, and
sent him to command the West with the title of Augustus. In 293 he appointed
Constantius Chlorus and Galerius as Caesars, giving to the former the government
of Gaul and Britain, to the latter that of the provinces between the Adriatic
and the Euxine, while Maximian held Africa and Italy, and Diocletian himself
retained the provinces of Asia. He issued an edict, opening his famous
persecution against the Christians, of which Eusebius gives an account in the
next book, on Feb. 23, 303.

271: On Dionysius, bishop of Rome, see chap. 27, note 2.

272: According to the Liberian catalogue, Felix became bishop on the fifth of
January, 269, and held office five years eleven months and twenty-five days,
until the thirtieth of December, 274, and these dates Lipsius accepts as
correct. Eusebius, in chap. 32, gives five years as the duration of his
episcopate, and with this Jerome's version of the Chron. agrees, while the
Armenian gives nineteen years, which is absolutely inconsistent with its own
notices, and must be of course a copyist's mistake. Jerome puts the accession of
Felix in the first year of Probus, which is wide of the mark, and the Armenian
in the first year of Aurelian, which is not so far out of the way.

273: The name Manes, or Mani, is not of Greek, but of Persian or Semitic origin.
It has not yet been satisfactorily explained. The Greek form is Manhj or
Manixaioj o maneij taj qrenaj , "the madman." This does not imply that Eusebius
supposed his name was originally Greek. He perhaps-as others of the Fathers
did-regarded it as a sign of divine providence that the Persian name chosen by
himself (Mani was not his original name) should when reproduced in Greek bear
such a significant meaning. See Stroth's note on this passage.

274: Beausobre maintains that Mani did not pretend to be the Paraclete, but
merely a man, the messenger of the Paraclete. The Fathers generally, however
agree with Eusebius in asserting that his claims were of the very highest sort.
The point cannot be satisfactorily settled.

275: See 1 Tim. vi. 20.

276: ekklhsiastikwn andrwn .

277: On Felix, see chap. 30, note 34.

278: Jerome's version of the Chron. agrees with this passage massigning eight
months to the episcopate of Eutychianus, while the Armenian gives him only two
months. The Liberian catalogue, however, gives eight years eleven months and
three days; and Lipsius accepts these figures as correct, putting his accession
on the filth of January, 275, and his death on the eighth of December, 283.
Jerome puts his accession in the fifth year of Probus, which is wide of the
mark, the Armenian in the second year, which is also too late by about two
years. Lipsius explains the eight months of the Church History and the Chron. as
a change, in their original source, of years to mouths. The present error makes
up in part for the error in chap. 27, where Xystus is given eleven years instead
of eleven months. Eutychianus was not a martyr, but was buried, according to the
Liberian catalogue, in the Catacombs of St. Calixtus, a statement which has been
confirmed by the discovery of a stone bearing his name.

279: According to the Liberian catalogue, Caius became bishop on the 17th of
December, 283, and held office for twelve years four months and six (or seven)
days, i.e. until April 22, 296, and these dates are accepted by Lipsius as
correct. Both versions of the Chron. agree with the History in assigning fifteen
years to Caius'episcopate, but this error is of a piece with the others which
abound in this period. The report of his martyrdom is fabulous.

280: According to the Liberian catalogue, Marcellinus became bishop on the 30th
of June, 296, and held office for eight years three months and twenty-five days,
i.e. until the 25th of October, 304, and these dates Lipsius accepts as correct,
although there is considerable uncertainty as to the exact date of his death.
Jerome's version of the Chron. puts his accession in the twelfth year of
Diocletian, which is not far out of the way, but does not give the duration of
his episcopate, nor does Eusebius in his History. The Armenian Chron. does not
mention Marcellinus at all. Tradition although denied by many of the Fathers,
says that he proved wanting in the Diocletian persecution, and this seems to
have been a fact. It is also said that he afterward repented and suffered
martyrdom, but that is only an invention. The expression of Eusebius in this
connection is ambiguous; he simply says he was "overtaken by the persecution,"
which might mean martyrdom, or might mean simply arrest. The eleven bishops that
preceded him from Pontianus to Caius were buried in the Catacombs of St.
Calixtus, but he was buried in those of Priscilla.

281: Of Timaeus we know nothing, nor can we fix his dates. The Chron. puts his
accession in the year of Abr. 2288 (270 a.d.), and the accession of his
successor, Cyril, in 2297 (279 a.d.), but the former at least is certainly far
too early. Harnack ( Zeit des Ignatius, p. 53) concludes that Cyril must have
been bishop as early as 280, and hence neither Domnus nor Timaeus can have held
office a great while.

282: On Domnus, see chap. 30, note 24.

283: According to Jerome's Chron., Cyril became bishop in the ear of Abr. 2297,
or fourth year of Probus (279-280 a.d.); and Harnack accepts this as at least
approximately correct. The same authority puts the accession of his successor,
Tyrannus, in the eighteenth year of Diocletian (301-302 a.d.), and just below
Eusebius says that the destruction of the churches (in Diocletian's persecution)
took place under Tyrannus, not under Cyril. But the Passio sanctorum quattuor
coronatorum (see Mason's Persecution of Diocletian, p. 259-271) contains a
reference to him which assumes that he was condemned to the mines, and died
there after three years. The condemnation, if a fact, must have taken place
after the second edict of Diocletian (303 a.d.), and his death therefore in 306.
There is no other authority for this report, but Harnack considers it in the
highest degree probable, and the indirect way in which Cyril is mentioned
certainly argues for its truth. Neither Eusebius nor Jerome, however, seems to
have known anything about it, and this is very hard to explain. The matter must,
in fact, be left undecided. See Harnack, Zeit des Ignatius, p. 53 sq.

284: This Dorotheus and his contemporary, Lucian (mentioned below, in Bk. VIII.
chap. 13), are the earliest representatives of the sound critical method of
Biblical exegesis, for which the theological school at Antioch was
distinguished, over against the school of Alexandria, in which the allegorical
method was practiced. From Bk. VIII. chap. 6 we learn that Dorotheus suffered
martyrdom by hanging early in the Diocletian persecution, so that it must have
been from this emperor, and not from Constantine, that he received his
appointment mentioned just below. Diocletian, before he began to persecute, had
a number of Christian officials in his household, and treated them with
considerable favor.

285: As Closs remarks, the knowledge of Hebrew was by no means a common thing
among the early teachers of the Church; and therefore Dorotheus is praised for
his acquaintance with it.

286: propaideiaj thj kaq0 Ellhnaj . Compare. Bk. VI. chap. 18, §3.

287: According to the first canon of the Council of Nicaea (see Hefele,
Conciliengeschichte, I. p. 376), persons who made themselves eunuchs were not to
be allowed to become clergymen, nor to remain clergymen if already such. But
this prohibition was not to apply to persons who were made eunuchs by physicians
or by their persecutors; and the latter part of the canon confines the
prohibition expressly to those who have purposely performed the act upon
themselves, and hence nothing would have stood in the way of the advancement of
one born a eunuch as Dorotheus was, even had he lived after the Council of
Nicaea, and still less previous to that time. Closs (followed by Heinichen) is
therefore hardly correct in regarding the fact that Dorotheus held office as an
exception to the established order of things.

288: i.e. Diocletian.

289: According to Jerome's Chron. Tyrannus became bishop in the eighteenth year
of Diocletian (301-302). If the account of Cyril's death accepted by Harnack be
taken as correct, this date is at least a year too early. If Cyril was sent to
the mines in 303 and died in 306, Tyrannus may have become bishop in 303, or not
until 306. According to Theodoret, H. E. I. 3, his successor, Vitalis, is said
to have become bishop "after peace had been restored to the Church," which seems
to imply, though it is not directly said, that Tyrannus himself lived until that
time (i.e. until 311). We know nothing certainly either about his character or
the dates of his episcopate.

290: This Eusebius, who is mentioned with praise by Dionysius of Alexandria, in
the epistle quoted in chap. 11, above, was a deacon in the church of Alexandria,
who distinguished himself by his good offices during the persecution of Valerian
(a.d. 257), as recorded in that epistle, and also during the revolt and siege of
Alexandria after the death of Valerian (in 262), as recorded in this chapter.
From the account given here we see that he attended the first, or at least one
of the earlier councils of Antioch in which the case of Paul was discussed
(undoubtedly as the representative of Dionysius, whose age prevented his
attending the first one, as mentioned in chap. 27), and the Laodiceans, becoming
acquainted with him there, compelled him to accept the bishopric of their
church, at that time vacant. As we see from the account of Anatolius'
appointment farther on in this chapter he died before the meeting of the council
which condemned Paul. We know in regard to him only what is told us in these two
chapters. The name Eusebius was a very common one in the early Church. The Dict.
of Christ. Biog. mentions 137 persons of that name belonging to the first eight
centuries.

291: Of this Socrates we know nothing.

292: In chap. 11, above.

293: Anatolius we are told here was a man of great distinction both for his
learning and for his practical common sense. It is not said that he held any
ecclesiastical office in Alexandria, but farther on in the chapter we are told
that he left that city after the close of the siege, as Eusebius had done, and
that he was ordained assistant bishop by Theotecnus, bishop of Caesarea, and was
the latter's colleague in that church for a short time. When on his way to
(possibly on his return from) the synod of Antioch, which passed condemnation
upon Paul (and at which Theotecnus was also present), he passed through Laodicea
and was prevailed upon to accept the bishopric of that city, Eusebius, his old
friend, being deceased. The way in which Laodicea got its two bishops is thus
somewhat remarkable. The character of Anatolius is clear from the account which
follows. Jerome mentions him in his de vir. ill. chap. 73, and in his Ep. ad
Magnum (Migne, No. 70), but adds nothing to Eusebius' account. Upon his
writings, one of which is quoted in this chapter, see below, notes 21 and 32.

294: thj 'Aristotelouj diadoxhj thn diarbhn : "A school of the Aristotelian
succession," or "order."

295: The Pyrucheium (the mss. of Eusebius vary considerably in their spelling,
but I have adopted that form which seems best supported) or Brucheium (as it is
called by other ancient writers and as it is more generally known) was one of
the three districts of Alexandria and was inhabited by the royal family and by
the Greeks. It was the finest and most beautiful quarter of the city, and
contained, besides the royal palaces, many magnificent public buildings.
Comprising, as it did, the citadel as well, it was besieged a number of times,
and it is uncertain which siege is meant in the present case. It seems to me
most likely that we are to think of the time of the revolt of Aemilian (see
above, chap. 11, note 4), in 260 a.d., when the Romans under Theodotus besieged
and finally (just how soon we cannot tell, but the city seems to have been at
peace again at least in 264) took the Brucheium. Valesius and others think of a
later siege under Claudius, but that seems to me too late (see Tillemont, Hist.
des Emp. III. p. 345 sq.).

296: Anatolius' work on the passover is still extant in a Latin translation
supposed to be the work of Rufinus (though this is uncertain), and which was
first published by Aegidius Bucherius in his Doctrina Temporum, Antwerp, 1634.
Ideler ( Chron. II. 230) claims that this supposed translation of Anatolius is a
work of the seventh century. But there are the best of reasons for supposing it
an early translation of Anatolius' genuine work (see Zahn, Forschungen zur
Gesch. des N. T. Kanons, III. p. 177-196). The Latin version is given with the
other extant fragments of Anatolius' works in Migne's Pat. Gr. X. 209-222,
231-236, and an English translation of the Paschal Canons in the Ante-Nicene
Fathers, VI. p. 146-151. Upon this work of Anatolius, see especially the works
of Ideler and Zahn referred to just above.

297: Anatolius was, so far as we know, the first Christian to employ the old
Metonic nineteen-year cycle for the determination of Easter (see above, chap.
20, note 6).

298: Phamenoth was the seventh month of the Alexandrian year, which was
introduced in the reign of Augustus (b.c. 25) and began on the 29th of August.
The month Phamenoth, therefore, began on the 25th of February, and the 26th of
the month corresponded to the 22d of our March.

299: Dystrus was the seventh month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded
exactly with our March, so that the 22d of Dystrus was the 22d of March, which
according to the Roman method of reckoning was the eleventh day before the
Kalends of April.

300: i.e. the first of the twelve signs of the Zodiac. On Anatolius' method of
calculation, see Ideler, ibid.

301: dwdekathmorion : "twelfth-part."

302: So far as I am aware, Musaeus is known to us only from this reference of
Anatolius.

303: 27 Who the two Agathobuli were we do not know. In the Chron. of Eusebius a
philosopher Agathobulus is mentioned under the third year of Hadrian in
connection with Plutarch, Sextus, and Oenomaus. Valesius therefore suspects that
Anatolius is in error in putting the Agathobuli earlier than Philo and Josephus.
I must confess, however, that the connection in which Eusebius mentions
Agathobulus in his Chron. makes it seem to me very improbable that he can be
referring to either of the Agathobuli whom Anatolius mentions, and that it is
much more likely that the latter were two closely related Jewish writers
(perhaps father and son), who lived, as Anatolius says, before the time of
Philo.

304: Aristobulus was a well-known Hellenistic philosopher of Alexandria, who
lived in the time of Ptolemy Philometor in the second century b.c. He was
thoroughly acquainted with Greek philosophy, and was in many respects the
forerunner of Philo. Anatolius' statement that he wrote in the time of Ptolemy
Philadelphus, and consequently his report that he was one of the seventy
translators of the Septuagint (on the legend as to its composition, see Bk. V.
chap. 8, note 31) must be looked upon as certainly an error (see Clement Alex
Strom. I. 22, Eusebius' Praep. Evang. IX. 6, and XIII. 12, and his Chron., year
of Abr. 1841). He is mentioned often by Clement of Alexandria, by Origen (
Contra Cels. IV. 51), and by Eusebius, who in his Praep. Evang. (VII. 14 and
VIII. 10) gives two fragments of his work (or works) On the Mosaic Law. It is
doubtless to this same work that Anatolius refers in the present passage. No
other fragments of his writings are extant. See especially Schürer, Gesch. der
Juden im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, II.p. 760 sq. See also Bk. VI. chap. 23, note
13, above.

305: On the origin of the LXX, see above, Bk. V. chap. 8, note 31. The mythical
character of the common legend in regard to its composition is referred to in
that note, and that the LXX (or at least that part of it which comprises the
law) was already in existence before the time of Aristobulus is clear from the
latter's words, quoted by Eusebius, Praep. Evang. XIII. 12, 1-2 (Heinichen's
ed.).

306: Cf.2 Cor. iii. 18.

307: The Book of Enoch is one of the so-called Old Testament Pseudepigrapha,
which was widely used in the ancient Church, and is quoted in the Epistle of
Jude, 14 sq. The work disappeared after about the fifth century, and was
supposed to have perished (with the exception of a few fragments) until in 1773
it was discovered entire in an Ethiopic Bible, and in 1838 was published in
Ethiopic by Lawrence, who in 1821 had already translated it into English.
Dillmann also published the Ethiopic text in 1851, and in 1853 a German
translation with commentary. Dillmann's edition of the original entirely
supersedes that of Lawrence, and his translation and commentary still form the
standard work upon the subject. More recently it has been re-translated into
English and discussed by George H. Schodde: The Book of Enoch, translated, with
Introduction and Notes, Andover, 1882. The literature on the book of Enoch is
very extensive. See especially Schodde's work, the German translation of
Dillmann, Schürer's Gesch. der Juden, II. p. 616 sq., and Lipsius' article,
Enoch, Apocryphal Book of, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. The teachings of the
book to which Anatolius refers are found in the seventy-second chapter
(Schodde's ed. p. 179 sq.), which contains a detailed description of the course
of the sun during the various months of the year.

308: =Ariqmhtikaj eisagwgaj 309: On Theotecnus, see chap. 14, note 9.

310: On the custom of appointing assistant bishops, see Bk. VI. chap. 11, note
1.

311: Eusebius doubtless refers here to the final council at which Paul was
condemned, and which has been already mentioned in chaps. 29 and 30 (on its
date, see chap. 29, note 1). That it is this particular council to which he
refers is implied in the way in which it is spoken of,-as if referring to the
well-known synod, of which so much has been said,-and still further by the fact
that Eusebius, who had attended the first one (see above, §5), and had then
become bishop of Laodicea, was already dead.

312: Of Stephen, bishop of Laodicea, we know only what Eusebius tells us in this
passage.

313: Theodotus, of whom Eusebius speaks in such high terms in this passage, was
bishop of Laodicea for a great many years, and played a prominent part in the
Arian controversy, being one of the most zealous supporters of the Arian cause
(see Theodoret, H. E. I. 5 and V. 7, and Athanasius de Synodis Arim. et Seleuc.
I. 17). He was present at the Council of Nicaea (Labbe, Concil. II. 51), and
took part in the council which deposed Eustathius of Antioch, in 330 (according
to Theodoret, H. E. I. 21, whose account, though unreliable, is very likely
correct so far as its list of bishops is concerned; on the council, see also p.
21, above). He was already dead in the year 341; for his successor, George, was
present at the Council of Antioch ( In Encaeniis ), which was held in that year
(see Sozomen, H. E. III. 5, and cf. Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. p. 502 sq.). We
have no information that he was present at the Council of Tyre, in 335 (as is
incorrectly stated by Labbe, who confounds Theodore of Heraclea with Theodotus;
see Theodoret, H. E. I. 28). It is, therefore, possible that he was dead at that
time, though his absence of course does not prove it. According to Socrates, H.
E. II. 46, and Sozomen, H. E. VI. 25, Theodotus had trouble with the two
Apolinarii, father and son, who resided at Antioch. We do not know the date of
the younger Apolinarius' birth (the approximate date, 335, given in the article
in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. is a gross error), but we can hardly put it much
earlier than 320, and therefore as he was a reader in the church, according to
Socrates (Sozomen calls him only a youth) in the time of Theodotus, it seems
best to put the death of the latter as late as possible, perhaps well on toward
340. The date of his accession is unknown to us; but as Eusebius says that he
became bishop straightway after the fall of Stephen, we cannot well put his
accession later than 311; so that he held office in all probability some thirty
years. Venables' article on Theodotus, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. is a tissue
of errors, caused by identifying Theodotus with Theodore of Heraclea (an error
committed by Labbe before him) and with another Theodotus, present at the
Council of Seleucia, in 359 (Athanasius, ibid. I. 12; cf. Hefele,
Conciliengesch. I. p. 713).

314: Qeodotoj "God-given."

315: Of Agapius we know only what Eusebius tells us in this passage. He was the
immediate predecessor of Eusebius in the church of Caesarea, and probably
survived the persecution, but not for many years (see above, p. 10 sq.).
Eusebius speaks of him in the past tense, so that he was clearly already dead at
the time this part of the History was written (i.e. probably in 313; see above,
p. 45).

316: Pamphilus, a presbyter of Caesarea, was Eusebius' teacher and most intimate
friend, and after his death Eusebius showed his affection and respect for him by
adopting his name, styling himself Eusebius Pamphili. He pursued his studies in
Alexandria (according to Photius under Pierius more probably under Achillas the
head of the catechetical school there; see below, notes 42 and 53), and
conceived an unbounded admiration for Origen, the great light of that school,
which he never lost. Pamphilus is chiefly celebrated for the library which he
collected at Caesarea and to which Eusebius owes a large part of the materials
of his history. Jerome also made extensive use of it. It was especially rich in
copies of the Scripture, of commentaries upon it, and of Origen's works (see
above, p. 38). He wrote very little, devoting himself chiefly to the study of
Scripture, and to the transcription of mss. of it and of the works of Origen.
During the last two years of his life, however, while in prison, he wrote with
the assistance of Eusebius a Defense of Origen in five books, to which Eusebius
afterward added a sixth (see above, p. 36 sq.). During the persecution under
Maximinus, he was thrown into prison by Urbanus, prefect of Caesarea, in 307,
and after remaining two years in close confinement, cheered by the companionship
of Eusebius, he was put to death by Firmilian, the successor of Urbanus, in 309,
as recorded below, in the Martyrs of Palestine, chap. 11 (see above, p. 9). The
Life of Pamphilus which Eusebius wrote is no longer extant (see above, p. 28).
On Pamphilus, see Jerome, de vir. ill. chap. 75, and Photius, Cod. 118. See also
the present volume, p. 5-9 passim.

317: On Eusebius' Life of Pamphilus, see above p. 28 sq.

318: According to Jerome ( de vir. ill. 76) Pierius was a presbyter and a
teacher in Alexandria under the emperors Carus and Diocletian, while Theonas was
bishop there (see note 51, below), on account of the elegance of his writings
was called "the younger Origen," was skilled, moreover, in dialectics and
rhetoric, lived an ascetic life, and passed his later years, after the
persecution, in Rome. According to Photius, Cod. 118, he was at the head of the
catechetical school of Alexandria, was the teacher of Pamphilus, and finally
suffered martyrdom. Photius may be correct in the former statements. The last
statement is at variance with Jerome's distinct report which in the present
instance at least is to be decidedly preferred to that of Photius. The first
statement also is subject to grave doubt, for according to Eusebius (§30,
below), Achillas, who was made presbyter at the same time as Pierius, and who
lived until after the persecution (when he became bishop), was principal of the
school. Eusebius' statement must be accepted as correct, and in that case it is
difficult to believe the report of Photius, both on account of Eusebius' silence
in regard to Pierius' connection with the school, and also because if Pierius
was principal of the school, he must apparently have given it up while he was
still in Alexandria, or must have left the city earlier than Jerome says.It is
more probable that Photius' report is false and rests upon acombination of the
accounts of Eusebius and Jerome. If both thefirst and third statements of
Photius are incorrect, little faith can be placed on the second, which may be
true, or which may be simply a combination of the known fact that Pamphilus
studied in Alexandria with the supposed fact that Pierius was the principal of
the catechetical school while he was there. It is quite as probable that
Pamphilus studied with Achillas. Jerome tells us that a number of works (
tractatuum ) by Pierius were extant in his day, among them a long homily on
Hosea (cf. also Jerome's Comment. in Osee, prologus ). In his second epistle to
Pammachius (Migne, No. 49) Jerome refers also to Pierius' commentary on First
Corinthians, and quotes from it the words, "In saying this Paul openly preaches
celibacy." Photius, Cod. 119, mentions a work in twelve books, whose title he
does not name, but in which he tells us Pierius had uttered some dangerous
sentiments in regard to the Spirit, pronouncing him inferior to the Father and
the Son. This work contained, according to Photius, a book on Luke's Gospel, and
another on the passover, and on Hosea. Pierius' writings are no longer extant.
The passages from Jerome's epistle to Pammachius and from Photius, Cod. 119, are
given, with notes, by Routh, Rel. Sac. 2d ed. III. 429 sq., and an English
translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VI. p. 157. Pierius was evidently a
"younger Origen" in his theology as well as in his literary character, as we can
gather from Photius' account of him (cf. Harnack's Dogmengesch. I. p. 640).

319: A Meletius bishop of Sabastopolis, is mentioned by Philostorgius ( H. E. I.
8) as in attendance upon the Council of Nicaea, and it is commonly assumed that
this is the same one referred to here by Eusebius. But Eusebius' words seem to
me to imply clearly that the Meletius of whom he speaks was already dead at the
time he wrote; and, therefore, if we suppose that Philostorgius is referring to
the same man, we must conclude that he was mistaken in his statement, possibly
confounding him with the later Meletius of Sebaste, afterwards of Antioch. Our
Meletius is, however, doubtless to be identified with the orthodox Meletius
mentioned in terms of praise by Athanasius, in his Ep. ad Episc.Aeg. §8, and by
Basil in his De Spir. Sanct. chap. 29, §74. It is suggested by Stroth that
Eusebius was a pupil of Meletius during the time that the latter was in
Palestine, but this is not implied in Eusebius' words (see above, p. 5).

320: to meli thj Attikhj , in allusion to Meletius' name.

321: The majority of the mss. and editors read Zambdaj . A few mss. followed by
Laemmer read Zabadaj Zabdaj 322: In chap. 14. See note 11 on that chapter.

323: According to Jerome's version of the Chron., Hermon became bishop in the
eighteenth year of Diocletian, a.d. 301; according to the Armenian, in the
sixteenth year. The accession of his successor Macharius is put by Jerome in the
eighth year of Constantine, a.d. 312. Eusebius' words seem to imply that Hermon
was still bishop at the time he was writing, though it is not certain that he
means to say that. Jerome's date may be incorrect, but is probably not far out
of the way. Of Hermon himself we know nothing more.

324: See above, chap. 19.

325: On Maximus, see chap. 28, note 10.

326: On Dionysius the Great, see especially Bk. VI. chap. 40, note 1.

327: According to Jerome's Chron., Theonas became bishop in the sixth year of
Probus (281 a.d.); according to the Armenian, in the first year of Numerian and
Carinus, i.e. a year later. Both agree with the History in assigning nineteen
years to his episcopate. An interesting and admirable epistle is extant
addressed to Lucian, the chief chamberlain of the emperor, and containing advice
in regard to the duties of his position, which is commonly and without doubt
correctly ascribed to Theonas. The name of the emperor is not given, but all of
the circumstances point to Diocletian, who had a number of Christians in
influential positions in his household during the earlier years of his reign.
The epistle, which is in Latin (according to some a translation of a Greek
original), is given by Routh, Rel. Sac. III. 439-445, and an English translation
is contained in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VI. p. 158-161.

328: The character given to Achillas by Eusebius is confirmed by Athanasius, who
calls him "the great Achillas" (in his Epistle to the Bishops of Egypt, §23). He
succeeded Peter as bishop of Alexandria (Epiphanius makes him the successor of
Alexander, but wrongly, for the testimony of Athanasius, to say nothing of
Jerome, Socrates, and other writers, is decisive on this point; see Athanasius'
Apology against the Arians, §§11 and 59, and Epist. to the Bishops of Egypt,
§23), but our authorities differ as to the date of his accession and the length
of his episcopate. Eusebius, in this chapter, §31, puts the death of Peter in
the ninth year of the persecution 311-312), and with this Jerome agrees in his
Chron., and there can be no doubt as to the correctness of the report. But
afterwards, quite inconsistently (unless it be supposed that Achillas became
bishop before Peter's death, which, in the face of Eusebius' silence on the
subject, is very improbable), Jerome puts the accession of Achillas into the
fifth year of Constantine, a.d. 309. Jerome commits another error in putting the
accession of his successor, Alexander, in the sixteenth year of Constantine
(a.d. 320); for Alexander's controversy with Arius (see above, p. 11 sq.) can
hardly have broken out later than 318 or 319, and it would appear that Alexander
had been bishop already some time when that took place. Theodoret ( H. E. I. 2)
states that Achillas ruled the church but a short time, and with him agrees
Epiphanius ( Haer. LXIX. 11), who says that he held office but three months. The
casual way in which Achillas is spoken of in all our sources, most of which
mention him only in passing from Peter to Alexander, would seem to confirm
Theodoret's report, and Alexander's accession may, therefore, be put not long
after 311.

329: thj ieraj pistewj to didaskaleion . Eusebius refers here to the famous
catechetical school of Alexandria (upon which, see above, Bk. V. chap. 10, note
2). The appointment of Achillas to the principalship of this school would seem
to exclude Pierius, who is said by Photius to have been at the head of it (see
above, note 42).

330: Peter is mentioned again in Bk. VIII. chap. 13, and in Bk. IX. chap. 6, and
both times in the highest terms. In the latter passage his death is said to have
taken place by order of Maximinus, quite unexpectedly and without any reason.
This was in the ninth year of the persecution, as we learn from the present
passage (i.e. Feb. 311 to Feb. 312, or according to Eusebius own reckoning, Mar.
or Apr. 311 to Mar. or Apr. 312; see below Bk. VII. chap. 2, note o), and
evidently after the publication of the toleration edict of Galerius, when the
Christians were not looking for any further molestation (see below, Bk. VIII.
chap. 14, note 2). According to this passage, Peter was bishop less than three
years before the outbreak of the persecution, and hence he cannot have become
bishop before the spring of 300. On the other hand since he died as early as the
spring of 312, and was bishop twelve years he must have become bishop not later
than the spring of 300, and he must have died not long before the spring of 312,
and even then, if Eusebius' other statements are exact, it is impossible to make
his episcopate fully twelve years in length. The date thus obtained for his
accession is in accord with the dates given for the episcopate of his
predecessor Theonas (see above, note 51). Jerome puts his accession in the
nineteenth year of Diocletian (a.d. 302), but this is at variance with his own
figures in connection with Theonas, and is plainly incorrect.Fourteen Canons,
containing detailed directions in regard to the lapsed were drawn up by Peter in
306 (see the opening sentence of the first canon), and are still extant. They
are published in all collections of canons and also in numerous other works. See
especially Routh's Rel. Sac. IV. p. 23 sq. An English translation is given in
the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VI. p. 269-278. Brief fragments of other works- On the
Passover, On the Godhead, On the Advent of the Saviour, On the Soul, and the
beginning of an epistle addressed to the Alexandrians-are given by Routh, ibid.
p. 45 sq. These fragments, together with a few others of doubtful origin, given
by Gallandius and Mai, are translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, ibid. p.
280-283. In the same volume (p. 261-268) are given The Genuine Acts of Peter,
containing an account of his life and martyrdom. These, however, are spurious
and historically quite worthless.Peter seems, to judge from the extant
fragments, to have been in the main an Origenist, but to have departed in some
important respects from the teachings of Origen, especially on the subject of
anthropology (cf. Harnack's Dogmengesch. I. p. 644). The famous Meletian schism
took its rise during the episcopate of Peter (see Athanasius, Apology against
the Arians, §59).

331: Diocletian's edict decreeing the demolition of the churches was published
in February, 303. See Bk. VIII. chap. 2, note 3.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 19: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 8
========================================================================

Book VIII.

Introduction.

Chapter I. The Events Which Preceded the Persecution in Our Times.

Chapter II. The Destruction of the Churches.

Chapter III. The Nature of the Conflicts Endured in the Persecution.

Chapter IV. The Famous Martyrs of God, Who Filled Every Place with Their Memory
and Won Various Crowns in Behalf of Religion.

Chapter V. Those in Nicomedia.24 Chapter VI. Those in the Palace.

Chapter VII. The Egyptians in Phoenicia.

Chapter VIII. These in Egypt.44 Chapter IX. Those in Thebais.45 Chapter X. The
Writings of Phileas the Martyr Describing the Occurrences at Alexandria.

Chapter XI. Those in Phrygia.

Chapter XII. Many Others, Both Men and Women, Who Suffered in Various Ways.

Chapter XIII. The Bishops of the Church that Evinced by Their Blood the
Genuineness of the Religion Which They Preached.

Chapter XIV. The Character of the Enemies of Religion.

Chapter XV. The Events Which Happened to the Heathen.91 Chapter XVI. The Change
of Affairs for the Better.

Chapter XVII. The Revocation of the Rulers.

Martyrs of Palestine.121

Chapter I.

Chapter II.

Chapter III.

Chapter IV.

Chapter V.

Chapter VI.

Chapter VII.

Chapter VIII.

Chapter IX.

Chapter X.

Chapter XI.

Chapter XII.

Chapter XIII.

Book VIII.

Introduction. As we have described in seven books the events from the time of
the apostles,1 we think it proper in this eighth book to record for the
information of posterity a few of the most important occurrences of our own
times, which are worthy of permanent record. Our account will begin at this
point.

Chapter I. The Events Which Preceded the Persecution in Our Times.

1 It is beyond our ability to describe in a suitable manner the extent and
nature of the glory and freedom with which the word of piety toward the God of
the universe, proclaimed to the world through Christ, was honored among all men,
both Greeks and barbarians, before the persecution in our day.

2 The favor shown our people by the rulers might be adduced as evidence; as they
committed to them the government of provinces,2 and on account of the great
friendship which they entertained toward their doctrine, released them from
anxiety in regard to sacrificing.

3 Why need I speak of those in the royal palaces, and of the rulers over all,
who allowed the members of their households, wives3 and children and servants,
to speak openly before them for the Divine word and life, and suffered them
almost to boast of the freedom of their faith?

4 Indeed they esteemed them highly, and preferred them to their fellow-servants.
Such an one was that Dorotheus,4 the most devoted and faithful to them of all,
and on this account especially honored by them among those who held the most
honorable offices and governments. With him was the celebrated Gorgonius,5 and
as many as had been esteemed worthy of the same distinction on account of the
word of God.

5 And one could see the rulers in every church accorded the greatest favor6 by
all officers and governors.But how can any one describe those vast assemblies,
and the multitude that crowded together in every city, and the famous gatherings
in the houses of prayer; on whose account not being satisfied with the ancient
buildings they erected from the foundation large churches in all the cities?

6 No envy hindered the progress of these affairs which advanced gradually, and
grew and increased day by day. Nor could any evil demon slander them or hinder
them through human counsels, so long as the divine and heavenly hand watched
over and guarded his own people as worthy.

7 But when on account of the abundant freedom, we fell into laxity and sloth,
and envied and reviled each other, and were almost, as it were, taking up arms
against one another, rulers assailing rulers with words like spears, and people
forming parties against people, and monstrous hypocrisy and dissimulation rising
to the greatest height of wickedness, the divine judgment with forbearance, as
is its pleasure, while the multitudes yet continued to assemble, gently and
moderately harassed the episcopacy.

8 This persecution began with the brethren in the army. But as if without
sensibility, we were not eager to make the Deity favorable and propitious; and
some, like atheists, thought that our affairs were unheeded and ungoverned; and
thus we added one wickedness to another. And those esteemed our shepherds,
casting aside the bond of piety, were excited to conflicts with one another, and
did nothing else than heap up strifes and threats and jealousy and enmity and
hatred toward each other, like tyrants eagerly endeavoring to assert their
power. Then, truly, according to the word of Jeremiah, "The Lord in his wrath
darkened the daughter of Zion, and cast down the glory of Israel from heaven to
earth, and remembered not his foot-stool in the day of his anger. The Lord also
overwhelmed all the beautiful things of Israel, and threw down all his
strongholds."7

9 And according to what was foretold in the Psalms: "He has made void the
covenant of his servant, and profaned his sanctuary to the earth, - in the
destruction of the churches, - and has thrown down all his strongholds, and has
made his fortresses cowardice. All that pass by have plundered the multitude of
the people; and he has become besides a reproach to his neighbors. For he has
exalted the right hand of his enemies, and has turned back the help of his
sword, and has not taken his part in the war. But he has deprived him of
purification, and has cast his throne to the ground. He has shortened the days
of his time, and besides all, has poured out shame upon him."8 Chapter II. The
Destruction of the Churches.

1 All these things were fulfilled in us, when we saw with our own eyes the
houses of prayer thrown down to the very foundations, and the Divine and Sacred
Scriptures committed to the flames in the midst of the market-places, and the
shepherds of the churches basely hidden here and there, and some of them
captured ignominiously, and mocked by their enemies. When also, according to
another prophetic word, "Contempt was poured out upon rulers, and he caused them
to wander in an untrodden and pathless way."9

2 But it is not our place to describe the sad misfortunes which finally came
upon them, as we do not think it proper, moreover, to record their divisions and
unnatural conduct to each other before the persecution. Wherefore we have
decided to relate nothing concerning them except the things in which we can
vindicate the Divine judgment.

3 Hence we shall not mention those who were shaken by the persecution, nor those
who in everything pertaining to salvation were shipwrecked, and by their own
will were sunk in the depths of the flood. But we shall introduce into this
history in general only those events which may be usefull first to ourselves and
afterwards to posterity.10 Let us therefore proceed to describe briefly the
sacred conflicts of the witnesses of the Divine Word.

4 It was in the nineteenth year of the reign of Diocletian,11 in the month
Dystrus,12 called March by the Romans, when the feast of the Saviour's passion
was near at hand,13 that royal edicts were published everywhere, commanding that
the churches be leveled to the ground and the Scriptures be destroyed by fire,
and ordering that those who held places of honor be degraded, and that the
household servants, if they persisted in the profession of Christianity, be
deprived of freedom.14

5 Such was the first edict against us. But not long after, other decrees were
issued, commanding that all the rulers of the churches in every place be first
thrown into prison,15 and afterwards by every artifice be compelled to
sacrifices.16 Chapter III. The Nature of the Conflicts Endured in the
Persecution.

1 Then truly a great many rulers of the churches eagerly endured terrible
sufferings, and furnished examples of noble conflicts. But a multitude of
others,17 benumbed in spirit by fear, were easily weakened at the first onset.
Of the rest each one endured different forms of torture.18 The body of one was
scourged with rods. Another was punished with insupportable rackings and
scrapings, in which some suffered a miserable death.

2 Others passed through different conflicts. Thus one, while those around
pressed him on by force and dragged him to the abominable and impure sacrifices,
was dismissed as if he had sacrificed, though he had not.19 Another, though he
had not approached at all, nor touched any polluted thing, when others said that
he had sacrificed, went away, bearing the accusation in silence.

3 Another being taken up half dead, was cast aside as if already dead, and again
a certain one lying upon the ground was dragged a long distance by his feet and
counted among those who had sacrificed. One cried out and with a loud voice
testified his rejection of the sacrifice; another shouted that he was a
Christian, being resplendent in the confession of the saving Name. Another
protested that he had not sacrificed and never would.

4 But they were struck in the mouth and silenced by a large band of soldiers who
were drawn up for this purpose; and they were smitten on the face and cheeks and
driven away by force; so important did the enemies of piety regard it, by any
means, to seem to have accomplished their purpose. But these things did no avail
them against the holy martyrs; for an accurate description of whom, what word of
ours could suffice?

Chapter IV. The Famous Martyrs of God, Who Filled Every Place with Their Memory
and Won Various Crowns in Behalf of Religion.

1 For we might tell of many who showed admirable zeal for the religion of the
God of the universe, not only from the beginning of the general persecution, but
long before that time, while yet peace prevailed.

2 For though he who had received power was seemingly aroused now as from a deep
sleep, yet from the time after Decius and Valerian, he had been plotting
secretly and without notice against the churches. He did not wage war against
all of us at once, but made trial at first only of those in the army. For he
supposed that the others could be taken easily if he should first attack and
subdue these. Thereupon many of the soldiers were seen most cheerfully embracing
private life, so that they might not deny their piety toward the Creator of the
universe. For when the commander,20 whoever he was,21 began to persecute the
soldiers, separating into tribes and purging those who were enrolled in the
army, giving them the choice either by obeying to receive the honor which
belonged to them, or on the other hand to be deprived of it if they disobeyed
the command, a great many soldiers of Christ's kingdom, without hesitation,
instantly preferred the confession of him to the seeming glory and prosperity
which they were enjoying.

4 And one and another of them occasionally received in exchange, for their pious
constancy,22 not only the loss of position, but death. But as yet the instigator
of this plot proceeded with moderation, and ventured so far as blood only in
some instances; for the multitude of believers, as it is likely, made him
afraid, and deterred him from waging war at once against all.

5 But when he made the attack more boldly, it is impossible to relate how many
and what sort of martyrs of God could be seen, among the inhabitants of all the
cities and countries.23 Chapter V. Those in Nicomedia.24

1 Immediately on the publication of the decree against the churches in
Nicomedia,25 a certain man, not obscure but very highly honored with
distinguished temporal dignities, moved with zeal toward God, and incited with
ardent faith, seized the edict as it was posted openly and publicly, and tore it
to pieces as a profane and impious thing;26 and this was done while two of the
sovereigns were in the same city, - the oldest of all, and the one who held the
fourth place in the government after him.27 But this man, first in that place,
after distinguishing himself in such a manner suffered those things which were
likely to follow such daring, and kept his spirit cheerful and undisturbed till
death.

Chapter VI. Those in the Palace.

1 This period produced divine and illustrious martyrs, above all whose praises
have ever been sung and who have been celebrated for courage, whether among
Greeks or barbarians, in the person of Dorotheus28 and the servants that were
with him in the palace. Although they received the highest honors from their
masters, and were treated by them as their own children, they esteemed
reproaches and trials for religion, and the many forms of death that were
invented against them, as, in truth, greater riches than the glory and luxury of
this life.

2 We will describe the manner in which one of them ended his life, and leave our
readers to infer from his case the sufferings of the others. A certain man was
brought forward in the above-mentioned city, before the rulers of whom we have
spoken.29 He was then commanded to sacrifice, but as he refused, he was ordered
to be stripped and raised on high and beaten with rods over his entire body,
until, being conquered, he should, even against his will, do what was commanded.

3 But as he was unmoved by these sufferings, and his bones were already
appearing, they mixed vinegar with salt and poured it upon the mangled parts of
his body. As he scorned these agonies, a gridiron and fire were brought forward.
And the remnants of his body, like flesh intended for eating, were placed on the
fire, not at once, lest he should expire instantly, but a little at a time. And
those who placed him on the pyre were not permitted to desist until, after such
sufferings, he should assent to the things commanded.

4 But he held his purpose firmly, and victoriously gave up hislife while the
tortures were still going on. Such was the martyrdom of one of the servants of
the palace, who was indeed well worthy of his name, for he was called Peter.30

5 The martyrdoms of the rest, though they were not inferior to his, we will pass
by for the sake of brevity, recording only that Dorotheus and Gorgonius,31 with
many others of the royal household, after varied sufferings, ended their lives
by strangling, and bore away the trophies of God-given victory.

6 At this time Anthimus,32 who then presided over the church in Nicomedia, was
beheaded for his testimony to Christ. A great multitude of martyrs were added to
him, a conflagration having broken out in those very days in the palace at
Nicomedia, I know not how, which through a false suspicion was laid to our
people.33 Entire families of the pious in that place were put to death in masses
at the royal command, some by the sword, and others by fire. It is reported that
with a certain divine and indescribable eagerness men and women rushed into the
fire. And the executioners bound a large number of others and put them on
boats34 and threw them into the depths of the sea.

7 And those who had been esteemed their masters considered it necessary to dig
up the bodies of the imperial servants, who had been committed to the earth with
suitable burial and cast them into the sea, lest any, as they thought, regarding
them as gods, might worship them lying in their sepulchers.35

8 Such things occurred in Nicomedia at the beginning of the persecution.36 But
not long after, as persons in the country called Melitene,37 and others
throughout Syria,38 attempted to usurp the government, a royal edict directed
that the rulers of the churches everywhere39 should be thrown into prison and
bonds.

9 What was to be seen after this exceeds all description. A vast multitude were
imprisoned in every place; and the prisons everywhere, which had long before
been prepared for murderers and robbers of graves, were filled with bishops,
presbyters and deacons, readers and exorcists,40 so that room was no longer left
in them for those condemned for crimes.

10 And as other decrees followed the first, directing that those in prison if
they would sacrifice should be permitted to depart in freedom, but that those
who refused should be harassed with many tortures,41 how could any one, again,
number the multitude of martyrs in every province,42 and especially of those in
Africa, and Mauritania, and Thebais, and Egypt? From this last country many went
into other cities and provinces, and became illustrious through martyrdom.

Chapter VII. The Egyptians in Phoenicia.

1 Those of them that were conspicuous in Palestine we know, as also those that
were at Tyre in Phoenicia.43 Who that saw them was not astonished at the
numberless stripes, and at the firmness which these truly wonderful athletes of
religion exhibited under them? and at their contest, immediately after the
scourging, with bloodthirsty wild beasts, as they were cast before leopards and
different kinds of bears and wild boars and bulls goaded with fire and red-hot
iron? and at the marvelous endurance of these noble men in the face of all sorts
of wild beasts?

2 We were present ourselves when these things occurred, and have put on record
the divine power of our martyred Saviour Jesus Christ, which was present and
manifested itself mightily in the martyrs. For a long time the man-devouring
beasts did not dare to touch or draw near the bodies of those dear to God, but
rushed upon the others who from the outside irritated and urged them on. And
they would not in the least touch the holy athletes, as they stood alone and
naked and shook their hands at them to draw them toward themselves, - for they
were commanded to do this. But whenever they rushed at them, they were
restrained as if by some divine power and retreated again.

3 This continued for a long time, and occasioned no little wonder to the
spectators. And as the first wild beast did nothing, a second and a third were
let loose against one and the same martyr.

4 One could not but be astonished at the invincible firmness of these holy men,
and the enduring and immovable constancy of those whose bodies were young. You
could have seen a youth not twenty years of age standing unbound and stretching
out his hands in the form of a cross, with unterrified and untrembling mind,
engaged earnestly in prayer to God, and not in the least going back or
retreating from the place where he stood, while bears and leopards, breathing
rage and death, almost touched his flesh. And yet their mouths were restrained,
I know not how, by a divine and incomprehensible power, and they ran back again
to their place. Such an one was he.

5 Again you might have seen others, for they were five in all, cast before a
wild bull, who tossed into the air with his horns those who approached from the
outside, and mangled them, leaving them to be token up half dead; but when he
rushed with rage and threatening upon the holy martyrs, who were standing alone,
he was unable to come near them; but though he stamped with his feet, and pushed
in all directions with his horns, and breathed rage and threatening on account
of the irritation of the burning irons, he was, nevertheless, held back by the
sacred Providence. And as he in nowise harmed them, they let loose other wild
beasts upon them.

6 Finally, after these terrible and various attacks upon them, they were all
slain with the sword; and instead of being buried in the earth they were
committed to the waves of the sea.

Chapter VIII. These in Egypt.44

1 Such was the conflict of those Egyptians who contended nobly for religion in
Tyre. But we must admire those also who suffered martyrdom in their native land;
where thousands of men, women, and children, despising the present life for the
sake of the teaching of our Saviour, endured various deaths. Some of them, after
scrapings and rackings and severest scourgings, and numberless other kinds of
tortures, terrible even to hear of, were committed to the flames; some were
drowned in the sea; some offered their heads bravely to those who cut them off;
some died under their tortures, and others perished with hunger. And yet others
were crucified; some according to the method commonly employed for malefactors;
others yet more cruelly, being nailed to the cross with their heads downward,
and being kept alive until they perished on the cross with hunger.

Chapter IX. Those in Thebais.45

1 It would be impossible to describe the outrages and tortures which the martyrs
in Thebais endured. They were scraped over the entire body with shells instead
of hooks until they died. Women were bound by one foot and raised aloft in the
air by machines, and with their bodies altogether bare and uncovered, presented
to all beholders this most shameful, cruel, and inhuman spectacle.

2 Others being bound to the branches and trunks of trees perished. For they drew
the stoutest branches together with machines, and bound the limbs of the martyrs
to them; and then, allowing the branches to assume their natural position, they
tore asunder instantly the limbs of those for whom they contrived this.

3 All these things were done, not for a few days or a short time, but for a long
series of years. Sometimes more than ten, at other times above twenty were put
to death. Again not less than thirty, then about sixty, and yet again a hundred
men with young children and women, were slain in one day, being condemned to
various and diverse torments.

4 We, also being on the spot ourselves, have observed large crowds in one day;
some suffering decapitation, others torture by fire; so that the murderous sword
was blunted, and becoming weak, was broken, and the very executioners grew weary
and relieved each other. And we beheld the most wonderful ardor, and the truly
divine energy and zeal of those who believed in the Christ of God. For as soon
as sentence was pronounced against the first, one after another rushed to the
judgment seat, and confessed themselves Christians. And regarding with
indifference the terrible things and the multiform tortures, they declared
themselves boldly and undauntedly for the religion of the God of the universe.
And they received the final sentence of death with joy and laughter and
cheerfulness; so that they sang and offered up hymns and thanksgivings to the
God of the universe till their very last breath.

6 These indeed were wonderful; but yet more wonderful were those who, being
distinguished for wealth, noble birth, and honor, and for learning and
philosophy, held everything secondary to the true religion and to faith in our
Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ.

7 Such an one was Philoromus, who held a high office under the imperial
government at Alexandria,46 and who administered justice every day, attended by
a military guard corresponding to his rank and Roman dignity. Such also was
Phileas,47 bishop of the church of Thmuis, a man eminent on account of his
patriotism and the services rendered by him to his country, and also on account
of his philosophical learning. These persons, although a multitude of 8
relatives and other friends besought them, and many in high position, and even
the judge himself entreated them, that they would have compassion on themselves
and show mercy to their children and wives, yet were not in the least induced by
these things to choose the love of life, and to despise the ordinances of our
Saviour concerning confession and denial. But with manly and philosophic minds,
or rather with pious and God-loving souls, they persevered against all the
threats and insults of the judge; and both of them were beheaded.

Chapter X. The Writings of Phileas the Martyr Describing the Occurrences at
Alexandria.

1 Since we have mentioned Phileas as having a high reputation for secular
learning, let him be his own witness in the following extract, in which he shows
us who he was, and at the same time describes more accurately than we can the
martyrdoms which occurred in his time at Alexandria:48

2 "Having before them all these examples and models and noble tokens which are
given us in the Divine and Sacred Scriptures, the blessed martyrs who were with
us did not hesitate, but directing the eye of the soul in sincerity toward the
God over all, and having their mind set upon death for religion, they adhered
firmly to their calling. For they understood that our Lord Jesus Christ had
become man on our account, that he might cut off all sin and furnish us with the
means of entrance into eternal life. For `he counted it not a prize to be on an
equality with God, but emptied himself taking the form of a servant; and being
found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself unto death, even the death of the
cross.'49

3 Wherefore also being zealous for the greater gifts, the Christ-bearing martyrs
endured all trials and all kinds of contrivances for torture; not once only, but
some also a second time. And although the guards vied with each other in
threatening them in all sorts of ways, not in words only, but in actions, they
did not give up their resolution; because `perfect love casteth out fear.'50

4 "What words could describe their courage and manliness under every torture?
For as liberty to abuse them was given to all that wished, some beat them with
clubs, others with rods, others with scourges, yet others with thongs, and
others with ropes.

5 And the spectacle of the outrages was varied and exhibited great malignity.
For some, with their hands bound behind them, were suspended on the stocks, and
every member stretched by certain machines. Then the torturers, as commanded,
lacerated with instruments51 their entire bodies not only their sides, as in the
case of murderers, but also their stomachs and knees and cheeks. Others were
raised aloft, suspended from the porch by one hand, and endured the most
terrible suffering of all, through the distension of their joints and limbs.
Others were bound face to face to pillars, not resting on their feet, but with
the weight of their bodies bearing on their bonds and drawing them tightly.

6 And they endured this, not merely as long as the governor talked with them or
was at leisure, but through almost the entire day. For when he passed on to
others, he left officers under his authority to watch the first, and observe if
any of them, overcome by the tortures, appeared to yield. And he commanded to
cast them into chains without mercy, and afterwards when they were at the last
gasp to throw them to the ground and drag them away. For he said that they were
not to have the least concern for us, but were to think and act as if we no
longer existed, our enemies having invented this second mode of torture in
addition to the stripes.

8 "Some, also, after these outrages, were placed on the stocks, and had both
their feet stretched over the four52 holes, so that they were compelled to lie
on their backs on the stocks, being unable to keep themselves up on account of
the fresh wounds with which their entire bodies were covered as a result of the
scourging. Others were thrown on the ground and lay there under the accumulated
infliction of tortures, exhibiting to the spectators a more terrible
manifestation of severity, as they bore on their bodies the marks of the various
and diverse punishments which had been invented.

9 As this went on, some died under the tortures, shaming the adversary by their
constancy. Others half dead were shut up in prison, and suffering with their
agonies, they died in a few days; but the rest, recovering under the care which
they received, gained confidence by time and their long detention in prison.

10 When therefore they were ordered to choose whether they would be released
from molestation by touching the polluted sacrifice, and would receive from them
the accursed freedom, or refusing to sacrifice, should be condemned to death,
they did not hesitate, but went to death cheerfully. For they knew what had been
declared before by the Sacred Scriptures. For it is said,53 `He that sacrificeth
to other gods shall be utterly destroyed,'54 and, `Thou shalt have no other gods
before me.'"55

11 Such are the words of the truly philosophical and God-loving martyr, which,
before the final sentence, while yet in prison, he addressed to the brethren in
his parish, showing them his own circumstances, and at the same time exhorting
them to hold fast, even after his approaching death, to the religion of Christ.

12 But why need we dwell upon these things, and continue to add fresh instances
of the conflicts of the divine martyrs throughout the world, especially since
they were dealt with no longer by common law, but attacked like enemies of war?

Chapter XI. Those in Phrygia.

1 A Small town56 of Phrygia, inhabited solely by Christians, was completely
surrounded by soldiers while the men were in it. Throwing fire into it, they
consumed them with the women and children while they were calling upon Christ.
This they did because all the inhabitants of the city, and the curator himself,
and the governor, with all who held office, and the entire populace, confessed
themselves Christians, and would not in the least obey those who commanded them
to worship idols.

9 There was another man of Roman dignity named Adauctus,57 of a noble Italian
family, who had advanced through every honor under the emperors, so that he had
blamelessly filled even the general offices of magistrate, as they call it, and
of finance minister.58 Besides all this he excelled in deeds of piety and in the
confession of the Christ of God, and was adorned with the diadem of martyrdom.
He endured the conflict for religion while still holding the office of finance
minister.

Chapter XII. Many Others, Both Men and Women, Who Suffered in Various Ways.

1 Why need we mention the rest by name, or number the multitude of the men, or
picture the various sufferings of the admirable martyrs of Christ? Some of them
were slain with the axe, as in Arabia. The limbs of some were broken, as in
Cappadocia. Some, raised on high by the feet, with their heads down, while a
gentle fire burned beneath them, were suffocated by the smoke which arose from
the burning wood, as was done in Mesopotamia. Others were mutilated by cutting
off their noses and ears and hands, and cutting to pieces the other members and
parts of their bodies, as in Alexandria.59

2 Why need we revive the recollection of those in Antioch who were roasted on
grates, not so as to kill them, but so asto subject them to a lingering
punishment? Or of others who preferred to thrust their right hand into the fire
rather than touch the impious sacrifice? Some, shrinking from the trial, rather
than be taken and fall into the hands of their enemies, threw themselves from
lofty houses, considering death preferable to the cruelty of the impious.

3 A certain holy person, - in soul admirable for virtue, in body a woman, - who
was illustrious beyond all in Antioch for wealth and family and reputation, had
brought up in the principles of religion her two daughters, who were now in the
freshness and bloom of life. Since great envy was excited on their account,
every means was used to find them in their concealment; and when it was
ascertained that they were away, they were summoned deceitfully to Antioch. Thus
they were caught in the nets of the soldiers. When the woman saw herself and her
daughters thus helpless, and knew the things terrible to speak of that men would
do to them, - and the most unbearable of all terrible things, the threatened
violation of their chastity,60 - she exhorted herself and the maidens that they
ought not to submit even to hear of this. For, she said, that to surrender their
souls to the slavery of demons was worse than all deaths and destruction; and
she set before them the only deliverance from all these things, - escape to
Christ.

4 They then listened to her advice. And after arranging their garments suitably,
they went aside from the middle of the road, having requested of the guards a
little time for retirement, and cast themselves into a river which was flowing
by.

5 Thus they destroyed themselves.61 But there were two other virgins in the same
city of Antioch who served God in all things, and were true sisters, illustrious
in family and distinguished in life, young and blooming, serious in mind, pious
in deportment, and admirable for zeal. As if the earth could not bear such
excellence, the worshipers of demons commanded to cast them into the sea. And
this was done to them.

6 In Pontus, others endured sufferings horrible to hear. Their fingers were
pierced with sharp reeds under their nails. Melted lead, bubbling and boiling
with the heat, was poured down the backs of others, and they were roasted in the
most sensitive parts of the body.

7 Others endured on their bowels and privy members shameful and inhuman and
unmentionable torments, which the noble and law-observing judges, to show their
severity, devised, as more honorable manifestations of wisdom. And new tortures
were continually invented, as if they were endeavoring, by surpassing one
another, to gain prizes in a contest.

8 But at the close of these calamities, when finally they could contrive no
greater cruelties, and were weary of putting to death, and were filled and
satiated with the shedding of blood, they turned to what they considered
merciful and humane treatment, so that they seemed to be no longer devising
terrible things against us.

9 For they said that it was not fitting that the cities should be polluted with
the blood of their own people, or that the government of their rulers, which was
kind and mild toward all, should be defamed through excessive cruelty; but that
rather the beneficence of the humane and royal authority should be extended to
all, and we should no longer be put to death. For the infliction of this
punishment upon us should be stopped in consequence of the humanity of the
rulers.

10 Therefore it was commanded that our eyes should be put out, and that we
should be maimed in one of our limbs. For such things were humane in their
sight, and the lightest of punishments for us. So that now on account of this
kindly treatment accorded us by the impious, it was impossible to tell the
incalculable number of those whose right eyes had first been cut out with the
sword, and then had been cauterized with fire; or who had been disabled in the
left foot by burning the joints, and afterward condemned to the provincial
copper mines, not so much for service as for distress and hardship. Besides all
these, others encountered other trials, which it is impossible to recount; for
their manly endurance surpasses all description.

11 In these conflicts the noble martyrs of Christ shone illustrious over the
entire world, and everywhere astonished those who beheld their manliness; and
the evidences of the truly divine and unspeakable power of our Saviour were made
manifest through them. To mention each by name would be a long task, if not
indeed impossible.

Chapter XIII. The Bishops of the Church that Evinced by Their Blood the
Genuineness of the Religion Which They Preached.

1 As for the rulers of the Church that suffered martyrdom in the principal
cities, the first martyr of the kingdom of Christ whom we shall mention among
the monuments of the pious is Anthimus,62 bishop of the city of Nicomedia, who
was beheaded.

2 Among the martyrs at Antioch was Lucian,63 a presbyter of that parish, whose
entire life was most excellent. At Nicomedia, in the presence of the emperor, he
proclaimed the heavenly kingdom of Christ, first in an oral defense, and
afterwards by deeds as well. Of the martyrs in Phénicia

3 the most distinguished were those devoted pastors of the spiritual flocks of
Christ: Tyrannion,64 bishop of the church of Tyre; Zenobius, a presbyter of the
church at Sidon; and Silvanus,65 bishop of the churches about Emesa.

4 The last of these, with others, was made food for wild beasts at Emesa, and
was thus received into the ranks of martyrs. The other two glorified the word of
God at Antioch through patience unto death. The bishop66 was thrown into the
depths of the sea. But Zenobius, who was a very skillful physician, died through
severe tortures which were applied to his sides.

5 Of the martyrs in Palestine, Silvanus,67 bishop of the churches about Gaza,
was beheaded with thirty-nine others at the copper mines of Phaeno.68 There also
the Egyptian bishops, Peleus and Nilus,69 with others, suffered

6 death by fire. Among these we must mention Pamphilus, a presbyter, who was
thegreat glory of the parish of Caesarea, and among the men of our time most
admirable.

7 The virtue of his manly deeds we have recorded in the proper place.70 Of those
who suffered death illustriously at Alexandria and throughout Egypt and Thebais,
Peter,71 bishop of Alexandria, one of the most excellent teachers of the
religion of Christ, should first be mentioned; and of the presbyters with him
Faustus,72 Dius and Ammonius, perfect martyrs of Christ; also Phileas,73
Hesychius,74 Pachymius and Theodorus, bishops of Egyptian churches, and besides
them many other distinguished persons who are commemorated by the parishes of
their country and region.It is not for us to describe the conflicts of those who
suffered for the divine religion throughout the entire world, and to relate
accurately what happened to each of them. This would be the proper work of those
who were eye-witnesses of the events. I will describe for posterity in another
work75 those which I myself witnessed.

8 But in the present book76 I will add to what I have given the revocation
issued by our persecutors, and those events that occurred at the beginning of
the persecution, which will be most profitable to such as shall read them.

9 What words could sufficiently describe the greatness and abundance of the
prosperity of the Roman government before the war against us, while the rulers
were friendly and peaceable toward us? Then those who were highest in the
government, and had held the position ten or twenty years, passed their time in
tranquil peace, in festivals and public games and most joyful pleasures and
cheer.

10 While thus their authority was growing uninterruptedly, and increasing day by
day, suddenly they changed their peaceful attitude toward us, and began an
implacable war. But the second year of this movement was not yet past, when a
revolution took place in the entire government and overturned all things.

11 For a severe sickness came upon the chief of those of whom we have spoken, by
which his understanding was distracted; and with him who was honored with the
second rank, he retired into private life.77 Scarcely had he done this when the
entire empire was divided; a thing which is not recorded as having ever occurred
before.78

12 Not long after, the Emperor Constantius, who through his entire life was most
kindly and favorably disposed toward his subjects, and most friendly to the
Divine Word, ended his life in the common course of nature, and left his own
son, Constantine, as emperor and Augustus in his stead.79 He was the first that
was ranked by them among the gods, and received after death every honor which
one could pay to an emperor.80

13 He was the kindest and mildest of emperors, and the only one of those of our
day that passed all the time of his government in a manner worthy of his office.
Moreover, he conducted himself toward all most favorably and beneficently. He
took not the smallest part in the war against us, but preserved the pious that
were under him unharmed and unabused. He neither threw down the church
buildings,81 nor did he devise anything else against us. The end of his life was
honorable and thrice blessed. He alone at death left his empire happily and
gloriously to his own son as his successor,-one who was in all respects most
prudent and pious.

14 His son Constantine entered on the government at once, being proclaimed
supreme emperor and Augustus by the soldiers, and long before by God himself,
the King of all. He showed himself an emulator of his father's piety toward our
doctrine. Such an one was he. But after this, Licinius was declared emperor and
Augustus by a common vote of the rulers.82

15 These things grieved Maximinus greatly, for until that time he had been
entitled by all only Caesar. He therefore, being exceedingly imperious, seized
the dignity for himself, and became Augustus, being made such by himself.83 In
the mean time he whom we have mentioned as having resumed his dignity after his
abdication, being detected in conspiring against the life of Constantine,
perished by a most shameful death.84 He was the first whose decrees and statues
and public monuments were destroyed because of his wickedness and impiety.85
Chapter XIV. The Character of the Enemies of Religion.

1 Maxentius his son, who obtained the government at Rome,86 at first feigned our
faith, in complaisance and flattery toward the Roman people. On this account he
commanded his subjects to cease persecuting the Christians, pretending to
religion that he might appear merciful and mild beyond his predecessors.

2 But he did not prove in his deeds to be such a person as was hoped, but ran
into all wickedness and abstained from no impurity or licentiousness, committing
adulteries and indulging in all kinds of corruption. For having separated wives
from their lawful consorts, he abused them and sent them back most dishonorably
to their husbands. And he not only practiced this against the obscure and
unknown, but he insulted especially the most prominent and distinguished members
of the Roman senate.

3 All his subjects, people and rulers, honored and obscure, were worn out by
grievous oppression. Neither, although they kept quiet, and bore the bitter
servitude, was there any relief from the murderous cruelty of the tyrant. Once,
on a small pretense, he gave the people to be slaughtered by his guards; and a
great multitude of the Roman populace were slain in the midst of the city, with
the spears and arms, not of Scythians and barbarians, but of their own
fellow-citizens.

4 It would be impossible to recount the number of senators who were put to death
for the sake of their wealth; multitudes being slain on various pretenses.

5 To crown all his wickedness, the tyrant resorted to magic. And in his
divinations he cut open pregnant women, and again inspected the bowels of
newborn infants. He slaughtered lions, and performed various execrable acts to
invoke demons and avert war. For his only hope was that, by these means, victory
would be secured to him.

6 It is impossible to tell the ways in which this tyrant at Rome oppressed his
subjects, so that they were reduced to such an extreme dearth of the necessities
of life as has never been known, according to our contemporaries, either at Rome
or elsewhere.

7 But Maximinus, the tyrant in the East, having secretly formed a friendly
alliance with the Roman tyrant as with a brother in wickedness, sought to
conceal it for a long time. But being at last detected, he suffered merited
punishment.87

8 It was wonderful how akin he was in wickedness to the tyrant at Rome, or
rather how far he surpassed him in it. For the chief of sorcerers and magicians
were honored by him with the highest rank. Becoming exceedingly timid and
superstitious, he valued greatly the error of idols and demons. Indeed, without
soothsayers and oracles he did not venture to move even a finger,88 so to speak.

9 Therefore he persecuted us more violently and incessantly than his
predecessors. He ordered temples to be erected in every city, and the sacred
groves which had been destroyed through lapse of time to be speedily restored.
He appointed idol priests in every place and city; and he set over them in every
province, as high priest, some political official who had especially
distinguished himself in every kind of service, giving him a band of soldiers
and a body-guard. And to all jugglers, as if they were pious and beloved of the
gods, he granted governments and the greatest privileges.

10 From this time on he distressed and harassed, not one city or country, but
all the provinces under his authority, by extreme exactions of gold and silver
and goods, and most grievous prosecutions and various fines. He took away from
the wealthy the property which they had inherited from their ancestors, and
bestowed vast riches and large sums of money on the flatterers about him.

11 And he went to such an excess of folly and drunkenness that his mind was
deranged and crazed in his carousals; and he gave commands when intoxicated of
which he repented afterward when sober. He suffered no one to surpass him in
debauchery and profligacy, but made himself an instructor in wickedness to those
about him, both rulers and subjects. He urged on the army to live wantonly in
every kind of revelry and intemperance, and encouraged the governors and
generals to abuse their subjects with rapacity and covetousness, almost as if
they were rulers with him.

12 Why need we relate the licentious, shameless deeds of the man, or enumerate
the multitude with whom he committed adultery? For he could not pass through a
city without continually corrupting women and ravishing virgins.

13 And in this he succeeded with all except the Christians. For as they despised
death, they cared nothing for his power. For the men endured fire and sword and
crucifixion and wild beasts and the depths of the sea, and cutting off of limbs,
and burnings, and pricking and digging out of eyes, and mutilations of the
entire body, and besides these, hunger and mines and bonds. In all they showed
patience in behalf of religion rather than transfer to idols the reverence due
to God.

14 And the women were not less manly than the men in behalf of the teaching of
the Divine Word, as they endured conflicts with the men, and bore away equal
prizes of virtue. And when they were dragged away for corrupt purposes, they
surrendered their lives to death rather than their bodies to impurity.89

15 One only of those who were seized for adulterous purposes by the tyrant, a
most distinguished and illustrious Christian woman in Alexandria, conquered the
passionate and intemperate soul of Maximinus by most heroic firmness. Honorable
on account of wealth and family and education, she esteemed all of these
inferior to chastity. He urged her many times, but although she was ready to
die, he could not put her to death, for his desire was stronger than his anger.

16 He therefore punished her with exile, and took away all her property. Many
others, unable even to listen to the threats of violation from the heathen
rulers, endured every form of tortures, and rackings, and deadly punishment.

These indeed should be admired. But far the most admirable was that woman at
Rome, who was truly the most noble and modest of all, whom the tyrant Maxentius,
fully resembling Maximinus in his actions, endeavored to abuse.

17 For when she learned that those who served the tyrant in such matters were at
the house (she also was a Christian), and that her husband, although a prefect
of Rome, would suffer them to take and lead her away, having requested a little
time for adorning her body, she entered her chamber, and being alone, stabbed
herself with a sword. Dying immediately, she left her corpse to those who had
come for her. And by her deeds, more powerfully than by any words, she has shown
to all men now and hereafter that the virtue which prevails among Christians is
the only invincible and indestructible possession.90

18 Such was the career of wickedness which was carried forward at one and the
same time by the two tyrants who held the East and the West. Who is there that
would hesitate, after careful examination, to pronounce the persecution against
us the cause of such evils? Especially since this extreme confusion of affairs
did not cease until the Christians had obtained liberty.

Chapter XV. The Events Which Happened to the Heathen.91

1 During the entire ten years92 of the persecution, they were constantly
plotting and warring against one another.93 For the sea could not be navigated,
nor could men sail from any port without being exposed to all kinds of outrages;
being stretched on the rack and lacerated in their sides, that it might be
ascertained through various tortures, whether they came from the enemy; and
finally being subjected to punishment by the cross or by fire.

2 And besides these things shields and breastplates were preparing, and darts
and spears and other warlike accoutrements were making ready, and galleys and
naval armor were collecting in every place. And no one expected anything else
than to be attacked by enemies any day. In addition to this, famine and
pestilence came upon them, in regard to which we shall relate what is necessary
in the proper place.94 Chapter XVI. The Change of Affairs for the Better.

1 Such was the state of affairs during the entire persecution. But in the tenth
year, through the grace of God, it ceased altogether, having begun to decrease
after the eighth year.95 For when the divine and heavenly grace showed us
favorable and propitious oversight, then truly our rulers, and the very
persons96 by whom the war against us had been earnestly prosecuted, most
remarkably changed their minds, and issued a revocation, and quenched the great
fire of persecution which had been kindled, by merciful proclamations and
ordinances concerning us. But this was not due to any human agency; nor was it
the result, as one might say, of the compassion or philanthropy of our
rulers;-far from it, for daily from the beginning until that time they were
devising more and more severe measures against us, and continually inventing
outrages by a greater variety of instruments;-but it was manifestly due to the
oversight of Divine Providence, on the one hand becoming reconciled to his
people, and on the other, attacking him97 who instigated these evils, and
showing anger toward him as the author of the cruelties of the entire
persecution.

3 For though it was necessary that these things should take place, according to
the divine judgment, yet the Word saith, "Woe to him through whom the offense
cometh."98 Therefore punishment from God came upon him, beginning with his
flesh, and proceeding to his soul.99

4 For an abscess suddenly appeared in the midst of the secret parts of his body,
and from it a deeply perforated sore, which spread irresistibly into his inmost
bowels. An indescribable multitude of worms sprang from them, and a deathly odor
arose, as the entire bulk of his body had, through his gluttony, been changed,
before his sickness, into an excessive mass of soft fat, which became putrid,
and thus presented an awful and intolerable sight to those who came near.

5 Some of the physicians, being wholly unable to endure the exceeding
offensiveness of the odor, were slain; others, as the entire mass had swollen
and passed beyond hope of restoration, and they were unable to render any help,
were put to death without mercy.

Chapter XVII. The Revocation of the Rulers.

1 Wrestling with so many evils, he thought of the cruelties which he had
committed against the pious. Turning, therefore, his thoughts toward himself, he
first openly confessed to the God of the universe, and then summoning his
attendants, he commanded that without delay they should stop the persecution of
the Christians, and should by law and royal decree, urge them forward to build
their churches and to perform their customary worship, offering prayers in
behalf of the emperor. Immediately the deed followed the word.

2 The imperial decrees were published in the cities, containing the revocation
of the acts against us in the following form:

3 "The Emperor Caesar Galerius Valerius Maximinus, Invictus, Augustus, Pontifex
Maximus, conqueror of the Germans, conqueror of the Egyptians, conqueror of the
Thebans, five times conqueror of the Sarmatians, conqueror of the Persians,
twice conqueror of the Carpathians, six times conqueror of the Armenians,
conqueror of the Medes, conqueror of the Adiabeni, Tribune of the people the
twentieth time, Emperor the nineteenth time, Consul the eighth time, Father of
his country, Proconsul;

4 and the Emperor Caesar Flavius Valerius Constantinus, Pius, Felix, Invictus,
Augustus, Pontifex Maximus, Tribune of the people, Emperor the fifth time,
Consul, Father of his country, Proconsul;

5 and the Emperor Caesar Valerius Licinius, Pius, Felix, Invictus, Augustus,
Pontifex Maximus, Tribune of the people the fourth time, Emperor the third time,
Consul, Father of his country, Proconsul; to the people of their provinces,
greeting:100

6 "Among the other things which we have ordained for the public advantage and
profit, we formerly wished to restore everything to conformity with the ancient
laws and public discipline101 of the Romans, and to provide that the Christians
also, who have forsaken the religion of their ancestors,102 should return to a
good disposition.

7 For in some way such arrogance had seized them and such stupidity had
overtaken them, that they did not follow the ancient institutions which possibly
their own ancestors had formerly established, but made for themselves laws
according to their own purpose, as each one desired, and observed them, and thus
assembled as separate congregations in various places.

8 When we had issued this decree that they should return to the institutions
established by the ancients,103 a great many104 submitted under danger, but a
great many being harassed endured all kinds of death.105

9 And since many continue in the same folly,106 and we perceive that they
neither offer to the heavenly gods the worship which is due, nor pay regard to
the God of the Christians, in consideration of our philanthropy and our
invariable custom, by which we are wont to extend pardon to all, we have
determined that we ought most cheerfully to extend our indulgence in this matter
also; that they may again be Christians, and may rebuild the conventicles in
which they were accustomed to assemble,107 on condition that nothing be done by
them contrary to discipline.108 In another letter we shall indicate to the
magistrates what they have to observe.

10 Wherefore, on account of this indulgence of ours, they ought to supplicate
their God for our safety, and that of the people, and their own, that the public
welfare may be preserved in every place,109 and that they may live securely in
their several homes."

11 Such is the tenor of this edict, translated, as well as possible, from the
Roman tongue into the Greek.110 It is time to consider what took place after
these events. That which follows is found in Some Copies in the Eighth Book.111

1 The author of the edict very shortly after this confession was released from
his pains and died. He is reported to have been the original author of the
misery of the persecution, having endeavored, long before the movement of the
other emperors, to turn from the faith the Christians in the army, and first of
all those in his own house, degrading some from the military rank, and abusing
others most shamefully, and threatening still others with death, and finally
inciting his partners in the empire to the general persecution. It is not proper
to pass over the death of these emperors in silence.

2 As four of them held the supreme authority, those who were advanced in age and
honor, after the persecution had continued not quite two years, abdicated the
government, as we have already stated,112 and passed the remainder of their
lives in a common and private station.

3 The end of their lives was as follows. He who was first in honor and age
perished through a long and most grievous physical infirmity.113 He who held the
second place ended his life by strangling,114 suffering thus according to a
certain demoniacal prediction, on account of his many daring crimes.

4 Of those after them, the last,115 of whom we have spoken as the originator of
the entire persecution, suffered such things as we have related. But he who
preceded him, the most merciful and kindly emperor Constantius,116 passed all
the time of his government in a manner worthy of his office.117 Moreover, he
conducted himself towards all most favorably and beneficently. He took not the
smallest part in the war against us, and preserved the pious that were under him
unharmed and unabused. Neither did he throw down the church buildings, nor
devise anything else against us. The end of his life was happy and thrice
blessed. He alone at death left his empire happily and gloriously to his own
son118 as his successor, one who was in all respects most prudent and pious. He
entered on the government at once, being proclaimed supreme emperor and Augustus
by the soldiers;

5 and he showed himself an emulator of his father's piety toward our doctrine.
Such were the deaths of the four of whom we have written, which took place at
different times.

6 Of these, moreover, only the one referred to a little above by us,119 with
those who afterward shared in the government, finally120 published openly to all
the above-mentioned confession, in the written edict which he issued.

Martyrs of Palestine.121 The Following also we found in a Certain Copy in the
Eighth Book.122

It was in the nineteenth year of the reign of Diocletian, in the month
Xanthicus,123 which is called April by the Romans, about the time of the feast
of our Saviour's passion, while Flavianus124 was governor of the province of
Palestine, that letters were published everywhere, commanding that the churches
be leveled to the ground and the Scriptures be destroyed by fire, and ordering
that those who held places of honor be degraded, and that the household
servants, if they persisted in the profession of Christianity, be deprived of
freedom.

Such was the force of the first edict against us. But not long after other
letters were issued, commanding that all the bishops of the churches everywhere
be first thrown into prison, and afterward, by every artifice, be compelled to
sacrifice.

Chapter I.

1 The first of the martyrs of Palestine was Procopius,125 who, before he had
received the trial of imprisonment, immediately on his first appearance before
the governor's tribunal, having been ordered to sacrifice to the so-called gods,
declared that he knew only one to whom it was proper to sacrifice, as he himself
wills. But when he was commanded to offer libations to the four emperors, having
quoted a sentence which displeased them, he was immediately beheaded. The
quotation was from the poet: "The rule of many is not good; let there be one
ruler and one king."126

2 It was the seventh127 day of the month Desius,128 the seventh before the ides
of June,129 as the Romans reckon, and the fourth day of the week, when this
first example was given at Caesura in Palestine.

3 Afterwards,130 in the same city, many rulers of the country churches readily
endured terrible sufferings, and furnished to the beholders an example of noble
conflicts. But others, benumbed in spirit by terror, were easily weakened at the
first onset. Of the rest, each one endured different forms of torture, as
scourgings without number, and rackings, and tearings of their sides, and
insupportable fetters, by which the hands of some were dislocated.

4 Yet they endured what came upon them, as in accordance with the inscrutable
purposes of God. For the hands of one were seized, and he was led to the altar,
while they thrust into his right hand the polluted and abominable offering, and
he was dismissed as if he had sacrificed. Another had not even touched it, yet
when others said that he had sacrificed, he went away in silence. Another, being
taken up half dead, was cast aside as if already dead, and released from his
bonds, and counted among the sacrificers. When another cried out, and testified
that he would not obey, he was struck in the mouth, and silenced by a large band
of those who were drawn up for this purpose, and driven away by force, even
though he had not sacrificed. Of such consequence did they consider it, to seem
by any means to have accomplished their purpose.

5 Therefore, of all this number, the only ones who were honored with the crown
of the holy martyrs were Alphaeus and Zacchaeus.131 After stripes and scrapings
and severe bonds and additional tortures and various other trials, and after
having their feet stretched for a night and day over four holes in the
stocks,132 on the seventeenth day of the month Dius,133 -that is, according to
the Romans, the fifteenth before the Kalends of December,-having confessed one
only God and Christ Jesus as king,134 as if they had uttered some blasphemy,
they were beheaded like the former martyr.

Chapter II.

1 What occurred to Romanus on the same day135 at Antioch, is also worthy of
record. For he was a native of Palestine, a deacon and exorcist in the parish of
Caesarea; and being present at the destruction of the churches, he beheld many
men, with women and children, going up in crowds to the idols and
sacrificing.136 But, through his great zeal for religion, he could not endure
the sight, and rebuked them with a loud voice.

2 Being arrested for his boldness, he proved a most noble witness of the truth,
if there ever was one. For when the judge informed him that he was to die by
fire,137 he received the sentence with cheerful countenance and most ready mind,
and was led away. When he was bound to the stake, and the wood piled up around
him, as they were awaiting the arrival of the emperor before lighting the fire,
he cried, "Where is the fire for me?"

3 Having said this, he was summoned again before the emperor,138 and subjected
to the unusual torture of having his tongue cut out. But he endured this with
fortitude and showed to all by his deeds that the Divine Power is present with
those who endure any hardship whatever for the sake of religion, lightening
their sufferings and strengthening their zeal. When he learned of this strange
mode of punishment, the noble man was not terrified, but put out his tongue
readily, and offered it with the greatest alacrity to those who cut it off.

4 After this punishment he was thrown into prison, and suffered there for a very
long time. At last the twentieth anniversary of the emperor being near,139 when,
according to an established gracious custom, liberty was proclaimed everywhere
to all who were in bonds, he alone had both his feet stretched over five holes
in the stocks,140 and while he lay there was strangled, and was thus honored
with martyrdom, as he desired.

5 Although he was outside of his country, yet, as he was a native of Palestine,
it is proper to count him among the Palestinian martyrs. These things occurred
in this manner during the first year, when the persecution was directed only
against the rulers of the Church.

Chapter III.

1 In the course of the second year, the persecution against us increased
greatly. And at that time Urbanus141 being governor of the province, imperial
edicts were first issued to him, commanding by a general decree that all the
people should sacrifice at once in the different cities, and offer libations to
the idols.142 In Gaza, a city of Palestine, Timotheus endured countless
tortures, and afterwards was subjected to a slow and moderate fire. Having
given, by his patience in all his sufferings, most genuine evidence of sincerest
piety toward the Deity, he bore away the crown of the victorious athletes of
religion. At the same time Agapius143 and our contemporary, Thecla,144 having
exhibited most noble constancy, were condemned as food for the wild beasts.

2 But who that beheld these things would not have admired, or if they heard of
them by report, would not have been astonished? For when the heathen everywhere
were holding a festival and the customary shows, it was noised abroad that
besides the other entertainments, the public combat of those who had lately been
condemned to wild beasts would also take place.

3 As this report increased and spread in all directions, six young men, namely,
Timolaus, a native of Pontus, Dionysius from Tripolis in Phoenicia, Romulus, a
sub-deacon of the parish of Diospolis,145 Paesis and Alexander, both Egyptians,
and another Alexander from Gaza, having first bound their own hands, went in
haste to Urbanus, who was about to open the exhibition, evidencing great zeal
for martyrdom. They confessed that they were Christians, and by their ambition
for all terrible things, showed that those who glory in the religion of the God
of the universe do not cower before the attacks of wild beasts.

4 Immediately, after creating no ordinary astonishment in the governor and those
who were with him, they were cast into prison. After a few days two others were
added to them. One of them, named Agapius,146 had in former confessions endured
dreadful torments of various kinds. The other, who had supplied them with the
necessaries of life, was called Dionysius. All of these eight were beheaded on
one day at Caesarea, on the twenty-fourth day of the month Dystrus,147 which is
the ninth before the Kalends of April.

5 Meanwhile, a change in the emperors occurred, and the first of them all in
dignity, and the second retired into private life,148 and public affairs began
to be troubled.

6 Shortly after the Roman government became divided against itself, and a cruel
war arose among them.149 And this division, with the troubles which grew out of
it, was not settled until peace toward us had been established throughout the
entire Roman Empire.

7 For when this peace arose for all, as the daylight after the darkest and most
gloomy night, the public affairs of the Roman government were re-established,
and became happy and peaceful, and the ancestral good-will toward each other was
revived. But we will relate these things more fully at the proper time. Now let
us return to the regular course of events.

Chapter IV.

1 Maximinus Caesar150 having come at that time into the government, as if to
manifest to all the evidences of his reborn enmity against God, and of his
impiety, armed himself for persecution against us more vigorously than his
predecessors.

2 In consequence, no little confusion arose among all, and they scattered here
and there, endeavoring in some way to escape the danger; and there was great
commotion everywhere. But what words would suffice for a suitable description of
the Divine love and boldness, in confessing God, of the blessed and truly
innocent lamb,-I refer to the martyr Apphianus,151 -who presented in the sight
of all, before the gates of Caesarea, a wonderful example of piety toward the
only God?

3 He was at that time not twenty years old. He had first spent a long time at
Berytus,152 for the sake of a secular Grecian education, as he belonged to a
very wealthy family. It is wonderful to relate how, in such a city, he was
superior to youthful passions, and clung to virtue, uncorrupted neither by his
bodily vigor nor his young companions; living discreetly, soberly and piously,
in accordance with his profession of the Christian doctrine and the life of his
teachers.

4 If it is needful to mention his native country, and give honor to it as
producing this noble athlete of piety, we will do so with pleasure.

5 The young man came from Pagae,153 -if any one is acquainted with the place,-a
city in Lycia of no mean importance. After his return from his course of study
in Berytus, though his father held the first place in his country, he could not
bear to live with him and his relatives, as it did not please them to live
according to the rules of religion. Therefore, as if he were led by the Divine
Spirit, and in accordance with a natural, or rather an inspired and true
philosophy, regarding this preferable to what is considered the glory of life,
and despising bodily comforts, he secretly left his family. And because of his
faith and hope in God, paying no attention to his daily needs, he was led by the
Divine Spirit to the city of Caesarea, where was prepared for him the crown of
martyrdom for piety.

6 Abiding with us there, and conferring with us in the Divine Scriptures
diligently for a short time, and fitting himself zealously by suitable
exercises, he exhibited such an end as would astonish any one should it be seen
again.

7 Who, that hears of it, would not justly admire his courage, boldness,
constancy, and even more than these the daring deed itself, which evidenced a
zeal for religion and a spirit truly superhuman?

8 For in the second attack upon us under Maximinus, in the third year of the
persecution, edicts of the tyrant were issued for the first time, commanding
that the rulers of the cities should diligently and speedily see to it that all
the people offered sacrifices.154 Throughout the city of Caesarea, by command of
the governor, the heralds were summoning men, women, and children to the temples
of the idols, and besides this, the chiliarchs were calling out each one by name
from a roll, and an immense crowd of the wicked were rushing together from all
quarters. Then this youth fearlessly, while no one was aware of his intentions,
eluded both us who lived in the house with him and the whole band of soldiers
that surrounded the governor, and rushed up to Urbanus as he was offering
libations, and fearlessly seizing him by the right hand, straightway put a stop
to his sacrificing, and skillfully and persuasively, with a certain divine
inspiration, exhorted him to abandon his delusion, because it was not well to
forsake the one and only true God, and sacrifice to idols and demons.

9 It is probable that this was done by the youth through a divine power which
led him forward, and which all but cried aloud in his act, that Christians, who
were truly such, were so far from abandoning the religion of the God of the
universe which they had once espoused, that they were not only superior to
threats and the punishments which followed, but yet bolder to speak with noble
and untrammeled tongue, and, if possible, to summon even their persecutors to
turn from their ignorance and acknowledge the only true God.

10 Thereupon, he of whom we are speaking, and that instantly, as might have been
expected after so bold a deed, was torn by the governor and those who were with
him as if by wild beasts. And having endured manfully innumerable blows over his
entire body, he was straightway cast into prison.

11 There he was stretched by the tormentor with both his feet in the stocks for
a night and a day; and the next day he was brought before the judge. As they
endeavored to force him to surrender, he exhibited all constancy under suffering
and terrible tortures. His sides were torn, not once, or twice, but many times,
to the bones and the very bowels; and he received so many blows on his face and
neck that those who for a long time had been well acquainted with him could not
recognize his swollen face.

12 But as he would not yield under this treatment, the torturers, as commanded,
covered his feet with linen cloths soaked in oil and set them on fire. No word
can describe the agonies which the blessed one endured from this. For the fire
consumed his flesh and penetrated to his bones, so that the humors of his body
were melted and oozed out and dropped down like wax.

13 But as he was not subdued by this, his adversaries being defeated and unable
to comprehend his superhuman constancy, cast him again into prison. A third time
he was brought before the judge; and having witnessed the same profession, being
half dead, he was finally thrown into the depths of the sea.

14 But what happened immediately after this will scarcely be believed by those
who did not see it. Although we realize this, yet we must record the event, of
which to speak plainly, all the inhabitants of Caesarea were witnesses. For
truly there was no age but beheld this marvelous sight. For as soon as

15 they had cast this truly sacred and thrice-blessed youth into the fathomless
depths of the sea, an uncommon commotion and disturbance agitated the sea and
all the shore about it, so that the land and the entire city were shaken by it.
And at the same time with this wonderful and sudden perturbation, the sea threw
out before the gates of the city the body of the divine martyr, as if unable to
endure it.155

Such was the death of the wonderful Apphianus. It occurred on the second day of
the month Xanthicus,156 which is the fourth day before the Nones of April, on
the day of preparation157

Chapter V.

1 About the same time, in the city of Tyre, a youth named Ulpianus,158 after
dreadful tortures and most severe scourgings, was enclosed in a raw oxhide, with
a dog and with one of those poisonous reptiles, an asp, and cast into the sea.
Wherefore I think that we may properly mention him in connection with the
martyrdom of Apphianus.

2 Shortly afterwards, Aedesius,159 a brother of Apphianus, not only in God, but
also in the flesh, being a son of the same earthly father, endured sufferings
like his, after very many confessions and protracted tortures in bonds, and
after he had been sentenced by the governor to the mines in Palestine. He
conducted himself through them all in a truly philosophic manner; for he was
more highly educated than his brother, and had prosecuted philosophic studies.

3 Finally in the city of Alexandria, when he beheld the judge, who was trying
the Christians, offending beyond all bounds, now insulting holy men in various
ways, and again consigning women of greatest modesty and even religious virgins
to procurers for shameful treatment, he acted like his brother. For as these
things seemed insufferable, he went forward with bold resolve, and with his
words and deeds overwhelmed the judge with shame and disgrace. After suffering
in consequence many forms of torture, he endured a death similar to his
brother's, being cast into the sea. But these things, as I have said, happened
to him in this way a little later.

Chapter VI.

1 In the fourth year of the persecution against us, on the twelfth day before
the Kalends of December, which is the twentieth day of the month Dius,160 on the
day before the Sabbath,161 while the tyrant Maximinus was present and giving
magnificent shows in honor of his birthday, the following event, truly worthy of
record, occurred in the city of Caesarea.

2 As it was an ancient custom to furnish the spectators more splendid shows when
the emperors were present than at other times, new and foreign spectacles taking
the place of the customary amusements, such as animals brought from India or
Ethiopia or other places, or men who could astonish the beholders with skillful
bodily exercises,-it was necessary at this time, as the emperor was giving the
exhibition, to add to the shows something more wonderful. And what should this
be?

3 A witness of our doctrine was brought into the midst and endured the contest
for the true and only religion. This was Agapius, who, as we have stated a
little above,162 was, with Thecla, the second to be thrown to the wild beasts
for food. He had also, three times and more, marched with malefactors from the
prison to the arena; and every time, after threats from the judge, whether in
compassion or in hope that he might change his mind, had been reserved for other
conflicts. But the emperor being present, he was brought out at this time, as if
he had been appropriately reserved for this occasion, until the very word of the
Saviour should be fulfilled in him, which through divine knowledge he declared
to his disciples, that they should be brought before kings on account of their
testimony unto him.163

4 He was taken into the midst of the arena with a certain malefactor who they
said was charged with the murder of his master. But this murderer of his master,
when he had been cast to the wild beasts, was deemed worthy of compassion and
humanity, almost like Barabbas in the time of our Saviour. And the whole theater
resounded with shouts and cries of approval, because the murderer was humanely
saved by the emperor, and deemed worthy of honor and freedom.

6 But the athlete of religion was first summoned by the tyrant and promised
liberty if he would deny his profession. But he testified with a loud voice
that, not for any fault, but for the religion of the Creator of the universe, he
would readily and with pleasure endure whatever might be inflicted upon him.
Having said this, he joined the deed7 to the word, and rushed to meet a bear
which had been let loose against him, surrendering himself most cheerfully to be
devoured by him. After this, as he still breathed, he was cast into prison. And
living yet one day, stones were bound to his feet, and he was drowned in the
depths of the sea. Such was the martyrdom of Agapius.

Chapter VII.

1 Again, in Caesarea, when the persecution had continued to the fifth year, on
the second day of the month Xanthicus,164 which is the fourth before the Nones
of April, on the very Lord's day of our Saviour's resurrection,165 Theodosia, a
virgin from Tyre, a faithful and sedate maiden, not yet eighteen years of age,
went up to certain prisoners who were confessing the kingdom of Christ and
sitting before the judgment seat, and saluted them, and, as is probable,
besought them to remember her when they came before the Lord.

2 Thereupon, as if she had committed a profane and impious act, the soldiers
seized her and led her to the governor. And he immediately, like a madman and a
wild beast in his anger, tortured her with dreadful and most terrible torments
in her sides and breasts, even to the very bones. And as she still breathed, and
withal stood with a joyful and beaming countenance, he ordered her thrown into
the waves of the sea. Then passing from her to the other confessors, he
condemned all of them to the copper mines in Phaeno in Palestine.

3 Afterwards on the fifth of the month Dius,166 on the Nones of November
according to the Romans, in the same city, Silvanus167 (who at that time was a
presbyter and confessor, but who shortly after was honored with the episcopate
and died a martyr), and those with him, men who had shown the noblest firmness
in behalf of religion, were condemned by him to labor in the same copper mines,
command being first given that their ankles be disabled with hot irons.

4 At the same time he delivered to the flames a man who was illustrious through
numerous other confessions. This was Domninus, who was well known to all in
Palestine for his exceeding fearlessness168 After this the same judge, who was a
cruel contriver of suffering, and an inventor of devices against the doctrine of
Christ, planned against the pious punishments that had never been heard of. He
condemned three to single pugilistic combat. He delivered to be devoured by wild
beasts Auxentius, a grave and holy old man. Others who were in mature life he
made eunuchs, and condemned them to the same mines. Yet others, after severe
tortures, he cast into prison.

Among these was my dearest friend Pamphilus,169 who was by reason of every
virtue the most illustrious of the martyrs in our time.

5 Urbanus first tested him in rhetorical philosophy and learning; and afterwards
endeavored to compel him to sacrifice. But as he saw that he refused and in
nowise regarded his threats, being exceedingly angry, he ordered him to be
tormented with severest tortures.

6 And when the brutal man, after he had almost satiated himself with these
tortures by continuous and prolonged scrapings in his sides, was yet covered
with shame before all, he put him also with the confessors in prison.

7 But what recompense for his cruelty to the saints, he who thus abused the
martyrs of Christ, shall receive from the Divine judgment, may be easily
determined from the preludes to it, in which immediately, and not long after his
daring cruelties against Pamphilus, while he yet held the government, the Divine
judgment came upon him. For thus suddenly, he who but yesterday was judging on
the lofty tribunal, guarded by a band of soldiers, and ruling over the whole
nation of Palestine, the associate and dearest friend and table companion of the
tyrant himself, was stripped in one night, and overwhelmed with disgrace and
shame before those who had formerly admired him as if he were himself an
emperor; and he appeared cowardly and unmanly, uttering womanish cries and
supplications to all the people whom he had ruled. And Maximinus himself, in
reliance upon whose favor Urbanus was formerly so arrogantly insolent, as if he
loved him exceedingly for his deeds against us, was set as a harsh and most
severe judge in this same Caesarea to pronounce sentence of death against him,
for the great disgrace of the crimes of which he was convicted. Let us say this
in passing.

8 A suitable time may come when we shall have leisure to relate the end and the
fate of those impious men who especially fought against us,170 both of Maximinus
himself and those with him.

Chapter VIII.

1 Up to the sixth year the storm had been incessantly raging against us. Before
this time there had been a very large number of confessors of religion in the
so-called Porphyry quarry in Thebais, which gets its name from the stone found
there. Of these, one hundred men, lacking three, together with women and
infants, were sent to the governor of Palestine. When they confessed the God of
the universe and Christ, Firmilianus,171 who had been sent there as governor in
the place of Urbanus, directed, in accordance with the imperial command, that
they should be maimed by burning the sinews of the ankles of their left feet,
and that their right eyes with the eyelids and pupils should first be cut out,
and then destroyed by hot irons to the very roots. And he then sent them to the
mines in the province to endure hardships with severe toil and suffering.

2 But it was not sufficient that these only who suffered such miseries should be
deprived of their eyes, but those natives of Palestine also, who were mentioned
just above as condemned to pugilistic combat, Since they would neither receive
food from the royal storehouse nor undergo the necessary preparatory Exercises.

3 Having been brought on this account not only before the overseers, but also
before Maximinus himself, and having manifested the noblest persistence in
confession by the endurance of hunger and stripes, they received like punishment
with those whom we have mentioned, and with them other confessors in the city of
Caesarea.

4 Immediately afterwards others who were gathered to hear the Scriptures read,
were seized in Gaza, and some endured the same sufferings in the feet and eyes;
but others were afflicted with yet greater torments and with most terrible
tortures in the sides.

5 One of these, in body a woman, but in understanding a man, would not endure
the threat of fornication, and spoke directly against the tyrant who entrusted
the government to such cruel judges. She was first scourged and then raised
aloft on the stake, and her sides lacerated.

6 As those appointed for this purpose applied the tortures incessantly and
severely at the command of the judge, another, with mind fixed, like the former,
on virginity as her aim,- a woman who was altogether mean in forth and
contemptible in appearance; but, on the other hand, strong in soul, and endowed
with an understanding superior to her body,-being unable to bear the merciless
and cruel and inhuman deeds, with a boldness beyond that of the combatants famed
among the Greeks, cried out to the judge from the midst of the crowd: "And how
long will you thus cruelly torture my sister?" But he was greatly enraged, and
ordered the woman to be immediately seized.

7 Thereupon she was brought forward and having called herself by the august name
of the Saviour, she was first urged by words to sacrifice, and as she refused
she was dragged by force to the altar. But her sister continued to maintain her
former zeal, and with intrepid and resolute foot kicked the altar, and
overturned it with the fire that was on it.

8 Thereupon the judge, enraged like a wild beast, inflicted on her such tortures
in her sides as he never had on any one before, striving almost to glut himself
with her raw flesh. But when his madness was satiated, he bound them both
together, this one and her whom she called sister, and condemned them to death
by fire. It is said that the first of these was from the country of Gaza; the
other, by name Valentina, was of Caesarea, and was well known to many.

9 But how can I describe as it deserves the martyrdom which followed, with which
the thrice-blessed Paul was honored. He was condemned to death at the same time
with them, under one sentence. At the time of his martyrdom, as the executioner
was about to cut off his head, he requested a brief respite.

10 This being granted, he first, in a clear and 10 distinct voice, supplicated
God in behalf of his fellow-Christians,172 praying for their pardon, and that
freedom might soon be restored to them. Then he asked for the conversion of the
Jews to God through Christ; and proceeding in order he requested the same things
for the Samaritans, and besought that those Gentiles, who were in error and were
ignorant of God, might come to a knowledge of him, and adopt the true religion.
Nor did he leave neglected the mixed multitude who were standing around.

11 After all these, oh! great and unspeakable forbearance! he entreated the God
of the universe for the judge who had condemned him to death, and for the
highest rulers, and also for the one who was about to behead him, in his hearing
and that of all present, beseeching that their sin toward him should not be
reckoned against them.

12 Having prayed for these things with a loud voice, and having, as one who was
dying unjustly, moved almost all to compassion and tears, of his own accord he
made himself ready, and submitted his bare neck to the stroke of the sword, and
was adorned with divine martyrdom. This took place on the twenty-fifth day of
the month Panemus,173 which is the eighth before the Kalends of August.

13 Such was the end of these persons. But not long after, one hundred and thirty
admirable athletes of the confession of Christ, from the land of Egypt, endured,
in Egypt itself, at the command of Maximinus the same afflictions in their eyes
and feet with the former persons, and were sent to the above-mentioned mines in
Palestine. But some of them were condemned to the mines in Cilicia.

Chapter IX.

1 After such noble acts of the distinguished martyrs of Christ, the flame of
persecution lessened, and was quenched, as it were by their sacred blood, and
relief and liberty were granted to those who, for Christ's sake, were laboring
in the mines of Thebais, and for a little time we were beginning to breath pure
air.

2 But by some new impulse, I know not what, he who held the power to persecute
was again aroused against the Christians. Immediately letters from Maximinus
against us were published everywhere in every province.174 The governors and the
military prefect175 urged by edicts and letters and public ordinances the
magistrates and generals and notaries176 in all the cities to carry out the
imperial decree, which ordered that the altars of the idols should with all
speed be rebuilt; and that all men, women, and children, even infants at the
breast, should sacrifice and offer oblations; and that with diligence and care
they should cause them to taste of the execrable offerings; and that the things
for sale in the market should be polluted with libations from the sacrifices;
and that guards should be stationed before the baths in order to defile with the
abominable sacrifices those who went to wash in them.

3 When these orders were being carried out, our people, as was natural, were at
the beginning greatly distressed in mind; and even the unbelieving heathen
blamed the severity and the exceeding absurdity of what was done. For these
things appeared to them extreme and burdensome.

4 As the heaviest storm impended over all in every quarter, the divine power of
our Saviour again infused such boldness into his athletes,177 that without being
drawn on or dragged forward by any one, they spurned the threats. Three of the
faithful joining together, rushed on the governor as he was sacrificing to the
idols, and cried out to him to cease from his delusion, there being no other God
than the Maker and Creator of the universe. When he asked who they were, they
confessed boldly that they were Christians.

5 Thereupon Firmilianus, being greatly enraged, sentenced them to capital
punishment without inflicting tortures upon them. The name of the eldest of
these was Antoninus; of the next, Zebinas, who was a native of Eleutheropolis;
and of the third, Germanus. This took place on the thirteenth of the month Dius,
the Ides of November.178

6 There was associated with them on the same day Ennathas, a woman from
Scythopolis, who was adorned with the chaplet of virginity. She did not indeed
do as they had done, but was dragged by force and brought before the judge.

7 She endured scourgings and cruel insults, which Maxys, a tribune of a
neighboring district, without the knowledge of the superior authority, dared to
inflict upon her. He was a man worse than his name,179 sanguinary in other
respects, exceedingly harsh, and altogether cruel, and censured by all who knew
him. This man stripped the blessed woman of all her clothing, so that she was
covered only from her loins to her feet and the rest of her body was bare. And
he led her through the entire city of Caesarea, and regarded it as a great thing
to beat her with thongs while she was dragged through all the market-places.

8 After such treatment she manifested the noblest constancy at the judgment seat
of the governor himself; and the judge condemned her to be burned alive. He also
carried his rage against the pious to a most inhuman length and transgressed the
laws of nature, not being ashamed even to deny burial to the lifeless bodies of
the sacred men.

9 Thus he ordered the dead to be exposed in the open air as food for wild beasts
and to be watched carefully by night and day. For many days a large number of
men attended to this savage and barbarous decree. And they looked out from their
post of observation, as if it were a matter worthy of care, to see that the dead
bodies should not be stolen. And wild beasts and dogs and birds of prey
scattered the human limbs here and there, and the whole city was strewed with
the entrails and bones of

10 men, so that nothing had ever appeared more dreadful and horrible, even to
those who formerly hated us; though they bewailed not so much the calamity of
those against whom these things were done, as the outrage against themselves and
the common nature of man.

11 For there was to be seen near the gates a spectacle beyond all description
and tragic recital; for not only was human flesh devoured in one place, but it
was scattered in every place; so that some said that limbs and masses of flesh
and parts of entrails were to be seen even within the gates.

12 After these things had continued for many days, a wonderful event occurred.
The air was clear and bright and the appearance of the sky most serene. When
suddenly throughout the city from the pillars which supported the public porches
many drops fell like tears; and the market places and streets, though there was
no mist in the air, were moistened with sprinkled water, whence I know not. Then
immediately it was reported everywhere that the earth, unable to endure the
abomination of these things, had shed tears in a mysterious manner; and that as
a rebuke to the relentless and unfeeling nature of men, stones and lifeless wood
had wept for what had happened. I know well that this account may perhaps appear
idle and fabulous to those who come after us, but not to those to whom the truth
was confirmed at the time.180

Chapter X.

1 On the fourteenth day of the following month Appellaeus,181 the nineteenth
before the Kalends of January, certain persons from Egypt were again seized by
those who examined people passing the gates. They had been sent to minister to
the confessors in Cilicia. They received the same sentence as those whom they
had gone to help, being mutilated in their eyes and feet. Three of them
exhibited in Ascalon, where they were imprisoned, marvelous bravery in the
endurance of various kinds of martyrdom. One of them named Ares was condemned to
the flames, and the others, called Probus182 and Elias, were beheaded.

2 On the eleventh day of the month Audynaeus,183 which is the third before the
Ides of January, in the same city of Caesarea, Peter an ascetic, also called
Apselamus,184 from the village of Anea,185 on the borders of Eleutheropolis,
like purest gold, gave noble proof by fire of his faith in the Christ of God.
Though the judge and those around him besought him many times to have compassion
on himself, and to spare his own youth and bloom, he disregarded them,
preferring hope in the God of the universe to all things, even to life itself. A
certain Asclepius, supposed to be186 a bishop of the sect of Marcion, possessed
as he thought with zeal for religion, but "not according to knowledge,"187 ended
his life on one and the same funeral pyre. These things took place in this
manner.

Chapter XI.

1 It is time to describe the great and celebrated spectacle of Pamphilus,188 a
man thrice dear to me, and of those who finished their course with him. They
were twelve in all; being counted worthy of apostolic grace and number.

2 Of these the leader and the only one honored with the position of presbyter at
Caesarea, was Pamphilus; a man who through his entire life was celebrated for
every virtue, for renouncing and despising the world, for sharing his
possessions with the needy, for contempt of earthly hopes, and for philosophic
deportment and exercise. He especially excelled all in our time in most sincere
devotion to the Divine Scriptures and indefatigable industry in whatever he
undertook, and in his helpfulness to his relatives and associates.

3 In a separate treatise on his life,189 consisting of three books, we have
already described the excellence of his virtue. Referring to this work those who
delight in such things and desire to know them, let us now consider the martyrs
in order.

4 Second after Pamphilus, Vales, who was honored for his venerable gray hair,
entered the contest. He was a deacon from Aelia,190 an old man of gravest
appearance, and versed in the Divine Scriptures, if any one ever was. He had so
laid up the memory of them in his heart that he did not need to look at the
books if he undertook to repeat any passage of Scripture.

5 The third was Paul from the city of Jamna,191 who was known among them as most
zealous and fervent in spirit. Previous to his martyrdom, he had endured the
conflict of confession by cauterization.

After these persons had continued in prison for two entire years, the occasion
of their martyrdom was a second arrival of Egyptian brethren who suffered with
them.

6 They had accompanied the confessors in Cilicia to the mines there and were
returning to their homes. At the entrance of the gates of Caesarea, the guards,
who were men of barbarous character, questioned them as to who they were and
whence they came. They kept back nothing of the truth, and were seized as
malefactors taken in the very act. They were five in number.

7 When brought before the tyrant, being very bold in his presence, they were
immediately thrown into prison. On the next day, which was the nineteenth of the
month Peritius,192 according to the Roman reckoning the fourteenth before the
Kalends of March, they were brought, according to command, before the judge,
with Pamphilus and his associates whom we have mentioned. First, by all kinds of
torture, through the invention of strange and various machines, he tested the
invincible constancy of the Egyptians.

8 Having practised these cruelties upon the leader193 of all, he asked him first
who he was. He heard in reply the name of some prophet instead of his proper
name. For it was their custom, in place of the names of idols given them by
their fathers, if they had such, to take other names; so that you would hear
them calling themselves Elijah or Jeremiah or Isaiah or Samuel or Daniel, thus
showing themselves inwardly true Jews, and the genuine Israel of God, not only
in deeds, but in the names which they bore. When Firmilianus had heard some such
name from the martyr, and did not understand the force of the word, he asked
next the name of his country.

9 But he gave a second answer similar to the former, saying that Jerusalem was
his country, meaning that of which Paul says, "Jerusalem which is above is free,
which is our mother,"194 and, "Ye are come unto Mount Sion, and unto the city of
the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem."195

10 This was what he meant; but the judge thinking only of the earth, sought
diligently to discover what that city was, and in what part of the world it was
situated. And therefore he applied tortures that the truth might be
acknowledged. But the man, with his hands twisted behind his back, and his feet
crushed by strange machines, asserted firmly that he had spoken the truth.

11 And being questioned again repeatedly what and where the city was of which he
spoke, he said that it was the country of the pious alone, for no others should
have a place in it, and that it lay toward the far East and the rising sun.

12 He philosophized about these things according to his own understanding, and
was in nowise turned froth them by the tortures with which he was afflicted on
every side. And as if he were without flesh or body he seemed insensible of his
sufferings. But the judge being perplexed, was impatient, thinking that the
Christians were about to establish a city somewhere, inimical and hostile to the
Romans. And he inquired much about this, and investigated where that country
toward the East was located.

13 But when he had for a long time lacerated the young man with scourgings, and
punished him with all sorts of torments, he perceived that his persistence in
what he had said could not be changed, and passed against him sentence of death.
Such a scene was exhibited by what was done to this man. And having inflicted
similar tortures on the others, he sent them away in the same manner.

14 Then being wearied and perceiving that he punished the men in vain, having
satiated his desire, he proceeded against Pamphilus and his companions. And
having learned that already under former tortures they had manifested an
unchangeable zeal for the faith, he asked them if they would now obey. And
receiving from every one of them only this one answer, as their last word of
confession in martyrdom, he inflicted on them punishment similar to the others.

15 When this had been done, a young man, one of the household servants of
Pamphilus, who had been educated in the noble life and instruction of such a
man, learning the sentence passed upon his master, cried out from the midst of
the crowd asking that their bodies might be buried.

16 Thereupon the judge, not a man, but a wild beast, or if anything more savage
than a wild beast, giving no consideration to the young man's age, asked him
only the same question. When he learned that he confessed himself a Christian,
as if he had been wounded by a dart, swelling with rage, he ordered the
tormentors to use their utmost power against him.

17 And when he saw that he refused to sacrifice as commanded, he ordered them to
scrape him continually to his very bones and to the inmost recesses of his
bowels, not as if he were human flesh but as if he were stones or wood or any
lifeless thing. But after long persistence he saw that this was in vain, as the
man was speechless and insensible and almost lifeless, his body being worn out
by the tortures.

18 But being inflexibly merciless and inhuman, he ordered him to be committed
straightway, as he was, to a slow fire. And before the death of his earthly
master, though he had entered later on the conflict, he received release from
the body, while those who had been zealous about the others were yet delaying.

19 One could then see. Porphyry,196 like one who had come off victorious in
every conflict, his body covered with dust, but his countenance cheerful, after
such sufferings, with courageous and exulting mind, advancing to death. And as
if truly filled with the Divine Spirit, covered only with his philosophic robe
thrown about him as a cloak, soberly and intelligently he directed his friends
as to what he wished, and beckoned to them, preserving still a cheerful
countenance even at the stake. But when the fire was kindled at some distance
around him in a circle, having inhaled the flame into his mouth, he continued
most nobly in silence from that time till his death, after the single word which
he uttered when the flame first touched him, and he cried out for the help of
Jesus the Son of God. Such was the contest of Porphyry. His death was reported
to Pamphilus by a messenger, Seleucus.

20 He was one of the confessors from the army. As the bearer of such a message,
he was forthwith deemed worthy of a similar lot. For as soon as he related the
death of Porphyry, and had saluted one of the martyrs with a kiss, some of the
soldiers seized him and led him to the governor. And he, as if he would hasten
him on to be a companion of the former on the way to heaven, commanded that he
be put to death immediately.

21 This man was from Cappadocia, and belonged to the select band of soldiers,
and had obtained no small honor in those things which are esteemed among the
Romans. For in stature and bodily strength, and size and vigor, he far excelled
his fellow-soldiers, so that his appearance was matter of common talk, and his
whole form was admired on account of its size and symmetrical proportions.

22 At the beginning of the persecution he was prominent in the conflicts of
confession, through his patience under scourging. After he left the army he set
himself to imitate zealously the religious ascetics, and as if he were their
father and guardian he showed himself a bishop and patron of destitute orphans
and defenceless widows and of those who were distressed with penury or sickness.
It is likely that on this account he was deemed worthy of an extraordinary call
to martyrdom by God, who rejoices in such things more than in the smoke and
blood of sacrifices.

23 He was the tenth athlete among those whom we have mentioned as meeting their
end on one and the same day. On this day, as was fitting, the chief gate was
opened, and a ready way of entrance into the kingdom of heaven was given to the
martyr Pamphilus and to the others with him.

24 In the footsteps of Seleucus came Theodulus, a grave and pious old man, who
belonged to the governor's household, and had been honored by Firmilianus
himself more than all the others in his house on account of his age, and because
he was a father of the third generation, and also on account of the kindness and
most faithful conscientiousness which he had manifested toward him.197 As he
pursued the course of Seleucus when brought before his master, the latter was
more angry at him than at those who had preceded him, and condemned him to
endure the martyrdom of the Saviour on the cross.198

25 As there lacked yet one to fill 25 up the number of the twelve martyrs of
whom we have spoken, Julian came to complete it. He had just arrived from
abroad, and had not yet entered the gate of the city, when having learned about
the martyrs while still on the way, he rushed at once, just as he was, to see
them. When he beheld the tabernacles of the saints prone on the ground, being
filled with joy, he embraced and kissed them all.

26 The ministers of slaughter straightway seized him as he was doing this and
led him to Firmilianus. Acting as was his custom, he condemned him to a slow
fire. Thereupon Julian, leaping and exulting, in a loud voice gave thanks to the
Lord who had judged him worthy of such things, and was honored with the crown of
martyrdom.

27 He was a Cappadocian by birth, and in his manner of life he was most
circumspect, faithful and sincere, zealous in all other respects, and animated
by the Holy Spirit himself. Such was the company which was thought worthy to
enter into martyrdom with Pamphilus.

28 By the command of the impious governor their sacred and truly holy bodies
were kept as food for the wild beasts for four days and as many nights. But
since, strange to say, through the providential care of God, nothing approached
them,-neither beast of prey, nor bird, nor dog,- they were taken up uninjured,
and after suitable preparation were buried in the customary manner.

29 When the report of what had been done to these men was spread in all
directions, Adrianus and Eubulus, having come from the so-called country of
Manganaea199 to Caesarea, to see the remaining confessors, were also asked at
the gate the reason for their coming; and having acknowledged the truth, were
brought to Firmilianus. But he, as was his custom, without delay inflicted many
tortures in their sides, and condemned them to be devoured by wild beasts.

30 After two days, on the fifth of the month Dystrus,200 the third before the
Nones of March, which was regarded as the birthday of the tutelary divinity of
Caesarea,201 Adrianus was thrown to a lion, and afterwards slain with the sword.
But Eubulus, two days later, on the Nones of March, that is, on the seventh of
the month Dystrus, when the judge had earnestly entreated him to enjoy by
sacrificing that which was considered freedom among them, preferring a glorious
death for religion to transitory life, was made like the other an offering to
wild beasts, and as the last of the martyrs in Caesarea, sealed the list of
athletes. It is proper also to relate here, how in a

31 short time the heavenly Providence came upon the impious rulers, together
with the tyrants themselves. For that very Firmilianus, who had thus abused the
martyrs of Christ, after suffering with the others the severest punishment, was
put to death by the sword. Such were the martyrdoms which took place at Caesarea
during the entire period of the persecution.

Chapter XII.

1 I Think it best to pass by all the other events which occurred in the
meantime: such as those which happened to the bishops of the churches, when
instead of shepherds of the rational202 flocks of Christ, over which they
presided in an unlawful manner, the divine judgment, considering them worthy of
such a charge, made them keepers of camels,203 an irrational beast204 and very
crooked in the structure of its body, or condemned them to have the care of the
imperial horses;-and I pass by also the insults and disgraces and tortures they
endured from the imperial overseers and rulers on account of the sacred vessels
and treasures of the Church; and besides these the lust of power on the part of
many, the disorderly and unlawful ordinations, and the schisms among the
confessors themselves; also the novelties which were zealously devised against
the remnants of the Church by the new and factious members, who added innovation
after innovation and forced them in unsparingly among the calamities of the
persecution, heaping misfortune upon misfortune. I judge it more suitable to
shun and avoid the account of these things, as I said at the beginning.205 But
such things as are sober and praiseworthy, according to the sacred word,-"and if
there be any virtue and praise,"206 -I consider it most proper to tell and to
record, and to present to believing hearers in the history of the admirable
martyrs. And after this I think it best to crown the entire work with an account
of the peace which has appeared unto us from heaven.

Chapter XIII.

1 The seventh year of our conflict was completed; and the hostile measures which
had continued into the eighth year were gradually and quietly becoming less
severe. A large number of confessors were collected at the copper mines in
Palestine, and were acting with considerable boldness, so far as even to build
places of worship. But the ruler of the province, a cruel and wicked man, as his
acts against the martyrs showed, having come there and learned the state of
affairs, communicated it to the emperor, writing in accusation whatever he
thought best.

2 Thereupon, being appointed superintendent of the mines, he divided the band of
confessors as if by a royal decree, and sent some to dwell in Cyprus and others
in Lebanon, and he scattered others in different parts of Palestine and ordered
them to labor in various works.

3 And, selecting the four who seemed to him to be the leaders, he sent them to
the commander of the armies in that section. These were Peleus and Nilus,207
Egyptian bishops, also a presbyter,208 and Patermuthius, who was well known
among them all for his zeal toward all. The commander of the army demanded of
them a denial of religion, and not obtaining this, he condemned them to death by
fire.

4 There were others there who had been allotted to dwell in a separate place by
themselves,- such of the confessors as on account of age or mutilations, or for
other bodily infirmities, had been released from service. Silvanus,209 a bishop
from Gaza, presided over them, and set a worthy and genuine example of
Christianity.

5 This man having from the first day of the persecution, and throughout its
entire continuance, been eminent for his confessions in all sorts of conflicts,
had been kept all that time that he might, so to speak, set the final seal upon
the whole conflier in Palestine.

6 There were with him many from Egypt, among whom was John, who surpassed all in
our time in the excellence of his memory. He had formerly been deprived of his
sight. Nevertheless, on account of his eminence in confession he had with the
others suffered the destruction of his foot by cauterization. And although his
sight had been destroyed he was subjected to the same burning with fire, the
executioners aiming after everything that was merciless and pitiless and cruel
and inhuman.

7 Since he was such a man, one would not be so much astonished at his habits and
his philosophic life, nor would he seem so wonderful for them, as for the
strength of his memory. For he had written whole books of the Divine Scriptures,
"not in tables of stone"210 as the divine apostle says, neither on skins of
animals, nor on paper which moths and time destroy, but truly "in fleshy tables
of the heart,"211 in a transparent soul and most pure eye of the mind, so that
whenever he wished he could repeat, as if from a treasury of words, any portion
of the Scripture, whether in the law, or the prophets, or the historical books,
or the gospels, or the writings of the apostles.

8 I confess that I was astonished when I first saw the man as he was standing in
the midst of a large congregation and repeating portions of the Divine
Scripture. While I only heard his voice, I thought that, according to the custom
in the meetings, he was reading. But when I came near and perceived what he was
doing, and observed all the others standing around him with sound eyes while he
was using only the eyes of his mind, and yet was speaking naturally like some
prophet, and far excelling those who were sound in body, it was impossible for
me not to glorify God and wonder. And I seemed to see in these deeds evident and
strong confirmation of the fact that true manhood consists not in excellence of
bodily appearance, but in the soul and understanding alone. For he, with his
body mutilated, manifested the superior excellence of the power that was within
him.

9 But as to those whom we have mentioned as abiding in a separate place, and
attending to their customary duties in fasting and prayer and other exercises,
God himself saw fit to give them a salutary issue by extending his right hand in
answer to them. The bitter foe, as they were armed against him zealously through
their prayers to God, could no longer endure them, and determined to slay and
destroy them from off the earth because they troubled him.

10 And God permitted him to complish this, that he might not be restrained from
the wickedness he desired, and that at the same time they might receive the
prizes of their manifold conflicts. Therefore at the command of the most
accursed Maximinus, forty, lacking one,212 were beheaded in one day.

11 These martyrdoms were accomplished 11 in Palestine during eight complete
years; and of this description was the persecution in our time. Beginning with
the demolition of the churches, it increased greatly as the rulers rose up from
time to time against us. In these assaults the multiform and various conflicts
of those who wrestled in behalf of religion produced an innumerable multitude of
martyrs in every province,-in the regions extending from Libya and throughout
all Egypt, and Syria, and from the East round about to the district of
Illyricum.

12 But the countries beyond these, all Italy and Sicily and Gaul, and the
regions toward the setting sun, in Spain, Mauritania, and Africa, suffered the
war of persecution during less than two years,213 and were deemed worthy of a
speedier divine visitation and peace; the heavenly Providence sparing the
singleness of purpose and faith of those men.

13 For what had never before been recorded in the annals of the Roman
government, first took place in our day, contrary to all expectation; for during
the persecution in our time the empire was divided into two parts.214 The
brethren dwelling in the part of which we have just spoken enjoyed peace; but
those in the other part endured trials without number.

14 But when the divine grace kindly and compassionately manifested its care for
us too, then truly our rulers also, those very ones through whom the wars
against us had been formerly carried on, changed their minds in a most wonderful
manner, and published a recantation;215 and by favorable edicts and mild decrees
concerning us, extinguished the conflagration against us. This recantation also
must be recorded.216 The End OF The Book OF Eusebius Pamphili Concerning Those
Who Suffered Martyrdom IN Palestine.217 1: Literally, "the succession of the
apostles" ( thn twn apostolwn diadoxhn ).

2: taj twn eqnwn hgemoniaj .

3: gametaij

4: Of this Dorotheus we know only what is told us here and in chap. 6, below,
where it is reported that he was put to death by strangling. It might be thought
at first sight that he is to be identified with the Dorotheus mentioned above in
Bk. VII. chap. 32, for both lived at the same time, and the fact that the
Dorotheus mentoned there was a eunuch would fit him for a prominent station in
the emperor's household. At the same time he is said by Eusebius to have been
made superintendent of the purple dye house at Tyre, and nothing is said either
as to his connection with the household of the emperor or as to his martyrdom;
nor is the Dorotheus mentioned in this chapter said to have been a presbyter. In
fact, inasmuch as Eusebius gives no hint of the identity of the two men, we must
conclude that they were different persons in spite of the similarity of their
circumstances.

5: Of Gorgonius, who is mentioned also in chap. 6, we know only that he was one
of the imperial household, and that he was strangled, in company with Dorotheus
and others, in consequence of the fires in the Nicomedian palace. See chap. 6,
note 3.

6: apodoxhj . A few mss., followed by Stephanus, Valesius, Stroth, Burton, and
most translators, add the words kai qerapeiaj kai deciwsewj ou thj tuxoushj ,
but the weight of ms. authority is against them, and they are omitted by the
majority of editors.

7: Lam. ii. 1, Lam. ii. 2.

8: Ps. lxxxix. 39-45.

9: Ps cvii. 40.

10: Gibbon uses this passage as the basis for his severe attack upon the honesty
of Eusebius ( Decline and Fall, chap. 16), but he has certainly done our author
injustice (cf. the remarks made on p. 49, above).

11: Diocletian began to reign Sept. 17, 284, and therefore his nineteenth year
extended from Sept. 17, 302, to Sept. 16, 303. Eusebius is in agreement with all
our authorities in assigning this year for the beginning of the persecution, and
is certainly correct. In regard to the month, however, he is not so accurate.
Lactantius, who was in Nicomedia at the time of the beginning of the
persecution, and certainly much better informed than Eusebius in regard to the
details, states distinctly (in his De mort. pers. chap. 12) that the festival of
the god Terminus, the seventh day before the Kalends of March (i.e. Feb. 23),
was chosen by the emperors for the opening of the persecution, and there is no
reason for doubting his exact statement. At the beginning of the Martyrs of
Palestine (p. 342, below) the month Xanthicus (April) is given as the date, but
this is still further out of the way. It was probably March or even April before
the edicts were published in many parts of the empire, and Eusebius may have
been misled by that fact, not knowing the exact date of their publication in
Nicomedia itself. We learn from Lactantius that on February 23d the great church
of Nicomedia, together with the copies of Scripture found in it, was destroyed
by order of the emperors, but that the edict of which Eusebius speaks just below
was not issued until the following day. For a discussion of the causes which led
to the persecution of Diocletian see below, p. 397.

12: Dustroj , the seventh month of the Macedonian year, corresponding to our
March. See the table on p. 403, below.

13: Valesius ( ad locum ) states, on the authority of Scaliger and Petavius,
that Easter fell on April 18th in the year 303. I have not attempted to verify
the statement.

14: This is the famous First Edict of Diocletian, which is no longer extant, and
the terms of which therefore have to be gathered from the accounts of Eusebius
and Lactantius. The interpretation of the edict has caused a vast deal of
trouble. It is discussed very fully by Mason in his important work, The
Persecution of Diocletian, p. 105 sq. and p. 343 sq. As he remarks, Lactantius
simply describes the edict in a general way, while Eusebius gives an accurate
statement of its substance, even reproducing its language in part. The first
provision (that the churches be leveled to the ground) is simply a carrying out
of the old principle, that it was unlawful for the Christians to hold
assemblies, under a new form. The second provision, directed against the sacred
books, was entirely new, and was a very shrewd move, revealing at the same time
an appreciation on the part of the authors of the persecution of the important
part which the Scriptures occupied in the Christian Church. The third provision,
as Mason has pointed out, is a substantial reproduction of a part of the edict
of Valerian, and was evidently consciously based upon that edict. (Upon the
variations from the earlier edict, see Mason, p. 115 sq.) It is noticeable that
not torture nor death is decreed, but only civil degradation. This degradation,
as can be seen from a comparison with the description of Lactantius ( ibid.
chap. 13) and with the edict of Valerian (given in Cyprian's Epistle to
Successus, Ep. No. 81, al. 80), consisted, in the case of those who held public
office ( timhj epeilhmmenouj ), in the loss of rank and also of citizenship;
that is, they fell through two grades, as is pointed out by Mason. In the
interpretation of the fourth provision, however, Mason does not seem to me to
have been so successful. The last clause runs touj de en oiketiaij, ei
epimenoien th tou xristianismou proqesei eleuqeriaj stereisqai . The difficult
point is the interpretation of the touj en oiketiaij . The words usually mean
"household slaves," and are commonly so translated in this passage. But, as
Valesius remarks, there is certainly no sense then in depriving them of freedom
( eleuqeria oi en oiketiaij a wider meaning than can legitimately be applied to
it. Mason remarks: "The word oiketia oi en oiketiaij touj en oiketiaij itself
there is nothing which forbids the paraphrase `private persons. 0'" But I submit
that to use so clumsy a phrase, so unnecessary a circumlocution, to designate
simply private people in general- oi polloi -would be the height of absurdity.
The interpretation of Stroth (which is approved by Heinichen) seems to me much
more satisfactory. He remarks: "Das Edict war zunächst nur gegen zwei Klassen
von Leuten gerichtet, einmal gegen die, welche in kaiserlichen Aemtern standen,
und dann gegen die freien oder freigelassenen Christen, welche bei den Kaisern
oder ihren Hofleuten und Statthaltern in Diensten standen, und zu ihrem
Hausgesinde gehörten." This seems to me more satisfactory, both on verbal and
historical grounds. The words oi en oiketiaij certainly cannot, in the present
case, mean "household slaves," but they can mean servants, attendants, or other
persons at court, or in the households of provincial officials, who did not hold
rank as officials, but at the same time were freemen born, or freedmen, and thus
in a different condition from slaves. Such persons would naturally be reduced to
slavery if degraded at all, and it is easier to think of their reduction to
slavery than of that of the entire mass of Christians not in public office.
Still further, this proposition finds support in the edict of Valerian, in which
this class of people is especially mentioned. And finally, it is, in my opinion,
much more natural to suppose that this edict (whose purpose I shall discuss on
p. 399) was confined to persons who were in some way connected with official
life,-either as chiefs or assistants or servants,-and therefore in a position
peculiarly fitted for the formation of plots against the government, than that
it was directed against Christians indiscriminately. The grouping together of
the two classes seems to me very natural; and the omission of any specific
reference to bishops and other church officers, who are mentioned in the second
edict, is thus fully explained, as it cannot be adequately explained, in my
opinion, on any other ground.

15: As we learn from chap. 6, §8, the edict commanding the church officers to be
seized and thrown into prison followed popular uprisings in Melitene and Syria,
and if Eusebius is correct, was caused by those outbreaks. Evidently the
Christians were held in some way responsible for those rebellious outbursts
(possibly they were a direct consequence of the first edict), and the natural
result of them must have been to make Diocletian realize, as he had not realized
before, that the existence of such a society as the Christian Church within the
empire-demanding as it did supreme allegiance from its members-was a menace to
the state. It was therefore not strange that what began as a purely political
thing, as an attempt to break up a supposed treasonable plot formed by certain
Christian officials, should speedily develop into a religious persecution. The
first step in such a persecution would naturally be the seizure of all church
officers (see below, p. 397 sq.).The decrees of which Eusebius speaks in this
paragraph are evidently to be identified with the one mentioned in chap. 6, §8.
This being so, it is clear that Eusebius' account can lay no claims to
chronological order. This must be remembered, or we shall fall into repeated
difficulties in reading this eighth book. We are obliged to arrange the order of
events for ourselves, for his account is quite desultory, and devoid both of
logical and chronological sequence. The decrees or writings ( grammata )
mentioned in this paragraph constituted really but one edict (cf. chap. 6, §8),
which is known to us as the Second Edict of Diocletian. Its date cannot be
determined with exactness, for, as Mason remarks, it may have been issued at any
time between February and November; but it was probably published not many
months after the first, inasmuch as it was a result of disturbances which arose
in consequence of the first. Mason is inclined to place it in March, within a
month after the issue of the first, but that seems to me a little too early. In
issuing the edict Diocletian followed the example of Valerian in part, and yet
only in part; for instead of commanding that the church officers be slain, he
commanded only that they be seized. He evidently believed that he could
accomplish his purpose best by getting the leading men of the church into his
hands and holding them as hostages, while denying them the glory of martyrdom
(cf. Mason, p. 132 sq.). The persons affected by the edict, according to
Eusebius, were "all the rulers of the churches" ( touj twn ekklhsiwn proedrouj
pantaj touj pantaxose twn ekklhsiwn proestwtaj

16: We learn from Lactantius ( l.c. ) that the officers of the church,under the
terms of the second edict, were thrown into prison without any option being
given them in the matter of sacrificing. They were not asked to sacrifice, but
were imprisoned unconditionally. This was so far in agreement with Valerian's
edict, which had decreed the instant death of all church officers without the
option of sacrificing. But as Eusebius tells us here, they were afterwards
called upon to sacrifice, and as he tells us in the first paragraph of the next
chapter, multitudes yielded, and that of course meant their release, as indeed
we are directly told in chap. 6, §10. We may gather from the present passage and
from the other passages referred to, taken in connection with the second chapter
of the Martyrs of Palestine, that this decree, ordaining their release on
condition of sacrificing, was issued on the occasion of Diocletian's Vicennalia,
which were celebrated in December, 303, on the twentieth anniversary of the
death of Carus, which Diocletian reckoned as the beginning of his reign, though
he was not in reality emperor until the following September. A considerable
time, therefore, elapsed between the edict ordaining the imprisonment of church
officers and the edict commanding their release upon condition of sacrificing.
This latter is commonly known as Diocletian's Third Edict, and is usually spoken
of as still harsher than any that preceded it. It is true that it did result in
the torture of a great many,-for those who did not sacrifice readily were to be
compelled to do so, if possible,-but their death was not aimed at. If they would
not sacrifice, they were simply to remain in prison, as before. Those who did
die at this time seem to have died under torture that was intended, not to kill
them, but to bring about their release. As Mason shows, then, this third edict
was of the nature of an amnesty; was rather a step toward toleration than a
sharpening of the persecution. The prisons were to be emptied, as was customary
on such great occasions, and the church officers were to be permitted to return
to their homes, on condition that they should sacrifice. Inasmuch as they had
not been allowed to leave prison on any condition before, this was clearly a
mark of favor (see Mason, p. 206 sq.). Many were released even without
sacrificing, and in their desire to empty the prisons, the governors devised
various expedients for freeing at least a part of those who would not yield (cf.
the instances mentioned in the next chapter). At the same time, some governors
got rid of their prisoners by putting them to death, sometimes simply by
increasing the severity of the tortures intended to try them, sometimes as a
penalty for rash or daring words uttered by the prisoners, which were
interpreted as treasonable, and which, perhaps, the officials had employed their
ingenuity, when necessary, to elicit. Thus many might suffer death, under
various legal pretenses, although the terms of the edict did not legally permit
death to be inflicted as a punishment for Christianity. The death penalty was
not decreed until the issue of the Fourth Edict (see below, Mart. Pal. chap.3,
note 2).

17: murioi d alloi . See the previous chapter, note 8.

18: i.e. those who, when freedom was offered them on condition of sacrificing,
refused to accept it at that price. It was desirous that the prisons which had
for so long been filled with these Christian prisoners (see chap. 6, §9) should,
if possible, be cleared; and this doubtless combined with the desire to break
the stubbornness of the prisoners to promote the use of torture at this time.

19: See the previous chapter, note 8.

20: stratopedarxhj .

21: In the Chron. we are told of a commander by name Veturius, who is doubtless
to be identified with the one referred to here. Why Eusebius does not give his
name in the History, we do not know. There seems to be contempt in the phrase,
"whoever he was," and it may be that he did not consider him worth naming. In
Jerome's version of the Chron. (sixteenth year of Diocletian) we read: Veturius
magister militiae Christianos milites persequitur, paulatim ex illo jam tempore
persecutione adversum nos incipiente; in the Armenian (fourteenth year):
Veturius magister militiae eos qui in exercitu Christiani erant, clanculum
opprimebat atque ex hoc inde tempore ubique locorum persecutio se extendit.
Evidently the occurrence took place a few years before the outbreak of the
regular persecution, but the exact date cannot be determined. It is probable,
moreover, from the way in which Eusebius refers to the man in the History that
he was a comparatively insignificant commander, who took the course he did on
his own responsibility. At least, there is no reason to connect the act with
Diocletian and to suppose it ordered by him. All that we know of his relation to
the Christians forbids such a supposition. There may have been some particular
occasion for such a move in the present instance, which evidently affected only
a small part of the army, and resulted in only a few deaths (see the next
paragraph). Perhaps some insubordination was discovered among the Christian
soldiers, which led the commander to be suspicious of all of them, and hence to
put the test to them,-which was always in order,-to prove their loyalty. It is
plain that he did not intend to put any of them to death, but only to dismiss
such as refused to evince their loyalty by offering the customary sacrifices.
Some of the Christian soldiers, however, were not content with simple
dismission, but in their eagerness to evince their Christianity said and did
things which it was impossible for any commander to overlook (cf. the instances
given by Mason, p. 41 sq.). It was such soldiers as these that suffered death;
and they of course were executed, not because they were Christians, but because
they were insubordinate. Their death was brought on themselves by their foolish
fanaticism; and they have no claim to be honored as martyrs, although Eusebius
evidently regarded them as such.

22: We should rather say "for their rash and unjustifiable fanaticism."

23: In this sentence reference is made to the general persecution, which did not
begin until some time after the events recorded in the previous paragraphs.

24: Nicomedia, the capital city of Bithynia, became Diocletian's chief place of
residence, and was made by him the Eastern capital of the empire.

25: The great church of Nicomedia was destroyed on Feb. 23, 303, and the First
Edict was published on the following day (see above, chap. 2, note 3).

26: Lactantius relates this account in his De mort. pers. chap. 13, and
expresses disapproval of the act, while admiring the spirit of the man. He, too,
is silent in regard to the name of the man, though, living as he did in
Nicomedia, he can hardly have been ignorant of it. We may perhaps imagine that
he did not care to perpetuate the name of a man whom he considered to have acted
rashly and illegally. The old martyrologies give the man's name as John. That he
deserved death is clear enough. He was not a martyr to the faith, but a
criminal, who was justly executed for treasonable conduct. The first edict
contemplated no violence to the persons of the Christians. If they suffered
death, it was solely in consequence of their own rashness, as in the present
case. It is clear that such an incident as this would anger Diocletian and
increase his suspicions of Christians as a class, and thus tend to precipitate a
regular persecution. It must have seemed to the authorities that the man would
hardly commit such a foolhardy act unless he was conscious of the support of a
large body of the populace, and so the belief in the wide extension of the plot
which had caused the movement on the part of the emperors must have been
confirmed. See below, p. 398 sq.

27: i.e. Diocletian and Galerius.

28: On Dorotheus, see above, chap. 1, note 3.

29: i.e. in Nicomedia, before Diocletian and Galerius.

30: petroj , "a rock." It is clear from the account of Lactantius (chap. 15)
that this man, and the others mentioned in this connection, suffered after the
second conflagration in the palace and in consequence of it (see below, p. 400).
The two conflagrations led Diocletian to resort to torture in order to ascertain
the guilty parties, or to obtain information in regard to the plots of the
Christians. Examination by torture was the common mode of procedure under such
circumstances, and hence implies no unusual cruelty in the present case. The
death even of these men, therefore, cannot be looked upon as due to persecution.
Their offense was purely a civil one. They were suspected of being implicated in
a treasonable plot, and of twice setting fire to the palace. Their refusal to
sacrifice under such circumstances, and thus evince their loyalty at so critical
a time, was naturally looked upon as practically a confession of guilt,-at any
rate as insubordination on a most grave occasion, and as such fitly punishable
by death. Compare Pliny's epistle to Trajan, in which he expresses the opinion
that "pertinacious and inflexible obstinacy" ought at any rate to be punished,
whatever might be thought of Christianity as such (see above, Bk. III. chap. 33,
note 1); and at such a time as this Diocletian must have felt that the first
duty of all his subjects was to place their loyalty beyond suspicion by doing
readily that which was demanded. His impatience with the Christians must have
been increasing under all these provocations, and thus the regular persecution
was becoming ever note imminent.

31: Gorgonius has been already mentioned in chap. 1, above. See note 4 on that
chapter.

32: In a fragment preserved by the Chron. Paschale, and purporting to be a part
of an epistle written from prison, shortly before his death, by the presbyter
Lucian of Antioch to the church of that city, Anthimus, bishop of Nicomedia, is
mentioned as having just suffered martyrdom (see Routh's Rel. Sac. IV. p. 5).
Lucian, however, was imprisoned and put to death during the persecution of
Maximinus (a.d. 311 or 312). See below, Bk. IX. chap. 6, and Jerome's de vir.
ill. chap. 77. It would seem, therefore, if the fragment given in the Chron.
Paschale be genuine, and there seems no good reason to doubt it, that Anthimus
suffered martyrdom not under Diocletian, but under Maximinus, in 311 or 312. In
that case Eusebius is mistaken in putting his death at this early date, in
connection with the members of the imperial household. Indeed, we see no reason
for his execution at this time, and should find it difficult to explain if we
were to accept it. In the time of Maximinus, however, it is perfectly natural,
and of a piece with the execution of Peter of Alexandria and other notable
prelates. Eusebius, as we have already seen, pays no attention to chronology in
this Eighth Book, and hence there is no great weight to be placed upon his
mention of the death of Anthimus at this particular place. Mason (p. 324) says
that Hunziker (p. 281) has conclusively shown Eusebius' mistake at this point. I
have not seen Hunziker, and therefore cannot judge of the validity of his
arguments, but, on the grounds already stated, have no hesitation in expressing
my agreement with his conclusion. Of Anthimus himself, we know nothing beyond
what has been already intimated. In chap. 13, §1, below, he is mentioned again,
but nothing additional is told us in regard to him.

33: Eusebius does not accuse Galerius of being the author of the conflagration,
as Lactantius does. In fact, he seems to have known very little about the
matter. He mentions only one fire, whereas Lactantius distinctly tells us there
were two, fifteen days apart (chap. 14). Eusebius evidently has only the very
vaguest information in regard to the progress of affairs at Nicomedia, and has
no knowledge of the actual order and connection of events. In regard to the
effects of the fire upon Diocletian's attitude toward the Christians, see above,
note 3, and below, p. 400. Constantine ( Orat. ad Sanct. Coet. XXV. 2) many
years afterwards referred to the fire as caused by lightning, which is clearly
only a makeshift, for, as Burckhardt remarks, there could have been no doubt in
that case how the fire originated. And, moreover, such an explanation at best
could account for only one of the fires. The fact that Constantine feels it
necessary to invent such an explanation gives the occurrence a still more
auspicious look, and one not altogether favorable to the Christians. In fact, it
must be acknowledged that the case against them is pretty strong.

34: Literally, "The executioners, having bound a large number of others on
boats, threw them into the depths of the sea" ( dhsantej de oi dhmioi allo ti
plhqoj epi skafaij, toij qalattioij enaperripton buqoij skafh

35: Compare Bk. IV. chap. 15, §41, above, and Lactantius, Div. Inst. V. 11. That
in the present case the suspicion that the Christians would worship the remains
of these so-called martyrs was not founded merely upon knowledge of the conduct
of Christians in general in relation to the relics of their martyrs, but upon
actual experience of their conduct in connection with these particular martyrs,
is shown by the fact that the emperor first buried them, and afterward had them
dug up. Evidently Christians showed them such honor, and collected in such
numbers about their tombs, that he believed it was necessary to take some such
step in order to prevent the growth of a spirit of rebellion, which was
constantly fostered by such demonstrations. Compare the remarks of Mason on p.
135.

36: Part of the events mentioned in this chapter occurred at the beginning;
others, a considerable time later. See note 5, above.

37: Melitene was the name of a district and a city in Eastern Cappadocia. Upon
the outbreak there we know only what can be gathered from this passage, although
Mason (p. 126 sq.) connects it with a rebellion, of which an account is given in
Simeon Metaphras-tes. It is possible that the account of the Metaphrast is
authentic, and that the uprising referred to here is to be identified with it,
but more than that cannot be said. There can be no doubt that the outbreak was
one of the causes of the promulgation of the Second Edict, in which case of
course it is clear that the Christians. whether rightly or wrongly, were held
responsible for it. See above, chap. 2, note 7.

38: Valesius identifies this usurpation in Syria with that of Eugenius in
Antioch, of which we are told by Libanius (in his Oratio ad Theodosium post
reconciliationem, and in his Oratio ad Theod. de seditione Antioch., according
to Valesius). The latter was but a small affair, involving only a band of some
five hundred soldiers, who compelled their commander Eugenius, to assume the
purple, but were entirely destroyed by the people of the city within twenty-four
hours. See the note of Valesius ad locum, Tillemont's Hist. des Emp. IX. 73 sq.,
and Mason, p. 124 sq. This rebellion took place in the time of Diocletian, but
there is no reason for connecting it with the uprising mentioned here by
Eusebius. The words of Eusebius would seem to imply that he was thinking, not of
a single rebellion, but of a number which took place in various parts of Syria.
In that case, the Antiochian affair may have been one of them.

39: touj pantaxose twn ekklhsiwn proestwtaj . Upon this second edict, see above,
chap. 2, note 7.

40: It is evident enough from this clause alone that the word proestwtaj ,
"rulers," is to be taken in a broad sense. See the note just referred to.

41: The Third Edict of Diocletian. Eusebius evidently looks upon the edict as a
sharpening of the persecution, but is mistaken in his view. The idea was not
that those who refused to sacrifice should be punished by torture for not
sacrificing, but that torture should be applied in order to induce them to
sacrifice, and thus render it possible to release them. The end sought was their
release, not their punishment. Upon the date and interpretation of this edict,
see chap. 2, note 8.

42: Eusebius is probably again in error, as so often in this book, in connecting
a "multitude of martyrs in every province" with this Third Edict. Wholesale
persecution and persecution as such-aimed directly at the destruction of all
Christians-did not begin until the issue of the Fourth Edict (see below, Mart.
Pal. chap. 3, note 2). These numerous martyrdoms referred to here doubtless
belong to the period after the issue of that edict, although in Africa and
Mauritania, which were under Maximian, considerable blood was probably shed even
before that time. For it was possible, of course, for a cruel and irresponsible
ruler like Maximian to fix the death penalty for refusal to deliver up the
Christian books, or for other acts of obstinacy which the Christian would quite
commonly commit. These cases, however, must be looked upon as exceptional at
this stage of affairs, and certainly rare.

43: From the Martyrs of Palestine, chap. 8 sq. (more fully in the Syriac;
Cureton's English translation p. 26 sq.), we learn that in the sixth and
following years of the persecution, many Egyptian Christians were sent to
Palestine to labor in the mines there, and that they underwent the severest
tortures in that country. No mention is made of such persons in the Martyrs of
Palestine previous to the sixth year. Those in Tyre to whom Eusebius refers very
likely suffered during the same period; not under Diocletian, but under
Maximinus, when the persecution was at its height. Since in his Martyrs of
Palestine Eusebius confines himself to those who suffered in that country (or
were natives of it), he has nothing to say about those referred to in this
chapter, who seem, from the opening of the next chapter, to have suffered, all
of them, in Tyre.

44: No part of Christendom suffered more severely during these years than the
territory of the tyrant Maximinus, who became a Caesar in 305, and who ruled in
Egypt and Syria.

45: Thebais, or the territory of Thebes, was one of the three great divisions of
Egypt, lying between lower Egypt on the north and Aethiopia on the south. From
§4, below, we learn that Eusebius was himself an eye-witness of at least some of
the martyrdoms to which he refers in the present chapter. Reasons have been
given on p. 10, above, for supposing that he did not visit Egypt until the later
years of the persecution, indeed not until toward the very end of it; and it is
therefore to this period that the events described in this chapter are to be
ascribed.

46: arxhn tina ou thn tuxousan thj kat Alecandreian basilikhj dioikhsewj
egkexeirismenoj tina

47: Phileas, bishop of Thmuis (an important town in lower Egypt, situated
between the Tanite and Mendeaian branches of the Nile), occupies an important
place among the Diocletian martyrs. The extant Acts of his martyrdom have been
referred to in the previous note. He is mentioned again by Eusebius in chaps. 10
and 13, and in the former a considerable part of his epistle to the people of
his diocese is quoted. Jerome mentions him in his de vir. ill. chap. 78, where
he says: elegantissimum iibrum de martyrum laude composuit, et disputatione
actorum habita adversum judicem, qui eum sacrificare cogebat, pro Christo capite
truncatur. The book referred to by Jerome seems to be identical with the epistle
quoted by Eusebius in the next chapter, for we have no record of another work on
this subject written by him. There is extant, however, the Latin version of an
epistle purporting to have been written by the imprisoned bishops Hesychius,
Pachymius, Theodorus, and Phileas, to Meletius, author of the Meletian schism.
There seems to be nothing in the epistle to disprove its genuineness, and it is
accepted by Routh and others. The authorship of the epistle is commonly ascribed
to Phileas, both because he is known to us as a writer, and also because his
name stands last in the opening of the epistle. Eusebius says nothing of such an
epistle (though the names of all four of the bishops are mentioned in chap. 13,
below). Jerome's silence in regard to it signifies nothing, for he only follows
Eusebius. This epistle, and also the fragment of the one quoted in the next
chapter by Eusebius, are given by Routh, Rel. Sac. IV. p. 87 sq., and an English
translation in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VI. p. 161 sq.

48: On this epistle, see the previous chapter, note 3.

49: Phil. ii. 6-8.

50: 1 John iv. 18.

51: toij amunthrioij . The word amunthrion amunthria amunthrion as cifoj
distomon , i.e. a "two-edged sword."

52: The majority of the mss., followed by Laemmer and Heinichen, omit tessarwn
53: fhsi : "He says," or "the Scripture saith."

54: Ex. xxii. 20.

55: Ex. xx. 3.

56: I read polixnhn with the majority of mss. and editors. A number of mss. read
polin

57: Rufinus connects this man with the town of Phrygia just referred to, and
makes him one of the victims of that catastrophe. But Eusebius does not intimate
any such connection, and indeed seems to separate him from the inhabitants of
that city by the special mention of him as a martyr. Moreover, the official
titles given to him are hardly such as we should expect the citizen of an
insignificant Phrygian town to bear. He is said, in fact, to have held the
highest imperial-not merely municipal-offices. We know nothing more about the
man than is told us here; nor do we know when and where he suffered.

58: taj kafolou dioikhseij thj tar autoij kaloumenj magistrothtoj te kai
kafolikothtoj . The second office ( kafolikothj ) is apparently to be identified
with that mentioned in Bk. VII. chap. 10, §5 (see note 8 on that chapter). We
can hardly believe, however, that Adauctus (of whom we hear nowhere else) can
have held so high a position as is meant there, and therefore are forced to
conclude that he was but one of a number of such finance ministers, and had the
administration of the funds only of a particular district in his hands.

59: The barbarous mutilation of the Christians which is spoken of here and
farther on in the chapter, began, as we learn from the Martyrs of Palestine, in
the sixth year of the persecution (a.d. 308). The tyrant Maximin seems to have
become alarmed at the number of deaths which the persecution was causing, and to
have hit upon this atrocious expedient as a no less effectual means of
punishment. It was practiced apparently throughout Maximin's dominions; we are
told of numbers who were treated in this way, both in Egypt and Palestine (see
Mart. Pal. chap. 8 sq.).

60: This abominable treatment of female Christians formed a feature of the
persecutions both of Maximian and Maximin, who were alike monsters of
licentiousness. It was entirely foreign to all the principles of Diocletian's
government, and could never have been allowed by him. It began apparently in
Italy under Maximian, after the publication by him of the Fourth Edict (see
Mart. Pal. chap. 3, note 2), and was continued in the East by Maximin, when he
came into power. We have a great many instances given of this kind of treatment,
and in many cases, as in the present, suicide relieved the victims of the
proposed indignity.

61: Eusebius evidently approved of these women's suicide, and it must be
confessed that they had great provocation. The views of the early Church on the
subject of suicide were in ordinary cases very decided. They condemned it
unhesitatingly as a crime, and thus made a decided advance upon the position
held by many eminent Pagans of that age, especially among the Stoics. In two
cases, however, their opinion of suicide was somewhat uncertain. There existed
in many quarters a feeling of admiration for those who voluntarily rushed to
martyrdom and needlessly sacrificed their lives. The wiser and steadier minds,
however, condemned this practice unhesitatingly (cf. p. 8, above). The second
case in connection with which the opinions of the Fathers were divided, was that
which meets us in the present passage. The majority of them evidently not only
justified but commended suicide in such an extremity. The first Father
distinctly to condemn the practice was Augustine ( De civ. Dei. I. 22-27). He
takes strong ground on the subject, and while admiring the bravery and chastity
of the many famous women that had rescued themselves by taking their own lives,
he denounces their act as sinful under all circumstances, maintaining that
suicide is never anything else than a crime against the law of God. The view of
Augustine has very generally prevailed since his time. Cf. Leckey's History of
European Morals, 3d edition (Appleton, New York), Vol. II. p. 43 sq.

62: On Anthimus, see above, chap. 6, note 5.

63: On Lucian of Antioch, see below, Bk. IX. chap. 6, note 4.

64: Of Tyrannion and Zenobius, we know only what is told us here and in the next
paragraph. All of the martyrs of whom Eusebius tells us in this and the
following books are commemorated in the Martyrologies, and accounts of the
passions of many of them are given in various Acts, usually of doubtful
authority. I shall not attempt to mention such documents in my notes, nor to
give references to the Martyrologies, unless there be some special reason for it
in connection with a case of particular interest. Wherever we have farther
information in regard to any of these martyrs, in Eusebius himself or other
early Fathers, I shall endeavor to give the needed references, passing other
names by unnoticed. Tillemont ( H. E. V.) contains accounts of all these men,
and all the necessary references to the Martyrologies, the Bollandist Acts, etc.
To his work the curious reader is referred.

65: Silvanus is mentioned again in Bk. IX. chap. 6, and from that passage we
learn that he was a very old man at the time of his death, and that he had been
bishop forty years. It is, moreover, directly stated in that passage that
Silvanus suffered martyrdom at the same period with Peter of Alexandria, namely,
in the year 312 or thereabouts. This being the date also of Lucian's martyrdom,
mentioned just above, we may assume it as probable that all mentioned in this
chapter suffered about the same time.

66: i.e. Tyrannion.

67: Silvanus, bishop of Gaza, is mentioned also in Mart. Pal. chaps. 7 and 13.
From the former chapter we learn that he became a confessor at Phaeno in the
fifth year of the persecution (a.d. 307), while still a presbyter; from the
latter, that he suffered martyrdom in the seventh year, at the very close of the
persecution in Palestine, and that he had been eminent in his confessions from
the beginning of the persecution.

68: Phaeno was a village of Arabia Petraea, between Petra and Zoar, and
contained celebrated copper mines, which were worked by condemned criminals.

69: Peleus and Nilus are mentioned in Mart. Pal. chap. 13, from which passage we
learn that they, like Silvanus, died in the seventh year of the persecution. An
anonymous presbyter and a man named Patermuthius, are named there as perishing
with them in the flames.

70: On Pamphilus, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 40. Eusebius refers here to
his Life of Pamphilus (see above, p. 28).

71: On Peter of Alexandria, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 54.

72: Faustus is probably to be identified with the deacon of the same name,
mentioned above in Bk. VI. chap. 40 and in Bk. VII. chap. 11. At any rate, we
learn from the latter chapter that the Faustus mentioned there lived to a great
age, and died in the persecution of Diocletian, so that nothing stands in the
way of identifying the two, though in the absence of all positive testimony, the
identification cannot be insisted upon. Of Dius and Ammonius we know nothing.

73: On Phileas, see above, chap. 9, note 3.

74: A Latin version of an epistle purporting to have been written by these four
bishops is still extant (see above, chap. 9, note 3). We know nothing more about
the last three named here. It has been customary to identify this Hesychius with
the reviser of the text of the LXX and the Gospels which was widely current in
Egypt in the time of Jerome, and was known as the Hesychian recension (see
Jerome, Praef. in Paralipom., Apol. adv. Ruf. II. 27, Praef in quattuor
Evangelia; and cf. Comment. in Isaiam, LVIII. II). We know little about this
text; but Jerome speaks of it slightingly, as does also the Decretal of
Gelasius, VI. §15 (according to Westcott's Hist. of the Canon, 5th ed. p. 392,
note 5). The identification of the two men is quite possible, for the recension
referred to belonged no doubt to this period; but no positive arguments beyond
agreement in hame and country can be urged in support of it. Fabricius proposed
to identify our Hesychius with the author of the famous Greek Lexicon, which is
still extant. But this identification is now commonly rejected; and the author
of the lexicon is regarded as a pagan, who lived in Alexandria during the latter
part of the fourth century. See Smith's Dict. of Greek and Roman Biography and
Smith and Wace's Dict. of Christ. Biog. s.v.

75: Eusebius refers here to his Martyrs of Palestine. See above, p. 29 sq.

76: kata ton paronya logon logoj

77: The abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, the two Augusti, took place on
May 1, 305, and therefore a little more, not a little less, than two years after
the publication of Diocletian's First Edict. The causes of the abdication have
been given variously by different writers, and our original authorities are
themselves in no better agreement. I do not propose to enter here into a
discussion of the subject, but am convinced that Burckhardt, Mason, and others
are correct in looking upon the abdication, not as the result of a sudden
resolve, but as a part of Diocletian's great plan, and as such long resolved
upon and regarded as one of the fundamental requirements of his system to be
regularly observed by his successors, as well as by himself. The abdication of
Diocletian and Maximian raised the Caesars Constantius and Galerius to the rank
of Augusti, and two new Caesars, Maximinus Daza in the East, and Severus in the
West, were appointed to succeed them. Diocletian himself retired to Dalmatia,
his native province, where he passed the remainder of his life in rural
pursuits, until his death in 313.

78: Eusebius is correct in saying that the empire had never been divided up to
this time. For it had always been ruled as one whole, even when the imperial
power was shared by two or more princes. And even the system of Diocletian was
not meant to divide the empire into two or more independent parts. The plan was
simply to vest the supreme power in two heads, who should be given lieutenants
to assist them in the government, but who should jointly represent the unity of
the whole while severally administering their respective territories. Imperial
acts to be valid had to be joint, not individual acts, and had to bear the name
of both Augusti, while the Caesars were looked upon only as the lieutenants and
representatives of their respective superiors. Finally, in the last analysis,
there was theoretically but the one supreme head, the first Augustus. While
Diocletian was emperor, the theoretical unity was a practical thing. So long as
his strong hand was on the helm, Maximian, the other Augustus, did not venture
to do anything in opposition to his wishes, and thus the great system worked
smoothly. But with Diocletian's abdication, everything was changed.
Theoretically Constantius was the first Augustus, but Galerius, not Constantius,
had had the naming of the Caesars; and there was no intention on Galerius' part
to acknowledge in any way his inferiority to Constantius. In fact, being in the
East, whence the government had been carried on for twenty years, it was natural
that he should be entirely independent of Constantius, and that thus, as
Eusebius says, a genuine division of the empire, not theoretical but practical,
should be the result. The principle remained the same; but West and East seemed
now to stand, not under one great emperor, but under two equal and independent
heads.

79: Constantius Chlorus died at York, in Britain, July 25, 306. According to the
system of Diocletian, the Caesar Severus should regularly have succeeded to his
place, and a new Caesar should have been appointed to succeed Severus. But
Constantine, the oldest son of Constantius, who was with his father at the time
of his death, was at once proclaimed his successor, and hailed as Augustus by
the army. This was by no means to Galerius' taste, for he had far other plans in
mind; but he was not in a position to dispute Constantine's claims, and so made
the best of the situation by recognizing Constantine not as Augustus, but as
second Caesar, while he raised Severus to the rank of Augustus, and made his own
Caesar Maximin first Caesar. Constantine was thus theoretically subject to
Severus, but the subjection was only a fiction, for he was practically
independent in his own district from that time on.

80: Not the first of Roman emperors to be so honored, but the first of the four
rulers who were at that time at the head of the empire. It had been the custom
from the beginning to decree divine honors to the Roman emperors upon their
decease, unless their characters or their reigns had been such as to leave
universal hatred behind them, in which case such honors were often denied them,
and their memory publicly and officially execrated, and all their public
monuments destroyed. The ascription of such honors. to Constantius, therefore,
does not in itself imply that he was superior to the other three rulers, nor
indeed superior to the emperors ingeneral, but only that he was not a monster,
as some had been. The st emperor to receive such divine honors was Diocletian
himself, with whose death the old pagan regime came finally to an end.

81: This is a mistake; for though Constantius seems to have proceeded as mildly
as possible, he did destroy churches, as we are directly informed by Lactantius
( de Mort. pers. 15), and as we can learn from extant Acts and other sources
(see Mason, p. 146 sq.). Eusebius, perhaps, knew nothing about the matter, and
simply drew a conclusion from the known character of Constantius and his general
tolerance toward the Christians.

82: The steps which led to the appointment of Licinius are omitted by Eusebius.
Maxentius, son of the old Augustus Maximian, spurred on by the success of
Constantine's move in Britain, attempted to follow his example in Italy. He won
the support of a considerable portion of the army and of the Roman people, and
in October of the same year (306) was proclaimed emperor by soldiers and people.
Severus, who marched against the usurper, was defeated and slain, and Galerius,
who endeavored to revenge his fallen colleague, was obliged to retreat without
accomplishing anything. This left Italy and Africa in the hands of an
independent ruler, who was recognized by none of the others. Toward the end of
the year 307, Licinius, an old friend and comrade-in-arms of Galerius, was
appointed Augustus to succeed Severus, whose death had occurred a number of
months before, but whose place had not yet been filled. The appointment of
Licinius took place at Carnuntum on the Danube, where Galerius, Diocletian, and
Maximian met for consultation. Inasmuch as Italy and Africa were still in the
hands of Maxentius, Licinius was given the Illyrian provinces with the rank of
second Augustus, and was thus nominally ruler of the entire West.

83: Early in 308 Maximinus, the first Caesar, who was naturally incensed at the
promotion of a new man, Licinius, to a position above himself, was hailed as
Augustus by his troops, and at once notified Galerius of the fact. The latter
could not afford to quarrel with Maximinus, and therefore bestowed upon him the
full dignity of an Augustus, as upon Constantine also at the same time. There
were thus four independent Augusti (to say nothing of the emperor Maxentius),
and the system of Diocletian was a thing of the past.

84: The reference is to the Augustus Maximian. After his abdication he retired
to Lucania, but in the following year was induced by his son, Maxentius, to
leave his retirement, and join him in wresting Italy and Africa from Severus. It
was due in large measure to his military skill and to the prestige of his name
that Severus was vanquished and Galerius repulsed. After his victories Maximian
went to Gaul, to see Constantine and form an alliance with him. He bestowed upon
him the title of Augustus and the hand of his daughter Fausta, and endeavored to
induce him to join him in a campaign against Galerius. This, however,
Constantine refused to do; and Maximian finally returned to Rome, where he found
his son Maxentius entrenched in the affections of the soldiers and the people,
and bent upon ruling for himself. After a bitter quarrel with him, in which he
attempted, but failed, to wrest the purple from him, he left the city, attended
the congress of Carnuntum, and acquiesced in the appointment of Licinius as
second Augustus, which of course involved the formal renunciation of his own
claims and those of his son. He then betook himself again to Constantine, but
during the latter's temporary absence treacherously had himself proclaimed
Augustus by some of the troops. He was, however, easily overpowered by
Constantine, but was forgiven and granted his liberty again. About two years
later, unable to resist the desire to reign, he made an attempt upon
Constantine's life with the hope of once more securing the power for himself,
but was detected and allowed to choose the manner of his own death, and in
February, 310, strangled himself. The general facts just stated are well made
out, but there is some uncertainty as to the exact order of events, in regard to
which our sources are at variance. Compare especially the works of Hunziker,
Burckhardt, and Mason, and the respective articles in Smith's Dict. of Greek and
Roman Biog.

85: Valesius understands by this (as in §12, above), the first of the four
emperors. But we find in Lactantius ( ibid. chap. 42) the distinct statement
that Diocletian (whose statues were thrown down in Rome with those of Maximian,
to which they were joined, Janus-fashion) was the first emperor that had ever
suffered such an indignity, and there is no hint in the text that Eusebius means
any less than that in making his statement, though we know that it is incorrect.

86: See the previous chapter, note 21.

87: On the alliance of Maximinus with Maxentius, his war with Licinius, and his
death, see below, Bk. IX. chaps. 9 and 10. Upon his accession to the Caesarship,
and usurpation of the title of Augustus, see above, chap. 13, notes 16 and 22.

88: Literally, "a finger-nail" ( onuxoj ).

89: Compare chap. 12, note 3, above.

90: Ibid.

91: toij ektoj .

92: Diocletian's First Edict was issued on Feb. 24, 303; and the persecution was
brought to a final end by Constantine and Licinius' edict of toleration, which
was issued at Milan late in the year 312 (see below, Bk. IX. chap. 9, note 17).
The persecution may therefore be said to have lasted altogether ten years;
although of course there were many cessations during that period, and in the
West it really came to an end with the usurpation of Maxentius in 306, and in
the East (except in Maximin's dominions) with the edict of Galerius in 311.

93: This passage is largely rhetorical. It is true that enough plotting and
warring went on after the usurpation of Maxentius in 306, and after the death of
Galerius in 311, to justify pretty strong statements. Gibbon, for instance,
says: "The abdication of Diocletian and Maximian was succeeded by eighteen years
of discord and confusion. The empire was afflicted by five civil wars; and the
remainder of the time was not so much a state of tranquillity as a suspension of
arms between several hostile monarchs, who, viewing each other with an eye of
fear and hatred, strove to increase their respective forces at the expense of
their subjects" (chap. xiv.). At the same time, during the four years between
307 and 311, though there was not the harmony which had existed under
Diocletian, and though the interests of the West and East were in the main
hostile, yet the empire was practically at peace, barring the persecution of the
Christians.

94: See below, Bk. IX. chap. 8.

95: The edict of Milan, issued by Constantine and Licinius toward the close of
the year 312 (upon the date, see Mason, p. 333, note) put an end to the
persecution in its tenth year, though complete toleration was not proclaimed by
Maximin until the following spring. Very soon after the close of the eighth
year, in April, 311, Galerius issued his edict of toleration which is given in
the next chapter. It is, therefore, to the publication of this edict that
Eusebius refers when he says that the persecution had begun to decrease after
the eighth year. Maximin yielded reluctant and partial consent to this edict for
a few months, but before the end of the year he began to persecute again; and
during the year 312 the Christians suffered severely in his dominions (see Bk.
IX. chap. 2 sq.).

96: The plural here seems a little peculiar, for the edict was issued only in
the name of Galerius, Constantine, and Licinius, not in the name of Maximin. We
have no record of Licinius as a persecutor before this time, and Eusebius' words
of praise in the ninth book would seem to imply that he had not shown himself at
all hostile to the Church. And in fact Licinius seems ruled out by §2, below,
where "they" are spoken of as having "from the beginning devised more and more
severe measures against us." And yet, since Constantine did not persecute, we
must suppose either that Licinius is included in Eusebius' plural, or what is
perhaps more probable, that Eusebius thinks of the edict as proceeding from all
four emperors though bearing the names of only three of them. It is true that
the latter is rather a violent supposition in view of Eusebius' own words in the
first chapter of Bk. IX. I confess that I find no satisfactory explanation of
the apparent inconsistency.

97: i.e. Galerius.

98: Matt. xviii. 7.

99: Galerius seems to have been smitten with the terrible disease, which
Eusebius here refers to, and which is described by Lactantius at considerable
length ( De mort. pers. chap. 33) and with many imaginative touches (e.g. the
stench of his disease pervades "not only the palace, but even the whole city"!),
before the end of the year 310, and his death took place in May of the following
year.

100: This edict was issued in April, 311 (see the previous chapter, note 1).
There has been considerable discussion as to the reason for the omission of
Maximin's name from the heading of the edict. The simplest explanation is that
he did not wish to have his name appear in a document which was utterly
distasteful to him and which he never fully sanctioned, as we learn from Bk. IX.
chaps. 1 and 2, below. It is possible, as Mason suggests, that in the copies of
the edict which were designed for other parts of the empire than his own the
names of all four emperors appeared. Eusebius gives a Greek translation of the
edict. The original Latin is found in Lactantius' De mort. pers. chap. 34. The
translation in the present case is in the main accurate though somewhat free.
The edict is an acknowledgment of defeat on Galerius' part, and was undoubtedly
caused in large part bye superstitious desire, brought on by his sickness, to
propitiate the God of the Christians whom he had been unable to conquer. And
yet, in my opinion, it is not as Mason calls it, "one of the most bizarre state
documents ever penned," "couched in language treacherous, contradictory, and
sown with the most virulent hatred"; neither does it "lay the blame upon the
Christians because they had forsaken Christ, " nor aim to "dupe and outwit the
angry Christ, by pretending to be not a persecutor, but a reformer." As will be
seen from note 3, below, I interpret the document in quite another way, and
regard it as a not inconsistent statement of the whole matter from Galerius' own
point of view.

101: thn dhmosian episthmhn 102: twn gonewn twn eautwn thn airesin eij agaqhn
proqesin epanelqoien proteron 103: epi ta upo twn arxaiwn katastaqenta

104: pleistoi 105: pantoiouj qanatouj upeferon 106: th auth aponoia diamenontwn
107: touj oikouj en oij sunhgonto, sunqwsin

108: contra disciplinam, i.e. "against the discipline or laws of the Romans."
Galerius does not tell us just what this indefinite phrase is meant to cover,
and the letter to the magistrates, in which he doubtless explained himself and
laid down the conditions, is unfortunately lost. The edict of Milan, as Mason
conclusively shows, refers to this edict of Galerius and to these accompanying
conditions; and from that edict some light is thrown upon the nature of these
conditions imposed by Galerius. It has been conjectured that in Galerius edict,
Christianity was forbidden to all but certain classes: "that if a man chose to
declare himself a Christian, he would incur no danger, but might no longer take
his seat as a decurion in his native town, or the like"; that Galerius had
endeavored to make money out of the transaction whereby Christians received
their church property back again; that proselytizing was forbidden; that
possibly the toleration of Christianity was made a matter of local option, and
that any town or district by a majority vote could prohibit its exercise within
its own limits (see Mason p. 330 sq.). These conjectures are plausible, though
of course precarious.

109: The Greek reads, in all our mss., kata panta tropon topon instead of tropon
. If, therefore, that translator was Eusebius, we must suppose that the change
to tropon is due to the error of some scribe. If, on the other hand. Eusebius
simply copied the Greek translation from some one else he may himself have
carelessly written tropon . In either case, however, topon must have been the
original translation, and I have therefore substituted it for tropon , and have
rendered accordingly. I find that Crusè has done likewise, whether for the same
reason I do not know.

110: Eusebius does not say whether the translating was done by himself or by
some one else. The epistle of Hadrian to Minucius Fundanus, quoted in Bk. IV.
chap. 9, above, was translated by himself, as he directly informs us (see ibid.
chap. 8, note 17). This might lead us to suppose him the translator in the
present case; but, on the other hand, in that case he directly says that the
translation was his work, in the present he does not. It is possible that Greek
copies of the edict were in common circulation, and that Eusebius used one of
them. At the same time, the words "translated as well as possible" ( kata to
dunaton ) would seem to indicate that Eusebius had supervised the present
translation, if he had not made it himself. Upon his knowledge of Latin, see the
note just referred to.

111: The words of this title, together with the section which follows, are found
in the majority of our mss. at the close of the eighth book, and are given by
all the editors. The existence of the passage would seem to imply that the work
in only eight books came into the hands of some scribe, who added the appendix
to make the work more complete. (Cf. chap. 13, note 15, above.) Whoever he was,
he was not venturesome in his additions, for, except the notice of Diocletian's
death and the statement of the manner of the death of Maximinus, he adds nothing
that has not been already said in substance by Eusebius himself. The appendix
must have been added in any case as late as 313, for Diocletian died in that
year.

112: See above, chap. 13, §11.

113: Diocletian died in 313, at the age of sixty-seven. The final ruin of all
his great plans for the permanent prosperity of the empire, the terrible
misfortunes of his daughter, and the indignities heaped upon him by Maximin,
Licinius, and Constantine, wore him out and at length drove the spirit from the
shattered body. According to Lactantius ( De mort. pers. 42), "having been
treated in the most contumelious manner, and compelled to abhor life, he became
incapable of receiving nourishment, and, worn out with anguish of mind,
expired."

114: Upon the death of Maximian, see above, chap. 13, note 23.

115: omen ustatoj , i.e. Galerius, who was the second Caesar and therefore the
last, or lowest, of the four rulers. Upon his illness and death, see chap. 16,
above.

116: Constantius was first Caesar, and thus held third rank in the government.
The following passage in regard to him is found also in chap. 13, §12-14, above.

117: Constantius was first Caesar, and thus held third rank in the government.
The following passage in regard to him is found also in chap. 13, §12-14, above.

118: i.e. Constantine.

119: i.e. Galerius.

120: I read loipon which is found in some mss. and is adopted by Stephanus and
Burton. Valesius, Schwegler, Laemmer and Heinichen follow other mss. in reading
lipwn , and this is adopted by Stroth, Closs and Crusè in their translations.
The last, however, makes it govern "the above-mentioned confession," which is
quite ungrammatical, while Stroth and Closs (apparently approved by Heinichen)
take it to mean "still alive" or "still remaining" ("Der unter diesen allein
noch Ueberlebende"; "Der unter diesen noch allein uebrige"), a meaning which
belongs to the middle but not properly to the active voice of leipw . The latter
translation, moreover, makes the writer involve himself in a mistake, for
Diocletian did not die until nearly two years after the publication of Galerius'
edict. In view of these considerations I feel compelled to adopt the reading
loipon which is nearly, if not quite, as well supported by ms. authority lipwn .

121: kai tauta en tini antigrafw en tw ogdow tomw euromen : "The following also
we found in a certain copy in the eighth book." In the Codex Castellanus,
however, according to Reading (in his edition of Valesius, Vol. I. p. 796, col.
2), the following title is inserted immediately after the words just quoted:
Eusebiou suggramma peri twn kat auton marturhsantwn en tw oktaetei Dioklhtianou
kai efechj Galeriou tou Maciminou diwgmw . Heinichen consequently prints the
first part of this title ( Eusebiou ... marturhsantwn ) at the head of the work
in his edition, and is followed by Burton and Migne. This title, however, can
hardly be looked upon as original, and I have preferred to employ rather the
name by which the work is described at its close, where we read Eusebiou tou
Pamfilou peri twn en Palaistinh marturhsantwn teloj

122: The Martyrs of Palestine, in all the mss. that contain it, is introduced
with these words. The passage which follows, down to the beginning of Chap. 1,
is a transcript, with a few slight variations, of Bk. VIII. chap. 2, §§4 and 5.
For notes upon it, see that chapter.

123: The month Xanthicus was the eighth month of the Macedonian year, and
corresponded to our April (see the table on p. 403, below). In Bk. VIII. chap.
2, Eusebius puts the beginning of the prosecution in the seventh month, Dystrus.
But the persecution really began, or at least the first edict was issued, and
the destruction of the churches in Nicomedia took place, in February. See Bk.
VIII. chap. 2, note 3.

124: Flavianus is not mentioned in Bk. VIII. chap. 2. In the Syriac version he
is named as the judge by whom Procopius was condemned (Cureton, p. 4). Nothing
further is known of him, so far as I am aware.

125: The account of Procopius was somewhat fuller in the longer recension of the
Martyrs of Palestine, as can be seen from the Syriac version (English
translation in Cureton, p. 3 sq.). There exists also a Latin translation of the
Acts of St. Procopius, which was evidently made from that longer recension, and
which is printed by Valesius and also by Cureton (p. 50 sq.), and in English by
Crusè in loco. We are told by the Syriac version that his family was from
Baishan. According to the Latin, he was a native of Aelia (Jerusalem), but
resided in Scythopolis (the Greek name of Baishan). With the Latin agrees the
Syriac version of these Acts, which is published by Assemani in his Acta SS.
Martt. Orient. et Occident. ed. 1748, Part II. p. 169 sq. (see Cureton, p. 52).
We learn from the longer account that he was a lector, interpreter, and exorcist
in the church, and that he was exceedingly ascetic in his manner of life. It is
clear from this paragraph that Procopius was put to death, not because he was a
Christian, but because he uttered words apparently treasonable in their import.
To call him a Christian martyr is therefore a misuse of terms. We cannot be sure
whether Procopius was arrested under the terms of the first or under the terms
of the second edict. If in consequence of the first, it may be that he was
suspected of complicity in the plot which Diocletian was endeavoring to crush
out, or that he had interfered with the imperial officers when they undertook to
execute the decree for the destruction of the church buildings. The fact that he
was commanded by the governor to sacrifice would lead us to think of the first,
rather than of the second edict (see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 6, note 3, and chap.
2, note 8). Still, it must be admitted that very likely many irregularities
occurred in the methods by which the decrees were executed in the province, and
the command to sacrifice can, therefore, not be claimed as proving that he was
not arrested under the terms of the second edict; and in fact, the mention of
imprisonment as the punishment which he had to expect would lead us to think of
the second edict as at least the immediate occasion of his arrest. In any case,
there is no reason to suppose that his arrest would have resulted in his death
had he not been rash in his speech.

126: ouk agaqon polukoiranih eij koiranoj estw, eij basileuj .

127: The majority of the mss. read "eighth," which according to Eusebius'
customary mode of reckoning the Macedonian months is incorrect. For, as Valesius
remarks, he always synchronizes the Macedonian with the Roman months, as was
commonly done in his time. But the seventh before the Ides of June is not the
eighth, but the seventh of June (or Desius). In fact, a few good mss. read
"seventh" instead of "eighth," and I have followed Burton, Schwegler, and
Heinichen in adopting that reading.

128: Desius was the tenth month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded to our
June (see the table on p. 403, below).

129: On the Roman method of reckoning the days of the month, see below, p. 402.

130: We may gather from §5, below, that the sufferings to which Eusebius refers
in such general terms in this and the following paragraphs took place late in
the year 303. In fact, from the Syriac version of the longer recension (Cureton,
p. 4) we learn that the tortures inflicted upon Alphaeus and Zacchaeus were, in
consequence of the third edict, issued at the approach of the emperor's
vicennalia, and intended rather as a step toward amnesty than as a sharpening of
the persecution (see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 5, note 8). This leads us to
conclude that all the tortures mentioned in these paragraphs had the same
occasion, and this explains the eagerness of the judges to set the prisoners
free, even if they had not sacrificed, so long as they might be made to appear
to have done so, and thus the law not be openly violated. Alphaeus and Zacchaeus
alone suffered death, as we are told in §5, and they evidently on purely
political grounds (see note 10).

131: We learn from the Syriac version that Zacchaeus was a deacon of the church
of Gadara, and that Alphaeus belonged to a noble family of the city of
Eleutheropolis, and was a reader and exorcist in the church of Caesarea.

132: See above, Bk. IV. chap. 16, note 9.

133: The month Dius was the third month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded
with our November (see below, p. 403).

134: monon ena Qeon kai xeiston basilea 'lhsoun omologhsantej . Basileuj was the
technical term for emperor, and it is plain enough from this passage that these
two men, like Procopius, were beheaded because they were regarded as guilty of
treason, not because of their religious faith. The instances given in this
chapter are very significant, for they reveal the nature of the persecution
during its earlier months, and throw a clear light back upon the motives which
had led Diocletian to take the step against the Christians which he did.

135: We learn from the Syriac version that the death of Romanus occurred on the
same day as that of Alphaeus and Zacchaeus. His arrest, therefore, must have
taken place some time before, according to §4, below. In fact, we see from the
present paragraph that his arrest took place in connection with the destruction
of the churches; that is, at the time of the execution of the first edict in
Antioch. We should naturally think that the edict would be speedily published in
so important a city, and hence can hardly suppose the arrest of Romanus to have
occurred later than the spring of 303. He therefore lay in prison a number of
months (according to §4, below, a "very long time," pleiston xronon ). Mason is
clearly in error in putting his arrest in November, and his death at the time of
the vicennalia, in December. It is evident from the Syriac version that the
order for the release of prisoners, to which the so-called third edict was
appended, preceded the vicennalia by some weeks, although issued in view of the
great anniversary which was so near at hand. It is quite possible that the
decree was sent out some weeks beforehand, in order that time might be given to
induce, the Christians to sacrifice, and thus enjoy release at the same time
with the others.

136: There is no implication here that these persons were commanded, or even
asked, to sacrifice. They seem, in their dread of what might come upon them,
when they saw the churches demolished, to have hastened of their own accord to
sacrifice to the idols, and thus disarm all possible suspicion.

137: As Mason remarks, to punish Romanus with death for dissuad-ing the
Christians from sacrificing was entirely illegal, as no imperial edict requiring
them to sacrifice had yet been issued, and therefore no law was broken in
exhorting them not to do so. At the same time, that he should be arrested as a
church officer was, under the terms of the second edict, legal, and, in fact,
necessary; and that the judge should incline to be very severe in the present
case, with the emperor so near at hand, was quite natural. That death, however,
was not yet made the penalty of Christian confession is plain enough from the
fact that, when the emperor was appealed to, as we learn from the Syriac
version, he remanded Romanus to prison, thus inflicting upon him the legal
punishment, according to the terms of the second edict. Upon the case of
Romanus, see Mason, p. 188 sq.

138: Valesius assumes that this was Galerius, and Mason does the same. In the
Syriac version, however, he is directly called Diocletian; but on the other
hand, in the Syriac acts published by Asse-mani (according to Cureton, p. 55),
he is called "Maximinus, the son-in-law of Diocletian"; i.e. Galerius, who was
known as Maximianus (of which Maximinus, in the present case, is evidently only
a variant form). The emperor's conduct in the present case is much more in
accord with Galerius' character, as known to us, than with the character of
Diocletian; and moreover, it is easier to suppose that the name of Maximinus was
later changed into that of Diocletian, by whose name the whole persecution was
known, than that the greater name was changed into the less. I am therefore
convinced that the reference in the present case is to Galerius, not to
Diocletian.

139: See above, Bk. VIII. chap. 2, note 8.

140: See above, Bk. IV. chap. 16, note 9, and Bk. VIII. chap. 10, note 5.

141: Of Urbanus governor of Palestine, we know only what is told us in the
present work (he is mentioned in this passage and in chaps. 4, 7, and 8, below)
and in the Syriac version. From the latter we learn that he succeeded Flavianus
in the second year of the persecution (304), and that he was deposed by
Maximinus in the fifth year (see also chap. 8, §7, below), and miserably
executed.

142: This is the famous fourth edict of Diocletian, which was issued in the year
304. It marks a stupendous change of method; in fact, Christianity as such is
made, for the first time since the toleration edict of Gallienus, a religio
illicita, whose profession is punishable by death. The general persecution, in
the full sense, begins with the publication of this edict. Hitherto persecution
had been directed only against supposed political offenders and church officers.
The edict is a complete stultification of Diocletian's principles as revealed in
the first three edicts, and shows a lamentable lack of the wisdom which had
dictated those measures. Mason has performed an immense service in proving (to
my opinion conclusively) that this brutal edict, senseless in its very severity,
was not issued by Diocletian, but by Maximian, while Diocletian was quite
incapacitated by illness for the performance of any public duties. Mason's
arguments cannot be reproduced here; they are given at length on p. 212 sq. of
his work. He remarks at the close of the discussion: "Diocletian, though he
might have wished Christianity safely abolished, feared the growing power of the
Church, and dared not persecute (till he was forced), lest he should rouse her
from her passivity. But this Fourth Edict was nothing more nor less than a loud
alarum to muster the army of the Church: as the centurions called over their
lists, it taught her the statistics of her numbers, down to the last child: it
proved to her that her troops could endure all the hardships of the campaign: it
ranged her generals in the exact order of merit. Diocletian, by an exquisite
refinement of thought, while he did not neglect the salutary fear which strong
penalties might inspire in the Christians, knew well enough that though he might
torture every believer in the world into sacrificing, yet Christianity was not
killed: he knew that men were Christians again afterwards as well as before:
could he have seen deeper yet, he would have known that the utter humiliation of
a fall before men and angels converted many a hard and worldly prelate into a
broken.hearted saint: and so he rested his hopes, not merely on the punishment
of individuals, but on his three great measures for crushing the corporate
life,-the destruction of the churches, the Scriptures, and the clergy. But this
Fourth Edict evidently returns with crass dullness and brutal complacency to the
thought that if half the church were racked till they poured the libations, and
the other half burned or butchered, Paganism would reign alone forever more, and
that the means were as eminently desirable as the end. Lastly, Diocletian had
anxiously avoided all that could rouse fanatic zeal. The first result of the
Fourth Edict was to rouse it."

143: Agapius, as we learn from chap. 6, below, survived his contest with the
wild beasts at this time, and was thrown into prison, where he remained until
the fourth year of the persecution, when he was again brought into the arena in
the presence of the tyrant Maximinus, and was finally thrown into the sea.

144: h kaq hmaj Qekla

145: A city of Palestine, lying northwest of Jerusalem, and identical with the
Lydda of Acts ix. 32 sq. For many centuries the seat of a bishop, and still
prominent in the time of the crusades. The persons referred to in this paragraph
are to be distinguished from others of the same names mentioned elsewhere.

146: To be distinguished from the Agapius mentioned earlier in the chapter, as
is clear from the date of his death, given in this paragraph.

147: Dystrus was the seventh month of the Macedonian year, corresponding to our
March. See the table on p. 403, below.

148: Diocletian and Maximian abdicated on May 1, 305. See above, Bk. VIII. chap.
13, note 16.

149: When Maxentius usurped the purple in Rome, in the year 306. See above, Bk.
VIII. chap. 13, note 21.

150: On Maximinus and his attitude toward the Christians, see above, Bk. VIII.
chap. 14, note 2. He was made a Caesar at the time of the abdication of
Diocletian and Maximian, May 1, 305, and Egypt and Syria were placed under his
supervision.

151: Apphianus is called, in the Syriac version, Epiphanius. We know him only
from this account of Eusebius. For some remarks upon his martyrdom, see above,
p. 8 sq.

152: The modern Beirût. A celebrated school of literature and law flourished
there for a number of centuries.

153: The mss., according to Valesius, are somewhat at variance in the spelling
of this name, and the place is perhaps to be identified with Araxa, a city of
some importance in northwestern Lycia.

154: This was simply a republication in its fullness of Maximian's fourth edict,
which was referred to in chap. 3 (see note 2 on that chapter). Eusebius does not
mean to say that this was the first time that such an edict was published, but
that this was the first edict of Mxirninus, the newly appointed Caesar.

155: It is perhaps not necessary to doubt that an earthquake took place at this
particular time. Nor is it surprising that under the circumstances the
Christians saw a miracle in a natural phenomenon.

156: Xanthicus was the eighth month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded to
our April (see table on p. 403, below). The martyrdom of Apphianus must have
taken place in 306, not 305; for according to the direct testimony of Lactantius
( de Mort. pers. chap. 19; the statement is unaccountably omitted in the English
translation given in the Ante-Nicene Fathers ), Maximinus did not become Caesr
until May 1, 305; while, according to the present chapter, Apphianus suffered
martyrdom after Maximinus had been raised to that position. Eusebius himself
puts the abdication of the old emperors and the appointment of the new Caesars
early in April or late in March (see above, chap. 3, §5, and the Syriac version
of the Martyrs, p. 12), and with him agree other early authorities. But it is
more difficult to doubt the accuracy of Lactantius' dates than to suppose the
others mistaken, and hence May 1st is commonly accepted by historians as the day
of abdication. About the year there can be no question; for Lactantius' account
of Diocletian's movements during the previous year exhibits a very exact
knowledge of the course of events, and its accuracy cannot be doubted. (For a
fuller discussion of the date of the abdication, see Tillemont's Hist. des Emp.,
2d ed., IV. p. 609.) But even if it were admitted that the abdication took place
four of five weeks earlier (according to Eusebius' own statement, it did not at
any rate occur before the twenty-fourth of March: see chap. 3, above, and the
Syriac version, p. 12), it would be impossible to put Apphianus' death on the
second of April, for this would not give time for all that must intervene
between the day of his appointment and the republication and execution of the
persecuting edicts. In fact, it is plain enough from the present chapter that
Apphianus did not suffer until some time after the accession of Maximinus, and
therefore not until the following year. Eusebius, as can be seen from the first
paragraph of this work on the martyrs, reckoned the beginning of the persecution
in Palestine not with the issue of the first edict in Nicomedia on Feb. 24, 303,
but with the month of April of that same year. Apphianus' death therefore took
place at the very close of the third year of the persecution, according to this
reckoning.

157: i.e. Friday, the old Jewish term being still retained and widely used,
although with the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the
week it had entirely lost its meaning. Upon the prevalence of the word among the
Fathers as a designation of Friday, see Suicer's Thesaurus, s.v. paraskeuh and
nhsteia . The day of Christ's crucifixion was called megalh paraskeuh , the
"great preparation."

158: The martyrdom of Ulpian is omitted in the Syriac version. It was apparently
a later addition, made when the abridgment of the longer version was produced;
and this perhaps accounts for the brevity of the notice and the words of
explanation with which the mention of him is concluded.

159: Called Alosis in the Syriac version.

160: The month Dius was the third month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded
to our November (see table on p. 403, below).

161: prosabbatou hmera , i.e. on Friday, prosabbatoj being sometimes used among
the Jews as a designation of that day, which was more commonly called paraskeuh
162: See above, chap. 3, §1.

163: Cf. Matt. x. 18.

164: i.e April 2, 307. Eusebius is inconsistent with himself in this case. In
chap. 3, above, he states that Apphianus suffered on April 2, in the third year
of the persecution. But as shown in the note on that passage, Apphianus suffered
in April, 306, and therefore, in that case, Eusebius reckons the first year of
the persecution as beginning after the second of April. But in the present case
he reckons it as beginning before the second of April, and the latter date as
falling early in a new year of the persecution. That the martyrdom recorded in
the present case actually took place in 307, and not in 308, as it must have
done if Eusebius were consistent with himself, is proved, first, by the fact
that, in entering upon this new chapter, he says, "the persecution having
continued to the fifth year," implying thereby that the event which he is about
to relate took place at the beginning, not at the end, of the fifth year; and
secondly, by the fact that later on, in this same chapter, while still relating
the events of the fifth year, he recounts martyrdoms as taking place in the
month of November (Dius). This is conclusive, for November of the fifth year can
be only November, 307, and hence the April mentioned in the present paragraph
can be only April of the same year. Evidently Eusebius did not reckon the
beginning of the persecution in Palestine from a fixed day, but rather from the
month Xanthicus (April). As a consequence, the inconsistency into which he has
fallen is not very strange; the second day of April might easily be reckoned
either as one of the closing days of a year, or as the beginning of the ensuing
year. In the present case, he evidently forgot that he had previously used the
former reckoning.

165: i.e. on Easter Sunday. In the Syriac version, the events recorded in the
present chapter are put on a Sunday; but that it was Easter is not stated.

166: i.e. November fifth.

167: On Silvanus, who afterward became bishop of Gaza, see above, Bk. VIII.
chap. 13.

168: Or "frankness"; literally, "freedom" ( eleuqeria ).

169: On Parnphilus, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 40.

170: The death of Maximinus is related in Bk. IX. chap. 10. Nothing further is
said in regard to Urbanus; but the fate of his successor Firmilianus is recorded
in chap. 11, below. It is quite possible that Eusebius, in the present case, is
referring to a more detailed statement of the fates of the various persecutors,
which was to form the second part of the present work; and it is possible, still
further, that the appendix printed at the close of the eighth book is a fragment
of this second part, as suggested by Lightfoot (see above, p. 29).

171: Of Firmilianus, the successor of Urbanus, we know only what is told us here
and in chaps. 9 and 11, below. In the latter chapter, §31, his execution is
recorded.

172: omoeqnwn .

173: i.e. July 25 (a.d. 308). See the table on p. 403, below.

174: This is the so-called Fifth Edict, and was issued (according to the Passio
S. Theodori ) by Galerius and Maximinus, but was evidently inspired by Maximinus
himself. Mason speaks of it as follows: "It would be inaccurate to say that this
Fifth Edict (if so we may call it) was worse than any of the foregoing. But
there is in it a thin bitterness, a venomous spitefulness, which may be noticed
as characteristic of all the later part of the persecution. This spitefulness is
due to two main facts. The first was that Paganism was becoming conscious of
defeat; the Church had not yielded a single point. The second fact was that the
Church had no longer to deal with the sensible, statesmanlike hostility of
Diocletian,-not even with the bluff bloodiness of Maximian. Galerius himself was
now, except in name, no longer persecutor-in-chief. He was content to follow the
lead of a man who was in all ways even worse than himself. Galerius was indeed
an Evil Beast; his nephew was more like the Crooked Serpent. The artful sour
spirit of Maximin employed itself to invent, not larger measures of solid policy
against his feared and hated foes, but petty tricks to annoy and sting them."
For a fuller discussion of the edict, see Mason, p. 284 sq. It must have been
published in the autumn of the year 308, for the martyrdom of Paul, recorded in
the previous chapter. took place in July of that year, and some little time
seems to have elapsed between that event and the present. On the other hand, the
martyrdoms mentioned below, in §5, took place in November of this same year, so
that we can fix the date of the edict within narrow limits.

175: o tou twn stratopedwn arxein epitetagmenoj . Many regard this officer as
the praetorian prefect. But we should naturally expect so high an official to be
mentioned before the governors ( hgemonej 176: Or "town clerks," taboularioi .

177: Literally, " its athletes" ( authj ). the antecedent of the pronoun being
"the divine power."

178: i.e. Nov. 13, 308.

179: Macuj

180: This is a glaring instance of uncritical credulity on Eusebius' part, and
yet even Crusè can say: "Perhaps some might smile at the supposed credulity of
our author, but the miracle in this account was not greater than the malignity,
and if man can perform miracles of vice, we can scarcely wonder if Providence
should present, at least, miracles of admonition." Cureton more sensibly
remarks: "This, which doubtless was produced by natural causes, seemed
miraculous to Eusebius, more especially if he looked upon it as fulfilling a
prophecy of our Lord-Luke xix. 40: `I tell you, that if these should hold their
peace, the stones would immediately cry out. 0' See also Hab. ii. 11."

181: i.e. Dec. 14, 308 (see the tables on p. 403, below).

182: The majority of the codices read Promoj , but as Valesius remarks, such a
proper name is quite unknown in Greek, and the form probably arose from a
confusion of b and m , which in ancient mss. were written alike. Two of our
existing codices read Proboj , and this has been adopted by Zimmermann and
Heinichen, whom I have followed in the text.

183: i.e. Jan. 11, 309.

184: In the Syriac version "Absalom."

185: Of this village we know nothing, but Eleutheropolis (originally
Bethozabris) was an important place lying some forty miles southwest of
Jerusalem.

186: einai dokwn . Eusebius did not wish to admit that he was a bishop in a true
sense.

187: Rom. x. 2.

188: On Pamphilus, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 40.

189: On Eusebius' Life of Pamphilus, see above, p. 28 sq.

190: i.e. Jerusalem.

191: thj 'Iamnitwn polewj . Jamna, or Jamnia, was a town of Judea, lying west of
Jerusalem, near the sea.

192: i.e Feb. 19 (see the table on p. 403, below). We learn from chap. 7, §§3-5,
that Pamphilus was thrown into prison in the fifth year of the persecution and
as late as November of that year, i.e. between November, 307, and April, 308.
Since he had lain two whole years in prison (according to §5, above), the date
referred to in the present passage must be February of the year 310. The
martyrdom of Pamphilus is commonly, for aught I know to the contrary, uniformly
put in the year 309, as the seventh year of the persecution is nearly
synchronous with that year. But that the common date is a mistake is plain
enough from the present chapter.

193: prohgoroj , literally "advocate," or "defender."

194: Gal. iv. 26.

195: Heb. xii. 22. Upon Eusebius' view of the authorship of the Epistle to the
Hebrews, see above, Bk. III. chap. 25, note 1.

196: The reference is still to the same slave of Pamphilus whose tortures
Eusebius has just been describing, as we learn from the Syriac version, where
the slave's name is given at the beginning of the account.

197: I read peri auton with Zimmermann, Heinichen, Burton, and Migne. The mss.
all have peri autouj , which can hardly have stood in the original.

198: The common mode of punishment inflicted on slaves.

199: Of the so-called country of Magganaia I know nothing. The Syriac version
reads Batanea, which was a district of country lying to the northeast of
Palestine, and it may be that Manganea was another name for the same region.

200: i.e. March 5, 310.

201: It was the universal custom in ancient times for a city to have its special
tutelary divinity, to which it looked for protection and to which it paid
especial honor. The name of the Caesarean deity is unknown to us.

202: logikwn .

203: "It was a punishment among the Romans that freemen should be condemned to
take care of the emperor's horses or camels, and to perform other personal
offices of that kind" (Valesius). For fuller particulars, see Valesius' note ad
locum. In the Acts of St. Marcellus (who was bishop of Rome) we are told that he
was set by Maximian to groom his horses in a church which the emperor had turned
into a stable.

204: alogou zwou .

205: Cf. Bk. VIII, chap. 2, §§2 and 3, and the note on that passage.

206: Phil. iv. 8.

207: On Peleus and Nilus, see above, 0Bk. VIII. chap. 13, note 8. Paleus is
called Paul in the Syriac version.

208: The name of this man is given as Elias in the Syriac version; but both he
and Patermuthius are called laymen.

209: On Silvanus, bishop of Gaza, see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 13, note 6.

210: 2 Cor. iii. 3.

211: Ibid. 2 Cor. iii. 3.

212: The Syriac version says forty.

213: On the cessation of the persecution in the West at the accession of
Maxentius, see Bk. VIII. chap. 14, note 1.

214: On the division of the empire to which Eusebius here refers; see above, Bk.
VIII. chap. 13, note 17.

215: i.e. the toleration edict of Galerius, published in the spring of 311 See
above, Bk. VIII. chap. 17, note 1.

216: It would seem that the edict was originally appended to this shorter
recension of the martyrs (the longer recension is complete in its present form,
and contains no hint of such an addition). Very likely it was dropped with the
second half of the work (see above, p. 29) as unnecessary, when the first half
was inserted in the History. The edict is given in full in Bk. VIII. chap. 17,
above.

217: peri twn en Palaistinh marturhsantwn teloj . On the title of the work, see
above, p. 342, note 1.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 20: THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS - BOOK 9
========================================================================

Book IX.

Chapter I. The Pretended Relaxation.

Chapter II. The Subsequent Reverse.

Chapter III. The Newly Erected Statue at Antioch.

Chapter IV. The Memorials Against Us.18 Chapter V. The Forged Acts.

Chapter VI. Those Who Suffered Martyrdom at This Time.

Chapter VII. The Decree Against Us Which Was Engraved on Pillars.

Chapter VIII. The Misfortunes Which Happened in Connection with These Things, in
Famine, Pestilence, and War.

Chapter IX. The Victory of the God-Beloved Emperors.39 Chapter X. The Overthrow
of the Tyrants and the Words, Which They Uttered Before Their Death.68 Chapter
XI. The Final Destruction of the Enemies of Religion.

Book IX.

Chapter I. The Pretended Relaxation.

1 The imperial edict of recantation, which has been quoted above,1 was posted in
all parts of Asia and in the adjoining provinces. After this had been done,
Maximinus, the tyrant in the East,-a most impious man, if there ever was one,
and most hostile to the religion of the God of the universe,-being by no means
satisfied with its contents,2 instead of sending the above-quoted decree to the
governors under him, gave them verbal commands to relax the war against us.

2 For since he could not in any other way oppose the decision of his superiors,
keeping the law which had been already issued secret, and taking care that it
might not be made known in the district under him, he gave an unwritten order to
his governors that they should relax the persecution against us. They
communicated the command to each other in writing.

3 Sabinus,3 at least, who was honored with the highest official rank among them,
communicated the will of the emperor to the provincial governors in a Latin
epistle, the translation of which is as follows:

4 "With continuous and most devoted earnestness their Majesties, our most divine
masters, the emperors,4 formerly directed the minds of all men to follow the
holy and correct course of life, that those also who seemed to live in a manner
foreign to that of the Romans, should render the worship due to the immortal
gods. But the obstinacy and most unconquerable determination of some went so far
that they could neither be turned back from their purpose by the just reason of
the command, nor be intimidated by the impending punishment.

5 Since therefore it has come to pass that by such conduct many have brought
themselves into danger, their Majesties, our most powerful masters, the
emperors, in the exalted nobility of piety, esteeming it foreign to their
Majesties' purpose to bring men into so great danger for such a cause, have
commanded their devoted servant, myself, to write to thy wisdom,5 that if any
Christian be found engaging in the worship of his own people, thou shouldst
abstain from molesting and endangering him, and shouldst not suppose it
necessary to punish any one on this pretext. For it has been proved by the
experience of so long a time that they can in no way be persuaded to abandon
such obstinate conduct.

6 Therefore it should be thy care to write to the curators6 and magistrates and
district overseers7 of every city, that they may know that it is not necessary
for them to give further attention to this matter."8

7 Thereupon the rulers of the provinces, thinking that the purpose of the things
which were written was truly made known to them, declared the imperial will to
the curators and magistrates and prefects of the various districts9 in writing.
But they did not limit themselves to writing, but sought more quickly to
accomplish the supposed will of the emperor in deeds also. Those whom they had
imprisoned on account of their confession of the Deity, they set at liberty, and
they released those of them who had been sent to the mines for punishment; for
they erroneously supposed that this was the true will of the emperor.

8 And when these things had thus been done, immediately, like a light shining
forth in a dark night, one could see in every city congregations gathered and
assemblies thronged, and meetings held according to their custom. And every one
of the unbelieving heathen was not a little astonished at these things,
wondering at so marvelous a transformation, and exclaiming that the God of the
Christians was great and alone true.

9 And some of our people, who had faithfully and bravely sustained the conflict
of persecution, again became frank and bold toward all; but as many as had been
diseased in the faith and had been shaken in their souls by the tempest, strove
eagerly for healing, beseeching and imploring the strong to stretch out to them
a saving hand, and supplicating God to be merciful unto them.

10 Then also the noble athletes of religion who had been set free from their
sufferings in the mines returned to their own homes. Happily and joyfully they
passed through every city, full of unspeakable pleasure and of a boldness which
cannot be expressed in words.

11 Great crowds of men pursued their journey along the highways and through the
market-places, praising God with hymns and psalms. And you might have seen those
who a little while before had been driven in bonds from their native countries
under a most cruel sentence, returning with bright and joyful faces to their own
firesides; so that even they who had formerly thirsted for our blood, when they
saw the unexpected wonder, congratulated us on what had taken place.

Chapter II. The Subsequent Reverse.

1 But the tyrant who, as we have said, ruled over the districts of the Orient, a
thorough hater of the good and an enemy of every virtuous person, as he was,
could no longer bear this; and indeed he did not permit matters to go on in this
way quite six months.10 Devising all possible means of destroying the peace, he
first attempted to restrain us, under a pretext,11 from meeting in the
cemeteries.

2 Then through the agency of some wicked men he sent an embassy to himself
against us,12 inciting tim citizens of Antioch to ask from him as a very great
favor that he would by no means permit any of the Christians to dwell in their
country; and others were secretly induced to do the same thing. The author of
all this in Antioch was Theotecnus,13 a violent and wicked man, who was an
impostor, and whose character was foreign to his name.14 He appears to have been
the curator15 of the city.

Chapter III. The Newly Erected Statue at Antioch.

After this man had carried on all kinds of war against us and had caused our
people to be diligently hunted up in their retreats, as if they were unholy
thieves, and had devised every sort of slander and accusation against us, and
become the cause of death to vast numbers, he finally erected a statue of
Jupiter Philius16 with certain juggleries and magic rites. And after inventing
unholy forms of initiation and ill-omened mysteries in connection with it, and
abominable means of purification,17 he exhibited his jugglery, by oracles which
he pretended to utter, even to the emperor; and through a flattery which was
pleasing to the ruler he aroused the demon against the Christians and said that
the god had given command to expel the Christians as his enemies beyond the
confines of the city and the neighboring districts.

Chapter IV. The Memorials Against Us.18 The fact that this man, who took the
lead in this matter, had succeeded in his purpose was an incitement to all the
other officials in the cities under the same government to prepare a similar
memorial.19 And the governors of the provinces perceiving that this was
agreeable to the emperor suggested to their subjects that they should do the
same.

2 And as the tyrant by a rescript declared himself well pleased with their
measures,20 persecution was kindled anew against us. Priests for the images were
then appointed in the cities, and besides them high priests by Maximinus
himself.21 The latter were taken from among those who were most distinguished in
public life and had gained celebrity in all the offices which they had filled;
and who were imbued, moreover, with great zeal for the service of those whom
they worshiped.

3 Indeed, the extraordinary superstition of the emperor, to speak in brief, led
all his subjects, both rulers and private citizens, for the sake of gratifying
him, to do everything against us, supposing that they could best show their
gratitude to him for the benefits which they had received from him, by plotting
murder against us and exhibiting toward us any new signs of malignity.

Chapter V. The Forged Acts.

1 Having therefore forged Acts of Pilate22 and our Saviour full of every kind of
blasphemy against Christ, they sent them with the emperor's approval to the
whole of the empire subject to him, with written commands that they should be
openly posted to the view of all in every place, both in country and city, and
that the schoolmasters should give them to their scholars, instead of their
customary lessons, to be studied and learned by heart.

2 While these things were taking place, another military commander, whom the
Romans call Dux,23 seized some infamous women in the market-place at Damascus in
Phoenicia,24 and by threatening to inflict tortures upon them compelled them to
make a written declaration that they had once been Christians and that they were
acquainted with their impious deeds,-that in their very churches they committed
licentious acts; and they uttered as many other slanders against our religion as
he wished them to. Having taken down their words in writing, he communicated
them to the emperor, who commanded that these documents also should be published
in every place and city.

Chapter VI. Those Who Suffered Martyrdom at This Time.

1 Not long afterward, however, this military commander became his own murderer
and paid the penalty for his wickedness. But we were obliged again to endure
exile and severe persecutions, and the governors in every province were once
more terribly stirred up against us; so that even some of those illustrious in
the Divine Word were seized and had sentence of death pronounced upon them
without mercy. Three of them in the city of Emesa25 in Phoenicia, having
confessed that they were Christians, were thrown as food to the wild beasts.
Among them was a bishop Silvanus,26 a very old man, who had filled his office
full forty years.

2 At about the same time Peter27 also, who presided most illustriously over the
parishes in Alexandria, a divine example of a bishop on account of the
excellence of his life and his study of the sacred Scriptures, being seized for
no cause and quite unexpectedly, was, as if by command of Maximinus, immediately
and without explanation, beheaded. With him also many other bishops of Egypt
suffered the same fate.

3 And Lucian,28 a presbyter of the parish at Antioch, and a most excellent man
in every respect, temperate in life and famed for his learning in sacred things,
was brought to the city of Nicomedia, where at that time the emperor happened to
be staying, and after delivering before the ruler an apology for the doctrine
which he professed, was committed to prison and put to death.

4 Such trials were brought upon us in a brief time by Maximinus, the enemy of
virtue, so that this persecution which was stirred up against us seemed far more
cruel than the former.

Chapter VII. The Decree Against Us Which Was Engraved on Pillars.

1 The memorials against us29 and copies of the imperial edicts issued in reply
to them were engraved and set up on brazen pillars in the midst of the cities,30
-a course which had never been followed elsewhere. The children in the schools
had daily in their mouths the names of Jesus and Pilate, and the Acts which had
been forged in wanton insolence.31

2 It appears to me necessary to insert here this document of Maximinus which was
posted on pillars, in order that there may be made manifest at the same time the
boastful and haughty arrogance of the God-hating man, and the sleepless
evil-hating divine vengeance upon the impious, which followed close upon him,
and under whose pressure he not long afterward took the opposite course in
respect to us and confirmed it by written laws.32 The rescript is in the
following words:

Copy of a translation of the rescript of Maximinus in answer to the memorials
against us, taken from the pillar in Tyre.

3 "Now at length the feeble power of the human mind has become able to shake off
and to scatter every dark mist of error, which before this besieged the senses
of men, who were more miserable than impious, and enveloped them in dark and
destructive ignorance; and to perceive that it is governed and established by
the beneficent providence of the immortal gods.

4 It passes belief how grateful, how pleasing and how agreeable it is to us,
that you have given a most decided proof of your pious resolution; for even
before this it was known to every one how much regard and reverence you were
paying to the immortal gods, exhibiting not a faith of bare and empty words, but
continued and wonderful examples of illustrious deeds.

5 Wherefore your city may justly be called a seat and dwelling of the immortal
gods. At least, it appears by many signs that it flourishes because of the
presence of the celestial gods.

6 Behold, therefore, your city, regardless of all private advantages, and
omitting its former petitions in its own behalf, when it perceived that the
adherents of that execrable vanity were again beginning to spread, and to start
the greatest conflagration,-like a neglected and extinguished funeral pile when
its brands are rekindled,-immediately resorted to our piety as to a metropolis
of all religiousness, asking some remedy and aid.

7 It is evident that the gods have given you this saving mind on account of your
faith and piety.

"Accordingly that supreme and mightiest Jove, who presides over your illustrious
city, who preserves your ancestral gods, your wives and children, your hearths
and homes from every destructive pest, has infused into your souls this
wholesome resolve; showing and proving how excellent and glorious and salutary
it is to observe with the becoming reverence the worship and sacred rites of the
immortal gods.

8 For who can be found so ignorant or so devoid of all understanding as not to
perceive that it is due to the kindly care of the gods that the earth does not
refuse the seed sown in it, nor disappoint the hope of the husbandmen with vain
expectation; that impious war is not inevitably fixed upon earth, and wasted
bodies dragged down to death under the influence of a corrupted atmosphere; that
the sea is not swollen and raised on high by blasts of intemperate winds; that
unexpected hurricanes do not burst forth and stir up the destructive tempest;
moreover, that the earth, the nourisher and mother of all, is not shaken from
its lowest depths with a terrible tremor, and that the mountains upon it do not
sink into the opening chasms. No one is ignorant that all these, and evils still
worse than these, have oftentimes happened hitherto.

9 And all these misfortunes have taken place on account of the destructive error
of the empty vanity of those impious men, when it prevailed in their souls, and,
we may almost say, weighed down the whole world with shame."

10 After other words he adds: "Let them look at the standing crops already
flourishing with waving heads in the broad fields, and at the meadows glittering
with plants and flowers, in response to abundant rains and the restored mildness
and softness of the atmosphere.

11 Finally, let all rejoice that the might of the most powerful and terrible
Mars has been propitiated by our piety, our sacrifices, and our veneration; and
let them on this account enjoy firm and tranquil peace and quiet; and let as
many as have wholly abandoned that blind error and delusion and have returned to
a right and sound mind rejoice the more, as those who have been rescued from an
unexpected storm or severe disease and are to reap the fruits of pleasure for
the rest of their life.

12 But if they still persist in their execrable vanity, let them, as you have
desired, be driven far away from your city and territory, that thus, in
accordance with your praiseworthy zeal in this matter, your city, being freed
from every pollution and impiety, may, according to its native disposition,
attend to the sacred rites of the immortal gods with becoming reverence.

13 But that ye may know how acceptable to us your request respecting this matter
has been, and how ready our mind is to confer benefits voluntarily, without
memorials and petitions, we permit your devotion to ask whatever great gift ye
may desire in return for this your pious disposition.

14 And now ask that this may be done and that ye may receive it; for ye shall
obtain it without delay. This, being granted to your city, shall furnish for all
time an evidence of reverent piety toward the immortal gods, and of the fact
that you have obtained from our benevolence merited prizes for this choice of
yours; and it shall be shown to your children and children's children."

15 This was published against us in all the provinces, depriving us of every
hope of good, at least from men; so that, according to that divine utterance,
"If it were possible, even the elect would have stumbled"33 at these things.

16 And now indeed, when the hope of most of 16 us was almost extinct, suddenly
while those who were to execute against us the above decree had in some places
scarcely finished their journey, God, the defender of his own Church, exhibited
his heavenly interposition in our behalf, well-nigh stopping the tyrant's
boasting against us.

Chapter VIII. The Misfortunes Which Happened in Connection with These Things, in
Famine, Pestilence, and War.

1 The customary rains and showers of the winter season ceased to fall in their
wonted abundance upon the earth and an unexpected famine made its appearance,
and in addition to this a pestilence, and another severe disease consisting of
an ulcer, which on account of its fiery appearance was appropriately called a
carbuncle.34 This, spreading over the whole body, greatly endangered the lives
of those who suffered from it; but as it chiefly attacked the eyes, it deprived
multitudes of men, women, and children of their sight.

2 In addition to this the tyrant was compelled to go to war with the Armenians,
who had been from ancient times friends and allies of the Romans. As they were
also Christians35 and zealous in their piety toward the Deity, the enemy of God
had attempted to compel them to sacrifice to idols and demons, and had thus made
friends foes, and allies enemies.

3 All these things suddenly took place at one and the same time, and refuted the
tyrant's empty vaunt against the Deity. For he had boasted that, because of his
zeal for idols and his hostility against us, neither famine nor pestilence nor
war had happened in his time.36 These things, therefore, coming upon him at once
and together, furnished a prelude also of his own destruction.

4 He himself with his forces was defeated in the war with the Armenians, and the
rest of the inhabitants of the cities under him were terribly afflicted with
famine and pestilence, so that one measure of wheat was sold for twenty-five
hundred Attic drachms.37

5 Those who died in the cities were innumerable, and those who died in the
country and villages were still more. So that the tax lists which formerly
included a great rural population were almost entirely wiped out; nearly all
being speedily destroyed by famine and pestilence.

6 Some, therefore, desired to dispose of their most precious things to those who
were better supplied, in return for the smallest morsel of food, and others,
selling their possessions little by little, fell into the last extremity of
want. Some, chewing wisps of hay and recklessly eating noxious herbs, undermined
and mined their constitutions.

7 And some of the high-born women in the cities, driven by want to shameful
extremities, went forth into the market-places to beg, giving evidence of their
former liberal culture by the modesty of their appearance and the decency of
their apparel.

8 Some, wasted away like ghosts and at the very point of death, stumbled and
tottered here and there, and too weak to stand fell down in the middle of the
streets; lying stretched out at full length they begged that a small morsel of
food might be given them, and with their last gasp they cried out Hunger! having
strength only for this most painful cry.

9 But others, who seemed to be better supplied, astonished at the multitude of
the beggars, after giving away large quantities, finally became hard and
relentless, expecting that they themselves also would soon suffer the same
calamities as those who begged. So that in the midst of the market-places and
lanes, dead and naked bodies lay unburied for many days, presenting the most
lamentable spectacle to those that beheld them.

10 Some also became food for dogs, on which account the survivors began to kill
the dogs, lest they should become mad and should go to devouring men.

11 But still worse was the pestilence which consumed entire houses and families,
and especially those whom the famine was not able to destroy because of their
abundance of food. Thus men of wealth, rulers and governors and multitudes in
office, as if left by the famine on purpose for the pestilence, suffered swift
and speedy death. Every place therefore was full of lamentation; in every lane
and market-place and street there was nothing else to be seen or heard than
tears, with the customary instruments and the voices of the mourners.38

12 In this way death, waging war with these two weapons, pestilence and famine,
destroyed whole families in a short time, so that one could see two or three
dead bodies carried out at once.

13 Such were the rewards of the boasting of Maximinus and of the measures of the
cities against us.

Then did the evidences of the universal zeal and piety of the Christians become
manifest to all the heathen.

14 For they alone in the 14 midst of such ills showed their sympathy and
humanity by their deeds. Every day some continued caring for and burying the
dead, for there were multitudes who had no one to care for them; others
collected in one place those who were afflicted by the famine, throughout the
entire city, and gave bread to them all; so that the thing became noised abroad
among all men, and they glorified the God of the Christians; and, convinced by
the facts themselves, confessed that they alone were truly pious and religious.

15 After these things were thus done, God, the great and celestial defender of
the Christians, having revealed in the events which have been described his
anger and indignation at all men for the great evils which they had brought upon
us, restored to us the bright and gracious sunlight of his providence in our
behalf; so that in the deepest darkness a light of peace shone most wonderfully
upon us from him, and made it manifest to all that God himself has always been
the ruler of our affairs. From time to time indeed he chastens his people and
corrects them by his visitations, but again after sufficient chastisement he
shows mercy and favor to those who hope in him.

Chapter IX. The Victory of the God-Beloved Emperors.39

1 Thus when Constantine, whom we have already mentioned40 as an emperor, born of
an emperor, a pious son of a most pious and prudent father, and Licinius, second
to him,41 -two God-beloved emperors, honored alike for their intelligence and
their piety,-being stirred up against the two most impious tyrants by God, the
absolute Ruler and Saviour of all, engaged in formal war against them, with God
as their ally, Maxentius42 was defeated at Rome by Constantine in a remarkable
manner, and the tyrant of the East43 did not long survive him, but met a most
shameful death at the hand of Licinius, who had not yet become insane.44

2 Constantine, who was the superior both in dignity and imperial rank,45 first
took compassion upon those who were oppressed at Rome, and having invoked in
prayer the God of heaven, and his Word, and Jesus Christ himself, the Saviour of
all, as his aid, advanced with his Whole army,46 proposing to restore to the
Romans their ancestral liberty.

3 But Maxentius, putting confidence rather in the arts of sorcery than in the
devotion of his subjects, did not dare to go forth beyond the gates of the city,
but fortified every place and district and town which was enslaved by him, in
the neighborhood of Rome and in all Italy, with an immense multitude of troops
and with innumerable bands of soldiers. But the emperor, relying upon the
assistance of God, attacked the first, second, and third army of the tyrant, and
conquered them all; and having advanced through the greater part of Italy, was
already very near Rome.

4 Then, that he might not be compelled to wage war with the Romans for the sake
of the tyrant, God himself drew the latter, as if bound in chains, some distance
without the gates, and confirmed those threats against the impious which had
been anciently inscribed in sacred books,-disbelieved, indeed, by most as a
myth, but believed by the faithful,-confirmed them, in a word, by the deed
itself to all, both believers and unbelievers, that saw the wonder with their
eyes.

5 Thus, as in the time of Moses himself and of the ancient God-beloved race of
Hebrews, "he cast Pharaoh's chariots and host into the sea, and overwhelmed his
chosen charioteers in the Red Sea, and covered them with the flood,"47 in the
same way Maxentius also with his soldiers and body-guards "went down into the
depths like a stone,"48 when he fled before the power of God which was with
Constantine, and passed through the river which lay in his way, over which he
had formed a bridge with boats, and thus prepared the means of his own
destruction.

6 In regard to him one might say, "he digged a pit and opened it and fell into
the hole which he had made; his labor shall turn upon his own head, and his
unrighteousness shall fall upon his own crown."49

7 Thus, then, the bridge over the river being broken, the passageway settled
down, and immediately the boats with the men disappeared in the depths, and that
most impious one himself first of all, then the shield-bearers who were with
him, as the divine oracles foretold, "sank like lead in the mighty waters";50 so
that those who obtained the victory from God, if not in words, at least in
deeds, like Moses, the great servant of God, and those who were with him,
fittingly sang as they had sung against the impious tyrant of old, saying, "Let
us sing unto the Lord, for he hath gloriously glorified himself; horse and rider
hath he thrown into the sea; a helper and a protector hath he become for my
salvation;"51 and "Who is like unto thee, O Lord; among the gods, who is like
unto thee glorious in holiness,52 marvelous in glory, doing wonders."53

8 These and the like praises Constantine, by his very deeds, sang to God, the
universal Ruler, and Author of his victory, as he entered Rome in triumph.

9 Immediately all the members of the senate and the other most celebrated men,
with the whole Roman people, together with children and women, received him as
their deliverer, their saviour, and their benefactor, with shining eyes and with
their whole souls, with shouts of gladness and unbounded joy.

10 But he, as one possessed of inborn piety toward God, did not exult in the
shouts, nor was he elated by the praises; but perceiving that his aid was from
God, he immediately commanded that a trophy of the Saviour's passion be put in
the hand of his own statue.

11 And when he had placed it, with the saving sign of the cross in its right
hand, in the most public place in Rome, he commanded that the following
inscription should be engraved upon it in the Roman tongue: "By this salutary
sign, the true proof of bravery, I have saved and freed your city from the yoke
of the tyrant and moreover, having set at liberty both the senate and the people
of Rome, I have restored them to their ancient distinction and splendor."54

12 And after this both Constantine himself and with him the Emperor Licinius,
who had not yet been seized by that madness into which he later fell,55 praising
God as the author of all their blessings, with one will and mind drew up a full
and most complete decree in behalf of the Christians,56 and sent an account of
the wonderful things done for them by God, and of the victory over the tyrant,
together with a copy of the decree itself, to Maximinus, who still ruled over
the nations of the East and pretended friendship toward them.

13 But he, like a tyrant, was greatly pained by what he learned; but not wishing
to seem to yield to others, nor, on the other hand, to suppress that which was
commanded, for fear of those who enjoined it, as if on his own authority, he
addressed, under compulsion, to the governors under him this first communication
in behalf of the Christians,57 falsely inventing things against himself which
had never been done by him.

Copy of a translation of the epistle of the tyrant Maximinus.

14 "Jovius Maximinus Augustus to Sabinus.58 am confident that it is manifest
both to thy firmness and to all men that our masters Diocletian and Maximianus,
our fathers, when they saw almost all men abandoning the worship of the gods and
attaching themselves to the party of the Christians, rightly decreed that all
who gave up the worship of those same immortal gods should be recalled by open
chastisement and punishment to the worship of the gods.

15 But when I first came to the East under favorable auspices and learned that
in some places a great many men who were able to render public service had been
banished by the judges for the above-mentioned cause, I gave command to each of
the judges that henceforth none of them should treat the provincials with
severity, but that they should rather recall them to the worship of the gods by
flattery and exhortations.59

16 Then when, in accordance with my command, these orders were obeyed by the
judges, it came to pass that none of those who lived in the districts of the
East were banished or insulted, but that they were rather brought back to the
worship of the gods by the fact that no severity was employed toward them.

17 But afterwards, when I went up last year60 under good auspices to Nicomedia
and sojourned there, citizens of the same city came to me with the images of the
gods, earnestly entreating that such a people should by no means be permitted to
dwell in their country.61

18 But when I learned that many men of the same religion dwelt in those regions,
I replied that I gladly thanked them for their request, but that I perceived
that it was not proffered by all, and that if, therefore, there were any that
persevered in the same superstition, each one had the privilege of doing as he
pleased, even if he wished to recognize the worship of the gods.62

19 Nevertheless, I considered it necessary to give a friendly answer to the
inhabitants of Nicomedia and to the other cities which had so earnestly
presented to me the same petition, namely, that no Christians should dwell in
their cities,-both because this same course had been pursued by all the ancient
emperors, and also because it was pleasing to the gods, through whom all men and
the government of the state itself endure,-and to confirm the request which they
presented in behalf of the worship of their deity.

20 Therefore, although before this time, special letters have been sent to thy
devotedness, and commands have likewise been given that no harsh measures should
be taken against those provincials who desire to follow such a course, but that
they should be treated mildly and moderately,-nevertheless, in order that they
may not suffer insults or extortions63 from the beneficiaries,64 or from any
others, I have thought meet to remind thy firmness in this epistle65 also that
thou shouldst lead our provincials rather by flatteries and exhortations to
recognize the care of the gods.

21 Hence, if any one of his own choice should decide to adopt the worship of the
gods, it is fitting that he should be welcomed, but if any should wish to follow
their own religion, do thou leave it in their power.

22 Wherefore it behooves thy devotedness to observe that which is committed to
thee, and to see that power is given to no one to oppress our provincials with
insults and extortions,66 since, as already written, it is fitting to recall our
provincials to the worship of the gods rather by exhortations and flatteries.
But, in order that this command of ours may come to the knowledge of all our
provincials, it is incumbent upon thee to proclaim that which has been enjoined,
in an edict issued by thyself."

23 Since he was forced to do this by necessity and did not give the command by
his own will, he was not regarded by any one as sincere or trustworthy, because
he had already shown his unstable and deceitful disposition after his former
similar concession.

24 None of our people, therefore, ventured to hold meetings or even to appear in
public, because his communication did not cover this, but only commanded to
guard against doing us any injury, and did not give orders that we should hold
meetings or build churches or perform any of our customary acts.

25 And yet Constantine and Licinius, the advocates of peace and piety, had
written him to permit this, and had granted it to all their subjects by edicts
and ordinances.67 But this most impious man did not choose to yield in this
matter until, being driven by the divine judgment, he was at last compelled to
do it against his will.

Chapter X. The Overthrow of the Tyrants and the Words, Which They Uttered Before
Their Death.68

1 The circumstances which drove him to this course were the following. Being no
longer able to sustain the magnitude of the government which had been
undeservedly committed to him, in consequence of his want of prudence and
imperial understanding, he managed affairs in a base manner, and with his mind
unreasonably exalted in all things with boastful pride, even toward his
colleagues in the empire who were in every respect his superiors, in birth, in
training, in education, in worth and intelligence, and, greatest of all, in
temperance and piety toward the true God, he began to venture to act audaciously
and to arrogate to himself the first rank.69

2 Becoming mad in his folly, he broke the treaties which he had made with
Licinius70 and undertook an implacable war. Then in a brief time he threw all
things into confusion, and stirred up every city, and having collected his
entire force, comprising an immense number of soldiers, he went forth to battle
with him, elated by his hopes in demons, whom he supposed to be gods, and by the
number of his soldiers.

3 And when he joined battle71 he was deprived of the oversight of God, and the
victory was given to Licinius,72 who was then ruling, by the one and only God of
all.

4 First, the army in which he trusted was destroyed, and as all his guards
abandoned him and left him alone, and fled to the victor, he secretly divested
himself as quickly as possible of the imperial garments, which did not fitly
belong to him, and in a cowardly and ignoble and unmanly way mingled with the
crowd, and then fled, concealing himself in fields and villages.73 But though he
was so careful for his safety, he scarcely escaped the hands of his enemies,
revealing by his deeds that the divine oracles are faithful and true,in which it
is said, "A king is not saved by a great force, and a giant shall not be saved
by the greatness of his strength; a horse is a vain thing for safety, nor shall
he be delivered by the greatness of his power.

5 Behold, the eyes of the Lord are upon them that fear him, upon them that hope
in his mercy, to deliver their souls from death."74

6 Thus the tyrant, covered with shame, went to his own country. And first, in
frantic rage, he slew many priests and prophets of the gods whom he had formerly
admired, and whose oracles had incited him to undertake the war, as sorcerers
and impostors, and besides all as betrayers of his safety. Then having given
glory to the God of the Christians and enacted a most full and complete
ordinance in behalf of their liberty,75 he was immediately seized with a mortal
disease, and no respite being granted him, departed this life.76 The law enacted
by him was as follows:

7 Copy of the edict of the tyrant in behalf of the Christians, translated from
the Roman tongue.

"The Emperor Caesar Caius Valerius Maximinus, Germanicus, Sarmaticus, Plus,
Felix, Invictus, Augustus. We believe it manifest that no one is ignorant, but
that every man who looks back over the past knows and is conscious that in every
way we care continually for the good of our provincials, and wish to furnish
them with those things which are of especial advantage to all, and for the
common benefit and profit, and whatever contributes to the public welfare and is
agreeable to the views of each.

8 When, therefore, before this, it became clear to our mind that under pretext
of the command of our parents, the most divine Diocletian and Maximianus, which
enjoined that the meetings of the Christians should be abolished, many
extortions77 and spoliations had been practiced by officials; and that those
evils were continually increasing, to the detriment of our provincials toward
whom we are especially anxious to exercise proper care, and that their
possessions were in consequence perishing, letters were sent last year78 to the
governors of each province, in which we decreed that, if any one wished to
follow such a practice or to observe this same religion, he should be permitted
without hindrance to pursue his purpose and should be impeded and prevented by
no one, and that all should have liberty to do without any fear or suspicion
that which each preferred.

9 But even now we cannot help perceiving that some of the judges have mistaken
our commands, and have given our people reason to doubt the meaning of our
ordinances, and have caused them to proceed too reluctantly to the observance of
those religious rites which are pleasing to them.

10 In order, therefore, that in the future every suspicion of fearful doubt may
be taken away, we have commanded that this decree be published, so that it may
be clear to all that whoever wishes to embrace this sect and religion is
permitted to do so by virtue of this grant of ours; and that each one, as he
wishes or as is pleasing to him, is permitted to practice this religion which he
has chosen to observe according to his custom. It is also granted them to build
Lord's houses.

11 But that this grant of ours may be the greater, we have thought good to
decree also that if any houses and lands before this time rightfully belonged to
the Christians, and by the command of our parents fell into the treasury, or
were confiscated by any city,-whether they have been sold or presented to any
one as a gift,-that all these should be restored to their original possessors,
the Christians, in order that in this also every one may have knowledge of our
piety and care."

12 These are the words of the tyrant which were published not quite a year after
the decrees against the Christians engraved by him on pillars.79 And by him to
whom a little before we seemed impious wretches and atheists and destroyers of
all life, so that we were not permitted to dwell in any city nor even in country
or desert,-by him decrees and ordinances were issued in behalf of the
Christians, and they who recently had been destroyed by fire and sword, by wild
beasts and birds of prey, in the presence of the tyrant himself, and had
suffered every species of torture and punishment, and most miserable deaths as
atheists and impious wretches, were now acknowledged by him as possessors of
religion and were permitted to build churches;and the tyrant himself bore
witness and confessed that they had some rights.

13 And having made such confessions, as if he had received some benefit on
account of them, he suffered perhaps less than he ought to have suffered, and
being smitten by a sudden scourge of God, he perished in the second campaign of
the war.

14 But his end was not like that of military chieftains who, while fighting
bravely in battle for virtue and friends, often boldly encounter a glorious
death; for like an impious enemy of God, while his army was still drawn up in
the field, remaining at home and concealing himself, he suffered the punishment
which he deserved. For he was smitten with a sudden scourge of God in his whole
body, and harassed by terrible pains and torments, he fell prostrate on the
ground, wasted by hunger, while all his flesh was dissolved by an invisible and
God-sent fire, so that the whole appearance of his frame was changed, and there
was left only a kind of image wasted away by length of time to a skeleton of dry
bones; so that those who were present could think of his body as nothing else
than the tomb of his soul, which was buried in a body already dead and
completely melted away.

15 And as the heat still more violently consumed him in the depths of his
marrow, his eyes burst forth, and falling from their sockets left him blind.
Thereupon still breathing and making free confession to the Lord, he invoked
death, and at last, after acknowledging that he justly suffered these things on
account of his violence against Christ, he gave up the ghost.

Chapter XI. The Final Destruction of the Enemies of Religion.

1 Thus when Maximinus, who alone had remained of the enemies of religion80 and
had appeared the worst of them all, was put out of the way, the renovation of
the churches from their foundations was begun by the grace of God the Ruler of
all, and the word of Christ. shining unto the glory of the God of the universe,
obtained greater freedom than before, while the impious enemies of religion were
covered with extremest shame and dishonor.

2 For Maximinus himself, being first pronounced by the emperors a common enemy,
was declared by public proclamations to be a most impious, execrable, and
God-hating tyrant. And of the portraits which had been set up in every city in
honor of him or of his children, some were thrown down from their places to the
ground, and torn in pieces; while the faces of others were obliterated by
daubing them with black paint. And the statues which had been erected to his
honor were likewise overthrown and broken, and lay exposed to the laughter and
sport of those who wished to insult and abuse them.

3 Then also all the honors of the other enemies of religion were taken away, and
all those who sided with Maximinus were slain, especially those who had been
honored by him with high offices in reward for their flattery, and had behaved
insolently toward our doctrine.

4 Such an one was Peucetius,81 the dearest of his companions, who had been
honored and rewarded by him above all, who had been consul a second and third
time, and had been appointed by him chief minister;82 and Culcianus,83 who had
likewise advanced through every grade of office, and was also celebrated for his
numberless executions of Christians in Egypt;84 and besides these not a few
others, by whose agency especially the tyranny of Maximinus had been confirmed
and extended.

5 And Theotecnus85 also was summoned by justice which by no means overlooked his
deeds against the Christians. For when the statue had been set up by him at
Antioch,86 he appeared to be in the happiest state, and was already made a
governor by Maximinus.

6 But Licinius, coming down to the city of Antioch, made a search for impostors,
and tortured the prophets and priests of the newly erected statue, asking them
for what reason they practiced their deception. They, under the stress of
torture, were unable longer to conceal the matter, and declared that the whole
deceptive mystery had been devised by the art of Theotecnus. Therefore, after
meting out to all of them just judgment, he first put Theotecnus himself to
death, and then his confederates in the imposture, with the severest possible
tortures.

7 To all these were added also the children87 of Maximinus, whom he had already
made sharers in the imperial dignity, by placing their names on tablets and
statues. And the relatives of the tyrant, who before had been boastful and had
in their pride oppressed all men, suffered the same punishments with those who
have been already mentioned, as well as the extremest disgrace. For they had not
received instruction, neither did they know and understand the exhortation given
in the Holy Word:

8 "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons of men, in whom there is no
salvation; his spirit shall go forth and return to his earth; in that day all
their thoughts perish."88

9 The impious ones having been thus removed, the government was preserved firm
and undisputed for Constantine and Licinius, to whom it fittingly belonged.
They, having first of all cleansed the world of hostility to the Divine Being,
conscious of the benefits which he had conferred upon them, showed their love of
virtue and of God, and their piety and gratitude to the Deity, by their
ordinance in behalf of the Christians.89

1: On this work, see above, p. 29 sq. As remarked there, the shorter form of the
work, the translation of which follows, is found in most, but not all, of the
mss. of Eusebius' Church History, in some of them at the close of the tenth
book, in one of them in the middle of Bk. VIII. chap. 13, in the majority of
them between Bks. VIII. and IX. It is found neither in the Syraic version of the
History, nor in Rufinus. Musculus omits it in his Latin version, but; a
translation of it is given both by Christophorsonus and Valesius. The Germans
Stroth and Closs omit it; but Stigloher gives it at the close of his translation
of the History. The English translators insert it at the close of the eighth
book. The work is undoubtedly genuine, in this, its shorter, as well as in its
longer form, but was in all probability attached to the History, not by Eusebius
himself, but by some copyist, and therefore is not strictly entitled to a place
in a translation of the History. At the same time it has seemed best in the
present case to include it and to follow the majority of the editors in
inserting it at this point. In all the mss. except one the work begins abruptly
without a title, introduced only by the words kai tauta en tini antigrafw en tw
ogdow tomw euromen : "The following also we found in a certain copy in the
eighth book." In the Codex Castellanus, however, according to Reading (in his
edition of Valesius, Vol. I. p. 796, col. 2), the following title is inserted
immediately after the words just quoted: Eusebiou suggramma peri twn kat auton
marturhsantwn en tw oktaetei Dioklhtianou kai efechj Galeriou tou Maciminou
diwgmw . Heinichen consequently prints the first part of this title ( Eusebiou
... marturhsantwn ) at the head of the work in his edition, and is followed by
Burton and Migne. This title, however, can hardly be looked upon as original,
and I have preferred to employ rather the name by which the work is described at
its close, where we read Eusebiou tou Pamfilou peri twn en Palaistinh
marturhsantwn teloj

2: The Martyrs of Palestine, in all the mss. that contain it, is introduced with
these words. The passage which follows, down to the beginning of Chap. 1, is a
transcript, with a few slight variations, of Bk. VIII. chap. 2, §§4 and 5. For
notes upon it, see that chapter.

3: The month Xanthicus was the eighth month of the Macedonian year, and
corresponded to our April (see the table on p. 403, below). In Bk. VIII. chap.
2, Eusebius puts the beginning of the prosecution in the seventh month, Dystrus.
But the persecution really began, or at least the first edict was issued, and
the destruction of the churches in Nicomedia took place, in February. See Bk.
VIII. chap. 2, note 3.

4: Flavianus is not mentioned in Bk. VIII. chap. 2. In the Syriac version he is
named as the judge by whom Procopius was condemned (Cureton, p. 4). Nothing
further is known of him, so far as I am aware.

5: The account of Procopius was somewhat fuller in the longer recension of the
Martyrs of Palestine, as can be seen from the Syriac version (English
translation in Cureton, p. 3 sq.). There exists also a Latin translation of the
Acts of St. Procopius, which was evidently made from that longer recension, and
which is printed by Valesius and also by Cureton (p. 50 sq.), and in English by
Crusè in loco. We are told by the Syriac version that his family was from
Baishan. According to the Latin, he was a native of Aelia (Jerusalem), but
resided in Scythopolis (the Greek name of Baishan). With the Latin agrees the
Syriac version of these Acts, which is published by Assemani in his Acta SS.
Martt. Orient. et Occident. ed. 1748, Part II. p. 169 sq. (see Cureton, p. 52).
We learn from the longer account that he was a lector, interpreter, and exorcist
in the church, and that he was exceedingly ascetic in his manner of life. It is
clear from this paragraph that Procopius was put to death, not because he was a
Christian, but because he uttered words apparently treasonable in their import.
To call him a Christian martyr is therefore a misuse of terms. We cannot be sure
whether Procopius was arrested under the terms of the first or under the terms
of the second edict. If in consequence of the first, it may be that he was
suspected of complicity in the plot which Diocletian was endeavoring to crush
out, or that he had interfered with the imperial officers when they undertook to
execute the decree for the destruction of the church buildings. The fact that he
was commanded by the governor to sacrifice would lead us to think of the first,
rather than of the second edict (see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 6, note 3, and chap.
2, note 8). Still, it must be admitted that very likely many irregularities
occurred in the methods by which the decrees were executed in the province, and
the command to sacrifice can, therefore, not be claimed as proving that he was
not arrested under the terms of the second edict; and in fact, the mention of
imprisonment as the punishment which he had to expect would lead us to think of
the second edict as at least the immediate occasion of his arrest. In any case,
there is no reason to suppose that his arrest would have resulted in his death
had he not been rash in his speech.

6: ouk agaqon polukoiranih eij koiranoj estw, eij basileuj .

7: The majority of the mss. read "eighth," which according to Eusebius'
customary mode of reckoning the Macedonian months is incorrect. For, as Valesius
remarks, he always synchronizes the Macedonian with the Roman months, as was
commonly done in his time. But the seventh before the Ides of June is not the
eighth, but the seventh of June (or Desius). In fact, a few good mss. read
"seventh" instead of "eighth," and I have followed Burton, Schwegler, and
Heinichen in adopting that reading.

8: Desius was the tenth month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded to our
June (see the table on p. 403, below).

9: On the Roman method of reckoning the days of the month, see below, p. 402.

10: We may gather from §5, below, that the sufferings to which Eusebius refers
in such general terms in this and the following paragraphs took place late in
the year 303. In fact, from the Syriac version of the longer recension (Cureton,
p. 4) we learn that the tortures inflicted upon Alphaeus and Zacchaeus were, in
consequence of the third edict, issued at the approach of the emperor's
vicennalia, and intended rather as a step toward amnesty than as a sharpening of
the persecution (see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 5, note 8). This leads us to
conclude that all the tortures mentioned in these paragraphs had the same
occasion, and this explains the eagerness of the judges to set the prisoners
free, even if they had not sacrificed, so long as they might be made to appear
to have done so, and thus the law not be openly violated. Alphaeus and Zacchaeus
alone suffered death, as we are told in §5, and they evidently on purely
political grounds (see note 10).

11: We learn from the Syriac version that Zacchaeus was a deacon of the church
of Gadara, and that Alphaeus belonged to a noble family of the city of
Eleutheropolis, and was a reader and exorcist in the church of Caesarea.

12: See above, Bk. IV. chap. 16, note 9.

13: The month Dius was the third month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded
with our November (see below, p. 403).

14: monon ena Qeon kai xeiston basilea 'lhsoun omologhsantej . Basileuj was the
technical term for emperor, and it is plain enough from this passage that these
two men, like Procopius, were beheaded because they were regarded as guilty of
treason, not because of their religious faith. The instances given in this
chapter are very significant, for they reveal the nature of the persecution
during its earlier months, and throw a clear light back upon the motives which
had led Diocletian to take the step against the Christians which he did.

15: We learn from the Syriac version that the death of Romanus occurred on the
same day as that of Alphaeus and Zacchaeus. His arrest, therefore, must have
taken place some time before, according to §4, below. In fact, we see from the
present paragraph that his arrest took place in connection with the destruction
of the churches; that is, at the time of the execution of the first edict in
Antioch. We should naturally think that the edict would be speedily published in
so important a city, and hence can hardly suppose the arrest of Romanus to have
occurred later than the spring of 303. He therefore lay in prison a number of
months (according to §4, below, a "very long time," pleiston xronon ). Mason is
clearly in error in putting his arrest in November, and his death at the time of
the vicennalia, in December. It is evident from the Syriac version that the
order for the release of prisoners, to which the so-called third edict was
appended, preceded the vicennalia by some weeks, although issued in view of the
great anniversary which was so near at hand. It is quite possible that the
decree was sent out some weeks beforehand, in order that time might be given to
induce, the Christians to sacrifice, and thus enjoy release at the same time
with the others.

16: There is no implication here that these persons were commanded, or even
asked, to sacrifice. They seem, in their dread of what might come upon them,
when they saw the churches demolished, to have hastened of their own accord to
sacrifice to the idols, and thus disarm all possible suspicion.

17: As Mason remarks, to punish Romanus with death for dissuad-ing the
Christians from sacrificing was entirely illegal, as no imperial edict requiring
them to sacrifice had yet been issued, and therefore no law was broken in
exhorting them not to do so. At the same time, that he should be arrested as a
church officer was, under the terms of the second edict, legal, and, in fact,
necessary; and that the judge should incline to be very severe in the present
case, with the emperor so near at hand, was quite natural. That death, however,
was not yet made the penalty of Christian confession is plain enough from the
fact that, when the emperor was appealed to, as we learn from the Syriac
version, he remanded Romanus to prison, thus inflicting upon him the legal
punishment, according to the terms of the second edict. Upon the case of
Romanus, see Mason, p. 188 sq.

18: Valesius assumes that this was Galerius, and Mason does the same. In the
Syriac version, however, he is directly called Diocletian; but on the other
hand, in the Syriac acts published by Asse-mani (according to Cureton, p. 55),
he is called "Maximinus, the son-in-law of Diocletian"; i.e. Galerius, who was
known as Maximianus (of which Maximinus, in the present case, is evidently only
a variant form). The emperor's conduct in the present case is much more in
accord with Galerius' character, as known to us, than with the character of
Diocletian; and moreover, it is easier to suppose that the name of Maximinus was
later changed into that of Diocletian, by whose name the whole persecution was
known, than that the greater name was changed into the less. I am therefore
convinced that the reference in the present case is to Galerius, not to
Diocletian.

19: See above, Bk. VIII. chap. 2, note 8.

20: See above, Bk. IV. chap. 16, note 9, and Bk. VIII. chap. 10, note 5.

21: Of Urbanus governor of Palestine, we know only what is told us in the
present work (he is mentioned in this passage and in chaps. 4, 7, and 8, below)
and in the Syriac version. From the latter we learn that he succeeded Flavianus
in the second year of the persecution (304), and that he was deposed by
Maximinus in the fifth year (see also chap. 8, §7, below), and miserably
executed.

22: This is the famous fourth edict of Diocletian, which was issued in the year
304. It marks a stupendous change of method; in fact, Christianity as such is
made, for the first time since the toleration edict of Gallienus, a religio
illicita, whose profession is punishable by death. The general persecution, in
the full sense, begins with the publication of this edict. Hitherto persecution
had been directed only against supposed political offenders and church officers.
The edict is a complete stultification of Diocletian's principles as revealed in
the first three edicts, and shows a lamentable lack of the wisdom which had
dictated those measures. Mason has performed an immense service in proving (to
my opinion conclusively) that this brutal edict, senseless in its very severity,
was not issued by Diocletian, but by Maximian, while Diocletian was quite
incapacitated by illness for the performance of any public duties. Mason's
arguments cannot be reproduced here; they are given at length on p. 212 sq. of
his work. He remarks at the close of the discussion: "Diocletian, though he
might have wished Christianity safely abolished, feared the growing power of the
Church, and dared not persecute (till he was forced), lest he should rouse her
from her passivity. But this Fourth Edict was nothing more nor less than a loud
alarum to muster the army of the Church: as the centurions called over their
lists, it taught her the statistics of her numbers, down to the last child: it
proved to her that her troops could endure all the hardships of the campaign: it
ranged her generals in the exact order of merit. Diocletian, by an exquisite
refinement of thought, while he did not neglect the salutary fear which strong
penalties might inspire in the Christians, knew well enough that though he might
torture every believer in the world into sacrificing, yet Christianity was not
killed: he knew that men were Christians again afterwards as well as before:
could he have seen deeper yet, he would have known that the utter humiliation of
a fall before men and angels converted many a hard and worldly prelate into a
broken.hearted saint: and so he rested his hopes, not merely on the punishment
of individuals, but on his three great measures for crushing the corporate
life,-the destruction of the churches, the Scriptures, and the clergy. But this
Fourth Edict evidently returns with crass dullness and brutal complacency to the
thought that if half the church were racked till they poured the libations, and
the other half burned or butchered, Paganism would reign alone forever more, and
that the means were as eminently desirable as the end. Lastly, Diocletian had
anxiously avoided all that could rouse fanatic zeal. The first result of the
Fourth Edict was to rouse it."

23: Agapius, as we learn from chap. 6, below, survived his contest with the wild
beasts at this time, and was thrown into prison, where he remained until the
fourth year of the persecution, when he was again brought into the arena in the
presence of the tyrant Maximinus, and was finally thrown into the sea.

24: h kaq hmaj Qekla

25: A city of Palestine, lying northwest of Jerusalem, and identical with the
Lydda of Acts ix. 32 sq. For many centuries the seat of a bishop, and still
prominent in the time of the crusades. The persons referred to in this paragraph
are to be distinguished from others of the same names mentioned elsewhere.

26: To be distinguished from the Agapius mentioned earlier in the chapter, as is
clear from the date of his death, given in this paragraph.

27: Dystrus was the seventh month of the Macedonian year, corresponding to our
March. See the table on p. 403, below.

28: Diocletian and Maximian abdicated on May 1, 305. See above, Bk. VIII. chap.
13, note 16.

29: When Maxentius usurped the purple in Rome, in the year 306. See above, Bk.
VIII. chap. 13, note 21.

30: On Maximinus and his attitude toward the Christians, see above, Bk. VIII.
chap. 14, note 2. He was made a Caesar at the time of the abdication of
Diocletian and Maximian, May 1, 305, and Egypt and Syria were placed under his
supervision.

31: Apphianus is called, in the Syriac version, Epiphanius. We know him only
from this account of Eusebius. For some remarks upon his martyrdom, see above,
p. 8 sq.

32: The modern Beirût. A celebrated school of literature and law flourished
there for a number of centuries.

33: The mss., according to Valesius, are somewhat at variance in the spelling of
this name, and the place is perhaps to be identified with Araxa, a city of some
importance in northwestern Lycia.

34: This was simply a republication in its fullness of Maximian's fourth edict,
which was referred to in chap. 3 (see note 2 on that chapter). Eusebius does not
mean to say that this was the first time that such an edict was published, but
that this was the first edict of Mxirninus, the newly appointed Caesar.

35: It is perhaps not necessary to doubt that an earthquake took place at this
particular time. Nor is it surprising that under the circumstances the
Christians saw a miracle in a natural phenomenon.

36: Xanthicus was the eighth month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded to
our April (see table on p. 403, below). The martyrdom of Apphianus must have
taken place in 306, not 305; for according to the direct testimony of Lactantius
( de Mort. pers. chap. 19; the statement is unaccountably omitted in the English
translation given in the Ante-Nicene Fathers ), Maximinus did not become Caesr
until May 1, 305; while, according to the present chapter, Apphianus suffered
martyrdom after Maximinus had been raised to that position. Eusebius himself
puts the abdication of the old emperors and the appointment of the new Caesars
early in April or late in March (see above, chap. 3, §5, and the Syriac version
of the Martyrs, p. 12), and with him agree other early authorities. But it is
more difficult to doubt the accuracy of Lactantius' dates than to suppose the
others mistaken, and hence May 1st is commonly accepted by historians as the day
of abdication. About the year there can be no question; for Lactantius' account
of Diocletian's movements during the previous year exhibits a very exact
knowledge of the course of events, and its accuracy cannot be doubted. (For a
fuller discussion of the date of the abdication, see Tillemont's Hist. des Emp.,
2d ed., IV. p. 609.) But even if it were admitted that the abdication took place
four of five weeks earlier (according to Eusebius' own statement, it did not at
any rate occur before the twenty-fourth of March: see chap. 3, above, and the
Syriac version, p. 12), it would be impossible to put Apphianus' death on the
second of April, for this would not give time for all that must intervene
between the day of his appointment and the republication and execution of the
persecuting edicts. In fact, it is plain enough from the present chapter that
Apphianus did not suffer until some time after the accession of Maximinus, and
therefore not until the following year. Eusebius, as can be seen from the first
paragraph of this work on the martyrs, reckoned the beginning of the persecution
in Palestine not with the issue of the first edict in Nicomedia on Feb. 24, 303,
but with the month of April of that same year. Apphianus' death therefore took
place at the very close of the third year of the persecution, according to this
reckoning.

37: i.e. Friday, the old Jewish term being still retained and widely used,
although with the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the
week it had entirely lost its meaning. Upon the prevalence of the word among the
Fathers as a designation of Friday, see Suicer's Thesaurus, s.v. paraskeuh and
nhsteia . The day of Christ's crucifixion was called megalh paraskeuh , the
"great preparation."

38: The martyrdom of Ulpian is omitted in the Syriac version. It was apparently
a later addition, made when the abridgment of the longer version was produced;
and this perhaps accounts for the brevity of the notice and the words of
explanation with which the mention of him is concluded.

39: Called Alosis in the Syriac version.

40: The month Dius was the third month of the Macedonian year, and corresponded
to our November (see table on p. 403, below).

41: prosabbatou hmera , i.e. on Friday, prosabbatoj being sometimes used among
the Jews as a designation of that day, which was more commonly called paraskeuh
42: See above, chap. 3, §1.

43: Cf. Matt. x. 18.

44: i.e April 2, 307. Eusebius is inconsistent with himself in this case. In
chap. 3, above, he states that Apphianus suffered on April 2, in the third year
of the persecution. But as shown in the note on that passage, Apphianus suffered
in April, 306, and therefore, in that case, Eusebius reckons the first year of
the persecution as beginning after the second of April. But in the present case
he reckons it as beginning before the second of April, and the latter date as
falling early in a new year of the persecution. That the martyrdom recorded in
the present case actually took place in 307, and not in 308, as it must have
done if Eusebius were consistent with himself, is proved, first, by the fact
that, in entering upon this new chapter, he says, "the persecution having
continued to the fifth year," implying thereby that the event which he is about
to relate took place at the beginning, not at the end, of the fifth year; and
secondly, by the fact that later on, in this same chapter, while still relating
the events of the fifth year, he recounts martyrdoms as taking place in the
month of November (Dius). This is conclusive, for November of the fifth year can
be only November, 307, and hence the April mentioned in the present paragraph
can be only April of the same year. Evidently Eusebius did not reckon the
beginning of the persecution in Palestine from a fixed day, but rather from the
month Xanthicus (April). As a consequence, the inconsistency into which he has
fallen is not very strange; the second day of April might easily be reckoned
either as one of the closing days of a year, or as the beginning of the ensuing
year. In the present case, he evidently forgot that he had previously used the
former reckoning.

45: i.e. on Easter Sunday. In the Syriac version, the events recorded in the
present chapter are put on a Sunday; but that it was Easter is not stated.

46: i.e. November fifth.

47: On Silvanus, who afterward became bishop of Gaza, see above, Bk. VIII. chap.
13.

48: Or "frankness"; literally, "freedom" ( eleuqeria ).

49: On Parnphilus, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 40.

50: The death of Maximinus is related in Bk. IX. chap. 10. Nothing further is
said in regard to Urbanus; but the fate of his successor Firmilianus is recorded
in chap. 11, below. It is quite possible that Eusebius, in the present case, is
referring to a more detailed statement of the fates of the various persecutors,
which was to form the second part of the present work; and it is possible, still
further, that the appendix printed at the close of the eighth book is a fragment
of this second part, as suggested by Lightfoot (see above, p. 29).

51: Of Firmilianus, the successor of Urbanus, we know only what is told us here
and in chaps. 9 and 11, below. In the latter chapter, §31, his execution is
recorded.

52: omoeqnwn .

53: i.e. July 25 (a.d. 308). See the table on p. 403, below.

54: This is the so-called Fifth Edict, and was issued (according to the Passio
S. Theodori ) by Galerius and Maximinus, but was evidently inspired by Maximinus
himself. Mason speaks of it as follows: "It would be inaccurate to say that this
Fifth Edict (if so we may call it) was worse than any of the foregoing. But
there is in it a thin bitterness, a venomous spitefulness, which may be noticed
as characteristic of all the later part of the persecution. This spitefulness is
due to two main facts. The first was that Paganism was becoming conscious of
defeat; the Church had not yielded a single point. The second fact was that the
Church had no longer to deal with the sensible, statesmanlike hostility of
Diocletian,-not even with the bluff bloodiness of Maximian. Galerius himself was
now, except in name, no longer persecutor-in-chief. He was content to follow the
lead of a man who was in all ways even worse than himself. Galerius was indeed
an Evil Beast; his nephew was more like the Crooked Serpent. The artful sour
spirit of Maximin employed itself to invent, not larger measures of solid policy
against his feared and hated foes, but petty tricks to annoy and sting them."
For a fuller discussion of the edict, see Mason, p. 284 sq. It must have been
published in the autumn of the year 308, for the martyrdom of Paul, recorded in
the previous chapter. took place in July of that year, and some little time
seems to have elapsed between that event and the present. On the other hand, the
martyrdoms mentioned below, in §5, took place in November of this same year, so
that we can fix the date of the edict within narrow limits.

55: o tou twn stratopedwn arxein epitetagmenoj . Many regard this officer as the
praetorian prefect. But we should naturally expect so high an official to be
mentioned before the governors ( hgemonej 56: Or "town clerks," taboularioi .

57: Literally, " its athletes" ( authj ). the antecedent of the pronoun being
"the divine power."

58: i.e. Nov. 13, 308.

59: Macuj

60: This is a glaring instance of uncritical credulity on Eusebius' part, and
yet even Crusè can say: "Perhaps some might smile at the supposed credulity of
our author, but the miracle in this account was not greater than the malignity,
and if man can perform miracles of vice, we can scarcely wonder if Providence
should present, at least, miracles of admonition." Cureton more sensibly
remarks: "This, which doubtless was produced by natural causes, seemed
miraculous to Eusebius, more especially if he looked upon it as fulfilling a
prophecy of our Lord-Luke xix. 40: `I tell you, that if these should hold their
peace, the stones would immediately cry out. 0' See also Hab. ii. 11."

61: i.e. Dec. 14, 308 (see the tables on p. 403, below).

62: The majority of the codices read Promoj , but as Valesius remarks, such a
proper name is quite unknown in Greek, and the form probably arose from a
confusion of b and m , which in ancient mss. were written alike. Two of our
existing codices read Proboj , and this has been adopted by Zimmermann and
Heinichen, whom I have followed in the text.

63: i.e. Jan. 11, 309.

64: In the Syriac version "Absalom."

65: Of this village we know nothing, but Eleutheropolis (originally Bethozabris)
was an important place lying some forty miles southwest of Jerusalem.

66: einai dokwn . Eusebius did not wish to admit that he was a bishop in a true
sense.

67: Rom. x. 2.

68: On Pamphilus, see above, Bk. VII. chap. 32, note 40.

69: On Eusebius' Life of Pamphilus, see above, p. 28 sq.

70: i.e. Jerusalem.

71: thj 'Iamnitwn polewj . Jamna, or Jamnia, was a town of Judea, lying west of
Jerusalem, near the sea.

72: i.e Feb. 19 (see the table on p. 403, below). We learn from chap. 7, §§3-5,
that Pamphilus was thrown into prison in the fifth year of the persecution and
as late as November of that year, i.e. between November, 307, and April, 308.
Since he had lain two whole years in prison (according to §5, above), the date
referred to in the present passage must be February of the year 310. The
martyrdom of Pamphilus is commonly, for aught I know to the contrary, uniformly
put in the year 309, as the seventh year of the persecution is nearly
synchronous with that year. But that the common date is a mistake is plain
enough from the present chapter.

73: prohgoroj , literally "advocate," or "defender."

74: Gal. iv. 26.

75: Heb. xii. 22. Upon Eusebius' view of the authorship of the Epistle to the
Hebrews, see above, Bk. III. chap. 25, note 1.

76: The reference is still to the same slave of Pamphilus whose tortures
Eusebius has just been describing, as we learn from the Syriac version, where
the slave's name is given at the beginning of the account.

77: I read peri auton with Zimmermann, Heinichen, Burton, and Migne. The mss.
all have peri autouj , which can hardly have stood in the original.

78: The common mode of punishment inflicted on slaves.

79: Of the so-called country of Magganaia I know nothing. The Syriac version
reads Batanea, which was a district of country lying to the northeast of
Palestine, and it may be that Manganea was another name for the same region.

80: i.e. March 5, 310.

81: It was the universal custom in ancient times for a city to have its special
tutelary divinity, to which it looked for protection and to which it paid
especial honor. The name of the Caesarean deity is unknown to us.

82: logikwn .

83: "It was a punishment among the Romans that freemen should be condemned to
take care of the emperor's horses or camels, and to perform other personal
offices of that kind" (Valesius). For fuller particulars, see Valesius' note ad
locum. In the Acts of St. Marcellus (who was bishop of Rome) we are told that he
was set by Maximian to groom his horses in a church which the emperor had turned
into a stable.

84: alogou zwou .

85: Cf. Bk. VIII, chap. 2, §§2 and 3, and the note on that passage.

86: Phil. iv. 8.

87: On Peleus and Nilus, see above, 0Bk. VIII. chap. 13, note 8. Paleus is
called Paul in the Syriac version.

88: The name of this man is given as Elias in the Syriac version; but both he
and Patermuthius are called laymen.

89: On Silvanus, bishop of Gaza, see above, Bk. VIII. chap. 13, note 6.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 21: THE HISTORY OF THE MARTYRS IN PALESTINE
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: The History of the Martyrs in Palestine (1861). Translated
by William Cureton.

HISTORY OF THE MARTYRS IN PALESTINE, BY EUSEBIUS, BISHOP OF CAESAREA, DISCOVERED
IN A VERY ANTIENT SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT.

EDITED AND TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH BY WILLIAM CURETON, D.D., MEMBER OF THE
IMPERIAL INSTITUTE OF FRANCE.

WILLIAMS AND NORGATE:

14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON AND 20, SOUTH FREDERICK STREET,
EDINBURGH.

PARIS: C. BORRANI.

MDCCCLXI.

W. M. WATTS, CROWN COURT, TEMPLE BAR. THIS ACCOUNT OF MARTYRS FOR THE TRUTH OF
THE HOLY RELIGION OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST IS Dedicated to the Memory OF FRANCIS
EGERTON EARL OF ELLESMERE

K.G. IN PIOUS RECOGNITION OF MUCH AND LONG-CONTINUED KINDNESS AND IN GRATEFUL
REMEMBRANCE OF THE PRIVILEGE OF ENJOYING THE FRIENDSHIP OF ONE WHO SO EMINENTLY
ADORNED THE HIGH STATION TO WHICH HE WAS BORN BY HIS OWN PERSONAL VIRTUES AND
ADDED REAL DIGNITY TO THE RANK WHICH HE INHERITED BY THE ACQUIREMENTS OF A
SCHOLAR THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF A GENTLEMAN AND THE GRACES OF A CHRISTIAN.

PREFACE. THE manuscript from which this work of Eusebius has been at length
recovered, after the lapse of several centuries, is that wonderful volume of the
Nitrian Collection 1 now in the British Museum, whose most curious and
remarkable history I have already made known in the Preface to my edition of the
Festal Letters of St. Athanasius.2 It is not necessary, therefore, for me in
this place to give any further account of it than to state that it was
transcribed fourteen hundred and fifty years ago,--as early as the year of our
Lord four hundred and eleven. The several works contained in it are now all
printed, and thereby rescued from the chance of being lost for all future time.
The first--a Syriac translation of the Recognitions of St. Clement, which I once
intended to publish, and had transcribed the greater part of it for that
purpose--has been edited by Dr. P. de Lagarde, 3 to whom I |ii gave my copy. The
transcript was completed by him, and compared with another manuscript of the
same work, and afterward printed with that great care and accuracy which gives
so much value to all the Syriac texts which he has edited. The second treatise
in this manuscript is the book of Titus, Bishop of Bostra, or Bozra, in Arabia,
against the Manicheans. We are also indebted for the publication of this
important work to Dr. de Lagarde.4 The third is the book of Eusebius on the
Theophania, or Divine Manifestation of our Lord. The text of this was edited by
the late Dr. Lee,5 who also published an English translation of it,6 with
valuable notes and a preliminary dissertation. The last is this history of the
Martyrs of Palestine, also written by the same Author. In the eighth book of the
Ecclesiastical History, upon the occasion of his giving a short account of
certain Bishops and others, who sealed their testimony for their faith with
their blood, Eusebius stated his intention of writing, in a distinct treatise, a
narrative of the confession |iii of those Martyrs with whom he had himself been
acquainted. 7 Up to the time of the discovery of this Syriac copy, no such work
was known to exist in a separate form, either in Latin or Greek. There is indeed
a brief history of those contemporaries of Eusebius who suffered in the
persecution of the Christians in Palestine, found in several antient Greek
manuscripts, inserted as a part of it, and combined with the Ecclesiastical
History : but it does not occupy the same place in all the copies of that work.
In one it is placed after the middle of the thirteenth chapter of the eighth
book;8 in two9 at the end of the tenth book; and in several,10 at the end of the
eighth; while from two |iv others,11 as well as from the Latin version made by
Ruffinus, it is omitted altogether. There is no distinct title prefixed to it in
any copy but one, the Codex Castellani,12 where it bears the
inscription:--Eusebiou suggramma peri twn kat' auton marturhsantwn en twi
oktaetei Dioklhtianou kai efexhV Galeriou tou Maximinou diwgmou; but two copies,
the Mazarine and Medicean, have at the end--Eusebiou tou Pamfilou peri twn en
Palaistinhi marturhsantwn teloV.13 That this was the history of the martyrs who
were known to Eusebius which he had promised, has never been doubted by any one;
while, on the other hand, almost every one who has undertaken to write on the
subject has judged it to be but an abridgment of the original work which
formerly existed in a more extended form.14 The |v antient Latin copy of the
Acts of Procopius,15 the Acts of Pamphilus and his companions, as exhibited by
Simeon Metaphrastes,16 in much fuller detail than they are now found in the
Greek text of Eusebius, and the additional facts respecting other martyrs who
suffered in Palestine, supplied by the Greek Menaea and Menologia, were adduced
as evidence of the existence at one time of a more copious work, and as a proof
that the narrative inserted in the Ecclesiastical History was only an
abridgment. The correctness of this critical induction has been completely
established by the discovery of this copy of the work of Eusebius of Caesarea on
the Martyrs of Palestine, in the vernacular language of the country where the
events took place, and actually transcribed within about seventy years after the
death of the author.17

S. E. Assemani goes so far as to express his conviction that this history of the
sufferings of the martyrs in Palestine was originally composed in Syriac, a
language with which Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, was necessarily well
acquainted, |vi as being the vernacular speech of his own country and diocese.18
It is not at all improbable that Eusebius might made have use of the Syriac for
ordinary purposes, or, indeed, as a safer deposit for any memoranda which he
might wish to commit to writing than the Greek, during the time that the
persecution continued. Could this inference of S. E. Assemani be established, it
would give still additional interest and value to the work which I now publish.
I must, however, own that I cannot admit the supposition that this work was
originally written in the Syriac language. Indeed, it seems to me to be
sufficiently disproved by the fact, that the Syriac copy of such of the Acts of
Martyrs in Palestine as have been published by S. E. Assemani, while it agrees
completely in substance with this, is evidently a translation by another hand;
and that the variation and errors which occur in some of the proper names are of
such a kind as could only have arisen from confounding two similar Greek letters
of the writing at that period;19 and further, there are some obscure passages in
this Syriac, which obviously seem to be the result of a translator not fully
apprehending the meaning of the Greek passage before him.20

How long the entire Greek text of the original work continued to be read, we
have now no means of learning with any degree of certainty. It must have been in
existence in the time of Simeon Metaphrastes, in the tenth century, for he has
supplied many facts20 from it |vii which the abridged form of the Greek does not
contain, and has also given entire the long passage relating to Pamphilus and
his companions.21 Neither can there be any doubt of its having been in use at
the period when the Greek Menaea and Menologia were compiled.22 The fact that
many of the circumstances and events which it described had been inserted in the
abovementioned books, and that an abridgment, which, I cannot doubt, was made by
Eusebius himself, had also been incorporated into the Ecclesiastical. History,
seems to have led to the discontinuance of the transcription of the larger work,
and to have been mainly the cause of its being no longer found in the Greek in a
separate form. The preservation of this work in its complete state up to the
present time, in the Syriac, is chiefly due to the circumstance of its having
been transported, at a very early period, to the Syrian Monastery in the
solitude of the Nitrian Desert, where the dryness of the climate kept the vellum
from decay, and the idleness and ignorance of the monks saved the volume from
being worn out and destroyed by frequent use.

Independently of the great interest of the subject of which it treats, this work
of Eusebius has especial claims to consideration, on the ground of the author
having been himself an eyewitness of most of the events which he |viii
describes. There are some, indeed, at which he could not have have been present;
for instance, the Confession of Romanus, who suffered at Antioch on the same day
as Alphaeus and Zacchaeus did at Caesarea, where he was then residing. He has,
given a narrative of the sufferings of Romanus, in his history of the Martyrs of
Palestine, because he was a native of Palestine, and had also been a deacon and
exorcist in one of the villages of Caesarea; and Eusebius was anxious to claim
for his own country and diocese the honour of this man's confession. This may
perhaps be the reason why there are found two distinct accounts of the Acts of
Romanus in Syriac, as well as in Greek and Latin.

It is not my intention to enter into any discussion respecting the time of the
composition of this treatise, or that of the great Church History by Eusebius:
nor will I consider at any length the question of the abridgment of the account
of the Martyrs of Palestine inserted in most of the copies of the Ecclesiastical
History, or that of the different recensions of this latter work by the author
himself. 23 These are certainly very interesting subjects of literary and
historical inquiry; and doubtless this book will supply the critic with new
data, to enable him to elucidate and determine them in a more complete and
satisfactory manner than it has been hitherto possible for any one to do. These
matters I would rather leave to other scholars. All now have the same materials
as I have, and some may be possessed of other greater facilities and appliances,
as well as better capacities for the task. I |ix believe it to be my duty to
employ my own time and exertions in another way.

I will therefore content myself with briefly observing that this work of
Eusebius on the Martyrs of Palestine bears evidently upon it the stamp of being
a record of facts which were noted down at the time as they severally occurred,
and were afterwards revised and arranged in due order at a subsequent period,
when some events, which, in the earlier years of the Persecution, the author
thought it probable might happen, had actually taken place; and when other
occurrences of earlier date were no longer so fresh and vivid in the minds of
men as they had been when all were still living who had witnessed them.

I would observe, also, that it seems to be evident that this work, in which
Eusebius recounts the martyrdom of Pamphilus and his companions, was composed
before he wrote the fuller history of that noble Martyr, to which he refers in
the Abridgment; for no reference whatever is made to the existence of any such
history in this original and more copious narrative of the Martyrs of Palestine.
It must, therefore, have been composed before he wrote the Ecclesiastical
History, in which he several times adverts to the life of Pamphilus as having
been already completed. The first edition of the Ecclesiastical History does not
appear to have contained the history of the Martyrs of Palestine. This seems to
be the copy used by Ruffinus, who neither gives any such history, nor has the
passage in the thirteenth chapter of the eighth book which refers to it.

Indeed, it is evident from his own words that the abridgment must have been made
by Eusebius himself.24 When, |x therefore, he condensed the narrative for the
purpose of incorporating it into the subsequent editions of the Ecclesiastical
History, he also took that opportunity of supplying several facts which, either
from considerations of prudence, or from not having had knowledge of them at the
time when the work was originally composed, he had previously omitted; and also
ventured to speak more plainly of persons, because the altered condition of
circumstances after the accession of Constantine enabled him to do this without
any apprehension of danger. This, I think, will be obvious to those who will be
at the pains to compare the general narrative of the events as they are recorded
year by year, with the notes which I have added, even without having recourse to
fuller and more minute researches. The translation I have endeavoured to make as
faithful as I could without following the Syriac idiom so closely as to render
the English obscure. There are a very few passages in which I cannot feel quite
sure that I have obtained the precise meaning of the Syriac; but the obscurity
of these passages is certainly due to the Translator, who does not seem to have
fully understood the Greek text which he had before him. My English translation
of the long account of Pamphilus and his companions was printed before I read
either the Greek text printed by Papebrochius, or the Latin translation made by
Lipomannus from the same Greek, as it was preserved by Simeon Metaphrastes. The
comparison of all of these together will be a good means of testing both the
integrity of the transmission of the original Greek to the present day, and the
fidelity of the Syriac translation. In the notes, my chief object has been to
collect such observations as may tend especially to throw light upon |xi the
time of the composition of this work and of the Ecclesiastical History by
Eusebius, and serve to elucidate the text; but in order to keep them from
extending to too great a length, I have omitted all those matters which it
appeared to me an ordinarily well-informed scholar might be presumed to be
acquainted with.

[[Footnotes given numbers and moved to end]] 1. (a) British Museum, Additional
MS. No. 12,150.

2. (b) P. xv. The Festal Letters of Athanasius, discovered in an antient Syriac
version. 8vo. London, 1848.

3. (c) Clementis Romani Recognitiones Syriace. Paulus Antonius de Lagarde
edidit. 8vo, Lipsise, 1861.

4. (a) Titi Bostreni contra Manchaeos libri quatuor Syriace. Paulus Antonius de
Lagarde edidit. 8vo. Berolini, 1859.

5. (b) Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, on the Theophania, or Divine Manifestation
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. A Syriac Version, edited from an ancient
Manuscript recently discovered. By Samuel Lee, D.D. 8vo. London, 1842.

6. (c) Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, on the Theophania, or Divine Manifestation
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Translated into English with Notes, from
an ancient Syriac Version of the Greek Original now lost. To which is prefixed a
Vindication of the Orthodoxy and Prophetical Views of that distinguished writer
By Samuel Lee, D.D. 8vo. Cambridge, 1843.

7. (a) OiV ge mhn autoV paregenomen, toutouV kai toiV meq hmaV gnwrimouV di
eteraV poihsomai grafhV. "Moreover, there were many other eminent martyrs who
have an honourable mention among the Churches, which are in those places and
countries. But our design is not to commit to writing the conflicts of all those
who suffered for the worship of God over the whole world, nor yet to give an
accurate relation of every accident that befel them; but this rather belongs to
those who, with their own eyes, beheld what was done. Moreover, those ourselves
were present at, we will commit to the knowledge of posterity in another work."
See Ecc. Hist., B. viii. ch. 13, Eng. Trans. p. 148.

8. (b) Codex olim Regiae Societatis, nunc vero Musei Britannici. This is G. of
Dr. Burton's edition : Oxford, 1838. See the same, pp. 572 and 591.

9. (c) Duo Codices Florentini Bibliothecae Mediceo-Laurentianae. Plut. lxx. n. 7
et 20. I. and K. of Burton. See Ibid. p. 591.

10. (d) 1. Codex Regius Bibliothecae Parisiensis n. 1436; 2. Codex Mediceus,
ibid. n. 1434; 3. Codex Mazarinasus, ibid. n. 1430; 4. Codex Fuketianus, ibid.
n. 1435; 5. Codex Savilianus, in Bibliotheca Bodleiana, n. 2278; being A. B. C.
D. and F. respectively of Burton. Ibid.

11. (d) Codex Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis n. 1431, and Codex Venetus n. 838;
being E. and H. of Burton. Ibid.

12. (a) See N. of Burton. Ibid.

13. (b) See Valesius, note (a), p. 154, Eng. Trans.

14. (c) See Valesius and Ruinart, cited in the notes to this, pp. 50, 51, 55,
59, 60, 64, 69, 84. Also S. E. Assemani remarks :-- "Graecam S. Procopii,
Martyrum Palaestinorum in Diocletiani persecutione antesignani, historiam, quae
in laudato de martyribus Palaestinae libro habetur; ab alia fusiori, atque
explicatiori fuisse contractam atque truncatam, certum et exploratum est, nam
quae ad patriam atque institum pertinent omittere nunquam consuevit
Eusebius."--Acta SS. Mart.

"Horum sanctorum martyrum historiam concisam pariter jejunamque exhibet nobis
Graecus Eusebii Caesariensis textus in libro de martyribus Palaestinae;
eandemque prorsus fortunam experta est, quam prior Procopii, ex latiori scilicet
narratione in brevem summam. Atque priorem illam Latina, quae superfuit, versio
supplerit, haec autem suppleri aliter non potuissent, nisi, favente Deo,
Chaldaicus Codex noster e tenebris Aegypti vindicatus emersisset in lucem."--
Ibid. p. 173.

Baillet:--" Eusébe de Cesarée avait recueilli à part les Martyrs de Palestine:
et quoique les Actes qu'il en avoit ramassez avec beaucoup de soin et de travail
ne paroissent plus, il nous en reste un bon abbregé dans le livre qui se trouve
joint à son histoire genérale de l'Eglise.'' See Les Vies des Saints, vol. i. p.
55.

15. (a) See these printed p. 50 below and Valesius' note thereon.

16. (b) The Latin, by Surius, of this, will be found in the Notes, at p. 69.

17. (c) Eusebius died A.D. 339 or 340 (Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graec. lib. v. c.
4. p. 31), and this copy was transcribed A.D. 411.

18. (a) See Note, p. 51, below.

19. (b) See Notes, pp. 57, 60 below.

20. (c) See p. 66, below.

21. (a) A Latin version of this, as it is found in Simeon Metaphrastes,
translated by Lipomannus, I have printed in the Notes, p. 69, below, for the
sake of comparison with this text. It also still exists in Greek, and was first
published by D. Papebrochius from a Medicean MS. in the Acta Sanctorum, June,
vol. i. p. 64; and afterwards reprinted by J. Alb. Fabricius in S. Hippoliti
Opera, 2 vols, fol. Hamb. 1716--19, vol. ii. p. 217.

22. (b) See notes pp. 53, 56, 59, 60, 64, 68.

23. (a) See Heinichen, Notitia Codicum, Editionum et Translationum Historiae
Ecclesiasticae Eusebianae, § vi.

24. (a) See Note below, p. 79. ON THE MARTYRS IN PALESTINE, BY EUSEBIUS OF
CAESAREA.

-------------

THOSE Holy Martyrs of God, who loved our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ, and God
supreme and sovereign of all, more than themselves and their own lives, who were
dragged forward to the conflict for the sake of religion, and rendered glorious
by the martyrdom of confession, who preferred a horrible death to a temporary
life, and were crowned with all the victories of virtue, and offered to the Most
High and supreme God the glory of their wonderful victory, because they had
their conversation in heaven, and walked with him who gave victory to their
testimony, also offered up glory, and honour, and majesty to the Father, and to
the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. Moreover, the souls of the martyrs being worthy
of the kingdom of heaven are in honour together with the company of the prophets
and apostles. Let us therefore, likewise, who stand in need of the aid of their
prayers, and have been also charged in the book of the Apostles, that we should
be partakers in the remembrance of the Saints,-- let us also be partakers with
them, and begin to describe those conflicts of theirs against sin, which are at
all times published abroad by the mouth of those believers who were acquainted
with them Nor, indeed, have their praises been noted by monu- ! ments of stone,
nor by statues variegated with painting and colours and resemblances of earthly
things without life, but by the word of truth spoken before God: the deed also
which is seen by our eyes bearing witness. |2

[P. 2.] Let us therefore, relate the manifest signs and glorious proofs of the
divine doctrine, and commit to writing a commemoration not to be forgotten,
setting also their marvellous virtues as a constant vision before our eyes. For
I am struck with wonder at their all-enduring courage, at their confession under
.many forms, and at the wholesome alacrity of their souls, the elevation of
their minds, the open profession of their faith, the clearness of their reason,
the patience of their condition, and the truth of their religion: how they were
not cast down in their minds, but their eyes looked upwards, and they neither
trembled nor feared. The love of God also, and of His Christ, supplied them with
an all-effective power, by which they overcame their enemies. For they loved
God, the supreme sovereign of all, and they loved Him with all their might. He,
too, requited their love to Him by the aid which He afforded them: and they also
were loved by Him, and strengthened against their enemies, applying the words of
that confessor who had already borne his testimony before them and exclaiming
"Who shall separate us from Christ? shall tribulation, or affliction, or
persecution, or hunger, or death, or the sword? as it is written, For thy sake
we die daily: we are reckoned as lambs for the slaughter." And again, when this
same martyr magnifies that patience which cannot be overcome by evil, he
says--"that in all these things we conquer for Him who loved us." And he
foretold that all evils are overcome by the love of God, and that all terrors
and afflictions are trodden down, while he exclaimed and said : "Because I am
persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor things present, nor things to come,
nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
separate us from the love of God which is in our Lord Jesus Christ." At that
time then, Paul, who exulted in the power of his Lord, was himself crowned with
the victory of martyrdom in the midst of Rome, the Imperial City [p. 3.],
because he had entered the contest there, as in a superior conflict. In that
victory also which Christ granted to his triumphant martyrs, Simon, the chief
and first of the disciples, likewise received the crown; and he |3 suffered in a
manner similar to our Lord's sufferings. Others of the Apostles too, in other
places, closed their lives in martyrdom. Nor was this grace given only to those
of former times, but it has also been bestowed abundantly upon this our own
generation. As for those conflicts, which were gloriously achieved in various
other countries, it is meet that they who were then living should describe what
took place in their own country; but for myself I pray that I may be enabled to
write an account of those with whom I had the honour of being cotemporary, and
that they may rank me also among them--I mean those of whom the whole people of
Palestine is proud, for in the midst of this our land also the Saviour of all
mankind himself arose like a thirst-refreshing fountain. The conflicts,
therefore, of these victorious combatants I will proceed to relate, for the
common instruction and benefit of all. THE CONFESSION OF PROCOPIUS, IN THE FIRST
YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS. THE first of all the martyrs who appeared
in Palestine was named Procopius. In truth he was a godly man, for even before
his confession he had given up his life to great endurance: and from the time
that he was a little boy had been of pure habits, and of strict morals: and by
the vigour of his mind he had so brought his body into subjection, that, even
before his death, his soul seemed to dwell in a body completely mortified, and
he had so strengthened his soul by the word of God that his body also was
sustained by the power of God. His food was bread only, and his drink water; and
he took nothing else besides these two. [P. 4.] Occasionally he took food every
second day only, and sometimes every third day; oftentimes too he passed a whole
week without food. But he never ceased day nor night from the study of the word
of God: and at the same time he was careful as to his manners and modesty of
conduct, so that he edified by his; meekness and piety all those of his own
standing. And while |4 his chief application was devoted to divine subjects, he
was acquainted also in no slight degree with natural science. His family was
from Baishan; and he ministered in the orders of the Church in three things
:--First, he had been a Reader; and in the second order he translated from Greek
into Aramaic; and in the last, which is even more excellent than the preceding,
he opposed the powers of the evil one, and the devils trembled before him. Now
it happened that he was sent from Baishan to our city Caesarea, together with
his brother confessors. And at the very moment that he passed the gates of the
city they brought him before the Governor: and immediately upon his first
entrance the judge, whose name was Flavianus, said to him: It is necessary that
thou shouldest sacrifice to the gods: but he replied with a loud voice, There is
no God but one only, the Maker and Creator of all things. And when the judge
felt himself smitten by the blow of the martyr's words, he furnished himself
with arms of another kind against the doctrine of truth, and, abandoning his
former order, commanded him to sacrifice to the emperors, who were four in
number; but the holy martyr of God laughed still more at this saying, and
repeated the words of the greatest of poets of the Greeks, which he said that
"the rule of many is not good: let there be one ruler and one sovereign." And on
account of his answer, which was insulting to the emperors, he, though alive in
his conduct, was delivered over to death, and forthwith the head of this blessed
man was struck off, and an easy transit afforded him along the way to heaven.
[P. 5.] And this took place on the seventh day of the month Heziran, in the
first year of the persecution in our days. This confessor was the first who was
consummated in our city Caesarea. THE CONFESSION OF ALPHAEUS, AND ZACCHAEUS, AND
ROMANUS, IN THE FIRST YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS.

IT happened, at the same time, that the festival, which is celebrated on the
twentieth year of the emperor's reign, was at hand, and a |5 pardon was
announced at that festival for the offences of those who were in prison. The
governor, therefore, of the country came before the festival, and instituted an
inquiry respecting the prisoners which were in confinement, and some of them
were set at liberty through the clemency of the emperors; but the martyrs of God
he insulted with tortures, as though they were worse malefactors than thieves
and murderers.

Zacchaeus, therefore, who had been a deacon of the Church in the city of Gadara,
was led like an innocent lamb from the flock--for such indeed he was by nature,
and those of his acquaintance had given him the appellation of Zacchaeus as a
mark of honour, calling him by the name of that first Zacchaeus--for one reason,
because of the smallness of his stature, and for another, on account of the
strict life which he led; and he was even more desirous of seeing our Lord than
the first Zacchaeus. And when he was brought in before the judge, he rejoiced in
his confession for the sake of Christ: and when he had spoken the words of God
before the judge, he was delivered over to all the tortures of punishment, and
after having been first scourged, he was made to endure dreadful lacerations,
and then after this he was thrown into prison again, and there for a whole day
and a whole night his feet were strained to four holes of the rack.

Alphaeus, also, a most amiable man, endured afflictions and sufferings similar
to these. His family was of the most illustrious of the city Eleutheropolis, and
in the church of Caesarea he had been honoured with the dignity of Reader and
Exorcist. But before he became a confessor he had been a preacher and teacher of
[p. 6.] the word of God; and had great confidence towards all men, and this of
itself was a good reason for his being brought to his confession of the truth.
And because he saw that there was fallen upon all men at that time laxity and
great fear, and many were swept along as it were before the force of many
waters, and carried away to the foul worship of idols, he deliberated how he
might withstand the violence of the evil by his own valour, and by his own
courageous words repress the terrible storm. Of his own accord, therefore, he
threw himself into the midst of |6 the crowd of the oppressors, and with words
of denunciation reproached those, who through their timidity had been dragged
into error; and held them back from the worship of idols, by reminding them of
the words which had been spoken by our Saviour, respecting confession. And when
Alphaeus, full of courage and bravery, had done these things openly with
boldness, the officers seized him, and took him at once before the judge. But
this is not the time for us to relate what words he uttered with all freedom of
speech, nor what answers he gave in words of godly religion, like a man filled
with the Spirit of God. In consequence of these things he was sent to prison.
And after some days he was brought again before the judge, and his body was torn
all over by severe scourgings without mercy, but the fortitude of his mind still
continued erect before the judge, and by his words he withstood all error. Then
he was tortured on his sides with the cruel combs, and, at last, having wearied
out the judge himself, and those who were ministering to the judge's will, he
was again committed to prison, together with another fellow-combatant, and
stretched out a whole day and night upon the wooden rack. After three days they
were both of them brought together before the judge, and he commanded them to
offer sacrifice to the emperors: but they confessed, and said, We acknowledge
one God only, the supreme sovereign of all; and when they had uttered these
words in the presence of all the people (p. 7.) they were numbered among the
company of Holy Martyrs, and were crowned as glorious and illustrious combatants
in the conflict of God, for whose sake also their heads were cut off. And better
than all the course of their lives did they love their departure, to be with Him
in whom they made their confession. But the day that they suffered martyrdom was
the seventh of Teshri the latter, on which day the confession of those of whom
we have been speaking was consummated. And on this selfsame day also Romanus
suffered martyrdom in the city of Antioch. But this Romanus belonged to
Palestine, and he was a Deacon, and an Exorcist likewise, in one of the villages
of Caesarea. And he, too, was stretched out upon the rack, |7 and like as the
martyr Alphaeus had done in Caesarea, so did the blessed Romanus by his words of
denunciation restrain from sacrificing those who, from their timidity, were
relapsed into the sin of the error of devils, recalling to the minds of them all
the terrors of God. He had also the courage to go in together with the;
multitude who were dragged by force into error and to present himself there in
Antioch before the judge: and when he heard the judge commanding them to
sacrifice, and they, in trepidation from their fears, were driven with trembling
to offer sacrifice, this zealous man was no longer able to endure this sad
spectacle, but was : moved with pity towards them as towards those who were
feeling about in thick darkness, and on the point of falling over a precipice,
and so he made the doctrine of the religion of God to rise up before them like
the sun, crying aloud and saying: Whither are ye being carried, oh men? Are ye
all stooping down to cast yourselves into the abyss? Lift up the eyes of your
understanding on high, and above all the worlds ye shall recognise God and the
Saviour of all the ends of the world; and do not abandon for error the
commandment which has been committed to you: then shall the godless error of the
worship of devils be apparent to you. Remember also the righteous judgment of
God supreme, [p. 8.] And when he had spoken these things to them with a loud
voice, and stood there without fear and without dread, at the command of him who
was constituted judge there, the officers seized him, and he condemned him to be
destroyed by fire, for the crafty judge perceived that many were confirmed by
the words which the martyr spake, and that he turned many back from error. And
because the servant of Jesus had done these things in the place where the
emperors were, they at once brought out this blessed man into the midst of the
city of Antioch. And he was arrived at the spot where he was to undergo his
punishment, and the things which were required for the fire were got ready, and
they were busying themselves to fulfil the command with haste, when the emperor
Diocletian, having heard of what was done, gave orders that they should withdraw
the martyr from the death by fire, because, said he, his insolence and folly
were not suitable |8 for punishment by fire; and so, like a merciful emperor, he
gave order for a new kind of punishment for the martyr, that his tongue should
be cut out. Nevertheless, when that member by which he spoke was taken away,
still was his true love not severed from his God; neither was his intellectual
tongue restrained from preaching, and immediately he received from God, the
sovereign of all, a recompense for his struggle in the conflict, and was filled
with power much greater than he had before. Then did great wonder seize upon all
men; for he, whose tongue had been cut out, forthwith, by the gift of God spake
out valiantly, and heartily exulted in the faith, as though he were standing by
the side of Him in whom he made his confession; and with a countenance bright
and cheerful he saluted his acquaintance, and scattered the seed of the word of
God into the ears of all men, exhorting them all to worship God alone, and
lifting up his prayers and thanksgiving to God, who worketh marvels [p. 9.] :
and when he had done these things he mightily gave testimony to the word of
Christ before all men, and in deed shewed forth the power of Him in whom he made
his confession. And when he had done so for a long time he was again stretched
upon the rack; and by the command of the governor and the judge they threw upon
him the strangling instrument, and he was strangled. And on the same day as
those blessed martyrs who appertained to Zacchaeus he was consummated in his
confession. And although this man actually passed through the conflict, and
suffered martyrdom in Antioch, nevertheless, because his family was of
Palestine, he is properly described among the company of martyrs in this our
country. THE CONFESSION OF TIMOTHEUS, IN THE CITY OF GAZA, IN THE SECOND YEAR OF
THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS.

IT was the second year of the persecution, and the hostility against us was more
violent than the first; and Urbanus, who at that same time had superseded the
governor Flavianus in his |9 office, was governor over the people of Palestine.
There came then again the second time edicts from the emperor, in addition to
the former, threatening persecution to all persons. For, in the former, he had
given orders respecting the rulers of the Church of God only, to compel them to
sacrifice; but, in the second edicts there was a strict ordinance, which
compelled all persons equally, that the entire population in every city, both
men and women, should sacrifice to dead idols, and a law was imposed upon them
to offer libations to devils; for such were the commands of the tyrants who, in
their folly, desired to wage war against God, the king supreme. And when these
commands of the emperor were put into effect, the blessed Timotheus, in the city
of Gaza, was delivered up to Urbanus while he was there, and was unjustly bound
in fetters, like a murderer [p. 10.], for indeed he was not bound in fetters on
account of any thing deserving of blame, because he had been blameless in all
his conduct, and during the whole of his life. When, therefore, he did not
comply with the law as to the worship of idols, nor bow down to dead images
without life, for he was a man perfect in every thing, and was in his soul
acquainted with his God, and because of his piety and his conduct and his
virtues, even before he was delivered up to the governor, he had already endured
severe sufferings from the inhabitants of his own city, having lived there under
insults and frequent blows and contumely, for the people of the city of Gaza
were accursed in the heathenism; and when they were present in the judgment hall
of the governor, this champion of righteousness came off victorious in all the
excellence of his patience. And the judge cruelly employed against him severe
tortures, and showered upon his body terrible scourgings without number,
inflicting on his sides horrible lacerations, such as it is impossible to
describe; but, under all these things this brave martyr of God sustained the
conflict like a hero, and at last obtained the victory in the struggle, by
enduring death by means of a slow fire : for it was a weak and slow fire by
which he was burned, so that his soul could not easily make her escape from the
body, and be at rest. |10 And there was he tried like pure gold in the furnace
of a slow fire, manifesting the perfection and the sincerity of his religion
towards his God, and obtaining the crown of victory which belongs to the
glorious conquerors of righteousness. And because he loved God, he received, as
the meet recompense of his will, that perfect life which he longed for in the
presence of God the sovereign of all. And together with this brave confessor, at
the same time of the trial of his confession, and in the same city, the martyr
Agapius, and the admirable Theckla (she of our days) were condemned by the
governor to suffer punishment and to be devoured by wild beasts, [p. 11.] THE
CONFESSION OF AGAPIUS, AND OF THE TWO ALEXANDERS, AND OF THE TWO DIONYSIUSES,
AND OF TIMOTHEUS, AND OF ROMULUS, AND OF PAESIS, IN THE SECOND YEAR OF THE
PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS, IN THE CITY OF CAESAREA.

IT was the festival at which all the people assembled themselves together in
their cities. The same festival also was held in Caesarea. And in the circus
there was an exhibition of horse races, and a representation was performed in
the theatre, and it was customary for impious and barbarous spectacles to take
place in the Stadium: and there was a rumour and a report generally current,
that Agapius, whose name we have mentioned above, and Theckla with him, together
with the rest of the Phrygians, were to be sent into the theatre in the form of
martyrs, in order that they might be devoured by the wild beasts; for the
governor Urbanus would present this gift to the spectators. When the fame of
these things was heard abroad, it happened further that other young men, perfect
in stature, and brave in person (they were in number six) arrived. And as the
governor was proceeding to the theatre, and passing through the city, these six
men stood up courageously before him: and having bound their hands behind them,
they drew near before the judge Urbanus, and, in fact, |11 by binding
themselves, shewed what was about to be done to them by others, and exhibited
their excellent patience, and the readiness of their mind for martyrdom, for
they confessed, crying aloud and saying, We are Christians; and beseeching the
governor Urbanus that they also might be thrown to the wild beasts in the
theatre in company with their brethren who appertained to Agapius. For all this
confidence of Jesus our Saviour, in his own champions did He manifest to all
men; extinguishing the menaces of the tyrants by his champion's valour, and
manifestly and clearly shewing, that neither fire, nor steel, nor even fierce
wild beasts, were able to subdue his victorious servants [p. 12.], for He had
girded them with the armour of righteousness, and strengthening them with
victorious and invincible armour, he made them despise death. And they struck at
once the governor and the whole band with him with astonishment at this their
courage: and the governor gave command that they should be delivered up to
prison; and there they were detained many days. And while they were in prison,
Agapius, a meek and good man, the brother of one of the prisoners, arrived from
the city of Gaza, and went frequently to the prison to visit his brother, and
having already striven in many contests of confession before, he went with
confidence to the place of imprisonment: and so he was denounced to the governor
as a man prepared for martyrdom, and consequently was delivered over to bonds,
in order that he might endure the trial of a second conflict. And things similar
to these did Dionysius also suffer. And this good recompense was given to him
from the martyrs of God as the reward of his service to them. And when the
governor was made aware of this recompense of the compassion of Dionysius
towards the martyrs, he gave the sentence of death against him. And thus he
became associated with those who preceded him. And all together they were eight
in number; namely, Timotheus, whose origin was from Pontus; and Dionysius, who
came from the city of Tripolis; and Romulus, a sub-deacon of the church of the
city of Diospolis; and two were Aegyptians, Paesis and Alexander; and again
another Alexander, |12 and those two respecting whom we have said that they were
at last cast into prison.

All these were delivered up together at one time, to be beheaded. And this
matter took place on the twenty-fourth of Adar. But there was, at the same time,
a sudden change of the emperors, both of him who was the chief and emperor, and
of him who was honoured in the next place after him: and those [p. 13.] who had
divested themselves of the power of empire and put on the ordinary dress, having
given up the empire to their associates, were rent asunder from their love
towards each other, and they raised against one another an implacable war; nor
was any remedy given to this malady of their hostility, until the peace in our
time, which was spread throughout the whole empire of the Romans; for it arose
like light out of clouds of darkness, and forthwith the Church of the supreme
God and the divine doctrine was extended throughout the whole world. THE
CONFESSION OF EPIPHANIUS (Gr. Apphianus), IN THE THIRD YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION
WHICH TOOK PLACE IN OUR DAYS IN THE CITY OF CAESAREA. THAT bitter viper, and
wicked and cruel tyrant, which in our time held the dominion of the Romans, went
forth, even from his very commencement, to fight as it were against God, and was
filled with persecution and rage against us in a far greater degree than any of
those who had preceded him--I mean Maximinus : and no little consternation fell
upon all the inhabitants of the cities, and many were scattered abroad into
every country, and dispersed themselves, in order that they might escape the
danger which surrounded them.

What words then are adequate to describe, as it deserves, the divine love of the
martyr Epiphanius, who had not yet attained the age of twenty years? He was
sprung from one of the most illustrious families in Lycia, famous also for their
extensive worldly wealth, and, by the care of his parents, he had been sent to
be educated in the city of Beyrout, where he had also acquired a |13 great stock
of learning. But this incident is not in any way connected with the narrative
which we are writing: if, however, it be befitting that we make any mention of
the virtuous conduct of this all-holy soul, it is very right to admire, how in a
city such as this he used to withdraw himself from the society and company [p.
14.] of young men, and practised the virtues and the habits of old men, adorning
himself with pure conduct and becoming manners, nor suffered himself to be
overcome by the vigour of his body, nor to be led away by the society of youth.
But he laid the foundation of all virtues for himself in patience, cherishing
perfect holiness and temperance, and applying himself with purity, as it is
right, to the worship of God. And when he had finished his education and quitted
Beyrout, and was returned to the house of his parents, he was no longer able to
live with those who were of his own family, because their manners were
dissimilar to his own. He therefore left them, without taking care to carry with
him the means of providing sustenance even for a single day. He conducted
himself, however, in his travels, with purity, and by the power of God which
accompanied him, he came to this our city, in which the crown of martyrdom was
prepared for him, and resided in the same house with us, confirming himself in
godly doctrine, and being instructed in the Holy Scriptures by that perfect
martyr, Pamphilus, and acquiring from him the excellence of virtuous habits and
conduct. And for this reason I have applied myself to the narrative of the
martyrdom of Epiphanius, in order that I may declare, if I be able, what a
consummation he also had. All the multitudes that beheld him were struck with
admiration of him. And who is there, even now-a-days, that can hear of his fame
without being filled with astonishment at his courage, and at his boldness of
speech, and at his daring, and at his patience, at his words addressed to the
governor, and his answers to the judge? And more than all to be wondered at is
the resolution with which he dedicated as it were with incense the offering of
his zeal for God. For when the persecution had been raised against us the second
time, in the third year of this same persecution, the former |14 edicts of
Maximinus arrived--those by which he gave command that the governors of the
cities should use great pains and diligence in order to compel all men to offer
sacrifices [p. 15.] and libations to devils. The heralds, therefore, through all
the cities made a diligent proclamation, that the men, together with their wives
and children, should assemble in the temples of the idols, and before the
Chiliarchs and Centurions, as they went round about to the houses and the
streets making a list of the inhabitants of the city. Then they summoned them by
name, and compelled them to offer sacrifice as they had been commanded. And
while this boundless tempest was threatening all men from all sides, Epiphanius,
a perfectly holy man, and a witness of the truth, performed an act which
surpasses all words. While no one was aware of his purpose; he even concealed it
from us who were in the same house with him, he went and drew near to the
governor of the place, and stood boldly before him; having also escaped the
observation of the whole band that was standing near the governor, for they had
not given heed when he approached the governor: and while Urbanus was offering
libations, he came up to him and laid hold of his right hand, and held him back
from offering the foul libation to idols, endeavouring with an excellent and
gentle address and godlike suavity to persuade him to turn from his error,
saying to him: That it was not right for us to turn away from the one only God
of truth, and offer sacrifice to lifeless idols and wicked devils. Thus did He,
who is more mighty than all, reprove the wicked through the youth Epiphanius,
whom, for the sake of his reproof, the power of Jesus had taken from the house
of his fathers, in order that he might be a reprover of the works of pollution.
He therefore despised threatenings and all deaths, and turned not aside from
good to evil, but spake gladly with pure knowledge and a glorifying tongue,
because he was desirous to carry speedily, if it were possible, persuasion even
to his persecutors, and to teach them to turn away from their error, and become
acquainted with our common deliverer, the Saviour and God of all. When then this
holy martyr of God had done these things, the servants [p. 16.] of devils,
together with the officers of the governor, |15 were smitten in their hearts as
if by a hot iron; and they struck him on the face, and when he had been thrown
down on the ground they kicked him with their feet, and tore his mouth and lips
with a bridle. And when he had endured all these things bravely, he was
afterwards delivered up to be taken to a dark prison, where his legs were then
stretched for a day and a night in the stocks. And after the next day they
brought Epiphanius, who, although a youth in age, was a mighty man in valour,
into the judgment hall, and there the governor Urbanus displayed a proof of his
own wickedness and hatred against this lovely youth by punishment and every kind
of torture inflicted upon this martyr of God. And he ordered them to lacerate
his sides until his bones and entrails became visible: he was also smitten upon
his face and his neck to such a degree, that his countenance was so disfigured
by the severe blows which he had received, that not even his friends could
recognise him. This martyr of Christ, however, was strengthened both in body and
soul like adamant, and stood up even more firmly in his confidence upon his God.
And when the governor asked him many questions, he gave him no further answer
than this--that he was a Christian: and he questioned him again as to whose son
he was, and whence he came and where he dwelt; but he made no other reply than
that he was the servant of Christ. For this cause therefore the fury of the
governor became more fierce, and he thundered forth the more in his rage, on
account of the indomitable speech of the martyr, giving command that his feet
should be wrapped up in cotton that had been dipped in oil, and then be set on
fire. So the officers of the judge did what he commanded them. And the martyr
was hung up at a great height, in order that, by this dreadful spectacle, he
might strike terror into all those who were looking on, while at the same time
they tore his sides and ribs with combs, till he became one mass of swelling all
over, and the appearance of his countenance was completely changed, [p. 17.] And
for a long time his feet were burning in a sharp fire, so that the flesh of his
feet, as it was consumed, dropped like melted wax, and the fire burnt into his
very bones like dry reeds. But at the same time, although he |16 was in great
suffering from what befel him, he became, by his patience, like one who had no
pain, for he had within, for a helper, that God who dwelt within him; and he
appeared evidently to all like the sun : and in consequence of the great courage
of this martyr of Christ many Christians also were assembled together to behold
him, and stood up with much open confidence; and he, with a loud voice and
distinct words, made his confession for the testimony of God, publishing by this
his valour the hidden power of Jesus, that He is ever near to those who
themselves draw near to Him. And all this wonderful spectacle did the glorious
Epiphanius exhibit, as it were in a theatre: for they who were the martyr's
oppressors became like corrupt demons, and suffered within themselves great
pain; being also themselves tortured in their own persons, as he was, on account
of his endurance in the doctrine of his Lord. And while they stood in bitter
pains, they gnashed upon him with their teeth, burning in their minds against
him, and trying to force him to tell them whence he came, and who he was, and
questioning him as to whose son he was, and where he lived, and commanding him
to offer sacrifice and comply with the edict. But he looked upon them all as
evil demons, and regarded them as corrupt devils : not returning an answer to
any of them, but using only this word in confessing Christ, that He is God and
the Son of God: [p. 18.] testifying also that he knew God his Father only. When
therefore those who were contending against him were grown weary and overcome,
and failed, they took him back to the prison, and on the next day they brought
him forth again before that bitter and merciless judge, but he still continued
in the same confession as before. And when the governor and his officers, and
the whole band that ministered to his will, were foiled, he gave orders at last
that he should be cast into the depths of the sea. But that wonderful thing
which happened after this act I know will not be believed by those who did not
witness the wonder with their own eyes, as I myself did: for men are not wont to
give the same credence to the hearing of the ear as to the seeing of |17 eye. It
is not, however, right for us also, like those who are in error and deficient in
faith, to conceal that prodigy which took place at the death of this martyr of
God; and we also call as witnesses to you of these things, which we have
written, the whole of the inhabitants of the city of Caasarea, for there was not
even one of the inhabitants of this city absent from this terrific sight. For
after this man of God had been cast into the depths of the terrible sea, with
stones tied to his feet, forthwith a great storm and frequent commotions and
mighty waves troubled the vast sea, and a severe earthquake made even the city
itself tremble, and every one's hands were raised towards heaven in fear and
trembling, for they supposed that the whole place, together with its
inhabitants, was about to be destroyed on that day. And at the same time, the
sea, even as if it were unable to endure it, vomited back the holy body of the
martyr of God, and carried it with the waves and laid it before the gate of the
city. And there was at that time vast affliction and commotion, for it seemed
like a messenger sent from God to threaten all men with great anger [p. 19]. And
this which took place was proclaimed to all the inhabitants of the city, and
they all ran at once and pushed against each other in order that they might
obtain a sight, both boys and men and old men together, and all grades of women,
so that even the modest virgins, who kept to their own apartments, went out to
see this sight. And the whole city together, even the very children as well,
gave glory to the God of the Christians alone, confessing with a loud voice the
name of Christ, who had given strength to the martyr in his lifetime to endure
such afflictions, and at his death had shewed prodigies to all who beheld.

Such was the termination of the history of Epiphanius, on the second of the
month Nisan, and his memory is observed on this day. THE CONFESSION OF ALOSIS
(Gr. Aedesius).

LIKE what had befallen the martyr Epiphanius, so after a short time the brother
of Epiphanius, both on the father's and the |18 mother's side, became a
confessor, whose name was Alosis. He too, as he contended against them with the
words of God, made use of his faith in the truth as armour; they also fought
against him with smiting and scourging, and they stood up against each other as
it were in battle array, and strove which side should get the victory. But even
before his brother had given himself up to God, this admirable Alosis had
applied his mind to philosophy, and meditated upon all the learned
investigations of the greatest minds. Nor was he a proficient in the learning of
the Greeks only, but he was also well acquainted with the philosophy of the
Romans, and he had passed a long time in the society of the martyr Pamphilus,
and by him had been embued with the godly doctrine as with purple suited for
royalty. This same Alosis, after his admirable confession, which was
accomplished before our eyes, and his sufferings of the evils (p. 20) of
imprisonment for a long period, was first of all delivered over to the copper
mines which are in our country, Palestine; and after that he had passed through
many afflictions there, and then been released, he went thence to the city
Alexandria, and fell in with Hierocles, who held the government of the province
in all the land of Egypt. Him also he beheld judging the Christians severely,
and contrary to just laws, making mock of the confessors of God, and delivering
up the holy virgins of God to fornication, and to lust, and to bodily shame.
When therefore these things were perpetrated before the eyes of this brave
combatant, he devoted himself to an act akin to that of his brother; and the
zeal of God was kindled within him like fire, and its heat burned within his
members as in dry stubble, and he drew near to Hierocles, the wicked governor,
with indignation, and put him to shame by his words of wisdom and his deeds of
righteousness, and, having struck him on the face with both his hands, he threw
him on his back upon the ground; and as his attendants laid hold upon him to
help him, he gave him some severe blows, saying to him, Beware how thou darest
to commit acts of pollution contrary to nature against the servants of God. And,
being well instructed, he convicted |19 him from the laws themselves of acting
contrary to the laws. And after Alosis had so courageously done all these
things, he endured with great patience the torments which were inflicted upon
his body; and as he resembled his brother in his appearance, and conduct, and in
his zeal and confession, so also did they resemble each other in their
punishment, and at the last, after their death the terrible sea received them
from the hand of the judge.

Now this servant of Jesus exhibited his contest for the truth in [p. 21] the
city of Alexandria, and was there adorned with the crown of victory; but the
next confessor after Epiphanius who was called to the conflict of martyrdom in
Palestine was Agapius. THE CONFESSION OF AGAPIUS, IN THE FOURTH YEAR OF THE
PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS.

IT was in the fourth year of the persecution in our days, and on Friday the
twentieth of the latter Teshri: it was on this same day that the chief of
tyrants, Maximinus, came to the city of Caesarea. And he made a boast that he
would exhibit some novel sight to all the spectators that were assembled
together on his account; for that was the same day on which he celebrated the
anniversary of his birthday. And it was requisite upon the arrival of the tyrant
that he should exhibit something more than what had ordinarily been done. What
then was this new spectacle, but that a martyr of God should be cast to wild
beasts to be devoured by them? while of old it had been the practice upon the
arrival of the emperor that he should set before the spectators competitive
exhibitions of various forms and different kinds, such as recitation of
speeches, and listening to new and strange songs and music, and also spectacles
of all sorts of wild beasts, and likewise that the spectators might have much
delight and amusement in a show of gladiators.

It was therefore requisite that the emperor at this festival of his birthday
should also do something great and extraordinary, |20 for at all the previous
exhibitions which he had furnished for them he had not done any thing new. So
that--what was at once a thing desired by himself, and acceptable to the wicked
tyrant--a martyr of God was brought forth into the midst, adorned with all
righteousness, and remarkable for the meekness of his life; and he was cast into
the theatre in order that he might be devoured by the wild beasts. His name was
Agapius, respecting whom, together with Theckla, an order had been given that
they should be devoured by wild beasts. The fair name of Theckla has been
already mentioned in another chapter [p. 22]. They therefore dragged the blessed
Agapius forward, and took him round about in mockery in the midst of the
Stadium. And a tablet, with an inscription upon it, was carried about before
him, on which no other accusation was exhibited against him, but this only--That
he was a Christian. And the same time also a slave, a murderer, that had killed
his master, was brought forward, together with the martyr of God, and they both
received equally one and the same sentence. And very closely did this passion
resemble that of our Saviour; for while the one was to suffer martyrdom for the
sake of the God of all, the other also was to be put to death for the murder of
his master; and one and the same sentence of evil went forth against both of
them without any distinction. And the judge in this case was the governor
Urbanus, for he was still governor in Palestine: but when Maximinus came to be
present at this spectacle which has been described above, as if on account of
the promptitude of Urbanus, he increased his power of evil, and liberated from
death that murderer which had slain his master, and put him beyond all torture;
but as for the martyr of God, he took delight in looking on with his own eyes
while he was being devoured by the savage beasts. When therefore they had led
the martyr Agapius round about in the Stadium, they asked him in the first place
if he would deny his God, but he cried out with a loud voice and said to all
those who were assembled together--Oh ye that are looking on at this trial in
which I am now placed, know that it is not for any evil crime which I have
committed that I am |21 brought to this trial, for I am a witness of the true
doctrine of God, and I bear testimony to you all, in order that ye may have
knowledge of the one only God, and of that Light which he has caused to arise,
that ye may know and adore Him who is the creator of the heavens and of the
earth. And all this which is come upon me for his name's sake, I receive with
joy in my mind; for they have not brought me to this place against my will, but
I desire this of my own free choice, by which I stand even unto death. Moreover,
I am contending for the sake of my faith, that I may afford encouragment to
those who are younger than myself, that they too may despise death while [p. 23]
they follow after their true life, and may disregard the grave in order to
obtain a kingdom; that they should make light of that which is mortal, and keep
in their recollection the life of the Giver of life, nor have any dread of
punishment which is momentary, but be in fear of those flames of fire which are
never quenched. When therefore this martyr of God had cried with a loud voice
and said these things, and stood erect in the midst of the Stadium, like one who
felt confident that there was no danger, the wicked tyrant was filled with rage
and fury, and gave orders for the wild beasts to be let loose upon him: but he,
being full of courage and despising death, turned not aside to the right hand or
to the left, but with lightness of feet and courage of heart advanced to meet
the savage beasts. And a fierce bear rushed upon him and tore him with her
teeth: he was then remanded to prison, while life was still left in him, and
there he lived one day. After this, stones were tied about him, and his body was
thrown into the sea; but the soul of the blessed Agapius winged her flight
through the air to the kingdom of heaven, whither she was previously hastening,
and was received together with the angels and the holy company of martyrs. So
far then was the contest and the valour of Agapius victorious. |22 THE
CONFESSION OF THEODOSIA, A VIRGIN OF GOD, IN THE FIFTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION
WHICH TOOK PLACE IN OUR DAYS. THE persecution in our days had been prolonged to
the fifth year. And it was the month Nisan, and the second day of the same
month, when a godly virgin, and holy in all things, one of the virgins of the
Son of God in the city of Tyre, who was not yet eighteen years old, out of pure
love for those, who on account of their confession of God were set before the
tribunal of the governor, [p. 24] drew near and saluted them, and entreated them
to remember her in their prayers: and because of these words which she had
spoken to them, the wicked men were filled with anger, as if she had been doing
something unjust and improper; and the officers seized her forthwith, and took
her before the governor Urbanus, for he still held the power in Palestine. And I
know not what happened to him, but immediately, like one much excited by this
young woman, he was filled with rage and fury against her, and commanded the
girl to offer sacrifice: and because he found, that although she was but a girl,
she withstood the imperial orders like a heroine, then did this savage governor
the more inflict tortures on her sides and on her breast with the cruel combs;
and she was torn on the ribs until her bowels were seen. And because this girl
had endured this severe punishment and the combs without a word, and still
survived, he again commanded her to offer sacrifice. She then raised her lips
and opened her eyes, and looking around with a joyful countenance in that time
of her suffering, (for she was charming in beauty and in the appearance of her
figure), with a loud voice she addressed the governor: Why, oh man, dost thou
deceive thyself, and not perceive that I have found the thing which I prayed to
obtain at thy hands? for I rejoice greatly in having been deemed worthy to be
admitted to the participation of the sufferings of God's martyrs: for indeed,
for this very cause, I stood up and |23 spake with them, in order that by some
means or other they might make me a sharer in their sufferings, so that I also
might obtain a portion in the kingdom of heaven together with them, because so
long as I had no share in their sufferings, I could not be a partaker with them
in their salvation. Behold therefore now, how, on account of the future
recompense, I stand at present before thee with great exultation, because I have
obtained the means of drawing near to my God, even before those just men, whom
but a little while ago I entreated to intercede for me. Then that wicked judge
[p. 25], seeing that he became a laughingstock, and that his haughty threats
were manifestly humbled before all those who were standing in his presence, did
not venture to assail the girl again with great tortures like the former, but
condemned her by the sentence which he passed to be thrown into the depths of
the sea. And when he passed on from the condemnation of this pure girl, he
proceeded to the rest of those confessors, on whose account this blessed maiden
had been called to this grace, and they were all delivered over to the copper
mines in Palestine, without his saying a word to them, or inflicting upon them
any sufferings or torture; for this holy girl prevented all those confessors by
her courageous conduct against error, and received in her own body, as it were
on a shield, all the inflictions and tortures which were intended for them,
having rebuked in her own person the enemy that opposed them; and subdued by her
valour and patience the furious and cruel judge, and rendered that fierce
governor like a coward with respect to the other confessors. It was on the first
day of the week that these confessors were condemned in Caesarea; and in the
month above written and in the year noted by us was this act accomplished. |24
THE CONFESSION OF DOMNINUS, IN THE FIFTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS, IN
THE CITY OF CAESAREA.

URBANUS was governor in Palestine; and it was the first day. of the latter
Teshri; and so, from day to day, he renewed himself in his wickedness, and every
year prepared some devices against us. I will therefore relate how many evils he
inflicted on this one day which I have mentioned. On the day then which we have
spoken of, a certain man, admirable in all his conduct, and excellently skilled
in the science of medicine, [p. 26] and he was a young man of tall stature and
handsome, and celebrated for the holiness of his life, and the purity of his
soul, and his modesty, and his name was Domninus; he was also well known to all
those in our time who had been confessors. Moreover, this same man, previously
to his receiving consummation by martyrdom, had endured torture in the copper
mines; and on account of his patience under his confession he was condemned to
the punishment by fire. When that same judge, cunning in his wickedness (for it
is not meet that those should be called wise who boast themselves in the
bitterness of their wickedness), had passed on from this martyr, he lighted upon
three young men of fine stature, and handsome in their person, and praiseworthy
as to their souls, on account of their courage in worshipping God; and in order
that he might afford amusement thereby, he sent them to the Ludus. Then he
passed on from these, and delivered up an excellent and godly old man to be
devoured by the wild beasts. Then the mad man passed on from this old man, and
came to others, and commanded them to be castrated and turned into eunuchs. Then
he left them also, and proceeded to those who appertained to Sylvanus, whose own
lot also it was some time afterwards to become a martyr of God, and these he
condemned to the mines of Phaeno. Afterwards he passed on from these and came to
others whom he insulted with tortures. Nor was the |25 fury of his malice
content with males, but he also threatened to torment the females, and delivered
over these virgins to fornicators for the violation of their persons. Others
again he sent to prison. Now all these things which we have described did this
arrogant judge perpetrate in one hour. And after all these things which I have
described had been accomplished, that heavenly martyr of God, Pamphilus, a name
very dear to me (p. 27), who was holy in all things, and adorned with every
virtue, was tried in the conflict of martyrdom. He was indeed the most famous of
all the martyrs in our time, on account of his accomplishments in philosophy,
and his acquirements both in sacred and profane literature. Of this same man,
admirable in all things, Urbanus first made a trial of his wisdom by questions
and answers; and at last endeavoured to compel him by threats to offer sacrifice
to dead idols; and when he had ascertained by trial that he was not to be
persuaded by words, and also perceived that his threats were not heeded by him,
he applied cruel torture, and lacerated him grievously on his sides. But he was
not able to subdue him by this means, as he had expected. The wicked judge then
considered that if he bound him in prison together with those confessors of whom
mention has been already made, he might by this means subdue this holy martyr.

Now as to this cruel judge, who employed all these wicked devices against the
confessors of God, what recompense and punishment must await him? For this is
easy for us to know from what we are writing. For forthwith, and immediately,
and without any long delay, the righteous judgment of God overtook him on
account of those things which he had dared to do, and took severe and bitter
vengeance upon him; and he that sat on the judgment-seat on high in his pride,
and boasted himself in his soldiers that stood before him, and considered
himself above all the people in Palestine, was in one night stripped of all his
splendour and all his honours, and reduced to the condition of a private
individual. And here, in our city of Caesarea, where he had perpetrated all
those crimes which have been written above, he was by the sentence of Maximinus,
a wicked tyrant like himself, delivered up to a |26 miserable death; and insult
and humiliation, which is worse than all deaths, was heaped upon him, so that
reproachful words from women, with dreadful imprecations from the mouths of all,
were poured into his ears before he died [p. 28]. Wherefore, by these things we
may perceive that this was a foretaste of that vengeance of God which is
reserved for him at the last, on account of all his maliciousness and
unmercifulness towards the servants of God.

These things we have related in a cursory manner for those believers, of whom
some still remain unto this present time, omitting to relate many afflictions
which passed over him, in order that we may arrange these things briefly, and in
a few words, as a record for those who are to come after us; but there may come
a time when we may recount in our narrative the end and fall of those wicked men
who exerted themselves against our people. THE CONFESSION OF PAULUS, AND
VALENTINA, AND HATHA, IN THE SIXTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS IN
CAESAREA.

UP to the sixth year of the persecution which was in our days, the storm which
had been raised against us was still raging; and great multitudes of confessors
were in the mines which are called Porphyrites, in the country of Thebais, which
is on one side of Egypt; and on account of the purple marble which is in that
land, the name of Porphyrites has also been given to those who were employed in
cutting it. This name, therefore, was also extended to those great multitudes of
confessors who were under sentence of condemnation in the whole of the land of
Egypt: for there were a hundred martyrs there all but three. And these
confessors were sent, the men together with the women and children, to the
governor in Palestine, whose name was Firmillianus. For he had superseded the
governor Urbanus in his office, and he was a man by no means of a peaceful turn;
indeed he even surpassed |27 his predecessor in ferocity, having been a soldier
that had been engaged in war, and had had much experience in blood and fighting,
[p 29.]

There is a large city in the land of Palestine, teeming with population, of
which all the inhabitants were Jews. It is called in the Aramaic tongue Lud, and
in the Greek it is called Diocaesarea. To this city the governor Firmillianus
went, and took thither the whole assembly of those hundred confessors. And this
was a great sight which well deserves to be recorded in writing. And the Jews
were spectators of this marvellous contest, having surrounded the place of
judgment on all sides; and as if it were for a rebuke to themselves, they looked
on with their own eyes at what took place, while the whole company of the
confessors, with much confidence and immense courage, made their confession of
belief in God's Christ. And they being Jews, to whom the coming of that Christ
had been foretold by their prophets, whose coming their fathers looked for, had
not received him when he was come; but these Egyptians, who had been of old the
enemies of God, confessed, even in the midst of persecutions, their faith in
God, the Lord of all, and in the Manifestation from him. And these Egyptians,
who had been taught by their fathers to worship idols only, were at that time,
from the conviction of their reason, undergoing this conflict, in order that
they might avoid the worship of idols; while those Jews, who had always been
accused by their prophets on account of their worship of idols, were surrounding
them, standing and looking on, and listening as the Egyptians repudiated the
gods of their own fathers, and confessed their faith in the same God as they
also did; and bare witness for Him whom they had many times denied. And they
were still more cut to the heart and rent, when they heard the criers of the
governor shouting and calling Egyptians by Hebrew names, and addressing them
with the names of the prophets. For the crier, shouting aloud, called to them
and said: Elias, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, and other appellations similar to
these, which their fathers had chosen from among the Hebrews, [p. 30.] in order
that they might call their sons after |28 the names of the prophets. Moreover,
it also came to pass that their deeds corresponded with their names; and the
Jews greatly wondered both at them and at their names, as well as at their words
and their deeds, being rendered despicable themselves both by their own vice and
infidelity. And I myself am convinced that these things were not done without
the will of God. However, after this trial they were deprived of the use of
their left leg, by having the muscles of the knee cauterized with fire, and then
again they had their right eyes blinded with the sword, and then destroyed by
fire. And not only were they men who endured these things, but really children
and many women. And after this they were delivered over to the copper mines to
see afflictions there. And after a short time, the three men from Palestine,
whom I mentioned a little while ago as having been for the moment handed over to
the Ludus, were called to undergo similar sufferings, because they would not
take the food from the royal provision, nor would give themselves up to that
exercise and instruction which were requisite for pugilism; and they suffered
many evils which we are not competent to describe: and at the end of all their
afflictions they underwent this severe sentence. And others in the city of Gaza,
being in the habit of assembling themselves for prayer, and being constant in
reading the Holy Scriptures, were seized, and had to endure the same sufferings
as their companions, being tortured on their legs and eyes. Others also had to
contend in conflicts even greater than these, and after having been tortured
both in their legs and eyes, were severely torn on their sides with combs. And
others again more than these attained to this great excellence, and at the end
of all contended with death itself. And when he had turned himself away from
these, he came to judge one who, although a woman in body, was a hero in the
bravery of mind, which she possessed [p. 31] : she was also a virgin in her mode
of life, and could not bear the threat of pollution which she heard, but at once
gave utterance to harsh words against the tyrannical emperor, for having given
authority to a |29 vile and wicked judge. On this account, therefore, he in the
first place bruised her body all over with stripes; then she was hung up and her
sides were lacerated; and this not once only, but two and three times in one
hour, and for a great while and also repeatedly, until those who inflicted the
punishment became wearied and tired; then others succeeded them against her,
and, at the commands of the furious governor, tortured her most severely. For
these judges were barbarous in their manners, and enemies in their hearts.
Moreover, it happened that while this furious judge was insulting this girl with
his tortures, another young woman, small indeed in person, but courageous in
soul--for she was possessed of a large mind, which supplied strength to the
smallness of her person--being no longer able to tolerate the wickedness and
cruelty of those things which were inflicted upon her sister, called out from
the midst of the crowd of persons who were standing before the governor, and
cried out complaining, and said: How long dost thou intend to tear my sister to
pieces in so cruel and merciless a manner? And when the wicked Firmillianus
heard this saying, he was bitterly incensed, and gave orders for the young woman
who had complained to be brought before him. Her name was Valentina. Having
therefore caught her up they brought her into the midst of the place of
judgment. But she placed her trust in the holy name of Jesus. Then the murderous
governor in his fury commanded her to offer sacrifice. But the maiden Valentina
despised the word even of the threatener. Then he gave orders for those who were
ministering to his will to lay hold upon the girl by force, and to take her up
to the side of the altar, so that she might be polluted by the sacrifices. Then
at that time of terror [p. 32.] the noble maiden shewed the courage of her mind,
and gave the altar a kick with her foot, and it was overturned, and; the fire
that had been kindled upon it was scattered about; and because she did all these
things without shewing any fear, the rage of the governor was roused like a wild
beast, and he gave command for her to be tortured with the combs, without any
mercy, so that no one man was ever torn to such a degree; and I think that, had
it been possible, he would even have devoured the girl's |30 flesh. And when at
length his fury was satisfied with the sight of her blood, and he had learned,
both by deeds and words, how divine is that invincible power which arms and
strengthens even little girls with courage and valour, he caused both the young
women, Hatha and Valentina, to be bound together, and gave sentence against them
of death by fire. The name of the first was Hatha, and her father's house was in
the land of Gaza; and the other was from Caesarea, our own city, and she was
well known to many, and her name was Valentina. And after these things, Paul the
confessor was called to the conflict. And he also endured it bravely, and in the
same hour was condemned to be put to death, and his sentence was to be beheaded
by the sword. When, then, this blessed man came to the place of execution where
he was to be put to death, he besought the officer who was to behead him to have
patience with him for a little while; and when the officer had granted him this
desire, in the first place, with a mild and cheerful voice, he offered up
thanksgiving, and worship, and glory, and supplication to God for having
accounted him worthy of this victory. Then he prayed for tranquillity and peace
for our people, and entreated God speedily to grant them deliverance. After this
he offered up prayer for our enemies, the Jews, many of whom at that time were
standing around him: then he went on in his supplication, and prayed for the
Samaritans, and for those among the Gentiles [p. 33] who were without knowledge;
he prayed that they might be converted to the knowledge of the truth. Nor was he
unmindful of those who were standing around him, but prayed also for them. And
oh, the perfection--which cannot be described--that he prayed even for that
judge who had condemned him to death, and for all rulers in every place; and not
only for them, but also for that officer who was then going to cut off his head.
And as he was offering his supplications to God, the officers heard him with
their own ears praying for them, and beseeching God not to lay to their charge
that which they did to him. And as he prayed for all with a suppliant voice, he
turned the whole multitude that was standing by and looking |31 on to sorrow and
tears; and then, of his own accord, he bent down his body, and put out his neck
to be cut off by the sword. The conflict of this victorious martyr was
consummated on the twenty-fifth of the month Thamuz. THE CONFESSION OF
ANTONINUS, AND ZEBINAS, AND GERMANUS, AND MANNATHUS (Gr. Ennathas) IN THE SIXTH
YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS IN CAESAREA. AND when some time had elapsed
after these things which I have related, another company of God's martyrs,
amounting in number to one hundred and thirty, was sent from the land of Egypt
into our country. And all of these had also undergone the same tortures in their
eyes and legs as the former martyrs; and some of them were sent to the mines of
Palestine, and some of them were delivered over to the judges in Cilicia to be
chastised with injurious and insulting tortures. But from us the flame of the
persecution ceased a little, the sword having been satiated with the blood of
the holy martyrs; and a little rest and cessation threw some check upon the
persecution which took place in our days. And continuously the scourge of God
was sent upon Maximinus, the wicked tyrant, of all these evils, of which the
governors of the countries were the instructors and cunning ministers, [p. 34],
and that duke who was the general of the army of the Romans. And because of
those things which took place, they urged the Logistae of the cities, and the
military commander, and the Tabularii to rebuild with diligence what was fallen
of the temples of idols, and to compel all the men, together with their wives
and children and slaves, and even the infants at the breast, to sacrifice and
offer libations to devils, and also to force them to eat of the sacrifices. And
a command was given that every thing that was sold in the market should be
polluted with the libations and the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifices.
When these things, therefore, were done |32 in this manner, these actions which
were performed were abominated, even by the heathen who were without faith.

Great tumult, therefore, and consternation, such as there had never been the
like before, overwhelmed all those who belonged to us in every place; and the
souls of every one were set in affliction and trouble. But the Divine Power, on
account of those things which had taken place, gave encouragement to such as
belonged to Him, so that they were able to tread under foot the threats of the
judges, and to depise their tortures. But some servants of Christ's people, who
in the stature of their bodies were only youths, but their soul was armed with
the worship of God, both came of themselves, and when the governor was offering
libations to idols in the midst of the city, suddenly rushed upon him, and
called upon him to abandon his error, For there is no other God but one, the
Maker and Creator of all things; and when they were asked who they were, they
confessed they were Christians. No sooner, then, were these words uttered than
they received sentence of death, and so passed on easily and without delay to
Him in whom they made their confession. The name of the first of them was
Antoninus, and the second was called Zebinas, and the third's name was Germanus;
and these things were done on the thirteenth of Teshri the latter. And they had
at the same time a companion, a sister, one of the Lord's virgins, [p. 35] a
chaste and courageous maiden, who came from the city of Baishan. She, however,
had not acted in the same manner as those had done with whom she became
confessor; for she had been brought by force from Baishan, and suffered insults
and cruel tortures from the judge before she was condemned. But one of those who
was set over the streets of the city was the originator of these evils. His name
was Maxys, and he proved to all men that he was worse even than his name. This
same blessed woman he stripped naked, and she was only left covered from the
groin downwards, in order that he might indulge his lustful eyes in looking at
the rest of her limbs; and he carried her about through the whole city, being
tortured with straps; and afterwards took her before the tribunal of the |33
governor, where with great boldness of speech she made the confession of her
faith--that she was a Christian; and there also displayed her courage and
patience under every kind of torture; and was afterwards delivered over by the
governor to be burnt with fire. Moreover, the same judge became day by day more
ferocious, displaying both his merciless disposition and cruelty, and he was
carried away even beyond the laws of nature, so that he wreaked his vengeance
and hatred even upon the lifeless corpses of the Christians, and forbade their
burial. And of this same maiden of whom it has been just spoken, and of those
who on the same day were consummated by confession, orders were issued that
their bodies should be devoured by animals, and be carefully guarded night and
day till they should be consumed by birds. Persons were therefore appointed to
watch over this barbarous order from a distance, and to keep guard to prevent
the bodies of the confessors from being carried away by us by stealth. So the
beasts of the field, and the dogs, and the fowls of the heaven, were here and
there tearing to pieces the flesh of men, so that men's bones and entrails were
found even in the middle of the city; and all men were clad in sorrow on account
of these things, because never before had such atrocities been done. [p. 35.]
And great sorrow and grief came even upon those who were aliens from us in the
faith, because of these things which their own eyes beheld; for even before the
gates of the city was exhibited the dreadful spectacle of men's bodies devoured
by wild beasts. When, therefore, things had continued in this manner for many
days, there happened in the midst of the city a prodigy which will scarcely be
believed. The atmosphere was perfectly calm and clear, when, all on a sudden,
many of the columns of the porticos in the city emitted spots as it were of
blood, while the market-places and the streets became sprinked and wet as with
water, although not a single drop had fallen from the heavens. And it was
declared by the mouth of every one, that the stones shed tears and the ground
wept; for even the senseless stones and the ground without feeling could not
endure this foul and barbarous deed; and that the blood which flowed from the
stones, and |34 the earth which without any rain emitted as it were tears from
its body, rebuked all these godless folk. And perhaps it may seem to such as did
not see with their own eyes the things which I have described, that what I have
related must be attributed to a fable devoid of truth. Far from it, for these
things which we have described were actually seen by those who were living at
that time, some of whom are alive unto this very day.

Such then was the consummation of those holy martyrs of God; whose struggles and
conflicts against error were exhibited before our eyes. THE CONFESSION OF ARES,
AND PRIMUS (Gr. Promus), AND ELIAS, IN THE SIXTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR
DAYS AT ASHKELON. IN the month Canun the former, on the fourteenth of the
same--on this day some Egyptian martyrs of God were seized before the gates of
Ashkelon; and because, when they were questioned as to who they were, they
acknowledged that they were Christians, [p. 38] and confessed that they had
undertaken the journey, and were come from their own country for the purpose of
taking sustenance to the confessors who were in Cilicia, they also were brought
as malefactors before the judge. For the keepers of the gates of the city were
cruel men, and laid hold upon these martyrs, and took them before Firmillianus
the governor, because he was also, up to that time, still over the people of
Palestine; and he decreed a cruel sentence against them: and some of them he
ordered to have their eyes and their feet injured by fire and steel, and some of
them to be delivered over to death by the sword; but one of them, whose name was
Ares, was consummated in his confession by a fierce fire, and Primus and Elias
were beheaded by the sword. |35 THE CONFESSION OF PETER, WHO WAS SURNAMED
ABSALOM, IN THE SEVENTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS IN THE CITY OF
CAESAREA. ON the tenth day of the month Canun the latter, Peter, who was called
Absalom, appeared, a famous confessor of the kingdom of God; and so manfully did
he behave in his struggle for the worship of God, and so victorious was he in
the conflict of his martyrdom, that he even excited admiration in the judge
himself, and made those who were standing by him wonder greatly. Much,
therefore, did they strive to induce him to have pity upon himself, to spare his
own person, and save himself from the evils which were hanging over him; but he
disregarded in his mind all that they said. And those who surrounded him--not
those only who knew him, but those also who were not acquainted with him--urged
him, and intreated him one after another, and besought the blessed man as if it
were for their own lives. But some of them confirmed his good resolution;
others, again, by what they said, suggested irresolution [p. 39], bidding him to
regard with pity his own youth and person. Those of the same mind as himself
called to his remembrance that hell fire which is to come, while others tried to
make him afraid of the fire which was visible before him. Some endeavoured to
terrify him by the mortal judge, while others reminded him of the Judge of all
judges. Some called upon him to regard this transitory life, while others
persuaded him to look to the kingdom of heaven. Those who belonged to the right
hand invited him to turn towards them, while they who belonged to the left hand
tried to persuade him to mind earthly things. But he was a young man, handsome
in person, brave in mind, and active and able in body; and being such he proved
his purity like gold in the furnace and the fire, and loved his confession in
our Saviour better than the life of this time, which so soon passes away. And
there was burned together |36 with him in the same fire one who belonged to the
heresy of Marcion, and called himself a bishop; and he gave himself up to this
as in the zeal for righteousness, although he was not in true knowledge, and
endured martyrdom by fire in company with this God's martyr. And this holy
martyr of whom we have spoken came from Aia (Gr. Anea), a village which is on
the confines of Beth Gobrin; and he contended in the consummation which we have
described, and obtained in the conflict the crown of the glorious victory of the
martyrs of Christ. THE CONFESSION OF PAMPHILUS, AND VALES, AND SELEUCUS, AND
PAULUS, AND PORPHYRIUS, AND THEOPHILUS (Theodulus), AND JULIANUS, AND ONE
EGYPTIAN, BEING IN NUMBER EIGHT, IN THE SEVENTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR
DAYS. THE time now calls upon us to describe that grand spectacle which was
displayed of the all-holy martyr Pamphilus, and of those [p. 39] who together
with him were consummated by martyrdom; men admirable and brave, who exhibited,
under many forms, contests for the sake of the worship of God. For indeed there
are many whom we know to have been victorious in this persecution; but in none
altogether like these whom we have just mentioned did we behold so completely
all kinds of bodily stature, and of moral qualities of soul and education, and
of deaths by different tortures, receiving the glory of the consummation of
martyrdom by various triumphs. For all of the Egyptians who were with them
appeared to be youths and boys; others Were young men in the prime of life,
among whom was Porphyrius; others again were in the full vigour both of mind and
body, namely, those who were of the house of Pamphilus, that name dearly beloved
by me; and Paulus, who came from Iamna; and Seleucus and Julianus, both of whom
came from the country of Cappadocia. There were also among them some venerable
seniors who were bent down with deep old age, as Vales, a deacon of the church
of Jerusalem, and that other, whose conduct was conformable to his name, |37
Theodulus. There was, likewise, a variety of bodily stature : and they differed
too in their mental acquirements, for some of them were very simple-minded and
ordinary like children, while others were possessed of profound understandings
and courageous habits. There were also some among them who were also instructed
in theology, and in all of them was their praiseworthy courage remarkable. But
like the sun which giveth light to the day among the stars, so in the midst of
them all shone forth the excellency of My Lord Pamphilus--for it is not meet
that I should mention the name of that holy and blessed Pamphilus without
styling him My Lord, for he indeed had no slight acquaintance with that learning
which those among the Greeks admire; while there was no one in our time who was
[p. 40] so well instructed in those scriptures which proceed from the Spirit of
God, and also in the whole range of theology. And what is even greater than
these acquirements, he was possessed of natural wisdom and discernment, that is,
he received them by the gift of God. Moreover, Pamphilus was by birth of an
illustrious family, and his mode of living in his own country was as that of the
noble. Seleucus also had held a place of authority in the army. Some of them
again were of the middle rank of life, and one also, who was called to this
honour together with the rest, was a slave of the governor. Porphyrius too was
reckoned the slave of Pamphilus, but in his love towards God and in his
admirable confession he was his brother; and by Pamphilus himself he was
considered rather as a beloved son; and, indeed, in every thing he closely
resembled him who had brought him up. And were any one to say of this company of
them all that they were a perfect representation of a congregation of the
church, I should say that he did not go beyond the truth. For among them
Pamphilus had been honoured with the presbytery, and Vales was in the orders of
the diaconate, and others among them had the rank of readers; and Seleucus, even
before the consummation of his confession, had been honoured as a confessor by
the suffering of cruel scourgings, and had endured with patience his dismissal
from his command in the army. And |38 the remainder of the others who came after
these were hearers and receivers (catechumens). And thus, under a small form,
they completed the representation of a perfect church of many persons. And so
this admirable selection of all these martyrs and such as these, while we looked
upon them, although they were not many in number, lo ! they still bore the
semblance of a many-stringed harp, which consists of chords that do not resemble
each other--the tenor and base, and flat, and sharp, and medial, all of which
are well arranged together by the art of music. Like this resemblance, also,
there were among them young men and old men together, and slaves and free, [p.
41] and clever and simple, and noble and common, and believers together with
hearers (catechumens), and deacons with presbyters: all of which were variously
harmonized together by one all-skilful--the Word--the only (begotten) of God.
And they displayed each individually the excellency of the power within them by
the endurance of tortures, and at the place of judgment produced the melody of a
glorious confession.

It is also worthy of our admiration, when we look to their number, how they were
twelve like the prophets and the apostles. Nor is it fit that we should omit the
all-patient readiness of every one of them, each in his own part; the combs on
their sides, and their incurable scourgings, and their tortures of every kind,
and how they forced by violence these martyrs to do that which was abominated by
them. And what necessity is there for our telling of the divine sayings which
they uttered, as though stripes were reckoned by them as nothing, while with a
cheerful and joyous countenance they answered the interrogatories of the judge,
and jested with readiness under the very tortures themselves. And when he asked
them over again whence they came, they avoided speaking of the city to which
they belonged on earth, and spake of the city which in truth is theirs, and said
that they were from Jerusalem which is above in heaven, confessing that they
were hastening to go thither. And because of these things the judge became the
more enraged at them, and prepared himself against them with cruel scourgings,
in order that he might |39 accomplish his will upon them; but when he failed in
his expectations, he gave command that one of them should receive the crown of
victory.

Moreover, the modes of their deaths also were of all kinds; for two of them were
hearers (catechumens), and they were baptized at their deaths with the baptism
of fire only, while others of them were delivered up to be crucified like our
Saviour. But Pamphilus, that name so especially dear to me--one who was a lover
of God in truth, and a peacemaker among all men-- [p. 42] received a triumph
different from these. He was the ornament of the church of Caesarea, because he
also sat in the chair of the presbytery, both adorning it and being himself
adorned thereby during his ministry in that place. In all his conduct too he was
truly godly, being at all times in communion with the Spirit of God; for he was
eminently virtuous in his mode of life, shunning wealth and honours, despising
and rejecting them, and devoting himself entirely to the word of God. For every
thing that he possessed from his parents he sold and distributed to the naked,
and the sick, and the poor, and continued in private life without any
possessions, and passed his time in the patient study of divine philosophy. He
therefore quitted Beyrout, the city in which he had grown up in stature and
learning together; and for the sake of his knowledge and understanding he
attached himself to men seeking perfection. Human wisdom he abandoned, and loved
the word of God. He also adopted the heavenly habit of the prophets, and was
crowned with martyrdom. The next after him that was brought to the conflict was
Vales, a man venerable for his comely grey hairs, being in appearance a pure and
respectable old man. Nor was he worthy of honour on this account only, but also
for his great knowledge of the holy scriptures; for his memory was completely
stored with the scriptures, so that he could repeat God's scriptures by rote
like one in whose memory the whole scriptures were deposited. Moreover, he was a
deacon of God's church. And he that was reckoned third among them was named
Paul,; a man who was fervent in the Spirit of God; and he came from |40 the city
Iamna. And he also had previously to this his confession contended with the
suffering [p. 43] of the cautery of confession. And when they had endured
affliction in prison for about two years, the immediate cause of their martyrdom
was the arrival of those Egyptians who were also consummated in martyrdom at the
same time together with them. For having accompanied those men who had been sent
to suffer affliction in the mines of Cilicia, and being then on their way back
to return to their own country, as they entered in at the gate of Caesarea, they
were questioned as to who they were and whence they came; and when they made no
concealment of the truth, but said, We are Christians, they were at once seized,
just as if they had been malefactors. And they were in number five. So when they
were carried before the judge, and spake in his presence with openness of
speech, they were forthwith committed to prison; and on the next day--the
sixteenth of the month Shebat--they, together with those who appertained to
Pamphilus, were brought before Firmillianus. First of all, then, the governor
tried the Egyptians, and proved them by every kind of torture; and he brought
forward the first of them into the midst, and asked him what was his name; but
instead of his real name he heard from them the name of a prophet. Also the rest
of the Egyptians who were with him, instead of those names which their fathers
had given them after the name of some idol, had taken for themselves the names
of the prophets, such as these-- Elias, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Samuel, Daniel. And
when the judge heard from the same martyrs some such name as these, he did not
perceive the force of what they said, and asked them again what was the city to
which they belonged. He then gave a reply similar to the former, and said,
Jerusalem is my city; for he was acquainted with that city of which St. Paul
spake, Jerusalem which is above is free, and our mother in whom we confess is
the holy church. And the governor inquired diligently about this. Then he
brought against them the combs and cauteries of fire. But he, when his hands had
been bound |41 behind him, and his feet were twisted in the stocks, sealed what
he had said before, [p. 44.] and spake the truth. And again, when he questioned
him many times as to what city and in what country was that Jerusalem which was
said to belong to the Christians only, he replied, It is in the east, and on the
side of the light of the sun, again making use of this artifice as it were in
his own mind, while those who surrounded him continued to torture him with
combs. Nor was he at all changed, but seemed as one who had no body. Then the
judge grew furious in his mind, and imagined that perchance the Christians had
built in some place a city for themselves; and so he became much more instant
with tortures against them, making inquiries respecting this city, and the
country in the east. When, therefore, he had punished this young man with
scourging, and perceived that he varied not at all from what he had said to him
at the first, he gave sentence of death against him that he should be beheaded.
The rest then of the Egyptians he tried with tortures similar to his, and they
likewise agreed in their confession with him who had preceded them. And then,
after these things he turned to those of the house of Pamphilus; and when he
learned that they had been previously tried by many tortures, he thought that it
would be folly in him to apply to them the same tortures again, and so labour in
vain. He therefore only put to them the question whether they would now comply;
and when he heard from them one after another the words of confession, he
condemned them in the same manner as those who had preceded them, and gave
sentence against them that they should be beheaded. And before the whole of the
sentence was uttered, a youth from among the men, who was a slave of Pamphilus,
cried out from the midst of the crowd which was standing round about the place
of judgment; and then came forward into the midst, and cried out again with a
loud voice to persuade the governor to grant permission for the bodies of the
confessors to be buried. And he was no other than the blessed Porphyrius, the
beloved disciple of Pamphilus, the mighty man of valour, [p. 45.] But Porphyrius
himself was not yet eighteen years old; and he had been |42 instructed in
literature and writing, and for his modesty and manners was deserving of all
praise. This youth then, who had been brought up by such a man, when he was
informed of the sentence which had been issued against his master, cried out
from the middle of the crowd, and begged the bodies of the confessors. Then that
wretch, who is not worthy to be called a man, but rather a savage brute, not
only refused to grant this becoming request, but also neither spared nor had
pity upon one who in years was but a youth; and having learnt this one thing
only, that he was a Christian, gave orders to those who applied the tortures to
tear him with all their might: and after this, having commanded the blessed
youth to sacrifice, and experiencing a refusal, he now applied the torture upon
him, not as if it were upon a human body, but rather as if it were upon lifeless
wood or stone, and commanded him to be torn even till they came to his bones and
entrails. And when he had done this for a long while, he perceived that he was
labouring to no purpose; and thus having exhibited his own cruelty and brutality
upon this youth, he condemned him to be given up to a slow and lingering fire.
Now, he was brought to the conflict before Pamphilus was consummated, and so
departed from the body before his master who had brought him up. And thus
Porphyrius exhibited himself as a warrior who was crowned with victory in all
his conflicts; and although he was weak in body, he was of a cheerful
countenance and courageous mind, and trod along the path of death without fear,
and in truth he was full of the Holy Ghost. And when he arrived at the place
where he was put to death, having put on his cloak like a philosopher, with his
shoulder uncovered, he looked with his eyes up towards heaven, and in his mind
looked down upon all the life of man, and approached the fire with a soul
unmoved, like one who had no harm near him, and with a watchful mind, and
undisturbed, he gave charge to his friends respecting his human affairs, and
then was anxious to go speedily [p. 46] to the presence of God. When, therefore,
the fire had been kindled at a distance around him, he caught at the flames here
and there with his mouth, and his soul hastened to |43 the journey which lay
before him. Such was the conflict of Porphyrius.

Then Seleucus carried to Pamphilus a report of all these things which had been
done to Porphyrius, and as the reward for this intelligence it was granted of
God to Seleucus that he should become a martyr with Pamphilus. For immediately
after he had given information to Pamphilus respecting the struggle and conflict
of Porphyrius, as he saluted one of the martyrs with a kiss, the soldiers laid
hold upon him and took him before the governor; and as Seleucus himself was
anxious to go in company with the confessors, commandment was given for him to
be beheaded. And this Seleucus came from the country of Cappadocia, and had
acquired a glorious reputation by his military service, having held an important
command in the ranks of the army. And not only this, but he also surpassed most
men in stature by the size of his person and his prowess. His appearance, too,
was very handsome. Moreover, at the commencement of the persecution he had been
famous for his endurance of scourgings in confession; and after he had been
dismissed from his military service on account of his religion, his zeal
suffered not him to abstain from doing good, and so he was anxious to serve in
the beloved ranks of Christ. As a visitor, therefore, of lonely orphans, and of
destitute widows, and of those who were afflicted with poverty and sickness, he
became a visitor and supporter of these, and, like a tender father, endeavoured
to heal their afflictions. And after all these things, in which God delighteth
more than sacrifices, and burnt-offerings, and incense, he was counted worthy of
being consummated by confession. And this was the tenth combatant of those who
have been mentioned above as having received all together on the same day their
consummation and crown. And it seemed as if a great door of the kingdom of
heaven had been opened by the confession of Pamphilus [p. 47], and an abundant
entrance been effected for others as well as himself into the paradise of God.
The next that was brought forward after Seleucus was the pure and pious
Theodulus; and he was one of the slaves of the governor, and the oldest of them
all, and was much respected by |44 them all, both on account of his manners and
his years; and although he was the father of three generations, and had served
his master with fidelity, still he had no mercy on him when he heard that he had
saluted the martyrs in the same way as Seleucus. For after this had been told to
his master, he was excited with fury against him much more than against the
rest; and gave command that he should be put to death by the same mode of
suffering as our Saviour, and suffer martyrdom on the cross. But there was still
one wanted after these to complete the number twelve; and so Julianus arrived
from a journey, and, as if it were on purpose to make up the number of martyrs
twelve, the moment he arrived, before he was yet entered into the city,
immediately on the way he was told by some one respecting the matter of the
confessors, and ran to have a sight of the confessors; and when he beheld the
bodies of the saints lying upon the ground, he was filled with joy, and embraced
them one after another with heavenly love, and saluted them all with a kiss. And
while he was still visiting them, and lamenting that he himself had not suffered
martyrdom with them, the officers seized him, and took him before the judge; and
that judge commanded what his evil heart conceived, and delivered him also to a
slow fire. So this Julianus, also, with joy and gladness praised God with a loud
voice for having counted him worthy of this; and his soul ascended to his Lord
with the company of the confessors. And this man was by family of Cappadocia,
and in his soul he was filled with the fear of God, being a quiet and religious
man, and diligent in the practice of every virtue. There was also in him a
glorious savour of the Holy Spirit; and he was counted worthy to be associated
with the company of these who received the consummation of confession together
with the blessed Pamphilus. [p. 48.]

Four days and nights then were the bodies of the all-holy martyrs of God exposed
to be devoured by wild beasts, by the command of the governor Firmillianus.
When, therefore, nothing had touched them, not even the wild beasts, they were
taken up whole without the permission of the governor, and with due |45
reverence committed to an honourable burial; and were laid in the interior of
the churches, and so consigned to a never-to-be-forgotten memorial in the
temples of the house of prayer, that they might be honoured of their brethren
who are with God. THE CONFESSION OF HADRIANUS AND EUBULUS, IN THE SEVENTH YEAR
OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS. WHEN the consummation of Pamphilus and of those
martyrs who were with him was published abroad by the mouths of all men, both
Hadrianus and Eubulus, from a place which is called part of Batanea, had
hastened to the rest of the martyrs at Caesarea: and when they drew near to the
gate of the city, they were interrogated as to the cause for which they were
come, and having stated the truth, they were taken before Firmillianus; and he
at once, without any delay, ordered them, in the first place, to have their
sides torn with combs, and punished them in a peculiar manner, as if they had
been enemies and were hated by him; and not being satisfied with this, he
condemned them to be devoured by wild beasts. And after an interval of two days,
the confessor Hadrianus was cast before a lion on the fifth of Adar, and bravely
accomplished his conflict, and after having been torn by the beast, he was at
last put to death by the sword. Eubulus, also, on the second day following, the
seventh of Adar, when the judge had made many attempts with him, and said to
him, If thou wilt sacrifice to devils thou shalt be set at liberty in peace,
both despised the whole existence of this passing time, and chose for himself
everlasting life rather than this fleeting and transitory life. He was then cast
to a lion, and after [p. 49] he had been torn by the teeth of the lion, he
suffered in the same manner as those who were gone before him. He was the last
of all that suffered martyrdom and finished his conflict in Caesarea. |46 THE
CONFESSION OF PAULUS (Gr.Peleus) AND NILUS, AND PATRIMYTHEAS (Gr. Patermutheus)
AND ELIAS, IN THE SEVENTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS.

IT was the nineteenth day of Ilul, and during the same wonderful conflict of the
martyrs of God, that a great spectacle was assembled in Phaeno, in this same
Palestine; and all the combatants were perfect, and in number they were about a
hundred and fifty. Many of them, also, were Egyptians, amounting to more than a
hundred. And the same in the first place had their right eyes and their left
legs in their sinews destroyed by cautery of fire and by the sword. And then
after these things they were delivered over to dig copper in the mines. Those,
also, who belonged to Palestine had to endure afflictions in the same manner as
the Egyptians; and they were all assembled together in a place called Zauara, as
a congregation consisting of many persons. There was also much people with them,
who came from other places to see them, and many others who ministered to them
in their necessities, and visited them in love, and filled up their lack. And
all the day they were occupied in the ministry of prayer, and in the service of
God, and in teaching and reading; and all the afflictions which passed over them
were esteemed by them as pleasures, and they spent all that time as if it had
been in a festive assembly. But the enemy of God and wicked envier was not able
to bear these things, so there was immediately sent out against them one of
those generals of the Romans that is styled Dux; and first of all he separated
them one by one from each other, and some of them were sent to that wretched
place Zauara, and some not; and some of them to Phaeno, the place where the
copper is dug; [p. 50.] and the others went to different places. Afterwards he
selected from among those in Phaeno four of them who were of great excellence,
in order that by them he might terrify the rest. Having, therefore, brought them
to the trial, and not one of them having shewn any signs of dismay, this |47
merciless judge, thinking that no punishment was so severe as that by fire,
delivered up God's holy martyrs to this kind of death. When, therefore, they
were brought to the fire, they cast themselves into the flames without fear, and
dedicated themselves as an offering more acceptable than all incense and
oblations; and presented their own bodies to God as a holocaust more excellent
than all sacrifices. And two of these were Bishops Paulus and Nilus; and the
other two were selected of the laity, Patermytheus and Elias; and by race they
were all of them Egyptians. They were pure lovers of that exalted philosophy
which is of God, and offered themselves like gold to the fire to be purified.
But He who giveth strength to the weak, and multiplieth comfort to the
afflicted, deemed them worthy of that life which is in heaven, and associated
them with the company of angels. THE CONFESSION OF SILVANUS, AND OF THOSE WITH
HIM, IN THE EIGHTH YEAR OF THE PERSECUTION IN OUR DAYS. THIS blessed Silvanus
came from Gaza, and he was one of the veteran soldiers; and when his freedom
from service proved to be contrary to his habits, he enlisted himself as a good
soldier of Christ. For he was a perfectly meek man, and of bright turn of mind,
and used his faith with simplicity and purity. And he was a presbyter of the
church in the city of Gaza, and conducted himself there with great propriety.
And because the conflict for life was proclaimed against the soldiers of Christ
[p. 51], he, an old man, of a noble person, went down to the Stadium, and there,
in his first confession before the people of Caesarea, he acquitted himself
valiantly, being tried with scourgings. And when he had endured these bravely,
he fought in a second conflict, in which the old man endured the combs on his
sides like a young man. And at the third conflict he was sent to the copper
mines; and during a life of much length he exhibited great probation. He was
also deemed worthy of the office of the episcopate, |48 and also rendered
himself illustrious in this office of his ministry. But on the fourth day of
Iyar the great gate of heaven was fully opened to him, and this blessed man went
up with a company of martyrs, not being left alone, for a great assembly of
brave men followed him. And suddenly a mandate of wickedness was issued, and
command was given that all those in the mines who were become enfeebled through
old age or sickness, and those who were not able to work, should be put to death
by the sword; and God's martyrs, being all together forty in number, were
beheaded all in one day. And many of them were Egyptians, but their leader and
guide was this same martyr and bishop of martyrs, Silvanus, a man truly blessed
and beloved of God. Being now arrived at this place in our narrative, we will
inform you how God in a short time took vengeance upon those wicked rulers, and
they speedily experienced the punishment of their crimes. For he that was
excited against these martyrs of God in a barbarous manner, like some fierce
wild beast, suffered a wretched punishment; and by the command of him who
possessed the power of the time, perished after the manner of a cruel wild
beast. And all the rest perished by various kinds of deaths, and received that
punishment which they deserved for their crimes. So, then, we have described and
made known the things which were done during the whole time of the persecution
among the people in Palestine. And all these were blessed martyrs [p. 52] of
God, who triumphed in our time; who made light of this temporary life, and
prized the worship of God far above every other thing, and have received the
hidden hope of those good things which are invisible to the bodily eyes.

Oh ! the blessed confessors of the kingdom of Christ, who were tried like gold
in the excellence of their righteousness, and obtained through the conflict in
which they were set the heavenly life of angels, and laid hold upon the promises
of the hidden good things of the victory of the high calling--For eye hath not
seen nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what God has
prepared for them that love him.

Here end the chapters of the narrative of the victories of the holy confessors
in Palestine.

[[These notes have been scanned, but only proofed a little, and all the Syriac
and most of the Greek omitted, as they seem unlikely to be of interest to anyone
online. I was going to omit them, rather than spend hours proofing them, but
what follows is a compromise]]

NOTES.

P. ii. l. 18.--"Who shall separate us ..... slaughter." Rom. viii. v. 35. l.
23.--" For him who loved us," v. 37... l. 27.--v. 38. ... l. 31.--Eusebius gives
the account of the martyrdom of Peter and Paul at Rome in his Eccl. Hist. book
ii. ch. 25.

P. iii. l. 6.--"As for those conflicts." Eusebius makes a similar statement,
book viii. ch. 13, on which passage Valesius has the following note:--(d) " He
means doubtless his book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine. For no other book
but that can be found, wherein Eusebius relates the conflicts of the Martyrs
which he himself had seen. The opinion of Christophorson is from this passage
further disproved, who supposed the book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine was
a part of this eighth book." In speaking here of Christophorson, Valesius
alludes to a note immediately preceding, which runs thus--" (b) To wit, in the
book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine, which is placed after this eighth
book. For in that Eusebius at large declares the martyrdom of Pamphilus, as may
there be seen. Moreover, from this place it appears that that book concerning
the Martyrs of Palestine was written by Eusebius after his Ecclesiastical
History, and after his books concerning the life of Pamphilus the Martyr.
Christophorson, who had inserted the whole Appendix before this chapter, was
forced to omit these words of Eusebius here, lest Eusebius should seem to have
forgot himself." See English Translation of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History in
"The History of the Church: fol., London, 1709, p. 148. I shall cite this in the
following notes as Eng. Trans. l. 18.--"Procopius." There is an antient Latin
copy of these Acts, as they stand here, published by Valesius in his notes upon
the first chapter of the Martyrs of Palestine as they exist in the Greek at the
end of the eighth book of the Eccl. Hist, of Eusebius. Respecting these, he
writes thus:--"The same relation is in the Acts of the Passion of Procopius the
Martyr, which begins thus : 'The first of the Martyrs that appeared in Palestine
was Procopius,' &c. From whence it is evident that those acts were translated
out of the Greek copy of Eusebius into Latin. To make this more apparent, it
will in no wise be unuseful to insert here the entire acts. For many things
worth our knowledge are contained in these which neither Baronius nor Molanus
happened to have a sight of."

Passio Sancti Procopii Martyris, qui passus est sub Fabiana judice 4 Nonas
Augusti.

Primus martyrum qui sunt in Palasstina, apparuit Procopius, vir coelestis
gratise, qui et ante martyrium sic suam vitam dis-posuit, ut etiam a parva
aetate castitati semper et morum virtuti-bus studeret. Corpus quidem suum sic
confecit, ut paene mortuum putaretur, animam vero ejus sic verbis confortabat
divinis, ut etiam corpori virtutem ex hujus refectione ministraret. Cibus et
potus ei panis et aqua fuit. Solis his utebatur, cum post biduum triduumque,
diem interdum etiam post septimam ad cibum rediret. Sacrorum quoque meditatio
sermonum ita mentem ejus obstrinxerat, ut nocte ac die in hoc infatigabilis
permaneret. dementias autem et mansuetudinis tanquam ceteris inferior documentum
sui prsebebat copiam. In verbis divinis ei tantum studium erat. Ilia vero quas
extrinsecus sunt, mediocriter attigerat. Igitur genere quidem Aeliensis,
conversatione autem vel habitatione Scythopolitarius erat. Ibi ecclesise tria
ministeria prsebebat, unum in legendi officio, alterum in Syri interpretatione
sermonis, et tertium adversus daemones manus impositione consummans. Cumque ab
Scythopoli una cum sociis in Caesaream. transmissus fuisset, ab ipsis portis ad
prsesidem ducitur, et priusquam carceris vel vinculorum experiretur angustias,
in ipso ingressu suo a judice Flaviano ut diis sacrificaret impellitur. At ille
magna voce non esse deos multos sed unum factorem omnium opificemque testatus
est. Judex autem plaga sermonis ictus et conscientia saucius, consensit ejus
sermoni. Atque ad alia se rursum argumenta constituit, ut vel regibus
sacrificaret. Sanctus autem Dei martyr sermonem ejus despiciens, Homeri, inquit,
versum dicens: non est bonum multos dominos esse. Unus dominus est, unus rex.
Itaque hoc verbo ejus audito, quasi qui infausta in regibus deprompsisset, jussu
judicis ducitur ad mortem, et capite amputate ingressum vitas ccelestis, vel
compendium beatus invenit: Desii septima Julii mensis, qua? Nonas Julias
"dicitur apud Latinos, primo anno quo adversus nos fuit persecutio. Hoc primum
in Caesarea martyrium consummatum est, regnante Domino nostro Jesu Christo, cui
honor et gloria in ssecula saeculorum. Amen. And in a note following this Latin
copy he writes (f)--" Many things are omitted in the Greek text of Eusebius,
which must be made perfect by these Acts in Latin. For when Eusebius had here
said expressly, that Procopius upon his first arrival was brought before the
judge, he adds nothing concerning the place from whence he came, where he was
apprehended, or to what place he was brought: nothing of which ought to have
been omitted. Besides, Eusebius does accurately relate the descent and country
of other Martyrs mentioned in this book; and if any of these had attained to any
Ecclesiastical honour, he does usually take notice of that also. But of this
person, who was the chief and leader of all the Palestine Martyrs, we see no
such relation made. This, it is probable, was not the fault of Eusebius, but of
his exscribers; for in the Latin Acts, which, as we before evinced, were
translated out of Eusebius, all these circumstances are manifestly declared."
See Ecc. Hist. Eng. Trans., p. 154. This Latin version is also printed by Th.
Ruinart, p. 353, Acta primorum Martyrum Sincera et Selecta, fol. Amstel. 1713.
There is also another Syriac version of these Acts taken from Cod. Nit. Vat. 1.
(See Assemani, Bibl. Orient, vol. 1. p. 56); and published with a Latin
translation and notes, by S. E. Assemani, in Acta SS. Martt. Orient, et
Occident., 2 vol. fol. Romae, 1748, part ii. p. 169. I have collated it with
this version. It is not of importance to note the variants, which seem to be
chiefly due to separate translations. l. 20.--" The first year of the
persecution in our days." The preface to the account of the Martyrs of
Palestine, in the eighth book of Ecc. Hist., says this was the 19th year of
Diocletian, or A. D. 303. See Ruinart Acta primorum Martt. p. 316.

P. iv. l. 2.--" His family was from Baishan." The Latin has-- '' Igitur genere
quidem Aeliensis, conversatione autem vel habitatione Scythopolitanus erat,"
with which the other Syriac agrees in reading, [Syriac snipped]. But his family
was from Jerusalem, and he dwelt in the city Baishan." Scythopolis was the Greek
name of Baishan, and Aelia occupied the site of Jerusalem. See, respecting
Baishan, S. E. Assemani, Ibid, not. p. 171. l.4.--" In the second order he
translated from Greek into Aramaic." He was an interpreter; on which passage S.
E. Assemani observes--"Ad munus interpretis recte adnotat Valesius, apud Syros
olim Divinas Scripturas Graece fuisse lectitatas, quas deinde Interpres Syriacus
redderet," Ibid. p. ii. p. 171. I should feel much disposed to question this
assertion without greater proof. Doubtless before this time the Scriptures were
translated into Syriac. The meaning of the passage may also imply that Procopius
was engaged in translating other ecclesiastical works into Syriac from the
Greek. This very copy of Eusebius was transcribed only 108 years after the
Martyrdom of Procopius. Ibid. p. 166. S. E. Assemani gives his opinion in these
words:--" Imo vero quum S. Procopius Sanctorum librorum a Graeco in Syriacum
sermonem in ecclesia Scythopolitana Interpres dicatur, plane inde colligitur,
Syriacum seu Chaldaicum idioma Palsestinis tune vernaculum fuisse, atque adeo
ejusdem Procopii, quemadmodum et aliorum martyrum in Palaestina coronatorum,
Acta Syriace seu Chaldaice ab Eusebio fuisse primum exarata, eademque ipsa esse,
quse prge manibus habemus, omnino tenendum est. Neque enim verisimile est,
Eusebium, quam in usum popularium suorum, et in ovium sibi concreditarum
solatium scribebat, martyrum historian! iis literis consignasse, quas omnes non
callerent." Ibid. p. 166. l. 12.--" Flavianus." The other Syriac has [Syriac],
Paulinus, evidently a mistake of the scribe. l. 21.--" Greatest of the poets of
the Greeks." The Latin has " Homeri inquit versum, dicens;" and the other
Syriac, [Syriac], "Homer, the celebrated of the poets of the Greeks."' Those
words of Homer, Iliad ii. 24, were often cited by the early Christians, and do
not therefore prove that Procopius was acquainted with his poems. See
Heinichen's note. l. 19.--"The Emperors, who were four in number." These were
Diocletianus, Maximianus, Constantius, and Galerius. See Eusebius Ecc. Hist. b.
viii. c. 13; and supplement to same book; and Valesius's notes, Eng. Trans. pp.
148. 153. l. 27.--" On the seventh day of the month Heziran." See Valesius's
note on this passage in the Greek; Eng. Trans. p. 157. l. 31.--" The confession
of Alphaeus, Zacchaeus, and Romanus." Their festival is celebrated on the 18th
of November. See Baillet, Vies des Saints. There is also a Syriac version of
these Acts published by S. E. Assemani in Acta SS. Martt. part ii. p. 177.

1. 35.--"Festival--on the twentieth year." That is, Diocletian's Vicennalia. See
Valesius's note on this place, Eng. Trans. p. 158; and also on Life of
Constantine, ibid. p. 529.

P. v. l. 9.--" Of Gadara." So in the other Syriac. This is not in the Greek, but
Valesius has supplied the fact in the following note (g):--"He was of Gadara,
concerning whom we have this passage in the Menology at 18th of November--The
commemoration of the holy Martyrs, Michaeus, Zacchaeus, deacon of Gadara, and
Alphaeus, ibid. p. 158. See also Ruinart, n. 4. p. 317, Acta prim. Martt. l.
22.--"Four holes of the rack." Valesius has the following note on Eusebius, Ecc.
Hist. b. v. c. i.--" The fashion of this engine for punishment, and the manner
how persons were punished in it, seems to have been this. It was a piece of
timber wherein five pairs of holes were made at a certain distance one from the
other. Into these holes, as it were into boots, they put the feet of the
offenders, and fastened them therein with cords and fetters. The meaning of
their feet being strained to the fifth hole is, they forced them to straddle so
wide as to put their feet into the last pair of holes, which posture (those
holes being at the greatest distance one from the other) was the sharpest degree
of torture in this engine."--Eng. Trans. p. 71. See also Gallonius De SS. Martt.
cruciatibus, Parisiis, 1659. l. 25.--"Exorcist." Valesius has this note on
Exorcists (c):-- " There was in former times a twofold use of the Exorcists in
the Church; for their business was to cleanse both those possessed with devils,
and also the catechumens, who were exorcised more than once; for after every
examination in their catechism they were brought to the Exorcist ungirt and with
their shoes off, that they might be purged by him. See Cyril Hierosol. in
Procatechesi ad llluminandos, and Chrysostom in his first Homily ad
Illuminandos." Eng. Trans. p. 158. See also Bingham, Antiquities of the
Christian Church, book iii. ch. 4. Respecting Readers or Lectors, see ibid. ch.
v.

P. vi. l. 16.--"Combs." See Gallonius de SS. Martt. Cruciat. ch. v. l. 33.--"
Romanus." There are other Acts of Romanus, in Syriac, giving a much longer and
fuller account than this. British Museum Cod. Add. 12,174, fol. 300 b. In these
the day of his martyrdom is given the 19th of Teshri the latter. See L. Surius,
de Probatis Sanctorum vitis, at the 18th of November, and Baillet, Vies des
Saints, at the same day. See a further account of him from Eusebius de
Resurrectione; Prudentius peri sephanon, &c., collected and published by
Ruinart. Acta prim. Martt. p. 357 seq.

P. vii. l. 7. -- " The judge." His name was Asclepiades. See Prudentius Hymn
peri stephanon, l. 687, in Ruinart, Acta prim. Martt. p. 361. S. E. Assemanni
also observes: -- "Hunc Asclepiadem vocant Acta apud Mombritium et Prudentius in
Hymno." See Acta SS. Martt. ii. p. 182, and the other Syriac Acts, Mus. Brit.
Cod. Add. 12,174. l. 24.-- " The officers," [Syriac], " Quaetionarii." They were
the persons who inflicted the punishment, as appears from the following passage
of the acts of Trypho : -- " Praefectus autem admirans tantam eorum
perseverantiam, jussit eos manibus post tergum ligatis nudos caedi : et cum
acerrime caederentur, quaestionarii deficiebant, Praefectus ira repletus jussit
ungulas et lampades eorum lateribus applicari. Quaestionarii accedentes jussa
complebant." See Ruinart, Act. prim. Martt. p. 163. He also has this note, ibid.
p. 172. -- " Quaestionis nomine designat tormenta, quae ad confessionem
eliciendam adhibentur : vox etiam nunc ad eandem rem significandam usurpata est.
Ab ea Confessor es quaestionati et torti dicuntur apud Cyprian, Epist. ad
Florentium, 66. l. 34. -- "The emperor Diocletian." The name is not given in the
Greek. It appears from this that Valesius was mistaken when he wrote, -- " I
suppose he means Galerius Caesar, for Diocletian made his abode then at
Nicomedia." See Eng. Trans. p. 158. The other Syriac Acts, however, give the
name [Syriac], "Maximinus, the son-in-law of Diocletianus." Mus. Brit. Cod, Add.
fol. 304.

P. viii. l. 8. -- " Then did great wonder." The miraculous part of this narrative, which savors so strongly of the superstitious, is omitted from the Greek; and that passage added which, in the Syriac, commences the account of Zacchaeus, but is not found at that place in the Greek. The story of Romanus having spoken after his tongue was cut out is, however, repeated in the other Syriac Acts, and is also told in the Greek Menaum. See Valesius, note (a) Eng. Trans. p. 158. Ruinart has the following note:--" Omittit miraculum Romani, etiam abscissa lingua loquentis, quod alias adeo exaggerat. Hinc patet non omnia isto libello contineri." p. 318. Eusebius himself also, in his book de Resurrectione, affirms the miracle. See Ruinart, Acta prim. Martt. p. 359; and Chrysostom, Oral. 43 et 48. Ibid. See also S. E. Assemani's note, Act. SS. Martt. p. ii. p. 182. l. 20.--" Upon the rack." The other Syriac version adds here, " to five holes," [Syriac] . Ibid. p. 181. l. 22.---" Strangling instrument." [Syriac]. Greek, τῳ ξυλῳ βροχῳ. The other Acts have, " He was strangled in Prison," fol. 304. l. 30.--"Confession of Timotheus." These Acts are also given in the other Syriac Translation by S. E. Assemani, Act. SS. Martt. p. ii. p. 184. See Surius, at the 19th of August, and Baillet, at the same day.

P.ix. l. 2.--"Edicts from the Emperors." Respecting these Edicts Valesius has
the following note on the Ecc. Hist. b. viii. c. vi. (e)-- " By the first Edict
of the Emperors against the Christians it was ordered that the churches should
be ruined and the scriptures burnt, and that those who were honoured with any
preferment (if they refused to sacrifice) should be deprived of their dignity.
The meaner sort were to lose their liberty. See chap. 2. Another Edict soon
followed this, that Bishops, Priests, and Deacons should be imprisoned, and by
all ways compelled to sacrifice. The third Edict comprehended all sorts of
Christians, as well those of the laity as the clergy; which Edict was proposed
(says Eusebius in the chap. 3 of his book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine)
in the second year of the Persecution. But this seems rather to have been the
fourth Edict: for the second and third concerned the Presbyters only. By the
second it was ordered they should be imprisoned, and by the third it was
enjoined that they should by tortures be compelled to sacrifice." Eng. Trans. p.
143. l. 25.--" The people of the city of Gaza were accursed in their
heathenism." See the account given by Theodoretus, book iii. c. 6 and 7; and S.
E. Assemani, Acta SS. Martt. p. ii. p. 186, note (4).

P. x. l. 9.--"Theckla (she of our days)." There were several martyrs of this
name. S. E. Assemani has published the Acts of two others. See Acta SS. Martt.
vol. i. pp. 101, 123; but Eusebius seems especially to draw the distinction with
reference to Theckla, the companion of St. Paul, so celebrated in the early ages
of Christianity. See Grabe, Spicilegium, vol. i. p. 95 Jer. Jones, New and Full
Method, vol. ii. p. 353; Tischendorf, Acta Apost. Apocr. Lips. 1851, p. 40.
There are also antient copies in Syriac of the Acts of Theckla, brought from the
Nitrian Convent, now in the British Museum. The account of Theckla is in one or
two instances found in a volume containing also the Books of Ruth, Esther, and
Judith, and called in Syriac " The Book of Women." See Cod. Add. 12,174; 14,641;
14,652. l.15.--"Timotheus." The Greek has Τιμολαος. See Surius, at March 24th,
and Baillet, at the same day.

1. 16.--"Paesis." The Syriac is [Syriac], "Plasis," which I have corrected here
from the reading below, where it is [Syriac], Paesis, or Pausis, for some Greek
MSS. read Παησις and others Παυσις. Valesius notes (c)--" In the Maz. and Med.
MSS. his name is Paesis. In the Greek Menology (which Canisius published) at the
5th of March, instead of Paesis he is called Publius." Eng. Trans. p. 159. The
variation in the Syriac doubtless arose from confounding Α with Λ in the word
ΠΑΗΣΙΣ or ΠΛΗΣΙΣ. l. 27.--" The Phrygians." There is no mention of Phrygians in
the Greek; but in Ecc. Hist, book viii. ch. 11, Eusebius speaks of the
destruction of a whole city of Christians in Phrygia. These, perhaps, were some
of them who had been reserved for a spectacle in the theatre.

P. xi. l. 35.--"A subdeacon." Syriac [], evidently a blunder for []. Greek
υποδιακονος.

P. xii. l. 5.--"A sudden change." See respecting this, Eusebius, Life of
Constantine, book i. ch. 18, Eng. Trans. p. 537, where Valesius has the
following note(a):--"This place is highly remarkable, for from it this
conclusion may be made, that the persecution began in Dioclesian's eighth, and
Maximian's seventh consulate, and not on the foregoing year, as Baronius will
have it. Concerning which matter I have spent many words in my notes on
Eusebius, Ecc. Hist, book viii. c. 2, note (c). For whereas Eusebius affirms
that the Emperors Dioclesian and Maximian divested themselves of their purple in
the year after the persecution was begun; and whereas it is manifest that they
did that on the year of Christ 304; what I have said does necessarily follow,,
that Dioclesian's persecution was begun in the year of Christ 303." Ruinart has
this note :--" Diocletianus scilicet prope Nicomediam, Herculius Mediolani,
cogente Galerio Maximinano, non autem sponte, uti hactenus putabatur. Totam hunc
historiani egregie describit Lactantius in lib. de Mortibus Persecut. cap. 18
seq. Acta Prim. Mar it. p. 319. l. 16.--The Greek adds a passage, "But we will
give an exact account of these matters at a more opportune place and time,"
referring perhaps to the Life of Constantine. l. 18.--" Epiphanius." Syriac, [];
but the Greek reads []; the other Syriac version published by S. E. Assemani,
Acta SS. Mart. P. ii. p. 189, []; and an Arabic account cited by him, []
Amphianus." In Latin he is called Apianus, Apphianus, and Amphianus. Ibid. See
Surius and Baillet, at the 2d of April. l. 33.--" He was sprung from one of the
most illustrious families in Syria." For which the Greek is, []. On this
Valesius has the following note (*):--"In the Med. MS. this city is called
Arpagas; in the Maz. MS. Arapagas, in the Fuk MS. Harpagas; but in the margin a
notice is given that it should be [] with an aspirate. I never met with any
thing concerning Aragas, a city of Lycia.--In the Menoeum of the Greeks,
Amphianus is said to have been born in Lydia."--Eng. Trans. p. 160. There seems,
therefore, to have been some mistake in the copies in this place at an early
period. l. 36.--"Educated at Beyrout." (c) "At Berytus there was a school of
civil law, as many have taken notice from Gregory Thaumaturgus, Eunapius,
Nonnus, and others. Gregorius Nazianzenus calls Berytus [], a famous city of
Phoenicia, the seat of Ausonian laws" See Valesius, ibid.

P. xiii. l. 20.--" This our city." The Greek has []. l. 23.--" Pamphilus." His
name is not mentioned in the Greek, and Valesius has this note on the passage
(f):--" Simeon Metaphrastes, who professes that he transcribed the Martyrdom of
Apphianus (or, as he calls him, Amphianus), out of Eusebius, has altered this
passage thus:--And having been conversant with us in divine studies, and
instructed in the sacred scriptures by the great Martyr Pamphilus, he obtained
no mean habit of virtue; by which he opened a passage for himself, whereby, he
procured the crown of Martyrdom" See Eng. Trans. p. 160. And in note (c), on the
same page, Yalesius writes:--" In the Menologies of the Greeks at the 2d of
April, Amphianus, with his brother Aedesius, is mentioned to have been
instructed in the Christian religion by Pamphilus the Martyr, at Berytus;" but
not having the knowledge of the fact that Pamphilus himself had been educated at
the same place--supplied in the Syriac, but omitted in the Greek--Yalesius
supposed the Menologies to be mistaken, See note (f), Ibid. It is evident from
this that Simeon Metaphrastes, and the compilers of the Menologies, read these
Acts as in the Syriac.

P. xv. 1. 12.--"His bones and entrails became visible." The same thing is said
of the Martyr Alexander, whose Acts were published by Ruinart:--" Ita enim
laniatum fuerat corpus crudelitate verberantium, ut carne soluta costarum,
patefactisque visceribus, secreta animae panderentur." Acta Prim. Martt. p. 77.
l. 28.--"Was hung up at a great height." See, respecting the various modes of
suspension in torture, Gallonius de SS. Martt. cruciatibus, p. 6.

P. xvii. l. 30.--After the Martyrdom of Apphianus the Greek adds the following
account of Ulpianus:--" At the same time, and almost on the same day, a young
man in the city of Tyre, by name Ulpianus, after he had been cruelly scourged,
and endured most grievous stripes, was sewn up in the raw hide of an ox,
together with a dog and a venomous serpent, and cast into the sea. Wherefore we
thought it agreeable to make mention of this person at [this place wherein we
have related] the Martyrdom of Apphianus."--Eng. Trans. p. 161. On this Valesius
has the following note (a):--"[] : that is, Although Ulpianus suffered not in
Palestine, but in Phoenicia., yet because he suffered martyrdom at the same
time, and died by the same sort of punishment that Apphianus had inflicted on
him, we judged it not unfit to make mention of him here. It is therefore
apparent from these words that Eusebius in this book designed to give an account
of the Martyrs of the Province of Palestine only."--Ibid. l. 33.--"Alosis." In
the Greek Aedesius, [], the variation has doubtless arisen from the similarity
of the names [] and [] in a MS. partly effaced. The other Syriac published by S.
E. Assemani has []. See Acta SS. Martt. P. ii. p. 195. The account of this
martyrdom is given by Baillet, at the 2d of April. l. 36.--"Both on the father's
and the mother's side." And so also in the other Syriac.--Ibid. p. 195. The
Greek has here [] only. Valesius has this note (''):--" In the Greek Menoeum, at
the second day of April, Aedesius is styled Apphianus's brother by the mother's
side."--Eng. Tram. p. 161. Hence it appears they both followed a text like this,
each omitting one part of it.

P. xviii. l. 12.--" In the society of the martyr Pamphilus." There is no mention of this or of Pamphilus in the Greek; but in the Mencea and in the Menology Apphianus, with his brother Aedesius, is said to have been instructed by Pamphilus. See Valesius, note (f), Eng. Trans. p. 160. l. 20.--" Hierocles." His name is also omitted in the Greek, but it is given in the Menaeum of the Greeks, which Valesius quotes in explanation of the passage, otherwise obscure, as it is found in the Greek, but plain enough from the facts supplied in the Syriac. " The explanation of this place is to be had from the Menaeum of the Greeks, where Aedesius is said to have struck Hierocles, Prefect of Egypt, with his fist. The words there are these:--But Aedesius, who was condemned to work in the mines of brass, having seen (at Alexandria in Egypt) Hierocles, the president, punishing the Christians, he accounted him a despicable person, and struck the president with his own hand.---Epiphanius and Lactantius mention this Hierocles, Prefect of Egypt, .who was famous for the great slaughter he made amongst the Christians. This was the Hierocles against which our Eusebius wrote a book." See Note (d) p. 161, Eng. Trans. See also Acta SS. Martt. S. E. Assemani, p. 1, p. 197. The last and best edition of Eusebius Against Hierocles was published by the late most excellent and learned Dr. Gaisford, Dean of Christ Church : Eusebii Pamphili contra Hieroclem et Marcellum libri, 8vo., Oxonii, 1852.

P. xix. l. 15.--" Agapius." The Syriac is [], which would be more correctly
transcribed "Agapus;" but the other Syriac, published by S. E. Assemani, Acta
SS. Martt. P. ii. p. 198, has []. The omission of the vowels causes frequently
great discrepancy in the transcription of Greek proper names in the Syriac
character. The Acts of Agapius are given by Baillet, at the 19th of August.

P. xx. l. 10.--" In another chapter." See above, p. 10. Valesius was mistaken in
supposing that this was a different Agapius from the one there mentioned. For it
is distinctly stated here, that although he had been condemned by the Judge
Urbanus to be devoured by wild beasts two years before, the sentence had not yet
been put into execution, but was kept back till now, when Maximinus was present.
See note (b) p. 162. Eng. Trans. He is called in the Greek the second
Agapius--[]--because, although he had been condemned before, he was not put to
death till after the other Agapius mentioned above, p. 11, who was beheaded. l.
12.--Concerning the leading about in the Stadium Valesius has this note on the
Ecc. Hist. b. v. c. 1 (z):--" The Gladiators and the Bestiarii, before they
began the encounter, were wont to be led about in the presence of the
spectators. See Lucian, in Toxari. This was usually done, not only with those
who let themselves out to play prizes, but also with those offenders, which were
condemned to the sword and to the wild beasts. So Martial, " Traducta est gyris,
nec cepit arena nocentes." Eng. Trans. p. 72. l. 25.--"Maximinus." The Emperor's
name is not mentioned in the Greek; but the following passage, not found in the
Syriac, is added:--"The Emperor himself being then present, being reserved as it
were on set purpose for that opportunity, that that saying of our Saviour's
which, by his divine knowledge, he foretold his disciples might be accomplished
in him, that they should be brought before kings for their testimony of him. See
Eng. Trans. p. 162.

P. xxi. l. 3.--" That Light which he had caused to arise." Syriac, []; and again
below, P. xxvii. l. 20.-- " The manifestation from him." Eusebius's work, Περι
Θεοφανιας, which having been long lost, was discovered in this same MS., and has
been published both in Syriac and English by the late lamented Dr. Lee, bears
the Syriac title, [], On the " Divine Manifestation," or, more literally, on "
The Divine Sunrise," the []; which is the Septuagint version of [] of Zech. vi.
12. []. In our English translation, " Behold the man whose name is the BRANCH."
So in Luke i. 78,[]; and Matt. iv. 16, []; Epist. to Heb. vii. 14, []: all
referring to the coming of Christ.

P. xxii. l. 1.--"Theodosia." There is another Syriac version of these Acts,
published by Assemani in Acta SS. Martt. P. ii. p. 203. Ruinart
notes:--"Celebris est ejus memoria apud Latinos et Graecos die 2 Aprilis. Alii
tamen aliis diebus ejus festum peragunt. Ejusdem Martyris Acta prolixiora
vidimus in multis codd. MSS. sed aliquatenus amplificata. Ipsius vero sacrum
corpus in Monasterium Dervense allatum ab ipso S. Berchario fuisse dicitur. Vide
Mabillon, saec. 2; Bened. p. 848; et Bolland, ad diem 2 April." See Acta Prim.
Marti, p. 323. Her martyrdom is given by Baillet, at the 2d of April. l. 10.--"
One of the virgins of the Son of God." The other Syriac has " Christian
virgins," []; the Greek, []. l. 18.--"Urbanus." The name of the Governor is
omitted in the Greek.

P. xxiii. l. 19.--"Copper mines in Palestine." The Greek adds the name of the
place Phaeno, which occurs also in the Syriac below. See P. xxiv. l. 35; P.
xlvi. l. 9, and note thereon. l. 28.--" The first day of the week." The Greek
has [], upon which Valesius has a note (a):--" In the MS. Acts of the passion of
Theodosia, she is said to have suffered, not on Easter-day, but only on a
Sunday.--Eng. Trans. p. 162.

P. xxiv. l. 1.--"Confession of Domninus." In the Greek mention is made of
Sylvanus before him, and the account of both much abridged. See Surius and
Baillet, at the 4th of October. l. 28.--"Ludus." " Munera seu ludi, pugnas cum
bestiis appellabantur, quod in populorum vel militum delectationem darentur.
Dicebantur autem ludi castrenses, si in castris fierent. Sermonem in die Munerum
habuit Augustinus in Basilica Restituta, qui est in nova edit. 19, tomi v. vide
notas ibi appositas." See Ruinart, Acta Prim. Martt. p. 96, in not; also p. 111.
The Greek, however, has in this place, [], on which Valesius has this note
(c):--" See the following chapter; from whence we are informed that those who
were condemned to such combats were delivered to the procurators of Caesar, who
caused them to practise exercise daily, so that at last they might be fit to
engage in combat." Eng. Trans. p. 163. l. 29.--" An excellent and godly old
man." The Greek gives his name "Auxentius." See Baillet, at the 13th of
December. l. 33.--" Silvanus." A further account is given of him below, p. 47.
The Greek adds here--" who was then a Presbyter and a Confessor, but some time
after was honoured with a Bishopric."--Eng. Trans. p. 162.

P. xxv. l. 26.--" Without any long delay." For this the Greek has, []. l. 31.--"
Considered himself above all the people of Palestine." The Greek adds here--"
Who also was companion of the tyrant himself, for he was his chief favourite,
and did usually eat at the same table with him." Ibid. p. 163.

P. xxvi. l. 8.--"The servants of God." The Greek more boldly, " against us," [];
and so at line 15 below. Instead of " There may come a time ..... against our
people," the Greek has, " There may happen a seasonable opportunity, wherein we
shall be more at leisure to relate the exits and calamitous deaths, by which
those impious wretches (especially Maximinus and those about him who were his
advisers) that were the greatest sticklers in the persecution against us,
finished their lives." See Eng. Trans. p. 163. This account is given in the
Appendix to the Eighth Book of the Ecc. Hist. Ibid. p. 153. See also Ecc. Hist.
b. viii. c. 16; and Valesius, note (b) Eng. Trans. p. 151, and b. ix. c. 9,
Ibid. p. 177. l. 19.--" Hatha." The Greek gives no name, but only [] " The
Sister." The word Hatha means "Sister." Hathai was not an uncommon woman's
name.--See S. E. Assemani, Acta SS. Martt. P. i. p. 101, &c. In the Greek
Menology she is called Thea. Yalesius gives this note ("):--"This virgin's name
is wanting here, but we will supply this defect from the Grecian Menology; where
this passage occurs at the 15th of July. On the same day the holy Martyrs
Valentina and Thea, which were Egyptians, being brought to the city Dio
Caesarea, before Firmillianus the judge, made confession of Christ's name, who
is our God; after which, their left feet being burnt and their right eyes pulled
out, they were killed with a sword, and their bodies burnt. But this account
disagrees with Eusebius's relation here. For he says the one was born at Gaza
and the other at Caesarea; and he makes no mention of the burning of their feet
or the pulling out of their eyes." See Eng. Trans. p. 164. The mistake in the
Menologium perhaps arose from the compiler having read that the Egyptians, who
are spoken of in the beginning of this same chapter, had their eyes put out and
their feet burnt, and therefore concluding that these two virgins, mentioned
immediately afterwards, were Egyptians, and had suffered like the rest. See
Surius and Baillet, at the 25th of July.

P. xxvii. l. 6.--" Lud:" and in the Greek it is called Dio Caesarea" Lydda is
the same as Diospolis. It seems, therefore, that Dio Caesarea, which is the same
as Sepphoris, is a mistake for Diospolis. See Van de Yelde, Memoir to accompany
the Map of the Holy Land, p. 331 and 347. If, however, it be a mistake, it has
been copied into the Greek Menology. See the preceding note. l. 31.--" Calling
Egyptians by Hebrew names." Eusebius refers to this in his Commentary on Isaiah
as a fulfilment of the prophecy contained in ch. 44, v. 5 :--" One shall say, I
am the Lord's, and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob, and another
shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name of
Israel." Eusebius's words are-- []. Hoc est: Mirari plane subit prophetiae vim
et efficaciam, et quam vere rei eventum oculis perceperimus. Nam in
persecutionibus nostro tempore concitatis, multos ex alienigenis gentibus
vidimus, qui sanctorum virorum nomina usurpabant; alius quippe sese Jacobum
appellabat, alius Israelem, alius Jeremiam, hie Hesaiam, iste Danielem. Etenim
his sibi adscriptis nominibus, ad martyrium pro Deo subeundum cum fiducia et
constantia accedebant. Quae prophetia indicat dum ait, Hie dicet, Dei Sum, &c.
See Eusebius's Comm. in Hesaiam, in Collectio Nova Patt., edited by Montfaucon,
vol. ii. pp. 353 et 527.

P. xxviii. l. 17.--" Food from the Royal provision ------
pugilism." The Greek is [] and
also adds, which is not in the Syriac, [] :
on which Yalesius observes (b):--"He means, as I judge, the
Procurators of the company of gladiators and of the morning exercises; of whom
there is frequent mention in the inscriptions. For the gladiators that were
maintained by stipends paid out of the imperial exchequer, were committed to
their care, and they gave them their allowances out of the treasury." Eng.
Trans. p. 163, note.

P. xxx. l. 8.--"Our own city." Omitted in the Greek; and so probably for the
same purpose below, [] instead of " for our people." l. 20.

P. xxxi. l. 8.--"Mannathus." The Greek has [] below, on which Valesius remarks (f)--" In the Greek Menology she is called Manatho." Eng. Trans. p. 165. Ruinart observes-- " Hoc ipso die memorantur (i. e. Antoninus, Zebinas, et Germanus) cum Ennatha virgine in Martyrol. Romano, ac Menologio Basilii Imp., sed in magnis Menaeis et Menologio Canisii die precedenti. Porro haec omnia Menologia Nicephorum tribus his martyribus adjiciunt, et pro Ennatha habent Manatho." Acta Prim. Martt. p. 327. See Baillet, Vies des Saints, at the 13th of November. l. 23.--" And continuously ---- Romans." This passage is evidently corrupt, and it is difficult to understand it. I subjoin the corresponding Greek:--[]. l. 28.--" They urged the Logistae of the cities, and the military commander, and the Tabularii." On this Valesius notes (a)-- " I judge he means the Prefect of the Praetorium. For at that time they took care of the military matters. Indeed, Eusebius's following words are a sufficient evidence that the Prefect of the Praetorium is meant here. For he speaks of the injunctions and public orders given to the Curators, Magistrates, and Tabularii of every city: which orders were issued out by the Prefect of the Praetorium only; as might be made to appear from several places. See Book 9, ch. 1 & 9, where Eusebius speaks of Sabinus, Prefect of the Praetorium to Maximin." Eng. Trans. p. 165. Concerning the Logistae or Curators he writes (b)--" The Curator of the city was he, who looked after the Treasure and whatever else belonged to the revenue of the city: this is manifest from the Pandects of the Law. He is also called Logista (from the Greek word [], which is the term here in the original) in Lege 3, Cod. de modo mulctandi. Hence [] was used to signify the performance of the Curator's office." See Ecc. Hist. b. viii. c. 9; Eng. Trans. p. 146. Respecting the Tabularii he writes (b)-- " These officers had in their custody the public tables or rolls of the cities, and looked after the accounts of the tribute. They were first called Numerarii. Afterwards Valens made a law that they should be called Tabularii." He then refers for further information to his observations on Ammianus Marcellinus, ibid. p. 165, which Heinichen has incorporated into his notes at this place.

P. xxxii. l. 18.--"They received sentence of death." The Greek says this was
passed upon them by Firmillianus. It also adds that Zebinas was from
Eleutheropolis. l. 20.-- "Antoninus." Valesius (e):--" In the Greeks' Menology
this man is called Antonius, where, besides Zebinas and Germanus, there is a
fourth companion of their's named, to wit, Nicephorus. For the 12th day of
November this passage occurs:--The birthday of the holy Martyrs Antonius and his
fellows, who were in the times of Maximinus. Antonius was an old man)
Nicephorus, Zebinas, and Germanus were in the flower of their age. They were
taken at Casarea, and after they had boldly confessed Christ, were slain. Here
you see the author of the Menology has rendered presbuteros an old man, and not
a Presbyter." Ibid. p. 165. l. 23.--" A sister, one of the Lord's virgins, a
chaste and courageous maiden." For this the Greek has []; and also adds the name
Ενναθας, omitted here in the Syriac. l. 30.--" Maxys." Greek Μαχυς. Ruinart,
Acta Marti, p. 327, has this note:--" Haec vox Graeca non est. An a Syris
repetenda, apud quos mochos est pulicanus a casas increpare?" That is [] from
[]; but the form here is [], which seems rather to follow the Greek.

P. xxxiii. l. 33.--" The stones shed tears," &c. This, which doubtless was
produced by natural causes, seemed miraculous to Eusebius, more especially if he
looked upon it as fulfilling a prophecy of our Lord--Luke xix. 40: "I tell you,
that if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out."
See also Habak. ii. 11. Compare note p. 55 above.

P. xxxiv. l. 12.--"Primus." The Greek is [], on which Valesius observes (a)--"In
the Greek this man's name is Promus; but I suppose it should be Probus, for I
have never met with such a proper name as Promus. This mistake rose from hence :
in antient MSS. Beta is usually written like My. In the Fuk. and Sav. MSS. it is
Probus.'" Eng. Trans. p. 166.

P. xxxv. l. 1.--"Peter, who was surnamed Absalom." In the Greek he is called [].
Valesius has this note : (*)--" Mention is made of this person in the Greek
Mencea at the 14th of October, although Eusebius says he suffered on the 3d of
the Ides of January. In the Menaeum he is called Auselamus, but in the Menology
Anselamus is, by a mistake, put for Auselamus or Abselamus. The import of the
passage there is this :--'On the same day is the commemoration of the holy
Martyr Petrus Anselamus of Eleutheropolis, who, being in the flower of his age
and of a vigorous mind, behaved himself most admirably in the conflicts he
underwent for religion; and having despised earthly things, was by fire offered
up as a victim well pleasing to God in the sixth year of Dioclesian's and
Maximian's empire. In which passage this is observable, that the sixth year of
Dioclesian's empire is put for the sixth year of the Persecution." See Eng.
Trans. p. 166. Ruinart has published Passio Sancti Petri Balsami, who, although
some have doubted the fact, can hardly be a different person from the one here
described as "Peter, who was surnamed Absalom." See Acta Prim. Martt. p. 501.
The account is given by Baillet in the Vies des Saints at the 3d of January.

P. xxxvi. l. 1.--" One who belonged to the heresy of Marcion." The Greek gives
the name Asclepius, omitted here. l. 6.--" Aia, a village which is on the
confines of Beth Gobrin."-- The Greek has []. The other Syriac version published
by S. E. Assemani has [], which he renders--"Ex agro Eleutheropolitano in vico
Anea." Acta SS. Martt. P. ii. p. 207. See Yan de Yelde--Eleutheropolis:
Betogabra (Ptolemy xvi. 4), Betogabri, Bethgebrim; also Geberin of the
Crusaders, identified with great care by Robinson and Smith (Bib. Res. 404--420,
642, seq.), with the Modern Beit-Jibrin. Memoir to accompany the Map of the Holy
Land, p. 309.

1l. 11.--" The Confession of Pamphilus," &c. This account is considerably
abridged in the Greek. Valesius has the following, note (a) :--" Symeon
Metaphrastes has transcribed this whole relation of the Martyrdom of Pamphilus
and his companions, out of our Eusebius, adding some things and altering others,
as he usually does. But he seems to have been furnished with more perfect copies
of Eusebius, than those we now have; which will manifestly appear to the reader,
who may meet with Metaphrastes' account hereof in the Latin version of him,
which Lipomaimus and Surius put forth, Tome the third, at the 1st of June, p.
139, Edit. Ven. at 1581." Eng. Trans. p. 166. This account of Pamphilus and his
companions still exists entire in Greek. It was first printed from a Medicean
MS. by D. Papebrochius in the Acta Sanctorum, June, vol. i. p. 64. J. A.
Fabricius reprinted it in his edition of Hippolytus' works, vol. ii. p. 217.
Both of these learned men supposed it to have been an extract of Eusebius' Life
of Pamphilus, to which he frequently refers in his Ecclesiastical History, and
of which Jerome speaks. See note, p. 78 below. It is quite evident that
Metaphrastes had before him the same copy of the Martyrs of Palestine as this
Syriac, with some very slight variations. I have thought that it would be
useful, for the sake of comparison, to copy here the whole of Lipomannus' Latin
version after Metaphrastes in Surius, De Probatis Sanctorum Vitis, at the 1st of
June :-- Certamen SS. Martyrum Pamphili et Sociorum ex Symeone Metaphraste.

I."Tempus invitat ad omnibus enarrandum magnum et gloriosum spectaculum Pamphili
et sociorum, virorum admirabilium, cum eo consummatorum, et qui ostenderunt
multiplicia certamina pietatis. Atque cum plurimi in nobis cognita persecutione
se fortiter gesserint, eorum de quibus agimus rarissimun certamen quod nos
cognovimus, conscripsimus, quod in se simul omne genus aetatis et corporis et
animi vitaeque diversorum studiorum est complexum, variis tormentorum generibus,
et diversis in perfecto martyrio coronis exornatum. Licebat enim videre quosdam
adolescentes et pueros, atque adeo plane infantes, ex illis qui erant ex ipsis,
alios autem pubescentes, cum quibus erat Porphyrius, corpore simul vigentes et
prudentia, nempe mihi carissirnum Jamnitem Paulum, Seleucumque et Julianum, qui
ambo orti erant ex terra Cappadocum. Erant autem inter eos sacris quoque canis
et profunda ornati senectute, Valens quidam diaconus ecclesias Hierosolymitanas,
et cui verum nomen obtigerat, Theodulus.

II. Atque hasc quidem fuit in eis astatum varietas. Animis autem inter se
differebant. Nam alii quidem erant rudiores, utpote pueri, et quibus erat
ingenium adhuc tenerius et simplicius, alii vero severi et morum gravitate
praediti. Erant autem inter eos quoque nonnulli disciplinarum sacrarum non
ignari. Aderat vero omnibus congeriita, insignis et admirabilis animi fortitude.
Veluti autem quoddam in die resplendens luminare in astris fulgentibus, in medio
eorum eminebat meus Dominus, non est enim fas mihi aliter appellare divinum et
plane beatissimum Pamphilum. Is enim et eruditionem, qua? habetur apud Grgecos
in admiratione, non modice attigerat, et in divinorum dogmatum et divinitus
inspiratarum scripturarum eruditione, si quid audacius, sed verum dicendum est,
ita erat exercitatus, ut nullus aeque ex iis qui erant suo tempore. Quod autem
erat his longe majus et praestantius, habebat donum, nempe domi natam, vel
potius ei a Deo datam, intelligentiam et sapientiam.

III. Et quod ad animum quidem attinet, omnes ita se babebant. Vitae autem
conditionis et conversations erat inter eos plurimadifferentia, cum Pamphilus
quidem duceret genus secundum carnem ex iis qui erant honesto loco nati, fuisset
autem insignis in republica gerenda in patria sua; Seleucus vero fuisset
insign'iter ornatus militige dignitatibus; alii autem nati essent ex mediocri et
communi loco. Non erat eorum chorus nee extra servilem conditionem. Nam et ex
prassidis domo in eorum numerum relatus erat Theodulus, et Porphyrius, qui
specie quidem erat Pamphili famulus; is autem ipsum affectione habebat loco
fratris, vel germani potius filii, ut qui mini omitteret, quo minus imitaretur
dominum. Quid aliud? Si quis dixerit in summa, eos ecclesiastici coetus typum
esse complexes, is non procul abfuerit a veritate, cum inter eos presbyterio
quidem dignatus esset Pamphilus; Valens vero diaconatu, et alii sortiti essent
locum eorum, qui e multitudine consueverunt legere, et confessionibus per
fortissimam flagrorum tolerantiam diu ante in martyrio praeclarissime se
gessisset Seleucus, et militaris dignitatis amissionem fortiter excepisset, et
reliqui deinde per catechumenos et fideles reliquam implerent similitudinem
innumerabilis ecclesiae, ut in parva imagine.

IV. Sic adspexi admirabilem tarn multorum et talium martyrum electionem, qui
etsi non essent multi numero, nullus tamen aberat ex iis ordinibus, qui
inveniuntur inter homines. Quomodo autem lyra, quae multas habet chordas, et ex
chordis constat dissimilibus, acutis et gravibus, remissisque et intensis, et
mediis, arte musica concinne adaptatis omnibus, eodem modo in his adolescentes
simul et senes, servi simul et liberi, eruditi et rudes, obscuri generis
homines, ut multis videbatur, et gloria insignes, fideles simul cum
catechumenis, et diaconi simul cum presbyteris. Qui omnes tanquam a
sapientissimo musico, nempe Dei verbo unigenito, varie pulsati, et quge erat in
ipsis potentiae unusquisque per tormentorum tolerantiam, hoc est confessionem,
ostendentes virtutem, et clarissimos numerososque, et concinnos sonos edentes in
judiiciis, uno et eodem fine in primis piam et longe sapientissimam, per
Martyrii consummationem, Deo universorum impleverunt melodiam.

V. Opera pretium autem est admirari virorum quoque numerum, qui significat
propheticam quamdam et apostolicam gratiam. Contigit enim omnes esse duodecim,
quo numero patriarchas et prophetas et apostolos fuisse accepimus. Non est autem
prastermittenda uniuscujusque singulatim laboriosa fortitude, laterum
lacerationes, et cum pilis caprinis laceratarum corporis partium attritiones, et
flagella immedicabilia, multipliciaque et varia tormenta, gravesque et toleratu
diflSciles cruciatus, quos, jubente judice, manibus et pedibus infligentes
satellites, vi cogebant martyres aliquid facere eorum quae prohibita.

VI. Quid opus est dicere memorias perpetuo mandandas voces virorum divinorum,
quibus labores m'hil curantes, laeto et alacri vultu respondebant judicis
interrogationibus, in ipsis tornientis ridentes viriliter, et bonis moribus
ludificantes ejus percontationes? Cum enim rogasset undenam essent, mittentes
dicere, quam in terris habebant civitatem, ostendebant earn, quae vere est eorum
patria, dicentes se esse ex Hierusalem. Indicabant vero eadem sententia Dei
quoque caelestern, ad quam tendebant, civitatem, et alia quas sunt ejusmodi,
ignota quidem et quEe non possunt perspici ab iis, qui sacras literas non
gustarunt, eis autem solis qui a fide divina sunt incitati, aperta adducebant.
Propter quaa judex indignatus, et valde animo cruciatus, et plane quid ageret
dubius, varia, ne vinceretur, in eos operabatur. Deinde cum a spe cecidisset,
concessit unicuique auferre prasmia victoriae. Erat autem varius modus eorum
mortis, cum duo quidem inter eos catechumeni, consummati sint baptismo ignis,
alius vero fuerit traditus figurae salutaris passionis, qui autem erat mihi
carus, fuerit diversis braviis redimitus.

VII. Atque haec quidem dixerit quispiam, horum magis faciens universam
mentionem, singulatim autem unumquemque persequens, merito beatum pronuntiarit
eum,qui in choro primum locum obtinet. Is autem erat Pamphilus, vir revera pius,
et omnium, ut semel dicam, amicus et familiaris, re ipsa nomen sibi impositum
verura esse ostendens, Cassariensium ecclesiaa ornamentum. Nam presbyterorurn
quoque cathedram, cum esset presbyter, honestabat, ut qui simul ornaret
ministerium et ex eo ornaretur. Quinetiam aliis quoque erat diviiius et divine
particeps inspirationis, quoniam tota sua vita fuit raaxime insignis virtute,
multum quidem jubens valere delicias et copiara divitiarum, cum se totum
dedicasset Dei verbo, renuntians quidem iis qua? ad ipsum redibant a majoribus,
nudis, mancis, et pauperibus omnia distribuit. Ipse autem degit in vita, quae
nihil possidebat, per valentissimam exercitationem, divinam persequens
philosophiam. Atque ortus quidem erat ex Berytensium civitate, ubi in prima
aetate educatus f'uerat in illis, quas illic erant, studiis litterariis.
Postquam autem ejus providentia ad virilem pervenisset aetatem, transiit ab iis
ad sacrarum litterarum scientiam. Assumpsit vero mores divinee et propheticae
vitae, et ipse se verum Dei martyrem exliibuit etiam ante ultimurn vitas finem.
Sed talis quidem erat Pampbilus.

VIII. Secundus autem post ipsum accessit Valens ad certamen, qui senili, et qua?
decet sacerdotem, erat ornatus canitie, ipsoque aspectu venerandus et
sacrosanctus senex; qui etiam divinarum scripturarum sciens, ut si quis alius,
eas quidem certe ita erat complexus memoria, ut a lectione nihil discreparent,
quas memoriae mandatae ab eo conservabantur, sacrosanctorum discipulorum
promissiones. Erat autem diaconus, etsi esset hujusmodi, ecclesiae Eliensium.

Tertius in eorum numerum relatus erat Paulus, qui, vir acerrimus et spiritu
fervens, agnoscebatur ex civitate lamnitarum: qui etiam in martyrio per cauterii
tolerantiam susceperat certamen confessionis.

IX. His in careers duobus annis contritis, martyrii occasio fuit Aegyptiorum
adventus, qui etiam cum eis fuere consummati. Ii autem cum vel sic valde
afflicti, in metallis usque ad loca pervenissent, domum revertebantur. Qui, cum
in ingressu portae Caesariensium interrogati essent a custodibus, quinam essent
et unde venirent, et nihil veri celassent, dixissent antem se esse Christianos;
perinde ac malefici in ipso furto deprehensi, vincti sunt et comprehensi: erant
vero quinque numero. Ad Praesidem autem adducti, et coram eo libere locuti, in
vincula quidem statim conjiciuntur: die autem sequente, qui erat sextus decimus
mensis Peritii, more vero Romano quartus decimus Calend. Martii, hos ipsos cum
Pamphilo et sociis adducunt ad Firmillianun. Ille autem Aegyptiorum solum
periculum fecit ante tormenta, ornni ratione eos exercens. Atque eorum quidem
principem, quum adduxisset in medium, rogavit quisnam esset, et unde? Qui cum
pro proprio nomine quoddam propheticum audisset (hoc autem fiebat ante alia, ut
qui pro patriis eis impositis idolicis nominibus sibi prophetica nomina
impossuissent, ut qui Eliam, et Hieremiam, Esaiam, Samuelem et Danielem ipsi
seipsos nomlnarent, et qui est in occulto, Judaeum et germanum Israelitem, non
solum factis, sed etiam vocibus proprie enunciatis judicarent).

X. Cum tale ergo Judex audivisset a martyre, rim autem nominis non attendisset,
secundo rogavit, qugenam esset ejus patria? Ille vero caelestem Hierusalem dixit
esse suam patriam, illam intelligens de qua dictum est Paulo. 'Quae sursum est
Jerusalem est libera, quae est mater nostra.' Et 'accessistis ad montem Sion et
civitatem Dei viventis, Hierusalem caelestem.' Et hic quidem hanc cogitabat:
ille autem humi suam abjiciens cogitationem, quaenam hasc esset, et ubi terrarum
sita esset, accurate perscrutabatur, atque adeo ei etiam inferabat tormenta, ut
verum fateretur. Hie vero dum torqueretur, se verum dixisse affirmabat. Deinde
eo hgec rursus et saspe sciscitante quasnam esset, et ubi sita esset dicta
civitas Hierusalem? solum dicebat earn esse patriam Christianorum; nullos enim
alios praeter eos esse ejus participes, sitam autem esse ad orientem et ad ipsam
lucem et solem. Atque hie quidem rursus per haec mente sua philosophabatur,
nihil sentiens eos, qui circumcirca ipsum tormentis afficiebant. Tanquam autem
carnis expers et incorporeus, nihil videbatur pati molestum. Judex vero animi
dubius, odio cruciabatur, et existimans Christianos hanc sibi civitatem, quae
esset infesta Romanis, constituisse, valde urgebat tormentis, et curiose
scrutabatur earn, quge dicta fuerat, civitatem, et quae est in Oriente,
inquirebat regionem. Cum autem adolescentem, diu caesum flagellis, videret non
posse dimoveri ab iis, quae prius dixerat, statuit in eum ferre sententiam
capitis.

XI. Et in eum quidem res hoc modo processit: reliquos autem Aegyptios cum simili
palaestra exercicuisset, similem quoque in eos fert sententiam. Deinde cum ab
his transisset ad Pamphilum, accepit quod ii jam prius essent plurima experti
tormenta. Absurdum autem esse arbitratus, eosdem iisdem rursus afficere
tormentis, et frustra laborare, hoc solum est percontatus, an nunc saltern
obedirent? Cum vero ab unoquoque eorum andiisset ultimam vocem martyrii, in eos
similiter fert sententiam capitis.

XII. Nondum autem dictum universum absolverat, et alicunde exclamat quidam
adolescens ex familia Pamphili, et ex media turba accedens in medium eorum, qui
circumsidebant judicium, alta voce corpora eorum petiit sepulturae. Is autem
erat beatus Porphyrius, Pamphili germanum pecus, nondum totos octodecim annos
natus, recte scribendi scientiae peritus, modestia vero morum has laudes celans,
ut qui a tali viro fuisset institutus. Is, postquam adversus dominum latam
cognovit sententiam, exclamavit ex media multitudine, Corpora rogo, ut humi
mandentur. Ille autem non homo, sed fera, et quavis fera agrestior, neque
honestam et rationi consentaneam admittens petitionem, neque juvenili astati
dans veniam, cum hoc solum intellexisset, eum fateri se esse Christianum, jubet
tortoribus ut totis viribus in eum uterentur. Cum vero, eo jubente, sacrificare
recusasset vir admirandus, non utique tanquam carnem hominis, sed tanquam
lapides et lignum, aut aliquid aliud inanimum usque ad ipsa ossa et ima viscera
jubet eum torquere et corpus ejus caedere. Cum autem hoc diu fieret, agnovit se
hoc frustra aggredi, cum propemodum mutum et inanimum effectum esset corpus
generoso Martyri. Perseverans vero Judex in sasvitia et inhumanitate, iubet
latera tormentis exagitata, pilorum textis amplius atteri. Deinde cum sic eum
cepisset satietas et furore esset exsatiatus, pronunciat sententiam ut tradatur
lento et molli igni. Atque hic quidem, cum ante Pamphili consummationem
postremus accessisset, prior e corpore excessit ad Dominum.

XIII. Licebat autem videre Porphyrium, non secus affectum quam victorem in
sacris certaminibus, qui in omnibus pugnis evaserat superior, corpore
pulverulentum, vultu Igetum, audenter et exultando ad mortem progredientem, re
vera plenum divino spiritu. Philosophico autem habitu suo indumento amictus
instar superhumeralis, rursum aspiciens et omnia humana despiciens, sicut vitam
mortalem, quieto animo accedit ad rogum. Cum jam flamma ei appropinquaret, et
tanquam nihil ei adesset molestum, sana mente et nulla afFecta perturbatione de
rebus suis manctavit suis necessariis, adhuc vultum et universum corpus lastum
conservans et immutatum. Postquam autem notos suos satis allocutus, eos valere
jussit, jam de caetero contendebat ad Dominum. Cum vero rogus, satis longo
spatio disjunctus, circa eum esset accensus, hinc et illinc ore flammam
arripiebat, se ipsum incitans ad iter propositum. Hoc autem faciebat nihil aliud
quam Jesum invocans. Tale est certamen Porphyrii.

XIV. Cum ejus autem consummations Pamphilo nuncius fuisset Seleucus, dignus.
habetur, cui sors eadem cum eis obtingeret. Cum primum itaque renuntiasset
Pamphilo exitum Porphjrii, et uno osculo salutasset Martjres, comprehendunt eum
milites et ducunt ad Praesidem. Ille autem perinde ac urgens, ut ipse abiret
simul cum prioribus, jubet eum affici supplicio capitis. Is erat ex regione
Cappadocum, cum autem militia se praeclare gessisset, ad non parvos gradus
dignitatum pervenerat in Romano exercitu. Quin etiam statura, viribusque et
magnitudine corporis, reliquos omnes longe superabat: ipso quoque aspectu erat
omnibus suspiciendus, et tota forma corporis plane admirabilis, tarn propter
magnitudinem quam propter pulchritudinem. Atque in principio «quidem
persecutionis, per flagellorum perpessionem clarus extitit in certaminibus
confessionis. Postquam autem fuerat liberatus a militia, seipsum constituens
semulatorem eorum, qui se exercent in pietate, efficitur Christi germanus miles,
orphanorum desertorum et viduarum, quee carebant praesidio, eorumque qui
paupertate opprimebantur et imbecillitate, tanquam episcopus quispiam et
procurator, curam gerens et instar diligentis et solicit! patris, omnium, qui
abjecti erant, labores recreans et affectiones. Quamobrem merito Deo his magis
laetante quam quae per fumum et sanguinem fiunt, sacrificiis, dignus fait
habitus consummatione, quge fit per martyrium. Hie decimus athleta cum iis, qui
dicti sunt, consummatus fait uno eodemque die: in quo, ut est coiisentaneum,
maxima Pamphili martyrio porta coelorum aperta, facilis et expeditus ei fuit
aditus regni coelorum.

XV. Seleuci institit vestigiis Theodulus quidam, venerandus et pius senex, qui
primum honoris locum obtinuerat inter servos praesidis, et morum et ffitatis
gratia, et quod trium filiorum esset pater, et maxime propter benevolentiam quam
conservabat in suos. Is autem, cum similiter fecisset atque Seleucus, et quendam
ex martyribus salutasset osculo, adducitur ad dominum. Quem cum magis ad iram
irritasset quam alii, salutaris passionis cruci traditus, subiit martyrium.

XVI. Cum post hos unus adhuc restaret, qui inter eos, qui dicti sunt, numerum
impleret duodecimum, eum impleturus aderat Julianus. Is, cum ea ipsa hora
rediisset ex peregrinatione, ne ingressus quidem civitatern, ita ut erat ex
itinere, hoc audito profectus ad videndos martyres, postquam adspexit sanctorum
corpora humi jacentia, gaudio repletus, unumquemque amplectitur, omnes salutans
osculo. Eo autem adhuc agente, eum comprehendunt lictores et adducunt ad
prassidem. Impius vero suo institute faciens consentanea, eum quoque tradit
lento igni. Sic itaque Julianus laetans et exultans, et magna voce Deo, qui
tantis bonis eum erat dignatus, agens gratias, assumptus fuit in chores
martyrum. Erat autem is quoque genere quidem Cappadox, moribus plenus quidem
pietate, plenus et fide, vir mitis et mansuetus, et alioqui vir bonus, et
spirans boiium odorem Sancti Spiritus. Tanta turba comitatus, dignatus fuit
consummatione martyrii cum beatissimo Pamphilo.

Et quatuor quidem dies et totidem noctes jussu Firmilliani sanctissirna martyrum
corpora exposita fuerunt bestiis carnivoris. Cum autem Dei providentia nihil ad
eos accessisset, non fera, non avis, non aliquid aliud, sed sana permansissent
et integra, justum et convenientem honorem consecuta, consuetae mandata sunt
sepulturae, reposita in pulchris templorum sedibus, et sacris traditas oratoriis
ad perpetuam memoriam, ut honorarentur a populo, ad gloriam Christi, veri Dei
nostri."

P. xxxvi. l. 13.--" Theophilus." An error of the scribe for Theodulus. It is
given correctly in the narrative below. l. 15.--"Being in number eight." And so
the names enumerated above are eight; but there were really twelve. See pp. 38
and 44. The Greek, which is here a good deal abridged, has at the beginning, [].
l. 28.--" Youths and boys." Papebrochius corrects here the error of
Lipomannus--"Adolescentes et pueros atque adeo plane infantes" See Hippolyti
Opera, curante J. A. Fabricio, vol. ii. p. 217. I have not the Ada Martyrum at
hand, and therefore cite the reprint of the Acts of Pamphilus and his companions
by Fabricius. When I use the term the other Greek, I mean these Acts, in
contradistinction to the Greek, which I have used in these notes to signify the
abridgement found in the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius. l. 29.--"
Porphyrius." The Syriac has by mistake here [], "Porphon."' l. 32.--"Iamna." "
Jamnia sive Jamna urbs maritima Palaestinae, haud procul a Joppe, sed totis 20
leueis horariis dissita a Caesarea, cujus Archiepiscopo subest: etiam urbs
maritima in confiniis Phoeniciae." Papebrochius. Ibid. p. 218. l. 36.--"
Conformable to his name, Theodulus." That is, Servant of God.

P. xxxvii. l. 7.--"But like the sun ..... My Lord Pamphilus." Eusebius speaks of
him several times in his Ecc. Hist. Book vi. chap. 32, he says:--"But what
necessity is there at present to write an exact catalogue of this man's works,
which requires a work itself, which we have also written in our History of
Pamphilus's life, the blessed martyr of our times. In which, endeavouring to
prove how great Pamphilus's care and love towards sacred learning was, we have
published the catalogue of Origen's works, and of several other ecclesiastical
writers which he collected." Eng. Trans. p. 107. And in the next chapter:--" But
what things concerning him are necessary to be known, may be read at large in
that Apology for him which was written by me and Pamphilus, the holy martyr of
our times, which we conjointly composed." Ibid. In book vii. ch. 33. " In this
man's(Agapius) times we knew Pamphilus, a most eloquent man and a true
philosopher in the practices of his life, honoured with a presbytership of that
church (Caesarea). To declare what a person this man was, and whence descended,
would be a copious subject. But all things relating to his life, the school he
founded, the conflicts which, during the time of persecution, he underwent in
several confessions, and lastly, the crown of martyrdom with which he was
encircled, we have fully declared in a peculiar work. Indeed, this Pamphilus was
the most admirable person of all that lived here." Valesius's note (x).
Christophorson takes these words to signify one book only. But Eusebius wrote
three books of the life of Pamphilus, which Hieromymus attesteth in his book, De
Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, and in his Apology against Ruffinus. Ibid. p. 138.
Book viii. c. 13--" Amongst which number we must in no wise omit the mention of
Pamphilus the Presbyter, the most admirable person in our age, and the greatest
ornament of the Church of Caesarea, whose fortitude and courageous exploits we
will declare at a fit and convenient opportunity." Valesius remarks (b)--" I
must indeed confess that in the Maz., Med., Fuk., and Savil MSS, the reading is
([], we have declared); but if that reading be true, Eusebius must mean his
Books concerning the life of Pamphilus the Martyr, which, as we before observed,
he wrote before his Ecclesiastical History, Ibid. p. 148. See the former part of
this note which I have quoted above, p. 49. See also what Eusebius says in the
Confession of Domninus, p. 25, above. The Greek, in the account of Pamphilus,
here adds:--" This person's other virtues and egregious performances, which
require a larger relation, we have already comprised in three Books, being a
particular work which we wrote concerning his life. On this Valesius remarks
(d): -- " Moreover, hence we make this manifest conclusion, that the Book
concerning the Martyrs of Palestine was Eusebius's own work, written by him
after his Books concerning Pamphilus's life, and after his Ecclesiastical
History." Eng. Tram. p. 166. We must bear in mind that this observation of
Valesius applies to the abridged form of the Martyrs of Palestine, and not to
the original copy; for the passage upon which he founds his conclusions does not
exist, either in the Syriac or the other Greek. It therefore affirms that the
abridgment was made by Eusebius himself. The Confession of Pamphilus is given by
Baillet, Vie des Saints, at the 1st of June. l. 10.--" Without styling him My
Lord." Upon referring to the Syriac here it is seen that Simeon Metaphrastes,
whom Lipomannus followed in translating "non est mihi fas aliter appellare" had
[] correctly; and that the reading [] of the other Greek is wrong. See
Papebrochius' note in Hipp. Oper. vol. ii. p. 218. l. 23.--" Porphyrius." His
martyrdom and that of those who suffered with him is given by Baillet, Vie des
Saints, Feb. 17. l. 36.--" His dismissal from his command in the army."
Lactantius speaks of the order of Diocletian respecting the dismissal of
soldiers who professed Christianity thus:--" Tunc ira furens, sacrificare non
eos tantum qui sacris ministrabant, sed universos qui erant in palatio, jussit,
et in eos, si detractassent, verberibus animadverti; datisque ad Prsepositos
litteris, etiam milites cogi ad nefanda sacrificia praecepit, ut qui non
paruissent, militia solverentur." See De Mortibus Persecutorum, ch. x.

P. xxxviii. l. 6.--"They bore the semblance of a many-stringed harp." Eusebius
uses the same comparison in hisTheophania, bk. i. ch. 28:--[] which. Dr. Lee
translates as follows : -- " This sensible world is therefore, not unlike the
lyre of many strings, consisting of many dissimilar portions: of acute and
grave, lax and intense; and of others between these, all well combined together
by the art of the musician. Such, then, is also this (universe), collected (as
it is) into one compound, consisting of many parts, and many compositions; of
cold at once, and warm its opposite; and of matter, wet and dry. It is,
moreover, a mighty vessel, and is the work of the God of all." See Eusebius,
Bishop of Caesarea, on the Theophania, translated by S. Lee. 8vo. Cambridge,
1843, p. 18. l. 19. -- "Like the prophets." He means the Twelve Minor Prophets.
l. 20. -- " Nor is it fit that we should omit." So also the Latin version of
Lipomannus. The other Greek is corrupt here, reading [].

P. xxxix. l. 6. -- " The baptism of fire." Martyrdom for the sake of Christ was
held in antient times to supply the place of baptism to those who had not yet
received that sacrament. It was generally called the "Baptism of Blood." Thus
Cyprian, letter 57, to Cornelius : -- " Qui martyrium tollit, sanguine suo
batizatur." Edit. Dodwell, Amst. 1691, p. 118. And 73, to Jubaianus: -- "
Sanguine autem suo baptizatos et passione sanctificatos consummari, et divinse
pollicitationis gratiam consequi; declarat in Evangelic idem Dominus." Ibid. p.
208. Exhort, ad Mart. :-- " Nos tantum, qui, Domino permittente, primum baptisma
credentibus dedimus, ad aliud quoque singulos praeparemus, insinuantes et
docentes hoc esse baptisma in gratia majus, in postestate sublimius, in honore
pretiosius: baptisma in quo angeli baptizant, baptisma in quo Deus et Christus
ejus exultant, baptisma post quod nemo jam peccat, baptisma quod fidei nostrse
incrementa consummat, baptisma quod nos de mundo recedentes statim Deo copulat.
In aquas baptismo accipitur peccatorum remissa, in sanguinis corona virtutum.
Ibid. p. 168. See also Bingham Antiquit. Book 10, ch. 2, s. 20, and other
passages cited by him. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. 3, ch. 10:--[] Eusebius
speaks also of Herais, a catechumen, receiving baptism by fire, Book 6, ch. 4:
--[]. l. 8.--"But Pamphilus, that name ..... different from these." The other
Greek varies here from the Syriac. See Lipomannus's Translation above, vii. l.
14.--"In communion with the Spirit of God." The other Greek, []. l.24.--"Men
seeking perfection." Other Greek, []. l. 26.--" Martyrdom." The other Greek adds
here, []. l. 27.--" Vales." There is added here in the Greek, " a deacon of
Aelia." This had been stated of him before in the part omitted from the Greek, "
a deacon of the Church of Jerusalem." See p. 37, l. 35, above.

P. xl. l. 4.--"ln prison." The other Greek has [], which Papebrochius has
corrected after Metaphrastes from Lipomannus's translation in carcere, to []. l.
33.--" Our Mother in whom we confess is the Holy Church." The Greek here, as in
Gal. iv. 26, [] and adds, Heb. xii. 12, [], and so the other Greek and
Lipomannus' version. See p. 74 above.

P. xli. l. 3.--" In what country was that Jerusalem." At the time when these
events took place, there was no city known to the Romans by the name of
Jerusalem; otherwise, as Valesius observes, Firmillianus, president of
Palestine, would never have been so earnest in his inquiries of the martyrs
where Jerusalem was situated. Eusebius writes, Book 4, ch; 6 :--" From that time
the whole nation was altogether interdicted to enter into the country about
Jerusalem, the law, edict, and sanctions of Adrian having commanded them that
they should not so much as from afar off behold their paternal soil. Ariston of
Pella relates this. Thus the city being destitute of the Jewish nation, and
wholly cleared of its old inhabitants, was possessed by foreigners, who dwelt
there, and afterwards made a Roman city; and changing its name, was, in honour
of the Emperor Aelius Adrianus, called Aelia." Valesius, in his note on this
place, says (e) :--" Eusebius is here doubly mistaken; both in that he says
Jerusalem was wholly destroyed in Adrian's time; and also because he thought
Aelia Capitolina was built by the same Adrian after the siege of
Betthera.--Aelia Capitolina was built long before; to wit, in the second year of
Adrian: from whose times to those of Constantine the Great it was always called
Aelia. But from the time of Constantine the Great it recovered again the name of
Jerusalem, both upon account of the honour of that name, and also because of its
prerogative, being the first episcopal seat." See Eng. Trans. p. 52.

P. xlii. l. 7.--"Wretch ---- savage brute." Such epithets as this, and others--"that bitter viper," p. 12, "fierce wild beast,' p. 49, when applied to the persecutors of the Christians, are not peculiar to Eusebius. Cyprian calls Nero, execrabilis ac nocens tyrannus, bestia mala; and Decius, execrabile animal: also he calls Diocletianus, Maximinianus Herculius, and Galerius Maximinianus, tres acerbissimae bestiae. See De mortt. Pers. ch. 4, 9, 16, &c. l.24.--"Weak in body." Syriac, []. The other Greek, [], and Lipomannus, corpore pulverulentum. Perhaps originally the translation was a,[] afterwards altered by a transcriber. l. 28.--" Having put on his cloak like a philosopher, with his shoulder uncovered." Valesius has this Note on Book 6, ch. 19 of Ecc. Hist. (p):--" The philosophic habit was the pallium or cloak, which was the usual badge of the Greek philosophers, different from that which was worn by the ordinary Greeks, which those Christians still kept to, who, before their conversion, were philosophers."--See Eng. Trans. p. 101. And on this place (n):--"This garment is in the Greek termed εξωμις: see its description, A. Gellius, Book 7, ch. 12." ibid. p. 168.

P. xliv. l. 2.--" The father of three generations." The Greek, [], and the other
Greek, []. On which Papebrochius observes:--" Trium filiorum patribus praemia
apud Romanos fuisse proposita notius est quam ut hie moneri debeat, atque id hie
dici credo []. Valesius, tamen aliter vertit quod tertiae jam stirpis nepotes
haberet" See Hippol. Opera, vol. ii. p. 224. l. 19.--" Officers," here "
Quaestionarii," as above, p. 55. The Greek is, in this place, []. l. 27.--"
There was also in him a glorious savour of the Holy Spirit." Greek, []; and the
other Greek, []. l. 36.--" Without the permission of the Governor." Omitted in
the Greek.

P. xlv. l. 1.--"And were laid in the interior of the Churches ..... with God."
This passage is not found in the abridged Greek, but it is in the other Greek.
Upon which Papebrochius has the following note: " Deest haec clausula in
historia: quam tamem Eusebio abjudicare nihil nos cogit, qui vitam Pamphili
seque ac Historiam Ecclesiasticam scripsit, cum jam Constantinus lege lata
permisisset Christianis sacras aedes condere et Martyrum corpora eis inferre."
See Hippol. Opera, vol. ii. p. 224. l. 13.--"Of Batanea." [] Greek, []. l.
32.--" He was the last ..... in Caesarea." The Greek here adds the account of
Firmillianus having been put to death by the sword; and then a chapter
concerning what happened to the prelates of the Church.

P. xlvi. l. 1.--" The confession of Paulus," &c. The name in the Greek is [], both in this place and in Ecc. Hist, Book 8, ch. 13. l. 9---"Phaeno." Eusebius has described this place thus in his book, De locis Hebraicis :--[]. And Athanasius:--[]. See Reading's Note on Eusebius at this place.

1. 18.--" Zauara." This is Zoura, mentioned by Eusebius in the preceding note,
now Zara, Zora, or Zoara. See Van de Velde, Memoir to Map of the Holy Land, p.
354.

P. xlvii. l. 8.--" Patermytheus." Above, Patrimytheas, with the usual
inconsistency in writing proper names in Syriac. l. 10.--" Lovers of that
exalted philosophy which is of God." That is, the Christian religion. See Ecc.
Hist, passim. l. 25.--" Presbyter of the Church in the city of Gaza." The Greek
has, []. And in the Ecc. Hist. Book 8, ch. 13:--. And in the Greek of the Mart.
Palest., ch. 7, he gives the same account of him as in this place, that he was
at that time presbyter of Gaza, and afterwards was promoted to the episcopate
:--[].

P. xlviii. l. 5.--"And suddenly a mandate of wickedness was issued." The Greek
states that this order was given by Maximinus. l. 9.--"Forty in number." The
Greek says "thirty-nine.'' l. 10.--" Many of them were Egyptians." The Greek
adds in this place the account of one John, who had learned the Scriptures so
thoroughly by heart, that Eusebius states, that when he saw him standing up and
repeating portions of the Scripture to the congregation, he supposed that he had
been reading, till he drew near, and discovered that he was quite blind. l.
16.--"For he that was excited against us ..... perished after the manner of a
cruel wild beast." It does not appear to whom this applies. Probably he means
Firmillianus, of whose savage disposition and extreme cruelty he had spoken
above in such strong terms, see p. 27, 29; some account of whose death he gives
in the Greek, although omitted here. See note above, on P. xlv. 1. 32, p. 84. Or
he may mean the Maximinus whose death he describes in the Ecclesiastical
History, b. xi. ch. 10.

[[Syriac text omitted]] This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 6th September
2002. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 22: THE LIFE OF THE BLESSED EMPEROR CONSTANTINE - BOOK 1
========================================================================

Book I.

Chapter I. Preface.-Of the Death of Constantine.

Chapter II. The Preface Continued.

Chapter III. How God Honors Pious Princes, But Destroys Tyrants.

Chapter IV. That God Honored Constantine.

Chapter V. That He Reigned Above Thirty Years, and Lived Above Sixty.

Chapter VI. That He Was the Servant of God, and the Conqueror of Nations.

Chapter VII. Comparison with Cyrus, King of the Persians, and with Alexander of
Macedon.

Chapter VIII. That He Conquered Nearly the Whole World.

Chapter IX. That He Was the Son of a Pious Emperor, and Bequeathed the Power to
Royal Sons.

Chapter X. Of the Need for This History, and Its Value for Edification.

Chapter XI. That His Present Object is to Record Only the Pious Actions of
Constantine.

Chapter XII. That Like Moses, He Was Reared in the Palaces of Kings.

Chapter XIII. Of Constantius His Father, Who Refused to Imitate Diocletian,
Maximian, and Maxentius,30 In Their Persecution of the Christians.

Chapter XIV. How Constantius His Father, Being Reproached with Poverty by
Diocletian, Filled His Treasury, and Afterwards Restored the Money to Those by
Whom It Had Been Contributed.

Chapter XV. Of the Persecution Raised by His Colleagues.

Chapter XVI. How Constantius, Feigning Idolatry, Expelled Those Who Consented to
Offer Sacrifice, But Retained in His Palace All Who Were Willing to Confess
Christ.

Chapter XVII. Of His Christian Manner of Life.

Chapter XVIII. That After the Abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, Constantius
Became Chief Augustus, and Was Blessed with a Numerous Offspring.

Chapter XIX. Of His Son Constantine, Who in His Youth Accompanied Diocletian
into Palestine.

Chapter XX. Flight of Constantine to His Father Because of the Plots of
Diocletian.45 Chapter XXI. Death of Constantius, Who Leaves His Son Constantine
Emperor.47 Chapter XXII. How, After the Burial of Constantius, Constantine Was
Proclaimed Augustus by the Army.

Chapter XXIII. A Brief Notice of the Destruction of the Tyrants.

Chapter XXIV. It Was by the Will of God that Constantine Became Possessed of the
Empire.

Chapter XXV. Victories of Constantine Over the Barbarians and the Britons.

Chapter XXVI. How He Resolved to Deliver Rome from Maxentius.

Chapter XXVII. That After Reflecting on the Dawnfall of Those Who Had Worshiped
Idols, He Made Choice of Christianity.

Chapter XXVIII. How, While He Was Praying, God Sent Him a Vision of a Cross of
Light in the Heavens at MID-Day, with an Inscription Admonishing Him to Conquer
by that.

Chapter XXIX. How the Christ of God Appeared to Him in His Sleep, and Commanded
Him to Use in His Wars a Standard Made in the Form of the Cross.

Chapter XXX. The Making of the Standard of the Cross.

Chapter XXXI. A Description of the Standard of the Cross, Which the Romans Now
Call the Labarum.62 Chapter XXXII. How Constantine Received Instruction, and
Read the Sacred Scriptures.

Chapter XXXIII. Of the Adulterous Conduct of Maxentius at Rome.69 Chapter XXXIV.
How the Wife of a Prefect Slew Herself for Chastity's Sake.73 Chapter XXXV.
Massacre of the Roman People by Maxentius.

Chapter XXXVI. Magic Arts of Maxentius Against Constantine; And Famine at Rome.

Chapter XXXVII. Defeat of Maxentius's Armies in Italy.

Chapter XXXVIII. Death of Maxentius on the Bridge of the Tiber.78 Chapter XXXIX.
Constantine's Entry into Rome.

Chapter XL. Of the Statue of Constantine Holding a Cross, and Its Inscription.

Chapter XLI. Rejoicings Throughout the Provinces; And Constantine's Acts of
Grace.

Chapter XLII. The Honors Conferred Upon Bishops, and the Building of Churches.

Chapter XLIII. Constantine's Liberality to the Poor.

Chapter XLIV. How He Was Present at the Synods of Bishops.

Chapter XLV. His Forbearance with Unreasonable Men.

Chapter XLVI. Victories Aver the Barbarians.

Chapter XLVII. Death of Maximin,99 Who Had Attempted a Conspiracy, and of Others
Whom Constantine Detected by Divine Revelation.

Chapter XLVIII. Celebration of Constantine's Decennalia.

Chapter XLIX. How Licinius Oppressed the East.

Chapter L. How Licinius Attempted a Conspiracy Against Constantine.

Chapter LI. Intrigues of Licinius Against the Bishops, and His Prohibition of
Synods.

Chapter LII. Banishment of the Christians, and Confiscation of Their Property.

Chapter LIII. Edict that Women Should Not Meet with the Men in the Churches.

Chapter LIV. That Those Who Refuse to Sacrifice are to Be Dismissed from
Military Service, and Those in Prison Not to Be Fed.

Chapter LV. The Lawless Conduct and Covetousness of Licinius.

Chapter LVI. At Length He Undertakes to Raise a Persecution.

Chapter LVII. That Maximian,107 Brought Low by a Fistulous Ulcer with Worms,
Issued an Edict in Favor of the Christians.

Chapter LVIII. That Maximin, Who Had Persecuted the Christians, Was Compelled to
Fly, and Conceal Himself in the Disguise of a Slave.

Chapter LIX. That Maximin, Blinded by Disease, Issued an Edict in Favor of the
Christians.

Book I.

Chapter I. Preface.-Of the Death of Constantine.

Already1 have all mankind united in celebrating with joyous festivities the
completion of the second and third decennial period of this great emperor's
reign; already have we ourselves received him as a triumphant conqueror in the
assembly of God's ministers, and greeted him with the due meed of praise on the
twentieth anniversary of his reign:2 and still more recently we have woven, as
it were, garlands of words, wherewith we encircled his sacred head in his own
palace on his thirtieth anniversary.3 But now, while I desire4 to give utterance
to some of the customary sentiments, I stand perplexed and doubtful which way to
turn, being wholly lost in wonder at the extraordinary spectacle before me. For
to whatever quarter I direct my view, whether to the east, or to the west, or
over the whole world, or toward heaven itself, everywhere and always I see the
blessed one yet administering the self-same empire. On earth I behold his sons,
like some new reflectors of his brightness, diffusing everywhere the luster of
their father's character,5 and himself still living and powerful, and governing
all the affairs of men more completely than ever before, being multiplied in the
succession of his children. They had indeed had previously the dignity of
Caesars;6 but now, being invested with his very self, and graced by his
accomplishments, for the excellence of their piety they are proclaimed by the
titles of Sovereign, Augustus, Worshipful, and Emperor.

Chapter II. The Preface Continued. And I am indeed amazed, when I consider that
he who was but lately visible and present with us in his mortal body, is still,
even after death, when the natural thought disclaims everything superfluous as
unsuitable, most marvelously endowed with the same imperial dwellings, and
honors, and praises as heretofore.7 But farther, when I raise my thoughts even
to the arch of heaven, and there contemplate his thrice-blessed soul in
communion with God himself, freed from every mortal and earthly vesture, and
shining in a refulgent robe of light, and when I perceive that it is no more
connected with the fleeting periods and occupations of mortal life, but honored
with an ever-blooming crown, and an immortality of endless and blessed
existence, I stand as it were without power of speech or thought8 and unable to
utter a single phrase, but condemning my own weakness, and imposing silence on
myself, I resign the task of speaking his praises worthily to one who is better
able, even to him who, being the immortal God and veritable Word, alone has
power to confirm his own saying.9 Chapter III. How God Honors Pious Princes, But
Destroys Tyrants.

Having given assurance that those who glorify and honor him will meet with an
abundant recompense at his hands, while those who set themselves against him as
enemies and adversaries will compass the ruin of their own souls, he has already
established the truth of these his own declarations, having shown on the one
hand the fearful end of those tyrants who denied and opposed him,10 and at the
same time having made it manifest that even the death of his servant, as well as
his life, is worthy of admiration and praise, and justly claims the memorial,
not merely of perishable, but of immortal monuments.

Mankind, devising some consolation for the frail and precarious duration of
human life, have thought by the erection of monuments to glorify the memories of
their ancestors with immortal honors. Some have employed the vivid delineations
and colors of painting11 ; some have carved statues from lifeless blocks of
wood; while others, by engraving their inscriptions deep on tablets12 and
monuments, have thought to transmit the virtues of those whom they honored to
perpetual remembrance. All these indeed are perishable, and consumed by the
lapse of time, being representations of the corruptible body, and not expressing
the image of the immortal soul. And yet these seemed sufficient to those who had
no well-grounded hope of happiness after the termination of this mortal life.
But God, that God, I say, who is the common Saviour of all, having treasured up
with himself, for those who love godliness, greater blessings than human thought
has conceived, gives the earnest and first-fruits of future rewards even here,
assuring in some sort immortal hopes to mortal eyes. The ancient oracles of the
prophets, delivered to us in the Scripture, declare this; the lives of pious
men, who shone in old time with every virtue, bear witness to posterity of the
same; and our own days prove it to be true, wherein Constantine, who alone of
all that ever wielded the Roman power was the friend of God the Sovereign of
all, has appeared to all mankind so clear an example of a godly life.

Chapter IV. That God Honored Constantine. And God himself, whom Constantine
worshiped, has confirmed this truth by the clearest manifestations of his will,
being present to aid him13 at the commencement, during the course, and at the
end of his reign, and holding him up to the human race as an instructive example
of godliness. Accordingly, by the manifold blessings he has conferred on him, he
has distinguished him alone of all the sovereigns of whom we have ever heard as
at once a mighty luminary and most clear-voiced herald of genuine piety.

Chapter V. That He Reigned Above Thirty Years, and Lived Above Sixty. With
respect to the duration of his reign, God honored him with three complete
periods of ten years, and something more, extending the whole term of his mortal
life to twice this number of years.14 And being pleased to make him a
representative of his own sovereign power, he displayed him as the conqueror of
the whole race of tyrants, and the destroyer of those God-defying giants15 of
the earth who madly raised their impious arms against him, the supreme King of
all. They appeared, so to speak, for an instant, and then disappeared: while the
one and only true God, when he had enabled his servant, clad in heavenly
panoply, to stand singly against many foes, and by his means had relieved
mankind from the multitude of the ungodly, constituted him a teacher of his
worship to all nations, to testify with a loud voice in the hearing of all that
he acknowledged the true God, and turned with abhorrence from the error of them
that are no gods.

Chapter VI. That He Was the Servant of God, and the Conqueror of Nations.

Thus, like a faithful and good servant, did he act and testify, openly declaring
and confessing himself the obedient minister of the supreme King. And God
forthwith rewarded him, by making him ruler and sovereign, and victorious to
such a degree that he alone of all rulers pursued a continual course of
conquest, unsubdued and invincible, and through his trophies a greater ruler
than tradition records ever to have been before. So dear was he to God, and so
blessed; so pious and so fortunate in all that he undertook, that with the
greatest facility he obtained the authority over more nations than any who had
preceded him,16 and yet retained his power, undisturbed, to the very close of
his life.

Chapter VII. Comparison with Cyrus, King of the Persians, and with Alexander of
Macedon.

Ancient history describes Cyrus, king of the Persians, as by far the most
illustrious of all kings up to his time. And yet if we regard the end of his
days,17 we find it but little corresponded with his past prosperity, since he
met with an inglorious and dishonorable death at the hands of a woman.18

Again, the sons of Greece celebrate Alexander the Macedonian as the conqueror of
many and diverse nations; yet we find that he was removed by an early death,
before he had reached maturity, being carried off by the effects of revelry and
drunkenness.19 His whole life embraced but the space of thirty-two years, and
his reign extended to no more than a third part of that period. Unsparing as the
thunderbolt, he advanced through streams of blood and reduced entire nations and
cities, young and old, to utter slavery. But when he had scarcely arrived at the
maturity of life, and was lamenting the loss of youthful pleasures, death fell
upon him with terrible stroke, and, that he might not longer outrage the human
race, cut him off in a foreign and hostile land, childless, without successor,
and homeless. His kingdom too was instantly dismembered, each of his officers
taking away and appropriating a portion for himself. And yet this man is
extolled for such deeds as these.20 Chapter VIII. That He Conquered Nearly the
Whole World. But our emperor began his reign at the time of life at which the
Macedonian died, yet doubled the length of his life, and trebled the length of
his reign. And instructing his army in the mild and sober precepts of godliness,
he carried his arms as far as the Britons, and the nations that dwell in the
very bosom of the Western ocean. He subdued likewise all Scythia, though
situated in the remotest North, and divided into numberless diverse and
barbarous tribes. He even pushed his conquests to the Blemmyans and Ethiopians,
on the very confines of the South; nor did he think the acquisition of the
Eastern nations unworthy his care. In short, diffusing the effulgence of his
holy light to the ends of the whole world, even to the most distant Indians, the
nations dwelling on the extreme circumference of the inhabited earth, he
received the submission of all the rulers,21 governors,22 and satraps of
barbarous nations, who cheerfully welcomed and saluted him, sending embassies
and presents, and setting the highest value on his acquaintance and friendship;
insomuch that they honored him with pictures and statues in their respective
countries, and Constantine alone of all emperors was acknowledged and celebrated
by all. Notwithstanding, even among these distant nations, he proclaimed the
name of his God in his royal edicts with all boldness.

Chapter IX. That He Was the Son of a Pious Emperor, and Bequeathed the Power to
Royal Sons. Nor did he give this testimony in words merely, while exhibiting
failure in his own practice, but pursued every path of virtue, and was rich in
the varied fruits of godliness. He ensured the affection of his friends by
magnificent proofs of liberality; and inasmuch as he governed on principles of
humanity, he caused his rule to be but lightly felt and acceptable to all
classes of his subjects; until at last, after a long course of years, and when
he was wearied by his divine labors, the God whom he honored crowned him with an
immortal reward, and translated him from a transitory kingdom to that endless
life which he has laid up in store for the souls of his saints, after he had
raised him up three sons to succeed him in his power. As then the imperial
throne had descended to him from his father, so, by the law of nature, was it
reserved for his children and their descendants, and perpetuated, like some
paternal inheritance, to endless generations. And indeed God himself, who
distinguished this blessed prince with divine honors while yet present with us,
and who has adorned his death with choice blessings from his own hand, should be
the writer of his actions; since he has recorded his labors and successes on
heavenly monuments.23 Chapter X. Of the Need for This History, and Its Value for
Edification.

However, hard as it is to speak worthily of this blessed character, and though
silence were the safer and less perilous course, nevertheless it is incumbent on
me, if I would escape the charge of negligence and sloth, to trace as it were a
verbal portraiture, by way of memorial of the pious prince, in imitation of the
delineations of human art. For I should be ashamed of myself were I not to
employ my best efforts, feeble though they be and of little value, in praise of
one who honored God with such surpassing devotion. I think too that my work will
be on other grounds both instructive and necessary, since it will contain a
description of those royal and noble actions which are pleasing to God, the
Sovereign of all. For would it not be disgraceful that the memory of Nero, and
other impious and godless tyrants far worse than he, should meet with diligent
writers to embellish the relation of their worthless deeds with elegant
language, and record them in voluminous histories, and that I should be silent,
to whom God himself has vouchsafed such an emperor as all history records not,
and has permitted me to come into his presence, and enjoy his acquaintance and
society?24

Wherefore, if it is the duty of any one, it certainly is mine, to make an ample
proclamation of his virtues to all in whom the example of noble actions is
capable of inspiring the love of God. For some who have written the lives of
worthless characters, and the history of actions but little tending to the
improvement of morals, from private motives, either love or enmity, and possibly
in some cases with no better object than the display of their own learning, have
exaggerated unduly their description of actions intrinsically base, by a
refinement and elegance of diction.25 And thus they have become to those who by
the Divine favor had been kept apart from evil, teachers not of good, but of
what should be silenced in oblivion and darkness. But my narrative, however
unequal to the greatness of the deeds it has to describe, will yet derive luster
even from the bare relation of noble actions. And surely the record of conduct
that has been pleasing to God will afford a far from unprofitable, indeed a most
instructive study, to persons of well-disposed minds.

Chapter XI. That His Present Object is to Record Only the Pious Actions of
Constantine.

It is my intention, therefore, to pass over the greater part of the royal deeds
of this thrice-blessed prince; as, for example, his conflicts and engagements in
the field, his personal valor, his victories and successes against the enemy,
and the many triumphs he obtained: likewise his provisions for the interests of
individuals, his legislative enactments for the social advantage of his
subjects, and a multitude of other imperial labors which are fresh in the memory
of all; the design of my present undertaking being to speak and write of those
circumstances only which have reference to his religious character. And since
these are themselves of almost infinite variety, I shall select from the facts
which have come to my knowledge such as are most suitable, and worthy of lasting
record, and endeavor to narrate them as briefly as possible. Henceforward,
indeed, there is a full and free opportunity for celebrating in every way the
praises of this truly blessed prince, which hitherto we have been unable to do,
on the ground that we are forbidden to judge any one blessed before his death,26
because of the uncertain vicissitudes of life. Let me implore then the help of
God, and may the inspiring aid of the heavenly Word be with me, while I commence
my history from the very earliest period of his life.

Chapter XII. That Like Moses, He Was Reared in the Palaces of Kings.

Ancient history relates that a cruel race of tyrants oppressed the Hebrew
nation; and that God, who graciously regarded them in their affliction, provided
that the prophet Moses, who was then an infant, should be brought up in the very
palaces and bosoms of the oppressors, and instructed in all the wisdom they
possessed. And when in the course of time he had arrived at manhood, and the
time was come for Divine justice to avenge the wrongs of the afflicted people,
then the prophet of God, in obedience to the will of a more powerful Lord,
forsook the royal household, and, estranging himself in word and deed from the
tyrants by whom he had been brought up, openly acknowledging his true brethren
and kinsfolk. Then God, exalting him to be the leader of the whole nation,
delivered the Hebrews from the bondage of their enemies, and inflicted Divine
vengeance through his means on the tyrant race. This ancient story, though
rejected by most as fabulous, has reached the ears of all. But now the same God
has given to us to be eye-witnesses of miracles more wonderful than fables, and,
from their recent appearance, more authentic than any report. For the tyrants of
our day have ventured to war against the Supreme God, and have sorely afflicted
His Church.27 And in the midst of these, Constantine, who was shortly to become
their destroyer, but at that time of tender age, and blooming with the down of
early youth, dwelt, as that other servant of God had done, in the very home of
the tyrants,28 but young as he was did not share the manner of life of the
ungodly: for from that early period his noble nature, under the leading of the
Divine Spirit, inclined him to piety and a life acceptable to God. A desire,
moreover, to emulate the example of his father had its influence in stimulating
the son to a virtuous course of conduct His father was Constantius29 (and we
ought to revive his memory at this time), the most illustrious emperor of our
age; of whose life it is necessary briefly to relate a few particulars, which
tell to the honor of his son.

Chapter XIII. Of Constantius His Father, Who Refused to Imitate Diocletian,
Maximian, and Maxentius,30 In Their Persecution of the Christians. At a time
when four emperors31 shared the administration of the Roman empire, Constantius
alone, following a course of conduct different from that pursued by his
colleagues, entered into the friendship of the Supreme God. For while they
besieged and wasted the churches of God, leveling them to the ground, and
obliterating the very foundations of the houses of prayer,32 he kept his hands
pure from their abominable impiety, and never in any respect resembled them.
They polluted their provinces by the indiscriminate slaughter of godly men and
women; but he kept his soul free from the stain of this crime.33 They, involved
in the mazes of impious idolatry, enthralled first themselves, and then all
under their authority, in bondage to the errors of evil demons, while he at the
same time originated the profoundest peace throughout his dominions, and secured
to his subjects the privilege of celebrating without hindrance the worship of
God. In short, while his colleagues oppressed all men by the most grievous
exactions, and rendered their lives intolerable, and even worse than death,
Constantius alone governed his people with a mild and tranquil sway, and
exhibited towards them a truly parental and fostering care. Numberless, indeed,
are the other virtues of this man, which are the theme of praise to all; of
these I will record one or two instances, as specimens of the quality of those
which I must pass by in silence, and then I will proceed to the appointed order
of my narrative.

Chapter XIV. How Constantius His Father, Being Reproached with Poverty by
Diocletian, Filled His Treasury, and Afterwards Restored the Money to Those by
Whom It Had Been Contributed. In consequence of the many reports in circulation
respecting this prince, describing his kindness and gentleness of character, and
the extraordinary elevation of his piety, alleging too, that by reason of his
extreme indulgence to his subjects, he had not even a supply of money laid up in
his treasury; the emperor who at that time occupied the place of supreme power
sent to reprehend his neglect of the public weal, at the same time reproaching
him with poverty, and alleging in proof of the charge the empty state of his
treasury. On this he desired the messengers of the emperor to remain with him
awhile, and, calling together the wealthiest of his subjects of all nations
under his dominion, he informed them that he was in want of money, and that this
was the time for them all to give a voluntary proof of their affection for their
prince. As soon as they heard this (as though they had long been desirous of an
opportunity for showing the sincerity of their good will), with zealous alacrity
they filled the treasury with gold and silver and other wealth; each eager to
surpass the rest in the amount of his contribution: and this they did with
cheerful and joyous countenances. And now Constantius desired the messengers of
the great emperor34 personally to inspect his treasures, and directed them to
give a faithful report of what they had seen; adding, that on the present
occasion he had taken this money into his own hands, but that it had long been
kept for his use in the custody of the owners, as securely as if under the
charge of faithful treasurers. The ambassadors were overwhelmed with
astonishment at what they had witnessed: and on their departure it is said that
the truly generous prince sent for the owners of the property, and, after
commending them severally for their obedience and true loyalty, restored it all,
and bade them return to their homes. This one circumstance, then, conveys a
proof of the generosity of him whose character we are attempting to illustrate:
another will contain the clearest testimony to his piety.

Chapter XV. Of the Persecution Raised by His Colleagues. By command of the
supreme authorities of the empire, the governors of the several provinces had
set on foot a general persecution of the godly. Indeed, it was from the imperial
courts themselves that the very first of the pious martyrs proceeded, who passed
through those conflicts for the faith, and most readily endured both fire and
sword, and the depths of the sea; every form of death, in short, so that in a
brief time all the royal palaces were bereft of pious men.35 The result was,
that the authors of this wickedness were entirely deprived of the protecting
care of God, since by their persecution of his worshipers they at the same time
silenced the prayers that were wont to be made on their own behalf.

Chapter XVI. How Constantius, Feigning Idolatry, Expelled Those Who Consented to
Offer Sacrifice, But Retained in His Palace All Who Were Willing to Confess
Christ. On the other hand, Constantius conceived an expedient full of sagacity,
and did a thing which sounds paradoxical, but in fact was most admirable.

He made a proposal to all the officers of his court, including even those in the
highest stations of authority, offering them the following alternative: either
that they should offer sacrifice to demons, and thus be permitted to remain with
him, and enjoy their usual honors; or, in case of refusal, that they should be
shut out from all access to his person, and entirely disqualified from
acquaintance and association with him. Accordingly, when they had individually
made their choice, some one way and some the other; and the choice of each had
been ascertained, then this admirable prince disclosed the secret meaning of his
expedient, and condemned the cowardice and selfishness of the one party, while
he highly commended the other for their conscientious devotion to God. He
declared, too, that those who had been false to their God must be unworthy of
the confidence of their prince; for how was it possible that they should
preserve their fidelity to him, who had proved themselves faithless to a higher
power? He determined, therefore, that such persons should be removed altogether
from the imperial court, while, on the other hand, declaring that those men who,
in bearing witness for the truth, had proved themselves to be worthy servants of
God, would manifest the same fidelity to their king, he entrusted them with the
guardianship of his person and empire, saying that he was bound to treat such
persons with special regard as his nearest and most valued friends, and to
esteem them far more highly than the richest treasures.

Chapter XVII. Of His Christian Manner of Life. The father of Constantine, then,
is said to have possessed such a character as we have briefly described. And
what kind of death was vouchsafed to him in consequence of such devotion to God,
and how far he whom he honored made his lot to differ from that of his
colleagues in the empire, may be known to any one who will give his attention to
the circumstances of the case. For after he had for a long time given many
proofs of royal virtue, in acknowledging the Supreme God alone, and condemning
the polytheism of the ungodly, and had fortified his household by the prayers of
holy men,36 he passed the remainder of his life in remarkable repose and
tranquillity, in the enjoyment of what is counted blessedness,-neither molesting
others nor being molested ourselves.

Accordingly, during the whole course of his quiet and peaceful reign, he
dedicated his entire household, his children, his wife, and domestic attendants,
to the One Supreme God: so that the company assembled within the walls of his
palace differed in no respect from a church of God; wherein were also to be
found his ministers, who offered continual supplications on behalf of their
prince, and this at a time when, with most,37 it was not allowable to have any
dealings with the worshipers of God, even so far as to exchange a word with
them.

Chapter XVIII. That After the Abdication of Diocletian and Maximian, Constantius
Became Chief Augustus, and Was Blessed with a Numerous Offspring. The immediate
consequence of this conduct was a recompense from the hand of God, insomuch that
he came into the supreme authority of the empire. For the older emperors, for
some unknown reason, resigned their power; and this sudden change took place in
the first year after their persecution of the churches.38 From that time
Constantius alone received the honors of chief Augustus, having been previously,
indeed, distinguished by the diadem of the imperial Caesars,39 among whom he
held the first rank; but after his worth had been proved in this capacity, he
was invested with the highest dignity of the Roman empire, being named chief
Augustus of the four who were afterwards elected to that honor. Moreover, he
surpassed most of the emperors in regard to the number of his family, having
gathered around him a very large circle of children both male and female. And,
lastly, when he had attained to a happy old age, and was about to pay the common
debt of nature, and exchange this life for another, God once more manifested His
power in a special manner on his behalf, by providing that his eldest son
Constantine should be present during his last moments, and ready to receive the
imperial power from his hands.40 Chapter XIX. Of His Son Constantine, Who in His
Youth Accompanied Diocletian into Palestine. The latter had been with his
father's imperial colleagues,41 and had passed his life among them, as we have
said, like God's ancient prophet. And even in the very earliest period of his
youth he was judged by them to be worthy of the highest honor. An instance of
this we have ourselves seen, when he passed through Palestine with the senior
emperor,42 at whose right hand he stood, and commanded the admiration of all who
beheld him by the indications he gave even then of royal greatness. For no one
was comparable to him for grace and beauty of person, or height of stature; and
he so far surpassed his compeers in personal strength as to be a terror to them.
He was, however, even more conspicuous for the excellence of his mental43
qualities than for his superior physical endowments; being gifted in the first
place with a sound judgment,44 and having also reaped the advantages of a
liberal education. He was also distinguished in no ordinary degree both by
natural intelligence and divinely imparted wisdom.

Chapter XX. Flight of Constantine to His Father Because of the Plots of
Diocletian.45 The emperors then in power, observing his manly and vigorous
figure and superior mind, were moved with feelings of jealousy and fear, and
thenceforward carefully watched for an opportunity of inflicting some brand of
disgrace on his character. But the young man, being aware of their designs, the
details of which, through the providence of God, more than once came to him,
sought safety in flight;46 in this respect again keeping up his resemblance to
the great prophet Moses. Indeed, in every sense God was his helper; and he had
before ordained that he should be present in readiness to succeed his father.

Chapter XXI. Death of Constantius, Who Leaves His Son Constantine Emperor.47

Immediately, therefore, on his escape from the plots which had been thus
insidiously laid for him, he made his way with all haste to his father, and
arrived at length at the very time that he was lying at the point of death.48 As
soon as Constantius saw his son thus unexpectedly in his presence, he leaped
from his couch, embraced him tenderly, and, declaring that the only anxiety
which had troubled him in the prospect of death, namely, that caused by the
absence of his son, was now removed, he rendered thanks to God, saying that he
now thought death better than the longest life,49 and at once completed the
arrangement of his private affairs. Then, taking a final leave of the circle of
sons and daughters by whom he was surrounded, in his own palace, and on the
imperial couch, he bequeathed the empire, according to the law of nature,50 to
his eldest son, and breathed his last.

Chapter XXII. How, After the Burial of Constantius, Constantine Was Proclaimed
Augustus by the Army. Nor did the imperial throne remain long unoccupied: for
Constantine invested himself with his father's purple, and proceeded from his
father's palace, presenting to all a renewal, as it were, in his own person, of
his father's life and reign. He then conducted the funeral procession in company
with his father's friends, some preceding, others following the train, and
performed the last offices for the pious deceased with an extraordinary degree
of magnificence, and all united in honoring this thrice blessed prince with
acclamations and praises, and while with one mind and voice, they glorified the
rule of the son as a living again of him who was dead, they hastened at once to
hail their new sovereign by the titles of Imperial and Worshipful Augustus, with
joyful shouts.51 Thus the memory of the deceased emperor received honor from the
praises bestowed upon his son, while the latter was pronounced blessed in being
the successor of such a father. All the nations also under his dominion were
filled with joy and inexpressible gladness at not being even for a moment
deprived of the benefits of a well ordered government. In the instance of the
Emperor Constantius, God has made manifest to our generation what the end of
those is who in their lives have honored and loved him.

Chapter XXIII. A Brief Notice of the Destruction of the Tyrants. With respect to
the other princes, who made war against the churches of God, I have not thought
it fit in the present work to give any account of their downfall,52 nor to stain
the memory of the good by mentioning them in connection with those of an
opposite character. The knowledge of the facts themselves will of itself suffice
for the wholesome admonition of those who have witnessed or heard of the evils
which severally befell them.

Chapter XXIV. It Was by the Will of God that Constantine Became Possessed of the
Empire.

Thus then the God of all, the Supreme Governor of the whole universe, by his own
will appointed Constantine, the descendant of so renowned a parent, to be prince
and sovereign: so that, while others have been raised to this distinction by the
election of their fellow-men, he is the only one to whose elevation no mortal
may boast of having contributed.

Chapter XXV. Victories of Constantine Over the Barbarians and the Britons. As
soon then as he was established on the throne, he began to care for the
interests of his paternal inheritance, and visited with much considerate
kindness all those provinces which had previously been under his father's
government. Some tribes of the barbarians who dwelt on the banks of the Rhine,
and the shores of the Western ocean, having ventured to revolt, he reduced them
all to obedience, and brought them from their savage state to one of gentleness.
He contented himself with checking the inroads of others, and drove from his
dominions, like untamed and savage beasts, those whom he perceived to be
altogether incapable of the settled order of civilized life.53 Having disposed
of these affairs to his satisfaction, he directed his attention to other
quarters of the world, and first passed over to the British nations,54 which lie
in the very bosom of the ocean. These he reduced to submission, and then
proceeded to consider the state of the remaining portions of the empire, that he
might be ready to tender his aid wherever circumstances might require it.

Chapter XXVI. How He Resolved to Deliver Rome from Maxentius.

While, therefore, he regarded the entire world as one immense body, and
perceived that the head of it all, the royal city of the Roman empire, was bowed
down by the weight of a tyrannous oppression; at first he had left the task of
liberation to those who governed the other divisions of the empire, as being his
superiors in point of age. But when none of these proved able to afford relief,
and those who had attempted it had experienced a disastrous termination of their
enterprise,55 he said that life was without enjoyment to him as long as he saw
the imperial city thus afflicted, and prepared himself for the overthrowal of
the tyranny.

Chapter XXVII. That After Reflecting on the Dawnfall of Those Who Had Worshiped
Idols, He Made Choice of Christianity. Being convinced, however, that he needed
some more powerful aid than his military forces could afford him, on account of
the wicked and magical enchantments which were so diligently practiced by the
tyrant,56 he sought Divine assistance, deeming the possession of arms and a
numerous soldiery of secondary importance, but believing the co-operating power
of Deity invincible and not to be shaken. He considered, therefore, on what God
he might rely for protection and assistance. While engaged in this enquiry, the
thought occurred to him, that, of the many emperors who had preceded him, those
who had rested their hopes in a multitude of gods, and served them with
sacrifices and offerings, had in the first place been deceived by flattering
predictions, and oracles which promised them all prosperity, and at last had met
with an unhappy end, while not one of their gods had stood by to warn them of
the impending wrath of heaven; while one alone who had pursued an entirely
opposite course, who had condemned their error, and honored the one Supreme God
during his whole life, had found I him to be the Saviour and Protector of his
empire, and the Giver of every good thing. Reflecting on this, and well weighing
the fact that they who had trusted in many gods had also fallen by manifold
forms of death, without leaving behind them either family or offspring, stock,
name, or memorial among men: while the God of his father had given to him, on
the other hand, manifestations of his power and very many tokens: and
considering farther that those who had already taken arms against the tyrant,
and had marched to the battle-field under the protection of a multitude of gods,
had met with a dishonorable end (for one of them57 had shamefully retreated from
the contest without a blow, and the other,58 being slain in the midst of his own
troops, became, as it were, the mere sport of death59 ); reviewing, I say, all
these considerations, he judged it to be folly indeed to join in the idle
worship of those who were no gods, and, after such convincing evidence, to err
from the truth; and therefore felt it incumbent on him to honor his father's God
alone.

Chapter XXVIII. How, While He Was Praying, God Sent Him a Vision of a Cross of
Light in the Heavens at MID-Day, with an Inscription Admonishing Him to Conquer
by that.

Accordingly he called on him with earnest prayer and supplications that he would
reveal to him who he was, and stretch forth his right hand to help him in his
present difficulties. And while he was thus praying with fervent entreaty, a
most marvelous sign appeared to him from heaven, the account of which it might
have been hard to believe had it been related by any other person. But since the
victorious emperor himself long afterwards declared it to the writer of this
history,60 when he was honored with his acquaintance and society, and confirmed
his statement by an oath, who could hesitate to accredit the relation,
especially since the testimony of after-time has established its truth? He said
that about noon, when the day was already beginning to decline, he saw with his
own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and
bearing the inscription, Conquer by this. At this sight he himself was struck
with amazement, and his whole army also, which followed him on this expedition,
and witnessed the miracle.61

Chapter XXIX. How the Christ of God Appeared to Him in His Sleep, and Commanded
Him to Use in His Wars a Standard Made in the Form of the Cross.

He said, moreover, that he doubted within himself what the import of this
apparition could be. And while he continued to ponder and reason on its meaning,
night suddenly came on; then in his sleep the Christ of God appeared to him with
the same sign which he had seen in the heavens, and commanded him to make a
likeness of that sign which he had seen in the heavens, and to use it as a
safeguard in all engagements with his enemies.

Chapter XXX. The Making of the Standard of the Cross. At dawn of day he arose,
and communicated the marvel to his friends: and then, calling together the
workers in gold and precious stones, he sat in the midst of them, and described
to them the figure of the sign he had seen, bidding them represent it in gold
and precious stones. And this representation I myself have had an opportunity of
seeing.

Chapter XXXI. A Description of the Standard of the Cross, Which the Romans Now
Call the Labarum.62

Now it was made in the following manner. A long spear, overlaid with gold,
formed the figure of the cross by means of a transverse bar laid over it. On the
top of the whole was fixed a wreath of gold and precious stones; and within
this,63 the symbol of the Saviour's name, two letters indicating the name of
Christ by means of its initial characters, the letter P being intersected by X
in its centre:64 and these letters the emperor was in the habit of wearing on
his helmet at a later period. From the cross-bar of the spear was suspended a
cloth,65 a royal piece, covered with a profuse embroidery of most brilliant
precious stones; and which, being also richly interlaced with gold, presented an
indescribable degree of beauty to the beholder. This banner was of a square
form, and the upright staff, whose lower section was of great length,66 bore a
golden half-length portrait67 of the pious emperor and his children on its upper
part, beneath the trophy of the cross, and immediately above the embroidered
banner. The emperor constantly made use of this sign of salvation as a safeguard
against every adverse and hostile power, and commanded that others similar to it
should be carried at the head of all his armies.

Chapter XXXII. How Constantine Received Instruction, and Read the Sacred
Scriptures.

These things were done shortly afterwards. But at the time above specified,
being struck with amazement at the extraordinary vision, and resolving to
worship no other God save Him who had appeared to him, he sent for those who
were acquainted with the mysteries of His doctrines, and enquired who that God
was, and what was intended by the sign of the vision he had seen. They affirmed
that He was God, the only begotten Son of the one and only God: that the sign
which had appeared was the symbol of immortality,68 and the trophy of that
victory over death which He had gained in time past when sojourning on earth.
They taught him also the causes of His advent, and explained to him the true
account of His incarnation. Thus he was instructed in these matters, and was
impressed with wonder at the divine manifestation which had been presented to
his sight. Comparing, therefore, the heavenly vision with the interpretation
given, he found his judgment confirmed; and, in the persuasion that the
knowledge of these things had been imparted to him by Divine teaching, he
determined thenceforth to devote himself to the reading of the Inspired
writings.

Moreover, he made the priests of God his counselors, and deemed it incumbent on
him to honor the God who had appeared to him with all devotion. And after this,
being fortified by well-grounded hopes in Him, he hastened to quench the
threatening fire of tyranny.

Chapter XXXIII. Of the Adulterous Conduct of Maxentius at Rome.69 For the who
had tyrannically possessed himself of the imperial city,70 had proceeded to
great lengths in impiety and wickedness, so as to venture without hesitation on
every vile and impure action. For example: he would separate women from their
husbands, and after a time send them back to them again, and these insults he
offered not to men of mean or obscure condition, but to those who held the first
places in the Roman senate. Moreover, though he shamefully dishonored almost
numberless free women, he was unable to satisfy his ungoverned and intemperate
desires. But71 when he assayed to corrupt Christian women also, he could no
longer secure success to his designs, since they chose rather to submit their
lives72 to death than yield their persons to be defiled by him.

Chapter XXXIV. How the Wife of a Prefect Slew Herself for Chastity's Sake.73

Now a certain woman, wife of one of the senators who held the authority of
prefect, when she understood that those who ministered to the tyrant in such
matters were standing before her house (she was a Christian), and knew that her
husband through fear had bidden them take her and lead her away, begged a short
space of time for arraying herself in her usual dress, and entered her chamber.
There, being left alone, she sheathed a sword in her own breast, and immediately
expired, leaving indeed her dead body to the procurers, but declaring to all
mankind, both to present and future generations, by an act which spoke louder
than any words, that the chastity for which Christians are famed is the only
thing which is invincible and indestructible. Such was the conduct displayed by
this Woman.

Chapter XXXV. Massacre of the Roman People by Maxentius.

All men, therefore, both people and magistrates, whether of high or low degree,
trembled through fear of him whose daring wickedness was such as I have
described, and were oppressed by his grievous tyranny. Nay, though they
submitted quietly, and endured this bitter servitude, still there was no escape
from the tyrant's sanguinary cruelty. For at one time, on some trifling
pretense, he exposed the populace to be slaughtered by his own body-guard; and
countless multitudes of the Roman people were slain in the very midst of the
city by the lances and weapons, not of Scythians or barbarians, but of their own
fellow-citizens. And besides this, it is impossible to calculate the number of
senators whose blood was shed with a view to the seizure of their respective
estates, for at different times and on various fictitious charges, multitudes of
them suffered death.

Chapter XXXVI. Magic Arts of Maxentius Against Constantine; And Famine at Rome.
But the crowning point of the tyrant's wickedness was his having recourse to
sorcery: sometimes for magic purposes ripping up women with child, at other
times searching into the bowels of new-born infants. He slew lions also, and
practiced certain horrid arts for evoking demons, and averting the approaching
war, hoping by these means to get the victory. In short, it is impossible to
describe the manifold acts of oppression by which this tyrant of Rome enslaved
his subjects: so that by this time they were reduced to the most extreme penury
and want of necessary food, a scarcity such as our contemporaries do not
remember ever before to have existed at Rome.74 Chapter XXXVII. Defeat of
Maxentius's Armies in Italy.

Constantine, however, filled with compassion on account of all these miseries,
began to arm himself with all warlike preparation against the tyranny. Assuming
therefore the Supreme God as his patron, and invoking His Christ to be his
preserver and aid, and setting the victorious trophy, the salutary symbol, in
front of his soldiers and body-guard, he marched with his whole forces, trying
to obtain again for the Romans the freedom they had inherited from their
ancestors. And whereas, Maxentius, trusting more in his magic arts than in the
affection of his subjects, dared not even advance outside the city gates,75 but
had guarded every place and district and city subject to his tyranny, with large
bodies of soldiers,76 the emperor, confiding in the help of God, advanced
against the first and second and third divisions of the tyrant's forces,
defeated them all with ease at the first assault,77 and made his way into the
very interior of Italy.

Chapter XXXVIII. Death of Maxentius on the Bridge of the Tiber.78 And already he
was approaching very near Rome itself, when, to save him from the necessity of
fighting with all the Romans for the tyrant's sake, God himself drew the tyrant,
as it were by secret cords, a long way outside the gates.79 And now those
miracles recorded in Holy Writ, which God of old wrought against the ungodly
(discredited by most as fables, yet believed by the faithful), did he in every
deed confirm to all alike, believers and unbelievers, who were eye-witnesses of
the wonders. For as once in the days of Moses and the Hebrew nation, who were
worshipers of God, "Pharaoh's chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea
and his chosen chariot-captains are drowned in the Red Sea,"80 -so at this time
Maxentius, and the soldiers and guards81 with him, "went down into the depths
like stone,"82 when, in his flight before the divinely-aided forces of
Constantine, he essayed to cross the river which lay in his way, over which,
making a strong bridge of boats, he had framed an engine of destruction, really
against himself, but in the hope of ensnaring thereby him who was beloved by
God. For his God stood by the one to protect him, while the other, godless,83
proved to be the miserable contriver of these secret devices to his own ruin. So
that one might well say, "He hath made a pit, and digged it, and is fallen into
the ditch which he made. His mischief shall return upon his own head, and his
violence shall come down upon his own pate."84 Thus, in the present instance,
under divine direction, the machine erected on the bridge, with the ambuscade
concealed therein, giving way unexpectedly before the appointed time, the bridge
began to sink, and the boats with the men in them went bodily to the bottom.85
And first the wretch himself, then his armed attendants and guards, even as the
sacred oracles had before described, "sank as lead in the mighty waters."86 So
that they who thus obtained victory from God might well, if not in the same
words, yet in fact in the same spirit as the people of his great servant Moses,
sing and speak as they did concerning the impious tyrant of old: "Let us sing
unto the Lord, for he hath been glorified exceedingly: the horse and his rider
hath he thrown into the sea. He is become my helper and my shield unto
salvation." And again, "Who is like unto thee, O Lord, among the gods? who is
like thee, glorious in holiness, marvelous in praises, doing wonders?"87 Chapter
XXXIX. Constantine's Entry into Rome.

Having then at this time sung these and suchlike praises to God, the Ruler of
all and the Author of victory, after the example of his great servant Moses,
Constantine entered the imperial city in triumph. And here the whole body of the
senate, and others of rank and distinction in the city, freed as it were from
the restraint of a prison, along with the whole Roman populace, their
countenances expressive of the gladness of their hearts, received him with
acclamations and abounding joy; men, women, and children, with countless
multitudes of servants, greeting him as deliverer, preserver, and benefactor,
with incessant shouts. But he, being possessed of inward piety toward God, was
neither rendered arrogant by these plaudits, nor uplifted by the praises he
heard:88 but, being sensible that he had received help from God, he immediately
rendered a thanksgiving to him as the Author of his victory.

Chapter XL. Of the Statue of Constantine Holding a Cross, and Its Inscription.

Moreover, by loud proclamation and monumental inscriptions he made known to all
men the salutary symbol, setting up this great trophy of victory over his
enemies in the midst of the imperial city, and expressly causing it to be
engraven in indelible characters, that the salutary symbol was the safeguard of
the Roman government and of the entire empire. Accordingly, he immediately
ordered a lofty spear in the figure of a cross to be placed beneath the hand of
a statue representing himself, in the most frequented part of Rome, and the
following inscription to be engraved on it in the Latin language: by virtue of
this salutary sign, which is the true test of valor, I have preserved and
liberated your city from the yoke of tyranny. I have also set at liberty the
roman senate and people, and restored them to their ancient distinction and
splendor.89 Chapter XLI. Rejoicings Throughout the Provinces; And Constantine's
Acts of Grace.

Thus the pious emperor, glorying in the confession of the victorious cross,
proclaimed the Son of God to the Romans with great boldness of testimony. And
the inhabitants of the city, one and all, senate and people, reviving, as it
were, from the pressure of a bitter and tyrannical domination, seemed to enjoy
purer rays of light, and to be born again into a fresh and new life. All the
nations, too, as far as the limit of the western ocean, being set free from the
calamities which had heretofore beset them, and gladdened by joyous festivals,
ceased not to praise him as the victorious, the pious, the common benefactor:
all, indeed, with one voice and one mouth, declared that Constantine had
appeared by the grace of God as a general blessing to mankind. The imperial
edict also was everywhere published, whereby those who had been wrongfully
deprived of their estates were permitted again to enjoy their own, while those
who had unjustly suffered exile were recalled to their homes. Moreover, he freed
from imprisonment, and from every kind of danger and fear, those who, by reason
of the tyrant's cruelty, had been subject to these sufferings.

Chapter XLII. The Honors Conferred Upon Bishops, and the Building of Churches.
The emperor also personally inviting the society of God's ministers,
distinguished them with the highest possible respect and honor, showing them
favor in deed and word as persons consecrated to the service of his God.
Accordingly, they were admitted to his table, though mean in their attire and
outward appearance; yet not so in his estimation, since he thought he saw not
the man as seen by the vulgar eye, but the God in him. He made them also his
companions in travel, believing that He whose servants they were would thus help
him. Besides this, he gave from his own private resources costly benefactions to
the churches of God, both enlarging and heightening the sacred edifices,90 and
embellishing the august sanctuaries91 of the church with abundant offerings.

Chapter XLIII. Constantine's Liberality to the Poor.

He likewise distributed money largely to those who were in need, and besides
these showing himself philanthropist and benefactor even to the heathen, who had
no claim on him;92 and even for the beggars in the forum, miserable and
shiftless, he provided, not with money only, or necessary food, but also decent
clothing. But in the case of those who had once been prosperous, and had
experienced a reverse of circumstances, his aid was still more lavishly
bestowed. On such persons, in a truly royal spirit, he conferred magnificent
benefactions; giving grants of land to some, and honoring others with various
dignities. Orphans of the unfortunate he cared for as a father, while he
relieved the destitution of widows, and cared for them with special solicitude.
Nay, he even gave virgins, left unprotected by their parents' death, in marriage
to wealthy men with whom he was personally acquainted. But this he did after
first bestowing on the brides such portions as it was fitting they should bring
to the communion of marriage.93 In short, as the sun, when he rises upon the
earth, liberally imparts his rays of light to all, so did Constantine,
proceeding at early dawn from the imperial palace, and rising as it were with
the heavenly luminary, impart the rays of his own beneficence to all who came
into his presence. It was scarcely possible to be near him without receiving
some benefit, nor did it ever happen that any who had expected to obtain his
assistance were disappointed in their hope.94 Chapter XLIV. How He Was Present
at the Synods of Bishops.

Such, then, was his general character towards all. But he exercised a peculiar
care over the church of God: and whereas, in the several provinces there were
some who differed from each other in judgment, he, like some general bishop
constituted by God, convened synods of his ministers. Nor did he disdain to be
present and sit with them in their assembly, but bore a share in their
deliberations, ministering to all that pertained to the peace of God. He took
his seat, too, in the midst of them, as an individual amongst many, dismissing
his guards and soldiers, and all whose duty it was to defend his person; but
protected by the fear of God, and surrounded by the guardianship of his faithful
friends. Those whom he saw inclined to a sound judgment, and exhibiting a calm
and conciliatory temper, received his high approbation, for he evidently
delighted in a general harmony of sentiment; while he regarded the unyielding
wills aversion.95 Chapter XLV. His Forbearance with Unreasonable Men.

Moreover he endured with patience some who were exasperated against himself,
directing them in mild and gentle terms to control themselves, and not be
turbulent. And some of these respected his admonitions, and desisted; but as to
those who proved incapable of sound judgment, he left them entirely at the
disposal of God, and never himself desired harsh measures against any one. Hence
it naturally happened that the disaffected in Africa reached such a pitch of
violence as even to venture on overt acts of audacity;96 some evil spirit, as it
seems probable, being jealous of the present great prosperity, and impelling
these men to atrocious deeds, that he might excite the emperor's anger against
them. He gained nothing, however, by this malicious conduct; for the emperor
laughed at these proceedings, and declared their origin to be from the evil one;
inasmuch as these were not the actions of sober persons, but of lunatics or
demoniacs; who should be pitied rather than punished; since to punish madmen is
as great folly as to sympathize with their condition is supreme philanthropy.97
Chapter XLVI. Victories Aver the Barbarians.

Thus the emperor in all his actions honored God, the Controller of all things,
and exercised an unwearied98 oversight over His churches. And God requited him,
by subduing all barbarous nations under his feet, so that he was able everywhere
to raise trophies over his enemies: and He proclaimed him as conqueror to all
mankind, and made him a terror to his adversaries: not indeed that this was his
natural character, since he was rather the meekest, and gentlest, and most
benevolent of men.

Chapter XLVII. Death of Maximin,99 Who Had Attempted a Conspiracy, and of Others
Whom Constantine Detected by Divine Revelation.

While he was thus engaged, the second of those who had resigned the throne,
being detected in a treasonable conspiracy, suffered a most ignominious death.
He was the first whose pictures, statues, and all similar marks of honor and
distinction were everywhere destroyed, on the ground of his crimes and impiety.
After him others also of the same family were discovered in the act of forming
secret plots against the emperor; all their intentions being miraculously
revealed by God through visions to His servant. For he frequently vouchsafed to
him manifestations of himself, the Divine presence appearing to him in a most
marvelous manner, and according to him manifold intimations of future events.
Indeed, it is impossible to express in words the indescribable wonders of Divine
grace which God was pleased to vouchsafe to His servant. Surrounded by these, he
passed the rest of his life in security, rejoicing in the affection of his
subjects, rejoicing too because he saw all beneath his government leading
contented lives; but above all delighted at the flourishing condition of the
churches of God.

Chapter XLVIII. Celebration of Constantine's Decennalia.

While he was thus circumstanced, he completed the tenth year of his reign. On
this occasion he ordered the celebration of general festivals, and offered
prayers of thanksgiving to God, the King of all, as sacrifices without flame or
smoke.100 And from this employment he derived much pleasure: not so from the
tidings he received of the ravages committed in the Eastern provinces.

Chapter XLIX. How Licinius Oppressed the East. For he was informed that in that
quarter a certain savage beast was besetting both the church of God and the
other inhabitants of the provinces, owing, as it were, to the efforts of the
evil spirit to produce effects quite contrary to the deeds of the pious emperor:
so that the Roman empire, divided into two parts, seemed to all men to resemble
night and day; since darkness overspread the provinces of the East, while the
brightest day illumined the inhabitants of the other portion. And whereas the
latter were receiving manifold blessings at the hand of God, the sight of these
blessings proved intolerable to that envy which hates all good, as well as to
the tyrant who afflicted the other division of the empire; and who,
notwithstanding that his government was prospering, and he had been honored by a
marriage connection101 with so great an emperor as Constantine, yet cared not to
follow the steps of that pious prince, but strove rather to imitate the evil
purposes and practice of the impious; and chose to adopt the course of those
whose ignominious end he had seen with his own eyes, rather than to maintain
amicable relations with him who was his superior.102 Chapter L. How Licinius
Attempted a Conspiracy Against Constantine.

Accordingly he engaged in an implacable war against his benefactor, altogether
regardless of the laws of friendship, the obligation of oaths, the ties of
kindred, and already existing treaties. For the most benignant emperor had given
him a proof of sincere affection in bestowing on him the hand of his sister,
thus granting him the privilege of a place in family relationship and his own
ancient imperial descent, and investing him also with the rank and dignity of
his colleague in the empire.103 But the other took the very opposite course,
employing himself in machinations against his superior, and devising various
means to repay his benefactor with injuries. At first, pretending friendship, he
did all things by guile and treachery, expecting thus to succeed in concealing
his designs; but God enabled his servant to detect the schemes thus devised in
darkness. Being discovered, however, in his first attempts, he had recourse to
fresh frauds; at one time pretending friendship, at another claiming the
protection of solemn treaties. Then suddenly violating every engagement, and
again beseeching pardon by embassies, yet after all shamefully violating his
word, he at last declared open war, and with desperate infatuation resolved
thenceforward to carry arms against God himself, whose worshiper he knew the
emperor to be.

Chapter LI. Intrigues of Licinius Against the Bishops, and His Prohibition of
Synods. And at first he made secret enquiry respecting the ministers of God
subject to his dominion, who had never, indeed, in any respect offended against
his government, in order to bring false accusations against them. And when he
found no ground of accusation, and had no real ground of objection against them,
he next enacted a law, to the effect that the bishops should never on any
account hold communication with each other, nor should any one of them absent
himself on a visit to a neighboring church; nor, lastly, should the holding of
synods, or councils for the consideration of affairs of common interest,104 be
permitted. Now this was clearly a pretext for displaying his malice against us.
For we were compelled either to violate the law, and thus be amenable to
punishment, or else, by compliance with its injunctions, to nullify the statutes
of the Church; inasmuch as it is impossible to bring important questions to a
satisfactory adjustment, except by means of synods. In other cases also this
God-hater, being determined to act contrary to the God-loving prince, enacted
such things. For whereas the one assembled the priests of God in order to honor
them, and to promote peace and unity of judgment; the other, whose object it was
to destroy everything that was good, used all his endeavors to destroy the
general harmony.

Chapter LII. Banishment of the Christians, and Confiscation of Their Property.
And whereas Constantine, the friend of God, had granted to His worshipers
freedom of access to the imperial palaces; this enemy of God, in a spirit the
very reverse of this, expelled thence all Christians subject to his authority.
He banished those who had proved themselves his most faithful and devoted
servants, and compelled others, on whom he had himself conferred honor and
distinction as a reward for their former eminent services, to the performance of
menial offices as slaves to others; and at length, being bent on seizing the
property of all as a windfall for himself, he even threatened with death those
who professed the Saviour's name. Moreover, being himself of a nature hopelessly
debased by sensuality, and degraded by the continual practice of adultery and
other shameless vices, he assumed his own worthless character as a specimen of
human nature generally, and denied that the virtue of chastity and continence
existed among men.

Chapter LIII. Edict that Women Should Not Meet with the Men in the Churches.

Accordingly he passed a second law, which enjoined that men should not appear in
company with women in the houses of prayer, and forbade women to attend the
sacred schools of virtue, or to receive instruction from the bishops, directing
the appointment of women to be teachers of their own sex. These regulations
being received with general ridicule, he devised other, means for effecting the
ruin of the churches. He ordered that the usual congregations of the people
should be held in the open country outside the gates, alleging that the open air
without the city was far more suitable for a multitude than the houses of prayer
within the walls.

Chapter LIV. That Those Who Refuse to Sacrifice are to Be Dismissed from
Military Service, and Those in Prison Not to Be Fed.

Failing, however, to obtain obedience in this respect also, at length he threw
off the mask, and gave orders that those who held military commissions in the
several cities of the empire should be deprived of their respective commands, in
case of their refusal to offer sacrifices to the demons. Accordingly the forces
of the authorities in every province suffered the loss of those who worshiped
God; and he too who had decreed this order suffered loss, in that he thus
deprived himself of the prayers of pious men. And why should I still further
mention how he directed that no one should obey the dictates of common humanity
by distributing food to those who were pining in prisons, or should even pity
the captives who perished with hunger; in short, that no one should perform a
virtuous action, and that those whose natural feelings impelled them to
sympathize with their fellow-creatures should be prohibited from doing them a
single kindness? Truly this was the most utterly shameless and scandalous of all
laws, and one which surpassed the worst depravity of human nature: a law which
inflicted on those who showed mercy the same penalties as on those who were the
objects of their compassion, and visited the exercise of mere humanity with the
severest punishments.105 Chapter LV. The Lawless Conduct and Covetousness of
Licinius.

Such were the ordinances of Licinius. But why should I enumerate his innovations
respecting marriage, or those concerning the dying, whereby he presumed to
abrogate the ancient and wisely established laws of the Romans, and to introduce
certain barbarous and cruel institutions in their stead, inventing a thousand
pretenses for oppressing his subjects? Hence it was that he devised a new method
of measuring land, by which he reckoned the smallest portion at more than its
actual dimensions, from an insatiable desire of acquisition. Hence too he
registered the names of country residents who were now no more, and had long
been numbered with the dead, procuring to himself by this expedient a shameful
gain. His meanness was unlimited and his rapacity insatiable. So that when he
had filled all his treasuries with gold, and silver, and boundless wealth, he
bitterly bewailed his poverty, and suffered as it were the torments of Tantalus.
But why should I mention how many innocent persons he punished with exile; how
much property he confiscated; how many men of noble birth and estimable
character he imprisoned, whose wives he handed over to be basely insulted by his
profligate slaves, and to how many married women and virgins he himself offered
violence, though already feeling the infirmities of age? I need not enlarge on
these subjects, since the enormity of his last actions causes the former to
appear trifling and of little moment.106 Chapter LVI. At Length He Undertakes to
Raise a Persecution. For the final efforts of his fury appeared in his open
hostility to the churches, and he directed his attacks against the bishops
themselves, whom he regarded as his worst adversaries, bearing special enmity to
those men whom the great and pious emperor treated as his friends. Accordingly
he spent on us the utmost of his fury, and, being transported beyond the bounds
of reason, he paused not to reflect on the example of those who had persecuted
the Christians before him, nor of those whom he himself had been raised up to
punish and destroy for their impious deeds: nor did he heed the facts of which
he had been himself a witness, though he had seen with his own eyes the chief
originator of these our calamities (whoever he was), smitten by the stroke of
the Divine scourge.

Chapter LVII. That Maximian,107 Brought Low by a Fistulous Ulcer with Worms,
Issued an Edict in Favor of the Christians. For whereas this man had commenced
the attack on the churches, and had been the first to pollute his soul with the
blood of just and godly men, a judgment from God overtook him, which at first
affected his body, but eventually extended itself to his soul. For suddenly an
abscess appeared in the secret parts of his person, followed by a deeply seated
fistulous ulcer; and these diseases fastened with incurable virulence on the
intestines, which swarmed with a vast multitude of worms, and emitted a
pestilential odor. Besides, his entire person had become loaded, through
gluttonous excess, with an enormous quantity of fat, and this, being now in a
putrescent state, is said to have presented to all who approached him an
intolerable and dreadful spectacle. Having, therefore, to struggle against such
sufferings, at length, though late, he came to a realization of his past crimes
against the Church; and, confessing his sins before God, he put a stop to the
persecution of the Christians, and hastened to issue imperial edicts and
rescripts for the rebuilding of their churches, at the same time enjoining them
to perform their customary worship, and to offer up prayers on his behalf.108

Chapter LVIII. That Maximin, Who Had Persecuted the Christians, Was Compelled to
Fly, and Conceal Himself in the Disguise of a Slave.

Such was the punishment which he underwent who had commenced the persecution.
He,109 however, of whom we are now speaking, who had been a witness of these
things, and known them by his own actual experience, all at once banished the
remembrance of them from his mind, and reflected neither on the punishment of
the first, nor the divine judgment which had been executed on the second
persecutor.110 The latter had indeed endeavored to outstrip his predecessor in
the career of crime, and prided himself on the invention of new tortures for us.
Fire nor sword, nor piercing with nails, nor yet wild beasts or the depths of
the sea sufficed him. In addition to all these, he discovered a new mode of
punishment, and issued an edict directing that their eyesight should be
destroyed. So that numbers, not of men only, but of women and children, after
being deprived of the sight of their eyes, and the use of the joints of their
feet, by mutilation or cauterization, were consigned in this condition to the
painful labor of the mines. Hence it was that this tyrant also was overtaken not
long after by the righteous judgment of God, at a time when, confiding in the
aid of the demons whom he worshiped as gods, and relying on the countless
multitudes of his troops, he had ventured to engage in battle. For, feeling
himself on that occasion destitute of all hope in God, he threw from him the
imperial dress which so ill became him, hid himself with unmanly timidity in the
crowd around him, and sought safety in flight.111

He afterwards lurked about the fields and villages in the habit of a slave,
hoping he should thus be effectually concealed. He had not, however, eluded the
mighty and all-searching eye of God: for even while he was expecting to pass the
residue of his days in security, he fell prostrate, smitten by God's fiery dart,
and his whole body consumed by the stroke of Divine vengeance; so that all trace
of the original lineaments of his person was lost, and nothing remained to him
but dry bones and a skeleton-like appearance.

Chapter LIX. That Maximin, Blinded by Disease, Issued an Edict in Favor of the
Christians. And still the stroke of God continued heavy upon him, so that his
eyes protruded and fell from their sockets, leaving him quite blind: and thus he
suffered, by a most righteous retribution, the very same punishment which he had
been the first to devise for the martyrs of God. At length, however, surviving
even these sufferings, he too implored pardon of the God of the Christians, and
confessed his impious fighting against God: he too recanted, as the former
persecutor had done; and by laws and ordinances explicitly acknowledged his
error in worshiping those whom he had accounted gods, declaring that he now
knew, by positive experience, that the God of the Christians was the only true
God. These were facts which Licinius had not merely received on the testimony of
others, but of which he had himself had personal knowledge: and yet, as though
his understanding had been obscured by some dark cloud of error, persisted in
the same evil course.

1: Literally "recently" or "not long since," and so it is rendered by Tr. 1709,
Stroth, Molzberger, Valesius ("nuper"), and Portesius. Christophorson and Cousin
avoid the awkwardness by circumlocution or simple omission, while our translator
shows his one characteristic excellence of hitting nearly the unliteral meaning
in a way which is hard to improve.

2: The assembly referred to was the Council of Nicaea. Constantine's vicennial
celebration was held at Nicomedia during the session of the Council at Nicaea
(July 25), according to Hieronymus and others, but celebrated again at Rome the
following year. The speech of Eusebius on this occasion is not preserved.
Valesius thinks the one spoken of in the V. C. 3. 11, as delivered in the
presence of the council, is the one referred to.

3: This oration is the one appended by Eusebius to this Life of Canstantine, and
given in this translation (cf. V. C. 4. 46).

4: [In the text it is o logoj 5: Constantine II., Constantius, and Constans
proved on the whole sorry reflectors of glory.

6: The first had been Caesar more than twenty years; the second, ten; and the
third, less than five.

7: Referring to special honors paid after death, as mentioned in Bk. 4.

8: Here there is play on the word Logos. My logos stands voiceless and a-logos,
"un-logosed." If the author meant both to refer to expression, the first relates
to the sound, and the second to the power of construction or composition. The
interchangeableness of the weaving of consecutive thought in the mind, and the
weaving it in expressed words, is precisely the question of the "relation of
thought and language," so warmly contested by modern philosophers and
philologians (cf. Müller, Science of Thought, Shedd's Essays, &c.). The old use
of logos for both operations of "binding together" various ideas into one
synthetical form has decided advantages.

9: Here there is again the play on the word Logos. For Eusebius' philosophy of
the logos, and of Christ as the Logos or Word, see the second half of his
tricennial oration and notes.

10: Compare Lactantius, De mortibus persecutorum, which doubtless the author had
in mind.

11: [ Khroxutou grafhd

12: Kubeij , at first used of triangular tablets of wood, brass, or stone, but
afterwards of any inscribed "pillars or tablets." Cf. Lexicons.

13: Whether deciwz is read or decioj , with Valesius, "present to aid," covers
the idea better than "graciously present" (Molz).

14: Compare discussion of length of reign and life under Life in Prolegomena, p.
411.

15: !Gigantwn

16: Compare the various wars against Franks, Bructerians, Goths, Sarmatians and
others mentioned in Life in Prolegomena. Compare also chapter 8 of this book.

17: [Such seems to be the probable meaning of this passage, which is manifestly
corrupt, and of which various emendations have been proposed.- Bag. ] Perhaps
better paraphrased, "But since the test of blessedness lies not in this, but in
his end, we 1ook and find that this." The key to the idea is found in the remark
near the end of chapter II. Cf. also note.

18: This is the account of Diodorus, who says he was taken prisoner and
crucified by the queen of the "Scythians" (3. II, ed. 1531, f. 80b). Herodotus
says that he was slain in battle, but his head cut off afterwards and dipped in
a sack of blood by the queen Tomyris, who had rejected his suit, the death of
whose son he had caused, and who had sworn to "give him his fill of blood"
(Herod. Bk. I, §§205-214). Xenophon says he died quietly in bed ( Cyrop. 8. 7).

19: A malarial fever, but made fatal by drinking at a banquet (cf. Plut. chaps.
75 and 76, Arrian, Bk. 7).

20: Eusebius' rhetorical purpose makes him unfair to Alexander, who certainly in
comparison with others of his time brought relative blessing to the conquered
(cf. Smith, Dict. I, p. 122).

21: Toparchs or prefects.

22: Ethnarchs.

23: "The pillars of heaven."- Molz (?).

24: The Bagster translation, following Valesius, divides the tenth chapter,
making the eleventh begin at this point.

25: It looks as if there might perhaps be a direct hit at Lactantius here, as
having, through "enmity," described actions intrinsically base in peculiarly
elegant diction; but Lactantius' descriptions are hardly more realistic than
Eusebius' own.

26: [Alluding probably to Ecclesiastes xi. 28, "Judge none blessed before his
death; for a man shall be known in his children." Or, possibly, to the
well-known opinion of Solon to the same effect. Vide Herod. i. 32; Aristot. Eth.
Nicom. i. II.- Bag. ] Compare also above, chapter 7.

27: The persecuting emperors. Compare Prolegomena, Life.

28: He was brought up with Diocletian and Galerius. Compare Prolegomena, Life.

29: Constantius Chlorus, Neo-Platonist and philanthropist. Compare following
description.

30: The author of the chapter heading means of course Galerius. Maxentius was
not emperor until after the death of Constantius.

31: [Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius, and Constantius.- Bag. ] 32: For account of
these persecutions, see Church History, Bk. 8, and notes of McGiffert.

33: Compare the Church History, 8. 13, and Lactantius, De mort. pers. 15. The
latter says he allowed buddings to be destroyed, but spared human life.

34: Or the senior Augustus. "Diocletian is thus entitled in the ancient
panegyrists and in inscriptions."- Heinichen.

35: Compare accounts of martyrs in the palaces, in the Church History, 8. 6.

36: "Is said to have" is added conjecturally here by an earlier editor, but
Heinichen omits, as it would seem Eusebius himself did.

37: Other readings are "with the others," or "with the rest," but in whatever
reading it refers to all the other emperors.

38: The persecution was in 303 or 304. Compare discussion of date in Clinton,
Fasti Rom. ann. 303-305. The abdication was in 305.

39: Eusebius uses the terms Augustus, king, autocrat, and Caesar with a good
deal of interchangeableness. It is hard to tell sometimes whether king (
basileuj ) means emperor or Caesar. In general, Augustus has been transferred in
translations, and king and autocrat both rendered emperor, which seems to be his
real usage.

40: Constantine reached him just before his death, though possibly some weeks
before. Compare Prolegomena.

41: Diocletian and Galerius.

42: Diocletian. He was on his way to Egypt in the famous campaign against
Achilleus in 296-297.

43: Or "psychical," meaning more than intellectual.

44: Rather, perhaps, "self-control."

45: Eusebius himself speaks in the plural, and other writers speak of plots by
both Diocletian and Galerius. Compare Prolegomena.

46: Compare detailed account in Lactantius, De M. P. c. 24.

47: Basileuj . The writer of the chapter headings uses this word here and
Augustus in the following chapter, but it does not seem to mean technically
"Caesar," and so the rendering emperor is retained.

48: This seems to imply that Constantine reached him only after he was sick in
bed, i.e. at York in Britain; but other accounts make it probable that he joined
him at Boulogne before he sailed on this last expedition to Britain. Compare
Prolegomena.

49: Literally, "than immortality [on earth]."

50: It will hardly be agreed that imperial succession is a law of nature anyway.
Rather, "the succession [where it exists] is established by the express will or
the tacit consent of the nation," and the "pretended proprietary right ...is a
chimera" (Vattell, Law of Nations, Phila., 1867, p. 24, 25). That primogeniture
is a natural law has been often urged, but it seems to be simply the law of
first come first served. The English custom of primogeniture is said to have
risen from the fact that in feudal times the eldest son was the one who, at the
time of the father's death, was of an age to meet the duties of feudal tenure
(compare Kent, Commentaries, Boston, 1867, v. 4, p. 420, 421). This is precisely
the fact respecting Constantine. His several brothers were all too young to be
thought of.

51: The verdict was not confirmed at once. Galerius refused him the title of
emperor, and he contented himself with that of Caesar for a little. Compare
Prolegomena.

52: But he has done this himself in his Church History. Compare also Lactantius,
De mortibus persecutorum.

53: The Franci, Bructeri, &c.

54: [Eusebius here speaks of a second expedition of Constantine to Britain,
which is not mentioned by other ancient writers; or he may have been forgetful
or ignorant of the fact that Constantine had received the imperial authority in
Britain itself, Constantius having died in his palace at York. a.d. 306. Vide
Gibbon's Decline and Fall, chap. 14.- Bag. ] It seems to be a part of the
confusion about his crossing to Britain in the first place.

55: Referring to the unsuccessful expeditions of Severus and Galerius.

56: Compare chapters 36 and 37; also Lactantius, De M. P. chap. 44.

57: Galerius.

58: Severus.

59: This last phrase has exercised the ingenuity of translators greatly. This
translation does well enough, though one might hazard "was easily overcome by
death," or "was an easy victim to death."

60: Note here the care Eusebius takes to throw off the responsibility for the
marvelous. It at the same time goes to show the general credibility of Eusebius,
and some doubt in his mind of the exact nature and reality of what he records.

61: This very circumstantial account has met with doubters from the very
beginning, commencing with Eusebius himself. There are all sorts of
explanations, from that of an actual miracle to that of pure later invention.
The fact of some, at least supposed, special divine manifestation at this time
can hardly be denied. It is mentioned vaguely by Paneg. 313, and on the
triumphal arch shortly after. It is reported as a dream by Lactantius about the
same time with the erection of the arch, and alluded to in general, but hardly
to be doubted, terms by Nazarius in 321. Moreover, it is witnessed to by the
fact of the standard of the cross which was made. As to the real nature of the
manifestation, it has been thought to be as recorded by Constantine, and if so,
as perhaps some natural phenomenon of the sun, or to have been a simple dream,
or an hallucination. It is hardly profitable to discuss the possibilities. The
lack of contemporary evidence to details and the description of Lactantius as a
dream is fatal to any idea of a miraculous image with inscriptions clearly seen
by all. Some cross-like arrangement of the clouds, or a "parahelion," or some
sort of a suggestion of a cross, may have been seen by all, but evidently there
was no definite, vivid, clear perception, or it would have been in the mouths of
all and certainly recorded, or at least it would not have been recorded as
something else by Lactantius. It seems probable that the emperor, thinking
intensely, with all the weight of his great problem resting on his energetic
mind, wondering if the Christian God was perhaps the God who could help, saw in
some suggestive shape of the clouds or of sunlight the form of a cross, and
there flashed out in his mind in intensest reality the vision of the words, so
that for the moment he was living in the intensest reality of such a vision. His
mind had just that intense activity to which such a thing is possible or actual.
It is like Goethe's famous meeting of his own self. It is that genius power for
the realistic representation of ideal things. This is not the same exactly as
"hallucination," or even "imagination." The hallucination probably came later
when Constantine gradually represented to himself and finally to Eusebius the
vivid idea with its slight ground, as an objective reality,-a common phenomenon.
When the emperor went to sleep, his brain molecules vibrating to the forms of
his late intense thought, he inevitably dreamed, and dreaming naturally
confirmed his thought. This does not say that the suggestive form seen, or the
idea itself, and the direction of the dream itself, were not providential and
the work of the Holy Spirit, for they were, and were special in character, and
so miraculous (or why do ideas come?); but it is to be feared that Constantine's
own spirit or something else furnished some of the later details. There is a
slight difference of authority as to when and where the vision took place. The
panegyrist seems to make it before leaving Gaul, and Malalas is inaccurate as
usual in having it happen in a war against the barbarians. For farther
discussion of the subject see monographs under Literature in the Prolegomena,
especially under the names: Baring, Du Voisin, Fabricius, Girault, Heumann,
Jacutius Mamachi, Molinet, St. Victor, Suhr, Toderini, Weidener, Wernsdorf,
Woltereck. The most concise, clear, and admirable supporter of the account of
Eusebius, or rather Constantine, as it stands, is Newman, Miracles (Lond. 1875),
271-286.

62:

63: Thus rather than "on." Compare cuts in article of Venables. "It [the
monogram of Christ] is often set within a crown or palm branch."- Wolcott,
Sacred Archaealogy , p. 390.

64: [ Xiazomenou tou r kata to mesaitaton

65: That this was no new invention of Constantine may be seen by comparing the
following description of an ordinary Roman standard, "... each cohort had for
its own ensign the serpent or dragon, which was woven on a square piece of
cloth, elevated on a gilt staff, to which a cross-bar was adapted for the
purpose ...under the eagle or other emblem was often placed a head of the
reigning emperor." Yates, art. Signa militaria, in Smith, Dict. Gr. and Rom.
Ant. (1878), 1044-1045.

66: "Which in its fill extent was of great length."- Bag., according to
suggestion of Valesius of a possible meaning, but better as above, meaning the
part below the cross-bar. So Valesius, Christopherson, 1700. Molzberger.

67: "Medallions."- Venables.

68: Both Socrates (5. 17) and Sozomen (7. 15) relate that symbols of the cross
found in a temple of Serapis, on its destruction by Theodosius, were explained
by the Christians of the time as symbols of immortality. Cf. also Suidas (ed.
Gasiford, 2 (1834), 3398), s. v. Stauroi

69:

70: Maxentius, made emperor by an uprising of the Praetorian Guards in 306.

71: "For" seems to express the author's real meaning, but both punctuation of
editors and renderings of translators insist on "but."

72: Various readings of text add "lawfully married" women, and send them back
again "grievously dishonored," and so Bag., but Heinichen has this reading.
Compare note of Heinichen.

73:

74: 1709, Molz. &c., add "nor anywhere else," but Bag. is undoubtedly fight in
translating simply "ever before." The chapter is found substantially and in part
word for word in the Church History, 8. 14.

75: "Because the soothsayers had foretold that if he went out of it, he should
perish." Lact. De M. P.

76: Bag. adds "and numberless ambuscades," following Valesius and 1709. The word
so rendered is the word for "companies of soldiers." The rather awkward
"multitude of heavy-armed soldiers and myriads of companies of soldiers" may be
rendered as above, although "larger bodies of soldiers and limitless
supplies"suggested by the translation is perhaps the real meaning. He had both
"men and means."

77: At Sigusium, Turin, Brescia, and Verona.

78: The Milvian, the present Ponte Molle.

79: The present Ponte Molle is nearly 2 1/2 kilometers (say 1 1/2 miles) from
the Porta del Popolo (at the Mons Pincius). The walls at that time were the ones
built by Aurelian, and are substantially the same as the present ones. This Pons
Milvius was first built 100 years b.c., and "some part of the first bridge is
supposed to remain" (Jenkin, p. 329). Compare Jenkin, art. Bridges, in Enc.
Brit. 4 (1878), 329, for cut and description.

80: Ex. xv. 4. This is identically taken from the Septuagint with the change of
only one word, where Eusebius gains little in exchanging "swallowed up in" for
plunged or drowned in.

81: "Heavy armed and light armed."

82: Ex. xv. 5.

83: "Godless," or if aneu aqeei .

84: Ps. vii. 15, Ps. vii. 16, Septuagint translation.

85: This matter is discussed in the Prolegomena.

86: Ex. xv. 10.

87: Ex. xv. 1, Ex. xv. 2, Ex. xv. 11, Septuagint version. This whole chapter
with the last paragraph of the preceding are in the Church History, 9. 9.

88: Compare Prolegomena under Character, and also for other accounts of the
universal joy under Life.

89: Compare the Church History, 9. 9.

90: "Oratories," or chapels.

91: Variously rendered, but seems to say that the smaller buildings were
enlarged and the larger ones enriched. The number of buildings which Constantine
is claimed to have erected in Rome alone is prodigious. One meets at every turn
in the modern city churches which were, it is said, founded or remodeled by him.
For interesting monograph which claims to have established the Constantinian
foundation of many of these, see Ciampini in Prolegomena, under Literature.

92: So usually rendered literally, "to those who came to him from without," but
it might rather mean "foreigners." His generosity included not only the worthy
poor citizens, but foreigners and beggars.

93: The word used is the koinwnia , familiar in the doctrine of the "communion"
or "fellowship" of the saints. It has the notion of reciprocity and mutual
sharing.

94: The popular proverb that at the end of his life he was a spendthrift, as
given by Victor, represents the other side of this liberality. Compare
Prolegomena, under Character.

95: Constantine, like Eusebius himself, would be a distinct "tolerationist" in
modern theological controversy. One may imagine that Eusebius entered into favor
with Constantine in this way. It commends itself to our feeling; but after all,
the unyielding Athanasius was a greater man than Eusebius.

96: Compare Prolegomena, under Life and Works.

97: [This passage in the text is defective or corrupt.- Bag. ] What is given is
substantially the conventional translation of Valesius, Heinichen, Molzberger,
and with some variation, 1709 and Bag. It is founded, however, on a conjectural
reading, and reluctating against this, a suggestion may be hazarded-"an
excessive philanthropy for the folly of the insane, even to the point of
sympathy for them."

98: Some read "unbroken" or "perfect."

99:

100: Unburnt offerings, meat offerings.

101: Licinius married in 313 Constantia, sister of Constantine.

102: Thus generally following the Church History (10. 8).

103: This rendering of Bag. is really a gloss from the Church History, 10. 8.
Compare rendering of McGiffert. Molzberger renders "and left him in complete
possession of the portions of the kingdom which had fallen to his lot."

104: Perhaps "synods or councils and conferences on economic matters."

105: Compare Church History, 10. 9.

106: Compare Church History, 10. 9, and the same for the following chapters, in
parts or whole.

107:

108: Compare edict in the Church History, 8. 17.

109: Licinius.

110: [Maximin, ruler of the Eastern provinces of the empire.- Bag. ] 111: He was
defeated by Licinius, who had much inferior forces. Compare Prolegomena, under
Life, and references.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 23: THE LIFE OF THE BLESSED EMPEROR CONSTANTINE - BOOK 2
========================================================================

Book II.

Chapter I. Secret Persecution by Licinius, Who Causes Some Bishops to Be Put to
Death at Amasia of Pontus.

Chapter II. Demolition of Churches, and Butchery of the Bishops.

Chapter III. How Constantine Was Stirred in Behalf of the Christians Thus in
Danger of Persecution.

Chapter IV. That Constantine Prepared Himself for the War by Prayer: Licinius by
the Practice of Divination.

Chapter V. What Licinius, While Sacrificing in a Grove, Said Concerning Idols,
and Concerning Christ.

Chapter VI. An Apparition Seen in the Cities Subject to Licinius, as of
Constantine's Troops Passing Through Them.

Chapter VII. That Victory Everywhere Followed the Presence of the Standard of
the Cross in Battle.

Chapter VIII. That Fifty Men Were Selected to Carry the Cross.

Chapter IX. That One of the Cross-Bearers, Who Fled from His Post, Was Slain:
While Another, Who Faithfully Stood His Ground, Was Preserved.

Chapter X. Various Battles, and Constantine's Victories.

Chapter XI. Flight, and Magic Arts of Licinius.

Chapter XII. How Constantine, After Praying in His Tabernacle, Obtained the
Victory.

Chapter XIII. His Humane Treatment of Prisoners.

Chapter XIV. A Farther Mention of His Prayers in the Tabernacle.

Chapter XV. Treacherous Friendship, and Idolatrous Practices of Licinius.

Chapter XVI. How Licinius Counseled His Soldiers Not to Attack the Standard of
the Cross.

Chapter XVII. Constantine's Victory.

Chapter XVIII. Death of Licinius, and Celebration of the Event.

Chapter XIX. Rejoicings and Festivities.

Chapter XX. Constantine's Enactments in Favor of the Confessors.

Chapter XXI. His Laws Concerning Martyrs, and Concerning Ecclesiastical
Property.

Chapter XXII. How He Won the Favor of the People.

Chapter XXIII. That He Declared God to Be the Author of His Prosperity: and
Concerning His Rescripts.

Chapter XXIV. Law of Constantine Respecting Piety Towards God, and the Christian
Religion.22 Chapter XXV. An Illustration from Ancient Times.

Chapter XXVI. Of Persecuted and Persecutors.

Chapter XXVII. How the Persecution Became the Occasion of Calamities to the
Aggressors.

Chapter XXVIII. That God Chose Constantine to Be the Minister of Blessing.

Chapter XXIX. Constantine's Expressions of Piety Towards God; And Praise of the
Confessors.

Chapter XXX. A Law Granting Release from Exile, from Service in the Courts, and
from the Confiscation of Property.

Chapter XXXI. Release Likewise Granted to Exiles in the Islands.

Chapter XXXII. And to Those Ignominiously Employed in the Mines and Public
Works.

Chapter XXXIII. Concerning Those Confessors Engaged in Military Service.

Chapter XXXIV. The Liberation of Free Persons Condemned to Labor in the Women's
Apartments, or to Servitude.

Chapter XXXV. Of the Inheritance of the Property of Martyrs and Confessors, Also
of Those Who Had Suffered Banishment or Confiscation of Property.

Chapter XXXVI. The Church is Declared Heir of Those Who Leave No Kindred; And
the Free Gifts of Such Persons Confirmed.

Chapter XXXVII. Lands, Gardens, or Houses, But Not Actual Produce from Them, are
to Be Given Back.

Chapter XXXVIII. In What Manner Requests Should Be Made for These.

Chapter XXXIX. The Treasury Must Restore Lands, Gardens, and Houses to the
Churches.

Chapter XL. The Tombs of Martyrs and the Cemeteries to Be Transferred to the
Possession of the Churches.

Chapter XLI. Those Who Have Purchased Property Belonging to the Church, or
Received It as a Gift, are to Restore It.

Chapter XLII. An Earnest Exhortation to Worship God.

Chapter XLIII. How the Enactments of Constantine Were Carried into Effect.

Chapter XLIV. That He Promoted Christians to Offices of Government, and Forbade
Gentiles in Such Stations to Offer Sacrifice.

Chapter XLV. Statutes Which Forbade Sacrifice, and Enjoined the Building of
Churches.

Chapter XLVI. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius and Other Bishops, Respecting the
Building of Churches, with Instructions to Repair the Old, and Erect New Ones on
a Larger Scale, with the Aid of the Provincial Governors.

Chapter XLVII. That He Wrote a Letter in Condemnation of Idolatry.

Chapter XLVIII. Constantine's Edict to the People of the Provinces Concerning
the Error of Polytheism, Commencing with Some General Remarks on Virtue and
Vice.

Chapter XLIX. Concerning Constantine's Pious Father, and the Persecutors
Diocletian and Maximian.

Chapter L. That the Persecution Originated on Account of the Oracle of Apollo,
Who, It Was Said, Could Not Give Oracles Because of "The Righteous Men."

Chapter LI. That Constantine, When a Youth, Heard from Him Who Wrote the
Persecution Edict that "The Righteous Men" Were the Christians.

Chapter LII. The Manifold Forms of Torture and Punishment Practiced Against the
Christians.

Chapter LIII. That the Barbarians Kindly Received the Christians.

Chapter LIV. What Vengeance Overtook Those Who on Account of the Oracle Raised
the Persecution.

Chapter LV. Constantine Gives Glory to God, Makes Grateful Acknowledgment of the
Sign of the Cross, and Prays for the Churches and People.

Chapter LVI. He Prays that All May Be Christians, But Compels None.

Chapter LVII. He Gives Glory to God, Who Has Given Light by His Son to Those Who
Were in Error.

Chapter LVIII. He Glorifies Him Again for His Government of the Universe.

Chapter LIX. He Gives Glory to God, as the Constant Teacher of Good.

Chapter LX. An Admonition at the Close of the Edict, that No One Should Trouble
His Neighbor.

Chapter LXI. How Controversies Originated at Alexandria Through Matters Relating
to Arius.48 Chapter LXII. Concerning the Same Arius, and the Melitians.51
Chapter LXIII. How Constantine Sent a Messenger and a Letter Concerning Peace.

Chapter LXIV. Constantine's Letter to Alexander the Bishop, and Arius the
Presbyter.

Chapter LXV. His Continual Anxiety for Peace.

Chapter LXVI. That He Also Adjusted the Controversies Which Had Arisen in
Africa.

Chapter LXVII. That Religion Began in the East.

Chapter LXVIII. Being Grieved by the Dissension, He Counsels Peace.

Chapter LXIX. Origin of the Controversy Between Alexander and Arius, and that
These Questions Ought Not to Have Been Discussed.

Chapter LXX. An Exhortation to Unanimity.

Chapter LXXI. There Should Be No Contention in Matters Which are in Themselves
of Little Moment.

Chapter LXXII. The Excess of His Pious Concern Caused Him to Shed Tears; And His
Intended Journey to the East Was Postponed Because of These Things.

Chapter LXXIII. The Controversy Continues Without Abatement, Even After the
Receipt of This Letter.

Book II.

Chapter I. Secret Persecution by Licinius, Who Causes Some Bishops to Be Put to
Death at Amasia of Pontus. In this manner, he of whom we have spoken continued
to rush headlong towards that destruction which awaits the enemies of God; and
once more, with a fatal emulation of their example whose ruin he had himself
witnessed as the consequence of their impious conduct, he re-kindled the
persecution of the Christians, like a long-extinguished fire, and fanned the
unhallowed flame to a fiercer height than any who had gone before him. At first,
indeed, though breathing fury and threatenings against God, like some savage
beast of prey, or some crooked and wriggling serpent, he dared not, from fear of
Constantine, openly level his attacks against the churches of God subject to his
dominion; but dissembled the virulence of his malice, and endeavored by secret
and limited measures to compass the death of the bishops, the most eminent of
whom he found means to remove, through charges laid against them by the
governors of the several provinces. And the manner in which they suffered had in
it something strange, and hitherto unheard of. At all events, the barbarities
perpetrated at Amasia of Pontus surpassed every known excess of cruelty.

Chapter II. Demolition of Churches, and Butchery of the Bishops. For in that
city some of the churches, for the second time since the commencement of the
persecutions, were leveled with the ground, and others were closed by the
governors of the several districts, in order to prevent any who frequented them
from assembling together, or rendering due worship to God. For he by whose
orders these outrages were committed was too conscious of his own crimes to
expect that these services were performed with any view to his benefit, and was
convinced that all we did, and all our endeavors to obtain the favor of God,
were on Constantine's behalf.

These servile governors1 then, feeling assured that such a course would be
pleasing to the impious tyrant, subjected the most distinguished prelates of the
churches to capital punishment. Accordingly, men who had been guilty of no crime
were led away, without cause2 punished like murderers: and some suffered a new
kind of death, having their bodies cut piecemeal; and, after this cruel
punishment, more horrible than any named in tragedy, being cast, as a food to
fishes, into the depths of the sea. The result of these horrors was again, as
before, the flight of pious men, and once more the fields and deserts received
the worshipers of God. The tyrant, having thus far succeeded in his object, he
farther determined to raise a general persecution of the Christians:3 and he
would have accomplished his purpose, nor could anything have hindered him from
carrying his resolution into effect, had not he who defends his own anticipated
the coming evil, and by his special guidance conducted his servant Constantine
to this part of the empire, causing him to shine forth as a brilliant light in
the midst of the darkness and gloomy night.

Chapter III. How Constantine Was Stirred in Behalf of the Christians Thus in
Danger of Persecution.

He, perceiving the evils of which he had heard to be no longer tolerable, took
wise counsel, and tempering the natural clemency of his character with a certain
measure of severity, hastened to succor those who were thus grievously
oppressed. For he judged that it would rightly be deemed a pious and holy task
to secure, by the removal of an individual, the safety of the greater part of
the human race. He judged too, that if he listened to the dictates of clemency
only, and bestowed his pity on one utterly unworthy of it, this would, on the
one hand, confer no real benefit on a man whom nothing would induce to abandon
his evil practices, and whose fury against his subjects would only be likely to
increase; 4 while, on the other hand, those who suffered from his oppression
would thus be forever deprived of all hope of deliverance.

Influenced by these reflections, the emperor resolved without farther delay to
extend a protecting hand to those who had fallen into such an extremity of
distress. He accordingly made the usual warlike preparations, and assembled his
whole forces, both of horse and foot. But before them all was carried the
standard which I have before described, as the symbol of his full confidence in
God.

Chapter IV. That Constantine Prepared Himself for the War by Prayer: Licinius by
the Practice of Divination.

He took with him also the priests of God, feeling well assured that now, if
ever, he stood in need of the efficacy of prayer, and thinking it right that
they should constantly be near and about his person, as most trusty guardians of
the soul.

Now, as soon as the tyrant understood that Constantine's victories over his
enemies were secured to him by no other means than the cooperation of God, and
that the persons above alluded to were continually with him and about his
person; and besides this, that the symbol of the salutary passion preceded both
the emperor himself and his whole army; he regarded these precautions with
ridicule (as might be expected), at the same time mocking and reviling the
emperor with blasphemous words. On the other hand, he gathered round himself
Egyptian diviners and soothsayers, with sorcerers and enchanters, and the
priests and prophets of those whom he imagined to be gods. He then, after
offering the sacrifices which he thought the occasion demanded, enquired how far
he might reckon on a successful termination of the war. They replied with one
voice, that he would unquestionably be victorious over his enemies, and
triumphant in the war: and the oracles everywhere held out to him the same
prospect in copious and elegant verses. The soothsayers certified him of
favorable omens from the flight of birds; the priests5 declared the same to be
indicated by the motion of the entrails of their victims. Elevated, therefore,
by these fallacious assurances, he boldly advanced at the head of his army, and
prepared for battle.

Chapter V. What Licinius, While Sacrificing in a Grove, Said Concerning Idols,
and Concerning Christ. And when he was now ready to engage, he desired the most
approved of his body-guard6 and his most valued friends to meet him in one of
the places which they consider sacred. It was a well-watered and shady grove,
and in it were several marble statues of those whom he accounted to be gods.
After lighting tapers and performing the usual sacrifices in honor of these, he
is said to have delivered the following speech:

"Friends and fellow-soldiers! These are our country's gods, and these we honor
with a worship derived from our remotest ancestors. But he who leads the army
now opposed to us has proved false to the religion of his forefathers, and
adopted atheistic sentiments, honoring in his infatuation some strange and
unheard-of Deity, with whose despicable standard he now disgraces his army, and
confiding in whose aid he has taken up arms, and is now advancing, not so much
against us as against those very gods whom he has forsaken. However, the present
occasion shall prove which of us is mistaken in his judgment, and shall decide
between our gods and those whom our adversaries profess to honor. For either it
will declare the victory to be ours, and so most justly evince that our gods are
the true saviours and helpers; or else, if this God of Constantine's, who comes
we know not whence, shall prove superior to our deities (who are many, and in
point of numbers, at least, have the advantage), let no one henceforth doubt
which god he ought to worship, but attach himself at once to the superior power,
and ascribe to him the honors of the victory. Suppose, then, this strange God,
whom we now regard with ridicule, should really prove victorious; then indeed we
must acknowledge and give him honor, and so bid a long farewell to those for
whom we light our tapers in vain. But if our own gods triumph (as they
undoubtedly will), then, as soon as we have secured the present victory, let us
prosecute the war without delay against these despisers of the gods."

Such were the words he addressed to those then present, as reported not long
after to the writer of this history by some who heard them spoken.7 And as soon
as he had concluded his speech, he gave orders to his forces to commence the
attack.

Chapter VI. An Apparition Seen in the Cities Subject to Licinius, as of
Constantine's Troops Passing Through Them.

While these things were taking place a supernatural appearance is said to have
been observed in the cities subject to the tyrant's rule. Different detachments
of Constantine's army seemed to present themselves to the view, marching at
noonday through these cities, as though they had obtained the victory. In
reality, not a single soldier was anywhere present at the time, and yet this
appearance was seen through the agency of a divine and superior power, and
foreshadowed what was shortly coming to pass. For as soon as the armies were
ready to engage, he who had broken through the ties of friendly alliance8 was
the first to commence the battle; on which Constantine, calling on the name of
"God the Supreme Saviour," and giving this as the watchword to his soldiers,
overcame him in this first conflict: and not long after in a second battle he
gained a still more important and decisive victory, the salutary trophy
preceding the ranks of his army.

Chapter VII. That Victory Everywhere Followed the Presence of the Standard of
the Cross in Battle.

Indeed, wherever this appeared, the enemy soon fled before his victorious
troops. And the emperor perceiving this, whenever he saw any part of his forces
hard pressed, gave orders that the salutary trophy should be moved in that
direction, like some triumphant charm9 against disasters: at which the
combatants were divinely inspired, as it were, with fresh strength and courage,
and immediate victory was the result.

Chapter VIII. That Fifty Men Were Selected to Carry the Cross.

Accordingly, he selected those of his bodyguard who were most distinguished for
personal strength, valor, and piety, and entrusted them with the sole care and
defense of the standard. There were thus no less than fifty men whose only duty
was to surround and vigilantly defend the standard, which they carried each in
turn on their shoulders. These circumstances were related to the writer of this
narrative by the emperor himself in his leisure moments, long after the
occurrence of the events: and he added another incident well worthy of being
recorded.

Chapter IX. That One of the Cross-Bearers, Who Fled from His Post, Was Slain:
While Another, Who Faithfully Stood His Ground, Was Preserved. For he said that
once, during the very heat of an engagement, a sudden tumult and panic attacked
his army, which threw the soldier who then bore the standard into an agony of
fear, so that he handed it over to another, in order to secure his own escape
from the battle. As soon, however, as his comrade had received it, and he had
withdrawn, and resigned all charge of the standard, he was struck in the belly
by a dart, which took his life. Thus he paid the penalty of his cowardice and
unfaithfulness, and lay dead on the spot: but the other, who had taken his place
as the bearer of the salutary standard, found it to be the safeguard of his
life. For though he was assailed by a continual shower of darts, the bearer
remained unhurt, the staff of the standard receiving every weapon. It was indeed
a truly marvelous circumstance, that the enemies' darts all fell within and
remained in the slender circumference of this spear, and thus saved the
standard-bearer from death; so that none of those engaged in this service ever
received a wound. This story is none of mine, but for this,10 too, I am indebted
to the emperor's own authority, who related it in my hearing along with other
matters. And now, having thus through the power of God secured these first
victories, he put his forces in motion and continued his onward march.

Chapter X. Various Battles, and Constantine's Victories. The van, however, of
the enemy, unable to resist the emperor's first assault, threw down their arms,
and prostrated themselves at his feet. All these he spared, rejoicing to save
human life. But there were others who still continued in arms, and engaged in
battle. These the emperor endeavored to conciliate by friendly overtures, but
when these were not accepted he ordered his army to commence the attack. On this
they immediately turned and betook themselves to flight; and some were overtaken
and slain according to the laws of war, while others fell on each other in the
confusion of their flight, and perished by the swords of their comrades.

Chapter XI. Flight, and Magic Arts of Licinius. In these circumstances their
commander, finding himself bereft of the aid of his followers,11 having lost his
lately numerous array, both of regular and allied forces, having proved, too, by
experience, how vain his confidence had been in those whom he thought to be
gods, ignominiously took to flight, by which indeed he effected his escape, and
secured his personal safety, for the pious emperor had forbidden his soldiers to
follow him too closely,12 and thus allowed him an opportunity for escape. And
this he did in the hope that he might hereafter, on conviction of the desperate
state of his affairs, be induced to abandon his insane and presumptuous
ambition, and return to sounder reason. So Constantine, in his excessive
humanity, thought and was willing patiently to bear past injuries, and extend
his forgiveness to one who so ill deserved it; but Licinius, far from renouncing
his evil practices, still added crime to crime, and ventured on more daring
atrocities than ever. Nay, once more tampering with the detestable arts of
magic, he again was presumptuous: so that it might well be said of him, as it
was of the Egyptian tyrant of old, that God had hardened his heart.13 Chapter
XII. How Constantine, After Praying in His Tabernacle, Obtained the Victory. But
while Licinius, giving himself up to these impieties, rushed blindly towards the
gulf of destruction, the emperor on the other hand, when he saw that he must
meet his enemies in a second battle, devoted the intervening time to his
Saviour. He pitched the tabernacle of the cross14 outside and at a distance from
his camp, and there passed his time in a pure and holy manner, offering up
prayers to God; following thus the example of his ancient prophet, of whom the
sacred oracles testify, that he pitched the tabernacle without the camp.15 He
was attended only by a few, whose faith and pious devotion he highly esteemed.
And this custom he continued to observe whenever he meditated an engagement with
the enemy. For he was deliberate in his measures, the better to insure safety,
and desired in everything to be directed by divine counsel. And making earnest
supplications to God, he was always honored after a little with a manifestation
of his presence. And then, as if moved by a divine impulse, he would rush from
the tabernacle, and suddenly give orders to his army to move at once without
delay, and on the instant to draw their swords. On this they would immediately
commence the attack, fight vigorously, so as with incredible celerity to secure
the victory, and raise trophies of victory over their enemies.

Chapter XIII. His Humane Treatment of Prisoners.

Thus the emperor and his army had long been accustomed to act, whenever there
was a prospect of an engagement; for his God was ever present to his thoughts,
and he desired to do everything according to his will, and conscientiously to
avoid any wanton sacrifice of human life. He was anxious thus for the
preservation not only of his own subjects, but even of his enemies. Accordingly
he directed his victorious troops to spare the lives of their prisoners,
admonishing them, as human beings, not to forget the claims of their common
nature. And whenever he saw the passions of his soldiery excited beyond control,
he repressed their fury by a largess of money, rewarding every man who saved the
life of an enemy with a certain weight of gold. And the emperor's own sagacity
led him to discover this inducement to spare human life, so that great numbers
even of the barbarians were thus saved, and owed their lives to the emperor's
gold.

Chapter XIV. A Farther Mention of His Prayers in the Tabernacle.

Now these, and a thousand such acts as these, were familiarly and habitually
done by the emperor. And on the present occasion he retired, as his custom was
before battle, to the privacy of his tabernacle, and there employed his time in
prayer to God. Meanwhile he strictly abstained from anything like ease, or
luxurious living, and disciplined himself by fasting and bodily mortification,
imploring the favor of God by supplication and prayer, that he might obtain his
concurrence and aid, and be ready to execute whatever he might be pleased to
suggest to his thoughts. In short, he exercised a vigilant care over all alike,
and interceded with God as much for the safety of his enemies as for that of his
own subjects.

Chapter XV. Treacherous Friendship, and Idolatrous Practices of Licinius. And
inasmuch as he who had lately fled before him now dissembled his real
sentiments, and again petitioned for a renewal of friendship and alliance, the
emperor thought fit, on certain conditions, to grant his request,16 in the hope
that such a measure might be expedient, and generally advantageous to the
community. Licinius, however, while he pretended a ready submission to the terms
prescribed, and attested his sincerity by oaths, at this very time was secretly
engaged in collecting a military force, and again meditated war and strife,
inviting even the barbarians to join his standard,17 and he began also to look
about him for other gods, having been deceived by those in whom he had hitherto
trusted. And, without bestowing a thought on what he had himself publicly spoken
on the subject of false deities, or choosing to acknowledge that God who had
fought on the side of Constantine, he made himself ridiculous by seeking for a
multitude of new gods.

Chapter XVI. How Licinius Counseled His Soldiers Not to Attack the Standard of
the Cross.

Having now learned by experience the Divine and mysterious power which resided
in the salutary trophy, by means of which Constantine's army had become
habituated to victory, he admonished his soldiers never to direct their attack
against this standard, nor even incautiously to allow their eyes to rest upon
it; assuring them that it possessed a terrible power, and was especially hostile
to him; so that they would do well carefully to avoid any collision with it. And
now, having given these directions, he prepared for a decisive conflict with him
whose humanity prompted him still to hesitate, and to postpone the fate which he
foresaw awaited his adversary. The enemy, however, confident in the aid of a
multitude of gods, advanced to the attack with a powerful array of military
force, preceded by certain images of the dead, and lifeless statues, as their
defense. On the other side, the emperor, secure in the armor of godliness,
opposed to the numbers of the enemy the salutary and life-giving sign, as at
once a terror to the foe, and a protection from every harm. And for a while he
paused, and preserved at first the attitude of forbearance, from respect to the
treaty of peace to which he had given his sanction, that he might not be the
first to commence the contest.

Chapter XVII. Constantine's Victory. But as soon as he perceived that his
adversaries persisted in their resolution, and were already drawing their
swords, he gave free scope to his indignation, and by a single charge18
overthrew in a moment the entire body of the enemy, thus triumphing at once over
them and their gods.

Chapter XVIII. Death of Licinius, and Celebration of the Event.

He then proceeded to deal with this adversary of God and his followers according
to the laws of war, and consign them to fitting punishment. Accordingly the
tyrant himself, and they whose counsels had supported him in his impiety, were
together subjected to the just punishment of death. After this, those who had so
lately been deceived by their vain confidence in false deities, acknowledged
with unfeigned sincerity the God of Constantine, and openly professed their
belief in him as the true and only God.

Chapter XIX. Rejoicings and Festivities. And now, the impious being thus
removed, the sun once more shone brightly after the gloomy cloud of tyrannic
power. Each separate portion of the Roman dominion became blended with the rest;
the Eastern nations united with those of the West, and the whole body of the
Roman empire was graced as it were by its head in the person of a single and
supreme ruler, whose sole authority pervaded the whole. Now too the bright rays
of the light of godliness gladdened the days of those who had heretofore been
sitting in darkness and the shadow of death. Past sorrows were no more
remembered, for all united in celebrating the praises of the victorious prince,
and avowed their recognition of his preserver as the only true God. Thus he
whose character shone with all the virtues of piety, the emperor Victor, for he
had himself adopted this name as a most fitting appellation to express the
victory which God had granted him over all who hated or opposed him,19 assumed
the dominion of the East, and thus singly governed the Roman empire, re-united,
as in former times, under one head. Thus, as he was the first to proclaim to all
the sole sovereignty of God, so he himself, as sole sovereign of the Roman
world, extended his authority over the whole human race. Every apprehension of
those evils under the pressure of which all had suffered was now removed; men
whose heads had drooped in sorrow now regarded each other with smiling
countenances, and looks expressive of their inward joy. With processions and
hymns of praise they first of all, as they were told, ascribed the supreme
sovereignty to God, as in truth the King of kings; and then with continued
acclamations rendered honor to the victorious emperor, and the Caesars, his most
discreet and pious sons. The former afflictions were forgotten, and all past
impieties forgiven: while with the enjoyment of present happiness was mingled
the expectation of continued blessings in the future.

Chapter XX. Constantine's Enactments in Favor of the Confessors.

Moreover, the emperor's edicts, permeated with his humane spirit, were published
among us also, as they had been among the inhabitants of the other division of
the empire; and his laws, which breathed a spirit of piety toward God, gave
promise of manifold blessings, since they secured many advantages to his
provincial subjects in every nation, and at the same time prescribed measures
suited to the exigencies of the churches of God. For first of all they recalled
those who, in consequence of their refusal to join in idol worship, had been
driven to exile, or ejected from their homes by the governors of their
respective provinces. In the next place, they relieved from their burdens those
who for the same reason had been adjudged to serve in the civil courts, and
ordained restitution to be made to any who had been deprived of property. They
too, who in the time of trial had signalized themselves by fortitude of soul in
the cause of God, and had therefore been condemned to the painful labor of the
mines, or consigned to the solitude of islands, or compelled to toil in the
public works, all received an immediate release from these burdens; while
others, whose religious constancy had cost them the forfeiture of their military
rank, were vindicated by the emperor's generosity from this dishonor: for he
granted them the alternative either of resuming their rank, and enjoying their
former privileges, or, in the event of their preferring a more settled life, of
perpetual exemption from all service. Lastly, all who had been compelled by way
of disgrace and insult to serve in the employments of women,20 he likewise freed
with the rest.

Chapter XXI. His Laws Concerning Martyrs, and Concerning Ecclesiastical
Property.

Such were the benefits secured by the emperor's written mandates to the persons
of those who had thus suffered for the faith, and his laws made ample provision
for their property also. With regard to those holy martyrs of God who had laid
down their lives in the confession of His name, he directed that their estates
should be enjoyed by their nearest kindred; and, in default of any of these,
that the right of inheritance should be vested in the churches. Farther,
whatever property had been consigned to other parties from the treasury, whether
in the way of sale or gift, together with that retained in the treasury itself,
the generous mandate of the emperor directed should be restored to the original
owners. Such benefits did his bounty, thus widely diffused, confer on the Church
of God.

Chapter XXII. How He Won the Favor of the People. But his munificence bestowed
still further and more numerous favors on the heathen peoples and the other
nations of his empire. So that the inhabitants of our [Eastern] regions, who had
heard of the privileges experienced in the opposite portion of the empire, and
had blessed the fortunate recipients of them, and longed for the enjoyment of a
similar lot for themselves, now with one consent proclaimed their own happiness,
when they saw themselves in possession of all these blessings; and confessed
that the appearance of such a monarch to the human race was indeed a marvelous
event, and such as the world's history had never yet recorded. Such were their
sentiments.

Chapter XXIII. That He Declared God to Be the Author of His Prosperity: and
Concerning His Rescripts. And now that, through the powerful aid of God his
Saviour, all nations owned their subjection to the emperor's authority, he
openly proclaimed to all the name of Him to whose bounty he owed all his
blessings, and declared that He, and not himself, was the author of his past
victories. This declaration, written both in the Latin and Greek languages, he
caused to be transmitted through every province of the empire. Now the
excellence of his style of expression21 may be known from a perusal of his
letters themselves which were two in number; one addressed to the churches of
God; the other to the heathen population in the several cities of the empire.
The latter of these I think it well to insert here as connected with my present
subject, in order on the one hand that a copy of this document may be recorded
as matter of history, and thus preserved to posterity, and on the other that it
may serve to confirm the truth of my present narrative. It is taken from an
authentic copy of the imperial statute in my own possession and the signature in
the emperor's own handwriting attaches as it were the impress of truth to the
statement I have made.

Chapter XXIV. Law of Constantine Respecting Piety Towards God, and the Christian
Religion.22 "Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to the inhabitants of the
province of Palestine.

"To all who entertain just and sound sentiments respecting the character of the
Supreme Being, it has long been most clearly evident, and beyond the possibility
of doubt, how vast a difference there has ever been between those who maintain a
careful observance of the hallowed duties of the Christian religion, and those
who treat this religion with hostility or contempt. But at this present time, we
may see by stilt more manifest proofs, and still more decisive instances, both
how unreasonable it were to question this truth, and how mighty is the power of
the Supreme God: since it appears that they who faithfully observe His holy
laws, and shrink from the transgression of His commandments, are rewarded with
abundant blessings, and are endued with well-grounded hope as well as ample
power for the accomplishment of their undertakings. On the other hand, they who
have cherished impious sentiments have experienced results corresponding to
their evil choice. For how is it to be expected that any blessing would be
obtained by one who neither desired to acknowledge nor duly to worship that God
who is the source of all blessing? Indeed, facts themselves are a confirmation
of what I say.

Chapter XXV. An Illustration from Ancient Times.

"For certainly any one who will mentally retrace the course of events from the
earliest period down to the present time, and will reflect on what has occurred
in past ages, will find that all who have made justice and probity the basis of
their conduct, have not only carried their undertakings to a successful issue,
but have gathered, as it were, a store of sweet fruit as the produce of this
pleasant root. Again, whoever observes the career of those who have been bold in
the practice of oppression or injustice; who have either directed their
senseless fury against God himself, or have conceived no kindly feelings towards
their fellow-men, but have dared to afflict them with exile, disgrace,
confiscation, massacre, or other miseries of the like kind, and all this without
any sense of compunction, or wish to direct thoughts to a better course, will
find that such men have received a recompense proportioned to their crimes. And
these are results which might naturally and reasonably be expected to ensue?23
Chapter XXVI. Of Persecuted and Persecutors.

"For whoever have addressed themselves with integrity of purpose to any course
of action, keeping the fear of God continually before their thoughts, and
preserving an unwavering faith in him, without allowing present fears or dangers
to outweigh their hope of future blessings-such persons, though for a season
they may have experienced painful trials, have borne their afflictions lightly,
being supported by the belief of greater rewards in store for them; and their
character has acquired a brighter luster inproportion to the severity of their
past sufferings. With regard, on the other hand, to those who have either
dishonorably slighted the principles of justice, or refused to acknowledge the
Supreme God themselves, and yet have dared to subject others who have faithfully
maintained his worship to the most cruel insults and punishments; who have
failed equally to recognize their own wretchedness in oppressing others on such
grounds, and the happiness and blessing of those who preserved their devotion to
God even in the midst of such sufferings: with regard, I say, to such men, many
a time have their armies been slaughtered, many a time have they been put to
flight; and their warlike preparations have ended in total ruin and defeat.

Chapter XXVII. How the Persecution Became the Occasion of Calamities to the
Aggressors.

"From the causes I have described, grievous wars arose, and destructive
devastations. Hence followed a scarcity of the common necessaries of life, and a
crowd of consequent miseries: hence, too, the authors of these impieties have
either met a disastrous death of extreme suffering, or have dragged out an
ignominious existence, and confessed it to be worse than death itself, thus
receiving as it were a measure of punishment proportioned to the heinousness of
their crimes.24 For each experienced a degree of calamity according to the blind
fury with which he had been led to combat, and as he thought, defeat the Divine
will: so that they not only felt the pressure of the ills of this present life,
but were tormented also by a most lively apprehension of punishment in the
future world.25 Chapter XXVIII. That God Chose Constantine to Be the Minister of
Blessing.

"And now, with such a mass of impiety oppressing the human race, and the
commonwealth in danger of being utterly destroyed, as if by the agency of some
pestilential disease, and therefore needing powerful and effectual aid; what was
the relief, and what the remedy which the Divinity devised for these evils? (And
by Divinity is meant the one who is alone and truly God, the possessor of
almighty and eternal power: and surely it cannot be deemed arrogance in one who
has received benefits from God, to acknowledge them in the loftiest terms of
praise.) I myself, then, was the instrument whose services He chose, and
esteemed suited for the accomplishment of his will. Accordingly, beginning at
the remote Britannic ocean, and the regions where, according to the law of
nature, the sun sinks beneath the horizon, through the aid of divine power I
banished and utterly removed every form of evil which prevailed, in the hope
that the human race, enlightened through my instrumentality, might be recalled
to a due observance of the holy laws of God, and at the same time our most
blessed faith might prosper under the guidance of his almighty hand.

Chapter XXIX. Constantine's Expressions of Piety Towards God; And Praise of the
Confessors.

"I Said,26 under the guidance of his hand; for I would desire never to be
forgetful of the gratitude due to his grace. Believing, therefore, that this
most excellent service had been confided to me as a special gift, I proceeded as
far as the regions of the East, which, being under the pressure of severer
calamities, seemed to demand still more effectual remedies at my hands. At the
same time I am most certainly persuaded that I myself owe my life, my every
breath, in short, my very inmost and secret thoughts, entirely to the favor of
the Supreme God. Now I am well aware that they who are sincere in the pursuit of
the heavenly hope, and have fixed this hope in heaven itself as the peculiar and
predominant principle of their lives, have no need to depend on human favor, but
rather have enjoyed higher honors in proportion as they have separated
themselves from the inferior and evil things of this earthly existence.
Nevertheless I deem it incumbent on me to remove at once and most completely
from all such persons the hard necessities laid upon them for a season, and the
unjust inflictions under which they have suffered, though free from any guilt or
just liability. For it would be strange indeed, that the fortitude and constancy
of soul displayed by such men should be fully apparent during the reign of those
whose first object it was to persecute them on account of their devotion to God,
and yet that the glory of their character should not be more bright and blessed,
under the administration of a prince who is His servant.

Chapter XXX. A Law Granting Release from Exile, from Service in the Courts, and
from the Confiscation of Property.

"Let all therefore who have exchanged their country for a foreign land, because
they would not abandon that reverence and faith toward God to which they had
devoted themselves with their whole hearts, and have in consequence at different
times been subject to the cruel sentence of the courts; together with any who
have been enrolled in the registers of the public courts though in time past
exempt from such office let these, I say, now render thanks to God the Liberator
of all, in that they are restored to their hereditary property, and their wonted
tranquility. Let those also who have been despoiled of their goods, and have
hitherto passed a wretched existence, mourning under the loss of all that they
possessed, once more be restored to their former homes, their families, and
estates, and receive with joy the bountiful kindness of God.

Chapter XXXI. Release Likewise Granted to Exiles in the Islands.

"Furthermore, it is our command that all those who have been detained in the
islands against their will should receive the benefit of this present provision;
in order that they who rill now have been surrounded by rugged mountains and the
encircling barrier of the ocean, being now set free from that gloomy and
desolate solitude, may fulfill their fondest wish by revisiting their dearest
friends. Those, too, who have prolonged a miserable life in the midst of abject
and wretched squalor, welcoming their restoration as an unlooked-for gain, and
discarding henceforth all anxious thoughts, may pass their lives with us in
freedom from all fear. For that any one could live in a state of fear under our
government, when we boast and believe ourselves to be the servants of God, would
surely be a thing most extraordinary even to hear of, and quite incredible; and
our mission is to rectify the errors of the others.

Chapter XXXII. And to Those Ignominiously Employed in the Mines and Public
Works.

"Again, with regard to those who have been condemned either to the grievous
labor of the mines, or to service in the public works, let them enjoy the sweets
of leisure in place of these long-continued toils, and henceforth lead a far
easier life, and more accordant with the wishes of their hearts, exchanging the
incessant hardships of their tasks for quiet relaxation. And if any have
forfeited the common privilege of liberty, or have unhappily suffered
dishonor,27 let them hasten back every one to the country of his nativity, and
resume with becoming joy their former positions in society, from which they have
been as it were separated by long residence abroad.

Chapter XXXIII. Concerning Those Confessors Engaged in Military Service.

"Once more, with respect to those who had previously been preferred to any
military distinction, of which they were afterwards deprived, for the cruel and
unjust reason that they chose rather to acknowledge their allegiance to God than
to retain the rank they held; we leave them perfect liberty of choice, either to
occupy their former stations, should they be content again to engage in military
service, or after an honorable discharge, to live in undisturbed tranquillity.
For it is fair and consistent that men who have displayed such magnanimity and
fortitude in meeting the perils to which they have been exposed, should be
allowed the choice either of enjoying peaceful leisure, or resuming their former
rank.

Chapter XXXIV. The Liberation of Free Persons Condemned to Labor in the Women's
Apartments, or to Servitude.

"Lastly, if any have wrongfully been deprived of the privileges of noble
lineage, and subjected to a judicial sentence which has consigned them to the
women's apartments28 and to the linen making, there to undergo a cruel and
miserable labor, or reduced them to servitude for the benefit of the public
treasury, without any exemption on the ground of superior birth; let such
persons, resuming the honors they had previously enjoyed, and their proper
dignities, henceforward exult in the blessings of liberty, and lead a glad life.
Let the free man,29 too, by some injustice and inhumanity, or even madness, made
a slave, who has felt the sudden transition from liberty to bondage, and
ofttimes bewailed his unwonted labors, return to his family once more a free man
in virtue of this our ordinance, and seek those employments which befit a state
of freedom; and let him dismiss from his remembrance those services which he
found so oppressive, and which so ill became his condition.

Chapter XXXV. Of the Inheritance of the Property of Martyrs and Confessors, Also
of Those Who Had Suffered Banishment or Confiscation of Property.

"Nor must we omit to notice those estates of which individuals have been
deprived on various pretenses. For if any of those who have engaged with
dauntless and resolute determination in the noble and divine conflict of
martyrdom have also been stripped of their fortunes; or if the same has been the
lot of the confessors, who have won for themselves the hope of eternal
treasures; or if the loss of property has befallen those who were driven from
their native land because they would not yield to the persecutors, and betray
their faith; lastly, if any who have escaped the sentence of death have yet been
despoiled of their worldly goods; we ordain that the inheritances of all such
persons be transferred to their nearest kindred. And whereas the laws expressly
assign this right to those most nearly related, it will be easy to ascertain to
whom these inheritances severally belong. And it is evidently reasonable that
the succession in these cases should belong to those who would have stood in the
place of nearest affinity, had the deceased experienced a natural death.

Chapter XXXVI. The Church is Declared Heir of Those Who Leave No Kindred; And
the Free Gifts of Such Persons Confirmed.

"But should there be no surviving relation to succeed in due course to the
property of those above-mentioned, I mean the martyrs, or confessors, or those
who for some such cause have been banished from their native land; in such cases
we ordain that the church locally nearest in each instance shall succeed to the
inheritance. And surely it will be no wrong to the departed that that church
should be their heir, for whose sake they have endured every extremity of
suffering. We think it necessary to add this also, that in case any of the
above-mentioned persons have donated any part of their property in the way of
free gift, possession of such property shall be assured, as is reasonable, to
those who have thus received it.

Chapter XXXVII. Lands, Gardens, or Houses, But Not Actual Produce from Them, are
to Be Given Back.

"And that there may be no obscurity in this our ordinance, but every one may
readily apprehend its requirements, let all men hereby know that if they are now
maintaining themselves in possession of a piece of land, or a house, or garden,
or anything else which had appertained to the before-mentioned persons, it will
be good and advantageous for them to acknowledge the fact, and make restitution
with the least possible delay. On the other hand, although it should appear that
some individuals have reaped abundant profits from this unjust possession, we do
not consider that justice demands the restitution of such profits. They must,
however, declare explicitly what amount of benefit they have thus derived, and
from what sources, and entreat our pardon for this offense; in order that their
past covetousness may in some measure be atoned for, and that the Supreme God
may accept this compensation as a token of contrition, and be pleased graciously
to pardon the sin.

Chapter XXXVIII. In What Manner Requests Should Be Made for These.

"But it is possible that those who have become masters of such property (if it
be right or possible to allow them such a title) will assure us by way of
apology for their conduct, that it was not in their power to abstain from this
appropriation at a time when a spectacle of misery in all its forms everywhere
met the view; when men were cruelly driven from their homes, slaughtered without
mercy, thrust forth without remorse: when the confiscation of the property of
innocent persons was a common thing, and when persecutions and property seizures
were unceasing. If any defend their conduct by such reasons as these, and still
persist in their avaricious temper, they shall be made sensible that such a
course will bring punishment on themselves, and all the more because this
correction of evil is the very characteristic of our service to the Supreme God.
So that it will henceforth be dangerous to retain what dire necessity may in
time past have compelled men to take; especially because it is in any case
incumbent on us to discourage covetous desires, both by persuasion, and by
warning examples.

Chapter XXXIX. The Treasury Must Restore Lands, Gardens, and Houses to the
Churches.

"Nor shall the treasury itself, should it have any of the things we have spoken
of, be permitted to keep them; but, without venturing as it were to raise its
voice against the holy churches, it shall justly relinquish in their favor what
it has for a time unjustly retained. We ordain, therefore, that all things
whatsoever which shall appear righteously to belong to the churches, whether the
property consist of houses or fields and gardens, or whatever the nature of it
may be, shall be restored in their full value and integrity, and with
undiminished right of possession.

Chapter XL. The Tombs of Martyrs and the Cemeteries to Be Transferred to the
Possession of the Churches.

"Again, with respect to those places which are honored in being the depositories
of the remains of martyrs, and continue to be memorials of their glorious
departure; how can we doubt that they rightly belong to the churches, or refrain
from issuing our injunction to that effect? For surely there can be no better
liberality, no labor more pleasing or profitable, than to be thus employed under
the guidance of the Divine Spirit, in order that those things which have been
appropriated on false pretenses by unjust and wicked men, may be restored, as
justice demands, and once more secured to the holy churches.

Chapter XLI. Those Who Have Purchased Property Belonging to the Church, or
Received It as a Gift, are to Restore It.

"And since it would be wrong in a provision intended to include all cases, to
pass over those who have either procured any such property by right of purchase
from the treasury, or have retained it when conveyed to them in the form of a
gift; let all who have thus rashly indulged their insatiable thirst of gain be
assured that, although by daring to make such purchases they have done all in
their power to alienate our clemency from themselves, they shall nevertheless
not fail of obtaining it, so far as is possible and consistent with propriety in
each case. So much then is determined.

Chapter XLII. An Earnest Exhortation to Worship God.

"And now, since it appears by the clearest and most convincing evidence, that
the miseries which erewhile oppressed the entire human race are now banished
from every part of the world, through the power of Almighty God, and at the same
time the counsel and aid which he is pleased on many occasions to administer
through our agency; it remains for all, both individually and unitedly, to
observe and seriously consider how great this power and how efficacious this
grace are, which have annihilated and utterly destroyed this generation, as I
may call them, of most wicked and evil men; have restored joy to the good, and
diffused it over all countries; and now guarantee the fullest authority both to
honor the Divine law as it should be honored, with all reverence, and pay due
observance to those who have dedicated themselves to the service of that law.
These rising as from some dark abyss and, with an enlightened knowledge of the
present course of events, will henceforward render to its precepts that becoming
reverence and honor which are consistent with their pious character.

Let this ordinance be published in our Eastern provinces."30 Chapter XLIII. How
the Enactments of Constantine Were Carried into Effect.

Such were the injunctions contained in the first letter which the emperor
addressed to us. And the provisions of this enactment were speedily carried into
effect, everything being conducted in a manner quite different from the
atrocities which had but lately been daringly perpetrated during the cruel
ascendancy of the tyrants. Those persons also who were legally entitled to it,
received the benefit of the emperor's liberality.

Chapter XLIV. That He Promoted Christians to Offices of Government, and Forbade
Gentiles in Such Stations to Offer Sacrifice.

After this the emperor continued to address himself to matters of high
importance, and first he sent governors to the several provinces, mostly such as
were devoted to the saving faith; and if any appeared inclined to adhere to
Gentile worship, he forbade them to offer sacrifice. This law applied also to
those who surpassed the provincial governors in rank and dignity,31 and even to
those who occupied the highest station, and held the authority of the Praetorian
Praefecture.32 If they were Christians, they were free to act consistently with
their profession; if otherwise, the law required them to abstain from idolatrous
sacrifices.

Chapter XLV. Statutes Which Forbade Sacrifice, and Enjoined the Building of
Churches.

Soon after this, two laws were promulgated about the same time; one of which was
intended to restrain the idolatrous abominations which in time past had been
practiced in every city and country; and it provided that no one should erect
images, or practice divination and other false and foolish arts, or offer
sacrifice in any way.33 The other statute commanded the heightening of the
oratories, and the enlargement in length and breadth of the churches of God; as
though it were expected that, now the madness of polytheism was wholly removed,
pretty nearly all mankind would henceforth attach themselves to the service of
God. His own personal piety induced the emperor to devise and write these
instructions to the governors of the several provinces: and the law farther
admonished them not to spare the expenditure of money, but to draw supplies from
the imperial treasury itself. Similar instructions were written also to the
bishops of the several churches; and the emperor was pleased to transmit the
same to myself, being the first letter which he personally addressed to me.

Chapter XLVI. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius and Other Bishops, Respecting the
Building of Churches, with Instructions to Repair the Old, and Erect New Ones on
a Larger Scale, with the Aid of the Provincial Governors.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Eusebius.

"Forasmuch as the unholy and willful rule of tyranny has persecuted the servants
of our Saviour until this present time, I believe and have fully satisfied
myself, best beloved brother, that the buildings belonging to all the churches
have either become ruinous through actual neglect, or have received inadequate
attention from the dread of the violent spirit of the times.

"But now, that liberty is restored, and that serpent34 driven from the
administration of public affairs by the providence of the Supreme God, and our
instrumentality, we trust that all can see the efficacy of the Divine power, and
that they who through fear of persecution or through unbelief have fallen into
any errors, will now acknowledge the true God, and adopt in future that course
of life which is according to truth and rectitude. With respect, therefore, to
the churches over which you yourself preside, as well as the bishops,
presbyters, and deacons of other churches with whom you are acquainted, do you
admonish all to be zealous in their attention to the buildings of the churches,
and either to repair or enlarge those which at present exist, or, in cases of
necessity, to erect new ones.

"We also empower you, and the others through you, to demand what is needful for
the work, both from the provincial governors and from the Praetorian Praefect.
For they have received instructions to be most diligent in obedience to your
Holiness's orders. God preserve you, beloved brother." A copy of this charge was
transmitted throughout all the provinces to the bishops of the several churches:
the provincial governors received directions accordingly, and the imperial
statute was speedily carried into effect.

Chapter XLVII. That He Wrote a Letter in Condemnation of Idolatry.

Moreover, the emperor, who continually made progress in piety towards God,
dispatched an admonitory letter to the inhabitants of every province, respecting
the error of idolatry into which his predecessors in power had fallen, in which
he eloquently exhorts his subjects to acknowledge the Supreme God, and openly to
profess their allegiance to his Christ as their Saviour. This letter also, which
is in his own handwriting, I have judged it necessary to translate from the
Latin for the present work, in order that we may hear, as it were, the voice the
emperor himself uttering these sentiments in the audience of all mankind.

Chapter XLVIII. Constantine's Edict to the People of the Provinces Concerning
the Error of Polytheism, Commencing with Some General Remarks on Virtue and
Vice.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to the people of the Eastern provinces.

"Whatever is comprehended under the sovereign35 laws of nature, seems to convey
to all men an adequate idea of the forethought and intelligence of the divine
order. Nor can any, whose minds are directed in the true path of knowledge to
the attainment of that end, entertain a doubt that the just perceptions of sound
reason, as well as those of the natural vision itself, through the sole
influence of genuine virtue, lead to the knowledge of God. Accordingly no wise
man will ever be surprised when he sees the mass of mankind influenced by
opposite sentiments. For the beauty of virtue would be useless36 and
unperceived, did not vice display in contrast with it the course of perversity
and folly. Hence it is that the one is crowned with reward, while the most high
God is himself the administrator of judgment to the other.

"And now I will endeavor to lay before you all as explicitly as possible, the
nature of my own hopes of future happiness.37 Chapter XLIX. Concerning
Constantine's Pious Father, and the Persecutors Diocletian and Maximian.

"The former emperors I have been accustomed to regard as those with whom I could
have no sympathy,38 on account of the savage cruelty of their character. Indeed,
my father was the only one who uniformly practiced the duties of humanity, and
with admirable piety called for the blessing of God the Father on all his
actions, but the rest, unsound in mind, were more zealous of cruel than gentle
measures; and this disposition they indulged without restraint, and thus
persecuted the true doctrine during the whole period of their reign. Nay, so
violent did their malicious fury become, that in the midst of a profound peace,
as regards both the religious and ordinary interests of men, they kindled, as it
were, the flames of a civil war.39

Chapter L. That the Persecution Originated on Account of the Oracle of Apollo,
Who, It Was Said, Could Not Give Oracles Because of "The Righteous Men."

"About that time it is said that Apollo spoke from a deep and gloomy cavern, and
through the medium of no human voice, and declared that the righteous men on
earth were a bar to his speaking the truth, and accordingly that the oracles
from the tripod were fallacious. Hence it was that he suffered his tresses to
droop in token of grief,40 and mourned the evils which the loss of the oracular
spirit would entail on mankind. But let us mark the consequences of this.

Chapter LI. That Constantine, When a Youth, Heard from Him Who Wrote the
Persecution Edict that "The Righteous Men" Were the Christians.

"I call now on thee, most high God, to witness that, when young, I heard him who
at that time was chief among the Roman emperors, unhappy, truly unhappy as he
was, and laboring under mental delusion, make earnest enquiry of his attendants
as to who these righteous ones on earth were, and that one of the Pagan priests
then present replied that they were doubtless the Christians. This answer he
eagerly received, like some honeyed draught, and unsheathed the sword which was
ordained for the punishment of crime, against those whose holiness was beyond
reproach. Immediately, therefore, he issued those sanguinary edicts, traced, if
I may so express myself, with a sword's point dipped in blood; at the same time
commanding his judges to tax their ingenuity for the invention of new and more
terrible punishments.

Chapter LII. The Manifold Forms of Torture and Punishment Practiced Against the
Christians.

"Then, indeed, one might see with what arrogance those venerable worshipers of
God were daily exposed, with continued and relentless cruelty, to outrages of
the most grievous kind, and how that modesty of character41 which no enemy had
ever treated with disrespect, became the mere sport of their infuriated
fellow-citizens. Is there any punishment by fire, are there any tortures or
forms of torment, which were not applied to all, without distinction of age or
sex? Then, it may be truly said, the earth shed tears, the all-encircling
compass of heaven mourned because of the pollution of blood; and the very light
of day itself was darkened in grief at the spectacle.

Chapter LIII. That the Barbarians Kindly Received the Christians.

"But what is the consequence of this? Why, the barbarians themselves may boast
now of the contrast their conduct presents to these creel deeds; for they
received and kept in gentlest captivity those who then fled from amongst us, and
secured to them not merely safety from danger, but also the free exercise of
their holy religion. And now the Roman people bear that lasting stain which the
Christians, at that time driven from the Roman world, and taking refuge with the
barbarians, have branded on them.

Chapter LIV. What Vengeance Overtook Those Who on Account of the Oracle Raised
the Persecution.

"But why need I longer dwell on these lamentable events, and the general sorrow
which in consequence pervaded the world? The perpetrators of this dreadful guilt
are now no more: they have experienced a miserable end, and are consigned to
unceasing punishment in the depths of the lower world. They encountered each
other in civil strife, and have left neither name nor race behind. And surely
this calamity would never have befallen them, had not that impious deliverance
of the Pythian oracle exercised a delusive power over them.42

Chapter LV. Constantine Gives Glory to God, Makes Grateful Acknowledgment of the
Sign of the Cross, and Prays for the Churches and People. And now I beseech
thee, most mighty God, to be merciful and gracious to thine Eastern nations, to
thy people in these provinces, worn as they are by protracted miseries; and
grant them healing through thy servant. Not without cause, O holy God, do I
prefer this prayer to thee, the Lord of all. Under thy guidance have I devised
and accomplished measures fraught with blessings: preceded by thy sacred sign I
have led thy armies to victory: and still, on each occasion of public danger, I
follow the same symbol of thy perfections while advancing to meet the foe.
Therefore have I dedicated to thy service a soul duly attempered by love and
fear. For thy name I truly love, while I regard with reverence that power of
which thou hast given abundant proofs, to the confirmation and increase of my
faith. I hasten, then, to devote all my powers to the restoration of thy most
holy dwelling-place, which those profane and impious men have defiled by the
contamination of violence.

Chapter LVI. He Prays that All May Be Christians, But Compels None.

"My own desire is, for the common good of the world and the advantage of all
mankind, that thy people should enjoy a life of peace and undisturbed concord.
Let those, therefore, who still delight in error, be made welcome to the same
degree of peace and tranquillity which they have who believe. For it may be that
this restoration of equal privileges to all will prevail to lead them into the
straight path. Let no one molest another, but let every one do as his soul
desires. Only let men of sound judgment be assured of this, that those only can
live a life of holiness and purity, whom thou callest to a reliance on thy holy
laws. With regard to those who will hold themselves aloof from us, let them
have, if they please, their temples43 of lies: we have the glorious edifice of
thy truth, which thou hast given us as our native home.44 We pray, however, that
they too may receive the same blessing, and thus experience that heartfelt joy
which unity of sentiment inspires.

Chapter LVII. He Gives Glory to God, Who Has Given Light by His Son to Those Who
Were in Error.

"And truly our worship is no new or recent thing, but one which thou hast
ordained for thine own due honor, from the time when, as we believe, this system
of the universe was first established. And, although mankind have deeply fallen,
and have been seduced by manifold errors, yet hast thou revealed a pure light in
the person of thy Son, that the power of evil should not utterly prevail, and
hast thus given testimony to all men concerning thyself.

Chapter LVIII. He Glorifies Him Again for His Government of the Universe. The
truth of this is assured to us by thy works. It is thy power which removes our
guilt, and makes us faithful. The sun and the moon have their settled course.
The stars move in no uncertain orbits round this terrestrial globe. The
revolution of the seasons recurs according to unerring laws. The solid fabric of
the earth was established by thy word: the winds receive their impulse at
appointed times; and the course of the waters continues with ceaseless flow,45
the ocean is circumscribed by an immovable barrier, and whatever is comprehended
within the compass of earth and sea, is all contrived for wondrous and important
ends.

"Were it not so, were not all regulated by the determination of thy will, so
great a diversity, so manifold a division of power, would unquestionably have
brought ruin on the whole race and its affairs. For those agencies which have
maintained a mutual strife46 would thus have carried to a more deadly length
that hostility against the human race which they even now exercise, though
unseen by mortal eyes.

Chapter LIX. He Gives Glory to God, as the Constant Teacher of Good.

"Abundant thanks, most mighty God, and Lord of all, be rendered to thee, that,
by so much as our nature becomes known from the diversified pursuits of man, by
so much the more are the precepts of thy divine doctrine confirmed to those
whose thoughts are directed aright, and who are sincerely devoted to true
virtue. As for those who will not allow themselves to be cured of their error,
let them not attribute this to any but themselves. For that remedy which is of
sovereign and healing virtue is openly placed within the reach of all. Only let
not any one inflict an injury on that religion which experience itself testifies
to be pure and undefiled. Henceforward, therefore, let us all enjoy in common
the privilege placed within our reach, I mean the blessing of peace, endeavoring
to keep our conscience pure from all that is contrary.

Chapter LX. An Admonition at the Close of the Edict, that No One Should Trouble
His Neighbor.

"Once more, let none use that to the detriment of another which he may himself
have received on conviction of its truth; but let every, one, if it be possible,
apply what he has understood and known to the benefit of his neighbor; if
otherwise, let him relinquish the attempt. For it is one thing voluntarily to
undertake the conflict for immortality, another to compel others to do so from
the fear of punishment.

"These are our words; and we have enlarged on these topics more than our
ordinary clemency would have dictated, because we were unwilling to dissemble or
be false to the true faith; and the more so, since we understand there are some
who say that the rites of the heathen temples, and the power of darkness, have
been entirely removed. We should indeed have earnestly recommended such removal
to all men, were it not that the rebellious spirit of those wicked errors still
continues obstinately fixed in the minds of some, so as to discourage the hope
of any general restoration of mankind to the ways of truth."47 Chapter LXI. How
Controversies Originated at Alexandria Through Matters Relating to Arius.48 In
this manner the emperor, like a powerful herald of God, addressed himself by his
own letter to all the provinces, at the same time warning his subjects against
superstitious49 error, and encouraging them in the pursuit of true godliness.
But in the midst of his joyful anticipations of the success of this measure, he
received tidings of a most serious disturbance which had invaded the peace of
the Church. This intelligence he heard with deep concern, and at once endeavored
to devise a remedy for the evil. The origin of this disturbance may be thus
described. The people of God were in a truly flourishing state, and abounding in
the practice of good works. No terror from without assailed them, but a bright
and most profound peace, through the favor of God, encompassed his Church on
every side. Meantime, however, the spirit of envy was watching to destroy our
blessings, which at first crept in unperceived, but soon revelled in the midst
of the assemblies of the saints. At length it reached the bishops themselves,
and arrayed them in angry hostility against each other, on pretense of a jealous
regard for the doctrines of Divine truth. Hence it was that a mighty fire was
kindled as it were from a little spark, and which, originating in the first
instance in the Alexandrian church,50 overspread the whole of Egypt and Libya,
and the further Thebaid. Eventually it extended its ravages to the other
provinces and cities of the empire; so that not only the prelates of the
churches might be seen encountering each other in the strife of words, but the
people themselves were completely divided, some adhering to one faction and
others to another. Nay, so notorious did the scandal of these proceedings
become, that the sacred matters of inspired teaching were exposed to the most
shameful ridicule in the very theaters of the unbelievers.

Chapter LXII. Concerning the Same Arius, and the Melitians.51

Some thus at Alexandria maintained an obstinate conflict on the highest
questions. Others throughout Egypt and the Upper Thebaid, were at variance on
account of an earlier controversy: so that the churches were everywhere
distracted by divisions. The body therefore being thus diseased, the whole of
Libya caught the contagion; and the rest of the remoter provinces became
affected with the same disorder. For the disputants at Alexandria sent
emissaries to the bishops of the several provinces, who accordingly ranged
themselves as partisans on either side, and shared in the same spirit of
discord.

Chapter LXIII. How Constantine Sent a Messenger and a Letter Concerning Peace.
As soon as the emperor was informed of these facts, which he heard with much
sorrow of heart, considering them in the light of a calamity personally
affecting himself, he forthwith selectedfrom the Christians in his train one
whom he well knew to be approved for the sobriety and genuineness of his
faith,52 and who had before this time distinguished himself by the boldness. of
his religious profession, and sent him to negotiate peace53 between the
dissentient parties at Alexandria. He also made him the bearer of a most needful
and appropriate letter to the original movers of the strife: and this letter, as
exhibiting a specimen of his watchful care over God's people, it may be well to
introduce into this our narrative of his life. Its purport was as follows.

Chapter LXIV. Constantine's Letter to Alexander the Bishop, and Arius the
Presbyter.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Alexander and Arius.

"I call that God to witness, as well I may, who is the helper of my endeavors,
and the Preserver of all men, that I had a twofold reason for undertaking that
duty which I have now performed.

Chapter LXV. His Continual Anxiety for Peace.

"My design then was, first, to bring the diverse judgments formed by all nations
respecting the Deity to a condition, as it were, of settled uniformity; and,
secondly, to restore to health the system of the world, then suffering under the
malignant power of a grievous distemper. Keeping these objects in view, I sought
to accomplish the one by the secret eye of thought, while the other I tried to
rectify by the power of military authority. For I was aware that, if I should
succeed in establishing, according to my hopes, a common harmony of sentiment
among all the servants of God, the general course of affairs would also
experience a change correspondent to the pious desires of them all.

Chapter LXVI. That He Also Adjusted the Controversies Which Had Arisen in
Africa.

"Finding, then, that the whole of Africa was pervaded by an intolerable spirit
of mad folly, through the influence of those who with heedless frivolity had
presumed to rend the religion of the people into diverse sects; I was anxious to
check this disorder, and could discover no other remedy equal to the occasion,
except in sending some of yourselves to aid in restoring mutual harmony among
the disputants, after I had removed that common enemy54 of mankind who had
interposed his lawless sentence for the prohibition of your holy synods.

Chapter LXVII. That Religion Began in the East.

"For since the power of Divine light, and the law of sacred worship, which,
proceeding in the first instance, through the favor of God, from the bosom, as
it were, of the East, have illumined the world, by their sacred radiance, I
naturally believed that you would be the first to promote the salvation of other
nations, and resolved with all energy of thought and diligence of enquiry to
seek your aid. As soon, therefore, as I had secured my decisive victory and
unquestionable triumph over my enemies, my first enquiry was concerning that
object which I felt to be of paramount interest and importance.

Chapter LXVIII. Being Grieved by the Dissension, He Counsels Peace.

"But, O glorious Providence of God! how deep a wound did not my ears only, but
my very heart receive in the report that divisions existed among yourselves more
grievous still than those which continued in that country!55 so that you,
through whose aid I had hoped to procure a remedy for the errors of others, are
in a state which needs healing even more than theirs. And yet, having made a
careful enquiry into the origin and foundation of these differences, I find the
cause to be of a truly insignificant character, and quite unworthy of such
fierce contention. Feeling myself, therefore, compelled to address you in this
letter, and to appeal at the same time to your unanimity56 and sagacity, I call
on Divine Providence to assist me in the task, while I interrupt your dissension
in the character of a minister of peace. And with reason: for if I might expect,
with the help of a higher Power, to be able without difficulty, by a judicious
appeal to the pious feelings of those who heard me, to recall them to a better
spirit, even though the occasion of the disagreement were a greater one, how can
I refrain from promising myself a far easier and more speedy adjustment of this
difference, when the cause which hinders general harmony of sentiment is
intrinsically trifling and of little moment?

Chapter LXIX. Origin of the Controversy Between Alexander and Arius, and that
These Questions Ought Not to Have Been Discussed.

I Understand, then, that the origin of the present controversy is this. When
you, Alexander, demanded of the presbyters what opinion they severally
maintained respecting a certain passage in the Divine law,57 or rather, I should
say, that you asked them something connected with an unprofitable question, then
you, Arius, inconsiderately insisted on58 what ought never to have been
conceived at all, or if conceived, should have been buried in profound silence.
Hence it was that a dissension arose between you, fellowship was withdrawn,59
and the holy people, rent into diverse parties, no longer preserved the unity of
the one body. Now, therefore, do ye both exhibit an equal degree of
forbearance,60 and receive the advice which your fellow-servant righteously
gives. What then is this advice? It was wrong in the first instance to propose
such questions as these, or to reply to them when propounded. For those points
of discussion which are enjoined by the authority of no law, but rather
suggested by the contentious spirit which is fostered by misused leisure, even
though they may be intended merely as an intellectual exercise, ought certainly
to be confined to the region of our own thoughts, and not hastily produced in
the popular assemblies, nor unadvisedly intrusted to the general ear. For how
very few are there able either accurately to comprehend, or adequately to
explain subjects so sublime and abstruse in their nature? Or, granting that one
were fully competent for this, how many people will he convince? Or, who, again,
in dealing with questions of such subtle nicety as these, can secure himself
against a dangerous declension from the truth? It is incumbent therefore on us
in these cases to be sparing of our words, lest, in case we ourselves are
unable, through the feebleness of our natural faculties, to give a clear
explanation of the subject before us, or, on the other hand, in case the
slowness of our hearers' understandings disables them from arriving at an
accurate apprehension of what we say, from one or other of these causes the
people be reduced to the alternative either of blasphemy or schism.

Chapter LXX. An Exhortation to Unanimity.

"Let therefore both the unguarded question and the inconsiderate answer receive
your mutual forgiveness.61 For the cause of your difference has not been any of
the leading doctrines or precepts of the Divine law, nor has any new heresy
respecting the worship of God arisen among you. You are in truth of one and the
same judgment:62 you may therefore well join in communion and fellowship.

Chapter LXXI. There Should Be No Contention in Matters Which are in Themselves
of Little Moment.

"For as long as you continue to contend about these small and very insignificant
questions, it is not fitting that so large a portion of God's people should be
under the direction of your judgment, since you are thus divided between
yourselves. I believe it indeed to be not merely unbecoming, but positively
evil, that such should be the case. But I will refresh your minds by a little
illustration, as follows. You know that philosophers, though they all adhere to
one system, are yet frequently at issue on certain points, and differ, perhaps,
in their degree of knowledge: yet they are recalled to harmony of sentiment by
the uniting power of their common doctrines. If this be true, is it not far more
reasonable that you, who are the ministers of the Supreme God, should be of one
mind respecting the profession of the same religion? But let us still more
thoughtfully and with closer attention examine what I have said, and see whether
it be right that, on the ground of some trifling and foolish verbal difference
between ourselves, brethren should assume towards each other the attitude of
enemies, and the august meeting of the Synod be rent by profane disunion,
because of you who wrangle together on points so trivial and altogether
unessential? This is vulgar, and rather characteristic of childish ignorance,
than consistent I with the wisdom of priests and men of sense. Let us withdraw
ourselves with a good will from these temptations of the devil. Our great God
and common Saviour of all has granted the same light to us all. Permit me, who
am his servant, to bring my task to a successful issue, under the direction of
his Providence, that I may be enabled, through my exhortations, and diligence,
and earnest admonition, to recall his people to communion and fellowship. For
since you have, as I said, but one faith, and one sentiment respecting our
religion, and since the Divine commandment in all its parts enjoins on us all
the duty of maintaining a spirit of concord, let not the circumstance which has
led to a slight difference between you, since it does not affect the validity of
the whole, cause any division or schism among you. And this I say without in any
way desiring to force you to entire unity of judgment in regard to this truly
idle question, whatever its real nature may be. For the dignity of your synod
may be preserved, and the communion of your whole body maintained unbroken,
however wide a difference may exist among you as to unimportant matters. For we
are not all of us like-minded on every subject, nor is there such a thing as one
disposition and judgment common to all alike. As far, then, as regards the
Divine Providence, let there be one faith, and one understanding among you, one
united judgment in reference to God. But as to your subtle disputations on
questions of little or no significance, though you may be unable to harmonize in
sentiment, such differences should be consigned to the secret custody of your
own minds and thoughts. And now, let the preciousness of common affection, let
faith in the truth, let the honor due to God and to the observance of his law
continue immovably among you. Resume, then, your mutual feelings of friendship,
love, and regard: restore to the people their wonted embracings; and do ye
yourselves, having purified your souls, as it were, once more acknowledge one
another. For it often happens that when a reconciliation is effected by the
removal of the causes of enmity, friendship becomes even sweeter than it was
before.

Chapter LXXII. The Excess of His Pious Concern Caused Him to Shed Tears; And His
Intended Journey to the East Was Postponed Because of These Things.

"Restore me then my quiet days, and untroubled nights, that the joy of undimmed
light, the delight of a tranquil life, may henceforth be my portion. Else must I
needs mourn, with constant tears, nor shall I be able to pass the residue of my
days in peace. For while the people of God, whose fellow-servant I am, are thus
divided amongst themselves by an unreasonable and pernicious spirit of
contention, how is it possible that I shall be able to maintain tranquillity of
mind? And I will give you a proof how great my sorrow has been on this behalf.
Not long since I had visited Nicomedia, and intended forthwith to proceed from
that city to the East. It was while I was hastening towards you, and had already
accomplished the greater part of the distance, that the news of this matter
reversed my plan, that I might not be compelled to see with my own eyes that
which I felt myself scarcely able even to hear. Open then for me henceforward by
your unity of judgment that road to the regions of the East which your
dissensions have closed against me, and permit me speedily to see yourselves and
all other peoples rejoicing together, and render due acknowledgment to God in
the language of praise and thanksgiving for the restoration of general concord
and liberty to all."

Chapter LXXIII. The Controversy Continues Without Abatement, Even After the
Receipt of This Letter. In this manner the pious emperor endeavored by means of
the foregoing letter to promote the peace of the Church of God. And the
excellent man63 to whom it was intrusted performed his part not merely by
communicating the letter itself, but also by seconding the views of him who sent
it; for he was, as I have said, in all respects a person of pious character. The
evil, however, was greater than could be remedied by a single letter, insomuch
that the acrimony of the contending parties continually increased, and the
effects of the mischief extended to all the Eastern provinces. These things
jealousy and some evil spirit who looked with an envious eye on the prosperity
of the Church, wrought.

1: Literally, "the flatterers and time-servers about him."

2: Or "openly."

3: [The reading in the text is toutwn , but should be pantwn

4: This seems to intend some exoneration of Constantine, explaining why he was
what the heathen called "faithless" towards Licinius.

5: Soothsayers and priests. These were technically "augurs" and
"haruspices."Compare for their functions the articles Augur, Divinatio, and
Haruspices, in Smith, Dict. Gr. and Rom. Ant.

6: Literally, "shield-bearers," but here relates to a chosen body of guards, as
in the Macedonian army. Compare Liddell and Scott, Lex. s.v. upaspisthj .

7: The whole passage seems altogether too appropriate to receive ready credence;
but it is worth noting here how Eusebius "quotes his authors," and seems to give
the thing for what it is worth, keeping perhaps the same modicum of reservation
for the hearers' relative imagination and memory, when relating after the
events, that the modern reader does.

8: [Licinius was suspected of having secretly countenanced Bassianus (who had
married Constantine's sister Anastasia, and received the rank of Caesar) in a
treasonable conspiracy. Vide Gibbon, Decline and Fall, chap. 14.- Bag. ] Compare
Prolegomena, under Life.

9: Or "remedy"; i.e. that which keeps off harm.

10: [ Palin 11: "Slaves," a word which has frequently been used by Eusebius in
this literal sense.

12: This idiom here is nearly the English, "followed on the heels" of any one.

13: Ex. ix. 12.

14: [This tabernacle, which Constantine always carried with him in his military
expeditions, is described by Sozomen, Bk. 1, c. 8: see English translation.-
Bag. ] 15: [Alluding to Ex. xxxiii. 7, &c.- Bag. ]

16: ["He consented to leave his rival, or, as he again styled Li-cinius, his
friend and brother, in the possession of Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt;
but the provinces of Pannonia, Dalmatia, Dacia, Macedonia, and Greece, were
yielded to the Western empire, and the dominions of Constantine now extended
from the confines of Caledonia to the extremity of Peloponnesus."-Gibbon,
Decline and Fall, chap. XIV.- Bag. ]

17: [Gibbon (chap. XIV.) says that the reconciliation of Constantine and
Licinius maintained, above eight years, the tranquillity of the Roman world. If
this be true, it may be regarded as one proof that our author's work is rather
to be considered as a general sketch of Constantine's life and character than as
a minutely correct historical document.- Bag. ] There is either a strange lack
of perspective in this account, or else Eusebius omits all account of the first
wars with Licinius (314) which resulted in the division of territory mentioned
in the above note. This latter view is plausible on comparison with the account
in the Church History. In this view the conditions referred to above relate to
the terms on which Licinius was spared on Constantia's request, and what follows
is the explanation of the alleged oath-breaking of Constantine in putting
Licinius to death.

18: "With one shout and charge." This does not agree with the account of the
final struggle by which Licinius came into Constantine's power, as generally
given, and lends some probability to the view that after he had been captured he
again revolted.

19: Like very many other things which Eusebius tells of Constantine, that which
was entirely customary with other emperors as well as Constantine has the
appearance of being peculiar to him. Victor is a common title of various
emperors.

20: [In the gynaecia ( gunaikeia 21: "The value of our narrative"is the
rendering of Molzberger."The powerfulness of his language."- 1709.

22: Compare Epitome in Sozomen, 1. 8.

23: There is a curious unanimity of effort on the part of theological amateurs,
ancient and modern, to prove that those upon whom the tower in Siloam fell were
guiltier than others. This was the spirit of Lactantius and it is not to be
wondered at that Constantine should adopt such a peculiarly self-satisfying
doctrine.

24: Compare Lactantius, On the deaths of the persecutors (De M. P.), and the
Church History of Eusebius.

25: Literally "beneath the earth," referring of course to the Graeco-Roman
conception of Hades.

26: ["I said, under the guidance," &c. It seems necessary to supply some
expression of this kind, in order to preserve the sense, which is otherwise
interrupted by the division (in this instance, at least, manifestly improper)
into chapters.- Bag. ] 27: Glossed by Molzberger as "political dishonor."

28: In the Greek houses there were separate suites for men and women. Compare
article Domus, in Smith, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Antig.

29: [That is, the free subject of inferior rank, accustomed to labor for his
subsistence, but not to the degradation of slavery.]

30: [This seems to be the subscription or signature in the emperor's own
handwriting, which is referred to at the end of ch. 23.- Bag. ] 31: [That is,
the proconsuls, the vicars (or vice-praefects), and counts, or provincial
generals.- Bag. ]

32: [The power of the four Praetorian Praefects in the time of Constantine is
thus described by Gibbon: "1. The Praefect of the East stretched his ample
jurisdiction into the three parts of the globe which were subject to the Romans,
from the cataracts of the Nile to the banks of the Phasis, and from the
mountains of Thrace to the frontiers of Persia. 2. The important provinces of
Pannonia, Dacia, Macedonia, and Greece once acknowledged the authority of the
Praefect of Illyricum. 3. The power of the Praefect of Italy was not confined to
the country from whence he derived his title; it extended over the additional
territory of Rhaetia as far as the banks of the Danube, over the dependent
islands of the Mediterranean, and over that part of the continent of Africa
which lies between the confines of Cyrene and those of Tingitania. 4. The
Praefect of the Gauls comprehended under that plural denomination the kindred
provinces of Britain and Spain, and his authority was obeyed from the wall of
Antoninus to the fort of Mount Atlas."- Decline and Fall, chap. 17.- Bag. ]

33: [That is, private sacrifices: for it appears that the idolatrous temples
were allowed to be open for public worship.- Bag. ]

34: [Licinius, thus designated for the subtlety of his character.- Bag. ] More
probably for his wickedness, and perhaps with thought of the "dragon" of the
Book of Revelation. The word is drakwn , not ofij 35: Or "fixed," "appointed."

36: By a conjectural reading Stroth makes this "fools," instead of "useless,"
and renders, "For fools would not otherwise recognize the charm of virtue."

37: [The remark of Valesius in reference to the difficulty of this chapter
appears probable; viz. that it is partly to be attributed to Constantine's own
want of clearness, and partly to his translator, who has rendered obscure Latin
into still more obscure Greek.- Bag. ]

38: The word means "having no share with," and sometimes "disinherited." It may
perhaps mean, "I have been accustomed to think of the former emperors as having
been deprived of their possessions on account," &c.

39: [The persecution of the Christians, with its attendant horrors, being the
act, not of foreign enemies, but of their countrymen and fellow-citizens.- Bag.
] 40: This is translated by Molzberger, "Therefore the priests let their hair
hang down," &c.

41: swfrosunh .

42: Compare, on all this, the Church History and notes, and also the Prolegomena
to this work.

43: Or "groves."

44: [ Onper katafusin dedwkaj fusij 45: Probably meaning rains.

46: [Constantine seems here to allude to the Gentile deities as powers of evil,
capable, if unrestrained by a superior power, of working universal ruin.- Bag. ]

47: The editorial "we" used by Bag. throughout these edicts has been retained,
although the first person singular is employed throughout in the original.

48:

49: "Demoniacal." 1709 renders "diabolical."

50: It was at Alexandria that the controversy with Arius arose.He was called to
account by Alexander of Alexandria who summoned one council and then another, at
which Arius and his followers were excommunicated.

51:

52: [Hosius, bishop of Cordova.- Bag. ] Hosius had already been for some time a
trusted adviser, having acted for Constantine also in the Donatist matters.
Compare on Hosius the full article of Morse in Smith and Wace.

53: By "acting as umpire."

54: [Licinius, whose prohibition of synods is referred to in Bk. 1, ch. 51. The
disputes here mentioned are those between the Catholic Christians and the
Donatists, a very violent sect which sprung up in Africa after the persecution
by Diocletian.- Bag. ] 55: [Africa: alluding to the schism of the Donatists.-
Bag. ] 56: Or "mutual."

57: [The word nomoj

58: The plain English "stuck to" represents the idea of Heinichen ( animo
infixisses infixunique teneres ) followed by Molz ( mit unkluger Hartnackigkeit
festhieltest ). Bag. had "gave utterance to," and with this Vales., 1709, and
Str. correspond.

59: Bag., "The meeting of the synod was prohibited."

60: On "forgiveness."

61: Rendered "forbearance" above.

62: [The emperor seems at this time to have had a very imperfect knowledge of
the errors of the Arian heresy. After the Council of Nice, at which he heard
them fully explained, he wrote of them in terms of decisive condemnation in his
letter to the Alexandrian church. Vide Socrates' Eccles. Hist., Bk. 1, ch. 9.-
Bag. ] Neither at this time nor at any time does Constantine seem to have
entered very fully into an appreciation of doctrinal niceties. Later he was more
than tolerant of semi-Arianism. He seems to have depended a good deal on the
"explanations" of others, and to have been led in a somewhat devious path in
trying to follow all.

63: [Hosius of Cordova, mentioned above, ch. 63.- Bag. ]


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 24: THE LIFE OF THE BLESSED EMPEROR CONSTANTINE - BOOK 3
========================================================================

Book III.

Chapter I. A Comparison of Constantine's Piety with the Wickedness of the
Persecutors.

Chapter II. Father Remarks on Constantine's Piety, and His Open Testimony to the
Sign of the Cross.

Chapter III. Of His Picture Surmounted by a Cross and Having Beneath It a
Dragon.

Chapter IV. A Farther Notice of the Controversies Raised in Egypt by Arius.

Chapter V. Of the Disagreement Respecting the Celebration of Easter.

Chapter VI. How He Ordered a Council to Be Held at Nicoea.

Chapter VII. Of the General Council, at Which Bishops from All Nations Were
Present.16 Chapter VIII. That the Assembly Was Composed, as in the Dots of the
Apostles, of Individuals from Various Nations.

Chapter IX. Of the Virtue and Age of the Two Hundred and Fifty Bishops.

Chapter X. Council in the Palace. Constantine, Entering, Took His Seat in the
Assembly.

Chapter XI. Silence of the Council, After Some Words by the the Bishop Eusebius.

Chapter XII. Constantine's Address to the Council Concerning Peace.27 Chapter
XIII. How He Led the Dissentient Bishops to Harmony of Sentiment.

Chapter XIV. Unanimous Declaration of the Council Concerning Faith, and the
Celebration of Easter.

Chapter XV. How Constantine Entertained the Bishops on the Occasion of His
Vicennalia.

Chapter XVI. Presents to the Bishops, and Letters to the People Generally.

Chapter XVII. Constantine's Letter to the Churches Respecting the Council at
Nicaea.

Chapter XVIII. He Speaks of Their Unanimity Respecting the Feast of Easter, and
Against the Practice of the Jews.

Chapter XIX. Exhortation to Follow the Example of the Greater Part of the World.

Chapter XX. Exhortation to Obey the Decrees of the Council.

Chapter XXI. Recommendation to the Bishops, on Their Departure, to Preserve
Harmony.

Chapter XXII. How He Dismissed Some, and Wrote Letters to Others; Also His
Presents.

Chapter XXIII. How He Wrote to the Egyptians, Exhorting Them to Peace.

Chapter XXIV. How He Wrote Frequent Letters of a Religious Character to the
Bishops and People.

Chapter XXV. How He Ordered the Erection of a Church at Jerusalem, in the Holy
Place of Our Saviour's Resurrection.

Chapter XXVI. That the Holy Sepulchre Had Been Covered with Rubbish and with
Idols by the Ungodly.

Chapter XXVII. How Constantine Commanded the Materials of the Idol Temple, and
the Soil Itself, to Be Removed at a Distance.

Chapter XXVIII. Discovery of the Most Holy Sepulchre.40

Chapter XXIX. How He Wrote Concerning the Erection of a Church, Both to the
Governors of the Provinces, and to the Bishop Macarius.

Chapter XXX. Constantine's Letter to Macarius Respecting the Building of the
Church of Our Saviour.

Chapter XXXI. That the Building Should Surpass All the Churches in the World in
the Beauty of Its Walls, Its Columns, and Marbles.

Chapter XXXII. That He Instructed the Governors Concerning the Beautifying of
the Roof; Also Concerning Workmen, and Materials.

Chapter XXXIII. How the Church of Our Saviour, the New Jerusalem Prophesied of
in Scripture, Was Built.

Chapter XXXIV. Description of the Structure of the Holy Sepulchre.

Chapter XXXV. Description of the Atrium and Porticos.

Chapter XXXVI. Description of the Walls, Roof, Decoration, and Gilding of the
Body of the Church.

Chapter XXXVII. Description of the Double Porticos on Either Side, and of the
Three Eastern Gates.

Chapter XXXVIII. Description of the Hemisphere, the Twelve Columns, and Their
Bowls.

Chapter XXXIX. Description of the Inner Court, the Arcades and Porches.

Chapter XL. Of the Number of His Offerings.

Chapter XLI. Of the Erection of Churches in Bethlehem, and an the Mount of
Olives.

Chapter XLII. That the Empress Helena,52 Constantine's Mother, Having Visited
This Locality for Devotional Purposes, Built These Churches.

Chapter XLIII. A Farther Notice of the Churches at Bethlehem.

Chapter XLIV. Of Helena's Generosity and Beneficent Acts.

Chapter XLV. Helena's Pious Conduct in the Churches.

Chapter XLVI. How She Made Her Will, and Died at the Age of Eighty Years.

Chapter XLVII. How Constantine Buried His Mother, and How He Honored Her During
Her Life.

Chapter XLVIII. How He Built Churches in Honor of Martyrs, and Abolished
Idolatry at Constantinople.

Chapter XLIX. Representation of the Cross in the Palace, and of Daniel at the
Public Fountains.

Chapter L. That He Erected Churches in Nicomedia, and in Other Cities.

Chapter LI. That He Ordered a Church to Be Built at Mambre.

Chapter LII. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius Concerning Mambre.

Chapter LIII. That the Saviour Appeared in This Place to Abraham.

Chapter LIV. Destruction of Idol Temples and Images Everywhere.

Chapter LV. Overthrow of an Idol Temple, and Abolition of Licentious Practices,
at Aphaca in Phoenicia.

Chapter LVI. Destruction of the Temple of Aesculapius at Egaae.68 Chapter LVII.
How the Gentiles Abandoned Idol Worship, and Turned to the Knowledge of God.

Chapter LVIII. How He Destroyed the Temple of Venus at Heliopolis, and Built the
First Church in that City.

Chapter LIX. Of the Disturbance at Antioch by Eustathius.

Chapter LX. Constantine's Letter to the Antiochians, Directing Them Not to
Withdraw Eusebius from Caesarea, But to Seek Some One Else.

Chapter LXI. The Emperor's Letter to Eusebius Praising Him for Refusing the
Bishopric of Antioch.

Chapter LXII. Constantine's Letter to the Council, Depreciating the Removal of
Eusebius from Caesarea.

Chapter LXIII. How He Displayed His Zeal for the Extirpation of Heresies.

Chapter LXIV. Constantine's Edict Against the Heretics.

Chapter LXV. The Heretics are Deprived of Their Meeting Places.

Chapter LXVI. How on the Discovery of Prohibited Books Among the Heretics, Many
of Them Return to the Catholic Church.

Book III.

Chapter I. A Comparison of Constantine's Piety with the Wickedness of the
Persecutors. In this manner that spirit who is the hater of good, actuated by
envy at the blessing enjoyed by the Church, continued to raise against her the
stormy troubles of intestine discord, in the midst of a period of peace and joy.
Meanwhile, however, the divinely-favored emperor did not slight the duties
befitting him, but exhibited in his whole conduct a direct contrast to those
atrocities of which the cruel tyrants had been lately guilty,1 and thus
triumphed over every enemy that opposed him. For in the first place, the
tyrants, being themselves alienated from the true God, had enforced by every
compulsion the worship of false deities: Constantine convinced mankind by
actions as well as words,2 that these bad but an imaginary existence, and
exhorted them to acknowledge the only true God. They had derided his Christ with
words of blasphemy: he assumed that as his safeguard3 against which they
directed their blasphemies, and gloried in the symbol of the Saviour's passion.
They had persecuted and driven from house and home the servants of Christ: he
recalled them every one, and restored them to their native homes. They had
covered them with dishonor: he made their condition honorable and enviable in
the eyes of all. They had shamefully plundered and sold the goods of godly men:
Constantine not only replaced this loss, but still further enriched them with
abundant presents. They had circulated injurious calumnies, through their
written ordinances, against the prelates of the Church: he on the contrary,
conferred dignity on these individuals by personal marks of honor, and by his
edicts and statutes raised them to higher distinction than before. They had
utterly demolished and razed to the ground the houses of prayer: he commanded
that those which still existed should be enlarged, and that new ones should be
raised on a magnificent scale at the expense of the imperial treasury. They had
ordered the inspired records to be burnt and utterly destroyed: he decreed that
copies of them should be multiplied, and magnificently adorned4 at the charge of
the imperial treasury. They had strictly forbidden the prelates, anywhere or on
any occasion, to convene synods; whereas he gathered them to his court from
every province, received them into his palace, and even to his own private
apartments and thought them worthy to share his home and table. They had honored
the demons with offerings: Constantine exposed their error, and continually
distributed the now useless materials for sacrifice, to those who would apply
them to a better use. They had ordered the pagan temples to be sumptuously
adorned: he razed to their foundations those of them which had been the chief
objects of superstitious reverence. They had subjected God's servants to the
most ignominious punishments: he took vengeance on the persecutors, and
inflicted on them just chastisement in the name of God, while he held the memory
of his holy martyrs in constant veneration. They had driven God's Worshipers
from the imperial palaces: he placed full confidence in them at all times, and
knowing them to be the better disposed and more faithful than any beside. They,
the victims of avarice, voluntarily subjected themselves as it were to the pangs
of Tantalus: he with royal magnificence unlocked all his treasures, and
distributed his gifts with rich and high-souled liberality They committed
countless murders, that they might plunder or confiscate the wealth of their
victims; while throughout the reign of Constantine the sword of justice hung
idle everywhere, and both people and municipal magistrates5 in every provence
were governed rather by paternal authority than by any constraining.6 Surely it
must seem to all who duly regard these facts, that a new and fresh era of
existence had begun to appear, and a light heretofore unknown suddenly to dawn
from the midst of darkness on the human race: and all must confess that these
things were entirely the work of God, who raised up this pious emperor to
withstand the multitude of the ungodly.

Chapter II. Father Remarks on Constantine's Piety, and His Open Testimony to the
Sign of the Cross. And when we consider that their iniquities were without
example, and the atrocities which they dared to perpetrate against the Church
such as had never been heard of in any age of the world, well might God himself
bring before us something entirely new, and work thereby effects such as had
hitherto been never either recorded or observed. And what miracle was ever more
marvelous than the virtues of this our emperor, whom the wisdom of God has
vouchsafed as a gift to the human race? For truly he maintained a continual
testimony to the Christ of God with all boldness, and before all men; and so far
was he from shrinking from an open profession of the Christian name, that he
rather desired to make it manifest to all that he regarded this as his highest
honor, now impressing on his face the salutary sign, and now glorying in it as
the trophy which led him on to victory.7 Chapter III. Of His Picture Surmounted
by a Cross and Having Beneath It a Dragon. And besides this, he caused to be
painted on a lofty tablet, and set up in the front of the portico of his palace,
so as to be visible to all, a representation of the salutary sign placed above
his head, and below it that hateful and savage adversary of mankind, who by
means of the tyranny of the ungodly had wasted the Church of God, falling
headlong, under the form of a dragon, to the abyss of destruction. For the
sacred oracles in the books of God's prophets have described him as a dragon and
a crooked serpent;8 and for this reason the emperor thus publicly displayed a
painted9 resemblance of the dragon beneath his own and his children's feet,
stricken through with a dart, and cast headlong into the depths of the sea. In
this manner he intended to represent the secret adversary of the human race, and
to indicate that he was consigned to the gulf of perdition by virtue of the
salutary trophy placed above his head. This allegory, then, was thus conveyed by
means of the colors of a picture: and I am filled with wonder at the
intellectual greatness of the emperor, who as if by divine inspiration thus
expressed what the prophets had foretold concerning this monster, saying that
"God would bring his great and strong and terrible sword against the dragon, the
flying serpent; and would destroy the dragon that was in the sea."10 This it was
of which the emperor gave a true and faithful representation in the picture
above described.

Chapter IV. A Farther Notice of the Controversies Raised in Egypt by Arius. In
such occupations as these he employed himself with pleasure: but the effects of
that envious spirit which so troubled the peace of the churches of God in
Alexandria, together with the Theban and Egyptian schism, continued to cause him
no little disturbance of mind. For in fact, in every city bishops were engaged
in obstinate conflict with bishops, and people rising against people; and almost
like the fabled Symplegades,11 coming into violent collision with each other.
Nay, some were so far transported beyond the bounds of reason as to be guilty of
reckless and outrageous conduct, and even to insult the statues of the emperor.
This state of things had little power to excite his anger, but rather caused in
him sorrow of spirit; for he deeply deplored the folly thus exhibited by
deranged men.

Chapter V. Of the Disagreement Respecting the Celebration of Easter. But before
this time another most virulent disorder had existed, and long afflicted the
Church; I mean the difference respecting the salutary feast of Easter.12 For
while one party asserted that the Jewish custom should be adhered to, the other
affirmed that the exact recurrence of the period should be observed, without
following the authority of those who were in error, and strangers to gospel
grace.

Accordingly, the people being thus in every place divided in respect of this,13
and the sacred observances of religion confounded for a long period (insomuch
that the diversity of judgment in regard to the time for celebrating one and the
same feast caused the greatest disagreement between those who kept it, some
afflicting themselves with fastings and austerities, while others devoted their
time to festive relaxation), no one appeared who was capable of devising a
remedy for the evil, because the controversy continued equally balanced between
both parties. To God alone, the Almighty, was the healing of these differences
an easy task; and Constantine appeared to be the only one on earth capable of
being his minister for this good end. For as soon as he was made acquainted with
the facts which I have described, and perceived that his letter to the
Alexandrian Christians had failed to produce its due effect, he at once aroused
the energies of his mind, and declared that he must prosecute to the utmost this
war also against the secret adversary who was disturbing the peace of the
Church.

Chapter VI. How He Ordered a Council to Be Held at Nicoea.

Then as if to bring a divine array against this enemy, he convoked a general
council, and invited the speedy attendance of bishops from all quarters, in
letters expressive of the honorable estimation in which he held them. Nor was
this merely the issuing of a bare command but the emperor's good will
contributed much to its being carried into effect: for he allowed some the use
of the public means of conveyance, while he afforded to others an ample supply
of horses14 for their transport. The place, too, selected for the synod, the
city Nicaea in Bithynia (named from "Victory"), was appropriate to the
occasion.15 As soon then as the imperial injunction was generally made known,
all with the utmost willingness hastened thither, as though they would outstrip
one another in a race; for they were impelled by the anticipation of a happy
result to the conference, by the hope of enjoying present peace, and the desire
of beholding something new and strange in the person of so admirable an emperor.
Now when they were all assembled, it appeared evident that the proceeding was
the work of God, inasmuch as men who had been most widely separated, not merely
in sentiment but also personally, and by difference of country, place, and
nation, were here brought together, and comprised within the walls of a single
city, forming as it were a vast garland of priests, composed of a variety of the
choicest flowers.

Chapter VII. Of the General Council, at Which Bishops from All Nations Were
Present.16 In effect, the most distinguished of God's ministers from all the
churches which abounded in Europe, Lybia,17 and Asia were here assembled. And a
single house of prayer, as though divinely enlarged, sufficed to contain at once
Syrians and Cilicians, Phoenicians and Arabians, delegates from Palestine, and
others from Egypt; Thebans and Libyans, with those who came from the region of
Mesopotamia. A Persian bishop too was present at this conference, nor was even a
Scythian found wanting to the number.18 Pontus, Galatia, and Pamphylia,
Cappadocia, Asia, and Phrygia, furnished their most distinguished prelates;
while those who dwelt in the remotest districts of Thrace and Macedonia, of
Achaia and Epirus, were notwithstanding in attendance. Even from Spain itself,
one whose fame was widely spread took his seat as an individual in the great
assembly.19 The prelate of the imperial city20 was prevented from attending by
extreme old age; but his presbyters were present, and supplied his place.
Constantine is the first prince of any age who bound together such a garland as
this with the bond of peace, and presented it to his Saviour as a thank-offering
for the victories he had obtained over every foe, thus exhibiting in our own
times a similitude of the apostolic company.

Chapter VIII. That the Assembly Was Composed, as in the Dots of the Apostles, of
Individuals from Various Nations. For it is said21 that in the Apostles' age,
there were gathered "devout men from every nation under heaven"; among whom were
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, in Judea,
and Cappadocia, in Pontus and Asia, in Phrygia and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and the
parts of Libya about Cyrene; and sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes,
Cretans and Arabians. But that assembly was less, in that not all who composed
it were ministers of God; but in the present company, the number of bishops
exceeded two hundred and fifty,22 while that of the presbyters and deacons in
their train, and the crowd of acolytes and other attendants was altogether
beyond computation.

Chapter IX. Of the Virtue and Age of the Two Hundred and Fifty Bishops. Of these
ministers of God, some were distinguished by wisdom and eloquence, others by the
gravity of their lives, and by patient fortitude of character, while others
again united in themselves all these graces.23 There were among them men whose
years demanded veneration: others were younger, and in the prime of mental
vigor; and some had but recently entered on the course of their ministry. For
the maintenance of all ample provision was daily furnished by the emperor's
command.

Chapter X. Council in the Palace. Constantine, Entering, Took His Seat in the
Assembly.

Now when the appointed day arrived on which the council met for the final
solution of the questions in dispute, each member was present for this in the
central building of the palace,24 which appeared to exceed the rest in
magnitude. On each side of the interior of this were many seats disposed in
order, which were occupied by those who had been invited to attend, according to
their rank. As soon, then, as the whole assembly had seated themselves with
becoming orderliness, a general silence prevailed, in expectation of the
emperor's arrival. And first of all, three of his immediate family entered in
succession, then others also preceded his approach, not of the soldiers or
guards who usually accompanied him, but only friends in the faith. And now, all
rising at the signal which indicated the emperor's entrance, at last he himself
proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of
God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light,
reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant
splendor of gold and precious stones. Such was the external appearance of his
person; and with regard to his mind, it was evident that he was distinguished by
piety and godly fear. This was indicated by his downcast eyes, the blush on his
countenance, and his gait. For the rest of his personal excellencies, he
surpassed all present in height of stature and beauty of form, as well as in
majestic dignity of mien, and invincible strength and vigor. All these graces,
united to a suavity of manner, and a serenity becoming his imperial station,
declared the excellence of his mental qualities to be above all praise.25 As
soon as he had advanced to the upper end of the seats, at first he remained
standing, and when a low chair of wrought gold had been set for him, he waited
until the bishops had beckoned to him, and then sat down, and after him the
whole assembly did the same.

Chapter XI. Silence of the Council, After Some Words by the the Bishop Eusebius.
The bishop who occupied the chief place in the right division of the assembly26
then rose, and, addressing the emperor, delivered a concise speech, in a strain
of thanksgiving to Almighty God on his behalf. When he had resumed his seat,
silence ensued, and all regarded the emperor with fixed attention; on which he
looked serenely round on the assembly with a cheerful aspect, and, having
collected his thoughts, in a calm and gentle tone gave utterance to the
following words.

Chapter XII. Constantine's Address to the Council Concerning Peace.27

"It was once my chief desire, dearest friends, to enjoy the spectacle of your
united presence; and now that this desire is fulfilled, I feel myself bound to
render thanks to God the universal King, because, in addition to all his other
benefits, he has granted me a blessing higher than all the rest, in permitting
me to see you not only all assembled together, but all united in a common
harmony of sentiment. I pray therefore that no malignant adversary may
henceforth interfere to mar our happy state; I pray that, now the impious
hostility of the tyrants has been forever removed by the power of God our
Saviour, that spirit who delights in evil may devise no other means for exposing
the divine law to blasphemous calumny; for, in my judgment, intestine strife
within the Church of God, is far more evil and dangerous than any kind of war or
conflict; and these our differences appear to me more grievous than any outward
trouble. Accordingly, when, by the will and with the co-operation of God, I had
been victorious over my enemies, I thought that nothing more remained but to
render thanks to him, and sympathize in the joy of those whom he had restored to
freedom through my instrumentality; as soon as I heard that intelligence which I
had least expected to receive, I mean the news of your dissension, I judged it
to be of no secondary importance, but with the earnest desire that a remedy for
this evil also might be found through my means, I immediately sent to require
your presence. And now I rejoice in beholding your assembly; but I feel that my
desires will be most completely fulfilled when I can see you all united in one
judgment, and that common spirit of peace and concord prevailing amongst you
all, which it becomes you, as consecrated to the service of God, to commend to
others. Delay not, then, dear friends: delay not, ye ministers of God, and
faithful servants of him who is our common Lord and Saviour: begin from this
moment to discard the causes of that disunion which has existed among you, and
remove the perplexities of controversy by embracing the principles of peace. For
by such conduct you will at the same time be acting in a manner most pleasing to
the supreme God, and you will confer an exceeding favor on me who am your
fellow-servant."

Chapter XIII. How He Led the Dissentient Bishops to Harmony of Sentiment. As
soon as the emperor had spoken these words in the Latin tongue, which another
interpreted, he gave permission to those who presided in the council to deliver
their opinions. On this some began to accuse their neighbors, who defended
themselves, and recriminated in their turn. In this manner numberless assertions
were put forth by each party, and a violent controversy arose at the very
commencement. Notwithstanding this, the emperor gave patient audience to all
alike, and received every proposition with steadfast attention, and by
occasionally assisting the argument of each party in turn, he gradually disposed
even the most vehement disputants to a reconciliation. At the same time, by the
affability of his address to all, and his use of the Greek language, with which
he was not altogether unacquainted, he appeared in a truly attractive and
amiable light, persuading some, convincing others by his reasonings, praising
those who spoke well, and urging all to unity of sentiment, until at last he
succeeded in bringing them to one mind and judgment respecting every disputed
question.

Chapter XIV. Unanimous Declaration of the Council Concerning Faith, and the
Celebration of Easter. The result was that they were not only united as
concerning the faith, but that the time for the celebration of the salutary
feast of Easter was agreed on by all. Those points also which were sanctioned by
the resolution of the whole body were committed to writing, and received the
signature of each several member.28 Then the emperor, believing that he had thus
obtained a second victory over the adversary of the Church, proceeded to
solemnize a triumphal festival in honor of God.

Chapter XV. How Constantine Entertained the Bishops on the Occasion of His
Vicennalia.

About this time he completed the twentieth year of his reign.29 On this occasion
public festivals were celebrated by the people of the provinces generally, but
the emperor himself invited and feasted with those ministers of God whom he had
reconciled, and thus offered as it were through them a suitable sacrifice to
God. Not one of the bishops was wanting at the imperial banquet,30 the
circumstances of which were splendid beyond description. Detachments of the
body-guard and other troops surrounded the entrance of the palace with drawn
swords, and through the midst of these the men of God proceeded without fear
into the innermost of the imperial apartments, in which some were the emperor's
own companions at table, while others reclined on couches arranged on either
side.31 One might have thought that a picture of Christ's kingdom was thus
shadowed forth, and a dream rather than reality.

Chapter XVI. Presents to the Bishops, and Letters to the People Generally.

After the celebration of this brilliant festival, the emperor courteously
received all his guests, and generously added to the favors he had already
bestowed by personally presenting gifts to each individual according to his
rank. He also gave information of the proceedings of the synod to those who had
not been present, by a letter in his own hand-writing. And this letter also I
will inscribe as it were on some monument by inserting it in this my narrative
of his life. It was as follows:

Chapter XVII. Constantine's Letter to the Churches Respecting the Council at
Nicaea.

"Constantinus Augustus, to the Churches.

"Having had full proof, in the general prosperity of the empire, how great the
favor of God has been towards us, I have judged that it ought to be the first
object of my endeavors, that unity of faith, sincerity of love, and community of
feeling in regard to the worship of Almighty God, might be preserved among the
highly favored multitude who compose the Catholic Church. And, inasmuch as this
object could not be effectually and certainly secured, unless all, or at least
the greater number of the bishops were to meet together, and a discussion of all
particulars relating to oar most holy religion to take place; for this reason as
numerous an assembly as possible has been convened, at which I myself was
present, as one among yourselves (and far be it from me to deny that which is my
greatest joy, that I am your fellow-servant), and every question received due
and full examination, until that judgment which God, who sees all things, could
approve, and which tended to unity and concord, was brought to light, so that no
room was left for further discussion or controversy in relation to the faith.

Chapter XVIII. He Speaks of Their Unanimity Respecting the Feast of Easter, and
Against the Practice of the Jews.

"At this meeting the question concerning the most holy day of Easter was
discussed, and it was resolved by the united judgment of all present, that this
feast ought to be kept by all and in every place on one and the same day. For
what can be more becoming or honorable to us than that this feast from which we
date our hopes of immortality, should be observed unfailingly by all alike,
according to one ascertained order and arrangement? And first of all, it
appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we
should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands
with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of
soul. For we have it in our power, if we abandon their custom, to prolong the
due observance of this ordinance to future ages, by a truer order, which we have
preserved from the very day of the passion until the present time. Let us then
have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received
from our Saviour a different way. A course at once legitimate and honorable lies
open to our most holy religion. Beloved brethren, let us with one consent adopt
this course, and withdraw ourselves from all participation in their baseness.32
For their boast is absurd indeed, that it is not in our power without
instruction from them to observe these things. For how should they be capable of
forming a sound judgment, who, since their parricidal guilt in slaying their
Lord, have been subject to the direction, not of reason, but of ungoverned
passion, and are swayed by every impulse of the mad spirit that is in them?
Hence it is that on this point as well as others they have no perception of the
truth, so that, being altogether ignorant of the true adjustment of this
question, they sometimes celebrate Easter twice in the same year. Why then
should we follow those who are confessedly in grievous error? Surely we shall
never consent to keep this feast a second time in the same year. But supposing
these reasons were not of sufficient weight, still it would be incumbent on your
Sagacities33 to strive and pray continually that the purity of your souls may
not seem in anything to be sullied by fellowship with the customs of these most
wicked men. We must consider, too, that a discordant judgment in a case of such
importance, and respecting such religious festival, is wrong. For our Saviour
has left us one feast in commemoration of the day of our deliverance, I mean the
day of his most holy passion; and he has willed that his Catholic Church should
be one, the members of which, however scattered in many and diverse places, are
yet cherished by one pervading spirit, that is, by the will of God. And let your
Holinesses' sagacity reflect how grievous and scandalous it is that on the
self-same days some should be engaged in fasting, others in festive enjoyment;
and again, that after the days of Easter some should be present at banquets and
amusements, while others are fulfilling the appointed fasts. It is, then,
plainly the will of Divine Providence (as I suppose you all clearly see), that
this usage should receive fitting correction, and be reduced to one uniform
rule.

Chapter XIX. Exhortation to Follow the Example of the Greater Part of the World.

"Since, therefore, it was needful that this matter should be rectified, so that
we might have nothing in common with that nation of parricides who slew their
Lord: and since that arrangement is consistent with propriety which is observed
by all the churches of the western, southern, and northern parts of the world,
and by some of the eastern also: for these reasons all are unanimous on this
present occasion in thinking it worthy of adoption. And I myself have undertaken
that this decision should meet with the approval of your Sagacities,34 in the
hope that your Wisdoms35 will gladly admit that practice which is observed at
once in the city of Rome, and in Africa; throughout Italy, and in Egypt, in
Spain, the Gauls, Britain, Libya, and the whole of Greece; in the dioceses of
Asia and Pontus, and in Cilicia, with entire unity of judgment. And you will
consider not only that the number of churches is far greater in the regions I
have enumerated than in any other, but also that it is most fitting that all
should unite in desiring that which sound reason appears to demand, and in
avoiding all participation in the perjured conduct of the Jews.36 In fine, that
I may express my meaning in as few words as possible, it has been determined by
the common judgment of all, that the most holy feast of Easter should be kept on
one and the same day. For on the one hand a discrepancy of opinion on so sacred
a question is unbecoming, and on the other it is surely best to act on a
decision which is free from strange folly and error.

Chapter XX. Exhortation to Obey the Decrees of the Council.

"Receive, then, with all willingness this truly Divine injunction, and regard it
as in truth the gift of God. For whatever is determined in the holy assemblies
of the bishops is to be regarded as indicative of the Divine will. As soon,
therefore, as you have communicated these proceedings to all our beloved
brethren, you are bound from that time forward to adopt for yourselves, and to
enjoin on others the arrangement above mentioned, and the due observance of this
most sacred day; that whenever I come into the presence of your love, which I
have long desired, I may have it in my power to celebrate the holy feast with
you on the same day, and may rejoice with you on all accounts, when I behold the
cruel power of Satan removed by Divine aid through the agency of our endeavors,
while your faith, and peace, and concord everywhere flourish. God preserve you,
beloved brethren."| The emperor transmitted a faithful copy37 of this letter to
every province, wherein they who read it might discern as in a mirror the pure
sincerity of his thoughts, and of his piety toward God.

Chapter XXI. Recommendation to the Bishops, on Their Departure, to Preserve
Harmony. And now, when the council was on the point of being finally dissolved,
he summoned all the bishops to meet him on an appointed day, and on their
arrival addressed them in a farewell speech, in which he recommended them to be
diligent in the maintenance of peace, to avoid contentious disputations, amongst
themselves and not to be jealous, if any one of their number should appear
pre-eminent for wisdom and eloquence, but to esteem the excellence of one a
blessing common to all. On the other hand he reminded them that the more gifted
should forbear to exalt themselves to the prejudice of their humbler brethren,
since it is God's prerogative to judge of real superiority. Rather should they
considerately condescend to the weaker, remembering that absolute perfection in
any case is a rare quality indeed. Each then, should be willing to accord
indulgence to the other for slight offenses, to regard charitably and pass over
mere human weaknesses; holding mutual harmony in the highest honor, that no
occasion of mockery might be given by their dissensions to those who are ever
ready to blaspheme the word of God: whom indeed we should do all in our power to
save, and this cannot be unless our conduct seems to them attractive. But you
are well aware of the fact that testimony is by no means productive of blessing
to all, since some who hear are glad to secure the supply of their mere bodily
necessities, while others court the patronage of their superiors; some fix their
affection on those who treat them with hospitable kindness, others again, being
honored with presents, love their benefactors in return; but few are they who
really desire the word of testimony, and rare indeed is it to find a friend of
truth. Hence the necessity of endeavoring to meet the case of all, and,
physician-like, to administer to each that which may tend to the health of the
soul, to the end that the saving doctrine may be fully honored by all. Of this
kind was the former part of his exhortation;38 and in conclusion he enjoined
them to offer diligent supplications to God on his behalf. Having thus taken
leave of them, he gave them all permission to return to their respective
countries; and this they did with joy, and thenceforward that unity of judgment
at which they had arrived in the emperor's presence continued to prevail, and
those who had long been divided were bound together as members of the same body.

Chapter XXII. How He Dismissed Some, and Wrote Letters to Others; Also His
Presents.

Full of joy therefore at this success, the emperor presented as it were pleasant
fruits in the way of letters to those who had not been present at the council.
He commanded also that ample gifts of money should be bestowed on all the
people, both in the country and the cities, being pleased thus to honor the
festive occasion of the twentieth anniversary of his reign.

Chapter XXIII. How He Wrote to the Egyptians, Exhorting Them to Peace. And now,
when all else were at peace, among the Egyptians alone an implacable contention
still raged,39 so as once more to disturb the emperor's tranquillity, though not
to excite his anger. For indeed he treated the contending parties with all
respect, as fathers, nay rather, as prophets of God; and again he summoned them
to his presence, and again patiently acted as mediator between them, and honored
them with gifts, and communicated also the result of his arbitration by letter.
He confirmed and sanctioned the decrees of the council, and called on them to
strive earnestly for concord, and not to distract and rend the Church, but to
keep before them the thought of God's judgment. And these injunctions the
emperor sent by a letter written with his own hand.

Chapter XXIV. How He Wrote Frequent Letters of a Religious Character to the
Bishops and People. But besides these, his writings are very numerous on kindred
subjects, and he was the author of a multitude of letters, some to the bishops,
in which he laid injunctions on them tending to the advantage of the churches of
God; and sometimes the thrice blessed one addressed the people of the churches
generally, calling them his own brethren and fellow-servants. But perhaps we may
hereafter find leisure to collect these despatches in a separate form, in order
that the integrity of our present history may not be impaired by their
insertion.

Chapter XXV. How He Ordered the Erection of a Church at Jerusalem, in the Holy
Place of Our Saviour's Resurrection.

After these things, the pious emperor addressed himself to another work truly
worthy of record, in the province of Palestine. What then was this work? He
judged it incumbent on him to render the blessed locality of our Saviour's
resurrection an object of attraction and veneration to all. He issued immediate
injunctions, therefore, for the erection in that spot of a house of prayer: and
this he did, not on the mere natural impulse of his own mind, but being moved in
spirit by the Saviour himself.

Chapter XXVI. That the Holy Sepulchre Had Been Covered with Rubbish and with
Idols by the Ungodly. For it had been in time past the endeavor of impious men
(or rather let me say of the whole race of evil spirits through their means), to
consign to the darkness of oblivion that divine monument of immortality to which
the radiant angel had descended from heaven, and rolled away the stone for those
who still had stony hearts, and who supposed that the living One still lay among
the dead; and had declared glad tidings to the women also, and removed their
stony-hearted unbelief by the conviction that he whom they sought was alive.
This sacred cave, then, certain impious and godless persons had thought to
remove entirely from the eyes of men, supposing in their folly that thus they
should be able effectually to obscure the truth. Accordingly they brought a
quantity of earth from a distance with much labor, and covered the entire spot;
then, having raised this to a moderate height, they paved it with stone,
concealing the holy cave beneath this massive mound. Then, as though their
purpose had been effectually accomplished, they prepare on this foundation a
truly dreadful sepulchre of souls, by building a gloomy shrine of lifeless idols
to the impure spirit whom they call Venus, and offering detestable oblations
therein on profane and accursed altars. For they supposed that their object
could not otherwise be fully attained, than by thus burying the sacred cave
beneath these foul pollutions. Unhappy men! they were unable to comprehend how
impossible it was that their attempt should remain unknown to him who had been
crowned with victory over death, any more than the blazing sun, when he rises
above the earth, and holds his wonted course through the midst of heaven, is
unseen by the whole race of mankind. Indeed, his saving power, shining with
still greater brightness, and illumining, not the bodies, but the souls of men,
was already filling the world with the effulgence of its own light.
Nevertheless, these devices of impious and wicked men against the truth had
prevailed for a long time, nor had any one of the governors, or military
commanders, or even of the emperors themselves ever yet appeared, with ability
to abolish these daring impieties, save only that one who enjoyed the favor of
the King of kings. And now, acting as he did under the guidance of the divine
Spirit, he could not consent to see the sacred spot of which we have spoken,
thus buried, through the devices of the adversaries, under every kind of
impurity, and abandoned to forgetfulness and neglect; nor would he yield to the
malice of those who had contracted this guilt, but calling on the divine aid,
gave orders that the place should be thoroughly purified, thinking that the
parts which had been most polluted by the enemy ought to receive special tokens,
through his means, of the greatness of the divine favor. As soon, then, as his
commands were issued, these engines of deceit were cast down from their proud
eminence to the very ground, and the dwelling-places of error, with the statues
and the evil spirits which they represented, were overthrown and utterly
destroyed.

Chapter XXVII. How Constantine Commanded the Materials of the Idol Temple, and
the Soil Itself, to Be Removed at a Distance. Nor did the emperor's zeal stop
here; but he gave further orders that the materials of what was thus destroyed,
both stone and timber, should be removed and thrown as far from the spot as
possible; and this command also was speedily executed. The emperor, however, was
not satisfied with having proceeded thus far: once more, fired with holy ardor,
he directed that the ground itself should be dug up to a considerable depth, and
the soil which had been polluted by the foul impurities of demon worship
transported to a far distant place.

Chapter XXVIII. Discovery of the Most Holy Sepulchre.40 This also was
accomplished without delay. But as soon as the original surface of the ground,
beneath the covering of earth, appeared, immediately, and contrary to all
expectation, the venerable and hollowed monument of our Saviour's resurrection
was discovered. Then indeed did this most holy cave present a faithful simili-
tude of his return to life, in that, after lying buried in darkness, it again
emerged to light, and afforded to all who came to witness the sight, a clear and
visible proof of the wonders of which that spot had once been the scene, a
testimony to the resurrection of the Saviour clearer than any voice could give.

Chapter XXIX. How He Wrote Concerning the Erection of a Church, Both to the
Governors of the Provinces, and to the Bishop Macarius.

Immediately after the transactions I have recorded, the emperor sent forth
injunctions which breathed a truly pious spirit, at the same time granting ample
supplies of money, and commanding that a house of prayer worthy of the worship
of God should be erected near the Saviour's tomb on a scale of rich and royal
greatness. This object he had indeed for some time kept in view, and had
foreseen, as if by the aid of a superior intelligence, that which should
afterwards come to pass. He laid his commands, therefore, on the governors of
the Eastern provinces, that by an abundant and unsparing expenditure they should
secure the completion of the work on a scale of noble and ample magnificence. He
also despatched the following letter to the bishop who at that time presided
over the church at Jerusalem, in which he clearly asserted the saving doctrine
of the faith, writing in these terms.

Chapter XXX. Constantine's Letter to Macarius Respecting the Building of the
Church of Our Saviour.

"Victor Constantius, Maximus Augustus, to Macarius.

1 "Such is our Saviour's grace, that no power of language seems adequate to
describe the wondrous circumstance to which I am about to refer. For, that the
monument of his most holy Passion, so long ago buried beneath the ground, should
have remained unknown for so long a series of years, until its reappearance to
his servants now set free through the removal of him41 who was the common enemy
of all, is a fact which truly surpasses all admiration. For if all who are
accounted wise throughout the world were to unite in their endeavors to say
somewhat worthy of this event, they would be unable to attain their object in
the smallest degree. Indeed, the nature of this miracle as far transcends the
capacity of human reason as heavenly things are superior to human affairs. For
this cause it is ever my first, and indeed my only object, that, as the
authority of the truth is evincing itself daily by fresh wonders, so our souls
may all become more zealous, with all sobriety and earnest unanimity, for the
honor of the Divine law. I desire, therefore, especially, that you should be
persuaded of that which I suppose is evident to all beside, namely, that I have
no greater care than how I may best adorn with a splendid structure that sacred
spot, which, under Divine direction, I have disencumbered as it were of the
heavy weight of foul idol worship; a spot which has been accounted holy from the
beginning in God's judgment, but which now appears holier still, since it has
brought to light a clear assurance of our Saviour's passion.

Chapter XXXI. That the Building Should Surpass All the Churches in the World in
the Beauty of Its Walls, Its Columns, and Marbles.

1 "It will be well, therefore, for your sagacity to make such arrangements and
provision of all things needful for the work, that not only the church itself as
a whole may surpass all others whatsoever in beauty, but that the details of the
building may be of such a kind that the fairest structures in any city of the
empire may be excelled by this. And with respect to the erection and decoration
of the walls, this is to inform you that our friend Dracilianus, the deputy of
the Praetorian Praefects, and the governor of the province, have received a
charge from us. For our pious directions to them are to the effect that
artificers and laborers, and whatever they shall understand from your sagacity
to be needful for the advancement of the work, shall forthwith be furnished by
their care. And as to the columns and marbles, whatever you shall judge, after
actual inspection of the plan, to be especially precious and serviceable, be
diligent to send information to us in writing, in order that whatever quantity
or sort of materials we shall esteem from your letter to be needful, may be
procured from every quarter, as required, for it is fitting that the most
marvelous place in the world should be worthily decorated.

Chapter XXXII. That He Instructed the Governors Concerning the Beautifying of
the Roof; Also Concerning Workmen, and Materials.

"With respect to the ceiling42 of the church, I wish to know from you whether in
your judgment it should be panel-ceiled,43 or finished with any other kind of
workmanship. If the panel ceiling be adopted, it may also be ornamented with
gold. For the rest, your Holiness will give information as early as possible to
the before-mentioned magistrates how many laborers and artificers, and what
expenditure of money is required. You will also be careful to send us a report
without delay, not only respecting the marbles and columns, but the paneled
ceiling also, should this appear to you to be the most beautiful form. God
preserve you, beloved brother!"

Chapter XXXIII. How the Church of Our Saviour, the New Jerusalem Prophesied of
in Scripture, Was Built. This was the emperor's letter; and his directions were
at once carried into effect. Accordingly, on the very spot which witnessed the
Saviour's sufferings, a new Jerusalem was constructed, over against the one so
celebrated of old, which, since the foul stain of guilt brought on it by the
murder of the Lord, had experienced the last extremity of desolation, the effect
of Divine judgment on its impious people. It was opposite this city that the
emperor now began to rear a monument to the Saviour's victory over death, with
rich and lavish magnificence. And it may be that this was that second and new
Jerusalem spoken of in the predictions of the prophets,44 concerning which such
abundant testimony is given in the divinely inspired records.

First of all, then, he adorned the sacred cave itself, as the chief part of the
whole work, and the hallowed monument at which the angel radiant with light had
once declared to all that regeneration which was first manifested in the
Saviour's person.

Chapter XXXIV. Description of the Structure of the Holy Sepulchre. This
monument, therefore, first of all, as the chief part of the whole, the emperor's
zealous magnificence beautified with rare columns, anti profusely enriched with
the most splendid decorations of every kind.

Chapter XXXV. Description of the Atrium and Porticos. The next object of his
attention was a space of ground of great extent, and open to the pure air of
heaven. This he adorned with a pavement of finely polished stone, and enclosed
it on three sides with porticos of great length.

Chapter XXXVI. Description of the Walls, Roof, Decoration, and Gilding of the
Body of the Church. For at the side opposite to the cave, which was the eastern
side, the church itself was erected; a noble work rising to a vast height, and
of great extent both in length and breadth. The interior of this structure was
floored with marble slabs of various colors; while the external surface of the
walls, which shone with polished stones exactly fitted together, exhibited a
degree of splendor in no respect inferior to that of marble. With regard to the
roof, it was covered on the outside with lead, as a protection against the rains
of winter. But the inner part of the roof, which was finished with sculptured
panel work, extended in a series of connected compartments, like a vast sea,
over the whole church;45 and, being overlaid throughout with the purest gold,
caused the entire building to glitter as it were with rays of light.

Chapter XXXVII. Description of the Double Porticos on Either Side, and of the
Three Eastern Gates.

Besides this were two porticos on each side, with upper and lower ranges of
pillars,46 corresponding in length with the church itself; and these also had
their roofs ornamented with gold. Of these porticos, those which were exterior
to the church were supported by columns of great size, while those within these
rested on piles47 of stone beautifully adorned on the surface. Three gates,
placed exactly east, were intended to receive the multitudes who entered the
church.

Chapter XXXVIII. Description of the Hemisphere, the Twelve Columns, and Their
Bowls.

Opposite these gates the crowning part of the whole was the hemisphere,48 which
rose to the very summit of the church. This was encircled by twelve columns
(according to the number of the apostles of our Saviour), having their capitals
embellished with silver bowls of great size, which the emperor himself presented
as a splendid offering to his God.

Chapter XXXIX. Description of the Inner Court, the Arcades and Porches. In the
next place he enclosed the atrium which occupied the space leading to the
entrances in front of the church. This comprehended, first the court, then the
porticos on each side, and lastly the gates of the court. After these, in the
midst of the open market-place,49 the general entrance-gates, which were of
exquisite workmanship, afforded to passers-by on the outside a view of the
interior which could not fail to inspire astonishment.

Chapter XL. Of the Number of His Offerings. This temple, then, the emperor
erected as a conspicuous monument of the Saviour's resurrection, and embellished
it throughout on an imperial scale of magnificence. He further enriched it with
numberless offerings of inexpressible beauty and various materials,-gold,
silver, and precious stones, the skillful and elaborate arrangement of which, in
regard to their magnitude, number, and variety, we have not leisure at present
to describe particularly.50 Chapter XLI. Of the Erection of Churches in
Bethlehem, and an the Mount of Olives. In the same country he discovered other
places, venerable as being the localities of two sacred caves: and these also he
adorned with lavish magnificence. In the one case, he rendered due honor to that
which had been the scene of the first manifestation of our Saviour's divine
presence, when he submitted to be born in mortal flesh; while in the case of the
second cavern he hallowed the remembrance of his ascension to heaven from the
mountain top. And while he thus nobly testified his reverence for these places,
he at the same time eternized the memory of his mother,51 who had been the
instrument of conferring so valuable a benefit on mankind.

Chapter XLII. That the Empress Helena,52 Constantine's Mother, Having Visited
This Locality for Devotional Purposes, Built These Churches. For she, having
resolved to discharge the duties of pious devotion to the God, the King of
kings, and feeling it incumbent on her to render thanksgivings with prayers on
behalf both of her own son, now so mighty an emperor, and of his sons, her own
grandchildren, the divinely favored Caesars, though now advanced in years, yet
gifted with no common degree of wisdom, had hastened with youthful alacrity to
survey this venerable land; and at the same time to visit the eastern provinces,
cities, and people, with a truly imperial solicitude. As soon, then, as she had
rendered due reverence to the ground which the Saviour's feet had trodden,
according to the prophetic word which says53 "Let us worship at the place
whereon his feet have stood," she immediately bequeathed the fruit of her piety
to future generations.

Chapter XLIII. A Farther Notice of the Churches at Bethlehem. For without delay
she dedicated two churches to the God whom she adored, one at the grotto which
had been the scene of the Saviour's birth; the other on the mount of his
ascension. For he who was "God with us" had submitted to be born even in a
cave54 of the earth, and the place of his nativity was called Bethlehem by the
Hebrews. Accordingly the pious empress honored with rare memorials the scene of
her travail who bore this heavenly child, and beautified the sacred cave with
all possible splendor. The emperor himself soon after testified his reverence
for the spot by princely offerings, and added to his mother's magnificence by
costly presents of silver and gold, and embroidered hangings. And farther, the
mother of the emperor raised a stately structure on the Mount of Olives also, in
memory of his ascent to heaven who is the Saviour of mankind, erecting a sacred
church and temple on the very summit of the mount. And indeed authentic history
informs us that in this very cave the Saviour imparted his secret revelations to
his disciples.55 And here also the emperor testified his reverence for the King
of kings, by diverse and costly offerings. Thus did Helena Augusta, the pious
mother of a pious emperor, erect over the two mystic caverns these two noble and
beautiful monuments of devotion, worthy of everlasting remembrance, to the honor
of God her Saviour, and as proofs of her holy zeal, receiving from her son the
aid of his imperial power. Nor was it long ere this aged woman reaped the due
reward of her labors. After passing the whole period of her life, even to
declining age, in the greatest prosperity, and exhibiting both in word and deed
abundant fruits of obedience to the divine precepts, and having enjoyed in
consequence an easy and tranquil existence, with unimpaired powers of body and
mind, at length she obtained from God an end befitting her pious course, and a
recompense of her good deeds even in this present life.

Chapter XLIV. Of Helena's Generosity and Beneficent Acts. For on the occasion of
a circuit which she made of the eastern provinces, in the splendor of imperial
authority, she bestowed abundant proofs of her liberality as well on the
inhabitants of the several cities collectively, as on individuals who approached
her, at the same time that she scattered largesses among the soldiery with a
liberal hand. But especially abundant were the gifts she bestowed on the naked
and unprotected poor. To some she gave money, to others an ample supply of
clothing: she liberated some from imprisonment, or from the bitter servitude of
the mines; others she delivered from unjust oppression, and others again, she
restored from exile.

Chapter XLV. Helena's Pious Conduct in the Churches.

While, however, her character derived luster from such deeds as I have
described, she was far from neglecting personal piety toward God.56 She might be
seen continually frequenting his Church, while at the same time she adorned the
houses of prayer with splendid offerings, not overlooking the churches of the
smallest cities. In short, this admirable woman was to be seen, in simple and
modest attire, mingling with the crowd of worshipers, and testifying her
devotion to God by a uniform course of pious conduct.

Chapter XLVI. How She Made Her Will, and Died at the Age of Eighty Years. And
when at length at the close of a long life, she was called to inherit a happier
lot, having arrived at the eightieth year of her age, and being very near the
time of her departure, she prepared and executed her last will in favor of her
only son, the emperor and sole monarch of the world, and her grandchildren, the
Caesars his sons, to whom severally she bequeathed whatever property she
possessed in any part of the world. Having thus made her will, this thrice
blessed woman died in the presence of her illustrious son, who was in attendance
at her side, caring for her and held her hands: so that, to those who rightly
discerned the truth, the thrice blessed one seemed not to die, but to experience
a real change and transition from an earthly to a heavenly existence, since her
soul, remoulded as it were into an incorruptible and angelic essence,57 was
received up into her Saviour's presence.58 Chapter XLVII. How Constantine Buried
His Mother, and How He Honored Her During Her Life. Her body, too, was honored
with special tokens of respect, being escorted on its way to the imperial city
by a vast train of guards, and there deposited in a royal tomb. Such were the
last days of our emperor's mother, a person worthy of being had in perpetual
remembrance, both for her own practical piety, and because she had given birth
to so extraordinary and admirable an offspring. And well may his character be
styled blessed, for his filial piety as well as on other grounds. He rendered
her through his influence so devout a worshiper of God, (though she had not
previously been such,) that she seemed to have been instructed from the first by
the Saviour of mankind: and besides this, he had honored her so fully with
imperial dignities, that in every province, and in the very ranks of the
soldiery, she was spoken of under the titles of Augusta and empress, and her
likeness was impressed on golden coins.59 He had even granted her authority over
the imperial treasures, to use and dispense them according to her own will and
discretion in every case for this enviable distinction also she received at the
hands of her son. Hence it is that among the qualities which shed a luster on
his memory, we may rightly include that surpassing degree of filial affection
whereby he rendered full obedience to the Divine precepts which enjoin due honor
from children to their parents. In this manner, then, the emperor executed in
Palestine the noble works I have above described: and indeed in every province
he raised new churches on a far more imposing scale than those which had existed
before his time.

Chapter XLVIII. How He Built Churches in Honor of Martyrs, and Abolished
Idolatry at Constantinople. And being fully resolved to distinguish the city
which bore his name with especial honor, he embellished it with numerous sacred
edifices, both memorials of martyrs on the largest scale, and other buildings of
the most splendid kind, not only within the city itself, but in its vicinity:
and thus at the same time he rendered honor to the memory of the martyrs, and
consecrated his city to the martyrs' God. Being filled, too, with Divine wisdom,
he determined to purgethe city which was to be distinguished by his own name
from idolatry of every kind, that henceforth no statues might be worshiped there
in the temples of those falsely reputed to be gods, nor any altars defiled by
the pollution of blood: that there might be no sacrifices consumed by fire, no
demon festivals, nor any of the other ceremonies usually observed by the
superstitious.

Chapter XLIX. Representation of the Cross in the Palace, and of Daniel at the
Public Fountains. On the other hand one might see the fountains in the midst of
the market place graced with figures representing the good Shepherd, well known
to those who study the sacred oracles, and that of Daniel also with the lions,
forged in brass, and resplendent with plates of gold. Indeed, so large a measure
of Divine love possessed the emperor's soul, that in the principal apartment of
the imperial palace itself, on a vast tablet60 displayed in the center of its
gold-covered paneled ceiling, he caused the symbol of our Saviour's Passion to
be fixed, composed of a variety of precious stones richly inwrought with gold.
This symbol he seemed to have intended to be as it were the safeguard of the
empire itself.

Chapter L. That He Erected Churches in Nicomedia, and in Other Cities.

Having thus embellished the city which bore his name, he next distinguished the
capital of Bithynia61 by the erection of a stately and magnificent church, being
desirous of raising in this city also, in honor of his Saviour and at his own
charges, a memorial of his victory over his own enemies and the adversaries of
God. He also decorated the principal cities of the other provinces with sacred
edifices of great beauty; as, for example, in the case of that metropolis of the
East which derived its name from Antiochus, in which, as the head of that
portion of the empire, he consecrated to the service of God a church of
unparalleled size and beauty. The entire building was encompassed by an
enclosure of great extent, within which the church itself rose to a vast
elevation, being of an octagonal form, and surrounded on all sides by many
chambers, courts, and upper and lower apartments; the whole richly adorned with
a profusion of gold, brass, and other materials of the most costly kind.

Chapter LI. That He Ordered a Church to Be Built at Mambre.

Such was the principal sacred edifices erected by the emperor's command. But
having heard that the self-same Saviour who erewhile had appeared on earth62 had
in ages long since past afforded a manifestation of his Divine presence to holy
men of Palestine near the oak of Mambre,63 he ordered that a house of prayer
should be built there also in honor of the God who had thus appeared.
Accordingly the imperial commission was transmitted to the provincial governors
by letters addressed to them individually, enjoining a speedy completion of the
appointed work. He sent moreover to the writer of this history an eloquent
admonition, a copy of which I think it well to insert in the present work, in
order to convey a just idea of his pious diligence and zeal. To express, then,
his displeasure at the evil practices which he had heard were usual in the place
just referred to, he addressed me in the following terms.

Chapter LII. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius Concerning Mambre.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Macarius, and the rest of the bishops
in Palestine.64

"One benefit, and that of no ordinary importance, has been conferred on us by my
truly pious mother-in-law,65 in that she has made known to us by letter that
abandoned folly of impious men which has hitherto escaped detection by you: so
that the criminal conduct thus overlooked may now through our means obtain
fitting correction and remedy, necessary though ardy. For surely it is a grave
impiety indeed, that holy places should be defiled by the stain of unhallowed
impurities. What then is this, dearest brethren, which, though it has eluded
your sagacity, she of whom I speak was impelled by a pious sense of duty to
disclose?

Chapter LIII. That the Saviour Appeared in This Place to Abraham.

"She assures me, then, that the place which takes its name from the oak of
Mambre, where we find that Abraham dwelt, is defiled by certain of the slaves of
superstition in every possible way. She declares that idols66 which should be
utterly destroyed have been erected on the site of that tree; that an altar is
near the spot; and that impure sacrifices are continually performed. Now since
it is evident that these practices are equally inconsistent with the character
of our times, and unworthy the sanctity of the place itself, I wish your
Gravities67 to be informed that the illustrious Count Acacius, our friend, has
received instructions by letter from me, to the effect that every idol which
shall be found in the place above-mentioned shall immediately be consigned to
the flames; that the altar be utterly demolished; and that if any one, after
this our mandate, shall be guilty of impiety of any kind in this place, he shall
be visited with condign punishment. The place itself we have directed to be
adorned with an unpolluted structure, I mean a church; in order that it may
become a fitting place of assembly for holy men. Meantime, should any breach of
these our commands occur, it should be made known to our clemency without the
least delay by letters from you, that we may direct the person detected to be
dealt with, as a transgressor of the law, in the severest manner. For you are
not ignorant that the Supreme God first appeared to Abraham, and conversed with
him, in that place. There it was that the observance of the Divine law first
began; there first the Saviour himself, with the two angels, vouchsafed to
Abraham a manifestation of his presence; there God first appeared to men; there
he gave promise to Abraham concerning his future seed, and straightway fulfilled
that promise; there he foretold that he should be the father of a multitude of
nations. For these reasons, it seems to me right that this place should not only
be kept pure through your diligence from all defilement, but restored also to
its pristine sanctity; that nothing hereafter may be done there except the
performance of fitting service to him who is the Almighty God, and our Saviour,
and Lord of all. And this service it is incumbent on you to care for with due
attention, if your Gravities be willing (and of this I feel confident) to
gratify my wishes, which are especially interested in the worship of God. May he
preserve you, beloved brethren!"

Chapter LIV. Destruction of Idol Temples and Images Everywhere.

All these things the emperor diligently performed to the praise of the saving
power of Christ, and thus made it his constant aim to glorify his Saviour God.
On the other hand he used every means to rebuke the superstitious errors of the
heathen. Hence the entrances of their temples in the several cities were left
exposed to the weather, being stripped of their doors at his command; the tiling
of others was removed, and their roofs destroyed. From others again the
venerable statues of brass, of which the superstition of antiquity had boasted
for a long series of years, were exposed to view in all the public places of the
imperial city: so that here a Pythian, there a Sminthian Apollo, excited the
contempt of the beholder: while the Delphic tripods were deposited in the
hippodrome and the Muses of Helicon in the palace itself. In short, the city
which bore his name was everywhere filled with brazen statues of the most
exquisite workmanship, which had been dedicated in every province, and which the
deluded victims of superstition had long vainly honored as gods with numberless
victims and burnt sacrifices, though now at length they learnt to renounce their
error, when the emperor held up the very objects of their worship to be the
ridicule and sport of all beholders. With regard to those images which were of
gold, he dealt with them in a different manner. For as soon as he understood
that the ignorant multitudes were inspired with a vain and childish dread of
these bugbears of error, wrought in gold and silver, he judged it right to
remove these also, like stumbling-stones thrown in the way of men walking in the
dark, and henceforward to open a royal road, plain and unobstructed to all.
Having formed this resolution, he considered no soldiers or military force of
any sort needful for the suppression of the evil: a few of his own friends
sufficed for this service, and these he sent by a simple expression of his will
to visit each several province. Accordingly, sustained by confidence in the
emperor's pious intentions and their own personal devotion to God, they passed
through the midst of numberless tribes and nations, abolishing this ancient
error in every city and country. They ordered the priests themselves, amidst
general laughter and scorn, to bring their gods from their dark recesses to the
light of day: they then stripped them of their ornaments, and exhibited to the
gaze of all the unsightly reality which had been hidden beneath a painted
exterior. Lastly, whatever part of the material appeared valuable they scraped
off and melted in the fire to prove its worth, after which they secured and set
apart whatever they judged needful for their purpose, leaving to the
superstitious worshipers that which was altogether useless, as a memorial of
their shame. Meanwhile our admirable prince was himself engaged in a work
similar to what we have described. For at the same time that these costly images
of the dead were stripped, as we have said, of their precious materials, he also
attacked those composed of brass; causing those to be dragged from their places
with ropes and as it were carried away captive, whom the dotage of mythology had
esteemed as gods.

Chapter LV. Overthrow of an Idol Temple, and Abolition of Licentious Practices,
at Aphaca in Phoenicia. The emperor's next care was to kindle, as it were, a
brilliant torch, by the light of which he directed his imperial gaze around, to
see if any hidden vestiges of error might still exist. And as the keen-sighted
eagle in its heavenward flight is able to descry from its lofty height the most
distant objects on the earth, so did he, while residing in the imperial palace
of his own fair city, discover as from a watch-tower a hidden and fatal snare of
souls in the province of Phoenicia. This was a grove and temple, not situated in
the midst of any city, nor in any public place, as for splendor of effect is
generally the case, but apart from the beaten and frequented road, at Aphaca, on
part of the summit of Mount Lebanon, and dedicated to the foul demon known by
the name of Venus. It was a school of wickedness for all the votaries of
impurity, and such as destroyed their bodies with effeminacy. Here men
undeserving of the name forgot the dignity of their sex, and propitiated the
demon by their effeminate conduct; here too unlawful commerce of women and
adulterous intercourse, with other horrible and infamous practices, were
perpetrated in this temple as in a place beyond the scope and restraint of law.
Meantime these evils remained unchecked by the presence of any observer, since
no one of fair character ventured to visit such scenes. These proceedings,
however, could not escape the vigilance of our august emperor, who, having
himself inspected them with characteristic forethought, and judging that such a
temple was unfit for the light of heaven, gave orders that the building with its
offerings should be utterly destroyed. Accordingly, in obedience to the imperial
command, these engines of an impure superstition were immediately abolished, and
the hand of military force was made instrumental in purging the place. And now
those who had heretofore lived without restraint learned self-control through
the emperor's threat of punishment, as likewise those superstitious Gentiles
wise in their own conceit, who now obtained experimental proof of their own
folly.

Chapter LVI. Destruction of the Temple of Aesculapius at Egaae.68 For since a
wide-spread error of these pretenders to wisdom concerned the demon worshiped in
Cilicia, whom thousands regarded with reverence as the possessor of saving and
healing power, who sometimes appeared to those who passed the night in his
temple, sometimes restored the diseased to health, though on the contrary he was
a destroyer of souls, who drew his easily deluded worshipers from the true
Saviour to involve them in impious error, the emperor, consistently with his
practice, and desire to advance the worship of him who is at once a jealous God
and the true Saviour, gave directions that this temple also should be razed to
the ground. In prompt obedience to this command, a band of soldiers laid this
building, the admiration of noble philosophers, prostrate in the dust, together
with its unseen inmate, neither demon nor god, but rather a deceiver of souls,
who had seduced mankind for so long a time through various ages. And thus he who
had promised to others deliverance from misfortune and distress, could find no
means for his own security, any more than when, as is told in myth, he was
scorched by the lightning's stroke.69 Our emperor's pious deeds, however, had in
them nothing fabulous or feigned; but by virtue of the manifested power of his
Saviour, this temple as well as others was so utterly overthrown, that not a
vestige of the former follies was left behind.

Chapter LVII. How the Gentiles Abandoned Idol Worship, and Turned to the
Knowledge of God.

Hence it was that, of those who had been the slaves of superstition, when they
saw with their own eyes the exposure of their delusion, and beheld the actual
ruin of the temples and images in every place, some applied themselves to the
saving doctrine of Christ; while others, though they declined to take this step,
yet reprobated the folly which they had received from their fathers, and laughed
to scorn what they had so long been accustomed to regard as gods. Indeed, what
other feelings could possess their minds, when they witnessed the thorough
uncleanness concealed beneath the fair exterior of the objects of their worship?
Beneath this were found either the bones of dead men or dry skulls, fraudulently
adorned by the arts of magicians,70 or filthy rags full of abominable impurity,
or a bundle of hay or stubble. On seeing all these things heaped together within
their lifeless images, they denounced their fathers' extreme folly and their
own, especially when neither in the secret recesses of the temples nor in the
statues themselves could any inmate be found; neither demon, nor utterer of
oracles, neither god nor prophet, as they had heretofore supposed: nay, not even
a dim and shadowy phantom could be seen. Accordingly, every gloomy cavern, every
hidden recess, afforded easy access to the emperor's emissaries: the
inaccessible and secret chambers, the innermost shrines of the temples, were
trampled by the soldiers' feet; and thus the mental blindness which had
prevailed for so many ages over the gentile world became clearly apparent to the
eyes of all.

Chapter LVIII. How He Destroyed the Temple of Venus at Heliopolis, and Built the
First Church in that City.

Such actions as I have described may well be reckoned among the emperor's
noblest achievements, as also the wise arrangements which he made respecting
each particular province. We may instance the Phoenician city Heliopolis, in
which those who dignify licentious pleasure with a distinguishing title of
honor, had permitted their wives and daughters to commit shameless fornication.
But now a new statute, breathing the very spirit of modesty, proceeded from the
emperor, which peremptorily forbade the con- tinuance of former practices. And
besides this he sent them also written exhortations, as though he had been
especially ordained by God for this end, that he might instruct all men in the
principles of chastity. Hence, he disdained not to communicate by letter even
with these persons, urging them to seek diligently the knowledge of God. At the
same time he followed up his words by corresponding deeds, and erected even in
this city a church of great size and magnificence: so that an event unheard of
before in any age, now for the first time came to pass, namely, that a city
which had hitherto been wholly given up to superstition now obtained the
privilege of a church of God, with presbyters and deacons, and its people were
placed under the presiding care of a bishop consecrated to the service of the
supreme God. And further, the emperor, being anxious that here also as many as
possible might be won to the truth, bestowed abundant provision for the
necessities of the poor, desiring even thus to invite them to seek the doctrines
of salvation, as though he were almost adopting the words of him who said,
"Whether in pretense, or in truth, let Christ be preached."71 Chapter LIX. Of
the Disturbance at Antioch by Eustathius. In the midst, however, of the general
happiness occasioned by these events, and while the Church of God was every
where and every way flourishing throughout the empire, once more that spirit of
envy, who ever watches for the ruin of the good, prepared himself to combat the
greatness of our prosperity, in the expectation, perhaps, that the emperor
himself, provoked by our tumults and disorders, might eventually become
estranged from us. Accordingly, he kindled a furious controversy at Antioch, and
thereby involved the church in that place in a series of tragic calamities,
which had well-nigh occasioned the total overthrow of the city. The members of
the Church were divided into two opposite parties; while the people, including
even the magistrates and soldiery, were roused to such a pitch, that the contest
would have been decided by the sword, had not the watchful providence of God, as
well as dread of the emperor's displeasure, controlled the fury of the
multitude. On this occasion, too, the emperor, acting the part of a preserver
and physician of souls, applied with much forbearance the remedy of persuasion
to those who needed it. He gently pleaded, as it were by an embassy, with his
people, sending among them oneof the best approved and most faithful of those
who were honored with the dignity of Count;72 at the same time that he exhorted
them to a peaceable spirit by repeated letters, and instructed them in the
practice of true godliness, Having prevailed by these remonstrances, he excused
their conduct in his subsequent letters, alleging that he had himself heard the
merits of the case from him on whose account the disturbance had arisen.73 And
these letters of his, which are replete with learning and instruction of no
ordinary kind, I should have inserted in this present work, were it not that
they might affix a mark of dishonor to the character of the persons accused. I
will therefore omit these, being unwilling to revive the memory of past
grievances, and will only annex those to my present narrative which he wrote to
testify his satisfaction at the re-establishment of peace and concord among the
rest. In these letters, he cautioned them against any desire to claim the ruler
of another district,74 through whose intervention peace had been restored, as
their own, and exhorted them, consistently with the usage of the Church, to
choose him as their bishop, whom the common Saviour of all should point out as
suited for the office. His letter, then, is addressed to the people and to the
bishops, severally, in the following terms.

Chapter LX. Constantine's Letter to the Antiochians, Directing Them Not to
Withdraw Eusebius from Caesarea, But to Seek Some One Else.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to the people of Antioch.

2 "How pleasing to the wise and intelligent portion of mankind is the concord
which exists among you! And I myself, brethren, am disposed to love you with an
enduring affection, inspired both by religion, and by your own manner of life
and zeal on my behalf. It is by the exercise of right understanding and sound
discretion, that we are enabled really to enjoy our blessings. And what can
become you so well as i this discretion? No wonder, then, if I affirm that your
maintenance of the truth has tended rather to promote your security than to draw
on you the hatred of others. Indeed, amongst brethren, whom the selfsame
disposition to walk in the ways of truth and righteousness promises, through the
favor of God, to register among his pure and holy family, what can be more
honorable than gladly to acquiesce in the prosperity of all men? Especially
since the precepts of the divine law prescribe a better direction to your
proposed intention, and we ourselves desire that your judgment should be
confirmed by proper sanction.75 It may be that you are surprised, and at a loss
to understand the meaning of this introduction to my present address. The cause
of it I will not hesitate to explain without reserve. I confess, then, that on
reading your records I perceived, by the highly eulogistic testimony which they
bear to Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, whom I have myself long well known and
esteemed for his learning and moderation, that you are strongly attached to him,
and desire to appropriate him as your own. What thoughts, then, do you suppose
that I entertain on this subject, desirous as I am to seek for and act on the
strict principles of right? What anxiety do you imagine this desire of yours has
caused me? O holy faith, who givest us in our Saviour's words and precepts a
model, as it were, of what our life should be, how hardly wouldst thou thyself
resist the sins of men, were it not that thou refusest to subserve the purposes
of gain! In my own judgment, he whose first object is the maintenance of peace,
seems to be superior to Victory herself; and where a right and honorable course
lies open to one's choice, surely no one would hesitate to adopt it. I ask then,
brethren, why do we so decide as to inflict an injury on others by our choice?
Why do we covet those objects which will destroy the credit of our own
reputation? I myself highly esteem the individual whom ye judge worthy of your
respect and affection: notwithstanding, it cannot be right that those principles
should be entirely disregarded which should be authoritative and binding on all
alike, so that each should not be content with his own circumstances, and all
enjoy their proper privileges: nor can it be right, in considering the claims of
rival candidates, to suppose but that not one only, but many, may appear worthy
of comparison with this person. For as long as no violence or harshness are
suffered to disturb the dignities of the church, they continue to be on an equal
footing, and worthy of the same consideration everywhere. Nor is it reasonable
that an inquiry into the qualifications of this one should be made to the
detriment of others; since the judgment of all churches, whether reckoned of
greater or less importance in themselves, is equally capable of receiving and
maintaining the divine ordinances, so that one is in no way inferior to another,
if we will but boldly declare the truth, in regard to that standard of practice
which is common to all. If this be so, we must say that you will be chargeable,
not with retaining this prelate, but with wrongfully removing him; your conduct
will be characterized rather by violence than justice; and whatever may be
generally thought by others, I dare clearly and boldly affirm that this measure
will furnish ground of accusation against you, and will provoke factious
disturbances of the most mischievous kind: for even timid flocks can show the
use and power of their teeth, when the watchful care of their shepherd declines,
and they find themselves bereft of his accustomed guidance. If this then be
really so, if I am not deceived in my judgment, let this, brethren, be your
first consideration, for many and important considerations will immediately
present themselves, whether, should you persist in your intention, that mutual
kindly feeling and affection which should subsist among you will suffer no
diminution? In the next place, remember that he, who came among you for the
purpose of offering disinterested counsel,76 now enjoys the reward which is due
to him in the judgment of heaven; for he has received no ordinary recompense in
the high testimony you have borne to his equitable conduct. Lastly, in
accordance with your usual sound judgment, do ye exhibit a becoming diligence in
selecting the person of whom you stand in need, carefully avoiding all factious
and tumultuous clamor; for such clamor is always wrong, and from the collision
of discordant elements both sparks and flame will arise. I protest, as I desire
to please God and you, and to enjoy a happiness commensurate with your kind
wishes, that I love you, and the quiet haven of your gentleness, now that you
have cast from you that which defiled,77 and received in its place at once sound
morality and concord, firmly planting in the vessel the sacred standard, and
guided, as one may say, by a helm of iron in your course onward to the light of
heaven. Receive then on board that merchandise which is incorruptible, since, as
it were, all bilge water has been drained from the vessel; and be careful
henceforth so to secure the enjoyment of all your present blessing, that you may
not seem at any future time either to have determined any measure on the impulse
of inconsiderate or ill-directed zeal, or in the first instance rashly to have
entered on an inexpedient course. May God preserve you, beloved brethren!"

Chapter LXI. The Emperor's Letter to Eusebius Praising Him for Refusing the
Bishopric of Antioch. The Emperor's Letter to me on my refusing the Bishopric of
Antioch.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Eusebius.

"I have most carefully perused your letter, and perceive that you have strictly
conformed to the rule enjoined by the discipline of the Church. Now to abide by
that which appears at the same time pleasing to God, and accordant with
apostolical tradition, is a proof of true piety. You have reason to deem
yourself happy on this behalf, that you are counted worthy, in the judgment, I
may say, of all the world, to have the oversight of any church. For the desire
which all feel to claim you for their own, undoubtedly enhances your enviable
fortune in this respect. Notwithstanding, your Prudence whose resolve it is to
observe the ordinances of God and the apostolic canon of the Church,78 has done
excellently well in declining the bishopric of the church at Antioch, and
desiring to continue in that church of which you first received the oversight by
the will of God. I have written on this subject to the people of Antioch, and
also to your colleagues in the ministry who had themselves consulted me in
regard to this question; on reading which letters, your Holiness will easily
discern, that, inasmuch as justice itself opposed their claims, I have written
to them under divine direction. It will be necessary that your Prudence should
be present at their conference, in order that this decision may be ratified in
the church at Antioch. God preserve you, beloved brother!"

Chapter LXII. Constantine's Letter to the Council, Depreciating the Removal of
Eusebius from Caesarea.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Theodotus, Theodorus, Narcissus, A
tius, Alpheus, and the rest of the bishops who are at Antioch.

"I have perused the letters written by your Prudences, and highly approve of the
wise resolution of your colleague in the ministry, Eusebius. Having, moreover,
been informed of the circumstances of the case, partly by your letters, partly
by those of our illustrious counts,79 Acacius and Strategius, after sufficient
investigation I have written to the people of Antioch, suggesting the course
which will be at once pleasing to God and advantageous for the Church. A copy of
this I have ordered to be subjoined to this present letter, in order that ye
yourselves may know what I thought fit, as an advocate of the cause of justice,
to write to that people: since I find in your letter this proposal, that, in
consonance with the choice of the people, sanctioned by your own desire,
Eusebius the holy bishop of Caesarea should preside over and take the charge of
the church at Antioch. Now the letters of Eusebius himself on this subject
appeared to be strictly accordant with the order prescribed by the Church.
Nevertheless it is expedient that your Prudences should be made acquainted with
my opinion also. For I am informed that Euphronius the presbyter, who isa
citizen of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and George of Arethusa, likewise a presbyter,
and appointed to that office by Alexander at Alexandria,80 are men of tried
faith. It was right, therefore, to intimate to your Prudences, that in proposing
these men and any others whom you may deem worthy the episcopal dignity, you
should decide this question in a manner conformable to the tradition of the
apostles. For in that case, your Prudences will be able, according to the rule
of the Church and apostolic tradition, to direct this election in the manner
which true ecclesiastical discipline shall prescribe. God preserve you, beloved
brethren!"

Chapter LXIII. How He Displayed His Zeal for the Extirpation of Heresies.

Such were the exhortations to do all things to the honor of the divine religion
which the emperor addressed to the rulers of the churches. Having by these means
banished dissension, and reduced the Church of God to a state of uniform
harmony, he next proceeded to a different duty, feeling it incumbent on him to
extirpate another sort of impious persons, as pernicious enemies of the human
race. These were pests of society, who ruined whole cities under the specious
garb of religious decorum; men whom our Saviour's warning voice somewhere terms
false prophets and ravenous wolves: "Beware of false prophets, which will come
to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves. By their fruits ye
shall know them."81 Accordingly, by an order transmitted to the governors of the
several provinces, he effectually banished all such offenders. In addition to
this ordinance he addressed to them personally a severely awakening admonition,
exhorting them to an earnest repentance, that they might still find a haven of
safety in the true Church of God. Hear, then, in what manner he addressed them
in this letter.

Chapter LXIV. Constantine's Edict Against the Heretics.

"Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to the heretics.

"Understand now, by this present statute, ye Novatians, Valentinians,
Marcionites, Paulians, ye who are called Cataphrygians,82 and all ye who devise
and support heresies by means of your private assemblies, with what a tissue of
falsehood and vanity, with what destructive and venomous errors, your doctrines
are inseparably interwoven; so that through you the healthy soul is stricken
with disease, and the living becomes the prey of everlasting death. Ye haters
and enemies of truth and life, in league with destruction! All your counsels are
opposed to the truth, but familiar with deeds of baseness; full of absurdities
and fictions: and by these ye frame falsehoods, oppress the innocent, and
withhold the light from them that believe. Ever trespassing under the mask of
godliness, ye fill all things with defilement: ye pierce the pure and guileless
conscience with deadly wounds, while ye withdraw, one may almost say, the very
light of day from the eyes of men. But why should I particularize, when to speak
of your criminality as it deserves demands more time and leisure than I can
give? For so long and unmeasured is the catalogue of your offenses, so hateful
and altogether atrocious are they, that a single day would not suffice to
recount them all. And, indeed, it is well to turn one's ears and eyes from such
a subject, lest by a description of each particular evil, the pure sincerity and
freshness of one's own faith be impaired. Why then do I still bear with such
abounding evil; especially since this protracted clemency is the cause that some
who were sound are become tainted with this pestilent disease? Why not at once
strike, as it were, at the root of so great a mischief by a public manifestation
of displeasure?

Chapter LXV. The Heretics are Deprived of Their Meeting Places.

"Forasmuch, then, as it is no longer possible to bear with your pernicious
errors, we give warning by this present statute that none of you henceforth
presume to assemble yourselves together.83 We have directed, accordingly, that
you be deprived of all the houses in which you are accustomed to hold your
assemblies: and our care in this respect extends so far as to forbid the holding
of your superstitious and senseless meetings, not in public merely, but in any
private house or place whatsoever. Let those of you, therefore, who are desirous
of embracing the true and pure religion, take the far better course of entering
the catholic Church, and uniting with it in holy fellowship, whereby you will be
enabled to arrive at the knowledge of the truth. In any case, the delusions of
your perverted understandings must entirely cease to mingle with and mar the
felicity of our present times: I mean the impious and wretched double-mindedness
of heretics and schismatics. For it is an object worthy of that prosperity which
we enjoy through the favor of God, to endeavor to bring back those who in time
past were living in the hope of future blessing, from all irregularity and error
to the right path, from darkness to light, from vanity to truth, from death to
salvation. And in order that this remedy may be applied with effectual power, we
have commanded, as before said, that you be positively deprived of every
gathering point for your superstitious meetings, I mean all the houses of
prayer, if such be worthy of the name, which belong to heretics, and that these
be made over without delay to the catholic Church; that any other places be
confiscated to the public service, and no facility whatever be left for any
future gathering; in order that from this day forward none of your unlawful
assemblies may presume to appear in any public or private place. Let this edict
be made public."

Chapter LXVI. How on the Discovery of Prohibited Books Among the Heretics, Many
of Them Return to the Catholic Church.

Thus were the lurking-places of the heretics broken up by the emperor's command,
and the savage beasts they harbored (I mean the chief authors of their impious
doctrines) driven to flight. Of those whom they had deceived, some, intimidated
by the emperor's threats, disguising their real sentiments, crept secretly into
the Church. For since the law directed that search should be made for their
books, those of them who practiced evil and forbidden arts were detected, and,
these were ready to secure their own safety by dissimulation of every kind.84
Others, however, there were, who voluntarily and with real sincerity embraced a
better hope. Meantime the prelates of the several churches. continued to make
strict inquiry, utterly rejecting those who attempted an entrance under the
specious disguise of false pretenses, while those who came with sincerity of
purpose were proved for a time, and after sufficient trial numbered with the
congregation. Such was the treatment of those who stood charged with rank
heresy: those, however, who maintained no impious doctrine, but had been
separated from the one body through the influence of schismatic advisers, were
received without difficulty or delay. Accordingly, numbers thus revisited, as it
were, their own country after an absence in a foreign land, and acknowledged the
Church as a mother from whom they had wandered long, and to whom they now
returned with joy and gladness. Thus the members of the entire body became
united, and compacted in one harmonious whole; and the one catholic Church, at
unity with itself, shone with full luster, while no heretical or schismatic body
anywhere continued to exist.85 And the credit of having achieved this mighty
work our Heaven-protected emperor alone, of all who had gone before him, was
able to attribute to himself.

1: Compare contrast with the other emperors in Prolegomena, under Life.

2: Eusebius expressly states that Constantine's words had little result in
conversion. It is meant here that the success of one who relied on God itself
proved the vanity of idols.

3: This may perhaps mean "ordered to be inscribed" or "wrote it to be his
safeguard." This form of Bag. is a satisfactory paraphrase.

4: Their bindings were adorned with precious stones according to Cedrenus.
Compare Prolegomena, Character, Magnificence.

5: [ Politeutwn andrwn

6: This above is a sort of resume of the life of Constantine. For illustration
of the various facts mentioned, compare the latter part of the Church History
and the various acts and documents in this Life. Compare also Prolegomena, under
Life, and especially under Character. It seems now and then to be like a little
homily on the glory of having the shoe on the other foot-the glory of having
done to others what others had done to them.

7: Note the explicit testimony of Eusebius here, and compare Prolegomena, under
Religious Characteristics.

8: Especially the book of Revelation, and Isaiah as quoted below.

9: [Literally, by encaustic painting. See Bk. 1, ch. 3, note.- Bag. ]

10: Isa. xxvii. 1. This is not taken from the Septuagint translation, as it
corresponds with the Hebrew against the LXX. It differs in the word used for
"terrible," and none of the editions (or at least not the Vatican, Holmes and
Parsons, Van Ess, or Tischendorf) and none of the mss. cited by Holmes and
Parsons, have the phrase "in the sea" as the Hebrew. Grabe has this latter as
rations reading (ed. Bagster, 16º, p. 74), but there is hardly a possibility
that it is the true reading.

11: The famous rocks in the Euxine which were wont to close against one another
and crush all passing ships, and by which the Argo was said ( Od. 12. 69) to be
the only ship which ever passed in safety.

12: For endless literature of the Paschal controversy, compare articles in all
the religious encyclop`dias. especially perhaps Steitz, in the Schaff-Herzog;
and for history and discussion of the question itself, see Hensley's art.
Easter, in Smith and Cheetham, Dict.

13: By some this phrase is joined to the preceding paragraph,-strangers ..."in
this as in other respects," and so Bag. translates, but the division followed
here is that of Hein.

14: "Beasts of burden."

15: The probably apocryphal version of the summoning letter given by Cowper (
Syr. Misc. ) from the Syriac gives the reason of the choice of Nicaea, "the
excellent temperature of the air" there.

16:

17: = Africa.

18: It is noted that this evidence of the presence of foreign
bishops-"missionary bishops," so to speak-is confirmed by Gelasius and also by
the roll of the members.

19: [Hosius of Cordova.- Bag. ]

20: [It has been doubted whether Rome or Constantinople is here intended. The
authority of Sozomen and others is in favor of the former. See English
translation, published as one volume of this series.- Bag. ] Also in this
series.

21: Acts ii. 5 sqq.

22: The number present is given variously as three hundred (Socrates), three
hundred and eighteen (Athanasius, &c.), two hundred and seventy (Theodoret), or
even two thousand (cf. Hefele). It has been conjectured that the variation came
from the omission of names of the Arians (cf. note of Heinichen, Vol. 3, P.
506-507), or that it varied during the two months and more.

23: This is the way it is interpreted by Sozomen, 1, 17. The phrase, which is
literally "of middling character," is translated by Molz. and others as if it
meant "mild" or "modest," as if it referred in some way to the doctrine of the
mean.

24: [Hence it seems probable that this was the last day of the Council; the
entire session of which occupied more than two months, and which was originally
held in a church.- Bag. ] The exact dates of the Council are controverted, but
it seems that it ended August 25, having probably begun June 14.

25: Compare Prolegomena, under Physical and Mental Characteristics.

26: [The authority of Sozomen and other writers seems to decide that this was
Eusebius himself.- Bag. ]

27:

28: The extant signatures are of doubtful authenticity. Compare Hefele, p. 269.

29: Compare Prolegomena, Life.

30: At the risk of seeming trivial in sober and professedly condensed
annotation, one cannot help noting that the human nature of ancient and modern
councils is the same,-much controversy and more or less absenteeism, but all
present at dinner.

31: For notice of these couches, see Smith, Dict. Gr. and Ram. Ant., article
Lectica.

32: [The idea seems to be (as explained by Valesius) that if they joined the
Jews in celebrating this feast they would seem to consent to their crime in
crucifying the Lord.- Bag. ] He carried out his reprobation of the Jews in his
actions in discriminating laws at least, and perhaps in actual persecution.

33: [ 'Agxinoia 34: Rather "sagacity" and "wisdom."

35: Rather "sagacity" and "wisdom."

36: [Valesius explains this as referring to the conduct of the Jews in
professing to acknowledge God as their king, and yet denying him by saying, "We
have no king but Caesar."- Bag. ]

37: This Hein. regards as the correct meaning, although "equally valid," or
"authoritative," has been regarded as possible.

38: Or "such were the injunctions which the emperor laid especially on their
consciences."

39: Continuation of the Arian controversy.

40:

41: [Licinius appears to be meant, whose death had occurred a.d. 326, in which
year the alleged discovery of the Lord's sepulchre took place.- Bag. ]

42: The word used is the technical "camera," meaning properly a certain style of
vaulted ceiling, but here it is perhaps the generic ceiling if the specific word
below means panel ceiling.

43: This is the word for the Lacunaria or panel ceilings, a style of ceiling
where "planks were placed across these beams at certain intervals leaving hollow
spaces" "which were frequently covered with gold and ivory and sometimes with
paintings." Compare article Domus, in Smith, Dict. Gr. and Nora. Ant. The
passage may mean either "with respect to the ceiling ...whether ...wainscoted"
or "with respect to the Camera ...whether panel ceiled."

44: [Apparently referring (says Valesius) to Rev. xxi. 2: "And I, John, saw the
holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God, out of heaven" &c.; an
extraordinary nay almost ludicrous application of Scripture, though perhaps
characteristic of the author's age.- Bag. ] And it may be said characteristic of
Eusebius himself, for it is not his only sin in this regard.

45: It would seem from this description that the paneling was like that of Santa
Maria Maggiore at Rome, a horizontal surface rather than the pointed roof
paneled.

46: Whether this means two series, one underground and one above ( Molz. and
many), or not, is fully discussed by Heinichen in a separate note ( Eusebius,
vol. 3, P. 520-521).

47: [These inner porticos seem to have rested on massy piles, because they
adjoined the sides of the church, and had to bear its roof, which was loftier
than any of the rest.- Bag. ] Translated by Molz. "Quadrangular supports." "In
Architecture a cubic mass of building, to serve for bearings."- Liddell and
Scott.

48: [Apparently the altar, which was of a hemispherical, or rather
hemicylindrical form- Bag. ] Also a much-discussed question. Compare Heinichen,
vol. 3, p. 521-522.

49: [In front of the larger churches there was generally a street, or open
space, where a market was held on the festival of the Martyr to whom the church
was dedicated. Regard was also had, in this arrangement, to architectural
effect, the object being that nothing should interfere with the view of the
front of the church. Vide Valesius in loc. - Bag. ]

50: Some idea of various features of this building may be gathered from the cuts
and descriptions of other basilicas in Fergusson, History of Architecture, 1
(1874), 400 sq.; Lübke, Geschickte der Architektur, 1 (Lpg. 1875), 229 sq.;
Langl.'s series of Bilder zur Geschichte, &c.

51: Compare Prolegomena, p. 411.

52:

53: [Ps. cxxxi. 7. Septuagint.- Bag. ] Engl. Vers. Ps. cxxxii. 7, "We will
worship at his footstool."

54: [Literally, beneath the earth. It seems to have been characteristic of the
age of Eusebius to invest the more prominent circumstances connected with the
Lord's life on earth with a degree of romance and mystery equally inconsistent
with Scripture and with probability. It is obvious that Scripture furnishes no
authority for the caves either of the nativity or ascension. See ch. 41, supra.
- Bag. ] Compare discussion by Andrews, Cave of the Nativity in his Life of our
Lord (N. Y.), 77-83.

55: [Alluding probably, to the discourse in Matt. xxiv., delivered by our Lord
to the disciples on the Mount of Olives.- Bag. ]

56: According to some apocryphal accounts Constantine owed his conversion to his
mother (compare the apocryphal letters mentioned under Writings, in the
Prolegomena), but Eusebius, below (ch. 47), seems to reverse the fact.

57: [These words seem to savor of Origen's doctrine, to which Eusebius was much
addicted. Origen believed that, in the resurrection, bodies would be changed
into souls, and souls into angels, according to the testimony of Jerome. See
Valesius in loc. - Bag. ]

58: The date of Helena's death is usually placed in 327 or 328. Compare
Wordsworth, l.c. Since she was eighty years old at the time of her death she
must have been about twenty-five when Constantine was born.

59: Compare note above. It is said (Wordsworth) that while silver and copper
coins have been found with her name, none of gold have yet come to light.

60: Perhaps the largest "panel." The restored church of St. Paul, outside the
walls at Rome, has a paneled ceiling with a very large central panel.

61: [Nicomedia, where Constantine had besieged Licinius, and compelled him to
surrender; in memory of which event he built this church.- Bag. ]

62: This doctrine, which appears again and again in Eusebius and in Constantine,
has a curiously interesting bearing at present theological controversies in
America, and England for that matter. It may be called the doctrine of the
"eternal Christ," as over against the doctrine of the "essential Christ," or
that which seems to make his existence begin with his incarnation-the
"historical Christ." He had historical existence from the beginning, both as the
indwelling and as the objective, and one might venture to think that advocates
of these two mews could find a meeting-ground, or solution of difficulty at
least, in this phrase which represents him who was in the beginning with God and
is and ever shall be, who has made all things which have been made, and is in
all parts of the universe and the world, among Jews and Gentiles.

63: [The English version in this passage (Gen. xviii. 1), and others, has
"plains," though the Septuagint and ancient interpreters generally render it, as
here, by "oak," some by "terebinth" (turpentine tree), the Vulgate by
"convallis."- Bag. ] The Revised Version (1881-1885) has "oaks."

64: The writer of this history says the letter was addressed to him, while it is
really to Macarius. On this ground the Eusebian authorship of the book has been
challenged, but of course Eusebius is among "the rest of the bishops."

65: [Eutropia, mother of his empress Fausta.- Bag. ]

66: [These objects of idolatrous worship were probably figures intended to
represent the angels who had appeared to Abraham.- Bag. ] More probably they
were some form of images obscenely worshiped.

67: Better "Reverences," and so throughout.

68:

69: [By Jupiter, for restoring Hippolytus to life, at Diana's request.- Bag. ]

70: Through another reading translated by Val., 1709, Bag., "stolen by
impostors." Stroth has "impiously employed for magicians arts."

71: Phil. i. 18. But "is preached," not "let Christ be preached."

72: "Believed to have been Strategus Musonius" ( Venables ).

73: [Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, whose deposition, on the ground of a charge
of immorality, by the partisans of Eusebius of Nicomedia, had occasioned the
disturbances alluded to in the text.- Bag. ] There is a view that this whole
trouble was the result of an intrigue of Eusebius to get the better of
Eustathius, who was in a sense a rival. Compare for very vigorous expression of
this view, Venables, Eustathius of Antioch, in Smith and Wace, Dict.

74: This is rather literal, and the paraphrase of Molz. may be better, "no
foreign bishops."

75: To the various and controverted translations of this passage it may be
ventured to add one, "we ourselves desire your judgment to be fortified by good
counsels."

76: The other point of view has been alluded to. It seems on the face of it, in
this unanimous endorsement by the church, as if Eusebius had had the right of it
in his quarrel with Eustathius; but on the other hand, it is to be remembered
that this wonderful harmony in the church had come about from the fact that
Eustathius and all who sympathized with him had withdrawn, and only the party of
Eusebius was left. It would be like a "unanimous" vote in Parliament with all
the opposition benches empty. The endorsement of his own party does not count
for much.

77: [Alluding to the deposition of Eustathius, who had been charged with the
crime of seduction. The reader who consults the original of this chapter,
especially the latter part of it, may judge of the difficulty of eliciting any
tolerable sense from an obscure. and possibly corrupted, text.- Bag. ] The
translator ( Bag. ) shows ingenuity in this extracting of the general sense from
the involved Greek of the writing of Constantine or the translation as it
supposably is. But the very fact of the obscurity shown in this and in his
oration alike is conclusive against any thought that the literary work ascribed
to Constantine was written by Eusebius.

78: Canon 15 (or 14) of the "Apostolical Canons." Cf. ed. Bruns. 1 (Berol.
1839), 3.

79: The word has thus generally been rendered by Bag., and does probably refer
to their official title, although in this case and occasionally he translates
"friends."

80: [George (afterwards bishop of Laodicea) appears to have been degraded from
the office of presbyter on the ground of impiety, by the same bishop who had
ordained him. Both George and Euphronius were of the Arian party, of which fact
it is possible that Constantine was ignorant.- Bag. ] Georgius was at one time
or another Arian, semi-Arian, and Anomoean, and is said to have been called by
Athanasius "the most wicked of all the Arians" (Venables in Smith and Wace,
Dict. 2. 637). He was constantly pitted against Eustathius, which accounts for
his appearance at this time. Euphronius was the one chosen at this time. Compare
Bennett, Euphronius , in Smith and Wace, Dict. 2. 297.

81: [Matt. vii. 15, Matt. vii. 16.] Quoted perhaps from memory, or else this
text is defective, for this reads, "will come" where all N. T. mss. have "come."

82: Sufficiently good general accounts of these various heresies may be found in
Blunt. Dict. of Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of
Religious Thought, Lond. 1874, p. 382-389, Novatians; p. 612-614, Valentintans;
p. 296-298, Marcionites; p. 515-517, Samosatenes (Paultans); p. 336-341,
Montanists (Cataphrygians). Or see standard Encyclopaedias.

83: There is throughout this Life a curious repetition in the details of action
against heretics of precisely the same things which Christians complained of as
having been done to them. The idea of toleration then seems to have been much as
it was in pre-reformation times, or, not to judge other times when there is a
beam in our own eye, as it is in America and England to-day,-the largest
toleration for every one who thinks as we do, and for the others a temporary
suspension of the rule to "judge not," with an amended prayer, "Lord, condemn
them, for they know not what they do," and a vigorous attempt to force the
divine judgment.

84: Here again it is worth noting, for history and for edification, that books
were prohibited and heretics treated just as the Christians did not like to "be
done by," by the heathen.

85: This famous "church unity," for which Constantine has been blessed or
execrated, as the case might be, in all the ages since, was hardly more complete
than modern unified churches where all the members held different pet doctrines
and are prepared to fight for them to the bitter end.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 25: THE LIFE OF THE BLESSED EMPEROR CONSTANTINE - BOOK 4
========================================================================

Book IV.

Chapter I. How He Honored Many by Presents and Promotions.

Chapter II. Remission of a Fourth Part of the Taxes.

Chapter III. Equalization of the More Oppressive Taxes.

Chapter IV. His Liberality, from His Private Resources, to the Losers in Suits
of a Pecuniary Nature.

Chapter V. Conquest of the Scythians Defeated Through the Sign of Our Saviour.

Chapter VI. Conquest of the Sarmatians, Consequent on the Rebellion of Their
Slaves.

Chapter VII. Ambassadors from Different Barbarous Nations Receive Presents from
the Emperor.

Chapter VIII. That He Wrote Also to the King of Persia7 Who Had Sent Him an
Embassy, on Behalf of the Christians in His Realm.

Chapter IX. Letter of Constantine Augustus to Sapor, King of the Persians,
Containing a Truly Pious Confession of God and Christ. Copy of His Letter to the
King of Persia.

Chapter X. The Writer Denounces Idols, and Glorifies God.

Chapter XI. Against the Tyrants and Persecutors; And on the Captivity of
Valerian.

Chapter XII. He Declares That, Having Witnessed the Fall of the Persecutors, He
Now Rejoices at the Peace Enjoyed by the Christians.

Chapter XIII. He Bespeaks His Affectionate Interest for He Christians in His
Country.

Chapter XIV. How the Zealous Prayers of Constantine Procured Peace to the
Christians.

Chapter XV. He Causes Himself to Be Represented on His Coins, and in His
Portraits, in the Attitude of Prayer.

Chapter XVI. He Forbids by Law the Plating His Likeness in Idol Temples.

Chapter XVII. Of His Prayers in the Palace, and His Reading the Holy Scriptures.

Chapter XVIII. He Enjoins the General Observance of the Lord's Day, and the Day
of Preparation.

Chapter XIX. That He Directed Even His Pagan Soldiers to Pray on the Lord's Day.

Chapter XX. The Form of Prayer Given by Constantine to His Soldiers.

Chapter XXI. He Orders the Sign of the Saviour's Cross to Be Engraven on His
Soldiers' Shields.

Chapter XXII. Of His Zeal in Prayer, and the Honor He Paid to the Feast of
Easter.

Chapter XXIII. How He Forbade Idolatrous Worship, But Honored Martyrs and the
Church Festivals.

Chapter XXIV. That He Described Himself to Be a Bishop, in Charge of Affairs
External to the Church.

Chapter XXV. Prohibition of Sacrifices, of Mystic Rites, Combats of Gladiators,
Also the Licentious Worship of the Nile.

Chapter XXVI. Amendment of the Law in Force Respecting Childless Persons, and of
the Law of Wills.

Chapter XXVII. Among Other Enactments, He Decrees that No Christian Shall Slave
to a Jew, and Affirms the Validity of the Decisions of Councils.

Chapter XXVIII. His Gifts to the Churches, and Bounties to Virgins and to the
Poor.

Chapter XXIX. Of Constantine's Discourses and Declamations.20 Chapter XXX. That
He Marked Out Before a Covetous Man the Measure of a Grave, and So Put Him to
Shame.

Chapter XXXI. That He Was Derided Because of His Excessive Clemency.23 Chapter
XXXII. Of Constantine's Oration Which He Wrote to the Assembly of the Saints.24
Chapter XXXIII. How He Listened Standing to Eusebius' Declamation in Honor of
Our Saviour's Sepulchre.

Chapter XXXIV. That He Wrote to Eusebius Respecting Easter, and Respecting
Copies of the Holy Scriptures.

Chapter XXXV. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius, in Praise of His Discourse
Concerning Easter.

Chapter XXXVI. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius on the Preparation of Copies of
the Holy Scriptures.

Chapter XXXVII. How the Copies Were Provided.

Chapter XXXVIII. How the Market-Town of Gaza Was Made a City for Its Profession
of Christianity, and Received the Name of Constantia.

Chapter XXXIX. That a Place in Phoenicia Also Was Made a City, and in Other
Cities Idolatry Was Abolished, and Churches Built.

Chapter XL. That Having Conferred the Dignity of Caesars on His Three Sons at
the Three Decennial Periods of His Reign, He Dedicated the Church at Jerusalem.

Chapter XLI. That in the Meantime He Ordered a Council to Be Convened at Tyre,
Because of Controversies Raised in Egypt.

Chapter XLII. Constantine's Letter to the Council at Tyre.

Chapter XLIII. Bishops from All the Provinces Attended the Dedication of the
Church at Jerusalem.

Chapter XLIV. Of Their Reception by the Notary Marianus; The Distribution of
Money to the Poor; And Offerings to the Church.

Chapter XLV. Various Discourses by the Assembled Bishops; Ala by Eusebius, the
Writer of This History.

Chapter XLVI. That Eusebius Afterwards Delivered His Description of the Church
of the Saviour, and a Tri-Cennial Oration Before Constantine Himself.

Chapter XLVII. That the Council at Nicaea Was Held in the Twentieth, the
Dedication of the Church at Jerusalem in the Thirtieth, Year of Constantine's
Reign.

Chapter XLVIII. That Constantine Was Displeased with One Who Praised Him
Excessively.

Chapter XLIX. Marriage of His Son Constantius Caesar.

Chapter L. Embassy and Presents from the Indians.

Chapter LI. That Constantine Divided the Empire Between His Three Sons, Whom He
Had Instructed in Politics and Religion.

Chapter LII. That After They Had Reached Man's Estate He Was Their Guide in
Piety.

Chapter LIII. Having Reigned About Thirty-Two Years, and Lived Above Sixty, He
Still Had a Sound Body.

Chapter LIV. Of Those Who Abused His Extreme Benevolence for Avarice and
Hypocrisy.

Chapter LV. Constantine Employed Himself in Composition of Various Kinds to the
Close of His Life.

Chapter LVI. How He Took Bishops with Him on an Expedition Against the Persians,
and Look with Him a Tent in the Form of a Church.

Chapter LVII. How He Received an Embassy from the Persians and Kept the Night
Vigil with Others at the Feast of Easter.

Chapter LVIII. Concerning the Building of a Church in Honor of the Apostles at
Constantinople.

Chapter LIX. Farther Description of the Same Church.

Chapter LX. He Also Erected His Own Sepulchral Monument in This Church.

Chapter LXI. His Sickness at Helenopolis, and Prayers Respecting His Baptism.

Chapter LXII. Constantine's Appeal to the Bishops, Requesting Them to Confer
Upon Him the Rite of Baptism.

Chapter LXIII. How After His Baptism He Rendered Thanks to God.

Chapter LXIV. Constantine's Death at Noon on the Feast of Pentecost.

Chapter LXV. Lamentations of the Soldiery and Their Officers.

Chapter LXVI. Removal of the Body from Nicomedia to the Palace at
Constantinople.

Chapter LXVII. He Received the Same Honors from the Counts and Other Officers as
Before His Death.

Chapter LXVIII. Resolution of the Army to Confer Thence-Forward the Title of
Augustus on His Sons.

Chapter LXIX. Mourning for Constantine at Rome; And the Honor Paid Him There
Through Paintings After His Death.

Chapter LXX. His Burial by His Son Constantius at Constantinople.

Chapter LXXI. Sacred Service in the Church of the Apostles an the Occasion of
Constantine's Funeral.

Chapter LXXII. Of the Phoenix.

Chapter LXXIII. How Constantine is Represented on Coins in the Act of Ascending
to Heaven.

Chapter LXXIV. The God Whom He Had Honored Deservedly Honored Him in Return.

Chapter LXXV. He Surpassed All Preceding Emperors in Devotion to God.

Book IV.

Chapter I. How He Honored Many by Presents and Promotions.

1 While thus variously engaged in promoting the extension and glory of the
church of God, and striving by every measure to commend the Saviour's doctrine,
the emperor was far from neglecting secular affairs; but in this respect also he
was unwearied in bestowing benefits of every kind and in quick succession on the
people of every province. On the one hand he manifested a paternal anxiety for
the general welfare of his subjects; on the other he would distinguish
individuals of his own acquaintance with various marks of honor; conferring his
benefits in every instance in a truly noble spirit. No one could request a favor
from the emperor, and fail of obtaining what he sought: no one expected a boon
from him, and found that expectation vain.1 Some received presents in money,
others in land; some obtained the Praetorian praefecture, others senatorial,
others again consular rank: many were appointed provincial governors: others
were made counts of the first, second, or third order: in numberless instances
the title of Most Illustrious and many other distinctions were conferred; for
the emperor devised new dignities, that he might invest a larger number with the
tokens of his favor.

Chapter II. Remission of a Fourth Part of the Taxes.

1 The extent to which he studied the general happiness and prosperity may be
understood from a single instance most beneficial and universal in its
application, and still gratefully remembered. He remitted a fourth part of the
yearly tribute paid for land, and bestowed it on the owners of the soil; so that
if we compute this yearly reduction, we shall find that the cultivators enjoyed
their produce free of tribute every fourth year.2 This privilege being
established by law, and secured for the time to come, has given occasion for the
emperor's beneficence to be held, not merely by the then present generation, but
by their children and descendants, in perpetual remembrance.

Chapter III. Equalization of the More Oppressive Taxes.

1 And whereas some persons found fault with the surveys of land which had been
made under former emperors, and complained that their property was unduly
burdened; acting in this case also on the principles of justice, he sent
commissioners to equalize the tribute, and to secure immunity to those who had
made this. appeal.

Chapter IV. His Liberality, from His Private Resources, to the Losers in Suits
of a Pecuniary Nature.

1 In cases of judicial arbitration, in order that the loser by his decision
might not quit his presence less contented than the victorious litigant, he
himself bestowed, and from his own private means in some cases lands, in other
money, on the defeated party. In this manner he took care that the loser, as
having appeared in his presence, should be as well satisfied as the gainer of
the cause; for he considered that no one ought in any case to retire dejected
and sorrowful from an interview with such a price.3 Thus it happened that both
parties returned from the scene of trial with glad and cheerful countenances,
while the emperor's noble-minded liberality excited universal admiration.

Chapter V. Conquest of the Scythians Defeated Through the Sign of Our Saviour.

1 And why should I relate even briefly and incidentally, how he subjected
barbarous nations to the Roman power; how he was the first who subjugated the
Scytian4 and Sarmatian tribes, which had never learned submission, and compelled
them, how unwilling soever, to own the sovereignitiy of Rome? for the emperors
who preceded him had actually rendered tribute to the Scythians: and Romans, by
an annual payment, had confessed themselves servants to barbarians; an indignity
which our emperor could no longer bear, nor think it consistent with his
victorious career to continue the payment his predecessors had made.
Accordingly, with full confidence in his Saviour's aid, he raised his conquering
standard against these enemies also, and soon reduced them all to obedience;
coercing by military force those who fiercely resisted his authority, while, on
the other hand, he conciliated the rest by wisely conducted embassies, and
reclaimed them to a state of order and civilization from their lawless and
savage life. Thus the Scythians at length learned to acknowledge subjection to
the power of Rome.

Chapter VI. Conquest of the Sarmatians, Consequent on the Rebellion of Their
Slaves.

1 With respect to the Sarmatians, God himself brought them beneath the rule of
Constantine, and subdued a nation swelling with barbaric pride in the following
manner. Being attacked by the Scythians, they had entrusted their slaves with
arms, in order to repel the enemy. These slaves first overcame the invaders and
then, turning their weapons against their masters, drove them all from their
native land. The expelled Sarmatians found that their only hope of safety was in
Constantine's protection: and he, whose familiar habit it was to save men's
lives, received them all within the confines of the Roman empire.5 Those who
were capable of serving he incorporated with his own troops: to the rest he
allotted lands to cultivate for their own support: so that they themselves
acknowledged that their past misfortune had produced a happy result, in that
they now enjoyed Roman liberty in place of savage barbarism. In this manner God
added to his dominions many and various barbaric tribes.

Chapter VII. Ambassadors from Different Barbarous Nations Receive Presents from
the Emperor.

1 Indeed, ambassadors were continually arriving from all nations, bringing for
his acceptance their most precious gifts. So that I myself have sometimes stood
near the entrance of the imperial palace, and observed a noticeable array of
barbarians in attendance, differing from each other in costume and decorations,
and equally unlike in the fashion of their hair and beard. Their aspect
truculent and terrible, their bodily stature prodigious: some of a red
complexion, others white as snow, others again of an intermediate color. For in
the number of those I have referred to might be seen specimens of the Blemmyan
tribes, of the Indians, and the Ethiopians,6 "that widely-divided race, remotest
of mankind." All these in due succession, like some painted pageant, presented
to the emperor those gifts which their own nation held in most esteem; some
offering crowns of gold, others diadems set with precious stones; some bringing
fair-haired boys, others barbaric vestments embroidered with gold and flowers:
some appeared with horses, others with shields and long spears, with arrows and
bows, thereby offering their services and alliance for the emperor's acceptance.
These presents he separately received and carefully laid aside, acknowledging
them in so munificent a manner as at once to enrich those who bore them. He also
honored the noblest among them with Roman offices of dignity; so that many of
them thenceforward preferred to continue their residence among us, and felt no
desire to revisit their native land.

Chapter VIII. That He Wrote Also to the King of Persia7 Who Had Sent Him an
Embassy, on Behalf of the Christians in His Realm.

1 The king of the Persians also having testified a desire to form an alliance
with Constantine, by sending an embassy and presents as assurances of peace and
friendship, the emperor, in negotiating this treaty, far surpassed the monarch
who had first done him honor, in the magnificence with which he acknowledged his
gifts. Having heard, too, that there were many churches of God in Persia, and
that large numbers there were gathered into the fold of Christ, full of joy at
this intelligence, he resolved to extend his anxiety for the general welfare to
that country also, as one whose aim it was to care for all alike in every
nation.

Chapter IX. Letter of Constantine Augustus to Sapor, King of the Persians,
Containing a Truly Pious Confession of God and Christ. Copy of His Letter to the
King of Persia.

1 "By keeping the Divine faith, I am made a partaker of the light of truth:
guided by the light of truth, I advance in the knowledge of the Divine faith.
Hence it is that, as my actions themselves evince, I profess the most holy
religion; and this worship I declare to be that which teaches me deeper
acquaintance with the most holy God; aided by whose Divine power, beginning from
the very borders of the ocean, I have aroused each nation of the world in
succession to a well-grounded hope of security; so that those which, groaning in
servitude to the most cruel tyrants and yielding to the pressure of their daily
sufferings, had well nigh been utterly destroyed, have been restored through my
agency to a far happier state. This God I confess that I hold in unceasing honor
and remembrance; this God I delight to contemplate with pure and guileless
thoughts in the height of his glory.

Chapter X. The Writer Denounces Idols, and Glorifies God.

1 "This God I invoke with bended knees, and recoil with horror from the blood of
sacrifices from their foul and detestable odors, and from every earth-born magic
fire:8 for the profane and impious superstitions which are defiled by these
rites have cast down and consigned to perdition many, nay, whole nations of the
Gentile world. For he who is Lord of all cannot endure that those blessings
which, in his own loving-kindness and consideration of the wants of men, he has
revealed for the use of all, should be perverted to serve the lusts of any. His
only demand from man is purity of mind and an undefiled spirit; and by this
standard he weighs the actions of virtue and godliness. For his pleasure is in
works of moderation and gentleness: he loves the meek, and hates the turbulent
spirit: delighting in faith, he chastises unbelief: by him all presumptuous
power is broken down, and he avenges the insolence of the proud. While the
arrogant and haughty are utterly overthrown, he requires the humble and
forgiving with deserved rewards: even so does he highly honor and strengthen
with his special help a kingdom justly governed, and maintains a prudent king in
the tranquillity of peace.

Chapter XI. Against the Tyrants and Persecutors; And on the Captivity of
Valerian.

1 "I Cannot, then, my brother believe that I err in acknowledging this one God,
the author and parent of all things: whom many of my predecessors in power, led
astray by the madness of error, have ventured to deny, but who were all visited
with a retribution so terrible and so destructive, that all succeeding
generations have held up their calamities as the most effectual warning to any
who desire to follow in their steps. Of the number of these I believe him9 to
have been, whom the lightning-stroke of Divine vengeance drove forth from hence,
and banished to your dominions and whose disgrace contributed to the fame of
your celebrated triumph.

Chapter XII. He Declares That, Having Witnessed the Fall of the Persecutors, He
Now Rejoices at the Peace Enjoyed by the Christians.

1 "And it is surely a happy circumstance that the punishment of such persons as
I have described should have been publicly manifested in our own times. For I
myself have witnessed the end of those who lately harassed the worshipers of God
by their impious edict. And for this abundant thanksgivings are due to God that
through his excellent Providence all men who observe his holy laws are gladdened
by the renewed enjoyment of peace. Hence I am fully persuaded that everything is
in the best and safest posture, since God is vouchsafing, through the influence
of their pure and faithful religious service, and their unity of judgment
respecting his Divine character, to gather all men to himself.

Chapter XIII. He Bespeaks His Affectionate Interest for He Christians in His
Country.

1 "Imagine, then, with what joy I heard tidings so accordant with my desire,
that the fairest districts of Persia are filled with those men on whose behalf
alone I am at present speaking, I mean the Christians. I pray, therefore, that
both you and they may enjoy abundant prosperity, and that your blessings and
theirs may be in equal measure;10 for thus you will experience the mercy and
favor of that God who is the Lord and Father of all. And now, because your power
is great, I commend these persons to your protection;because your piety is
eminent, I commit them to your care. Cherish them with your wonted humanity and
kindness; for by this proof of faith you will secure an immeasurable benefit
both to yourself and us."

Chapter XIV. How the Zealous Prayers of Constantine Procured Peace to the
Christians.

1 Thus, the nations of the world being everywhere guided in their course as it
were by the skill of a single pilot, and acquiescing in the administration of
him who governed as the servant of God, the peace of the Roman empire continued
undisturbed, and all classes of his subjects enjoyed a life of tranquillity and
repose. At the same time the emperor, who was convinced that the prayers of
godly men contributed powerfully to the maintenance of the public welfare, felt
himself constrained zealously to seek such prayers and not only himself implored
the help and favor of God, but charged the prelates of the churches to offer
supplications on his behalf.

Chapter XV. He Causes Himself to Be Represented on His Coins, and in His
Portraits, in the Attitude of Prayer.

1 How deeply his soul was impressed by the power of divine faith may be
understood from the circumstance that he directed his likeness to be stamped on
the golden coin of the empire with the eyes uplifted as in the posture of prayer
to God: and this money became current throughout the Roman world. His portrait
also at full length was placed over the entrance gates of the palaces in some
cities, the eyes upraised to heaven, and the hands outspread as if in prayer.

Chapter XVI. He Forbids by Law the Plating His Likeness in Idol Temples.

1 In this manner he represented himself, even through the medium of painting, as
habitually engaged in prayer to God. At the same time he forbade, by an express
enactment, the setting up of any resemblance of himself in any idol temple, that
not even the mere lineaments of his person might receive contamination from the
error of forbidden superstition.

Chapter XVII. Of His Prayers in the Palace, and His Reading the Holy Scriptures.

1 Still nobler proofs of his piety might be discerned by those who marked how he
modeled as it were his very palace into a church of God, and himself afforded a
pattern of zeal to those assembled therein: how he took the sacred scriptures
into his hands, and devoted himself to the study of those divinely inspired
oracles; after which he would offer up regular prayers with all the members of
his imperial court.

Chapter XVIII. He Enjoins the General Observance of the Lord's Day, and the Day
of Preparation.

1 He ordained, too, that one day should be regarded as a special occasion for
prayer: I mean that which is truly the first and chief of all, the day of our
Lord and Saviour. The entire care of his household was entrusted to deacons and
other ministers consecrated to the service of God, and distinguished by gravity
of life and every other virtue: while his trusty body guard, strong in affection
and fidelity to his person, found in their emperor an instructor in the practice
of piety, and like him held the Lord's salutary day in honor and performed on
that day the devotions which he loved. The same observance was recommended by
this blessed prince to all classes of his subjects: his earnest desire being
gradually to lead all mankind to the worship of God. Accordingly he enjoined on
all the subjects of the Roman empire to observe the Lord's day, as a day of
rest, and also to honor the day which precedes the Sabbath; in memory, I
suppose, of what the Saviour of mankind is recorded to have achieved on that
day.11 And since his desire was to teach his whole army zealously to honor the
Saviour's day (which derives its name from light, and from the sun),12 he freely
granted to those among them who were partakers of the divine faith, leisure for
attendance on the services of the Church of God, in order that they might be
able, without impediment, to perform their religious worship.

Chapter XIX. That He Directed Even His Pagan Soldiers to Pray on the Lord's Day.

1 With regard to those who were as yet ignorant of divine truth, he provided by
a second statute that they should appear on each Lord's day on an open plain
near the city, and there, at a given signal, offer to God with one accord a
prayer which they had previously learnt. He admonished them that their
confidence should not rest in their spears, or armor, or bodily strength, but
that they should acknowledge the supreme God as the giver of every good, and of
victory itself; to whom they were bound to offer their prayers with due
regularity, uplifting their hands toward heaven, and raising their mental vision
higher still to the king of heaven, on whom they should call as the Author of
victory, their Preserver, Guardian, and Helper.The emperor himself prescribed
the prayer to be used by all his troops, commanding them, to pronounce the
following words in the Latin tongue:

Chapter XX. The Form of Prayer Given by Constantine to His Soldiers.

1 "We acknowledge thee the only God: we own thee, as our King and implore thy
succor. By thy favor have we gotten the victory through thee are we mightier
than our enemies. We render thanks for thy past benefits, and trust thee for
future blessings. Together we pray to thee, and beseech thee long to preserve to
us, safe and triumphant, our emperor Constantine and his pious sons." Such was
the duty to be performed on Sunday by his troops, and such the prayer they were
instructed to offer up to God.

Chapter XXI. He Orders the Sign of the Saviour's Cross to Be Engraven on His
Soldiers' Shields.

1 And not only so, but he also caused the sign of the salutary trophy to be
impressed on the very shields of his soldiers; and commanded that his embattled
forces should be preceded in their march, not by golden images, as heretofore,13
but only by the standard of the cross.

Chapter XXII. Of His Zeal in Prayer, and the Honor He Paid to the Feast of
Easter.

1 The emperor himself, as a sharer in the holy mysteries of our religion, would
seclude himself daily at a stated hour in the innermost chambers of his palace;
and there in solitary converse with his God, would kneel in humble supplication,
and entreat the blessings of which he stood in need. But especially at the
salutary feast of Easter, his religious diligence was redoubled; he fulfilled as
it were the duties of a hierophant with every energy of his mind and body, and
outvied all others in the zealous celebration of this feast. He changed, too,
the holy night vigil into a brightness like that of day, by causing waxen tapers
of great length to be lighted throughout the city: besides which, torches
everywhere diffused their light, so as to impart to this mystic vigil a
brilliant splendor beyond that of day.14 As soon as day itself returned, in
imitation of our Saviour's gracious acts, he opened a liberal hand to his
subjects of every nation, province, and people, and lavished abundant bounties
on all.

Chapter XXIII. How He Forbade Idolatrous Worship, But Honored Martyrs and the
Church Festivals.

1 Such were his sacred ministrations in the service of his God. At the same
time, his subjects, both civil and military, throughout the empire, found a
barrier everywhere opposed against idol worship, and every kind of sacrifice
forbidden.15 A statute was also passed, enjoining the due observance of the
Lord's day, and transmitted to the governors of every province, who undertook,
at the emperor's command, to respect the days commemorative of martyrs, and duly
to honor the festal seasons in the churches:16 and all these intentions were
fullfilled to the emperor's entire satisfaction.

Chapter XXIV. That He Described Himself to Be a Bishop, in Charge of Affairs
External to the Church.

1 Hence it was not without reason that once, on the occasion of his entertaining
a company of bishops, he let fall the expression, "that he himself too was a
bishop," addressing them in my hearing in the following words: "You are bishops
whose jurisdiction is within the Church: I also am a bishop, ordained by God to
overlook whatever is external to the Church."17 And truly his measures
corresponded with his words: for he watched over his subjects with an episcopal
care, and exhorted them as far as in him lay to follow a godly life.

Chapter XXV. Prohibition of Sacrifices, of Mystic Rites, Combats of Gladiators,
Also the Licentious Worship of the Nile.

1 Consistently with this zeal he issued successive laws and ordinances,
forbidding any to offer sacrifice to idols, to consult diviners, to erect
images, or to pollute the cities with the sanguinary combats of gladiators.18
And inasmuch as the Egyptians, especially those of Alexandria, had been
accustomed to honor their river through a priesthood composed of effeminate men,
a further law was passed commanding the extermination of the whole class as
vicious, that no one might thenceforward be found tainted with the like
impurity. And whereas the superstitious inhabitants apprehended that the river
would in consequence withhold its customary flood, God himself showed his
approval of the emperor's law by ordering all things in a manner quite contrary
to their expectation. For those who had defiled the cities by their vicious
conduct were indeed seen no more; but the river, as if the country through which
it flowed had been purified to receive it, rose higher than ever before, and
completely overflowed the country with its fertilizing streams: thus effectually
admonishing the deluded people to turn from impure men, and ascribe their
prosperity to him alone who is the Giver of all good.

Chapter XXVI. Amendment of the Law in Force Respecting Childless Persons, and of
the Law of Wills.

1 So numerous, indeed, were the benefits of this kind conferred by the emperor
on every province, as to afford ample materials to any who might desire to
record them. Among these may be instanced those laws which he entirely
remodelled, and established on a more equitable basis: the nature of which
reform may be briefly and easily explained. The childless were punished under
the old law with the forfeiture of their hereditary property a merciless
statute, which dealt with them as positive criminals. The emperor annulled this,
and decreed that those so circumstanced should inherit. He regulated the
question on the principles of equity and justice, arguing willful transgressors
should be chastised with the penalties their crimes deserve. But nature herself
denies children to many, who long, perhaps, for a numerous offspring, but are
disappointed of their hope by bodily infirmity. Others continue childless, not
from any dislike of posterity, but because their ardent love of philosophy19
renders them averse to the conjugal union. Women, too, consecrated to the
service of God, have maintained a pure and spotless virginity, and have devoted
themselves, soul and body to a life of entire chastity and holiness. What then?
Should this conduct be deemed worthy of punishment, or rather of admiration and
praise; since to desire this state is in itself honorable, and to maintain it
surpasses the power of unassisted nature? Surely those whose bodily infirmity
destroys their hope of offspring are worthy of pity, not of punishment: and he
who devotes himself to a higher object calls not for chastisement, but especial
admiration. On such principles of sound reason did the emperor rectify the
defects of this law. Again, with regard to the wills of dying persons, the old
laws had ordained that they should be expressed, even at the latest breath, as
it were, in certain definite words, and had prescribed the exact form and terms
to be employed. This practice had occasioned many fraudulent attempts to hinder
the intentions of the deceased from being carried into full effect. As soon as
our emperor was aware of these abuses, he reformed this law likewise, declaring
that a dying man ought to be permitted to indicate his last wishes in as few
words as possible, and in whatever terms he pleased; and to set forth his will
in any written form; or even by word of mouth, provided it were done in the
presence of proper witnesses, who might be competent faithfully to discharge
their trust.

Chapter XXVII. Among Other Enactments, He Decrees that No Christian Shall Slave
to a Jew, and Affirms the Validity of the Decisions of Councils.

1 He also passed a law to the effect that no Christian should remain in
servitude to a Jewish master, on the ground that it could not be right that
those whom the Saviour had ransomed should be subjected to the yoke of slavery
by a people who had slain the prophets and the Lord himself. If any were found
hereafter in these circumstances, the slave was to be set at liberty, and the
master punished by a fine.

2 He likewise added the sanction of his authority to the decisions of bishops
passed at their synods, and forbade the provincial governors to annul any of
their decrees: for he rated the priests of God at a higher value than any judge
whatever. These and a thousand similar provisions did he enact for the benefit
of his subjects; but there is not time now to give a special description of
them, such as might convey an accurate idea of his imperial wisdom in these
respects: nor need I now relate at length, how, as a devoted servant of the
Supreme God, he employed himself from morning until night in seeking objects for
his beneficence, and how equally and universally kind he was to all.

Chapter XXVIII. His Gifts to the Churches, and Bounties to Virgins and to the
Poor.

1 His liberality, however, was most especially exercised on behalf of the
churches of God. In some cases he granted lands, in others he issued supplies of
food for the support of the poor, of orphan children, and widows; besides which,
he evinced much care and forethought in fully providing the naked and destitute
with clothing. He distinguished, however, with most special honor those who had
devoted their lives to the practice of Divine philosophy. Hence his respect,
little short of veneration, for God's most holy and ever virgin choir: for he
felt assured that the God to whom such persons devoted themselves was himself an
inmate of their souls.

Chapter XXIX. Of Constantine's Discourses and Declamations.20

1 For himself, he sometimes passed sleepless nights in furnishing his mind with
Divine knowledge: and much of his time was spent in composing discourses, many
of which he delivered in public; for he conceived it to be incumbent on him to
govern his subjects by appealing to their reason, and to secure in all respects
a rational obedience to his authority. Hence he would sometimes himself evoke an
assembly, on which occasions vast multitudes attended, in the hope of hearing an
emperor sustain the part of a philosopher. And if in the course of his speech
any occasion offered of touching on sacred topics, he immediately stood erect,
and with a grave aspect and subdued tone of voice seemed reverently to be
initiating his auditors in the mysteries of the Divine doctrine: and when they
greeted him with shouts of acclamation, he would direct them by his gestures to
raise their eyes to heaven, and reserve their admiration for the Supreme King
alone, and honor him with adoration and praise. He usually divided the subjects
of his address, first thoroughly exposing the error of polytheism, and proving
the superstition of the Gentiles to be mere fraud, and a cloak for impiety. He
then would assert the sole sovereignty of God: passing thence to his Providence,
both general and particular. Proceeding next to the dispensation of salvation,
he would demonstrate its necessity, and adaptation to the nature of the case;
entering next in order on the doctrine of the Divine judgment.21 And here
especially he appealed most powerfully to the consciences of his hearers, while
he denounced the rapacious and violent, and those who were slaves to an
inordinate thirst of gain. Nay, he caused some of his own acquaintance who were
present to feel the severe lash of his words, and to stand with downcast eyes in
the consciousness of guilt, while he testified against them in the clearest and
most impressive terms that they would have an account to render of their deeds
to God. He reminded them that God himself had given him the empire of the world,
portions of which he himself, acting on the same Divine principle, had intrusted
to their government; but that all would in due time be alike summoned to give
account of their actions to the Supreme Sovereign of all. Such was his constant
testimony; such his admonition and instruction. And he himself both felt and
uttered these sentiments in the genuine confidence of faith: but-his hearers
were little disposed to learn, and deaf to sound advice; receiving his words
indeed with loud applause, but induced by insatiable cupidity practically to
disregard them.

Chapter XXX. That He Marked Out Before a Covetous Man the Measure of a Grave,
and So Put Him to Shame.

1 On one occasion he thus personally addressed one of his courtiers: "How far,
my friend, are we to carry our inordinate desires?" Then drawing the dimensions
of a human figure with a lance which he happened to have in his hand, he
continued: "Though thou couldst obtain the whole wealth of this world, yea, the
whole world itself, thou wilt carry with thee at last no more than this little
spot which I have marked out, if indeed even that be thine."22 Such were the
words and actions of this blessed prince; and though at the time he failed to
reclaim any from their evil ways, yet notwithstanding the course of events
afforded evident proof that his admonitions were more like Divine prophecies
than mere words.

Chapter XXXI. That He Was Derided Because of His Excessive Clemency.23

1 Meantime, since there was no fear of capital punishment to deter from the
commission of crime, for the emperor himself was uniformly inclined to clemency,
and none of the provincial governors visited offenses with their proper
penalties, this state of things drew with it no small degree of blame on the
general administration of the empire; whether justly or not, let every one form
his own judgment: for myself, I only ask permission to record the fact.

Chapter XXXII. Of Constantine's Oration Which He Wrote to the Assembly of the
Saints.24

1 The emperor was in the habit of composing his orations in the Latin tongue,
from which they were translated into Greek by interpreters appointed for this
special service. One of the discourses thus translated I intend to annex, by way
of specimen, to this present work, that one, I mean, which he inscribed "To the
assembly of the saints," and dedicated to the Church of God, that no one may
have ground for deeming my testimony on this head mere empty praise.

Chapter XXXIII. How He Listened Standing to Eusebius' Declamation in Honor of
Our Saviour's Sepulchre.

1 One act, however, I must by no means omit to record, which this admirable
prince performed in my own presence. On one occasion, emboldened by the
confident assurance I entertained of his piety, I had begged permission to
pronounce a discourse on the subject of our Saviour's sepulchre in his hearing.
With this request he most readily complied, and in the midst of a large number
of auditors, in the interior of the palace itself, he stood and listened with
the rest. I entreated him, but in vain, to seat himself on the imperial throne
which stood near: he continued with fixed attention to weigh the topics of my
discourse, and gave his own testimony to the truth of the theological doctrines
it contained. After some time had passed, the oration being of considerable
length, I was myself desirous of concluding; but this he would not permit, and
exhorted me to proceed to the very end. On my again entreating him to sit, he in
his turn was displeased and said that it was not right to listen in a careless
manner to the discussion of doctrines relating to God; and again, that this
posture was good and profitable to himself, since it was reverent to stand while
listening to sacred truths. Having, therefore, concluded my discourse, I
returned home, and resumed my usual occupations.

Chapter XXXIV. That He Wrote to Eusebius Respecting Easter, and Respecting
Copies of the Holy Scriptures.

1 Ever careful for the welfare of the churches of God, the emperor addressed me
personally in a letter on the means of providing copies of the inspired oracles,
and also on the subject of the most holy feast of Easter. For I had myself
dedicated to him an exposition of the mystical import of that feast; and the
manner in which he honored me with a reply may be understood by any one who
reads the following letter.

Chapter XXXV. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius, in Praise of His Discourse
Concerning Easter.

1 "Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Eusebius.

2 "It is indeed an arduous task, and beyond the power of language itself,
worthily to treat of the mysteries of Christ, and to explain in a fitting manner
the controversy respecting the feast of Easter, its origin as well as its
precious and toilsome accomplishment.25 For it is not in the power even of those
who are able to apprehend them, adequately to describe the things of God. I am,
notwithstanding, filled with admiration of your learning and zeal, and have not
only myself read your work with pleasure, but have given directions, according
to your own desire, that it be communicated to many sincere followers of our
holy religion. Seeing, then, with what pleasure we receive favors of this kind
from your Sagacity, be pleased to gladden us more frequently with those
compositions, to the practice of which, indeed, you confess yourself to have
been trained from an early period, so that I am urging a willing man, as they
say, in exhorting you to your customary pursuits. And certainly the high and
confident judgment we entertain is a proof that the person who has translated
your writings into the Latin tongue is in no respect incompetent to the task,
impossible though it be that such version should fully equal the excellence of
the works themselves. God preserve you, beloved brother." Such was his letter on
this subject: and that which related to the providing of copies of the
Scriptures for reading in the churches was to the following purport.

Chapter XXXVI. Constantine's Letter to Eusebius on the Preparation of Copies of
the Holy Scriptures.

1 "Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Eusebius.

2 "It happens, through the favoring providence of God our Saviour, that great
numbers have united themselves to the most holy church in the city which is
called by my name. It seems, therefore, highly requisite, since that city is
rapidly advancing in prosperity in all other respects, that the number of
churches should also he increased. Do you, therefore, receive with all readiness
my determination on this behalf. I have thought it expedient to instruct your
Prudence to order fifty copies of the sacred Scriptures, the provision and use
of which you know to be most needful for the instruction of the Church, to be
written on prepared parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient, portable
form, by professional transcribers thoroughly practiced in their art.26 The
catholicus27 of the diocese has also received instructions by letter from our
Clemency to be careful to furnish all things necessary for the preparation of
such copies; and it will be for you to take special care that they be completed
with as little delay as possible.28 You have authority also, in virtue of this
letter, to use two of the public carriages for their conveyance, by which
arrangement the copies when fairly written will most easily be forwarded for my
personal inspection; and one of the deacons of your church may be intrusted with
this service, who, on his arrival here, shall experience my liberality. God
preserve you, beloved brother!"

Chapter XXXVII. How the Copies Were Provided.

1 Such were the emperor's commands, which were followed by the immediate
execution of the work itself, which we sent him in magnificent and elaborately
bound volumes of a threefold and fourfold form.29 This fact is attested by
another letter, which the emperor wrote in acknowledgment, in which, having
heard that the city Constantia in our country, the inhabitants of which had been
more than commonly devoted to superstition, had been impelled by a sense of
religion to abandon their past idolatry, he testified his joy, and approval of
their conduct.

Chapter XXXVIII. How the Market-Town of Gaza Was Made a City for Its Profession
of Christianity, and Received the Name of Constantia.

1 For in fact the place now called Constantia, in the province of Palestine,
having embraced the saving religion, was distinguished both by the favor of God,
and by special honor from the emperor, being now for the first time raised to
the rank of a city, and receiving the more honored name of his pious sister in
exchange for its former appellation.

Chapter XXXIX. That a Place in Phoenicia Also Was Made a City, and in Other
Cities Idolatry Was Abolished, and Churches Built.

1 A Similar change was effected in several other cities; for instance, in that
town of Phoenicia which received its name from that of the emperor, and the
inhabitants of which committed their innumerable idols to the flames, and
adopted in their stead the principles of the saving faith. Numbers, too, in the
other provinces, both in the cities and the country, became willing inquirers
after the saving knowledge of God; destroyed as worthless things the images of
every kind which they had heretofore held most sacred; voluntarily demolished
the lofty temples and shrines which contained them; and, renouncing their former
sentiments, or rather errors, commenced and completed entirely new churches. But
since it is not so much my province to give a circumstantial detail of the
actions of this pious prince, as it is theirs who have been privileged to enjoy
his society at all times, I shall content myself with briefly recording such
facts as have come to my own personal knowledge, before I proceed to notice the
last days of his life.

Chapter XL. That Having Conferred the Dignity of Caesars on His Three Sons at
the Three Decennial Periods of His Reign, He Dedicated the Church at Jerusalem.

1 By this time the thirtieth year of his reign was completed. In the course of
this period, his three sons had been admitted at different times as his
colleagues in the empire. The first, Constantinus, who bore his father's name,
obtained this distinction about the tenth year of his reign. Constantius, the
second son, so called from his grandfather, was proclaimed Caesar about the
twentieth, while Constans, the third, whose name expresses the firmness and
stability of his character, was advanced to the same dignity at the thirtieth
anniversary of his father's reign.30 Having thus reared a threefold offspring, a
Trinity,31 as it were, of pious sons, and having received them severally at each
decennial period to a participation in his imperial authority, he judged the
festival of his Tricennalia to be a fit occasion for thanksgiving to the
Sovereign Lord of all, at the same time believing that the dedication of the
church which his zealous magnificence had erected at Jerusalem might
advantageously be performed.

Chapter XLI. That in the Meantime He Ordered a Council to Be Convened at Tyre,
Because of Controversies Raised in Egypt.

1 Meanwhile that spirit of envy which is the enemy of all good, like a dark
cloud intercepting the sun's brightest rays, endeavored to mar the joy of this
festivity, by again raising contentions to disturb the tranquillity of the
Egyptian churches. Our divinely favored emperor, however, once more convened a
synod composed of many bishops, and set them as it were in armed array, like the
host of God, against this malignant spirit, having commanded their presence from
the whole of Egypt and Libya, from Asia, and from Europe, in order, first, to
decide the questions in dispute, and afterwards to perform the dedication of the
sacred edifice above mentioned. He enjoined them, by the way, to adjust their
differences at the capital city of Phoenicia, reminding them that they had no
right, while harboring feelings of mutual animosity, to engage in the service of
God, since his law expressly forbids those who are at variance to offer their
gift until they have first become reconciled and mutually disposed to peace.
Such were the salutary precepts which the emperor continually kept vividly
before his own mind, and in accordance with which he admonished them to
undertake their present duties in a spirit of perfect unanimity and concord, in
a letter to the following purport.

Chapter XLII. Constantine's Letter to the Council at Tyre.

1 "Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to the holy Council at Tyre.

2 "Surely it would best consist with and best become the prosperity of these our
times, that the Catholic Church should be undivided, and the servants of Christ
be at this present moment clear from all reproach. Since, however, there are
those who, carried away by a baleful and furious spirit of contention (for I
will not charge them with intentionally leading a life unworthy of their
profession), are endeavoring to create that general confusion which, in my
judgment, is the most pernicious of all evils; I exhort you, forward as you
already are, to meet together and form a synod without delay: to defend those
who need protection; to administer remedies to your brethren who are in peril;
to recall the divided members to unity of judgment; to rectify errors while
opportunity is yet allowed: that thus you may restore to so many provinces that
due measure of concord which, strange and sad anomaly! the arrogance of a few
individuals has destroyed. And I believed that all are alike persuaded that this
course is at the same time pleasing to Almighty God (as well as the highest
object of my own desires), and will bring no small honor to yourselves, should
you be successful in restoring peace. Delay not, then, but hasten with redoubled
zeal to terminate the present dissensions in a manner becoming the occasion, by
assembling together in that spirit of true sincerity and faith which the Saviour
whom we serve especially demands from us, I may almost say with an audible
voice, on all occasions. No proof of pious zeal on my part shall be wanting.
Already have I done all to which my attention was directed by your letters. I
have sent to those bishops whose presence you desired, that they may share your
counsels. I have despatched Dionysius, a man of consular rank, who will both
remind those prelates of their duty who are bound to attend the Council with
you, and will himself be there to superintend the proceedings, but especially to
maintain good order. Meantime should any one, though I deem it most improbable,
venture on this occasion to violate my command, and refuse his attendance, a
messenger shall be despatched forthwith to banish that person in virtue of an
imperial edict, and to teach him that it does not become him to resist an
emperor's decrees when issued in defense of truth. For the rest, it will be for
your Holinesses, unbiased either by enmity or favor, but consistently with
ecclesiastical and apostolic order, to devise a fitting remedy whether it be for
positive offenses or for unpremeditated errors; in order that you may at once
free the Church from all reproach, relieve my anxiety, and, by restoring the
blessings of peace to those who are now divided, procure the highest honor for
yourselves. God preserve you, beloved brethren!"32 Chapter XLIII. Bishops from
All the Provinces Attended the Dedication of the Church at Jerusalem.

1 No sooner had these injunctions been carried into effect, than another
emissary arrived with despatches from the emperor, and an urgent admonition to
the Council to hasten their journey to Jerusalem without delay.33 Accordingly
they all took their departure from the province of Phoenicia, and proceeded to
their destination, availing themselves of the public means of transport. Thus
Jerusalem became the gathering point for distinguished prelates from every
province, and the whole city was thronged by a vast assemblage of the servants
of God. The Macedonians had sent the bishop of their metropolis;34 the
Pannonians and Moesians the fairest of God's youthful flock among them. A holy
prelate from Persia too was there, deeply versed in the sacred oracles; while
Bithynian and Thracian bishops graced the Council with their presence; nor were
the most illustrious from Cilicia wanting, nor the chief of the Cappadocians,
distinguished above all for learning and eloquence. In short, the whole of Syria
and Mesopotamia, Phoenicia and Arabia, Palestine, Egypt, and Libya, with the
dwellers in the Thebaid, all contributed to swell the mighty concourse of God's
ministers, followed as they were by vast numbers from every province. They were
attended by an imperial escort,35 and officers of trust had also been sent from
the palace itself, with instructions to heighten the splendor of the festival at
the emperor's expense.

Chapter XLIV. Of Their Reception by the Notary Marianus; The Distribution of
Money to the Poor; And Offerings to the Church.

1 The director and chief of these officers was a most useful servant of the
emperor, a man eminent for faith and piety, and thoroughly acquainted with the
Divine word, who had been honorably conspicuous by his profession of godliness
during the time of the tyrants' power, and therefore was deservedly entrusted
with the arrangement of the present proceedings. Accordingly, in faithful
obedience to the emperor's commands, he received the assembly with courteous
hospitality, and entertained them with feasts and banquets on a scale of great
splendor. He also distributed lavish supplies of money and clothing among the
naked and destitute, and the multitudes of both sexes who suffered from want of
food and the common necessaries of life. Finally, he enriched and beautified the
church itself throughout with offerings of imperial magnificence, and thus fully
accomplished the service he had been commissioned to perform.

Chapter XLV. Various Discourses by the Assembled Bishops; Ala by Eusebius, the
Writer of This History.

1 Meantime the festival derived additional luster both from the prayers and
discourses of the ministers of God, some of whom extolled the pious emperor's
willing devotion to the Saviour of mankind, and dilated on the magnificence of
the edifice which he had raised to his memory. Others afforded, as it were, an
intellectual feast to the ears of all present, by public disquisitions on the
sacred doctrines of our religion. Others interpreted passages of holy Scripture,
and unfolded their hidden meaning; while such as were unequal to these efforts
presented a bloodless sacrifice and mystical service to God in the prayers which
they offered for general peace, for the Church of God, for the emperor himself
as the instrumental cause of so many blessings, and for his pious sons. I myself
too, unworthy as I was of such a privilege, pronounced various public orations
in honor of this solemnity, wherein I partly explained by a written description
the details of the imperial edifice, and partly endeavored to gather from the
prophetic visions apt illustrations of the symbols it displayed.36 Thus joyfully
was the festival of dedication celebrated in the thirtieth year of our emperor's
reign.

Chapter XLVI. That Eusebius Afterwards Delivered His Description of the Church
of the Saviour, and a Tri-Cennial Oration Before Constantine Himself.

1 The structure of the church of our Saviour, the form of his sacred cave, the
splendor of the work itself, and the numberless offerings in gold, and silver,
and precious stones, I have described to the best of my ability, and dedicated
to the emperor in a separate treatise, which on a fitting opportunity I shall
append to this present work. I shall add to it also that oration on his
Tricennalia which shortly afterwards, having traveled to the city which bears
his name, I delivered in the emperor's own presence.37 This was the second
opportunity afforded me of glorifying the Supreme God in the imperial palace
itself: and on this occasion my pious hearer evinced the greatest joy, as he
afterwards testified, when he entertained the bishops then present, and loaded
them with distinctions of every kind.

Chapter XLVII. That the Council at Nicaea Was Held in the Twentieth, the
Dedication of the Church at Jerusalem in the Thirtieth, Year of Constantine's
Reign.

1 This second synod the emperor convened at Jerusalem, being the greatest of
which we have any knowledge, next to the first which he had summoned at the
famous Bithynian city. That indeed was a triumphal assembly, held in the
twentieth year of his reign, an occasion of thanksgiving for victory over his
enemies in the very city which bears the name of victory.38 The present meeting
added luster to the thirtieth anniversary, during which the emperor dedicated
the church at the sepulchre of our Saviour, as a peace-offering to God, the
giver of all good.

Chapter XLVIII. That Constantine Was Displeased with One Who Praised Him
Excessively.

1 And now that all these ceremonies were completed, and the divine qualities of
the emperor's character continued to be the theme of universal praise, one of
God's ministers presumed so far as in his own presence to pronounce him blessed,
as having been counted worthy to hold absolute and universal empire in this
life, and as being destined to share the empire of the Son of God in the world
to come. These words, however, Constantine heard with indignation, and forbade
the speaker to hold such language, exhorting him rather to pray earnestly on his
behalf, that whether in this life or in that which is to come, he might be found
worthy to be a servant of God.39 Chapter XLIX. Marriage of His Son Constantius
Caesar.

1 On the completion of the thirtieth year of his reign he solemnized the
marriage of his second son,40 having concluded that of his first-born long
before. This was an occasion of great joy and festivity, the emperor himself
attending on his son at the ceremony, and entertaining the guests of both sexes,
the men and women in distinct and separate companies, with sumptuous
hospitality. Rich presents likewise were liberally distributed among the cities
and people.

Chapter L. Embassy and Presents from the Indians.

1 About this time ambassadors from the Indians, who inhabit the distant regions
of the East, arrived with presents consisting of many varieties of brilliant
precious stones, and animals differing in species from those known to us. These
offerings they presented to the emperor, thus allowing that his sovereignty
extended even to the Indian Ocean, and that the princes of their country, who
rendered homage to him both by paintings and statues, acknowledged his imperial
and paramount authority. Thus the Eastern Indians now submitted to his sway, as
the Britons of the Western Ocean had done at the commencement of his reign.

Chapter LI. That Constantine Divided the Empire Between His Three Sons, Whom He
Had Instructed in Politics and Religion.

1 Having thus established his power in the opposite extremities of the world, he
divided the whole extent of his dominions, as though he were allotting a
patrimonial inheritance to the dearest objects of his regard, among his three
sons. To the eldest he assigned his grandfather's portion; to the second, the
empire of the East; to the third, the countries which lie between these two
divisions.41 And being desirous of furnishing his children with an inheritance
truly valuable and salutary to their souls, he had been careful to imbue them
with true religious principles, being himself their guide to the knowledge of
sacred things, and also appointing men of approved piety to be their
instructors. At the same time he assigned them the most accomplished teachers of
secular learning, by some of whom they were taught the arts of war, while they
were trained by others in political, and by others again in legal science. To
each moreover was granted a truly royal retinue, consisting of infantry,
spearmen, and body guards, with every other kind of military force; commanded
respectively by captains, tribunes, and generals42 of whose warlike skill and
devotion to his sons the emperor had had previous experience.

Chapter LII. That After They Had Reached Man's Estate He Was Their Guide in
Piety.

1 As long as the Caesars were of tender years, they were aided by suitable
advisers in the management of public affairs; but on their arrival at the age of
manhood their father's instructions alone sufficed. When present he proposed to
them his own example, and admonished them to follow his pious course: in their
absence he furnished them by letter with rules of conduct suited to their
imperial station, the first and greatest of which was an exhortation to value
the knowledge and worship of the Sovereign Lord of all more than wealth, nay,
more than empire itself. At length he permitted them to direct the public
administration of the empire without control, making it his first request that
they would care for the interests of the Church of God, and boldly profess
themselves disciples of Christ. Thus trained, and excited to obedience not so
much by precept as by their own voluntary desire for virtue, his sons more than
fulfilled the admonitions of their father, devoting their earnest attention to
the service of God, and observing the ordinances of the Church even in the
palace itself, with all the members of their households.43 For their father's
forethought had provided that all the attendants of his son's should be
Christians. And not only so, but the military officers of highest rank, and
those who had the control of public business, were professors of the same faith:
for the emperor placed confidence in the fidelity of men devoted to the service
of God, as in a strong and sure defense. When our thrice blessed prince had
completed these arrangements, and thus secured order and tranquillity throughout
the empire, God, the dispenser of all blessings, judged it to be the fitting
time to translate him to a better inheritance, and summoned him to pay the debt
of nature.

Chapter LIII. Having Reigned About Thirty-Two Years, and Lived Above Sixty, He
Still Had a Sound Body.

1 He completed the time of his reign in two and thirty years, wanting a few
months and days,44 and his whole life extended to about twice that period. At
this age he still possessed a sound and vigorous body, free from all blemish,
and of more than youthful vivacity; a noble mien, and strength equal to any
exertion; so that he was able to join in martial exercises, to fide, endure the
fatigues of travel, engage in battle, and erect trophies over his conquered
enemies, besides gaining those bloodless victories by which he was wont to
triumph over those who opposed him.45 Chapter LIV. Of Those Who Abused His
Extreme Benevolence for Avarice and Hypocrisy.

1 In like manner his mental46 qualities reached the highest point of human
perfection. Indeed he was distinguished by every excellence of character, but
especially by benevolence; a virtue, however, which subjected him to censure
from many, in consequence of the baseness of wicked men, who ascribed their own
crimes to the emperor's forbearance. In truth I can myself bear testimony to the
grievous evils which prevailed during these times; I mean the violence of
rapacious and unprincipled men, who preyed on all classes of society alike, and
the scandalous hypocrisy of those who crept into the Church, and assumed the
name and character of Christians. His own benevolence and goodness of heart, the
genuineness of his own faith, and his truthfulness of character, induced the
emperor to credit the profession of these reputed Christians, who craftily
preserved the semblance of sincere affection for his person. The confidence he
reposed in such men sometimes forced him into conduct unworthy of himself, of
which envy took advantage to cloud in this respect the luster of his
character.47 Chapter LV. Constantine Employed Himself in Composition of Various
Kinds to the Close of His Life.

1 These offenders, however, were soon over-taken by divine chastisement. To
return to our emperor. He had so thoroughly trained his mind in the art of
reasoning that he continued to the last to compose discourses on various
subjects, to deliver frequent orations in public, and to instruct his hearers in
the sacred doctrines of religion. He was also habitually engaged in legislating
both on political and military questions;48 in short, in devising whatever might
be conducive to the general welfare of the human race. It is well worthy of
remark, that, very shortly before his departure, he pronounced a funeral oration
before his usual auditory, in which he spoke at length on the immortality of the
soul, the state of those who had persevered in a life of godliness, and the
blessings which God has laid up in store for them that love him. On the other
hand he made it appear by copious and conclusive arguments what the end of those
will be who have pursued a contrary career, describing in vivid language the
final ruin of the ungodly. His powerful testimony on these subjects seemed so
far to touch the consciences of those around him, that one of the self-imagined
philosophers, of whom he asked his opinion of what he had heard, bore testimony
to the truth of his words, and accorded a real, though reluctant, tribute of
praise to the arguments by which he had exposed the worship of a plurality of
gods. By converse such as this with his friends before his death, the emperor
seemed as it were to smooth and prepare the way for his transition to a happier
life.

Chapter LVI. How He Took Bishops with Him on an Expedition Against the Persians,
and Look with Him a Tent in the Form of a Church.

1 It is also worthy of record that about the time of which I am at present
writing, the emperor, having heard of an insurrection of some barbarians in the
East, observed that the conquest of this enemy was still in store for him, and
resolved on an expedition against the Persians. Accordingly he proceeded at once
to put his forces in motion, at the same time communicating his intended march
to the bishops who happened to be at his court, some of whom he judged it right
to take with him as compan- ions, and as needful coadjutors in the service of
God. They, on the other hand, cheerfully declared their willingness to follow in
his train, disclaiming any desire to leave him, and engaging to battle with and
for him by supplication to God on his behalf. Full of joy at this answer to his
request, he unfolded to them his projected line of march;49 after which he
caused a tent of great splendor, representing in shape the figure of a church,
to be prepared for his own use in the approaching war. In this he intended to
unite with the bishops in offering prayers to the God from whom all victory
proceeds.

Chapter LVII. How He Received an Embassy from the Persians and Kept the Night
Vigil with Others at the Feast of Easter.

1 In the meanwhile the Persians, hearing of the emperor's warlike preparations,
and not a little terrified at the prospect of an engagement with his forces,
dispatched an embassy to pray for conditions of peace. These overtures the
emperor, himself a sincere lover of peace, at once accepted, and readily entered
on friendly relations with that people. At this time, the great festival of
Easter was at hand; on which occasion he rendered the tribute of his prayers to
God, and passed the night in watching with the rest.

Chapter LVIII. Concerning the Building of a Church in Honor of the Apostles at
Constantinople.

1 After this he proceeded to erect a church in memory of the apostles, in the
city which bears his name. This building he carried to a vast height, and
brilliantly decorated by encasing it from the foundation to the roof with marble
slabs of various colors. He also formed the inner roof of finely fretted work,
and overlaid it throughout with gold. The external covering, which protected the
building from the rain, was of brass instead of tiles; and this too was
splendidly and profusely adorned with gold, and reflected the sun's rays with a
brilliancy which dazzled the distant beholder. The dome was entirely encompassed
by a finely carved tracery, wrought in brass and gold.

Chapter LIX. Farther Description of the Same Church.

1 Such was the magnificence with which the emperor was pleased to beautify this
church. The building was surrounded by an open area of great extent, the four
sides of which were terminated by porticos which enclosed the area and the
church itself. Adjoining these porticos were ranges of stately chambers, with
baths and promenades, and besides many apartments adapted to the use of those
who had charge of the place.

Chapter LX. He Also Erected His Own Sepulchral Monument in This Church.

1 All these edifices the emperor consecrated with the desire of perpetuating the
memory of the apostles of our Saviour. He had, however, another object in
erecting this building: an object at first unknown, but which afterwards became
evident to all. He had in fact made choice of this spot in the prospect of his
own death, anticipating with extraordinary fervor of faith that his body would
share their title with the apostles themselves, and that he should thus even
after death become the subject, with them, of the devotions which should be
performed to their honor in this place. He accordingly caused twelve coffins to
be set up in this church, like sacred pillars in honor and memory of the
apostolic number, in the center of which his own was placed, having six of
theirs on either side of it. Thus, as I said, he had provided with prudent
foresight an honorable resting-place for his body after death, and, having long
before secretly formed this resolution, he now consecrated this church to the
apostles, believing that this tribute to their memory would be of no small
advantage to his own soul. Nor did God disappoint him of that which he so
ardently expected and desired. For after he had completed the first services of
the feast of Easter, and had passed this sacred day of our Lord in a manner
which made it an occasion of joy and gladness to himself and to all; the God
through whose aid he performed all these acts, and whose zealous servant he
continued to be even to the end of life, was pleased at a happy time to
translate him to a better life.

Chapter LXI. His Sickness at Helenopolis, and Prayers Respecting His Baptism.

1 At first he experienced some slight bodily indisposition, which was soon
followed by positive disease. In consequence of this he visited the hot baths of
his own city; and thence proceeded to that which bore the name of his mother.
Here he passed some time in the church of the martyrs, and offered up
supplications and prayers to God. Being at length convinced that his life was
drawing to a close, he felt the time was come at which he should seek
purification from sins of his past career, firmly believing that whatever errors
he had committed as a mortal man, his soul would be purified from them through
the efficacy of the mystical words and the salutary waters of baptism.50
Impressed with these thoughts, he poured forth his supplications and confessions
to God, kneeling on the pavement in the church itself, in which he also now for
the first time received the imposition of hands with prayer.51 After this he
proceeded as far as the suburbs of Nicomedia, and there, having summoned the
bishops to meet him, addressed them in the following words.

Chapter LXII. Constantine's Appeal to the Bishops, Requesting Them to Confer
Upon Him the Rite of Baptism.

1 "The time is arrived which I have long hoped for, with an earnest desire and
prayer that I might obtain the salvation of God. The hour is come in which I too
may have the blessing of that seal which confers immortality; the hour in which
I may receive the seal of salvation. I had thought to do this in the waters of
the river Jordan, wherein our Saviour, for our example, is recorded to have been
baptized: but God, who knows what is expedient for us, is pleased that I should
receive this blessing here. Be it so, then, without delay:52 for should it be
his will who is Lord of life and death, that my existence here should be
prolonged, and should I be destined henceforth to associate with the people of
God, and unite with them in prayer as a member of his. Church, I will prescribe
to myself from this time such a course of life as befits his service." After he
had thus spoken, the prelates performed the sacred ceremonies in the usual
manner, and, having given him the necessary instructions, made him a partaker of
the mystic ordinance. Thus was Constantine the first of all sovereigns who was
regenerated and perfected in a church dedicated to the martyrs of Christ; thus
gifted with the Divine seal of baptism, he rejoiced in spirit, was renewed, and
filled with heavenly light: his soul was gladdened by reason of the fervency of
his faith, and astonished at the manifestation of the power of God. At the
conclusion of the ceremony he arrayed himself in shining imperial vestments,
brilliant as the light,53 and reclined on a couch of the purest white, refusing
to clothe himself with the purple any more.

Chapter LXIII. How After His Baptism He Rendered Thanks to God.

1 He then lifted his voice and poured forth a strain of thanksgiving to God;
after which he added these words. "Now I know that I am truly blessed: now I
feel assured that I am accounted worthy of immortality, and am made a partaker
of Divine light." He further expressed his compassion for the unhappy condition
of those who were strangers to such blessings as he enjoyed: and when the
tribunes and generals of his army appeared in his presence with lamentations and
tears at the prospect of their bereavement, and with prayers that his days might
yet be prolonged, he assured them in reply that he was now in possession of true
life; that none but himself could know the value of the blessings he had
received; so that he was anxious rather to hasten than to defer his departure to
God. He then proceeded to complete the needful arrangement of his affairs,
bequeathing an annual donation to the Roman inhabitants of his imperial city;
apportioning the inheritance of the empire, like a patrimonial estate, among his
own children; in short, making every disposition according to his own
pleasure.54 Chapter LXIV. Constantine's Death at Noon on the Feast of Pentecost.

1 All these events occurred during a most important festival, I mean the august
and holy solemnity of Pentecost, which is distinguished by a period of seven
weeks, and sealed with that one day on which the holy Scriptures attest, the
ascension of our common Saviour into heaven, and the descent of the Holy Spirit
among men. In the course of this feast the emperor received the privileges I
have described; and on the last day of all, which one might justly call the
feast of feasts, he was removed about mid-day to the presence of his God,
leaving his mortal remains to his fellow mortals, and carrying into fellowship
with God that part of his being which was capable of understanding and loving
him.55 Such was the close of Constantine's mortal life. Let us now attend to the
circumstances which followed this event.

Chapter LXV. Lamentations of the Soldiery and Their Officers.

1 Immediately the assembled spearmen and body-guard rent their garments, and
prostrated themselves on the ground, striking their heads, and uttering
lamentations and cries of sorrow, calling on their imperial lord and master, or
rather, like true children, on their father, while their tribunes and centurions
addressed him as their preserver, protector, and benefactor. The rest of the
soldiery also came in respectful order to mourn as a flock the removal of their
good shepherd. The people meanwhile ran wildly throughout the city, some
expressing the inward sorrow of their hearts by loud cries, others appearing
confounded with grief: each mourning the event as a calamity which had befallen
himself, and bewailing his death as though they felt themselves bereft of a
blessing common alike to all.

Chapter LXVI. Removal of the Body from Nicomedia to the Palace at
Constantinople.

1 After this the soldiers lifted the body from its couch, and laid it in a
golden coffin, which they enveloped in a covering of purple, and removed to the
city which was called by his own name. Here it was placed in an elevated
position in the principal chamber of the imperial palace, and surrounded by
candles burning in candlesticks of gold, presenting a marvelous spectacle, and
such as no one under the light of the sun had ever seen on earth since the world
itself began. For in the central apartment of the imperial palace, the body of
the emperor lay in its elevated resting-place, arrayed in the symbols of
sovereignty, the diadem and purple robe, and encircled by a numerous retinue of
attendants, who watched around it incessantly night and day.

Chapter LXVII. He Received the Same Honors from the Counts and Other Officers as
Before His Death.

1 The military officers, too, of the highest rank, the counts, and the whole
order of magistrates, who had been accustomed to do obeisance to their emperor
before, continued to fulfill this duty without any change, even after his death
entering the chamber at the appointed times, and saluting their coffined
sovereign with bended knee, as though he were still alive. After them the
senators appeared, and all who had been distinguished by any honorable office,
and rendered the same homage. These were followed by multitudes of every rank,
who came with their wives and children to witness the spectacle. These honors
continued to be rendered for a considerable time, the soldiers having resolved
thus to guard the body until his sons should arrive, and take on themselves the
conduct of their father's funeral. No mortal had ever, like this blessed prince,
continued to reign even after death, and to receive the same homage as during
his life: he only, of all who have ever lived, obtained this reward from God: a
suitable reward, since he alone of all sovereigns had in all his actions honored
the Supreme God and his Christ, and God himself accordingly was pleased that
even his mortal remains should still retain imperial authority among men; thus
indicating to all who were not utterly devoid of understanding the immortal and
endless empire which his soul was destined to enjoy. This was the course of
events here.

Chapter LXVIII. Resolution of the Army to Confer Thence-Forward the Title of
Augustus on His Sons.

1 Meanwhile the tribunes selected from the troops under their command those
officers whose fidelity and zeal had long been known to the emperor, and
dispatched them to the Caesars with intelligence of the late event. This service
they accordingly performed. As soon, however, as the soldiery throughout the
provinces received the tidings of the emperor's decease, they all, as if by a
supernatural impulse, resolved with one consent, as though their great emperor
had been yet alive, to acknowledge none other than his sons as sovereigns of the
Roman world: and these they soon after determined should no longer retain the
name of Caesar, but should each be honored with the title of Augustus, a name
which indicates the highest supremacy of imperial power. Such were the measures
adopted by the army; and these resolutions they communicated to each other by
letter, so that the unanimous desire of the legions became known at the same
point of time throughout the whole extent of the empire.

Chapter LXIX. Mourning for Constantine at Rome; And the Honor Paid Him There
Through Paintings After His Death.

1 On the arrival of the news of the emperor's death in the imperial city, the
Roman senate and people felt the announcement as the heaviest and most
afflictive of all calamities, and gave themselves up to an excess of grief. The
baths and markets were closed, the public spectacles, and all other recreations
in which men of leisure are accustomed to indulge, were interrupted. Those who
had erewhile lived in luxurious ease, now walked the streets in gloomy sadness,
while all united in blessing the name of the deceased, as the one who was dear
to God, and truly worthy of the imperial dignity. Nor was their sorrow expressed
only in words: they proceeded also to honor him, by the dedication of paintings
to his memory, with the same respect as before his death. The design of these
pictures embodied a representation of heaven itself, and depicted the emperor
reposing in an ethereal mansion above the celestial vault. They too declared his
sons alone to be emperors and Augusti, and begged with earnest entreaty that
they might be permitted to receive the body of their emperor, and perform his
obsequies in the imperial city.

Chapter LXX. His Burial by His Son Constantius at Constantinople.

1 Thus did they there testify their respect for the memory of him who had been
honored by God. The second of his sons, however, who had by this time arrived,
proceeded to celebrate his father's funeral in the city which bears his name,
himself heading the procession, which was preceded by detachments of soldiers in
military array, and followed by vast multitudes, the body itself being
surrounded by companies of spearmen and heavy armed infantry. On the arrival of
the procession at the church dedicated to the apostles of our Saviour, the
coffin was there entombed. Such honor did the youthful emperor Constantius
render to his deceased parent, both by his presence, and by the due performance
of this sacred ceremony.

Chapter LXXI. Sacred Service in the Church of the Apostles an the Occasion of
Constantine's Funeral.

1 As soon as [Constantius] had withdrawn himself with the military train, the
ministers of God came forward, with the multitude and the whole congregation of
the faithful, and performed the rites of Divine worship with prayer. At the same
time the tribute of their praises was given to the character of this blessed
prince, whose body rested on a lofty and conspicuous monument, and the whole
multitude united with the priests of God in offering prayers for his soul, not
without tears,-nay, rather with much weeping; thus performing an office
consonant with the desires of the pious deceased.56 In this respect also the
favor of God was manifested to his servant, in that he not only bequeathed the
succession of the empire to his own beloved sons, but that the earthly
tabernacle of his thrice blessed soul, according to his own earnest wish, was
permitted to share the monument of the apostles; was associated with the honor
of their name, and with that of the people of God; was honored by the
performance of the sacred ordinances and mystic service; and enjoyed a
participation in the prayers of the saints. Thus, too, he continued to possess
imperial power even after death, controlling, as though with renovated life, a
universal dominion, and retaining in his own name, as Victor, Maximus, Augustus,
the sovereignty of the Roman world.57 Chapter LXXII. Of the Phoenix.

1 We cannot compare him with that bird of Egypt, the only one, as they say, of
its kind, which dies, self-sacrificed, in the midst of aromatic perfumes, and,
rising from its own ashes with new life, soars aloft in the same form which it
had before. Rather did he resemble his Saviour, who, as the sown corn which is
multiplied from a single grain, had yielded abundant increase through the
blessing of God, and had overspread the whole world with his fruit. Even so did
our thrice blessed prince become multiplied, as it were, through the succession
of his sons. His statue was erected along with theirs in every province; and the
name of Constantine was owned and honored even after the close of his mortal
life.

Chapter LXXIII. How Constantine is Represented on Coins in the Act of Ascending
to Heaven.

1 A Coinage was also struck which bore the following device. On one side
appeared the figure of our blessed prince, with the head closely veiled: the
reverse exhibited him sitting as a charioteer, drawn by four horses, with a hand
stretched downward from above to receive him up to heaven.

Chapter LXXIV. The God Whom He Had Honored Deservedly Honored Him in Return.

1 Such are the proofs by which the Supreme God has made it manifest to us, in
the person of Constantine, who alone of all sovereigns had openly professed the
Christian faith, how great a difference he perceives between those whose
privilege it is to worship him and his Christ, and those who have chosen the
contrary part, who provoked his enmity by daring to assail his Church, and whose
calamitous end, in every instance, afforded tokens of his displeasure, as
manifestly as the death of Constantine conveyed to all men an evident assurance
of his Divine love.

Chapter LXXV. He Surpassed All Preceding Emperors in Devotion to God.

1 Standing, as he did, alone and pre-eminent among the Roman emperors as a
worshiper of God; alone as the bold proclaimer to all men of the doctrine of
Christ; having alone rendered honor, as none before him had ever done, to his
Church; having alone abolished utterly the error of polytheism, and
discountenanced idolatry in every form: so, alone among them both during life
and after death, was he accounted worthy of such honors as none can say have
been attained to by any other; so that no one, whether Greek or Barbarian, nay,
of the ancient Romans themselves, has ever been presented to us as worthy of
comparison with him.58

1: Compare Prolegomena, under Character, for the criticism of this conduct from
those who viewed it from another point of view.

2: For directly contrary account of his taxations, compare Prolegomena, under
Character.

3: In reality it may have been less childish than Eusebius makes it appear, for
it probably refers to cases where it was a matter of just equalization of
claims, where each party thought his claim just.

4: [Probably the Goths are meant, as in Socrates' Eccles. Hist. Bk. I. ch. 18.-
Bag. ] Compare for his Gothic wars, references in Prolegomena, under Life .

5: To the number of 300,000, according to Anonymus Valesianus . This was in the
year 334.

6:

7:

8: [Referring to the luminous appearances produced by the Pagan priests in the
celebration of their mysteries.- Bag. ]

9: [Valerian, who had been a persecutor of the Christians, and whose expedition
against the Persians had terminated in his own captivity, and subjection to
every kind of insult and cruelty from the conquerors.- Bag. ]

10: [The sense given above of this passage (which in the text is corrupt), is
founded on the reading restored by Valesius from Theodoritus and Nicephorus.-
Bag .] Stroth translates ( Hein. ), "So I desire for you the greatest
prosperity; and for them, too, I wish that it may prosper as with you."

11: [That is, Friday. The passage is not very intelligible. Does it mean that
Constantine ordered this day to be distinguished in some way from others, as the
day of the Lord's crucifixion?- Bag. ]

12: [The decree of Constantine for the general observance of Sunday appears to
have been issued a.d. 321, before which time both "the old and new sabbath" were
observed by Christians.

13: Compare for these, Yates, article Sigma Militaria in Smith, Dict. Gr. and
Rom. Ant., where there is given cut of the arch of Constantine showing such
standards.

14: Compare Venables, Easter, Ceremonies of, in Smith and Cheetham, Dict., for
account of the customs of the day.

15: [This prohibition must be limited to private sacrifices. See Bk. II., ch.
45, note.- Bag .]

16: " Str. rightly translates `and honored the festal days by public gatherings,
0' while Val . [and Bag. ] falsely renders `duly honored the festival seasons of
the church. 0'"- Hein .

17: This saying of Constantine has occasioned a deal of exegesis and conjecture.
Compare monograph of Walch mentioned under Literature in the Prolegomena for
discussion and references to other older literature.

18: The most accessible reference for getting a glimpse of the legislation of
Constantine in these and similar regards is the section, The alteration in
general and penal legislation in Wordsworth's Constantinus I., in Smith and
Wace, Dict. 1 (1877). This section is on p. 636-7. Compare also the laws
themselves as gathered in Migne, Patrol. lat. vol. 8. Compare also Prolegomena
for general statement of the value of his legislation and his reputation as
legislator.

19: [The word "philosophy," here and in the 28th chapter, plainly indicates that
virginity which was so highly honored in the earlier ages of Christianity, and
the undue exaltation of which was productive, necessarily, of evils which it is
scarcely possible to estimate at their full extent.- Bag. ] On the growing
prevalence of the practice of virginity compare Hatch, Virgins, in Smith and
Cheetham, Dict. But this note belongs rather to the paragraph below; for the
author does not refer to Christian virginity but primarily to philosophical
celibacy in this instance. The Neo-Platonic philosophy of the times, through its
doctrine of the purification of the soul by its liberation from the body or
sensuous things, taught celibacy and ascetic practices generally. So Plotinus
(d. 270 a.d.) practiced and taught to a degree, and Porphyry (d. 301+) more
explicitly. Compare rich literature on Neo-Platonism, and conveniently Zeller,
Outlines of Gr. Philos, Lond., 1886, p. 326-43, passim.

20:

21: Compare Prolegomena, and the Oration appended to this work.

22: [Since it is uncertain whether thou wilt be buried in the ground, or
consumed by fire, or drowned in the sea, or devoured by wild beasts (Valesius in
loc.).- Bag .]

23:

24: Compare the Oration itself following this work.

25: [i.e. through the sufferings and resurrection of Christ.- Bag .]

26: Molz. in a note regards these as lectionaries, but they are usually thought
to have been regular copies of the Scriptures in Greek-Septuagint and N. T., and
the Codex Sinaiticus has been thought to be one of them. It dates from not
earlier than the time of Eusebius, as it contains the Eusebian Canons, but yet
from the fourth century. Altogether it is not impossible that it was one of
these, and at all events a description of it, extracted from Scriveners (
Introduction, 1883, p. 88 sq.), will be a fair illustration. "13 1/2 inches in
length by 14 7/8 inches high." "Beautiful vellum." "Each page comprises four
columns, with 48 lines in each column." "Continuous noble uncials." "Arranged in
quires of four or three sheets." It is evident from comparison of several
quotations of Eusebius that the copy of the New Testament which he himself used
was not closely related with the Sinaitic text, unless the various readings
headed by this ms. are all mistakes originating with it. Compare allusions in
the notes to such different readings. The last clause, although in the text of
Heinichen, is of doubtful authority.

27: This word is a transcription, rendered "Procurator" by Bag., and is perhaps
corresponding to that official (cf. Long. article Fiscus, in Smith, Dict. Gr.
and R. Ant. ). But this transcription is recognized (cf. Ffoulkes, Catholicus,
in Smith and Cheetham, Dict. ).

28: The fact that the Sinaiticus exhibits two or three hands suggests that it
was prepared with rapidity, and the having various scribes was a way to speed.

29: [The parchment copies were usually arranged in quaternions, i.e. four leaves
made up together, as the ternions consisted of three leaves. The quaternions
each contained sixteen pages, the ternions twelve (Valesius in loc.).- Bag. ] So
probably, although the three-columned form of the Sinaiticus and the four of the
Vaticanus suggest a possible other meaning.

30: These are general dates; "about" the tenth, etc., would have been more
exact. Compare Prolegomena, under Life.

31: [ Griadoj logw 32: Compare on the Synod of Tyre (held 335 a.d.), Hefele,
Hist. of Councils, 2 (1876), 17-26.

33: Compare Hefele, 2. 26-7.

34: [Alexander, bishop of Thessalonica. By the Pannonian and Maesian bishops are
meant Ursacius and Valens, leaders of the Arian party; by the Bithynian and
Thracian, Theogonius of Nicaea, and Theodorus of Perinthus (Valesius).- Bag. ]
35: "The emperor showed himself very attentive to them."- Molz.

36: [Eusebius gives us no example of his application of Scripture in this case.
His commentator Valesius refers to Zeph. iii. 8 (LXX), Dia touto upomeinon me,
legei Kurioj, eij hmeran anastasewj mou eij marturion 37: The Oration is
appended to this work.

38: Nicaea.

39: Yet Eusebius himself in his Oration uses language almost as obnoxious, and
records that Constantine was much pleased with it. The difference was probably
one of gracefulness.

40: His second son by Fausta. Crispus seems now to be counted out. This was not
the famous Eusebia who was his second wife.

41: ["The younger Constantine was appointed to hold his court in Gaul; and his
brother Constantius exchanged that department, the ancient patrimony of their
father, for the more opulent, but less martial, countries of the East. Italy,
the Western Illyricum, and Africa, were accustomed to revere Constans, the third
of his sons, as the representative of the great Constantine" (Gibbon, Decline
and Fall, ch. 18).- Bag. ] Compare Prolegomena, under Life.

42: Centurions, generals, tribunes.

43: The expression is over strong. Constantius, e.g., was not baptized until
just before his death.

44: [In his Chronicon, Eusebius gives the more correct period of thirty years
and ten months. Constantine's reign began a.d. 306, and his death took place
a.d. 337.- Bag. ] Compare Prolegomena, also Clinton, Fasti Rom. an. 337.

45: Compare Prolegomena, under Character.

46: "Psychical qualities"-including more than intellectual.

47: Compare Prolegomena, Character. There is a striking touch of naturalness in
this passage which tells for the historical trustworthiness of the biographer,
and though exposing the fault of the emperor yet gives a rather pleasing glimpse
of his character.

48: Compare remarks in Prolegomena, under Writings and Character.

49: From this point to the end of the first sentence in ch. 58 is bracketed by
Heinichen.

50: Literally "salutary word of cleansing," but the paraphrase of Bag. will
stand well whichever of the readings, "salutary cleansing," or "salutary word of
cleansing," is adopted.

51: [These words seem to prove that the emperor now first became a catechumen.
His postponement of baptism until his last illness (after having stood forward
so long as the public advocate and protector of the Christian religion), and the
superstitious reliance which he was encouraged to place on the late performance
of this "mysterious" rite, afford an evidence of the melancholy obscuration of
Christian truth at the very time when Christianity was ostensibly becoming the
religion of the Roman Empire. There is probably too much truth in the following
remarks of Gibbon: "The pride of Constantine, who refused the privileges of a
catechumen, cannot easily be explained or excused: but the delay of his baptism
maybe justified by the maxims and practice of ecclesiastical antiquity. The
sacrament of baptism was supposed to contain a full and absolute expiation of
sin; and the soul was instantly restored to its original purity, and entitled to
the promise of eternal salvation. Among the proselytes of Christianity, there
were many who judged it imprudent to precipitate a salutary rite, which could
not be repeated; to throw away an inestimable privilege, which could never be
recovered," &c. ( Decline and Fall, ch. 20).- Bag. ] On the forms of admission
to the catechumenate, compare Marriott, Baptism, in Smith and Cheetham, Dict.

52: Or "no hesitation." On this clause a deal of controversy has hinged. "No
hesitation shall longer prevail" is the rendering of Molz., and Keim (Uebertritt
C. p. 1) similarly gives "let all duplicity be banished." In the view of this
translation, Constantine had been hedging all his life, trying to be Christian
to Christians and heathen to heathen. The basis of the hypothesis is too slight
for it to have any weight in view of the overwhelming documentary evidence of
the frequent public professions of Christianity by Constantine, for which see
Prolegomena, under Character. Discussion of various points relating to his
baptism will be found under Literature, under the names Busaeus, Castelli,
Dalhus, Frimelius Fuhrmann, Guidi, Halloix, Hynitzsch, Jacobus of Sarug,
Nicolai, Polus, Schelstrate, Scultetus, Tentzel, Walther, Withof.

53: [It was customary for neophytes to wear white garments, which they laid
aside on the eighth day from their baptism.- Bag. ]

54: The idea of ownership in empire which seems so strange in these days of
republics, and is disallowed even by theoretical monarchists, seems to have been
a most matter-of-course one in the mind of Constantine, and Eusebius was a true
imperialist regarding "tyranies" and "republics" as in the same category.
Whether it was by "divine right" or "natural right" they were quite sure it was
a "right," and one to be freely exercised.

55: Compare Prolegomena, Life, Last Years; also for age at time of death,
Prolegomena, p. 411, note.

56: [Alluding to his desire of being buried in the church of the apostles, and
sharing their honors, as noticed in ch. 60.- Bag. ]

57: [It appears that an interregnum of about three months took place, during
which all the laws and edicts continued to be issued in the name of Constantine,
as before his death.- Bag. ]

58: The sharp sarcasms of Julian's Caesars seem almost to have taken their text
from this challenge. He marshals the great emperors before the gods, where each
presents his claim to greatness. Constantine is greatly ridiculed, and yet to
choose between Julian and Eusebius, if regard is had to Constantine's real
effect on world history, Eusebius is the truer judge, and is at least not so far
wrong that his superlative enthusiasm for his imperial friend cannot be readily
pardoned.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 26: THE ORATION IN PRAISE OF THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE
========================================================================

The Oration in Praise of the Emperor Constantine.

Pronounced on the Thirtieth Anniversary of His Reign.

Prologue to the Oration.1 Chapter I. The Oration.

Chapter II.

Chapter III.

Chapter IV.

Chapter V.

Chapter VI.

Chapter VII.

Chapter VIII.

Chapter IX.

Chapter X.

Chapter XI.

Chapter XII.

Chapter XIII.

Chapter XIV.

Chapter XV.

Chapter XVI.

Chapter XVII.

Chapter XVIII. The Oration in Praise of the Emperor Constantine.

Pronounced on the Thirtieth Anniversary of His Reign.

Prologue to the Oration.1

1 I Come not forward prepared with a fictitious narrative, nor with elegance of
language to captivate the ear, desiring to charm my hearers as it were, with a
siren's voice; nor shall I present the draught of pleasure in cups of gold
decorated with lorry flowers (I mean the graces of style) to those who are
pleased with such things. Rather would I follow the precepts of the wise, and
admonish all to avoid and turn aside from the beaten road, and keep themselves
from contact with the vulgar crowd.

2 I come, then, prepared to celebrate our emperor's praises in a newer strain;
and, though the number be infinite of those who desire to be my companions in my
present task, I am resolved to shun the common track of men,2 and to pursue that
untrodden path which it is unlawful to enter on with unwashed feet. Let those
who admire a vulgar style, abounding in puerile subtleties, and who court a
pleasing and popular muse, essay, since pleasure is the object they have in
view, to charm the ears of men by a narrative of merely human merits. Those,
however who are initiated into the universal science,3 and have attained to
Divine as well as human knowledge, and account the choice of the latter as the
real excellence, will prefer those virtues of the emperor which Heaven itself
approves, and his pious actions, to his merely human accomplishments; and will
leave to inferior encomiasts the task of celebrating his lesser merits.

3 For since our emperor is gifted as well with that sacred wisdom which has
immediate reference to God, as with the knowledge which concerns the interests
of men; let those who are competent to such a task describe his secular
acquirements, great and transcendent as they are, and fraught with advantage to
mankind (for all that characterizes the emperor is great and noble), yet still
inferior to his diviner qualifies, to those who stand without the sacred
precincts.

4 Let those, however, who are within the sanctuary, and have access to its
inmost and untrodden recesses, close the doors against every profane ear, and
unfold, as it were, the secret mysteries of our emperor's character to the
initiated alone. And let those who have purified their ears in the streams of
piety, and raised their thoughts on the soaring wing of the mind itself, join
the company which surrounds the Sovereign Lord of all, and learn in silence the
divine mysteries.

5 Meanwhile let the sacred oracles, given, not by the spirit of divination (or
rather let me say of madness and folly), but by the inspiration of Divine
truth,4 be our instructors in these mysteries; speaking to us of sovereignty,
generally: of him who is the Supreme Sovereign of all, and the heavenly array
which surrounds the Lord of all; of that exemplar of imperial power which is
before us, and that counterfeit coin: and, lastly, of the consequences which
result from both. With these oracles, then, to initiate us in the knowledge of
the sacred rites, let us essay, as follows, the commencement of our divine
mysteries.

Chapter I. The Oration.

1 To-Day is the festival of our great emperor: and we his children rejoice
therein, feeling the inspiration of our sacred theme. He who presides over our
solemnity is the Great Sovereign himself; he, I mean, who is truly great; of
whom I affirm (nor will the sovereign who hears me be offended, but will rather
approve of this ascription of praise to God), that HE is above and beyond all
created things, the Highest, the Greatest, the most Mighty One; whose throne is
the arch of heaven, and the earth the footstool of his feet.5 His being none can
worthily comprehend; and the ineffable splendor of the glory which surrounds him
repels the gaze of every eye from his Divine majesty.

2 His ministers are the heavenly hosts; his armies the supernal powers, who own
allegiance to him as their Master, Lord, and King. The countless multitudes of
angels, the companies of archangels, the chorus of holy spirits, draw from and
reflect his radiance as from the fountains of everlasting light. Yea every
light, and specially those divine and incorporeal intelligences whose place is
beyond the heavenly sphere, celebrate this august Sovereign with lofty and
sacred strains of praise. The vast expanse of heaven, like an azure veil, is
interposed between those without, and those who inhabit his royal mansions:
while round this expanse the sun and moon, with the rest of the heavenly
luminaries (like torch-bearers around the entrance of the imperial palace),
perform, in honor of their sovereign, their appointed courses; holding forth, at
the word of his command, an ever-burning light to those whose lot is cast in the
darker regions without the pale of heaven.

3 And surely when I remember that our own victorious emperor renders praises to
this Mighty Sovereign, I do well to follow him, knowing as I do that to him
alone we owe that imperial power under which we live. The pious Caesars,
instructed by their father's wisdom, acknowledge him as the source of every
blessing: the soldiery, the entire body of the people, both in the country and
in the cities of the empire, with the governors of the several provinces,
assembling together in accordance with the precept of their great Saviour and
Teacher, worship him. In short, the whole family of mankind, of every nation,
tribe, and tongue, both collectively and severally, however diverse their
opinions on other subjects, are unanimous in this one confession; and, in
obedience to the reason implanted in them, and the spontaneous and uninstructed
impulse of their own minds, unite in calling on the One and only God.6

4 Nay, does not the universal frame of earth acknowledge him her Lord, and
declare, by the vegetable and animal life which she produces her subjection to
the will of a superior Power? The rivers, flowing with abundant stream, and the
perennial fountains, springing from hidden and exhaustless depths, ascribe to
him the cause of their marvellous source. The mighty waters of the sea, enclosed
in chambers of unfathomable depth, and the swelling surges, which lift
themselves on high, and menace as it were the earth itself, shrink back when
they approach the shore, checked by the power of his Divine law. The duly
measured fall of winter's rain, the rolling thunder, the lightning's flash, the
eddying currents of the winds, and the airy courses of the clouds, all reveal
his presence to those to whom his Person is invisible.

5 The all-radiant sun, who holds his constant career through the lapse of ages,
owns him Lord alone, and obedient to his will, dares not depart from his
appointed path. The inferior splendor of the moon, alternately diminished and
increased at stated periods, is subject to his Divine command. The beauteous
mechanism of the heavens, glittering with the hosts of stars, moving in
harmonious order, and preserving the measure of each several orbit, proclaims
him the giver of all light: yea, all the heavenly luminaries maintaining at his
will and word a grand and perfect unity of motion, pursue the track of their
ethereal career, and complete in the lapse of revolving ages their distant
course. The alternate recurrence of day and night, the changing seasons, the
order and proportion of the universe, all declare the manifold wisdom of [his
boundless power]. To him the unseen agencies which hold their course throughout
the expanse of space, render the due tribute of praise. To him this terrestrial
globe itself, to him the heavens above, and the choirs beyond the vault of
heaven, give honor as to their mighty Sovereign: the angelic hosts greet him
with ineffable songs of Praise; and the spirits which draw their being from
incorporeal light, adore him as their Creator. The everlasting ages which were
before this heaven and earth, with other periods beside them, infinite, and
antecedent to all visible creation, acknowledge him the sole and supreme
Sovereign and Lord.

6 Lastly, he who is in all, before, and after all,7 his only begotten,
pre-existent Word, the great High Priest of the mighty God, elder than all time
and every age, devoted to his Father's glory, first and alone makes intercession
with him for the salvation of mankind.8 Supreme and pre-eminent Ruler of the
universe, he shares the glory of his Father's kingdom: for he is that Light,
which, transcendent above the universe, encircles the Father's Person,
interposing and dividing between the eternal and uncreated Essence and all
derived existence: that Light which, streaming from on high, proceeds from that
Deity who knows not origin or end, and illumines the super-celestial regions,
and all that heaven itself contains, with the radiance of wisdom bright beyond
the splendor of the sun. This is he who holds a supreme dominion over this whole
world,9 who is over and in all things, and pervades all things10 visible and
invisible; the Word of God. From whom and by whom our divinely favored emperor,
receiving, as it were a transcript of the Divine sovereignty, directs, in
imitation of God himself, the administration of this world's affairs.

Chapter II.

1 This only begotten Word of God reigns, from ages which had no beginning, to
infinite and endless ages, the partner of his Father's kingdom. And [our
emperor] ever beloved by him, who derives the source of imperial authority from
above, and is strong in the power of his sacred title,11 has controlled the
empire of the world for a long period of years.

2 Again, that Preserver of the universe orders these heavens and earth, and the
celestial kingdom, consistently with his Father's will. Even so our emperor whom
he loves, by bringing those whom he rules on earth to the only begotten Word and
Saviour renders them fit subjects of his kingdom.

3 And as he who is the common Saviour of mankind, by his invisible and Divine
power as the good shepherd, drives far away from his flock, like savage beasts,
those apostate spirits which once flew through the airy tracts above this earth,
and fastened on the souls of men;12 so this his friend, graced by his heavenly
favor with victory over all his foes, subdues and chastens the open adversaries
of the truth in accordance with the usages of war.

4 He who is the pre-existent Word, the Preserver of all things, imparts to his
disciples the seeds of true wisdom and salvation, and at once enlightens and
gives them understanding in the knowledge of his Father's kingdom. Our emperor,
his friend, acting as interpreter to the Word of God, aims at recalling the
whole human race to the knowledge of God; proclaiming clearly in the ears of
all, and declaring with powerful voice the laws of truth and godliness to all
who dwell on the earth.

5 Once more, the universal Saviour opens the heavenly gates of his Father's
kingdom to those whose course is thitherward from this world. Our emperor,
emulous of his Divine example, having purged his earthly dominion from every
stain of impious error, invites each holy and pious worshiper within his
imperial mansions, earnestly desiring to save with all its crew that mighty
vessel of which he is the appointed pilot. And he alone of all who have wielded
the imperial power of Rome, being honored by the Supreme Sovereign with a reign
of three decennial periods, now celebrates this festival, not, as: his ancestors
might have done, in honor of infernal demons, or the apparitions of seducing
spirits, or of the fraud and deceitful arts of impious men; but as an act of
thanksgiving to him by whom he has thus been honored, and in acknowledgment of
the blessings he has received at his hands. He does not, in imitation of ancient
usage, defile his imperial mansions with blood and gore, nor propitiate the
infernal deities with fire and smoke, and sacrificial offerings; but dedicates
to the universal Sovereign a pleasant and acceptable sacrifice, even his own
imperial soul, and a mind truly fitted for the service of God.

6 For this sacrifice alone is grateful to him: and this sacrifice our emperor
has learned, with purified mind and thoughts, to present as an offering without
the intervention of fire and blood, while his own piety, strengthened by the
truthful doctrines with which his soul is stored, he sets forth in magnificent
language the praises of God, and imitates his Divine philanthropy by his own
imperial acts. Wholly devoted to him, he dedicates himself as a noble offering,
a first-fruit of that world, the government of which is intrusted to his charge.
This first and greatest sacrifice our emperor first dedicates to God; and then,
as a faithful shepherd, he offers, not "famous hecatombs of firstling lambs,"
but the souls of that flock which is the object of his care, those rational
beings whom he leads to the knowledge and pious worship of God.

Chapter III.

1 And gladly does he accept and welcome this sacrifice, and commend the
presenter of so august and noble an offering, by protracting his reign to a
lengthened period of years, giving larger proofs of his beneficence in
proportion to the emperor's holy services to himself. Accordingly he permits him
to celebrate each successive festival during great and general prosperity
throughout the empire, advancing one of his sons, at the recurrence of each
decennial period, to a share of his own imperial power.13

2 The eldest, who bears his father's name, he received as his partner in the
empire about the close of the first decade of his reign: the second, next in
point of age, at the second; and the third in like manner at the third decennial
period, the occasion of this our present festival. And now that the fourth
period has commenced, and the time of his reign is still further prolonged, he
desires to extend his imperial authority by calling still more of his kindred to
partake his power; and, by the appointment of the Caesars,14 fulfills the
predictions of the holy prophets, according to what they uttered ages before:
"And the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom."15

3 And thus the Almighty Sovereign himself accords an increase both of years and
of children to our most pious emperor, and renders his sway over the nations of
the world still fresh and flourishing, as though it were even now springing up
in its earliest vigor. He it is who appoints him this present festival, in that
he has made him victorious over every enemy that disturbed his peace: he it is
who displays him as an example of true godliness to the human race.

4 And thus our emperor, like the radiant sun, illuminates the most distant
subjects of his empire through the presence of the Caesars, as with the far
piercing rays of his own brightness. To us who occupy the eastern regions he has
given a son worthy of himself;16 a second and a third respectively to other
departments of his empire, to be, as it were, brilliant reflectors of the light
which proceeds from himself. Once more, having harnessed, as it were, under the
self-same yoke the four most noble Caesars17 as horses in the imperial chariot,
he sits on high and directs their course by the reins of holy harmony and
concord; and, himself every where present, and observant of every event, thus
traverses every region of the world.

5 Lastly, invested as he is with a semblance of heavenly sovereignty, he directs
his gaze above, and frames his earthly government according to the pattern of
that Divine original, feeling strength in its conformity to the monarchy of God.
And this conformity is granted by the universal Sovereign to man alone of the
creatures of this earth: for he only is the author of sovereign power, who
decrees that all should be subject to the rule of one.

6 And surely monarchy far transcends every other constitution and form of
government: for that democratic equality of power, which is its opposite, may
rather be described as anarchy and disorder. Hence there is one God, and not
two, or three, or more: for to assert a plurality of gods is plainly to deny the
being of God at all. There is one Sovereign; and his Word and royal Law is one:
a Law not expressed in syllables and words, not written or engraved on tablets,
and therefore subject to the ravages of time; but the living and self-subsisting
Word, who himself is God, and who administers his Father's kingdom on behalf of
all who are after him and subject to his power.

7 His attendants are the heavenly hosts; the myriads of God's angelic ministers;
the super-terrestrial armies, of unnumbered multitude; and those unseen spirits
within heaven itself, whose agency is employed in regulating the order of this
world. Ruler and chief of all these is the royal Word, acting as Regent of the
Supreme Sovereign. To him the names of Captain, and great High Priest, Prophet
of the Father, Angel of mighty counsel, Brightness of the Father's light, Only
begotten Son, with a thousand other titles, are ascribed in the oracles of the
sacred writers. And the Father, having constituted him the living Word, and Law
and Wisdom the fullness of all blessing, has presented this best and greatest
gift to all who are the subjects of his sovereignty.

8 And he himself, who pervades all things, and is every where present, unfolding
his Father's bounties to all with unsparing hand, has accorded a specimen of his
sovereign power even to his rational creatures of this earth, in that he has
provided the mind of man, who is formed after his own image, with Divine
faculties, whence it is capable of other virtues also, which flow from the same
heavenly source. For he only is wise, who is the only God: he only is
essentially good: he only is of mighty power, the Parent of justice, the Father
of reason and wisdom, the Fountain of light and life, the Dispenser of truth and
virtue: in a word, the Author of empire itself, and of all dominion and power.

Chapter IV.

1 But whence has man this knowledge, and who has ministered these truths to
mortal ears? Or whence has a tongue of flesh the power to speak of things so
utterly distinct from fleshly or material substance? Who has gazed on the
invisible King, and beheld these perfections in him? The bodily sense may
comprehend elements and their combinations, of a nature kindred to its own: but
no one yet has boasted to have scanned with corporeal eye that unseen kingdom
which governs all things nor has mortal nature yet discerned the beauty of
perfect wisdom. Who has beheld the face of righteousness through the medium of
flesh? And whence came the idea of legitimate sovereignty and imperial power to
man? Whence the thought of absolute dominion to a being composed of flesh and
blood? Who declared those ideas which are invisible and undefined, and that
incorporeal essence which has no external form, to the mortals of this earth?

2 Surely there was but one interpreter of these things; the all-pervading Word
of God.18 For he is the author of that rational and intelligent being which
exists in man; and, being himself one with his Father's Divine nature, he sheds
upon his offspring the out-flowings of his Father's bounty. Hence the natural
and untaught powers of thought, which all men, Greeks or Barbarians, alike
possess: hence the perception of reason and wisdom, the seeds of integrity and
righteousness, the understanding of the arts of life, the knowledge of virtue,
the precious name of wisdom, and the noble love of philosophic learning. Hence
the knowledge of all that is great and good: hence apprehension of God himself,
and a life worthy of his worship: hence the royal authority of man, and his
invincible lordship over the creatures of this world.

3 And when that Word, who is the Parent of rational beings, had impressed a
character on the mind of man according to the image and likeness of God,19 and
had made him a royal creature, in that he gave him alone of all earthly
creatures capacity to rule and to obey (as well as forethought and foreknowledge
even here, concerning the promised hope of his heavenly kingdom, because of
which he himself came, and, as the Parent of his children, disdained not to hold
converse with mortal men); he continued to cherish the seeds which himself had
sown, and renewed his gracious favors from above; holding forth to all the
promise of sharing his heavenly kingdom. Accordingly he called men, and exhorted
them to be ready for their heavenward journey, and to provide themselves with
the garment which became their calling. And by an indescribable power he filled
the world in every part with his doctrine, expressing by the similitude of an
earthly kingdom that heavenly one to which he earnestly invites all mankind, and
presents it to them as a worthy object of their hope.

Chapter V.

1 And in this hope our divinely-favored emperor partakes even in this present
life, gifted as he is by God with native virtues, and having received into his
soul the out-flowings of his favor. His reason he derives from the great Source
of all reason: he is wise, and good, and just, as having fellowship with perfect
Wisdom, Goodness, and Righteousness: virtuous, as following the pattern of
perfect virtue: valiant, as partaking of heavenly strength.

2 And truly may he deserve the imperial title, who has formed his soul to royal
virtues, according to the standard of that celestial kingdom. But he who is a
stranger to these blessings, who denies the Sovereign of the universe, and owns
no allegiance to the heavenly Father of spirits; who invests not himself with
the virtues which become an emperor, but overlays his soul with moral deformity
and baseness; who for royal clemency substitutes the fury of a savage beast; for
a generous temper, the incurable venom of malicious wickedness; for prudence,
folly; for reason and wisdom, that recklessness which is the most odious of all
vices, for from it, as from a spring of bitterness, proceed the most pernicious
fruits; such as inveterate profligacy of life, covetousness, murder, impiety and
defiance of God; surely one abandoned to; such vices as these, however he may be
deemed powerful through despotic violence, has no true title to the name of
Emperor.

3 For how should he whose soul is impressed with a thousand absurd images of
false deities,20 be able to exhibit a counterpart of the true and heavenly
sovereignty? Or how can he be absolute lord of others, who has subjected himself
to the dominion of a thousand cruel masters? a slave of low delights and
ungoverned lust, a slave of wrongfully-extorted wealth, of rage and passion, as
well as of cowardice and terror; a slave of ruthless demons, and soul-destroying
spirits?

4 Let, then, our emperor, on the testimony of truth itself, be declared alone
worthy of the title; who is dear to the Supreme Sovereign himself; who alone is
free, nay, who is truly lord: above the thirst of wealth, superior to sexual
desire; victorious even over natural pleasures; controlling, not controlled by,
anger and passion.21 He is indeed an emperor, and bears a title corresponding to
his deeds; a Victor in truth, who has gained the victory over those passions
which overmaster the rest of men: whose character is formed after the Divine
original22 of the Supreme Sovereign, and whose mind reflects, as in a mirror,
the radiance of his virtues. Hence is our emperor perfect in discretion, in
goodness, in justice, in courage, in piety, in devotion to God: he truly and
only is a philosopher, since he knows himself, and is fully aware that supplies
of every blessing are showered on him from a source quite external to himself,
even from heaven itself. Declaring the august title of supreme authority by the
splendor of his vesture, he alone worthily wears that imperial purple which so
well becomes him.

5 He is indeed an emperor, who calls on and implores in prayer the favor of his
heavenly Father night and day, and whose ardent desires are fixed on his
celestial kingdom. For he knows that present things, subject as they are to
decay and death, flowing on and disappearing like a river's stream, are not
worthy to be compared with him who is sovereign of all; therefore it is that he
longs for the incorruptible and incorporeal kingdom of God. And this kingdom he
trusts he shall obtain, elevating his mind as he does in sublimity of thought
above the vault of heaven, and filled with inexpressible longing for the glories
which shine there, in comparison with which he deems the precious things of this
present world but darkness. For he sees earthly sovereignty to be but a petty
and fleeting dominion over a mortal and temporary life, and rates it not much
higher than the goatherd's, or shepherd's, or herdsman's power: nay, as more
burdensome than theirs, and exercised over more stubborn subjects. The
acclamations of the people, and the voice of flattery, he reckons rather
troublesome than pleasing, because of the steady constancy of his character, and
genuine discipline of his mind.

6 Again, when he beholds the military service of his subjects, the vast array of
his armies, the multitudes of horse and foot, entirely devoted to his command,
he feels no astonishment, no pride at the possession of such mighty power; but
turns his thoughts inward on himself, and recognizes the same common nature
there. He smiles at his vesture, embroidered with gold and flowers, and at the
imperial purple and diadem itself, when he sees the multitude gaze in wonder,
like children at a bugbear, on the splendid spectacle.23 Himself superior to
such feelings, he clothes his soul with the knowledge of God, that vesture, the
broidery of which is temperance, righteousness, piety, and all other virtues; a
vesture such as truly becomes a sovereign.

7 The wealth which others so much desire, as gold, silver, or precious gems, he
regards to be, as they really are, in themselves mere stones and worthless
matter, of no avail to preserve or defend from evil. For what power have these
things to free from disease, or repel the approach of death? And knowing as he
does this truth by personal experience in the use of these things, he regards
the splendid attire of his subjects with calm indifference, and smiles at the
childishness of those to whom they prove attractive. Lastly, he abstains from
all excess in food and wine, and leaves superfluous dainties to gluttons,
judging that such indulgences, however suitable to others, are not so to him,
and deeply convinced of their pernicious tendency, and their effect in darkening
the intellectual powers of the soul.

8 For all these reasons, our divinely taught and noble-minded emperor, aspiring
to higher objects than this life affords, calls upon his heavenly Father as one
who longs for his kingdom; exhibits a pious spirit in each action of his life;
and finally, as a wise and good instructor, imparts to his subjects the
knowledge of him who is the Sovereign Lord of all.

Chapter VI.

1 And God himself, as an earnest of future reward, assigns to him now as it were
tricennial crowns24 composed of prosperous periods of time; and now, after the
revolution of three circles of ten years, he grants permission to all mankind to
celebrate this general, nay rather, this universal festival. And while those on
earth thus rejoice, crowned as it were with the flowers of divine knowledge,
surely, we may not unduly suppose that the heavenly choirs, attracted by a
natural sympathy, unite their joy with the joy of those on earth: nay, that the
Supreme Sovereign himself, as a gracious father, delights in the worship of
duteous children, and for this reason is pleased to honor the author and cause
of their obedience through a lengthened period of time; and, far from limiting
his reign to three decennial circles of years, he extends it to the remotest
period, even to far distant eternity. Now eternity25 in its whole extent is
beyond the power of decline or death: its beginning and extent alike incapable
of being scanned by mortal thoughts. Nor will it suffer its central point to be
perceived, nor that which is termed its present duration to be grasped by the
inquiring mind. Far less, then, the future, or the past: for the one is not, but
is already gone; while the future has not yet arrived, and therefore is not. As
regards what is termed the present time, it vanishes even as we think or speak,
more swiftly than the word itself is uttered. Nor is it possible in any sense to
apprehend this time as present; for we must either expect the future, or
contemplate the past; the present slips from us, and is gone, even in the act of
thought. Eternity, then, in its whole extent, resists and refuses subjection to
mortal reason. But it does not refuse to acknowledge its own Sovereign and
Lord,26 and bears him as it were mounted on itself, rejoicing in the fair
trappings which he bestows.27 And he himself, not binding it, as the poet
imagined, with a golden chain,28 but as it were controlling its movements by the
reins of ineffable wisdom, has adjusted its months and seasons, its times and
years, and the alterations of day and night, with perfect harmony, and has thus
attached to itlimits and measures of various kinds. For eternity, being in its
nature direct, and stretching onward into infinity, and receiving its name,
eternity, as having an everlasting existence,29 and being similar in all its
parts, or rather having no division or distance, progresses only in a line of
direct extension. But God, who has distributed it by intermediate sections, and
has divided it, like a far extended line, in many points, has included in it a
vast number of portions; and though it is in its nature one, and resembles unity
itself, he has attached to it a multiplicity of numbers, and has given it,
though formless in itself, an endless variety of forms.

5 For first of all he framed in it formless matter, as a substance capable of
receiving all forms. He next, by the power of the number two, imparted quality
to matter, and gave beauty to that which before was void of all grace. Again, by
means of the number three, he framed a body compounded of matter and form, and
presenting the three dimensions of breadth, and length, and depth. Then, from
the doubling of the number two, he devised the quaternion of the elements,
earth, water, air, and fire, and ordained them to be everlasting sources for the
supply of this universe. Again, the number four produces the number ten. For the
aggregate of one, and two, and three, and four, is ten.30 And three multiplied
with ten discovers the period of a month: and twelve successive months complete
the course of the sun. Hence the revolutions of years, and changes of the
seasons, which give grace, like variety of color in painting, to that eternity
which before was formless and devoid of beauty, for the refreshment and delight
of those whose lot it is to traverse therein the course of life.

6 For as the ground is defined by stated distances for those who run in hope of
obtaining the prize; and as the road of those who travel on a distant journey is
marked by resting-places and measured intervals, that the traveler's courage may
not fail at the interminable prospect; even so the Sovereign of the universe,
controlling eternity itself within the restraining power of his own wisdom,
directs and turns its course as he judges best. The same God, I say, who thus
clothes the once undefined eternity as with fair colors and blooming flowers,
gladdens the day with the solar rays; and, while he overspreads the night with a
covering of darkness, yet causes the glittering stars, as golden spangles, to
shine therein. It is he who lights up the brilliancy of the morning stab the
changing splendor of the moon, and the glorious companies of the starry host,
and has arrayed the expanse of heaven, like some vast mantle, in colors of
varied beauty. Again, having created the lofty and profound expanse of air, and
caused the world in its length and breadth to feel its cooling influence, he
decreed that the air itself should be graced with birds of every kind, and left
open this vast ocean of space to be traversed by every creature, visible or
invisible, whose course is through the tracts of heaven. In the midst of this
atmosphere he poised the earth, as it were its center, and encompassed it with
the ocean as with a beautiful azure vesture.

7 Having ordained this earth to be at once the home, the nurse, and the mother
of all the creatures it contains, and watered it both with rain and
water-springs, he caused it to abound in plants and flowers of every species,
for the enjoyment of life. And when he had formed man in his own likeness, the
noblest of earthly creatures, and dearest to himself, a creature gifted with
intellect and knowledge, the child of reason and wisdom, he gave him dominion
over all other animals which move and live upon the earth. For man was in truth
of all earthly creatures the dearest to God: man, I say, to whom, as an
indulgent Father, he has subjected the brute creation; for whom he has made the
ocean navigable, and crowned the earth with a profusion of plants of every kind;
to whom he has granted reasoning faculties for acquiring all science; under
whose control he has placed even the creatures of the deep, and the winged
inhabitants of the air; to whom he has permitted the contemplation of celestial
objects, and revealed the course and changes of the sun and moon, and the
periods of the planets and fixed stars. In short, to man alone of earthly beings
has he given commandment to acknowledge him as his heavenly Father, and to
celebrate his praises as the Supreme Sovereign of eternity itself.

8 But the unchangeable course of eternity the Creator has limited by the four
seasons of the year, terminating the winter by the approach of spring, and
regulating as with an equal balance that season which commences the annual
period. Having thus graced the eternal course of time with the varied
productions of spring, he added the summer's heat; and then granted as it were a
relief of toil by the interval of autumn: and lastly, refreshing and cleansing
the season by the showers of winter, he brings it, rendered sleek land glossy,
like a noble steed, by these abundant rains, once more to the gates of spring.

9 As soon, then, as the Supreme Sovereign had thus connected his own eternity by
these cords of wisdom with the annual circle, he committed it to the guidance of
a mighty Governor, even his only begotten Word, to whom, as the Preserver of all
creation, he yielded the reins of universal power. And he, receiving this
inheritance as from a beneficent Father, and uniting all things both above and
beneath the circumference of heaven in one harmonious whole, directs their
uniform course; providing with perfect justice whatever is expedient for his
rational creatures on the earth, appointing its allotted limits to human life,
and granting to all alike permission to anticipate even here the commencement of
a future existence. For he has taught them that beyond this present world there
is a divine and blessed state of being, reserved for those who have been
supported here by the hope of heavenly blessings; and that those who have lived
a virtuous and godly life will remove hence to a far better habitation; while he
adjudges to those who have been guilty and wicked here a place of punishment
according to their crimes.

10 Again, as in the distribution of prizes at the public games, he proclaims
various crowns to the victors, and invests each with the rewards of different
virtues: but for our good emperor, who is clothed in the very robe of piety, he
declares that a higher recompense of his toils is prepared; and, as a prelude to
this recompense, permits us now to assemble at this festival, which is composed
of perfect numbers, of decades thrice, and triads ten times repeated.

11 The first of these, the triad, is the offspring of the unit, while the unit
is the mother of number itself, and presides over all months, and seasons, and
years, and every period of time. It may, indeed, be justly termed the origin,
foundation, and principle of all number, and derives its name from its abiding
character.31 For, while every other number is diminished or increased according
to the subtraction or addition of others, the unit alone continues fixed and
steadfast, abstracted from all multitude and the numbers which are formed from
it, and resembling that indivisible essence which is distinct from all things
beside, but by virtue of participation in which the nature of all things else
subsists.

12 For the unit is the originator of every number, since all multitude is made
up by the composition and addition of units; nor is it possible without the unit
to conceive the existence of number at all. But the unit itself is independent
of multitude, apart from and superior to all number; forming, indeed, and making
all, but receiving 13 no increase from any. Kindred to this is the triad;
equally indivisible and perfect, the first of those sums which are formed of
even and uneven numbers. For the perfect number two, receiving the addition of
the unit, forms the triad, the first perfect compound number. And the triad, by
explaining what equality is, first taught men justice, having itself an equal
beginning, and middle, and end. And it is also an image of the mysterious, most
holy, and royal Trinity, which, though itself without beginning or origin, yet
contains the germs, the reasons, and causes of the existence of all created
things.

14 Thus the power of the triad may justly be regarded as the first cause of all
things. Again, the number ten, which contains the end of all numbers, and
terminates them in itself, may truly be called a full and perfect number, as
comprehending every species and every measure of numbers, proportions, concords,
and harmonies. For example, the units by addition form and are terminated by the
number ten; and, having this number as their parent, and as it were the limit of
their course they round this as the goal of their career.

15 Then they perform a second circuit, and again a third, and a fourth, until
the tenth and thus by ten decades they complete the hundredth number. Returning
thence to the first starting point, they again proceed to the number ten, and
having ten times completed the hundredth number, again they recede, and perform
round the same barriers their protracted course, proceeding from themselves back
to themselves again, with revolving motion.

16 For the unit is the tenth of ten, and ten units make up a decade, which is
itself the limit, the settled goal and boundary of units: it is that which
terminates the infinity of number; the term and end of units. Again, the triad
combined with the decade, and performing a threefold circuit of tens, produces
that most natural number, thirty. For as the triad is in respect to units, so is
the number thirty in respect to tens.

17 It is also the constant limit to the course of that luminary which is second
to the sun in brightness. For the course of the moon from one conjunction with
the sun to the next, completes the period of a month; after which, receiving as
it were a second birth, it recommences a new light, and other days, being
adorned and honored with thirty units, three decades, and ten triads.

18 In the same manner is the universal reign of our victorious emperor
distinguished by the giver of all good, and now enters on a new sphere of
blessing, accomplishing, at present, this tricennalian festival, but reaching
forward beyond this to far more distant intervals of time, and cherishing the
hope of future blessings in the celestial kingdom; where, not a single sun, but
infinite hosts of light surround the Almighty Sovereign, each surpassing the
splendor of the sun, glorious and resplendent with rays derived from the
everlasting source of light.

19 There the soul enjoys its existence, surrounded by fair and unfading
blessings; there is a life beyond the reach of sorrow; there the enjoyment of
pure and holy pleasures, and a time of unmeasured and endless duration,
extending into illimitable space; not defined by intervals of days and months,
the revolutions of years, or the recurrence of times and seasons, but
commensurate with a life which knows no end. And this life needs not the light
of the sun, nor the lustre of the moon or the starry host, since it has the
great Luminary himself, even God the Word, the only begotten Son of the Almighty
Sovereign.

20 Hence it is that the mystic and sacred oracles reveal him to be the Sun of
righteousness, and the Light which far transcends all light. We believe that he
illumines also the thrice-blessed powers of heaven with the rays of
righteousness, and the brightness of wisdom, and that he receives truly pious
souls, not within the sphere of heaven alone, but into his own bosom, and
confirms indeed the assurances which he himself has given.

21 No mortal eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor can the mind in its vesture of
flesh understand what things are prepared for those who have been here adorned
with the graces of godliness; blessings which await thee too, most pious
emperor, to whom alone since the world began has the Almighty Sovereign of the
universe granted power to purify the course of human life: to whom also he has
revealed his own symbol of salvation, whereby he overcame the power of death,
and triumphed over every enemy. And this victorious trophy, the scourge of evil
spirits, thou hast arrayed against the errors of idol worship, and hast obtained
the victory not only over all thy impious and savage foes, but over equally
barbarous adversaries, the evil spirits themselves.

Chapter VII.

1 For whereas we are composed of two distinct natures, I mean of body and
spirit, of which the one is visible to all, the other i invisible, against both
these natures two kinds of barbarous and savage enemies, the one invisibly, the
other openly, are constantly arrayed. The one oppose our bodies with bodily
force: the other with incorporeal assaults besiege the naked soul itself.

2 Again, the visible barbarians, like the wild nomad tribes, no better than
savage beasts, assail the nations of civilized men, ravage their country, and
enslave their cities, rushing on those who inhabit them like ruthless wolves of
the desert, and destroying all who fall under their power. But those unseen
foes, more cruel far than barbarians, I mean the soul-destroying demons whose
course is through the regions of the air, had succeeded, through the snares of
vile polytheism, in enslaving the entire human race, insomuch that they no
longer recognized the true God, but wandered in the mazes of atheistic error.
For they procured, I know not whence, gods who never anywhere existed, and set
him aside who is the only and the true God, as though he were not.

3 Accordingly the generation of bodies was esteemed by them a deity, and so the
opposite principle to this, their dissolution and destruction, was also deified.
The first, as the author of generative power, was honored with rites under the
name of Venus:32 the second, as rich, and mighty in dominion over the human
race, received the names of Pluto, and Death. For men in those ages, knowing no
other than naturally generated life, declared the cause and origin of that life
to be divine: and again, believing in no existence after death, they proclaimed
Death himself a universal conqueror and a mighty god. Hence, unconscious of
responsibility, as destined to be annihilated by death, they lived a life
unworthy of the name, in the practice of actions deserving a thousand deaths. No
thought of God could enter their minds, no expectation of Divine judgment, no
recollection of, no reflection on, their spiritual existence: acknowledging one
dread superior, Death, and persuaded that the dissolution of their bodies by his
power was final annihilation, they bestowed on Death the title of a mighty, a
wealthy god, and hence the name of Pluto.33 Thus, then, Death became to them a
god; nor only so, but whatever else they accounted precious in comparison with
death, whatever contributed to the luxuries of life.

4 Hence animal pleasure became to them a god; nutrition, and its production, a
god; the fruit of trees, a god; drunken riot, a god; carnal desire and pleasure,
a god. Hence the mysteries of Ceres and Proserpine, the rape of the latter, and
her subsequent restoration, by Pluto: hence the orgies of Bacchus, and Hercules
overcome by drunkenness as by a mightier god: hence the adulterous rites of
Cupid and of Venus: hence Jupiter himself infatuated with the love of women, and
of Ganymede:34 hence the licentious legends of deities abandoned to effeminacy
and pleasure.

5 Such were the weapons of superstition whereby these cruel barbarians and
enemies of the Supreme God afflicted, and indeed entirely subdued, the human
race; erecting everywhere the monuments of impiety, and rearing in every corner
the shrines and temples of their false religion.

6 Nay, so far were the ruling powers of those times enslaved by the force of
error, as to appease their gods with the blood of their own countrymen and
kindred; to whet their swords against those who stood forward to defend the
truth; to maintain a ruthless war and raise unholy hands, not against foreign or
barbarian foes, but against men l bound to them by the ties of family and
affection, against brethren, and kinsmen, and dearest friends, who had resolved,
in the practice of virtue and true piety, to honor and worship God.

7 Such was the spirit of madness with which these princes sacrificed to their
demon deities men consecrated to the service of the King of kings. On the other
hand their victims, as noble martyrs in the cause of true godliness, resolved to
welcome a glorious death in preference to life itself, and utterly despised
these cruelties. Strengthened, as soldiers of God, with patient fortitude, they
mocked at death in all its forms; at fire, and sword, and the torment of
crucifixion; at exposure to savage beasts, and drowning in the depths of the
sea; at the cutting off and searing of limbs, the digging out of eyes, the
mutilation of the whole body; lastly, at famine, the labor of the mines, and
captivity: nay, all these sufferings they counted better than any earthly good
or pleasure, for the love they bore their heavenly King. In like manner women
also evinced a spirit of constancy and courage not inferior to that of men.

8 Some endured the same conflicts with them, and obtained a like reward of their
virtue: others, forcibly carried off to be the victims of violence and
pollution, welcomed death rather than dishonor; while many, very many more,
endured not even to hear the same threats wherewith they were assailed by the
provincial governors, but boldly sustained every variety of torture, and
sentence of death in every form.35 Thus did these valiant soldiers of the
Almighty Sovereign maintain the conflict with steadfast fortitude of soul
against the hostile forces of polytheism: and thus did these enemies of God and
adversaries of man's salvation, more cruel far than the ferocious savage,
delight in libations of human blood: thus did their ministers drain as it were
the cup of un-righteous slaughter in honor of the demons whom they served, and
prepare for them this dread and impious banquet, to the ruin of the human race.

9 In these sad circumstances, what course should the God and King of these
afflicted ones pursue? Could he be careless of the safety of his dearest friends
or abandon his servants in this great extremity? Surely none could deem him a
wary pilot, who, without an effort to save his fellow-mariners should suffer his
vessel to sink with all her crew: surely no general could be found so reckless
as to yield his own allies, without resistance, to the mercy of the foe: nor can
a faithful shepherd regard with unconcern the straying of a single sheep from
his flock, but will rather leave the rest in safety, and dare all things for the
wanderer's sake, even, if need be, to contend with savage beasts.

10 The zeal, however, of the great Sovereign of all was for no unconscious36
sheep: his care was exercised for his own faithful host, for those who sustained
the battle for his sake: whose conflicts in the cause of godliness he himself
approved, and honored those who had returned to his presence with the prize of
victory which he only can bestow, uniting them to the angelic choirs. Others he
still preserved on earth, to communicate the living seeds of piety to future
generations; to be at once eye-witnesses of his vengeance on the ungodly, and
narrators 11 of the events.

11 After this he outstretched his arm in judgment on the adversaries, and
utterly destroyed them with the stroke of Divine wrath, compelling them, how
reluctant soever to confess with their own lips and recant their wickedness, but
raising from the ground and exalting gloriously those who had long been
oppressed and disclaimed by all.

12 Such were the dealings of the Supreme Sovereign, who ordained an invincible
champion to be the minister of his heaven-sent vengeance (for our emperor's
surpassing piety delights in the title of Servant of God), and him he has,
proved victorious over all that opposed him, having raised him up, an individual
against many foes. For they were indeed numberless, being the friends of many
evil spirits (though in reality they were nothing, and hence are now no more);
but our emperor is one, appointed by, and the representative of, the one
Almighty Sovereign. And they, in the very spirit of impiety, destroyed the
righteous with cruel slaughter: but he, in imitation of his Saviour, and knowing
only how to save men's lives, has spared and instructed in godliness the impious
themselves.

13 And so, as truly worthy the name of Victor, he has subdued the twofold race
of barbarians; soothing the savage tribes of men by prudent embassies,
compelling them to know and acknowledge their superiors, and reclaiming them
from a lawless and brutal life to the governance of reason and humanity; at the
same time that he proved by the facts themselves that the fierce and ruthless
race of unseen spirits had long ago been vanquished by a higher power. For he
who is the preserver of the universe had punished these invisible spirits by an
invisible judgment: and our emperor, as the delegate of the Supreme Sovereign,
has followed up the victory, bearing away the spoils of those who have long
since died and mouldered into dust, and distributing the plunder with lavish
hand among the soldiers of his victorious Lord.37

Chapter VIII.

1 For as soon as he understood that the ignorant multitudes were inspired with a
vain and childish dread of these bugbears of error, wrought in gold and silver,
he judged it right to remove these also, like stumbling-stones thrown in the
path of men walking in the dark, and henceforward to open a royal road, plain
and unobstructed, to all.

2 Having formed this resolution, he considered that no soldiers or military
force of any sort was needed for the repression of the evil: a few of his own
friends sufficed for this service, and these he sent by a simple expression of
his will to visit each several province.

3 Accordingly, sustained by confidence in the emperor's piety and their own
personal devotion to God, they passed through the midst of numberless tribes and
nations, abolishing this ancient system of error in every city and country. They
ordered the priests themselves, in the midst of general laughter and scorn, to
bring their gods from their dark recesses to the light of day. They then
stripped them of their ornaments, and exhibited to the gaze of all the unsightly
reality which had been hidden beneath a painted exterior: and lastly, whatever
part of the material appeared to be of value they scraped off and melted in the
fire to prove its worth, after which they secured and set apart whatever they
judged needful for their purposes, leaving to the superstitious worshipers what
was altogether useless, as a memorial of their shame.

4 Meanwhile our admirable prince was himself engaged in a work similar to that
we have described. For at the same time that these costly images of the dead
were stripped, as we have said, of their precious materials, he also attacked
those composed of brass; causing those to be dragged from their places with
ropes, and, as it were, carried away captive, whom the dotage of mythology had
esteemed as gods. The next care of our august emperor was to kindle, as it were,
a brilliant torch, by the light of which he directed his imperial gaze around,
to see if any hidden vestiges of error might yet exist.

5 And as the keen-sighted eagle in its heavenward flight is able to descry from
its lofty height the most distant objects on the earth: so did he, whilst
residing in the imperial palace of his own fair city, discover, as from a
watch-tower, a hidden and fatal snare of souls in the province of Phoenicia.
This was a grove and temple, not situated in the midst of any city, or in any
public place, as for splendor of effect is generally the case, but apart from
the beaten and frequented road, on part of the summit of Mount Lebanon, and
dedicated to the foul demon known by the name of Venus.

6 It was a school of wickedness for all the abandoned votaries of impurity and
such as destroyed their bodies with effeminacy. Here men undeserving the name
forgot the dignity of their sex, and propitiated the demon by their effeminate
conduct: here too unlawful commerce of women, and adulterous intercourse, with
other horrible and infamous practices, were perpetrated in this temple as in a
place beyond the scope and restraint of law.

7 Meantime these evils remained unchecked by the presence of any observer, since
no one of fair character ventured to visit such scenes. These proceedings,
however, could not escape the vigilance of our august emperor, who, having
himself inspected them with characteristic forethought, and judging that such a
temple was unfit for the light of heaven, gave orders that the building with its
offerings should be utterly destroyed. Accordingly, in obedience to the imperial
edict, these engines of an impure superstition were immediately abolished, and
the hand of military force was made instrumental in purging the place. And now
those who had heretofore lived without restraint, learned, through the imperial
threat of punishment, to practice self-control.

8 Thus did our emperor tear the mask from this system of delusive wickedness,
and expose it to the public gaze, at the same time proclaiming openly his
Saviour's name to all. No advocate appeared; neither god nor demon, prophet nor
diviner, could lend his aid to the detected authors of the imposture. For the
souls of men were no longer enveloped in thick darkness: but enlightened by the
rays of true godliness, they deplored the ignorance and pitied the blindness of
their forefathers, rejoicing at the same time in their own deliverance from such
fatal error.38

9 Thus speedily, according to the counsel of the mighty God, and through our
emperor's agency, was every enemy, whether visible or unseen, utterly removed:
and henceforward peace, the happy nurse of youth, extended her reign throughout
the world. Wars were no more, for the gods were not: no more did warfare in
country or town, no more did the effusion of human blood, distress mankind, as
heretofore, when demon-worship and the madness of idolatry prevailed.

Chapter IX.

1 And now we may well compare the present with former things, and review these
happy changes in contrast with the evils that are past, and mark the elaborate
care with which in ancient times porches and sacred precincts, groves and
temples, were prepared in every city for these false deities, and how their
shrines were enriched with abundant offerings.

2 The sovereign rulers of those days had indeed a high regard for the worship of
the gods. The nations also and people subject to their power honored them with
images both in the country and in every city, nay, even in their houses and
secret chambers, according to the religious practice of their fathers. The
fruit, however, of this devotion, far different from the peaceful concord which
now meets our view, appeared in war, in battles, and seditions, which harassed
them throughout their lives, and deluged their countries with blood and civil
slaughter.

3 Again, the objects of their worship could hold out to these sovereigns with
artful flattery the promise of prophecies, and oracles, and the knowledge of
futurity: yet could they not predict their own destruction, nor forewarn
themselves of the coming ruin: and surely this was the greatest and most
convincing proof of their imposture.

4 Not one of those whose words once were heard with awe and wonder, had
announced the glorious advent of the Saviour of mankind,39 or that new
revelation of divine knowledge which he came to give. Not Pythius himself, nor
any of those mighty gods, could apprehend the prospect of their approaching
desolation; nor could their oracles point at him who was to be their conqueror
and destroyer.

5 What prophet or diviner could foretell that their rites would vanish at the
presence of a new Deity in the world, and that the knowledge and worship of the
Almighty Sovereign should be freely given to all mankind? Which of them foreknew
the august and pious reign of our victorious emperor, or his triumphant
conquests everywhere over the false demons, or the overthrow of their high
places?

6 Which of the heroes has announced the melting down and conversion of the
lifeless statues from their useless forms to the necessary uses of men? Which of
the gods have yet had power to speak of their own images thus melted and
contemptuously reduced to fragments?

7 Where were the protecting powers, that they should not interpose to save their
sacred memorials, thus destroyed by man? Where, I ask, are those who once
maintained the strife of war, yet now behold their conquerors abiding securely
in the profoundest peace? And where are they who upheld themselves in a blind
and foolish confidence, and trusted in these vanities as gods; but who, in the
very height of their superstitious error, and while maintaining an implacable
war with the champions of the truth, perished by a fate proportioned to their
crimes?

8 Where is the giant race whose arms were turned against heaven itself; the
hissings of those serpents whose tongues were pointed with impious words against
the Almighty King? These adversaries of the Lord of all, confident in the aid of
a multitude of gods, advanced to the attack with a powerful array of military
force, preceded by certain images of the dead, and lifeless statues, as their
defense. On the other, side our emperor, secure in the armor of godliness,
opposed to the numbers of the enemy the salutary and life-giving Sign, as at the
same time a terror to the foe, and a protection against every harm; and returned
victorious at once over the enemy and the demons whom they served.40 And then,
with thanksgiving and praise, the tokens of a grateful spirit, to the Author of
his victory, he proclaimed this triumphant Sign, by monuments as well as words,
to all mankind, erecting it as a mighty trophy against every enemy in the midst
of the imperial city, and expressly enjoining on all to acknowledge this
imperishable symbol of salvation as the safeguard of the power of Rome and of
the empire of the world.

9 Such were the instructions which he gave to his subjects generally; but
especially to his soldiers, whom he admonished to repose their confidence, not
in their weapons, or armor, or bodily strength, but to acknowledge the Supreme
God as the giver of every good, and of victory itself.

10 Thus did the emperor himself, strange and incredible as the fact may seem,
become the instructor of his army in their religious exercises, and teach them
to offer pious prayers in accordance with the divine ordinances, uplifting their
hands towards heaven, and raising their mental vision higher still to the King
of heaven, on whom they should call as the Author of victory, their preserver,
guardian, and helper. He commanded too, that one day should be regarded as a
special occasion for religious worship; I mean that which is truly the first and
chief of all, the day of our Lord and Saviour; that day the name of which is
connected with light, and life, and immortality, and every good.

11 Prescribing the same pious conduct to himself, he honored his Saviour in the
chambers of his palace, performing his devotions according to the Divine
commands, and storing his mind with instruction through the hearing of the
sacred word. The entire care of his household was intrusted to ministers devoted
to the service of God, and distinguished by gravity of life and every other
virtue; while his trusty body-guards, strong in affection and fidelity to his
person, found in their emperor an instructor in the practice of a godly life.

12 Again, the honor with which he regards the victorious Sign is founded on his
actual experience of its divine efficacy. Before this the hosts of his enemies
have disappeared: by this the powers of the unseen spirits have been turned to
flight: through this the proud boastings of God's adversaries have come to
nought, and the tongues of the profane and blasphemous been put to silence. By
this Sign the Barbarian tribes were vanquished: through his the rites of
superstitious fraud received a just rebuke: by this our emperor, discharging as
it were a sacred debt, has performed the crowning good of all, by erecting
triumphant memorials of its value in all parts of the world, raising temples and
churches on a scale of royal costliness, and commanding all to unite in
constructing the sacred houses of prayer.

13 Accordingly these signal proofs of our emperor's magnificence forthwith
appeared in the provinces and cities of the empire, and soon shone conspicuously
in every country; convincing memorials of the rebuke and overthrow of those
impious tyrants who but a little while before had madly dared to fight against
God, and, raging like savage dogs, had vented on unconscious buildings that fury
which they were unable to level against him; had thrown to the ground and
Upturned the very foundations of the houses of prayer, causing them to present
the appearance of a city captured and abandoned to the enemy. Such was the
exhibition of that wicked spirit whereby they sought as it were to assail God
himself, but soon experienced the result of their own madness and folly. But a
little time elapsed, when a single blast of the storm of Heaven's displeasure
swept them utterly away, leaving neither kindred, nor offspring, nor memorial of
their existence among men: for all, numerous as they were, disappeared as in a
moment beneath the stroke of Divine vengeance.

14 Such, then, was the fate which awaited these furious adversaries of God: but
he who, armed with the salutary Trophy, had alone opposed them (nay rather, not
alone, but aided by the presence and the power of him who is the only
Sovereign), has replaced the ruined edifices on a greater scale, and made the
second far superior to the first. For example, besides erecting various churches
to the honor of God in the city which bears his name, and adorning the Bithynian
capital with another on the greatest and most splendid scale, he has
distinguished the principal cities of the other provinces by structures of a
similar kind.

15 Above all, he has selected two places in the eastern division of the empire,
the one in Palestine (since from thence the life-giving stream has flowed as
from a fountain for the blessing of all nations), the other in that metropolis
of the East which derives its name from that of Antiochus; in which, as the head
of that portion of the empire, he has consecrated to the service of God a church
of unparalleled size and beauty. The entire building is encompassed by an
enclosure of great extent, within which the church itself rises to a vast
elevation, of an octagonal form, surrounded by many chambers and courts on every
side, and decorated with ornaments of the richest kind.41

16 Such was his work here. Again, in the province of Palestine, in that city
which was once the seat of Hebrew sovereignty, on the very site of the Lord's
sepulchre, he has raised a church of noble dimensions, and adorned a temple
sacred to the salutary Cross with rich and lavish magnificence, honoring that
everlasting monument, and the trophies of the Saviour's victory over the power
of death, with a splendor which no language can describe.

17 In the same country he discovered three places venerable as the localities of
three sacred caves: and these also he adorned with costly structures, paying a
fitting tribute of reverence to the scene of the first manifestation of the
Saviour's presence; while at the second cavern he hallowed the remembrance of
his final ascension from the mountain top; and celebrated his mighty conflict,
and the victory which crowned it, at the third.42

18 All these places our emperor thus adorned in the hope of proclaiming the
symbol of redemption to all mankind; that Cross which has in deed repaid his
pious zeal; through which his house and throne alike have prospered, his reign
has been confirmed for a lengthened series of years, and the rewards of virtue
bestowed on his noble sons, his kindred, and their descendants.

19 And surely it is a mighty evidence of the power of that God whom he serves,
that he has held the balances of justice with an equal hand, and has apportioned
to each party their due reward. With regard to the destroyers of the houses of
prayer, the penalty of their impious conduct followed hard upon them: forthwith
were they swept away, and left neither race, nor house, nor family behind. On
the other hand, he whose pious devotion to his Lord is conspicuous in his every
act, who raises royal temples to his honor, and proclaims his name to his
subjects by sacred offerings throughout the world, he, I say, has deservedly
experienced him to be the preserver and defender of his imperial house and race.
Thus clearly have the dealings of God been manifested, and this through the
sacred efficacy of the salutary Sign.

Chapter X.

1 Much might indeed be said of this salutary Sign, by those who are skilled in
the mysteries of our Divine religion. For it is in very truth the symbol of
salvation, wondrous to speak of, more wondrous still to conceive; the appearance
of which on earth has thrown the fictions of all false religion from the
beginning into the deepest shade, has buried superstitious error in darkness and
oblivion, and has revealed to all that spiritual light which enlightens the
souls of men, even the knowledge of the only true God.

2 Hence the universal change for the better, which leads men to spurn their
lifeless idols, to trample under foot the lawless rites of their demon deities,
and laugh to scorn the time-honored follies of their fathers. Hence, too, the
establishment in every place of those schools of sacred learning, wherein men
are taught the precepts of saving truth, and dread no more those objects of
creation which are seen by the natural eye, nor direct a gaze of wonder at the
sun, the moon, or stars; but acknowledge him who is above all these, that
invisible Being who is the Creator of them all, and learn to worship him alone.

3 Such are the blessings resulting to mankind from this great and wondrous Sign,
by virtue of which the evils which once existed are now no more, and virtues
heretofore unknown shine everywhere resplendent with the light of true
godliness.

4 Discourses, and precepts, and exhortations to a virtuous and holy life, are
proclaimed in the ears of all nations. Nay, the emperor himself proclaims them:
and it is indeed a marvel that this mighty prince, raising his voice in the
hearing of all the world, like an interpreter of the Almighty Sovereign's will,
invites his subjects in every country to the knowledge of the true God.

5 No more, as in former times, is the babbling of impious men heard in the
imperial palace; but priests and pious worshipers of God together celebrate his
majesty with royal hymns of praise. The name of the one Supreme Ruler of the
universe is proclaimed to all: the gospel of glad tidings connects the human
race with its Almighty King, declaring the grace and love of the heavenly Father
to his children on the earth.

6 His praise is everywhere sung in triumphant strains: the voice of mortal man
is blended with the harmony of the angelic choirs in heaven; and the reasoning
soul employs the body which invests it as an instrument for sounding forth a
fitting tribute of praise and adoration to his name. The nations of the East and
the West are instructed at the same moment in his precepts: the people of the
Northern and Southern regions unite with one accord, under the influence of the
same principles and laws, in the pursuit of a godly life, in praising the one
Supreme God, in acknowledging his only begotten Son their Saviour as the source
of every blessing, and our emperor as the one ruler on the earth, together with
his pious sons.

7 He himself, as a skillful pilot, sits on high at the helm of state, and
directs the vessel with unerring course, conducting his people as it were with
favoring breeze to a secure and tranquil haven. Meanwhile God himself, the great
Sovereign, extends the right hand of his power from above for his protection,
giving him victory over every foe, and establishing his empire by a lengthened
period of years: and he will bestow on him yet higher blessings, and confirm in
every deed the truth of his own promises. But on these we may not at present
dwell; but must await the change to a better world: for it is not given to
mortal eyes or ears of flesh, fully to apprehend the things of God.43

Chapter XI.

1 And now, victorious and mighty Constantine, in this discourse, whose noble
argument is the glory of the Almighty King, let me lay before thee some of the
mysteries of his sacred truth: not as presuming to instruct thee, who art
thyself taught of God; nor to disclose to thee those secret wonders which he
himself, not through the agency of man, but through our common Saviour, and the
frequent light of his Divine presence has long since revealed and unfolded to
thy view: but in the hope of leading the unlearned to the light, and displaying
before those who know them not the causes and motives of thy pious deeds.

2 True it is that thy noble efforts for the daily worship and honor of the
Supreme God throughout the habitable world, are the theme of universal praise.
But those records of gratitude to thy Saviour and Preserver which thou hast
dedicated in our own province of Palestine, and in that city from which as from
a fountain-head the Saviour Word44 has issued forth to all mankind; and again,
the hallowed edifices and consecrated temples which thou hast raised as trophies
of his victory over death; and those lofty and noble structures, imperial
monuments of an imperial spirit, which thou hast erected in honor of the
everlasting memory of the Saviour's tomb the cause, I say, of these things is
not equally obvious to all.

3 Those, indeed, who are enlightened in heavenly knowledge by the power of the
Divine Spirit, well understand the cause, and justly admire and bless thee for
that counsel and resolution which Heaven itself inspired. On the other hand the
ignorant and spiritually blind regard these designs with open mockery and scorn,
and deem it a strange and unworthy thing indeed that so mighty a prince should
waste his zeal on the graves and monuments of the dead.

4 "Were it not better," such a one might say, "to cherish those rites which are
hallowed by ancient usage; to seek the favor of those gods and heroes whose
worship is observed in every province; instead of rejecting and disclaiming
them, because subject to the calamities incident to man? Surely they may claim
equal honors with him who himself has suffered: or, if they are to be rejected,
as not exempt from the sorrows of humanity, the same award would justly be
pronounced respecting him." Thus, with important and contracted brow, might he
give utterance in pompous language to his self-imagined wisdom.

5 Filled with compassion for this ignorance, the gracious Word of our most
beneficent Father freely invites, not such a one alone, but all who are in the
path of error, to receive instruction in Divine knowledge; and has ordained the
means of such instruction throughout the world, in every country and village, in
cultivated and desert lands alike, and in every city: and, as a gracious Saviour
and Physician of the soul, calls on the Greek and the Barbarian, the wise and
the unlearned, the rich and the poor, the servant and his master, the subject
and his lord, the ungodly, the profane, the ignorant, the evil-doer, the
blasphemer, alike to draw near, and hasten to receive his heavenly cure. And
thus in time past had he clearly announced to all the pardon of former
transgressions, saying, "Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden,
and I will give you rest."45 And again, "I am not come to call the righteous,
but sinners, to repentance."46 And he adds the reason, saying, "For they that
are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick."47 And again, "I desire
not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should repent."48

6 Hence it is only for those who are themselves instructed in Divine things and
understand the motives of that zeal of which these works are the result, to
appreciate the more than human impulse by which our emperor was guided, to
admire his piety toward God, and to believe his care for the memorial of our
Saviour's resurrection to be a desire imparted from above, and truly inspired by
that Sovereign, to be whose faithful servant and minister for good is his
proudest boast.

7 In full persuasion, then, of thy approval, most mighty emperor, I desire at
this present time to proclaim to all the reasons and motives of thy pious works.
I desire to stand as the interpreter of thy designs, to explain the counsels of
a soul devoted to the love of God. I propose to teach all men, what all should
know who care to understand the principles on which our Saviour God employs his
power, the reasons for which he who was the pre-existent Controller of all
things at length descended to us from heaven: the reasons for which he assumed
our nature, and submitted even to the power of death. I shall declare the causes
of that immortal life which followed, and of his resurrection from the dead.
Once more, I shall adduce convincing proofs and arguments, for the sake of those
who yet need such testimony: and now let me commence my appointed task.

8 Those who transfer the worship due to that God who formed and rules the world
to the works of his hand; who hold the sun and moon, or other parts of this
material system, nay, the elements themselves, earth, water, air, and fire, in
equal honor with the Creator of them all; who give the name of gods to things
which never would have had existence, or even name, except as obedient to that
Word of God who made the world: such persons in my judgment resemble those who
overlook the master hand which gives its magnificence to a royal palace; and,
while lost in wonder at its roofs and walls, the paintings of varied beauty and
coloring which adorn them, and its gilded ceilings and sculptures, ascribe to
them the praise of that skill which belongs to the artist whose work they are:
whereas they should assign the cause of their wonder, not to these visible
objects, but to the architect himself, and confess that the proofs of skill are
indeed manifest, but that he alone is the possessor of that skill who has made
them what they are.

9 Again, well might we liken those to children, who should admire the
seven-stringed lyre, and disregard him who invented or has power to use it: or
those who forget the valiant warrior, and adorn his spear and shield with the
chaplet of victory: or, lastly, those who hold the squares and streets, the
public buildings, temples, and gymnasia of a great and royal city in equal honor
with its founder; forgetting that their admiration is due, not to lifeless
stones, but to him whose wisdom planned and executed these mighty works.

10 Not less absurd is it for those who regard this universe with the natural eye
to ascribe its origin to the sun, or moon, or any other heavenly body. Rather
let them confess that these are themselves the works of a higher wisdom,
remember the Maker and Framer of them all, and render to him the praise and
honor above all created objects. Nay rather, inspired by the sight of these very
objects, let them address themselves with full purpose of heart to glorify and
worship him who is now invisible to mortal eye, but perceived by the clear and
unclouded vision of the soul, the supremely sovereign Word of God. To take the
instance of the human body: no one has yet conferred the attribute of wisdom on
the eyes, or head, the hands, or feet, or other members, far less on the outward
clothing, of a wise and learned man: no one terms the philosopher's household
furniture and utensils, wise: but every rational person admires that invisible
and secret power, the mind of the man himself.

11 How much more, then, is our admiration due, not to the visible mechanism of
the universe, material as it is, and formed of the selfsame elements; but to
that invisible Word who has moulded and arranged it all, who is the
only-begotten Son of God, and whom the Maker of all things, who far transcends
all being, has begotten of himself, and appointed Lord and Governor of this
universe?

12 For since it was impossible that perishable bodies, or the rational spirits
which he had created, should approach the Supreme God, by reason of their
immeasurable distance from his perfections, for he is unbegotten, above and
beyond all creation, ineffable, inaccessible, unapproachable, dwelling, as his
holy word assures us,49 in the light which none can enter; but they were created
from nothing, and are infinitely far removed from his unbegotten Essence; well
has the all-gracious and Almighty God interposed as it were an intermediate
Power50 between himself and them, even the Divine omnipotence of his
only-begotten Word. And this Power, which is in perfect nearness and intimacy of
union, with the Father which abides in him, and shares his secret counsels, has
yet condescended, in fullness of grace, as it were to conform itself to those
who are so far removed from the supreme majesty of God. How else, consistently
with his own holiness could he who is far above and beyond all things unite
himself to corruptible and corporeal matter? Accordingly the Divine Word, thus
connecting himself with this universe, and receiving into his hands the reins,
as it were, of the world, turns and directs it as a skillful charioteer
according to his own will and pleasure

13 The proof of these assertions is evident. For supposing that those component
parts of the world which we call elements, as earth, water, air, and fire, the
nature of which is manifestly without intelligence, are self-existent; and if
they have one common essence, which they who are skilled in natural science call
the great receptacle, mother, and nurse of all things; and if this itself be
utterly devoid of shape and figure, of soul and reason; whence shall we say it
has obtained its present form and beauty? To what shall we ascribe the
distinction of the elements, or the union of things contrary in their very
nature? Who has commanded the liquid water to sustain the heavy element of
earth? Who has turned back the waters from their downward course, and carried
them aloft in clouds? Who has bound the force of fire, and caused it to lie
latent in wood, and to combine with substances most contrary to itself? Who has
mingled the cold air with heat, and thus reconciled the enmity of opposing
principles? Who has devised the continuous succcession of the human race, and
given it as it were an endless term of duration? Who has moulded the male and
female form, adapted their mutual relations with perfect harmony, and given one
common principle of production to every living creature? Who changes the
character of the fluid and corruptible seed, which in itself is void of reason,
and gives it its prolific power? Who is at this moment working these and ten
thousand effects more wonderful than these, nay, surpassing all wonder, and with
invisible influence is daily and hourly perpetuating the production of them all?

14 Surely the wonder-working and truly omnipotent Word of God may well be deemed
the efficient cause of all these things: that Word who, diffusing himself
through all creation, pervading height and depth with incorporeal energy, and
embracing the length and breadth of the universe within his mighty grasp, has
compacted and reduced to order this entire system, from whose unreasoned and
formless matter he has framed for himself an instrument of perfect harmony, the
nicely balanced chords and notes of which he touches with all-wise and unerring
skill. He it is who governs the sun, and moon, and the other luminaries of
heaven by inexplicable laws, and directs their motions for the service of the
universal whole.

15 It is this Word of God who has stooped to the earth on which we live, and
created the manifold species of animals, and the fair varieties of the vegetable
world. It is this same Word who has penetrated the recesses of the deep, has
given their being to the finny race, and produced the countless forms of life
which there exist. It is he who fashions the burden of the womb, and informs it
in nature's laboratory with the principle of life. By him the fluid and heavy
moisture is raised on high, and then, sweetened by a purifying change, descends
in measured quantities to the earth, and at stated seasons in more profuse
supply.

16 Like a skillful husbandman, he fully irrigates the land, tempers the moist
and dry in just proportion, diversifying the whole with brilliant flowers, with
aspects of varied beauty, with pleasant fragrance, with alternating varieties of
fruits, and countless gratifications for the taste of men. But why do I dare
essay a hopeless task, to recount the mighty works of the Word of God, and
describe an energy which surpasses mortal thought? By some, indeed, he has been
termed the Nature of the universe, by others, the World-Soul, by others, Fate.
Others again have declared him to be the most High God himself, strangely
confounding things most widely different; bringing down to this earth, uniting
to a corruptible and material body, and assigning to that supreme and unbegotten
Power who is Lord of all an intermediate place between irrational animals and
rational mortals on the one hand, and immortal beings on the other.51

Chapter XII.

1 On the other hand, the sacred doctrine teaches that he who is the supreme
Source of good, and Cause of all things, is beyond all comprehension, and
therefore inexpressible by word, or speech, or name; surpassing the power, not
of language only, but of thought itself. Un-circumscribed by place, or body;
neither in heaven, nor in ethereal space, nor in any other part of the universe;
but entirely independent of all things else, he pervades the depths of
unexplored and secret wisdom. The sacred oracles teach us to acknowledge him as
the only true God,52 apart from all corporeal essence, distinct from all
subordinate ministration. Hence it is said that all things are from him, but not
through him.53

2 And he himself dwelling as Sovereign in secret and undiscovered regions of
unapproachable light, ordains and disposes all things by the single power of his
own will. At his will whatever is, exists; without that will, it cannot be. And
his will is in every case for good, since he is essentially Goodness itself. But
he through whom are all things, even God the Word, proceeding in an ineffable
manner from the Father above, as from an everlasting and exhaustless fountain,
flows onward like a river with a full and abundant stream of power for the
preservation of the universal whole.

3 And now let us select an illustration from our own experience. The invisible
and undiscovered mind within us, the essential nature of which no one has ever
known, sits as a monarch in the seclusion of his secret chambers, and alone
resolves on our course of action. From this proceeds the only-begotten word from
its father's bosom, begotten in a manner and by a power inexplicable to us; and
is the first messenger of its father's thoughts, declares his secret counsels,
and, conveying itself to the ears of others, accomplishes his designs.

4 And thus the advantage of this faculty is enjoyed by all: yet no one has ever
yet beheld that invisible and hidden mind, which is the parent of the word
itself.54 In the same manner, or rather in a manner which far surpasses all
likeness or comparison, the perfect Word of the Supreme God, as the
only-begotten Son of the Father (not consisting in the power of utterance, nor
comprehended in syllables and parts of speech, nor conveyed by a voice which
vibrates on the air; but being himself the living and effectual Word of the most
High, and subsisting personally as the Power and Wisdom of God),55 proceeds from
his Father's Deity and kingdom.56 Thus, being the perfect Offspring of a perfect
Father, and the common Preserver of all things, he diffuses himself with living
power throughout creation, and pours from his own fullness abundant supplies of
reason,57 wisdom, light, and every other blessing, not only on objects nearest
to himself, but on those most remote, whether in earth, or sea, or any other
sphere of being.

5 To all these he appoints with perfect equity their limits, places, laws, and
inheritance, allotting to each their suited portion according to his sovereign
will. To some he assigns the super-terrestrial regions, to others heaven itself
as their habitation: others he places in ethereal space, others in air, and
others still on earth. He it is who transfers mankind from hence to another
sphere, impartially reviews their conduct here, and bestows a recompense
according to the life and habits of each.

6 By him provision is made for the life and food, not of rational creatures
only, but also of the brute creation, for the service of men; and while to the
latter he grants the enjoyment of a perishable and fleeting term of existence,
the former he invites to a share in the possession of immortal life. Thus
universal is the agency of the Word of God: everywhere present, and pervading
all things by the power of his intelligence, he looks upward to his Father, and
governs this lower creation, inferior to and consequent upon himself, in
accordance with his will, as the common Preserver of all things.

7 Interme- diate, as it were, and attracting the created to the uncreated
Essence, this Word of God exists as an unbroken bond between the two, uniting
things most widely different by an inseparable tie. He is the Providence which
rules the universe; the guardian and director of the whole: he is the Power and
Wisdom of God the only-begotten God, the Word begotten of God himself. For "In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All
things were made by him and without him was not anything made that hath been
made"; as we learn from the words of the sacred writer.58 Through his vivifying
power all nature grows and flourishes, refreshed by his continual showers, and
invested with a vigor and beauty ever new.

8 Guiding the reigns of the universe, he holds its onward course in conformity
to the Father's will and moves, as it were, the helm of this mighty ship. This
glorious Agent, the only-begotten Son of the Supreme God, begotten by the Father
as his perfect Offspring, the Father has given to this world as the highest of
all goods infusing his word, as spirit into a lifeless body, into unconscious
nature; imparting light and energy to that which in itself was a rude,
inanimate, and formless mass, through the Divine power. Him therefore it is ours
to acknowledge and regard as everywhere present, and giving life to matter and
the elements of nature:59 in him we see Light, even the spiritual offspring of
inexpressible Light: one indeed in essence, as being the Son of one Father; but
possessing in himself many and varied powers.

9 The world is indeed divided into many parts; yet let us not therefore suppose
that there are many independent Agents: nor, though creation's works be
manifold, let us thence assume the existence of many gods. How grievous the
error of those childish and infatuated advocates of polytheistic worship, who
deify the constituent parts of the universe, and divide into many that system
which is only one!

10 Such conduct resembles theirs who should abstract the eyes of an individual
man, and term them the man himself, and the ears, another man, and so the head:
or again, by an effort of thought should separate the neck, the breast and
shoulders, the feet and hands,: or other members, nay, the very powers of sense,
and thus pronounce an individual to be a multitude of men. Such folly must
surely be rewarded with contempt by men of sense. Yet such is he who from the
component parts of a single world can devise for himself a multitude of gods, or
even deem that world which is the work of a Creator, and consists of many parts,
to be itself a god:60 not knowing that the Divine Nature can in no sense be
divisible into parts; since, if compounded, it must be so through the agency of
another power; and that which is so compounded can never be Divine. How indeed
could it be so, if composed of unequal and dissimilar, and hence of worse and
better elements? Simple, indivisible, uncompounded, the Divine Nature exists at
an infinite elevation above the visible constitution of this world.

11 And hence we are assured by the clear testimony of the sacred Herald,61 that
the Word of God, who is before all things, must be the sole Preserver of all
intelligent beings: while God, who is above all, and the Author of the
generation of the Word, being himself the Cause of all things, is rightly called
the Father of the Word, as of his only-begotten Son, himself acknowledging no
superior Cause. God, therefore, himself is One, and from him proceeds the one
only-begotten Word, the omnipresent Preserver of all things. And as the
many-stringed lyre is composed of different chords, both sharp and flat, some
slightly, others tensely strained, and others intermediate between-the two
extremes, yet all attuned according to the rules of harmonic art; even so this
material world, compounded as it is of many elements, containing opposite and
antagonist principles, as moisture and dryness, cold and heat, yet blended into
one harmonious whole, may justly be termed a mighty instrument framed by the
hand of God: an instrument on which the Divine Word, himself not composed of
parts or opposing principles, but indivisible and uncompounded, performs with
perfect skill, and produces a melody at once accordant with the will of his
Father the Supreme Lord of all, and glorious to himself. Again, as there are
manifold external and internal parts and members comprised in a single body, yet
one invisible soul, one undivided and incorporeal mind pervades the whole; so is
it in this creation, which, consisting of many parts, yet is but one: and so the
One mighty, yea, Almighty Word of God, pervading all things, and diffusing
himself with undeviating energy throughout this universe, is the Cause of all
things that exist therein.

12 Survey the compass of this visible world. Seest thou not how the same heaven
contains within itself the countless courses and companies of the stars? Again,
the sun is one, and yet eclipses many, nay all other luminaries, by the
surpassing glory of his rays. Even so, as the Father himself is One, his Word is
also One, the perfect Son of that perfect Father. Should any one object because
they are not more, as well might he complain that there are not many suns, or
moons, or worlds, and a thousand things beside; like the madman, who would fain
subvert the fair and perfect course of Nature herself. As in the visible, so
also in the spiritual world: in the one the same sun diffuses his light
throughout this material earth; in the other the One Almighty Word of God
illumines all things with invisible and secret power.

13 Again, there is in man one spirit, and one faculty of reason, which yet is
the active cause of numberless effects. The same mind, instructed in many
things, will essay to cultivate the earth, to build and guide a ship, and
construct houses: nay, the one mind and reason of man is capable of acquiring
knowledge in a thousand forms: the same mind shall understand geometry and
astronomy, and discourse on the rules of grammar, and rhetoric, and the healing
art. Nor will it excel in science only, but in practice too: and yet no one has
ever supposed the existence of many minds in one human form, nor expressed his
wonder at a plurality of being in man, because he is thus capable of varied
knowledge.

14 Suppose one were to find a shapeless mass of clay, to mould it with his
hands, and give it the form of a living creature; the head in one figure, the
hands and feet in another, the eyes and cheeks in a third, and so to fashion the
ears, the mouth and nose, the breast and shoulders, according to the rules of
the plastic art. The result, indeed, is a variety of figure, of parts and
members in the one body; yet must we not suppose it the work of many hands, but
ascribe it entirely to the skill of a single artist, and yield the tribute of
our praise to him who by the energy of a single mind has framed it all. The same
is true of the universe itself, which is one, though consisting of many parts:
yet surely we need not suppose many creative powers, nor invent a plurality of
gods. Our duty is to adore the all-wise and all-perfect agency of him who is
indeed the Power and the Wisdom of God, whose undivided force and energy
pervades and penetrates the universe, creating and giving life to all things,
and furnishing to all, collectively and severally, those manifold supplies of
which he is himself the source.

15 Even so one and the same impression of the solar rays illumines the air at
once, gives light to the eyes, warmth to the touch, fertility to the earth, and
growth to plants. The same luminary constitutes the course of time, governs the
motions of the stars, performs the circuit of the heavens, imparts beauty to the
earth, and displays the power of God to all: and all this he performs by the
sole and unaided force of his own nature. In like manner fire has the property
of refining gold, and fusing lead, of dissolving wax, of parching clay, and
consuming wood; producing these varied effects by one and the same burning
power.

16 So also the Supreme Word of God, pervading all things, everywhere existent,
everywhere present in heaven and earth, governs and directs the visible and
invisible creation, the sun, the heaven, and the universe itself, with an energy
inexplicable in its nature, irresistible in its effects. From him, as from an
everlasting fountain, the sun, the moon, and stars receive their light: and he
forever rules that heaven which he has framed as the fitting emblem of his own
greatness. The angelic and spiritual powers, the incorporeal and intelligent
beings which exist beyond the sphere of heaven and earth, are filled by him with
light and life, with wisdom and virtue, with all that is great and good, from
his own peculiar treasures. Once more, with one and the same creative skill, he
ceases not to furnish the elements with substance, to regulate the union and
combinations, the forms and figures, and the innumerable qualities of organized
bodies; preserving the varied distinctions of animal and vegetable life, of the
rational and the brute creation; and supplying all things to all with equal
power: thus proving himself the Author, not indeed of the seven-stringed lyre,62
but of that system of perfect harmony which is the workmanship of the One
world-creating Word.63

Chapter XIII.

1 And now let us proceed to explain the reasons for which this mighty Word of
God descended to dwell with men. Our ignorant and foolish race, incapable of
comprehending him who is the Lord of heaven and earth, proceeding from his
Father's Deity as from the supreme fountain, ever present throughout the world,
and evincing by the clearest proofs his providential care for the interests of
man; have ascribed the adorable title of Deity to the sun, and moon, the heaven
and the stars of heaven. Nor did they stop here, but deified the earth itself,
its products, and the various substances by which animal life is sustained, and
devised images of Ceres, of Proserpine, of Bacchus,64 and many such as these.

2 Nay, they shrank not from giving the name of gods to the very conceptions of
their own minds, and the speech by which those conceptions are expressed;
calling the mind itself Minerva, and language Mercury,65 and affixing the names
of Mnemosyne and the Muses to those faculties by means of which science is
acquired. Nor was even this enough: advancing still more rapidly in the career
of impiety and folly, they deified their own evil passions, which it behooved
them to regard with aversion, or restrain by the principles of self-control.
Their very lust and passion and impure disease of soul, the members of the body
which tempt to obscenity, and even the very uncontrol66 in shameful pleasure,
they described under the titles of Cupid, Priapus, Venus,67 and other kindred
terms.

3 Nor did they stop even here. Degrading their thoughts of God to this corporeal
and mortal life, they deified their fellow-men, conferring the names of gods and
heroes on those who had experienced the common lot of all, and vainly imagining
that the Divine and imperishable Essence could frequent the tombs and monuments
of the dead. Nay, more than this: they paid divine honors to animals of various
species, and to the most noxious reptiles: they felled trees, and excavated
rocks; they provided themselves with brass, and iron, and other metals, of which
they fashioned resemblances of the male and female human form, of beasts, and
creeping things; and these they made the objects of their worship.

4 Nor did this suffice. To the evil spirits themselves which lurked within their
statues, or lay concealed in secret and dark recesses, eager to drink their
libations, and inhale the odor of their sacrifices, they ascribed the same
divine honors. Once more, they endeavored to secure the familiar aid of these
spirits, and the unseen powers which move through the tracts of air, by charms
of forbidden magic, and the compulsion of unhallowed songs and incantations.
Again, different nations have adopted different persons as objects of their
worship. The Greeks have rendered to Bacchus, Hercules, Aesculapius, Apollo, and
others who were mortal men, the titles of gods and heroes. The Egyptians have
deified Horus and Isis, Osiris, and other mortals such as these. And thus they
who boast of the wondrous skill whereby they have discovered geometry,
astronomy, and the science of number, know not, wise as they are in their own
conceit, nor understand how to estimate the measure of the power of God, or
calculate his exceeding greatness above the nature of irrational and mortal
beings.

5 Hence they shrank not from applying the name of gods to the most hideous of
the brute creation, to venomous reptiles and savage beasts. The Phoenicians
deified Melcatharus, Usorus,68 and others; mere mortals, and with little claim
to honor: the Arabians, Dusaris69 and Obodas: the Getae, Zamolxis: the
Cicilians, Mopsus: and the Thebans, Amphiaraus:70 in short, each nation has
adopted its own peculiar deities, differing in norespect from their
fellow-mortals, being simply and truly men. Again, the Egyptians with one
consent, the Phoenicians, the Greeks, nay, every nation beneath the sun, have
united in worshiping the very parts and elements of the world, and even the
produce of the ground itself. And, which is most surprising, though
acknowledging the adulterous, unnatural, and licentious crimes of their deities,
they have not only filled every city, and village, and district with temples,
shrines, and statues in their honor, but have followed their evil example to the
ruin of their own souls.

6 We hear of gods and the sons of gods described by them as heroes and good
genii, titles entirely opposed to truth, honors utterly at variance with the
qualifies they are intended to exalt. It is as if one who desired to point out
the sun and the luminaries of heaven, instead of directing his gaze thitherward,
should grope with his hands on the ground, and search for the celestial powers
in the mud and mire. Even so mankind, deceived by their own folly and the craft
of evil spirits, have believed that the Divine and spiritual Essence which is
far above heaven and earth could be compatible with the birth, the affections,
and death, of mortal bodies here below. To such a pitch of madness did they
proceed, as to sacrifice the dearest objects of their affection to their gods,
regardless of all natural ties, and urged by frenzied feeling to slay their only
and best beloved children.

7 For what can be a greater proof of madness, than to offer human sacrifice, to
pollute every city, and even their own houses, with kindred blood? Do not the
Greeks themselves attest this, and is not all history filled with records of the
same impiety? The Phoenicians devoted their best beloved and only children as an
annual sacrifice to Saturn. The Rhodians, on the sixth day of the month
Metageitnion,71 offered human victims to the same god. At Salamis, a man was
pursued in the temple of Minerva Agraulis and Diomede, compelled to run thrice
round the altar, afterwards pierced with a lance by the priest, and consumed as
a burnt offering on the blazing pile. In Egypt, human sacrifice was most
abundant. At Heliopolis three victims were daily offered to Juno, for whom king
Amoses, impressed with the atrocity of the practice, commanded the substitution
of an equal number of waxen figures. In Chios, and again in Tenedos, a man was
slain and offered up to Omadian Bacchus. At Sparta they immolated human beings
to Mars. In Crete they did likewise, offering human sacrifices to Saturn. In
Laodicea of Syria a virgin was yearly slain in honor of Minerva, for whom a hart
is now the substitute. The Libyans and Carthaginians appeased their gods with
human victims. The Dumateni of Arabia buried a boy annually beneath the altar.
History informs us that the Greeks without exception, the Thracians also, and
Scythians, were accustomed to human sacrifice before they marched forth to
battle. The Athenians record the immolation of the virgin children of Leus,72
and the daughter of Erechtheus.73 Who knows not that at this day a human victim
is offered in Rome itself at the festival of Jupiter Latiaris?

8 And these facts are confirmed by the testimony of the most approved
philosophers. Diodorus, the epitomizer of libraries,74 affirms that two hundred
of the noblest youths were sacrificed to Saturn by the Libyan people, and that
three hundred more were voluntarily offered by their own parents. Dionysius, the
compiler of Roman history,75 expressly says that Jupiter and Apollo demanded
human sacrifices of the so-called Aborigines, in Italy. He relates that on this
demand they offered a proportion of all their produce to the gods; but that,
because of their refusal to slay human victims, they became involved in manifold
calamities, from which they could obtain no release until they had decimated
themselves, a sacrifice of life which proved the desolation of their country.

9 Such and so great were the evils which of old afflicted the whole human race.
Nor was this the full extent of their misery: they groaned beneath the pressure
of other evils equally numerous and irremediable. All nations, whether civilized
or barbarous, throughout the world, as if actuated by a demoniac frenzy, were
infected with sedition as with some fierce and terrible disease: insomuch that
the human family was irreconcilably divided against itself; the great system of
society was distracted and torn asunder; and in every corner of the earth men
stood opposed to each other, and strove with fierce contention on questions of
law and government.

10 Nay, more than this: with passions aroused to fury, they engaged in mutual
conflicts, so frequent that their lives were passed as it were in uninterrupted
warfare. None could undertake a journey except as prepared to encounter an enemy
in the very country and villages the rustics girded on the sword, provided
themselves with armor rather than with the implements of rural labor, and deemed
it noble exploit to plunder and enslave any who belonged to a neighboring state.

11 Nay, more than this: from the fables they had themselves devised respecting
their own deities, they deduced occasions for a vile and abandoned life, and
wrought the ruin of body and soul by licentiousness of every kind. Not content
with this, they even overstepped the bounds which nature had defined, and
together committed incredible and nameless crimes, "men with men (in the words
of the sacred writer) working un-seemliness, and receiving in themselves that
recompense of their error which was due."

12 Nor did they stop even here; but perverted their natural thoughts of God, and
denied that the course of this world was directed by his providential care,
ascribing the existence and constitution of all things to the blind operation of
chance, or the necessity of fate.

13 Once more: believing that soul and body were alike dissolved by death, they
led a brutish life, unworthy of the name: careless of the nature or existence of
the soul, they dreaded not the tribunal of Divine justice, expected no reward of
virtue, nor thought of chastisement as the penalty of an evil life.

14 Hence it was that whole nations, a prey to wickedness in all its forms, were
wasted by the effects of their own brutality: some living in the practice of
most vile and lawless incest with mothers, others with sisters, and others again
corrupting their own daughters. Some were found who slew their confiding guests;
others who fed on human flesh; some strangled, and then feasted on, their aged
men; others threw them alive to dogs. The time would fail me were I to attempt
to describe the multifarious symptoms of the inveterate malady which had
asserted its dominion over the whole human race.

15 Such, and numberless others like these, were the prevailing evils, on account
of which the gracious Word of God, full of compassion for his human flock, had
long since, by the ministry of his prophets, and earlier still, as well as
later, by that of men distinguished by pious devotion to God, invited those thus
desperately afflicted to their own cure; and had, by means of laws,
exhortations, and doctrines of every kind, proclaimed to man the principles and
elements of true godliness. But when for mankind, distracted and torn as I have
said, not indeed by wolves and savage beasts, but by ruthless and
soul-destroying spirits of evil, human power no longer sufficed, but a help was
needed superior to that of man; then it was that the Word of God, obedient to
his all-gracious Father's will, at length himself appeared, and most willingly
made his abode amongst us.

16 The causes of his advent I have already described, induced by which he
condescended to the society of man; not in his wonted form and manner, for he is
incorporeal, and present everywhere throughout the world, proving by his agency
both in heaven and earth the greatness of his almighty power, but in a character
new and hitherto unknown. Assuming a mortal body, he deigned to associate and
converse with men; desiring, through the medium of their own likeness, to save
our mortal race.

Chapter XIV.

1 And now let us explain the cause for which the incorporeal Word of God assumed
this mortal body as a medium of intercourse with man. How, indeed, else than in
human form could that Divine and impalpable, that immaterial and invisible
Essence manifest itself to those who sought for God in created and earthly
objects, unable or unwilling otherwise to discern the Author and Maker of all
things?

2 As a fitting means, therefore, of communication with mankind, he assumed a
mortal body, as that with which they were themselves familiar; for like, it is
proverbially said, loves its like. To those, then, whose affections were engaged
by visible objects, who looked for gods in statues and lifeless images, who
imagined the Deity to consist in material and corporeal substance, nay, who
conferred on men the title of divinity, the Word of God presented himself in
this form.

3 Hence he procured for himself this body as a thrice-hallowed temple, a
sensible habitation of an intellectual power; a noble and most holy form, of far
higher worth than any lifeless statue. The material and senseless image,
fashioned by base mechanic hands, of brass or iron, of gold or ivory, wood or
stone, may be a fitting abode for evil spirits: but that Divine form, wrought by
the power of heavenly wisdom, was possessed of life and spiritual being; a form
animated by every excellence, the dwelling-place of the Word of God, a holy
temple of the holy God.

4 Thus the indwelling Word76 conversed with and was known to men, as kindred
with themselves; yet yielded not to passions such as theirs, nor owned, as the
natural soul, subjection to the body. He parted not with aught of his intrinsic
greatness, nor changed his proper Deity. For as the all-pervading radiance of
the sun receives no stain from contact with dead and impure bodies; much less
can the incorporeal power of the Word of God be injured in its essential purity,
or part with any of its greatness, from spiritual contact with a human body.

5 Thus, I say, did our common Saviour prove himself the benefactor and preserver
of all, displaying his wisdom through the instrumentality of his human nature,
even as a musician uses the lyre to evince his skill. The Grecian myth tells us
that Orpheus had power to charm ferocious beasts, and tame their savage spirit,
by striking the chords of his instrument with a master hand: and this story is
celebrated by the Greeks, and generally believed, that an unconscious instrument
could subdue the untamed brute, and draw the trees from their places, in
obedience to its melodious power. But he who is the author of perfect harmony,
the all-wise Word of God, desiring to apply every remedy to the manifold
diseases of the souls of men, employed that human nature which is the
workmanship of his own wisdom, as an instrument by the melodious strains of
which he soothed, not indeed the brute creation, but savages endued with reason;
healing each furious temper, each fierce and angry passion of the soul, both in
civilized and barbarous nations, by the remedial power of his Divine doctrine.
Like a physician of perfect skill, he met the diseases of their souls who sought
for God in nature and in bodies, by a fitting and kindred remedy, and showed
them God in human form.

6 And then, with no less care for the body than the soul, he presented before
the eyes of men wonders and signs, as proofs of his Divine power, at the same
time instilling into their ears of flesh the doctrines which he himself uttered
with a corporeal tongue. In short, he performed all his works through the medium
of that body which he had assumed for the sake of those who else were incapable
of apprehending his Divine nature.

7 In all this he was the servant of his Father's will, himself remaining still
the same as when with the Father; unchanged in essence, unimpaired in nature,
unfettered by the trammels of mortal flesh, nor hindered by his abode in a human
body from being elsewhere present.77

8 Nay, at the very time of his intercourse with men, he was pervading all
things, was with and in the Father, and even then was caring for all things both
in heaven and earth. Nor was he precluded, as we are, from being present
everywhere, or from the continued exercise of his Divine power. He gave of his
own to man, but received nothing in return: he imparted of his Divine power to
mortality, but derived no accession from mortality itself.

9 Hence his human birth to him brought no defilement; nor could his impassible
Essence suffer at the dissolution of his mortal body. For let us suppose a lyre
to receive an accidental injury, or its chord to be broken; it does not follow
that the performer on it suffers: nor, if a wise man's body undergo punishment,
can we fairly assert that his wisdom, or the soul within him, are maimed or
burned.

10 Far less can we affirm that the inherent power of the Word sustained any
detriment from his bodily passion, any more than, as in the instance we have
already used, the solar rays which are shot from heaven to earth contract
defilement, though in contact with mire and pollution of every kind. We may,
indeed, assert that these things partake of the radiance of the light, but not
that the light is contaminated, or the sun defiled, by this contact with other
bodies.

11 And indeed these things are themselves not contrary to nature; but the
Saviour, the incorporeal Word of God, being Life and spiritual Light itself,
whatever he touches with Divine and incorporeal power must of necessity become
endued with the intelligence of light and life. Thus, if he touch a body, it
becomes enlightened and sanctified, is at once delivered from all disease,
infirmity, and suffering, and that which before was lacking is supplied by a
portion of his fullness.

12 And such was the tenor of his life on earth; now proving the sympathies of
his human nature with our own, and now revealing himself as the Word of God:
wondrous and mighty in his works as God; foretelling the events of the far
distant future; declaring in every act, by signs, and wonders, and supernatural
powers, that Word whose presence was so little known; and finally, by his Divine
teaching, inviting the souls of men to prepare for those mansions which are
above the heavens.

Chapter XV.

1 What now remains, but to account for those which are the crowning facts of
all; I mean his death, so far and widely known, the manner of his passion, and
the mighty miracle of his resurrection after death: and then to establish the
truth of these events by the clearest testimonies?

2 For the reasons detailed above he used the instrumentality of a mortal body,
as a figure becoming his Divine majesty, and like a mighty sovereign employed it
as his interpreter in his intercourse with men, performing all things
consistently with his own Divine power. Supposing, then, at the end of his
sojourn among men, he had by any other means suddenly withdrawn himself from
their sight, and, secretly removing that interpreter of himself, the form which
he had assumed, had hastened to flee from death, and afterwards by his own act
had consigned his mortal body to corruption and dissolution: doubtless in such a
case he would have been deemed a mere phantom by all. Nor would he have acted in
a manner worthy of himself, had he who is Life, the Word, and the Power of God,
abandoned this interpreter of himself to corruption and death.

3 Nor, again, would his warfare with the spirits of evil have received its
consummation by conflict. with the power of death. The place of his retirement
must have remained unknown; nor would his existence have been believed by those
who had not seen him for themselves. No proof would have been given that he was
superior to death nor would he have delivered mortality from the law of its
natural infirmity. His name had never been heard throughout the world nor could
he have inspired his disciples with contempt of death, or encouraged those who
embraced his doctrine to hope for the enjoyment of a future life with God. Nor
would he have fulfilled the assurances of his own promise, nor have accomplished
the predictions of the prophets concerning himself. Nor would he have undergone
the last conflict of all; for this was to be the struggle with the power of
death.

4 For all these reasons, then, and inasmuch as it was necessary that the mortal
body which had rendered such service to the Divine Word should meet with an end
worthy its sacred occupant, the manner of his death was ordained accordingly.
For since but two alternatives remained: either to consign his body entirely to
corruption, and so to bring the scene of life to a dishonored close, or else to
prove himself victorious over death, and render mortality immortal by the act of
Divine power; the former of these alternatives would have contravened his own
promise. For as it is not the property of fire to cool, nor of light to darken,
no more is it compatible with life, to deprive of life, or with Divine
intelligence, to act in a manner contrary to reason. For how would it be
consistent,with reason, that he who had promised life to others, should permit
his own body, the form which he had chosen, to perish beneath the power of
corruption? That he who had inspired his disciples with hopes of immortality,
should yield this exponent of his Divine counsels to be destroyed by death?

5 The second alternative was therefore needful I mean, that he should assert his
dominion over the power of death. But how? should this be a furtive and secret
act, or openly performed and in the sight of all? So mighty an achievement, had
it remained unknown and unrevealed, must have failed of its effect as regards
the interests of men; whereas the same event, if openly declared and understood,
would, from its wondrous character, redound to the common benefit of all. With
reason, therefore, since it was needful to prove his body victorious over death,
and that not secretly but before the eyes of men, he shrank not from the trial,
for this indeed would have argued fear, and a sense of inferiority to the power
of death, but maintained that conflict with the enemy which has rendered
mortality immortal; a conflict undertaken for the life, the immortality, the
salvation of all.

6 Suppose one desired to show us that a vessel could resist the force of fire;
how could he better prove the fact than by casting it into the furnace and
thence withdrawing it entire and unconsumed? Even thus the Word of God who is
the source of life to all, desiring to prove the triumph of that body over death
which he had assumed for man's salvation, and to make this body partake his own
life and immortality, pursued a course consistent with this object. Leaving his
body for a little while,78 and delivering it up to death in proof of its mortal
nature, he soon redeemed it from death, in vindication of that Divine power
whereby he has manifested the immortality which he has promised to be utterly
beyond the sphere of death.

7 The reason of this is clear. It was needful that his disciples should receive
ocular proof of the certainty of that resurrection on which he had taught them
to rest their hopes as a motive for rising superior to the fear of death. It was
indeed most needful that they who purposed to pursue a life of godliness should
receive a clear impression of this essential truth: more needful still for those
who were destined to declare his name in all the world, and to communicate to
mankind that knowledge of God which he had before ordained for all nations.

8 For such the strongest conviction of a future life was necessary, that they
might be able with fearless and unshrinking zeal to maintain the conflict with
Gentile and polytheistic error: a conflict the dangers of which they would
never, have been prepared to meet, except as habituated to the contempt of
death. Accordingly, in arming his disciples against the power of this last
enemy, he delivered not his doctrines in mere verbal precepts, nor attempted to
prove the soul's immortality, by persuasive and probable arguments; but
displayed to them in his own person a real victory over death.

9 Such was the first and greatest reason of our Saviour's conflict with the
power of death, whereby he proved to his disciples the nothingness of that which
is the terror of all mankind, and afforded a visible evidence of the reality of
that life which he had promised; presenting as it were a first-fruit of our
common hope, of future life and immortality in the presence of God.

10 The second cause of his resurrection was, that the Divine power might be
manifested which dwelt in his mortal body. Mankind had heretofore conferred
Divine honors on men who had yielded to the power of death, and had given the
titles of gods and heroes to mortals like themselves. For this reason,
therefore, the Word of God evinced his gracious character, and proved to man his
own superiority over death, recalling his mortal body to a second life,
displaying an immortal triumph over death in the eyes of all, and teaching them
to acknowledge the Author of such a victory to be the only true God, even in
death itself.

11 I may allege yet a third cause of the Saviour's death. He was the victim
offered to the Supreme Sovereign of the universe for the whole human race: a
victim consecrated for the need of the human race, and for the overthrow of the
errors of demon worship. For as soon as the one holy and mighty sacrifice, the
sacred body of our Saviour, had been slain for man, to be as a ransom for all
nations, heretofore involved in the guilt of impious superstition, thenceforward
the power of impure and unholy spirits was utterly abolished, and every
earth-born and delusive error was at once weakened and destroyed.

12 Thus, then, this salutary victim taken from among themselves, I mean the
mortal body of the Word, was offered on behalf of the common race of men. This
was that sacrifice delivered up to death, of which the sacred oracles speak:
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."79 And again,
as follows: "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before the
shearer is dumb." They declare also the cause, saying: "He bears our sins, and
is pained for us: yet we accounted him to be in trouble, and in suffering, and
in affliction. But he was wounded on account of our sins, and bruised because of
our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and by his bruises
we were healed. All we as sheep have gone astray; every one has gone astray in
this way; and the Lord gave him up for our sins."80

13 Such were the causes which led to the offering of the human body of the Word
of God. But forasmuch as he was the great high priest, consecrated to the
Supreme Lord and King, and therefore more than a victim, the Word, the Power,
and the Wisdom of God; he soon recalled his body from the grasp of death,
presented it to his Father as the first-fruit of our common salvation, and
raised this trophy, a proof at once of his victory over death and Satan, and of
the abolition of human sacrifices, for the blessing of all mankind.

Chapter XVI.

1 And now the time is come for us to proceed to the demonstration of these
things; if indeed such truths require demonstration, and if the aid of testimony
be needful to confirm the certainty of palpable facts. Such testimony, however,
shall be here given; and let it be received with an attentive and gracious ear.

2 Of old the nations of the earth, the entire human race, were variously
distributed into provincial, national, and local governments,81 subject to
kingdoms and principalities of many kinds. The consequences of this variety were
war and strife, depopulation and captivity, which raged in country and city with
unceasing fury. Hence, too, the countless subjects of history, adulteries, and
rapes of women; hence the woes of Troy, and the ancient tragedies, so known
among all peoples.

3 The origin of these may justly be ascribed to the delusion of polytheistic
error. But when that instrument of our redemption, the thrice holy body of
Christ, which proved itself superior to all Satanic fraud, and free from evil
both in word and deed, was raised, at once for the abolition of ancient evils,
and in token of his victory over the powers of darkness; the energy of these
evil spirits was at once destroyed. The manifold forms of government, the
tyrannies and republics, the siege of cities, and devastation of countries
caused thereby, were now no more, and one God

4 was proclaimed to all mankind. At the same time one universal power, the Roman
empire, arose and flourished, while the enduring and implacable hatred of nation
against nation was now removed: and as the knowledge of one God, and one way of
religion and salvation, even the doctrine of Christ, was made known to all
mankind; so at the self-same period, the entire dominion of the Roman empire
being vested in a single sovereign, profound peace reigned throughout the world.
And thus, by the express appointment of the same God, two roots of blessing, the
Roman empire, and the doctrine of Christian piety, sprang up together for the
benefit of men.

5 For before this time the various countries of the world, as Syria, Asia,
Macedonia, Egypt, and Arabia, had been severally subject to different rulers.
The Jewish people, again, had established their dominion in the laud of
Palestine. And these nations, in every village, city, and district, actuated by
some insane spirit, were engaged in incessant and murderous war and conflict.
But two mighty powers, starting from the same point, the Roman empire, which
henceforth was swayed by a single sovereign, and the Christian religion, subdued
and reconciled these contending elements.

6 Our Saviour's mighty power destroyed at once the many governments and the many
gods of the powers of darkness, and proclaimed to all men, both rude and
civilized, to the extremities of the earth, the sole sovereignty of God himself.
Meantime the Roman empire, the causes of multiplied governments being thus
removed, effected an easy conquest of those which yet remained; its object being
to unite all nations in one harmonious whole; an object in great measure already
secured, and destined to be still more perfectly attained, even to the final
conquest of the ends of the habitable world, by means of the salutary doctrine,
and through the aid of that Divine power which facilitates and smooths its way.

7 And surely this must appear a wondrous fact to those who will examine the
question in the love of truth, and desire not to cavil at these blessings.82 The
falsehood of demon superstition was convicted: the inveterate strife and mutual
hatred of the nations was removed: at the same time One God, and the knowledge
of that God, were proclaimed to all: one universal empire prevailed; and the
whole human race, subdued by the controlling power of peace and concord,
received one another as brethren, and responded to the feelings of their common
nature. Hence, as children of one God and Father, and owning true religion as
their common mother, they saluted and welcomed each other with words of peace.
Thus the whole world appeared like one well-ordered and united family: each one
might journey unhindered as far as and whithersoever he pleased: men might
securely travel from West to East, and from East to West, as to their own native
country: in short, the ancient oracles and predictions of theprophets were
fulfilled, more numerous than we can at present cite, and those especially which
speak as follows concerning the saving Word. "He shall have dominion from sea to
sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth." And again, "In his days shall
righteousness spring up; and abundance of peace." "And they shall beat their
swords into plough-shares, and their spears into sickles: and nation shall not
take up sword against nation, neither shall they learn to war any more."83

8 These words, predicted ages before in the Hebrew tongue, have received in our
own day a visible fulfillment, by which the testimonies of the ancient oracles
are clearly confirmed. And now, if thou still desire more ample proof, receive
it, not in words, but from the facts themselves. Open the eyes of thine
understanding expand the gates of thought; pause awhile, and consider; inquire
of thyself as though thou weft another, and thus diligently examine the nature
of the case. What king or prince in any age of the world, what philosopher,
legislator, or prophet, in civilized or barbarous lands, has attained so great a
height of excellence, I say not after death, but while living still, and full of
mighty power, as to fill the ears and tongues of all mankind with the praises of
his name? Surely none save our only Saviour has done this, when, after his
victory over death, he spoke the word to his followers, and fulfilled it by the
event, saying to them, "Go ye, and make disciples of all nations in my name."84
He it was who gave the distinct assurance, that his gospel must be preached in
all the world for a tes testimony to all nations, and immediately verifiedhis
word: for within a little time the world itself was filled with his doctrine.

9 How, then, will those who caviled at the commencement of my speech be able to
reply to this? For surely the force of ocular testimony is superior to any
verbal argument. Who else than he, with an invisible and yet potent hand, has
driven from human society like savage beasts that ever noxious and destructive
tribe of evil spirits who of old had made all nations their prey, and by the
motions of their images had practiced many a delusion among men? Who else,
beside our Saviour, by the invocation of his name, and by unfeigned prayer
addressed through him to the Supreme God, has given power to banish from the
world the remnant of those wicked spirits to those who with genuine and sincere
obedience pursue the course of life and conduct which he has himself prescribed?
Who else but our Saviour has taught his followers to offer those bloodless and
reasonable sacrifices which are performed by prayer and the secret worship of
God?

10 Hence is it that throughout the habitable world altars are erected, and
churches dedicated, wherein these spiritual and rational sacrifices are offered
as a sacred service by every nation to the One Supreme God. Once more, who but
he, with invisible and secret power, has suppressed and utterly abolished those
bloody sacrifices which were offered with fire and smoke, as well as the cruel
and senseless immolation of human victims; a fact which is attested by the
heathen historians themselves? For it was not till after the publication of the
Saviour's Divine doctrine, about the time of Hadrian's reign, that the practice
of human sacrifice was universally abandoned.

11 Such and so manifest are the proofs of our Saviour's power and energy after
death. Who then can be found of spirit so obdurate as to withhold his assent to
the truth, and refuse to acknowledge his life to be Divine? Such deeds as I have
described are done by the living, not the dead; and visible acts are to us as
evidence of those which we cannot see. It is as it were an event of yesterday
that an impious and godless race disturbed and confounded the peace of human
society, and possessed mighty power. But these, as soon as life departed, lay
prostrate on the earth, worthless as dung, breathless, motionless, bereft of
speech, and have left neither fame nor memorial behind. For such is the
condition of the dead; and he who no longer lives is nothing: and how can he who
is nothing be capable of any act? But how shall his existence be called in
question, whose active power and energy are greater than in those who are still
alive? And though he be invisible to the natural eye, yet the discerning faculty
is not in outward sense. We do not comprehend the rules of art, or the theories
of science, by bodily sensation; nor has any eye yet discerned the mind of man.
Far less, then, the power of God: and in such cases our judgment is formed from
apparent results.

12 Even thus are we bound to judge of our Saviour's invisible power, and decide
by its manifest effects whether we shall acknowledge the mighty operations which
he is even now carrying on to be the works of a living agent; or whether they
shall be ascribed to one who has no existence; or, lastly, whether the inquiry
be not absurd and inconsistent in itself. For with what reason can we assert the
existence of one who is not? Since all allow that that which has no existence is
devoid of that power, and energy, and action, for these are characteristics of
the living, but the contrary is characteristic of the dead.

Chapter XVII.

1 And now the time is come for us to consider the works of our Saviour in our
own age, and to contemplate the living operations of the living God. For how
shall we describe these mighty works save as living proofs of the power of a
living agent, who truly enjoys the life of God? If any one inquire the nature of
these works, let him now attend.

2 But recently a class of persons, impelled by furious zeal, and backed by equal
power and military force, evinced their enmity against God, by destroying his
churches, and overthrowing from their foundations the buildings dedicated to his
worship. In short, in every way they directed their attacks against the unseen
God, and assailed him with a thousand shafts of impious words. But he who is
invisible avenged himself with an invisible hand.

3 By the single fiat of his will his enemies were utterly destroyed, they who a
little while before had been flourishing in great prosperity, exalted by their
fellow men as worthy of divine honor, and blessed with a continued period of
power and glory,85 so long as they had maintained peace and amity with him whom
they afterwards opposed. As soon, however, as they dared openly to resist his
will, and to set their gods in array against him whom we adore; immediately,
according to the will and power of that God against whom their arms were raised,
they all received the judgment due to their audacious deeds. Constrained to
yield and flee before his power, together they acknowledged his Divine nature,
and hastened to reverse the measures which they had before essayed.

4 Our Saviour, therefore, without delay erected trophies of this victory
everywhere, and once more adorned the world with holy temples and consecrated
houses of prayer; in every city and village, nay, throughout all countries, and
even in barbaric wilds, ordaining the erection of churches and sacred buildings
to the honor of the Supreme God and Lord of all. Hence it is that these hallowed
edifices are deemed worthy to bear his name, and receive not their appellation
from men, but from the Lord himself, from which circumstances they are called
churches (or houses of the Lord).86

5 And now let him who will stand forth and tell us who, after so complete a
desolation, has restored these sacred buildings from foundation to roof? Who,
when all hope appeared extinct, has caused them to rise on a nobler scale than
heretofore? And well may it claim our wonder, that this renovation was not
subsequent to the death of those adversaries of God, but whilst the destroyers
of these edifices were still alive; so that the recantation of their evil deeds
came in their own words and edicts.87 And this they did, not in the sunshine of
prosperity and ease (for then we might suppose that benevolence or clemency
might be the cause), but at the very time that they were suffering under the
stroke of Divine vengeance.

6 Who, again, has been able to retain in obedience to his heavenly precepts,
after so many successive storms of persecution, nay, in the very crisis of
danger, so many persons throughout the world devoted to philosophy, and the
service of God and those holy choirs of virgins who had dedicated themselves to
a life of perpetual chastity and purity? Who taught them cheerfully to persevere
in the exercise of protracted fasting, and to embrace a life of severe and
consistent self-denial? Who has persuaded multitudes of either sex to devote
themselves to the study of sacred things, and prefer to bodily nutriment that
intellectual food which is suited to the wants of a rational soul?88 Who has
instructed barbarians and peasants, yea, feeble women, slaves, and children, in
short, unnumbered multitudes of all nations, to live in the contempt of death;
persuaded of the immortality of their souls, conscious that human actions are
observed by the unerring eye of justice, expecting God's award to the righteous
and the wicked, and therefore true to the practice of a just and virtuous life?
For they could not otherwise have persevered in the course of godliness. Surely
these are the acts which our Saviour, and he alone, even now performs.

7 And now let us pass from these topics, and endeavor by inquiries such as these
that follow to convince the objector's obdurate understanding. Come forward,
then, whoever thou art, and speak the words of reason: utter, not the thoughts
of a senseless heart, but those of an intelligent and enlightened mind: speak, I
say, after deep solemn converse with thyself. Who of the sages whose names have
yet been known to fame, has ever been fore-known and proclaimed from the
remotest ages, as our Saviour was by the prophetic oracles to the once
divinely-favored Hebrew nation? But his very birth-place, the period of his
advent the manner of his life, his miracles, and words and mighty acts, were
anticipated and recorded in the sacred volumes of these prophets.

8 Again, who so present an avenger of crimes against himself; so that, as the
immediate consequence of their impiety, the entire Jewish people were scattered
by an unseen power, their royal seat utterly removed, and their very temple with
its holy things levelled with the ground? Who, like our Saviour, has uttered
predictions at once concerning that impious nation and the establishment of his
church throughout the world, and has equally verified both by the event?
Respecting the temple of these wicked men, our Saviour said: "Your house is left
unto you desolate":89 and, "There shall not be left one stone upon another in
this place, that shall not be thrown down."90 And again, of his church he says:
"I will build my church upon a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it."91

9 How wondrous, too, must that power be deemed which summoned obscure and
unlettered men from their fisher's trade, and made them the legislators and
instructors of the human race! And how clear a demonstration of his deity do we
find in the promise so well performed, that he would make them fishers of men:
in the power and energy which he bestowed, so that they composed and published
writings of such authority that they were translated into every civilized and
barbarous language,92 were read and pondered by all nations, and the doctrines
contained in them accredited as the oracles of God!

10 How marvelous his predictions of the future, and the testimony whereby his
disciples were forewarned that they should be brought before kings and rulers,
and should endure the severest punishments, not indeed as criminals, but simply
for their confession of his name! Or who shall adequately describe the power
with which he prepared them thus to suffer with a willing mind, and enabled
them, strong in the armor of godliness, to maintain a constancy of spirit
indomitable in the midst of conflict?

11 Or how shall we enough admire that steadfast firmness of soul which
strengthened, not merely his immediate followers, but their successors also,
even to our present age, in the joyful endurance of every infliction, and every
form of torture, in proof of their devotion to the Supreme God? Again, what
monarch has prolonged his government through so vast a series of ages? Who else
has power to make war after death, to triumph over every enemy, to subjugate
each barbarous and civilized nation and city, and to subdue his adversaries with
an invisible and secret hand?

12 Lastly, and chief of all, what slanderous lip shall dare to question that
universal peace to which we have already referred; established by his power
throughout the world93 For thus the mutual concord and harmony of all nations
coincided in point of time with the extension of our Saviour's doctrine and
preaching in all the world: a concurrence of events predicted in long ages past
by the prophets of God. The day itself would fail me, gracious emperor, should I
attempt to exhibit in a single view those cogent proofs of our Saviour's Divine
power which even now are visible in their effects; for no human being, in
civilized or barbarous nations, has ever yet exhibited such power of Divine
virtue as our Saviour.

13 But why do I speak of men, since of the beings whom all nations have deemed
divine, none has appeared on earth with power like to his? If there has, let the
fact now be proved. Come forward, ye philosophers, and tell us what god or hero
has yet been known to fame, who has delivered the doctrines of eternal life and
a heavenly kingdom as he has done who is our Saviour? Who, like him, has
persuaded multitudes throughout the world to pursue the principles of Divine
wisdom, to fix their hope on heaven itself, and look forward to the mansions
there reserved for them that love God? What god or hero in human form has ever
held his course from the rising to the setting sun, a course co-extensive as it
were with the solar light, and irradiated mankind with the bright and glorious
beams of his doctrine, causing each nation of the earth to render united worship
to the One true God? What god or hero yet, as he has done, has set aside all
gods and heroes among civilized or barbarous nations; has ordained that divine
honors should be withheld from all, and claimed obedience to that command: and
then, though singly conflicting with the power of all, has utterly destroyed the
opposing hosts; victorious over the gods and heroes of every age, and causing
himself alone,in every region of the habitable world, to be acknowledged by all
people as the only Son of God?

14 Who else has commanded the nations inhabiting the continents and islands of
this mighty globe to assemble weekly on the Lord's day, and to observe it as a
festival, not indeed for the pampering of the body, but for the invigoration of
the soul by instruction in Divine truth? What god or hero, exposed, as our
Saviour was, to so sore a conflict, has raised the trophy of victory over every
foe? For they indeed, from first to last, unceasingly assailed his doctrine and
his people: but he who is invisible, by the exercise of a secret power, has
raised his servants and the sacred houses of their worship to the height of
glory. But why should we still vainly aim at detailing those Divine proofs of
our Saviour's power which no language can worthily express; which need indeed no
words of ours, but themselves appeal in loudest tones to those whose mental ears
are open to the truth? Surely it is a strange, a wondrous fact, unparalleled in
the annals of human life; that the blessings we have described should be
accorded to our mortal race, and that he who is in truth the only, the eternal
Son of God, should thus be visible on earth.

Chapter XVIII.

1 These words of ours, however, [gracious] Sovereign, may well appear
superfluous in your ears, convinced as you are, by frequent and personal
experience, of our Saviour's Deity; yourself also, in actions still more than
words, a herald of the truth to all mankind. Yourself, it may be, will vouchsafe
at a time of leisure to relate to us the abundant manifestations which your
Saviour has accorded you of his presence, and the oft-repeated visions of
himself which have attended you in the hours of sleep. I speak not of those
secret suggestions which to us are unrevealed: but of those principles which he
has instilled into your own mind, and which are fraught with general interest
and benefit to the human race. You will yourself relate in worthy terms the
visible protection which your Divine shield and guardian has extended in the
hour of battle; the ruin of your open and secret foes; and his ready aid in time
of peril. To him you will ascribe relief in the midst of perplexity; defence in
solitude; expedients in extremity; foreknowledge of events yet future; your
fore-thought for the general weal; your power to investigate uncertain
questions; your conduct of most important enterprises; your administration of
civil affairs; your military arrangements, and correction of abuses in all
departments; your ordinances respecting public right; and, lastly, your
legislation for the common benefit of all. You will, it may be, also detail to
us those particulars of his favor which are secret to us, but known to you
alone, and treasured in your royal memory as in secret storehouses. Such,
doubtless, are the reasons, and such the convincing proofs of your Saviour's
power, which caused you to raise that sacred edifice which presents to all,
believers and unbelievers alike, a trophy of his victory over death, a holy
temple of the holy God: to consecrate those noble and splendid monuments of
immortal life and his heavenly kingdom: to offer memorials of our Almighty
Saviour's conquest which well become the imperial dignity of him by whom they
are bestowed. With such memorials have you adorned that edifice which witnesses
of eternal life: thus, as it were in imperial characters, ascribing victory and
triumph to the heavenly Word of God: thus proclaiming to all nations, with clear
and unmistakable voice, in deed and word, your own devout and pious confession
of his name.parparpar

1: The conventional heading has been retained. Literally it is "Tricennial
oration of Eusebius, addressed to the Emperor Constantine. Prologue to the
praises addressed to Constantine."

2: Cf. Hom. Il. 6. 202, tr. Bryant, 6. 263-4, "shunning every haunt of
human-kind."

3: Eusebius seems to use this phrase much as the modern phrases "The final
philosophy," "The science of sciences," "The queen of sciences," when applied to
theology.

4: "Divine light."

5: Paraphrased from Is. lxvi. 1.

6: [We must be content here (and probably in other passages of this Oration ) to
tolerate as rhetorical embellishment that which, regarded literally, is in every
sense palpably untrue.- Bag. ] The intention of the passage is probably like
that of those who say now that there is no nation where, in some form, God is
not worshiped.

7: [Referring possibly to Rev. i. 8. "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and
the ending saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the
Almighty."- Bag. ] Or, possibly, refers to Eph. iv. 6, as it seems to be simply
some verbal suggestion.

8: [The Arianism implied in this passage, if referred to the Word as God,
disappears if we regard it as spoken of Christ as the Word manifested in human
nature. See the note of Valesius ad loc.- Bag. ]

9: Universe.

10: This is directly from Eph. iv. 6: "Who is over all and through all and in
all." It is thus directly referred to the Father, and on the basis of the above
note of Bag. seems to convict of Arianism, but in reality the conception of a
pre-existing Word is distinctly orthodox.

11: [It is difficult to know precisely what is meant here. Possibly the name of
Christian.- Bag. ]

12: This is an allusion to what was afterwards known as Vampireism,-a belief of
unknown antiquity and especially prevalent in various forms in the East. Rydberg
( Magic of the Middle Ages, p. 207) describes the mediaeval form thus: "The
vampires, according to the belief of the Middle Ages, are disembodied souls
which clothe themselves again in their buried bodies steal at night into houses,
and suck from the nipple of the sleeping all their blood." (Cf. Perty, d. myst.
Ersch. 1 [1872], 383. 91; Görres' Chr. myst. Vol. 3, etc.) Similar in nature was
that notion of the spirits who sucked away the breath of sleeping persons, which
has left its trace in the modern, superstition that cats suck away the breath of
sleeping children.

13: A general statement, such as Eusebius is fond of making. The elevation of
his sons was about these times, but not on them exactly. Compare Prolegomena,
Life.

14: [Dalmatius and Hanniballianus.- Bag. ]

15: [Dan. vii. 18. It is surely needless to remark on so singular and vicious an
application of Scripture as this, further than that it is either a culpable
rhetorical flourish, or else an indication of a lamentable defect of spiritual
intelligence in the most learned writer of the fourth century.- Bag. ] "But the
saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom."- Revised Version.

16: [Constantius Caesar.- Bag. ] 17: Compare Prolegomena, under Life.

18: "And no one knoweth who the Son is, save the Father; and who the Father is,
save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him."-Luke x. 22.

19: Eusebius, in making is the Word who impresses the image of God on men, shows
good philosophy and good theology.

20: There seems to be a clear hint of Philonism here, or Philonism as developed
by the Neo-Platonists and the Christian Theologians. The history of the thought
seems to begin in the Platonic ideas. These self-existing forms which impress
themselves on the soul naturally become personalities to which the soul submits,
and whose images are impressed on the soul. These personalized ideas are in the
thought of Philo the thoughts or ideas of God, "powers" who do his will, like
the Valkyr of the Northern mythology,-the personified thoughts or will of Odin.
These objective ideas in organized whole were the Word.

21: Compare Prolegomena, Character. This peculiar self-control, it is to be
remembered, was characteristic also of his father, and in a measure the product
of the Neo-Platonic philosophy.

22: Literally, the "archetypal idea,"-the same phrase as that used by Philo, 1.
4 (ed. Lips., 1828, I. p. 7): i.e. that incorporeal model or image of God on
which the corporeal world was formed.

23: This may be true: but compare Prolegomena, Character, for his practice, at
least.

24: [Alluding (says Valesius) to the crowns of gold which the people of the
several provinces were accustomed to present to the Roman emperors on such
occasions as the present.- Bag. ] In his prologue to the Life, Eusebius calls
this very oration a weaving of tricennial crowns (or garlands). These crowns had
their historical origin in the triumphal crowns under the Roman system. Cf.
Rich, in Smith, Dict. Gr. and Rom. Ant. p. 361.

25: [It is perhaps difficult to find a better word to express the original aiwn
26: Compare 1 Tim. i. 17 ( marg. ), "King of the ages" ("aeons," or according to
this translation "eternity").

27: [Days, months, years, seasons, &c., are here intended. Valesius, ad loc.-
Bag. ] 28: Hom. Il. 8, 19.

29: [ Aiwn, wsper aei wn

30: From what source Eusebius draws this particular application of the
Pythagorean principle is uncertain. This conception of the derivation of ten
from four is found in Philo, de Mund. Opif. ch. 15, and indeed it is said (
Ueberweg ) that with the earliest Pythagoreans four and ten were the especially
significant numbers in creation. This mixture of Neo-Pythagoreanism with
Platonism and Philonism. was characteristic of the time.

31: [ Monaj, para to menein wnomasmenh 32: Or Aphrodite.

33: [ Megan qeon kai plousion, para kai Ploutwna, ton qanaton anhgoreuon 34: On
these various names, compare Smith, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Biog.

35: For account of the various details of persecution mentioned, compare the
Church History.

36: " alogou ."

37: [That is, stripping the images of those whose temples he destroyed, and
apportioning the spoils among his Christian followers: See the next chapter,
which is mostly a transcript of the 54th and 55th chapters of the Third Book of
the Life of Constantine. - Bag. ] 38: "The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with
himself, God, I thank thee that I am not as the rest of men."

39: He seems to disagree with the view of the heathen prophecy which his
imperial hearer maintained in his Oration to the Saints.

40: For details respecting the following enumeration, compare the Life of
Constantine, of which this is a résumé. This sentence and the preceding are
taken almost word for word from ch. 16 of Bk. II.

41: Almost word for word from the Life, Bk. III. ch. 50.

42: [In the Life of Constantine (vide [Bk. III. ch. 41] supra), Eusebius
mentions two caves only, and speaks of the churches built by Helena at Bethlehem
and on the Mount of Olives. He here alludes to the magnificent church erected by
Constantine at the Lord's sepulchre, and ascribes to him those of Helena also,
as having been raised at the emperor's expense. Valesius, ad loc.- Bag. ] 43: At
this point, according to some (compare Special Prolegomena), one oration ends
and another begins.

44: Here the author seems to speak doubly of the Word and the word.

45: Matt. xi. 28.

46: Matt. xi. 13. R. V.: "For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."
The text here has the reading eismetanoian , omitted by Tischendorf and the
revisers with ) 47: Matt. xi. 12.

48: Ezek. xviii. 23. R. V.: "Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked,
saith the Lord God: and not rather that he should return from his way and live?"

49: 1 Tim. vi. 16.

50: [This whole passage (which is defended by Valesius) appears, if rigidly
interpreted, to lie under suspicion of a tinge of Arianism.- Bag. ] It savors
directly of Philo. His doctrine was of an ineffable God, above and separate from
matter, and defiled by any contact with it. To bring him into connection with
created things he introduced intermediate beings, or "powers," the universal
power including all the rest being the Logos. Compare brief account in Zeller's
Outlines of Greek Philosophy, p. 320-325; Siegfried, Philo von Alexandria (Jena,
1875), especially p. 199 sq., 219 sq., and p. 362-364, where he treats very
inadequately of Eusebius' dependence on Philo; also works of Philo and Eusebius'
Praep. and Demonst. Ev. There is a chance of viewing the Word thus as created,
but if this is guarded against (as it is by him in the use of "begotten"), there
is nothing intrinsically heterodox in making the Word the Creator of the world
and only Revealer of the Father. The direct Philonian influence is seen in the
phraseology of the following sentences.

51: [Of this somewhat obscure passage, a translator can do no more than give as
nearly as possible a literal version. The intelligent reader will not fail to
perceive that the author, here and in the following chapter, has trodden on very
dangerous ground.- Bag. ] Compare above notes on the relations of Eusebius and
Philo.

52: [Referring, apparently, to John xvii. 3, "And this is life eternal, that
they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent:" a
passage which has been called a stronghold of the impugners of the Deity of
Christ; but which, simply considered with its context, cannot fairly be
understood to indicate any inferiority of the Son to the Father; but rather
appears to speak of the mission of the former as the manifestation of the grace
of him who is called "the only true God" in contradistinction to the polytheism
of the heathen world. In other words, the knowledge of "the only true God," in
connection with that of "Jesus Christ whom he has sent," constitutes "eternal
life"; the one being ineffectual, and indeed impossible, without the other.-
Bag. ] Compare 1 John v. 20-21: "That we know him that is true and we are in him
that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal
life," which seems to show that John had no idea of any subordination in essence
in this matter.

53: [But see, for a refutation of this statement, Rom. xi. 36, and Heb. ii. 10.-
Bag. ] Yet the second of these references clearly refers to the Son. Eusebius,
speaking of God the Father, has in mind the truth that all things were made by
the Son, "and without him was not anything made that hath been made." John i. 3.

54: The author is now speaking especially of the spoken or "expressed" word.

55: Compare 1 Cor. i. 24.

56: This conception that the Divine Word stands in something the same relation
with the Father that the human word (internal and external) does to the human
spirit has, at least, an interesting suggestion towards the unraveling of this
curious mystery, which, for lack of a better word, it is the fashion just now to
call a human personality, and which certainly is made in the image and likeness
of God. Unless there lurks in the idea some subtle heresy, one may venture to
accept as an interesting analogy this relation of invisible self, self expressed
to self (internal word), self revealed (external word), and an expression
carried to the point of embodiment (incarnation).

57: "Logos" again,-here the internal word.

58: John i. 1-3.

59: One on the scent for heresy might prick up his ears, and sound the alarm of
"Gnosticism."

60: A curious work just issued (anonymous), under the authority of the Bureau of
Education, very complacently evolves the truth of existence out of the author's
pure, untrammeled consciousness,-for he has never read any works either on
science or on theology,-and arrives at the condescending conclusion that there
is a God; or rather, in the words of Eusebius, the author comes to "deem that
world ...to be itself God."

61: [Referring (says Valesius) to St. John, whose words Eusebius had lately
cited, "In the beginning was the Word," &c., and now explains paraphrastically.
The reader will decide for himself on the merits of the paraphrase.- Bag. ] 62:
[In reference, singularly enough, to the illustration of the lyre in the
preceding chapter.- Bag. ]

63: It is idle to treat as philosophically or theologically unworthy of
consideration a system of thought so definitely unified, and with such
Scriptural basis as the above. It may not be profound or original, but is
definite and clear.

64: "Of Demeter, of Cora, of Dionysius."

65: "Athene ...Hermes."

66: The word used here, akrateia , is the opposite of the famous philosophical
word for self-control- egkrateia .

67: "Eros, Priapus, Aphrodite."

68: It is probably that "Melkathros" and "Usous" referred to in the Praep.
Evang. 1. 10 (ed. Gaisford, Oxon. 1843, 1. p. 77 and 84). The same passage may
be found with English translation in Cory's Ancient Fragments, Lond. 1832, p.
6-7, 13.

69: Dusaris was, it is said, equivalent to Bacchus.

70: All the above names, excepting those specially noted, may be found in Smith,
Dict. of Greek and Roman Biog. and Mythol.

71: Corresponding nearly to our August. Key. Calendarium, in Smith, Dict. Gr.
and R. Ant. p. 223.

72: [Leus is said to have offered his three daughters, Phasithea, Theope, and
Eubule; the oracle at Delphi having declared that the relief of the city from
famine could only be effected by the shedding of the blood of his daughters by
one of the citizens.- Bag. ]

73: [Alluding to the sacrifice of his daughter Chthonia by Erechtheus, son of
Pandion; the Athenians having been promised victory, by the oracle, over the
Eleusinians and their Thracian allies, on the condition of the death of a
daughter of Erechtheus.- Bag. ]

74: Diodorus Siculus, whose work is mentioned elsewhere ( Praep. Evang. 1. 6,
ed. Gaisford, p. 40) as a "historical library."

75: Dionysius of Halicarnassus.

76: All these various conceptions of the Word are strictly Biblical: (1) The
Word the only revealer of the Father, who otherwise could not be known; (2) The
human body the temple of God; (3) The indwelling Word.

77: This ought to relieve Eusebius from any charge of Arianism in this relation,
however "dangerous" the ground he has trodden on may be.

78: [These words (as Valesius observes) need not be too rigidly interpreted.-
Bag. ]

79: John i. 29.

80: [Isaiah liii. 4, Isaiah liii. 5, Isaiah liii. 6, Isaiah liii. 7. Septuagint,
English translation p. 728.- Bag. ] P. 889 of the Bagster ed., 1879. Though the
first reasons make one feel as if the author had been in danger of slighting the
atoning work of the Word, he here very clearly comes up, as usual, to the
Biblical position.

81: Eparchies, ethnarchies, and toparchies.

82: This is a fair appeal, applicable to his present hearers. It at least was
true of Constantine's reign, that it produced a state of relative peace and
prosperity.

83: [Psalm lxxi. 7, Psalm lxxi. 8; Isaiah ii. 4. Septuagint.- Bag. ] Psalm
lxxii., English version.

84: Matt. xxviii. 19. There is an interesting various reading here, where
Eusebius, with B. as against Aleph, adds something; but where B. and others have
oun , and D, and others have nun , Eusebius has goun .

85: [Referring to Diocletian, and others of the persecuting emperors.- Bag. ]
86: [ Kuriakwn hciwntai twnepwnuiwn 87: Compare literature on the edicts of
toleration.

88: [There is nothing which need surprise us in the praises of virginity,
monkery, and asceticism, in a writer of the fourth century. The intelligent
Christian will surely shrink from the thought of scribing, with Eusebius, these
fruitful sources of corruption to the Lord himself.- Bag. ] 89: Matt. xxiii. 38.

90: Matt. xxiv. 2,-apparently a paraphrase from memory.

91: Matt. xvi. 18.

92: The Syriac, Peschito, and possibly the Curetonian, the old Latin (Itala),
probably both the Thebaic and Memphitic Coptic versions, at least, had been made
at this time.

93: [The peace which Christ, at his birth, bestowed on the Roman world
(Valesius).- Bag. ]


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 27: THE ORATION OF THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE
========================================================================

The Oration of the Emperor Constantine Which He Addressed "To the Assembly of
the Saints."

Chapter I. Preliminary Remarks on the Feast of Easter: and How the Word of God,
Having Conferred Manifold Benefits on Mankind, Was Betrayed by His
Beneficiaries.

Chapter II. An Appeal to the Church and to His Hearers to Pardon and Correct the
Errors of His Speech.

Chapter III. That God is the Father of the Word, and the Creator of All Things;
And that Material Objects Could Not Continue to Exist, Were Their Causes
Various.

Chapter IV. On the Error of Idolatrous Worship.

Chapter V. That Christ, the Son of God, Created All Things, and Has Appointed to
Every Thing the Term of Its Existence.

Chapter VI. The Falsity of the General Opinion Respecting Fate24 Is Proved by
the Consideration of Human Laws, and by the Works of Creation, the Course of
Which is Not Fortuitous, But According to an Orderly Arrangement Which Evinces
the Design of the Creator.

Chapter VII. In Regard to Things Above Our Comprehension, We Should Glorify the
Creator's Wisdom, and Attribute Their Causes to Him Alone, and Not to Chance.

Chapter VIII. That God Bestows an Abundant Supply of Whatever is Suited to the
Wants of Man, and Ministers But Sparingly to His Pleasures; In Both Cases with a
View to His Advantage.

Chapter IX. Of the Philosophers, Who Fell into Mistaken Notions, and Some of
Them into Danger, by Their Desire of Universal Knowledge.-Also of the Doctrines
of Plato.

Chapter X. Of Those Who Reject the Doctrines of Philosophers, as Well as Those
of Scripture: and that We Ought to Believe the Poets in All Things, or
Disbelieve Them in All.

Chapter XI. On the Coming of Our Lord in the Flesh; Its Nature and Cause.50

Chapter XII. Of Those Who are Ignorant of This Mystery; And that Their Ignorance
is Voluntary. The Blessings Which Await Those Who Know It, Especially Such as
Die in the Confession of the Faith.68

Chapter XIII. That There is a Necessary Difference Between Created Things. That
the Propensity to Good and Evil Depends on the Will of Man; And That,
Consequently, Judgment is a Necessary and Reasonable Thing.

Chapter XIV. That Created Nature Differs Infinitely from Uncreated Being; To
Which Man Makes the Nearest Approach by a Life of Virtue.

Chapter XV. Of the Saviour's Doctrines and Miracles; And the Benefits He Confers
on Those Who Own Subjection to Him.

Chapter XVI. The Coming of Christ Was Predicted by the Prophets; And Was
Ordained to Be the Overthrow of Idols and Idolatrous Cities.

Chapter XVII. Of the Wisdom of Moses, Which Was an Object of Imitation to the
Wise Among Heathen Nations. Also Concerning Daniel, and the Three Children.

Chapter XVIII. Of the Erythraean Sibyl, Who Pointed in a Prophetic Acrostic at
Our Lord and His Passion. The Acrostic is "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour,
Cross."

Chapter XIX. That This Prophecy Respecting Our Saviour Was Not the Fiction of
Any Member of the Christian Church, But the Testimony of the Erythraean Sibyl,
Whose Books Were Translated into Latin by Cicero Before the Coming of Christ.
Also that Virgil Makes Mention of the Same, and of the Birth of the Virgin's
Child: Though He Spoke Obscurely of This Mystery from Fear of the Ruling Powers.

Chapter XX. A Farther Quotation from Virgilius Maro Respecting Christ, with Its
Interpretation, Showing that the Mystery Was Indicated Therein Darkly, as Might
Be Expected from a Poet.

Chapter XXI. That These Things Cannot Have Been Spoken of a Mere Man: and that
Unbelievers, Owing to Their Ignorance of Religion, Know Not Even the Origin of
Their Own Existence.

Chapter XXII. The Emperor Thankfully Ascribes His Victories and All Other
Blessings to Christ; And Condemns the Conduct of the Tyrant Maximin, the
Violence of Whose Persecution Had Enhanced the Glory of Religion.

Chapter XXIII. Of Christian Conduct. That God is Pleased with Those Who Lead a
Life of Virtue: and that We Must Expect a Judgment and Future Retribution.

Chapter XXIV. Of Decius, Valerian, and Aurelian Who Experienced a Miserable End
in Consequence of Their Persecution of the Church.

Chapter XXV. Of Diocletian, Who Ignobly Abdicated123 The Imperial Throne, and
Was Terrified by the Dread of Lightning for His Persecution of the Church.

Chapter XXVI. The Emperor Ascribes His Personal Piety to God; And Shows that We
are Bound to Seek Success from God, and Attribute It to Him; But to Consider
Mistakes as the Result of Our Own Negligence. The Oration of the Emperor
Constantine Which He Addressed "To the Assembly of the Saints."

Chapter I. Preliminary Remarks on the Feast of Easter: and How the Word of God,
Having Conferred Manifold Benefits on Mankind, Was Betrayed by His
Beneficiaries. That light which far outshines the day and sun, first pledge of
resurrection, and renovation of bodies long since dissolved,1 the divine token2
of promise, the path which leads to everlasting life-in a word, the day of the
Passion-is arrived, best beloved doctors, and ye, my friends who are assembled
here, ye blessed multitudes, who worship him who is the author of all worship,
and praise him continually with heart and voice, according to the precepts of
his holy word. But thou, Nature,3 parent of all things, what blessing like to
this hast thou ever accomplished for mankind? Nay rather, what is in any sense
thy workmanship, since he who formed the universe is himself the author of thy
being? For it is he who has arrayed thee in thy beauty; and the beauty of Nature
is life according to Nature's laws. But principles quite opposed to Nature have
mightily prevailed; in that men have agreed in withholding his rightful worship
from the Lord of all, believing that the order of the universe depended, not on
his providence, but, on the blind uncertainty of chance: and this
notwithstanding the clearest announcement of the truth by his inspired prophets,
whose words should have claimed belief, but were in every way resisted by that
impious wickedness which hates the light of truth, and loves the obscure mazes
of darkness. Nor was this error unaccompanied by violence and cruelty,
especially in that the will of princes encouraged the blind impetuosity of the
multitude, or rather itself led the way in the career of reckless folly. Such
principles as these, confirmed by the practice of many generations, became the
source of terrible evils in those early times: but no sooner had the radiance of
the Saviour's presence appeared, than justice took the place of wrong, a calm
succeeded the confusion of the storm, and the predictions of the prophets were
all fulfilled. For after he had enlightened the world by the glorious discretion
and purity of his character, and had ascended to the mansions of his father's
house, he founded his Church on earth, as a holy temple of virtue, an immortal,
imperishable temple, wherein the worship due to the Supreme Father and to
himself should be piously performed. But what did the insane malice of the
nations hereupon devise? Their effort was to reject the grace of Christ, and to
ruin that Church which was ordained for the salvation of all, though they thus
ensured the overthrow of their own superstition.4 Once more then unholy
sedition, once more war and strife prevailed, with stiff-neckedness, luxurious
riot, and that craving for wealth which now soothes its victims with specious
hope, now strikes them with groundless fear; a craving which is contrary to
nature, and the very characteristic of Vice herself. Let her, however, lie
prostrate in the dust, and own the victorious power of Virtue; and let her rend
and tear herself, as well she may, in the bitterness of repentance. But let us
now proceed to speak of topics which pertain to the Divine doctrine.

Chapter II. An Appeal to the Church and to His Hearers to Pardon and Correct the
Errors of His Speech.

Hear then, thou master5 of the ship, possessor of virgin purity, and thou
Church, the cherisher of tender and inexperienced age, guardian of truth and
gentleness, through whose perennial fountain the stream6 of salvation flows! Be
ye also indulgent, my hearers, who worship God sincerely, and are, therefore,
the objects of his care: attending, not to the language, but to the truth of
what is said; not to him who speaks, but rather to the pious zeal which hallows
his discourse! For what will be the use of words when the real purpose of the
speaker remains unknown? It may be, indeed, that I essay great things; the love
of God which animates my soul, a love which overpowers natural reserve, is my
plea for the bold attempt. On you, then, I call, who are best instructed in the
mysteries of God, to aid me with your counsel, to follow me with your thoughts,
and correct whatever shall savor of error in my words, expecting no display of
perfect knowledge, but graciously accepting the sincerity of my endeavor. And
may the Spirit of the Father and the Son accord his mighty aid, while I utter
the words which he shall suggest to speech or thought.7 For if any one, whether
in the practice of eloquence, or any other art, expects to produce a finished
work without the help of God, both the author and his efforts will be found
alike imperfect; while he has no cause to fear, no room for discouragement,8 who
has once been blessed with the inspiration of Heaven. Wherefore asking your
indulgence for the length of this preface, let us attempt the theme in its
utmost scope.9

Chapter III. That God is the Father of the Word, and the Creator of All Things;
And that Material Objects Could Not Continue to Exist, Were Their Causes
Various.

God, who is ever above all existence, and the good which all things desire, has
no origin, and therefore no beginning, being himself the originator10 of all
things which receive existence. But he who proceeds from him is again united to
him; and this separation from and union with him is not local, but intellectual
in its character. For this generation was accompanied by no diminution of the
Father's substance (as in the case of generation by seed); but by the
determining act of foreknowledge God manifested a Saviour presiding over11 this
sensible world, and all created things therein.12 From hence, then, is the
source of existence and life to all things which are within the compass of this
world; hence proceed the soul, and every sense;13 hence those organs through
which the sense-perceptions are perfected. What, then, is the object of this
argument? To prove that there is One director of all things that exist, and that
all things, whether in heaven or on earth, both natural and organized bodies,14
are subject to his single sovereignty. For if the dominion of these things,
numberless as they are, were in the hands, not of one but of many, there must be
a partition and distribution of the elements, and the old fables would be
true;15 jealousy, too, and ambition, striving for superior power, would destroy
the harmonious concord of the whole, while each of the many masters would
regulate in a manner different from the rest the portion subject to his control.
The fact, however, that this universal order is ever one and the same, is the
proof that it is under the care of a superior power, and that its origin cannot
be ascribed to chance. Else how could the author of universal nature ever be
known? To whom first, or last, could prayers and supplications be addressed?
Whom could I choose16 as the object of my worship, without being guilty of
impiety towards the rest? Again, if haply I desired to obtain some temporal
blessing, should I not, while expressing my gratitude to the Power who favored
my request, convey a reproach to him who opposed it? Or to whom should I pray,
when desiring to know the cause of my calamity, and to obtain deliverance? Or
let us suppose that the answer is given by oracles and prophecies, but that the
case is not within the scope of their authority, being the province of some
other deity.17 Where, then, is mercy? where is the provident care of God for the
human race? Unless, indeed, some more benevolent Power, assuming a hostile
attitude against another who has no such feeling, be disposed to accord me his
protection. Hence anger, discords, mutual censure, and finally universal
confusion, would ensue, while each departed from his proper sphere of action,
dissatisfied, through ambitious love of power, with his allotted portion. What,
then, would be the result of these things? Surely this discord among the
heavenly powers would prove destructive to the interests of earth: the orderly
alternation of times and seasons would disappear; the successive productions of
the earth would be enjoyed no more: the day itself, and the repose of night
which follows it, would cease to be. But enough on this subject: let us once
more resume that species of reasoning which admits of no reply.

Chapter IV. On the Error of Idolatrous Worship.

Whatever has had a beginning, has also an end. Now that which is a beginning in
respect of time, is called a generation: and whatever is by generation is
subject to corruption, and its beauty18 is impaired by the lapse of time. How,
then, can they whose origin is from corruptible generation, be immortal? Again,
this supposition has gained credit with the ignorant multitude, that marriages,
and the birth of children, are usual among the gods. Granting, then, such
offspring to be immortal, and continually produced, the race must of necessity
multiply to excess: and if this were so, where is the heaven, or the earth,
which could contain so vast and still increasing a multitude of gods? But what
shall we say of those men who represent these celestial beings as joined in
incestuous union with their sister goddesses, and charge them with adultery and
impurity?19 We declare, further, with all confidence, that the very honors and
worship which these deities receive from men are accompanied by acts of
wantonness and profligacy. Once more; the experienced and skillful sculptor,
having formed the conception of his design, perfects his work according to the
rules of art; and in a little while, as if forgetful of himself, idolizes his
own creation, and adores it as an immortal god, while yet he admits that
himself, the author and maker of the image, is a mortal man. Nay, they even show
the graves and monuments of those whom they deem immortal, and bestow divine
honors on the dead: not knowing that that which is truly blessed and
incorruptible needs no distinction which perishable men can give: for that
Being, who is seen by the mental eye, and conceived by the intellect alone,
requires to be distinguished by no external form, and admits no figure to
represent its character and likeness. But the honors of which we speak are given
to those who have yielded to the power of death: they once were men, and
tenants, while they lived, of a mortal body.

Chapter V. That Christ, the Son of God, Created All Things, and Has Appointed to
Every Thing the Term of Its Existence. But why do I defile my tongue with
unhallowed words, when my object is to sound the praises of the true God? Rather
let me cleanse myself, as it were, from this bitter draught by the pure stream
which flows from the everlasting fountain of the virtue20 of that God who is the
object of my praise. Be it my special province to glorify Christ, as well by the
actions of my life, as by that thanksgiving which is due to him for the manifold
and signal blessings which he has bestowed. I affirm, therefore, that he21 has
laid the foundations of this universe; and conceived the race of men, ordaining
these things by his word. And immediately he transferred our newly created
parents (ignorant at first, according to his will, of good and evil) to a happy
region, abounding in flowers and fruits of every kind.22 At length, however, he
appointed them a seat on earth befitting creatures endued with reason; and then
unfolded to their faculties, as intelligent beings, the knowledge of good and
evil. Then, too, he bade the race increase; and each healthy region of the
world, as far as the bounds of the circumambient ocean, became the
dwelling-place of men; while with this increase of numbers the invention of the
useful arts went hand in hand. Meantime the various species of inferior23
animals increased in due proportion, each kind discovering some characteristic
quality, the special gift of nature: the tame distinguished by gentleness and
obedience to man; the wild by strength and swiftness, and an instinctive
foresight which warned them to escape from peril. The gentler animals he placed
entirely beneath man's protecting care, but entailed on him the necessity of
strife with those of fiercer nature. He next created the feathered race,
manifold in number, diverse in character and habits; brilliant with every
variety of color, and endued with native powers of melody. Finally, having
arranged with wise discrimination whatever else the compass of this world
contains, and having assigned to every creature the stated term of its
existence, he thus completed the beautiful order of the perfect whole.

Chapter VI. The Falsity of the General Opinion Respecting Fate24 Is Proved by
the Consideration of Human Laws, and by the Works of Creation, the Course of
Which is Not Fortuitous, But According to an Orderly Arrangement Which Evinces
the Design of the Creator. The great majority, however, in their folly, ascribe
the regulation of the universe to nature, while some imagine fate, or
accident,25 to be the cause. With regard to those who attribute the control of
all things to fate, they know not that in using this term they utter a mere
word, but designate no active power, nor anything which has real and substantial
existence. For what can this fate be, considered in itself, if nature be the
first cause of all things? Or what shall we suppose nature itself to be, if the
law of fate be inviolable? Indeed, the very assertion that there is a law of
fate implies that such law is the work of a legislator: if, therefore, fate
itself be a law, it must be a law devised by God. All things, therefore, are
subject to God, and nothing is beyond the sphere of his power. If it be said
that fate is the will26 of God, and is so considered, we admit the fact. But in
what respect do justice,27 or self-control,28 or the other virtues, depend on
fate? From whence, if so, do their contraries, as injustice and intemperance,
proceed? For vice has its origin from nature, not from fate; and virtue is the
due regulation of natural character and disposition. But, granting that the
varied results of actions, whether right or erroneous in themselves, depend on
fortune or fate: in what sense can the general principle of justice,29 the
principle of rendering to every one his due, be ascribed to fate?30 Or how can
it be said that laws, encouragements to virtue and dissuasives from what is
evil, praise, blame, punishment, in short whatever operates as a motive to
virtue, and deters from the practice of vice, derive their origin from fortune
or accident, and not rather from that of justice,31 which is a characteristic
attribute of the God of providence? For the events which befall men are
consequent upon the tenor of their lives. Hence pestilence or sedition, famine
and plenty, succeed in turn, declaring plainly and emphatically that all these
things are regulated with reference to our course of life. For the Divine Being
delights in goodness, but turns with aversion from all impiety; looks with
acceptance on the humble spirit, but abhors presumption, and that pride which
exalts itself above what becomes a creature. And though the proofs of these
truths are clear and manifest to our sight, they appear in a still stronger
light, when we collect, and as it were concentrate our thoughts within
ourselves, and ponder their causes with deep attention. I say, then, that it
becomes us to lead a life of modesty and gentleness, not suffering our thoughts
to rise proudly above our natural condition, and ever mindful that God is near
us, and is the observer of all our actions. But let us still farther test the
truth of the proposition, that the order of the universe depends on chance32 or
accident.33 Are we then to suppose that the stars and other heavenly bodies, the
earth and sea, fire and wind, water and air, the succession of the seasons, the
recurrence of summer and winter, that all these have an undesigned and
fortuitous existence, and not rather that they proceed from the creative hand of
God? Some, indeed, are so senseless as to say that most of these things have
been devised by mankind because of their need of them. Let it be admitted that
this opinion has a semblance of reason in regard to earthly and corruptible
things (though Nature herself supplies every good with a lavish hand); yet can
we believe that things which are immortal and unchangeable are the inventions of
men? These, indeed, and all things else which are beyond the reach of our
senses, and comprehended by the intellect34 alone, receive their being, not from
the material life of man, but from the intellectual and eternal essence of God.
Again, the orderly arrangement of these things is the work of his providence:
for instance, that the day, deriving radiance from the sun, is bright; that
night succeeds his setting, and the starry host35 by which night itself is
redeemed from total darkness. And what shall we say of the moon, which when most
distant from, and opposite to the sun, is filled with light, but wanes in
proportion to the nearness of her approach to him? Do not these things
manifestly evince the intelligence36 and sagacious wisdom of God? Add to this
that needful warmth of the solar rays which ripens the fruits of the earth; the
currents of wind, so conducive to the fertility of the seasons; the cool and
refreshing showers; and the harmony of all these things in accordance with which
all are reasonably and systematically conducted: lastly, the everlasting order
of the planets, which return to the self-same place at their appointed times:
are not all these, as well as the perfect ministry of the stars, obedient to a
divine law, evident proofs of the ordinance37 of God? Again, do the mountain
heights, the deep and hollow valleys, the level and extensive plains, useful as
they are, as well as pleasing to the eye, appear to exist independently of the
will of God? Or do not the proportion and alternate succession of land and
water, serviceable, the one for husbandry, the other for the transport of such
foreign products as we need, afford a clear demonstration of his exact and
proportionate providential care? For instance, the mountains contain a store of
water, which the level ground receives, and after imbibing sufficient for the
renovation of the soil, sends forth the residue into the sea, and the sea in
turn passes it onward to the ocean. And still we dare to say that all these
things happen by chance38 and accident; unable though we be to show by what
shape or form this chance is characterized; a thing which has no foundation
either in intellect or sense existence; which rings in our ears as the mere
sound of an unsubstantial name!

Chapter VII. In Regard to Things Above Our Comprehension, We Should Glorify the
Creator's Wisdom, and Attribute Their Causes to Him Alone, and Not to Chance. In
fact, this word "chance" is the expression of men who think in haphazard and
illogical fashion; who are unable to understand the causes of these things, and
who, owing to the feebleness of their own apprehensions, conceive that those
things for which they cannot assign a reason, are ordered without reason. There
are, unquestionably, some things which possess wonderful natural properties, and
the full apprehension of which is very difficult: for example, the nature of hot
springs. For no one can easily explain the cause of so powerful a fire; and it
is indeed surprising that though surrounded on all sides by a body of cold
water, it loses none of its native heat. These phenomena appear to be of rare
occurrence throughout the world, being intended, I am persuaded, to afford to
mankind convincing evidence of the power of that Providence which ordains that
two directly opposite natures, heat and cold, should thus proceed from the
self-same source. Many indeed, yea, numberless, are the gifts which God has
bestowed for the comfort and enjoyment of man; and of these the fruit of the
olive-tree and the vine deserve especial notice; the one for its power of
renovating and cheering the soul,39 the other because it ministers to our
enjoyment, and is likewise adapted for the cure of bodily disease. Marvelous,
too, is the course of rivers, flowing night and day with unceasing motion, and
presenting a type of ever-flowing, never-ceasing life: and equally wonderful is
the alternate succession of day and night.

Chapter VIII. That God Bestows an Abundant Supply of Whatever is Suited to the
Wants of Man, and Ministers But Sparingly to His Pleasures; In Both Cases with a
View to His Advantage.

Let what has been said suffice to prove that nothing exists without reason and
intelligence, and that reason itself and providence are of God. It is he who has
also distributed the metals, as gold, silver, copper, and the rest, in due
proportion; ordaining an abundant supply of those which would be most needed and
generally employed, while he dispensed those which serve the purposes merely of
pleasure in adornment of luxury with a liberal and yet a sparing hand, holding a
mean between parsimony and profusion. For the searchers for metals, were those
which are employed for ornament procured in equal abundance with the rest, would
be impelled by avarice to despise and neglect to gather those which, like iron
or copper, are serviceable for husbandry, or house-building, or the equipment of
ships; and would care for those only which conduce to luxury and a superfluous
excess of wealth. Hence it is, as they say, that the search for gold and silver
is far more difficult and laborious than that for any other metals, the violence
of the toil thus acting as a counterpoise to the violence of the desire. And how
many instances might still further be enumerated of the workings of that Divine
Providence which, in all the gifts which it has so unsparingly conferred upon
us, plainly urges us to the practice of self-control and all other virtues, and
leads us away from unbefitting covetousness! To trace the secret reasons of all
these things is indeed a task which exceeds the power of human faculties. For
how can the intellect of a frail and perishable being arrive at the knowledge of
perfect truth, or apprehend in its purity the counsel of God from the beginning?

Chapter IX. Of the Philosophers, Who Fell into Mistaken Notions, and Some of
Them into Danger, by Their Desire of Universal Knowledge.-Also of the Doctrines
of Plato.

We ought, therefore, to aim at objects which are within our power, and exceed
not the capacities of our nature. For the persuasive influence of argument has a
tendency to draw most of us away from the truth of things, which has happened to
many philosophers, who have employed themselves in reasoning, and the study of
natural science, and who, as often as the magnitude of the subject surpasses
their powers of investigation, adopt various devices for obscuring the truth.
Hence their diversities of judgment, and contentious opposition to each others'
doctrines, and this notwithstanding their pretensions to wisdom. Hence, too,
popular commotions have arisen, and severe sentences, passed by those in power,
apprehensive of the overthrow of hereditary institutions, have proved
destructive to many of the disputants themselves. Socrates, for example, elated
by his skill in argumentation, indulging his power of making the worse appear
the better reason,40 and playing continually with the subtleties of controversy,
fell a victim to the slander of his own countrymen and fellow-citizens.
Pythagoras, too, who laid special claim to the virtues of silence and
self-control, was convicted of falsehood. For he declared to the Italians that
the doctrines which he had received during his travels in Egypt, and which had
long before been divulged by the priests of that nation, were a personal
revelation to himself from God. Lastly, Plato himself, the gentlest and most
refined of all, who first essayed to draw men's thoughts from sensible to
intellectual and eternal objects, and taught them to aspire to sublimer
speculations, in the first place declared, with truth, a God exalted above every
essence, but to him he added also a second, distinguishing them numerically as
two, though both possessing one perfection, and the being of the second Deity
proceeding from41 the first. For he is the creator and controller of the
universe, and evidently supreme: while the second, as the obedient agent of his
commands, refers the origin of all creation to him as the cause. In accordance,
therefore, with the soundest reason, we may say that there is one Being whose
care and providence are over all things, even God the Word, who has ordered all
things; but the Word being God himself is also the Son of God. For by what name
can we designate him except by this title of the Son, without falling into the
most grievous error? For the Father of all things is properly considered the
Father of his own Word. Thus far, then, Plato's sentiments were sound; but in
what follows he appears to have wandered from the truth, in that he introduces a
plurality of gods, to each of whom he assigns specific forms. And this has given
occasion to still greater error among the unthinking portion of mankind, who pay
no regard to the providence of the Supreme God, but worship images of their own
devising, made in the likeness of men or other living beings. Hence it appears
that the transcendent nature and admirable learning of this philosopher, tinged
as they were with such errors as these, were by no means free from impurity and
alloy. And yet he seems to me to retract, and correct his own words, when
he-plainly declares that a rational soul is the breath42 of God, and divides all
things into two classes, intellectual and sensible: [the one simple, the
other]43 consisting of bodily structure; the one comprehended by the intellect
alone, the other estimated by the judgment and the senses. The former class,
therefore, which partakes of the divine spirit, and is uncompounded and
immaterial, is eternal, and inherits everlasting life; but the latter, being
entirely resolved into the elements of which it is composed, has no share in
everlasting life. He farther teaches the admirable doctrine, that those who have
passed a life of virtue, that is, the spirits of good and holy men, are
enshrined, after their separation from the body, in the fairest mansions of
heaven. A doctrine not merely to be admired, but profitable too.44 For who can
believe in such a statement, and aspire to such a happy lot, without desiring to
practice righteousness and temperance, and to turn aside from vice? Consistently
with this doctrine he represents the spirits of the wicked as tossed like
wreckage on the streams of Acheron and Pyriphlegethon.

Chapter X. Of Those Who Reject the Doctrines of Philosophers, as Well as Those
of Scripture: and that We Ought to Believe the Poets in All Things, or
Disbelieve Them in All.

There are, however, some persons so infatuated, that when they meet with such
sentiments as these, they are neither converted or alarmed: nay, they even treat
them with contempt and scorn, as if they listened to the inventions of fable;
applauding, perhaps, the beauty of the eloquence, but abhorring the severity of
the precepts. And yet they give credence to the fictions of the poets, and make
both civilized and barbarous45 countries ring with exploded and false tales. For
the poets assert that the judgment of souls after death is committed to men
whose parentage they ascribe to the gods,46 ex-tolling their righteousness and
impartiality and represent them as guardians of the dead. The same poets
describe the battles of the gods and certain usages of war among them, and speak
of them as subject to the power of fate. Some of these deities they picture to
us as cruel, others as strangers to all care for the human race, and others
again as hateful in their character. They introduce them also as mourning the
slaughter of their own children, thus implying their inability to succor, not
strangers merely, but those most dear to them. They describe them, too, as
subject to human passions, and sing of their battles and wounds, their joys and
sorrows. And in all this they appear worthy of belief.47 For if we suppose them
to be moved by a divine impulse to attempt the poetic art, we are bound to
believe them and to be persuaded of what they utter under this inspiration. They
speak, then, of the calamities to which their divinities are subject; calamities
which of course are altogether true! But it will be objected that it is the
privilege of poets to lie, since the peculiar province of poetry is to charm48
the spirits of the hearers, while the very essence of truth is that things told
be in reality exactly what they are said to be.49 Let us grant that it is a
characteristic of poetry occasionally to conceal the truth. But they who speak
falsehood do it not without an object; being influenced either by a desire of
personal gain or advantage, or possibly, being conscious of some evil conduct,
they are induced to disguise the truth by dread of the threatening vengeance of
the laws. But surely it were possible for them (in my judgment), by adhering
faithfully to truth at least while treating of the nature of the Supreme Being,
to avoid the guilt at once of falsehood and impiety.

Chapter XI. On the Coming of Our Lord in the Flesh; Its Nature and Cause.50

Whoever, then, has pursued a course unworthy of a life of virtue, and is
conscious of having lived an irregular and disorderly life, let him repent, and
turn with enlightened spiritual vision to God; and let him abandon his past
career of wickedness, content if he attain to wisdom even in his declining
years. We, however, have received no aid from human instruction; nay, whatever
graces of character are esteemed of good report by those who have understanding,
are entirely the gift of God. And I am able to oppose no feeble buckler against
the deadly weapons of Satan's armory; I mean the knowledge I possess of those
things which are pleasing to him: and of these I will select such as are
appropriate to my present design, while I proceed to sing the praises of the
Father of all. But do thou, O Christ, Saviour of mankind, be present to aid me
in my hallowed task! Direct the words which celebrate thy virtues,51 and
instruct me worthily to sound thy praises. And now, let no one expect to listen
to the graces of elegant language: for well I know that the nerveless eloquence
of those who speak to charm the ear, and whose aim is rather applause than sound
argument, is distasteful to hearers of sound judgment. It is asserted, then, by
some profane and senseless persons, that Christ, whom we worship, was justly
condemned to death, and that he who is the author of life to all, was himself
deprived of life. That such an assertion should be made by those who have once
dared to enter the paths of impiety, who have cast aside all fear, and all
thought of concealing their own depravity, is not surprising. But it is beyond
the bounds of folly itself that they should be able, as it seems, really to
persuade themselves that the incorruptible God yielded to the violence of men,
and not rather to that love alone which he bore to the human race: that they
should fail to perceive that divine magnanimity and forbearance is changed by no
insult, is moved from its intrinsic steadfastness by no revilings; but is ever
the same, breaking down and repelling, by the spirit of wisdom and greatness of
soul, the savage fierceness of those who assail it. The gracious kindness of God
had determined to abolish iniquity, and to exalt order and justice. Accordingly,
he gathered a company of the wisest among men,52 and ordained that most noble
and useful doctrine, which is calculated to lead the good and blessed of mankind
to an imitation of his own providential care. And what higher blessing can we
speak of than this, that God should prescribe the way of righteousness, and make
those who are counted worthy of his instruction like himself; that goodness
might be communicated to all classes of mankind, and eternal felicity be the
result? This is the glorious victory: this the true power: this the mighty work,
worthy of its author, the restoration of all people to soundness of mind: and
the glory of this triumph we joyfully ascribe to thee, thou Saviour of all! But
thou, vile and wretched blasphemy, whose glory is in lies and rumors and
calumny; thy power is to deceive and prevail with the inexperience of youth, and
with men who still retain the folly of youth. These thou seducest from the
service of the true God, and settest up false idols as the objects of their
worship and their prayers; and thus the reward of their folly awaits thy deluded
victims: for they calumniate Christ, the author of every blessing, who is God,
and the Son of God. Is not the worship of the best and wisest of the nations of
this world worthily directed to that God, who, while possessing boundless power,
remains immovably true to his own purpose, and retains undiminished his
characteristic kindness and love to man? Away, then, ye impious, for still ye
may while vengeance on your transgressions is yet withheld; begone to your
sacrifices, your feasts, your scenes of revelry and drunkenness, wherein, under
the semblance of religion, your hearts are devoted to profligate enjoyment, and
pretending to perform sacrifices, yourselves are the willing slaves of your own
pleasures. No knowledge have ye of any good, nor even of the first commandment
of the mighty God, who both declares his will to man, and gives commission to
his Son to direct the course of human life, that they who have passed a career
of virtue and self-control may obtain, according to the judgment of that Son, a
second, yea, a blessed and happy existence.53 I have now declared the decree of
God respecting the life which he prescribes to man, neither ignorantly, as many
have done, nor resting on the ground of opinion or conjecture. But it may be
that some will ask, Whence this title of Son? Whence this generation of which we
speak, if God be indeed only One, and incapable of union with another? We are,
however, to consider generation as of two kinds; one in the way of natural
birth, which is known to all; the other, that which is the effect of an eternal
cause, the mode of which is seen by the prescience of God, and by those among
men whom he loves. For he who is wise will recognize the cause which regulates
the harmony of creation. Since, then, nothing exists without a cause, of
necessity the cause of existing substances preceded their existence. But since
the world and all things that it contains exist, and are preserved,54 their
preserver must have had a prior existence; so that Christ is the cause of
preservation, and the preservation of things is an effect:55 even as the Father
is the cause of the Son, and the Son the effect of that cause. Enough, then, has
been said to prove his priority of existence. But how do we explain his descent
to this earth, and to men? His motive in this,56 as the prophets had foretold,
originated in his watchful care for the interests of all: for it needs must be
that the Creator should care for his own works. But when the time came for him
to assume a terrestrial body, and to sojourn on this earth, the need requiring,
he devised for himself a new mode57 of birth. Conception was there, yet apart
from marriage: childbirth, yet pure virginity: and a maiden became the mother of
God! An eternal nature received a beginning of temporal existence: a sensible
form of a spiritual essence, a material manifestation of incorporeal
brightness,58 appeared. Alike wondrous were the circumstances which attended
this great event. A radiant dove, like that which flew from the ark of Noah,59
alighted on the Virgin's bosom: and accordant with this impalpable union, purer
than chastity, more guileless than innocence itself, were the results which
followed. From infancy possessing the wisdom of God, received with reverential
awe by the Jordan, in whose waters he was baptized, gifted with that royal
unction, the spirit of universal intelligence; with knowledge and power to
perform miracles, and to heal diseases beyond the reach of human art; he yielded
a swift and unhindered assent to the prayers of men, to whose welfare, indeed,
his whole life was devoted without reserve. His doctrines instilled, not
prudence only,60 but real wisdom: his hearers were instructed, not in the mere
social virtues,61 but in the ways which conduct to the spiritual world; and
devoted themselves to the contemplation of immutable and eternal things, and the
knowledge of the Supreme Father. The benefits which he bestowed were no common
blessings: for blindness, the gift of sight; for helpless weakness, the vigor of
health; in the place of death, restoration to life again. I dwell not on that
abundant provision in the wilderness, whereby a scanty measure of food became a
complete and enduring supply62 for the wants of a mighty multitude?63 Thus do we
render thanks to thee, our God and Saviour, according to our feeble power; unto
thee, O Christ, supreme Providence of the mighty Father, who both savest us from
evil, and impartest to us thy most blessed doctrine: for I say these things, not
to praise, but to give thanks. For what mortal is he who shall worthily declare
thy praise, of whom we learn that thou didst from nothing call creation into
being, and illumine it with thy light; that thou didst regulate the confusion of
the elements by the laws of harmony and order? But chiefly we mark thy
loving-kindness,64 in that thou hast caused those whose hearts inclined to thee
to desire earnestly a divine and blessed life, and hast provided that, like
merchants of true blessings, they might impart to many others the wisdom and
good fortune they had received; themselves, meanwhile, reaping the everlasting
fruit of virtue. Freed from the trammels of vice, and imbued with the love of
their fellow-men, they keep mercy ever before their eyes, and hoping for the
promises of faith;65 devoted to modesty, and all those virtues which the past
career of human life had thrown aside [but which were now restored by him whose
providence is over all].66 No other power could be found to devise a remedy for
such evils, and for that spirit of injustice which had heretofore asserted its
dominion over the race of men. Providence, however, could reach the
circumstances even here, and with ease restored whatever had been disordered by
violence and the licentiousness of human passion. And this restoring power he
exercised without concealment. For he knew that, though there were some whose
thoughts were able to recognize and understand his power, others there were
whose brutish and senseless nature led them to rely exclusively on the testimony
of their own senses. In open day, therefore, that no one, whether good or evil,
might find room for doubt, he manifested his blessed and wondrous healing power;
restoring the dead to life again, and renewing with a word the powers of those
who had been bereft of bodily sense.67 Can we, in short, suppose, that to render
the sea firm as the solid ground, to still the raging of the storm, and finally
to ascend to heaven, after turning the unbelief of men to steadfast faith by the
performance of these wondrous acts, demanded less than almighty power, was less
than the work of God? Nor was the time of his passion unaccompanied by like
wonders: when the sun was darkened, and the shades of night obscured the light
of day. Then terror everywhere laid hold upon the people, and the thought that
the end of all things was already come, and that chaos, such as had been ere the
order of creation began, would once more prevail. Then, too, the cause was
sought of so terrible an evil, and in what respect the trespasses of men had
provoked the wrath of Heaven; until God himself, who surveyed with calm dignity
the arrogance of the ungodly, renewed the face of heaven, and adorned it with
the host of stars. Thus the beclouded face of Nature was again restored to her
pristine beauty.

Chapter XII. Of Those Who are Ignorant of This Mystery; And that Their Ignorance
is Voluntary. The Blessings Which Await Those Who Know It, Especially Such as
Die in the Confession of the Faith.68 But it will be said by some, who love to
blaspheme, that it was in the power of God to ameliorate and soften the natural
will of man. What better way, I ask, what better method could be devised, what
more effectual effort put forth for reclaiming evil man, than converse with God
himself? Was not he visibly present to teach them the principles of virtuous
conduct? And if the personal instructions of God were without effect, how much
more, had he continued absent and unheard? What, then, had power to hinder this
most blessed doctrine? The perverse folly of man. For the clearness of our
perceptions is at once obscured, as often as we receive with angry impatience
those precepts which are given for our blessing and advantage. In truth, it was
the very choice of men to disregard these precepts, and to turn a deaf ear to
the commandments so distasteful to them; though had they listened, they would
have gained a reward well worthy such attention, and that not for the present
only, but the future life, which is indeed the only true life. For the reward of
obedience to God is imperishable and everlasting life, to which they may aspire
who know him,69 and frame their course of life so as to afford a pattern to
others, and as it were a perpetual standard for the imitation of those who
desire to excel in virtue. Therefore was the doctrine committed to men of
understanding, that the truths which they communicated might be kept with care
and a pure conscience by the members of their households, and that thus a
truthful and steadfast observance of God's commands might be secured, the fruit
of which is that boldness in the prospect of death which springs from pure faith
and genuine holiness before God. He who is thus armed can withstand the tempest
of the world, and is sustained even to martyrdom by the invincible power of God,
whereby he boldly overcomes the greatest terrors, and is accounted worthy of a
crown of glory by him to whom he has thus nobly testified.70 Nor does he himself
assume the praise, knowing full well that it is God who gives the power both to
endure, and to fulfill with ready zeal the Divine commands. And well may such a
course as this receive the meed of never-failing remembrance and everlasting
honor. For as the martyr's life is one of sobriety and obedience to the will of
God, so is his death an example of true greatness and generous fortitude of
soul. Hence it is followed by hymns and psalms, words and songs of praise to the
all-seeing God: and a sacrifice of thanksgiving is offered in memory of such
men, a bloodless, a harmless sacrifice, wherein is no need of the fragrant
frankincense, no need of fire; but only enough of pure light71 to suffice the
assembled worshipers. Many, too, there are whose charitable spirit leads them to
prepare a temperate banquet for the comfort of the needy, and the relief of
those who had been driven from their homes: a custom which can only be deemed
burdensome72 by those whose thoughts are not accordant with the divine and
sacred doctrine.

Chapter XIII. That There is a Necessary Difference Between Created Things. That
the Propensity to Good and Evil Depends on the Will of Man; And That,
Consequently, Judgment is a Necessary and Reasonable Thing.

There are, indeed, some who venture with childish presumption to find fault with
God in respect of this also, and ask why it is that he has not created one and
the same natural disposition for all, but rather has ordained the existence of
many things different, nay, contrary in their nature, whence arises the
dissimilarity of our moral conduct and character. Would it not (say they) have
been better, both as regards obedience to the commands of God, and a just
apprehension of himself, and for the confirmation of individual faith, that all
mankind should be of the same moral character? It is indeed ridiculous to expect
that this could be the case, and to forget that the constitution of the world is
different from that of the things that are in the world; that physical and moral
objects are not identical in their nature, nor the affections of the body the
same as those of the soul. [For the immortal soul far exceeds the material world
in dignity, and is more blessed than the perishable and terrestrial creation, in
proportion as it is noble and more allied to God.73 ] Nor is the human race
excluded from participation in the divine goodness; though this is not the lot
of all indiscriminately, but of those only who search deeply into the Divine
nature, and propose the knowledge of sacred things as the leading object of
their lives.

Chapter XIV. That Created Nature Differs Infinitely from Uncreated Being; To
Which Man Makes the Nearest Approach by a Life of Virtue.

Surely it must be the very height of folly to compare created with eternal
things, which latter have neither beginning nor end, while the former, having
been originated and called into being, and having received a commencement of
their existence at some definite time, must consequently, of necessity have an
end. How then can things which have thus been made, bear comparison with him who
has ordained their being? Were this the case,74 the power to command their
existence could not rightly be attributed to him. Nor can celestial things be
compared to him, any more than the material75 with the intellectual76 world, or
copies with the models from which they are formed. Nay, is it not absurd thus to
confound all things, and to obscure the honor of God by comparing him with men,
or even with beasts? And is it not characteristic of madmen, utterly estranged
from a life of sobriety and virtue, to affect a power equivalent to that of God?
If indeed we in any sense aspire to blessedness like that of God, our duty is to
lead a life according to his commandments: so shall we, having finished a course
consistent with the laws which he has prescribed, dwell for ever superior to the
power of fate, in eternal and undecaying mansions. For the only power in man
which can be elevated to a comparison with that of God, is sincere and guileless
service and devotion of heart to himself, with the contemplation and study of
whatever pleases him, the raising our affections above the things of earth, and
directing our thoughts, as far as we may, to high and heavenly objects: for from
such endeavors, it is said, a victory accrues to us more valuable than many
blessings.77 The cause, then, of that difference which subsists, as regards the
inequality both of dignity and power in created beings, is such as I have
described. In this the wise acquiesce with abundant thankfulness and joy: while
those who are dissatisfied, display their own folly, and their arrogance will
reap its due reward.

Chapter XV. Of the Saviour's Doctrines and Miracles; And the Benefits He Confers
on Those Who Own Subjection to Him. The Son of God invites all men to the
practice of virtue, and presents himself to all who have understanding hearts,
as the teacher of his saving precepts.78 Unless, indeed, we will deceive
ourselves; and remain in wretched ignorance of the fact, that for our advantage,
that is, to secure the blessing of the human race, he went about upon earth;
and, having called around him the best men of their age, committed to them
instructions full of profit, and of power to preserve them in the path of a
virtuous life; teaching them the faith and righteousness which are the true
remedy against the adverse power of that malignant spirit whose delight it is to
ensnare and delude the inexperienced. Accordingly he visited the sick, relieved
the infirm from the ills which afflicted them, and consoled those who felt the
extremity of penury and want. He commended also sound and rational sobriety of
character, enjoining his followers to endure, with dignity and patience, every
kind of injury and contempt: teaching them to regard such as visitations
permitted by their Father, and the victory is ever theirs who nobly bear the
evils which befall them. For he assured them that the highest strength of all
consisted in this steadfastness of soul, combined with that philosophy which is
nothing else than the knowledge of truth and goodness, producing in men the
generous habit of sharing with their poorer brethren those riches which they
have themselves acquired by honorable means. At the same time he utterly forbade
all proud oppression, declaring that, as he had come to associate with the
lowly, so those who despised the lowly would be excluded from his favor. Such
and so great was the test whereby he proved the faith of those who owned
allegiance to his authority, and thus he not only prepared them for the contempt
of danger and terror, but taught them at the same time the most genuine
confidence in himself. Once, too, his rebuke was uttered to restrain the zeal of
one of his companions, who yielded too easily to the impulse of passion, when he
assaulted with the sword, and, eager to protect his Saviour's life, exposed his
own. Then it was that he bade him desist, and returned his sword to its sheath,
reproving him for his distrust of refuge and safety in himself, and declaring
solemnly that all who should essay to retaliate an injury by like aggression, or
use the sword, should perish by a violent death.79 This is indeed heavenly
wisdom, to choose rather to endure than to inflict injury, and to be ready,
should necessity so require, to suffer, but not to do, wrong. For since
injurious conduct is in itself a most serious evil, it is not the injured party,
but the injuring, on whom the heaviest punishment must fall. It is indeed
possible for one who is subject to the will of God to avoid the evil both of
committing and of suffering injury, provided his confidence be firm in the
protection of that God whose aid is ever present to shield his servants from
harm. For how should that man who trusts in God attempt to seek for resources in
himself? In such a case he must abide the conflict with uncertainty of victory:
and no man of understanding could prefer a doubtful to a certain issue. Again,
how can that man doubt the presence and aid of God, who has had experience of
manifold dangers, and has at all times been easily delivered, at his simple nod,
from all terrors: who has passed, as it were, through the sea which was leveled
by the Saviour's word, and afforded a solid road for the passage of the people?
This is, I believe, the sure basis of faith, the true foundation of confidence,
that we find such miracles as these performed and perfected at the command of
the God of Providence. Hence it is that even in the midst of trial we find no
cause to repent of our faith, but retain an unshaken hope in God; and when this
habit of confidence is established in the soul, God himself dwells in the inmost
thoughts. But he is of invincible power: the soul, therefore, which has within
it him who is thus invincible, will not be overcome by the perils which may
surround it. Likewise,80 we learn this truth from the victory of God himself,
who, while intent on providing for the blessing of mankind, though grievously
insulted by the malice of the ungodly, yet passed unharmed through the
sufferings of his passion, and gained a mighty conquest, an everlasting crown of
triumph, over all iniquity; thus accomplishing the purpose of his own providence
and love as regards the just, and destroying the cruelty of the impious and
unjust.

Chapter XVI. The Coming of Christ Was Predicted by the Prophets; And Was
Ordained to Be the Overthrow of Idols and Idolatrous Cities.

Long since had his passion, as well as his advent in the flesh, been predicted
by the prophets. The time, too, of his incarnation had been foretold, and the
manner in which the fruits of iniquity and profligacy, so ruinous to the works
and ways of righteousness, should be destroyed, and the whole world partake of
the virtues of wisdom and sound discretion, through the almost universal
prevalence of those principles of conduct which the Saviour should promulgate,
over the minds of men; whereby the worship of God should be confirmed, and the
rites of superstition utterly abolished. By these not the slaughter of animals
alone, but the sacrifice of human victims, and the pollutions of an accursed
worship, had been devised: as, for example, by the laws of Assyria and Egypt,
the lives of innocent men were offered up in images of brass or earth. Therefore
have these nations received a recompense worthy so foul a worship. Memphis and
Babylon [it was declared]81 shall be wasted, and left desolate with their
fathers' gods. Now these things I speak not from the report of others, but
having myself been present, and actually seen the most wretched of these cities,
the unfortunate Memphis.82 Moses desolated, at the Divine command, the land of
the once mighty Pharaoh, whose arrogance was his destruction,83 and destroyed
his army (which had proved victorious over numerous and mighty nations, an army
strong in defenses and in arms), not by the flight of arrows or the hurling of
hostile weapons, but by holy prayer alone, and quiet supplication.

Chapter XVII. Of the Wisdom of Moses, Which Was an Object of Imitation to the
Wise Among Heathen Nations. Also Concerning Daniel, and the Three Children. No
nation has ever been more highly blessed than that which Moses led: none would
have continued to enjoy higher blessings, had they not willingly withdrawn
themselves from the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But who can worthily describe
the praises of Moses himself; who, after reducing to order an unruly nation, and
disciplining their minds84 to habits of obedience and respect, out of captivity
restored them to a state of freedom, turned their mourning into gladness, and so
far elevated their minds,85 that, through the excess of contrast with their
former circumstances, and the abundance of their prosperity, the spirit of the
people was elated with haughtiness and pride? So far did he surpass in wisdom
those who had lived before him, that even the wise men and philosophers86 who
are extolled by heathen nations aspired to imitate his wisdom. For Pythagoras,
following his wisdom, attained to such a pitch of self-control, that he became
to Plato, himself a model of discretion, the standard of his own self-mastery.
Again, how great and terrible the cruelty of that ancient Syrian king, over whom
Daniel triumphed, the prophet who unfolded the secrets of futurity, whose
actions evinced transcendent greatness of soul, and the luster of whose
character and life shone conspicuous above all? The name of this tyrant was
Nebuchadnezzar, whose race afterward became extinct, and his vast and mighty
power was transferred to Persian hands. The wealth of this tyrant was then, and
is even now, celebrated far and wide, as well as his ill-timed devotion to
unlawful worship, his idol statues, lifting their heads to heaven, and formed of
various metals, and the terrible and savage laws ordained to uphold this
worship. These terrors Daniel, sustained by genuine piety towards the true God,
utterly despised, and predicted that the tyrant's unseasonable zeal would be
productive of fearful evil to himself. He failed, however, to convince the
tyrant (for excessive wealth is an effectual barrier to true soundness of
judgment), and at length the monarch displayed the savage cruelty of his
character, by commanding that the righteous prophet should be exposed to the
fury of wild beasts. Noble, too, indeed was the united spirit exhibited by those
brethren87 (whose example others have since followed, and have won surpassing
glory by their faith in the Saviour's name),88 those, I mean, who stood unharmed
in the fiery furnace, and the terrors appointed to devour them, repelling by the
holy touch of their bodies the flame by which they were surrounded. On the
overthrow of the Assyrian Empire, which was destroyed by thunderbolts from
Heaven,89 the providence of God conducted Daniel to the court of Cambyses the
Persian king. Yet envy followed him even here; nor envy only, but the deadly
plots of the magians against his life, with a succession of many and urgent
dangers, from all which he was easily delivered by the providential care of
Christ,90 and shone conspicuous in the practice of every virtue. Three times in
the day did he present his prayers to God, and memorable were the proofs of
supernatural power which he displayed: and hence the magians, filled with envy
at the very efficacy of his petitions, represented the possession of such power
to the king as fraught with danger, and prevailed on him to adjudge this
distinguished benefactor of the Persian people to be devoured by savage lions.
Daniel, therefore, thus condemned, was consigned to the lions' den (not indeed
to suffer death, but to win unfading glory); and though surrounded by these
ferocious beasts of prey, he found them more gentle than the men who had
enclosed him there. Supported by the power of calm and steadfast prayer, he was
enabled to subdue all these animals, ferocious as, by nature, they were.
Cambyses, on learning the event (for so mighty a proof of Divine power could not
possibly be concealed), amazed at the marvelous story, and repenting the too
easy credence he had given to the slanderous charges of the magians, resolved,
notwithstanding, to be himself a witness of the spectacle. But when he saw the
prophet with uplifted hands rendering praises to Christ, and the lions
crouching, and as it were worshiping, at his feet, immediately he adjudged the
magians, to whose persuasions he had listened, to perish by the self-same
sentence, and shut them up in the lions' den.91 The beasts, erewhile so gentle,
rushed at once upon their victims, and with all the fierceness of their nature
tore and destroyed them all.92

Chapter XVIII. Of the Erythraean Sibyl, Who Pointed in a Prophetic Acrostic at
Our Lord and His Passion. The Acrostic is "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour,
Cross." My desire, however, is to derive even from foreign sources a testimony
to the Divine nature of Christ. For on such testimony it is evident that even
those who blaspheme his name must acknowledge that he is God, and the Son of God
if indeed they will accredit the words of those whose sentiments coincided with
their own.93 The Erythraean Sibyl, then, who herself assures us that she lived
in the sixth generation after the flood, was a priestess of Apollo, who wore the
sacred fillet in imitation of the God she served, who guarded also the tripod
encompassed with the serpent's folds, and returned prophetic answers to those
who approached her shrine; having been devoted by the folly of her parents to
this service, a service productive of nothing good or noble, but only of
indecent fury, such as we find recorded in the case of Daphne.94 On one
occasion, however, having rushed into the sanctuary of her vain superstition,
she became really filled with inspiration from above, and declared in prophetic
verses the future purposes of God; plainly indicating the advent of Jesus by the
initial letters of these verses, forming an acrostic in these words: Jesus
Christ, Son of God, Saviour, Cross. The verses themselves are as follows:

Judgment! Earth's oozing pores95 shall mark the day;

Earth's heavenly king his glories shall display:

Sovereign of all, exalted on his throne, Unnumbered multitudes their God shall
own; Shall see their Judge, with mingled joy and fear, Crowned with his saints,
in human form appear.

How vain, while desolate earth's glories lie, Riches, and pomp, and man's
idolatry! In that dread hour, when Nature's fiery doom Startles the slumb'ring
tenants of the tomb, Trembling all flesh shall stand; each secret wile, Sins
long forgotten, thoughts of guilt and guile, Open beneath God's searching light
shall lie: No refuge then, but hopeless agony.

O'er heaven's expanse shall gathering shades of night From earth, sun, stars,
and moon, withdraw their light;

God's arm shall crush each mountain's towering pride; On ocean's plain no more
shall navies ride.

Dried at the source, no river's rushing sound Shall soothe, no fountain slake
the parched ground.

Around, afar, shall roll the trumpet's blast, Voice of wrath long delayed,
revealed at last. In speechless awe, while earth's foundations groan, On
judgment's seat earth's kings their God shall own.

Uplifted then, in majesty divine, Radiant with light, behold Salvation's Sign!

Cross of that Lord, who, once for sinners given, Reviled by man, now owned by
earth and heaven, O'er every land extends his iron sway. liSuch is the name
these mystic lines display;

Saviour, eternal king, who bears our sins away.96

It is evident that the virgin uttered these verses under the influence of Divine
inspiration. And I cannot but esteem her blessed, whom the Saviour thus selected
to unfold his gracious purpose towards us.

Chapter XIX. That This Prophecy Respecting Our Saviour Was Not the Fiction of
Any Member of the Christian Church, But the Testimony of the Erythraean Sibyl,
Whose Books Were Translated into Latin by Cicero Before the Coming of Christ.
Also that Virgil Makes Mention of the Same, and of the Birth of the Virgin's
Child: Though He Spoke Obscurely of This Mystery from Fear of the Ruling Powers.

Many, however, who admit that the Erythraean Sibyl was really a prophetess, yet
refuse to credit this prediction, and imagine that some one professing our
faith, and not unacquainted with the poetic art, was the composer of these
verses. They hold, in short, that they are a forgery, and alleged to be the
prophecies of the Sibyl on the ground of their containing useful moral
sentiments, tending to restrain licentiousness, and to lead man to a life of
sobriety and decorum. Truth, however, in this case is evident, since the
diligence of our countrymen97 has made a careful computation of the times; so
that there is no room to suspect that this poem was composed after the advent
and condemnation of Christ, or that the general report is false, that the verses
were a prediction of the Sibyl in an early age. For it is allowed that Cicero
was acquainted with this poem, which he translated into the Latin tongue, and
incorporated with his own works.98 This writer was put to death during the
ascendancy of Antony, who in his turn was conquered by Augustus, whose reign
lasted fifty-six years. Tiberius succeeded, in whose age it was that the
Saviour's advent enlightened the world, the mystery of our most holy religion
began to prevail, and as it were a new race of men commenced: of which, I
suppose, the prince of Latin poets thus speaks:

Behold, a new, a heaven-born race appears.99 And again, in another passage of
the Bucolics:

Sicilian Muses, sound a loftier strain.

What can be clearer than this? For he adds, The voice of Cuma's oracle is heard
again.100

Evidently referring to the Cumaean Sibyl. Nor was even this enough: the poet
goes further, as if irresistibly impelled to bear his testimony. What then does
he say?

Behold! the circling years new blessings bring:The virgincomes, with her the
long-desired king.101

Who, then, is the virgin who was to come? Is it not she who was filled with, and
with child of the Holy Spirit? And why is it impossible that she who was with
child of the Holy Spirit should be, and ever continue to be a virgin? This king,
too, will return, and by his coming lighten the sorrows of the world. The poet
adds, Thou, chaste Lucina, greet the new-born child, Beneath whose reign the
iron offspring ends, A golden progeny from heaven descends; His kingdom banished
virtue shall restore, And crime shall threat the guilty world no more.

We perceive that these words are spoken plainly and at the same time darkly, by
way of allegory. Those who search deeply for the import of the words, are able
to discern the Divinity of Christ. But lest any of the powerful in the imperial
city might be able to accuse the poet of writing anything contrary to the laws
of the country, and subverting the religious sentiments which had prevailed from
ancient times, he intentionally obscures the truth. For he was acquainted, as I
believe, with that blessed mystery which gave to our Lord the name of
Saviour:102 but, that he might avoid the severity of cruel men, he drew the
thoughts of his hearers to objects with which they were familiar, saying that
altars must be erected, temples raised, and sacrifices offered to the new-born
child. His concluding words also are adapted to the sentiments of those who were
accustomed to such a creed; for he says:

Chapter XX. A Farther Quotation from Virgilius Maro Respecting Christ, with Its
Interpretation, Showing that the Mystery Was Indicated Therein Darkly, as Might
Be Expected from a Poet. A life immortal he shall lead, and be By heroes seen,
himself shall heroes see; evidently meaning the righteous. The jarring nations
he in peace shall bind, And with paternal virtues rule mankind.

Unbidden earth her earliest fruits shall bring, And fragrant herbs, to greet her
infant king.

Well indeed was this admirably wise and accomplished man acquainted with the
cruel character of the times. He proceeds: The goats, uncall'd, full udders home
shall bear; The lowing herds no more fierce lions fear.

Truly said: for faith will not stand in awe of the mighty in the imperial
palace. His cradle shall with rising flowers be crown'd: The serpent's brood
shall die; the sacred ground Shall weeds and poisonous plants refuse to bear;

Each common bush th' Assyrian rose103 shall wear.

Nothing could be said more true or more consistent with the Saviour's excellency
than this. For the power of the Divine Spirit presents the very cradle of God,
like fragrant flowers, to the new-born race.104 The serpent, too, and the venom
of that serpent, perishes, who originally beguiled our first parents, and drew
their thoughts from their native innocence105 to the enjoyment of pleasures,
that they might experience106 that threatened death. For before the Saviour's
advent, the serpent's power was shown in subverting the souls of those who were
sustained by no well-grounded hope, and ignorant of that immortality which
awaits the righteous. But after that he had suffered, and was separated for a
season from the body which he had assumed, the power of the resurrection was
revealed to man through the communication of the Holy Spirit: and whatever stain
of human guilt might yet remain was removed by the washing of sacred
lustrations.

Then indeed could the Saviour bid his followers be of good cheer, and,
remembering his adorable and glorious resurrection, expect the like for
themselves. Truly, then, the poisonous race may be said to be extinct. Death
himself is extinct, and the truth of the resurrection sealed. Again, the
Assyrian race is gone, which first led the way to faith in God.107 But when he
speaks of the growth of amomum every where, he alludes to the multitude of the
true worshipers of God.108 For it is as though a multitude of branches, crowned
with fragrant flowers, and fitly watered, sprung from the self-same root. Most
justly said, Maro, thou wisest of poets! and with this all that follows is
consistent. But when heroic worth his youth shall hear, And learn his father's
virtues to revere. By the praises of heroes, he indicates the works of righteous
men: by the virtues of his Father he speaks of the creation and everlasting
structure of the world: and, it may be, of those laws by which God's beloved
Church is guided, and ordered in a course of righteousness and virtue.
Admirable, again, is the advance to higher things of that state of life which is
intermediate, as it were, between good and evil, and which seldom admits a
sudden change:

Unlabored harvests shall the fields adorn,109 that is, the fruit of the Divine
law springs up for the service of men. And clustered gropes shall blush on every
thorn.

Far otherwise has it been during the corrupt and lawless period of human life.
The knotted oaks shall showers of honey weep.110

He here describes the folly and obduracy of the men of that age; and perhaps he
also intimates that they who suffer hardships in the cause of God, shall reap
sweet fruits of their own endurance.

Yet, of old fraud some footsteps shall remain; The merchant still shall plough
the deep for gain:

Great cities shall with walls be compassed round, And sharpened shares shall vex
the fruitful ground:

Another Tiphys shall new seas explore;

Another Argo land the chiefs upon the Iberian shore;

Another Helen other wars create, And great Achilles urge the Trojan fate.

Well said, wisest of bards! Thou hast carried the license of a poet precisely to
the proper point. For it was not thy purpose to assume the functions of a
prophet, to which thou hadst no claim. I suppose also he was restrained by a
sense of the danger which threatened one who should assail the credit of ancient
religious practice. Cautiously, therefore, and securely, as far as possible, he
presents the truth to those who have faculties to understand it; and while he
denounces the munitions and conflicts of war111 (which indeed are still to be
found in the course of human life), he describes our Saviour as proceeding to
the war against Troy, understanding by Troy the world itself.112 And surely he
did maintain the struggle against the opposing powers of evil, sent on that
mission both by the designs of his own providence and the commandment of his
Almighty Father. How, then, does the poet proceed? But when to ripen'd manhood
he shall grow, that is, when, having arrived at the age of manhood, he shall
utterly remove the evils which encompass the path of human life, and tranquilize
the world by the blessings of peace: The greedy sailor shall the seas forego; No
keel shall cut the waves for foreign ware, For every soil shall every product
bear. The laboring hind his oxen shall disjoin; No plough shall hurt the glebe,
no pruning-hook the vine; Nor wool shall in dissembled colors shine: But the
luxurious father of the fold, With native purple, and unborrow'd gold, Beneath
his pompous fleece shall proudly sweat; And under Tyrian robes the lamb shall
bleat.

Mature in years, to ready honors move, O of celestial seed, O foster son of
Jove!

See, laboring nature calls thee to sustain The nodding flame of heaven, and
earth, and main!

See to their base restored, earth, seas, and air; And joyful ages, from behind,
in crowing ranks appear. To sing thy praise, would heaven my breath prolong.

Infusing spirits worthy such a song, Not Thracian Orpheus should transcend my
lays, Nor Linus, crown'd with never-fading bays;

Though each his heavenly parent should inspire; The Muse instruct the voice, and
Phoebus tune the lyre. Should Pan contend in verse, and thou my theme, Arcadian
judges should their God condemn.113 Behold (says he) how the mighty world and
the elements together manifest their joy.

Chapter XXI. That These Things Cannot Have Been Spoken of a Mere Man: and that
Unbelievers, Owing to Their Ignorance of Religion, Know Not Even the Origin of
Their Own Existence.

It may be some will foolishly suppose that these words were spoken of the birth
of a mere ordinary mortal. But if this were all, what reason could there be that
the earth should need neither seed nor plough, that the vine should require no
pruning-hook, or other means of culture? How can we suppose these things to be
spoken of a mere mortal's birth? For nature is the minister of the Divine will,
not an instrument obedient to the command of man. Indeed, the very joy of the
elements indicates the advent of God, not the conception of a human being. The
prayer, too, of the poet that his life might be prolonged is a proof of the
Divinity of him whom he invoked; for we desire life and preservation from God,
and not from man. Indeed, the Erythraean Sibyl thus appeals to God: "Why, O
Lord, dost thou compel me still to foretell the future, and not rather remove me
from this earth to await the blessed day of thy coming?" And Maro adds to what
he had said before:

Begin, sweet boy! with smiles thy mother know, Who ten long months did with thy
burden go. No mortal parents smiled upon thy birth: No nuptial joy thou know'st,
no feast of earth.

How could his parents have smiled on him? For his Father114 is God, who is a
Power without sensible quality,115 existing, not in any definite shape, but as
comprehending other beings,116 and not, therefore, in a human body. And who
knows not that the Holy Spirit has no participation in the nuptial union? For
what desire can exist in the disposition of that good which all things else
desire? What fellowship, in short, can wisdom hold with pleasure? But let these
arguments be left to those who ascribe to him a human origin, and who care not
to purify themselves from all evil in word as well as deed. On thee, Piety, I
call to aid my words, on thee who art the very law of purity, most desirable of
all blessings, teacher of holiest hope, assured promise of immortality! Thee,
Piety, and thee, Clemency, I adore. We who have obtained thine aid117 owe thee
everlasting gratitude for thy healing power. But the multitudes whom their
innate hatred of thyself deprives of thy succor, are equally estranged from God
himself, and know not that the very cause of their life and being, and that of
all the ungodly, is connected with the rightful worship of him who is Lord of
all: for the world itself is his, and all that it contains.

Chapter XXII. The Emperor Thankfully Ascribes His Victories and All Other
Blessings to Christ; And Condemns the Conduct of the Tyrant Maximin, the
Violence of Whose Persecution Had Enhanced the Glory of Religion. To thee,
Piety, I ascribe the cause of my own prosperity, and of all that I now possess.
To this truth the happy issue of all my endeavors bears testimony: brave deeds,
victories in war, and triumphs over conquered foes. This truth the great city
itself allows with joy and praise. The people, too, of that much-loved city
accord in the same sentiment, though once, deceived by ill-grounded hopes, they
chose a ruler unworthy of themselves,118 a ruler who speedily received the
chastisement which his audacious deeds deserved. But be it far from me now to
recall the memory of these events, while holding converse with thee, Piety, and
essaying with earnest endeavor to address thee with holy and gentle words. Yet
will I say one thing, which haply shall not be unbefitting or unseemly. A
furious, a cruel, and implacable war was maintained by the tyrants against thee,
Piety, and thy holy churches: nor were there wanting some in Rome itself who
exulted at a calamity so grievous to the public weal. Nay, the battlefield was
prepared; when thou disdst stand forth,119 and present thyself a voluntary
victim, supported by faith in God. Then indeed it was that the cruelty of
ungodly men, which raged incessantly like a devouring fire, wrought for thee a
wondrous and ever memorable glory. Astonishment seized the spectators
themselves, when they beheld the very executioners who tortured the bodies of
their holy victims wearied out, and disgusted at the cruelties;120 the bonds
loosened, the engines of torture powerless, the flames extinguished, while the
sufferers preserved their constancy unshaken even for a moment. What, then, hast
thou gained by these atrocious deeds, most impious of men?121 And what was the
cause of thy insane fury? Thou wilt say, doubtless, these acts of thine were
done in honor of the gods. What gods are these? or what worthy conception hast
thou of the Divine nature? Thinkest thou the gods are subject to angry passions
as thou art? Were it so indeed, it had been better for thee to wonder at their
strange determination than obey their harsh command, when they urged thee to the
unrighteous slaughter of innocent men. Thou wilt allege, perhaps, the customs of
thy ancestors and the opinion of mankind in general, as the cause of this
conduct. I grant the fact: for those customs are very like the acts themselves,
and proceed from the self-same source of folly. Thou thoughtest, it may be, that
some special power resided in images formed and fashioned by human art; and
hence thy reverence, and diligent care lest they should be defiled: those mighty
and highly exalted gods, thus dependent on the care of men!

Chapter XXIII. Of Christian Conduct. That God is Pleased with Those Who Lead a
Life of Virtue: and that We Must Expect a Judgment and Future Retribution.

Compare our religion with your own. Is there not with us genuine concord, and
unwearied love of others? If we reprove a fault, is not our object to admonish,
not to destroy; our correction for safety, not for cruelty: Do we not exercise,
not only sincere faith towards God, but fidelity in the relations of social
life? Do we not pity the unfortunate? Is not ours a life of simplicity which
disdains to cover evil beneath the mask of fraud and hypocrisy? Do we not
acknowledge the true God, and his undivided sovereignty? This is real godliness:
this is religion sincere and truly undefiled: this is the life of wisdom; and
they who have it are travelers, as it were, on a noble road which leads to
eternal life. For he who has entered on such a course, and keeps his soul pure
from the pollutions of the body, does not wholly die: rather may he be said to
complete the service appointed him by God, than to die. Again, he who confesses
allegiance to God is not easily overborne by insolence or rage, but nobly stands
under the pressure of necessity and the trial of his constancy is as it were, a
passport to the favor of God. For we cannot doubt that the Deity is pleased with
excellence in human conduct. For it would be absurd indeed if the powerful and
the humble alike acknowledge gratitude to those from whose services they receive
benefit, and repay them by services in return, and yet that he who is supreme
and sovereign of all, nay, who is Good itself, should be negligent in this
respect. Rather does he follow us throughout the course of our lives, is near us
in every act of goodness, accepts, and at once rewards our virtue and obedience;
though he defers the full recompense to that future period, when the actions of
our lives shall pass under his review and when those who are clear in that
account shall receive the reward of everlasting life, while the wicked shall be
visited with the penalties due to their crimes.

Chapter XXIV. Of Decius, Valerian, and Aurelian Who Experienced a Miserable End
in Consequence of Their Persecution of the Church. To thee, Decius,122 I now
appeal, who has trampled with insult on the labors of the righteous: to thee,
the hater of the Church, the punisher of those who lived a holy life: what is
now thy condition after death? How hard and wretched thy present circumstances!
Nay, the interval before thy death gave proof enough of thy miserable fate, when
overthrown with all thine army on the plains of Scythia, thou didst expose the
vaunted power of Rome to the contempt of the Goths. Thou, too, Valerian, who
didst manifest the same spirit of cruelty towards the servants of God, hast
afforded an example of righteous judgment. A captive in the enemies' hands, led
in chains while yet arrayed in the purple and imperial attire, and at last thy
skin stripped from thee, and preserved by command of Sapor the Persian king,
thou hast left a perpetual trophy of thy calamity. And thou, Aurelian, fierce
perpetrator of every wrong, how signal was thy fall, when, in the midst of thy
wild career in Thrace, thou wast slain on the public highway, and didst fill the
furrows of the road with thine impious blood!

Chapter XXV. Of Diocletian, Who Ignobly Abdicated123 The Imperial Throne, and
Was Terrified by the Dread of Lightning for His Persecution of the Church.

Diocletian, however, after the display of relentless cruelty as a persecutor,
evinced a consciousness of his own guilt and owing to the affliction of a
disordered mind, endured the confinement of a mean and separate dwelling.124
What then, did he gain by his active hostility against our God? Simply this I
believe, that he passed the residue of his life in continual dread of the
lightning's stroke. Nicomedia attests the fact; eyewitnesses, of whom I myself
am one, declare it. The palace, and the emperor's private chamber were
destroyed, consumed by lightning, devoured by the fire of heaven. Men of
understanding hearts had indeed predicted the issue of such conduct; for they
could not keep silence, nor conceal their grief at such unworthy deeds; but
boldly and openly expressed their feeling, saying one to another: "What madness
is this? and what an insolent abuse of power, that man should dare to fight
against God; should deliberately insult the most holy and just of alI religions;
and plan, without the slightest provocation, the destruction of so great a
multitude of righteous persons? O rare example of moderation to his subjects!
Worthy instructor of his army in the care and protection due to their
fellow-citizens! Men who had never seen the backs of a retreating army plunged
their swords into the breasts of their own countrymen!" So great was the
effusion of blood shed, that if shed in battle with barbarian enemies, it had
been sufficient to purchase a perpetual peace.125 At length, indeed, the
providence of God took vengeance on these unhallowed deeds; but not without
severe damage to the state. For the entire army of the emperor of whom I have
just spoken, becoming subject to the authority of a worthless person,126 who had
violently usurped the supreme authority at Rome (when the providence of God
restored freedom to that great city), was destroyed in several successive
battles. And when we remember the cries with which those who were oppressed, and
who ardently longed for their native liberty implored the help of God; and their
praise and thanksgiving to him on the removal of the evils under which they had
groaned, when that liberty was regained, and free and equitable intercourse
restored: do not these things every way afford convincing proofs of the
providence of God, and his affectionate regard for the interests of mankind?

Chapter XXVI. The Emperor Ascribes His Personal Piety to God; And Shows that We
are Bound to Seek Success from God, and Attribute It to Him; But to Consider
Mistakes as the Result of Our Own Negligence. When men commend my services,
which owe their origin to the inspiration of Heaven, do they not clearly
establish the truth that God is the cause of the exploits I have performed?
Assuredly they do: for it belongs to God to do whatever is best, and to man, to
perform the commands of God. I believe, indeed, the best and noblest course of
action is, when, before an attempt is made, we provide as far as possible for a
secure result: and surely all men know that the holy service in which these
hands have been employed has originated in pure and genuine faith towards God;
that whatever has been done for the common welfare has been effected by active
exertion combined with supplication and prayer; the consequence of which has
been as great an amount of individual and public benefit as each could venture
to hope for himself and those he holds most dear. They have witnessed battles,
and have been spectators of a war in which the providence of God has granted
victory to this people:127 they have seen how he has favored and seconded our
prayers. For righteous prayer is a thing invincible; and no one fails to attain
his object who addresses holy supplication to God: nor is a refusal possible,
except in the case of wavering faith;128 for God is ever favorable, ever ready
to approve of human virtue. While, therefore, it is natural for man occasionally
to err, yet God is not the cause of human error. Hence it becomes all pious
persons to render thanks to the Saviour of all, first for our own individual
security, and then for the happy posture of public affairs: at the same time
intreating the favor of Christ with holy prayers and constant supplications,
that he would continue to us our present blessings. For he is the invincible
ally and protector of the righteous: he is the supreme judge of all things, the
prince of immorality, the Giver of everlasting life.

1: Or "once suffering."

2: ermaiou , "gift of Hermes"; i.e. providential good-fortune. Valesius wrongly
conjectures erma , "foundation" of promise.

3: Valesius, followed by various translators, substitutes "God" for "Nature."
But all ms. authority, and the context as well, is against.

4: 1709, Molz., Vales., Cous., render "substitute in place thereof their own
superstition."

5: [The bishop who is thus metaphorically addressed as the guide and controller
of the Church.- Bag. ] 6: Some mss. read poma , "draught."

7: "I read auth frasei ...but regarding frasei as derived not from the verb
frazein , but from the noun frasij 8: "Ought not to shrink or to be neglectful."

9: Valesius, followed by 1709 and substantially by Bag., omitting proj proj 10:
"Beginning."

11: Presiding "overseer," "president," or "ruler." It is the one who has charge
of games or ships or public works, &c.

12: Cf. John i. 3, John i. 13, John i. 14, and Eph. i. 10. There is the greatest
variety in the rendering of this passage, of which Bag.'s is the worst. The
writer draws here on a philosophy of the Logos, which recognizes the second
person of the Trinity as the creator and head of created things. The free
version of Cousin gives the best flavor ofthe idea. "He was produced by the
inexhaustible fecundity of hiseternal mind to preside over the creation and
government of thisvisible world." A better translation waits on a better
exposition of the doctrine of the Logos and its history.

13: Molz. renders "und die Organe, mir Hilfe deter das Wahrgenommene innerlich
zur Idee erhoben wird."

14: Chr. substantially "natural and artificial"; Molz. "lifeless and live";
perhaps "inorganic and organic" is meant.

15: [Alluding to the fabulous division of the world between the brothers
Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto. Valesius in loc. - Bag. ] Or rather Zeus, Poseidon,
and Hades. Zeus had the heavens, Poseidon the sea, and Hades the underworld,
while the earth remained "with high Olympus, common to us all"-a fruitful source
of dissension. Cf. Homer, Il. XV. 184-195, ed. Doederlein, 2 (1864), p. 64-65;
tr. Bryant, XV. ll. 227-245.

16: A possible reading here is ecairetwj

17: Valesius remarks that many instances are recorded where the oracle of Apollo
replied to those who consulted him that Bacchus or Saturn must be placated in
order to their liberation.

18: "Form."

19: A favorite theme of the Christian apologists. Cf. long list given in the
Clementine Recognitions, X. 22.

20: Or "perfections."

21: "To be referred not to the preceding `Christ 0' but ...the supreme God."-
Hein. (?).

22: [Constantine seems to have supposed the Paradise of our first parents to be
somewhere apart from this earth. In this fanciful idea, which is obviously
indefensible from Scripture he is countenanced by the opinions of Tertullian,
Tatian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Valentinian, and Jerome, some of whom
placed it in or above the third heaven, others in the fourth, others again in a
world superior to the present, &c. See the note of Valesius, who quotes from
some of these Fathers. In reference to what follows, we may ask, Was Constantine
acquainted with, or does he avoid noticing, the circumstances of the fall?- Bag.
] Ans. Constantine like many another to our own day seems to regard the "fall"
as a fall upwards-that complacent optimism which ignores Scripture and
Schopenhauer alike.

23: Without the logoj , i.e. inarticulate or (as here) irrational.

24: For a full discussion of various definitions and usage of the word Fate ( h
eiriarmenh

25: automaton . The usual word for chance or accident is tuxh . These may be
here, as is often the case, simple synonyms, but both words are used in the same
phrase later in such way as to suggest that tuxh is parallel with "fate" rather
than "chance" in the author's mind. automaton seems to be used of
"self-originating," tuxh tuxh ) as a "cause by accident" ( sumbebhkoj automaton
in contrast with tuxh -" tuxh or even automaton ," which has been rendered
(M'Mahon) "chance or even spontaneity." In modern phrase those who hold these
three various views of the universe might be characterized as "material
evolutionists," "transcendental idealists," and "philosophical (or perhaps
`agnostic 0') evolutionists."

26: i.e. "plan."

27: dikaiosunh adikia 28: swfrosunh akolasia swfrosunh and akolasia 29: ti
dikaion dikaiosunh .

30: This is very free, and follows translation of Valesius and 1709 text. 1709
marg. translates more literally, "But either crimes, or, on the other hand,
brave performances, which are [the property] of a good and right purpose of
mind, if they happen sometimes one way, at others another," and Molz. somewhat
similarly. It is possible that it should read: "Granted that either evil actions
proceeding from a good and upright will, or contrariwise, good actions [from an
evil will] which issue directly contrary [to their own nature or to just
expectation] may be ascribed to chance or fate, how can the right," &c.

31: dikiosunh .

32: tuxh .

33: automaton .

34: nooj was not narrowed to the mere intellectual functions. "Intellectual" is
not to be taken of brain function only, but of brain and heart,-real knowing, as
against the "intellectuation" which men nowadays try to force the word "know" to
mean.

35: "Quire of the stars," 1709.

36: The " logoj endiaqetoj 37: Fore-ordination, or plan.

38: automaton .

39: yuxhj yuxh ) is rendered "life."

40: This is almost identically the form of what Socrates ( Apol. c.2) declared
to be the falsehood circulated by his enemies to his prejudice. "But far more
dangerous are those who began when you were children and took possession of your
minds with their falsehoods, telling of one Socrates, a wise man who ...made the
worse appear the better cause" ( logon , "reason"), Tr. Jowett, 1 (1874), 316.
This example does peculiar discredit either to the learning or the mental
honesty of the author.

41: Rather "deriving existence from," "proceeding from," gives strict idea, but
may be confounded with the technical "proceeding from" of the "filioque"
controversy, which is quite another phrase.

42: "Spirit."

43: "The one simple" is not in the text, but is a conjectural addition of
Valesius, followed by most translators. "Consisting of bodily structure" seems
possibly to be an epexegetical phrase relating to the "all things" which he
divides into intellectual and sensible, making the intellectual as well as the
sensible to have bodily (somatic) structure. "All things," or "the universe," a
plural technical term, is regarded as his mind passes to the explanation as "the
all." This psychological probability appears a simpler solution than the various
textual conjectures.

44: Heinichen suspects that there has been an inversion of words here, and that
it should have been, "He further teaches the admirable and profitable doctrine,"
and "a doctrine not merely to be admired" omitted.

45: "All the Greek-speaking world, and foreign lands as well."

46: Rhadamanthus was a son of Jove (or Vulcan) and Europa. Cf. Hom. Il. 14. 322;
Od. 4. 564, 7. 323.

47: [There can be no doubt (though the fact is not immediately apparent from the
wording of the text), that the spirit of this passage is ironical.- Bag. ]

48: Rather "cheat," or "delude." Mr. Charles Dudley Warner, essayist and
novelist, says in an interesting essay on the relation of fiction to life, that
the object of fiction is to produce illusions, and the test of its art is its
power to produce such illusion.

49: There is a temptation here to adopt the translation of Molz. "Truth lies in
the fiction, however, when what is told corresponds to reality." Mr. Warner, in
his lecture, goes on to say that the object of fiction is to reveal what is,-not
the base and sordid things rely or peculiarly, but the best possibilities, and
gives an exquisite exposition of the fact that the idealism of true fiction is
simply the realism of the nobler characteristics and truths. The truth is, that
the object of fiction or poetry as art is to produce the image,-fill the whole
personality with a picture. This is only gained in its highest form when every
detail exactly corresponds to truth or reality. The function of fiction is not
illusion, but realization. Its object is the reproduction of truth. Molz. makes
Constantine say that fiction is true when it corresponds to reality, though the
forms be not historical or actual. This is a true observation, but not what
Constantine says. He says in substance, with Mr. Warner, that the object is to
produce illusion or deceive, while the idea of truth is just the reverse.

50: One ms. adds, "and concerning those who did not know this mystery." In
another the chapter is divided, and this is the heading of the second part.

51: Or "this discourse concerning virtue."

52: [Alluding to the apostles, who are called in the beginning of ch. 15, "the
best men of their age." Were it our province to criticise, we might notice the
contrariety of such expressions as these to the account which Scripture gives us
of those "unlearned and ignorant men," the feeble, and, in themselves, fallible
instruments, whom God selected to further his wondrous designs of mercy to a
ruined world.- Bag. ] Were it in our province to criticise the critic, we might
notice that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and refer to the
whole Book of Proverbs. Any just conception of wisdom or true learning says the
same thing. The man who knows that God and not fusij or tuxh manages the
universe, is more learned than the wisest of those learned in things which are
not so.

53: Christophorson extends ch. 10 to this point, and here introduces ch. II,
with the heading "On the coming of Our Lord in the flesh; its nature and cause."

54: Preserved, preserver, and preservation = saved, saviour, and salvation. This
represents the N. T. idea better than the popular conception which confuses
Christ our Saviour with Christ our Redeemer. Redemption was a necessary part of
his effort for our salvation, but the salvation itself was a saving, in literal
English preserving. We have been redeemed; we are being saved.

55: Bag. follows here Valesius' translation and note where he makes the word
"preservation" a conjectural emendation of Scaliger, inconsistent with the
meaning of the passage, and omits translating "the cause of all things that
exist." But Hein. does not even hint such reading, and his text (followed also
by Molz. ), so far from tending to disturb the whole meaning, gives much the
more intelligent conception. Christ is the preserver (saviour) of things.
Preservation of things is the effect of that cause, just as the Father is the
cause of the Son, and the Son the effect of that cause. Therefore they preserver
precedes created things as a cause precedes its effect.

56: Valesius expresses a preference for the reading kaqodou (advent) here
instead of kaqolou 57: "New mode" is a paraphrase supported by only one ms. The
real meaning of noqhn 58: This is supposed to refer to Heb. i. 3, although a
different Greek word is used.

59: Various suggestions have been made regarding the dove which according to the
literal rendering "flew from the ark of Noah." Christophorson (according to
Valesius) supposes it to be that dove which Noah formerly sent out of the ark,
this dove being a figure of the Holy Spirit which was afterward to come in the
Virgin. Jerome, Ep. ad Oc., also regards the Noachic dove as a symbol of the
Holy Spirit. Vales., followed by 1711 and Bag., prefer to translate as if it
were "like that," &c. This form of the story, according to which the Holy Spirit
descends in the form of a dove, is according to Valesius from the Apochrypha;
perhaps, he suggests, from the "Gospel to the Hebrews." In later art the dove is
the constant symbol of the Holy Spirit, and is often found in pictures of the
annunciation, e.g. in pictures by Simeone Memmi, Dürer, Andrea del Sarto, and
many others. It is found in six of the pictures of the annunciation given by
Mrs. Jameson ( Legends of the Madonna, p. 165 sq.).

60: The author seems to have here a reference to the Aristotelian distinction
between prudence and wisdom (cf. Ethics, 6. 3; 7. 8, &c.). It reminds of that
passage (vi. 7, ed. Grant ad. ii. 165-166), where the two are distinguished and
defined, wisdom being "concerned with the immutable, and prudence with the
variable"; and a little farther along wisdom is distinguished from
"statesmanship," i.e. the "social" of Bag., which is a form of "prudence" (tr.
Williams, p. 160), and indeed (vi. 8. 1) generically identical with prudence. So
again (1, 2) "political art" is identified with ethics.

61: Social virtues or "political" virtues. Cf. the "political art" or
"statesmanship" of Aristotle.

62: [ Pollou cronou 63: At this point Christophorson begins his chapter xii.,
"of those who did not know the mystery," &c.

64: The translator takes most extraordinary liberties with the word
"philanthropy"; now it is "loving-kindness," now "love of their fellow-men," and
so on in picturesque variety, and yet as appropriate as it is lacking in
uniformity.

65: Cf. Rom. viii. 25; Gal. v. 5.

66: [The text, in the last clause of this passage, is undoubtedly corrupt. The
above is an attempt to supply a probable sense.- Bag. ] This is omitted by Hein.
from his text.

67: i.e. healing the paralytics. This paraphrased passage reads more literally,
"bidding those bereft of sense [i.e. sensation, feeling] to feel again." Still
it may be that Molz. is right in thinking it refers to the senses-seeing,
hearing, &c.-as well as feeling, though his translation will-hardly stand; "and
to such as lacked any of the senses he granted the full use of all their senses
again."

68:

69: Cf. John xvii. 3; 1 John v. 19-20.

70: This translation "to whom" accords with the reading of Valesius, followed by
1611, Molz., " Zimmermann, " Cous. ("whose cause he has sustained"), but Hein.
adopts the reading "who," preceded by Chr., who translates "who himself bravely
endured martyrdom."

71: [Alluding to the tapers, &c., lighted at the tombs of martyrs on the
anniversary of their death.- Bag. ] Compare Scudamore, Lights, The Ceremnonial
Use of, in Smith and Cheetham, Dict. 1 (1880), 993 sq.

72: "Vulgar."

73: [The text of this passage is defective. The conjectural restoration of
Valesius, which seems probable, is chiefly followed.- Bag. ] Heinichen, like
Christophorson and Savil before him, "does not hesitate," with one of the mss.,
to omit this passage.

74: This is following with Heinichen, and meets the conjecture of Valesius as
over against the mss. and other conjectures, which, substituting mania for omoia
, read "for if it be madness to liken these things to him," &c.

75: Or "sensible"; i.e. world of sense or perception.

76: This is the word often rendered by Bag. as "spiritual."

77: This is supposed to refer to Rev. ii. 7-10; Rev iii. 11, &c. It might well
have in mind Col. iii. 2-4, or best of all Rev. xxi. 7, as containing the
thought of victory ( nikaw = "overcome").

78: This accords with the "margin of the Geneva Edition," and mentioned by
Valesius, who gives also "in the Saviour's commands" and "in the Father's
commands," which latter is adopted by Heinichen.

79: Matt. xxvi. 52; for "all they that take the sword shall perish by the
sword." Note the characteristic inflation of style. Matthew takes eight words,
the English translators twelve, Constantine sixteen, and his translator
twenty-two ponderous words.

80: Val. prefers proj ("besides") to para 81: Not in text. This parenthesis is
the least obnoxious of various proposed paraphrases.

82: Probably refers to its destruction by Diocletian, whom Constantine
accompanied. See Prolegomena, Life, Early Years.

83: The text of this passage is most dubious. Bag., following Valesius,
translates: "And an actual witness of the wretched fate which has befallen these
cities. Memphis lies desolate; that city which was the pride of the once mighty
Pharaoh whose power Moses crushed at the Divine command." This has been changed
to accord with the text and punctuation of Heinichen. The change makes
Constantine declare himself an eye-witness of the fate of Memphis alone, which
is thought to accord with the facts; for while he was in fact in Egypt with
Diocletian there is no evidence that he ever saw Babylon. And yet it is possible
he did.

84: "Souls."

85: "Souls."

86: The sage commentators on this passage have thought it incumbent to explain
and, as it were, apologize for the apparent tautology, "wise men or
philosophers,-whichever you choose to call them" ( Val. and Hein. ).
Colloquially speaking, there is a vast difference between being a philosopher
and being a wise man. Probably this is no slip of style nor gracious option of
language such as the editors impute, but some more or less clear distinction of
technical terms.

87: "Spirit exhibited by these brethren in suffering martyrdom."

88: Molz. remarks that to get any intelligent meaning out of this mass of
sounding words, the translator often has to guess and translate very freely.

89: [ Anaireqeeishj keraunwn bolaij 90: Constantine evidently believed in an
eternal Christ.

91: "He adjudged to perish by the self-same sentence, and shut them up in the
lions' den," is bracketed by Valesius and the second clause omitted by Bag.

92: "Eliminated them all." Valesius calls attention to the characteristic slight
inaccuracies of our author! e.g. in the Biblical account (1) it was not the
magi; (2) it was not Cambyses.

93: "Of their own selves."

94: [Daughter of Tiresias, and priestess at Delphi. She was called Sibyl, on
account of the wildness of her looks and expressions when she delivered oracles
(Lempriere in voc.).- Bag. ] 95: [ 9Idrwsei gar xqwn, k.t.l

96: [It can scarcely be necessary to observe that the acrostic, the general
sense of which has been aimed at in the above translation must be regarded as
the pious fiction of some writer, whose object was to recommend the truth of
Christianity to heathens by an appeal to the authority of an (alleged) ancient
heathen prophecy.- Bag. ] The quotation is found in the edition of Alexandre,
Bk. VIII. ch. 219-250. (Cf. translation in Augustin, De civ. Dei. ) The
translation of Bag., giving the "general sense" and reproducing the acrostic,
stands unchanged. The translation of 1709, much more vigorous and suggestive of
the "Dies Irae," is as follows:

97: "Our men," i.e. Christians rather than "countrymen."

98: [The passage in Cicero ( De Divinatione, Bk. II. ch. 54) clearly does not
refer to this acrostic, and contains in itself a plain denial of prophetic truth
in the Sibylline prediction (whatever it was) which the writer had in view. "Non
esse autem illud carmen furentis, cum ipsum poema declaret (est enim magis artis
et diligentiae, quam incitationis et motus), tum verò ca, quae akrostixij

99:

100:

101: Constantine takes large liberty with the poet here in order to make him say
what he would like to have had him say. The latest translation at hand (Bowen)
renders:

102: "The blessed and salutary mystery of our Saviour."- 1709. "Mystery of
salvation."- Molz.

103:

104: [i.e. the Christians.- Bag. ] 105: Self-control.

106: "Might not experience," according to some, including Heinichen, who rejects
in first, but accepts in text of his second edition.

107: [Referring, apparently, to Abraham. This passage is founded on a
misconstruction of Virgil's line by Constantine. which is followed by the Greek
verse itself according to one edition.- Bag. ] 108: [By a kind of play on the
word amomum, he alludes to the Christians as amwmoi 109: "The fields shall
mellow wax with golden grain."

110:

111: Literally, "times and wars."- 1709.

112: This, bad as it is, is hardly worse than the subjective interpretation of
scripture modern allegorizers, and certainly no worse than some of the Scripture
interpretations of Eusebius.

113: [The reader will perceive that the foregoing verses, with but little
exception, and very slight alteration, are taken from Dryden's translation of
the fourth eclogue of Virgil.- Bag. ]

114: "Father" is emendation of Valesius embodied in his translation (1659), but
not his text (1659). It is bracketed by Molz. "His God [and Father]."

115: "Pure force."

116: In this form it sounds much like Pantheism, but in translation of Molz.
this reads, "but determinable through the bounds of other [existences]."

117: So Valesius conjectures it should read, but the text of Val. and Hein.
read, "We needy ones owe," &c.

118: [Maxentius (W. Lowth in loc.).- Bag. ] 119: This passage clearly refers to
the voluntary sufferings of the martyrs. See the note of Valesius.

120: "At a loss to invent fresh cruelties," Bag.; "And perplexed at the labor
and trouble they met with," 1709; "And reluctantly pursuing their terrible
work," Molz.

121: Alluding to Maximin, the most bitter persecutor of the Christians, as
appears from the title of this chapter.

122: [ Vide Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Bk. VI. ch. 39. Gibbon (ch. 16) notices very
leniently the persecution of Decius.- Bag. ]

123:

124: [The derangement of Diocletian appears to have been temporary only. The
causes of his abdication are not very clearly ascertained; but he seems to have
meditated the step a considerable time previously. See Gibbon, ch. 13, and the
note of Valesius.- Bag. ]

125: Valesius and Hein., in his first edition, and Bag. read this transposed
thus, "... severe damage to the state, and an effusion of blood; which, if
shed," etc. But Val. suggests, and Heinichen adopts in his second edition, that
the whole sentence should be transposed as above.

126: ["He means Maxentius, as appears from what follows. How Diocletian's army
came under the command of Maxentius, it is not difficult to understand. After
Diocletian's abdication, Galerius Maximian took the command of his forces,
giving part to Severus Caesar for the defence of Italy. Shortly afterwards,
Maxentius having usurped the Imperial power at Rome, Galerius sent Severus
against him with his forces. Maxentius, however, fraudulently and by promises
corrupted and drew to his own side Severus's army. After this, Galerius, having
marched against Maxentius with a more numerous force, was himself in like manner
deserted by his troops. Thus the army of Diocletian came under the power of
Maxentius" (Valesius ad loc.).- Bag. ] 127: i.e. the Roman. So Val. and Hein.,
hut Val. thinks it may perhaps rather be "to my army."

128: Better, literally, "slackening faith." There is somewhat of loss from the
primitive and real conception of faith in the fixing of the word "wavering" as
the conventional expression for weak. Faith is the steadfast current of
personality towards an object, and poverty of faith is more often the abatement
or slackening of that steady, insistent activity than the wavering of doubt.
There is more unbelief than disbelief.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 28: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 1
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 1

BOOK I

CONTENTS I. What the treatise on the Gospel promises p 1 a II. The charges
usually brought against us by those who try to slander our doctrines p 4 d III.
That we did not adopt the sentiments of the word of salvation without inquiry p
6 b IV. Our adoption of belief in the greatest blessings is not uncritical as to
time p 9 d V. We did not forsake the superstitious errors of our fathers without
sound reason p 14 b VI. Primitive theology of Phoenicians and Egyptians p 17 b
VII. Character of the cosmogony of the Greeks p 19 a VIII. Philosophers'
opinions concerning the system of the universe p 22 b

IX. The ancients worshipped no other gods than the celestial luminaries, knowing
nothing of the God of the universe, nor even of the erection of carved images,
nor of daemons p 27 b The stories about the gods among other nations are of
later introduction p 30 d X. Theology of the Phoenicians p 33 b

CHAPTER I By the present treatise, which includes in its design the
Demonstration of the Gospel, I purpose to show the nature of Christianity to
those who know not what it means; and here with prayers I dedicate this work to
thee, Theodotus, most excellent of Bishops, a man beloved of God and holy, in
the hope of so gaining from thee the help of thy devout intercessions on my
behalf, whereby thou mayest give me great assistance in my proposed argument on
the teaching of the Gospel. But first of all, it is well to define clearly what
this word 'Gospel' means to express. It is this then that brings 'good tidings'
to all men of the advent of the highest and greatest blessings, which having
been long since foretold have recently shone forth on all mankind—a Gospel which
makes not provision for undiscerning wealth, nor for this petty and
much-suffering life, nor for anything belonging to the body and corruption, but
for the blessings which are dear and congenial to souls possessing an
intelligent nature, and on which the interests of their bodies also depend, and
follow them like a shadow.

Now the chief of these blessings must be religion, not that which is falsely so
called and full of error, but that which makes a true claim to the title; and
this consists in the looking up to Him, who in very truth is both acknowledged
to be, and is, the One and Only God; and in the kindling of the life after God,
wherein friendship also with Him is engendered; and this is followed by that
thrice-blessed end of God's true favour, which coming from on high is dependent
upon that better world, and is thereto directed, and terminates again therein.

What then can be more blessed than this excellent and all-happy friendship with
God? Is not He both the dispenser and provider to all men of life and light and
truth and all things good? Does He not contain in Himself the cause of the being
and the life of all things? To one then who has secured friendship with Him what
more can be wanting? What can he lack, who has made the Creator of all true
blessings his friend? Or who can be superior to him who claims in the place of a
father and a guardian the great President and absolute Monarch of the universe?

Nay, it is not possible to mention anything in which he who draws near in
disposition to God the absolute Monarch, and through his intelligent piety has
been deemed worthy of His all-blessed friendship, can fail to be happy alike in
soul and body and all outward things.

It is then this good and saving friendship of men with God that the Word of God
sent down from above, like a ray of infinite light, from the God of all goodness
proclaims as good tidings to all men; and urges them to come not from this or
that place but from every part out of all nations to the God of the universe,
and to hasten and accept the gift with all eagerness of soul, Greeks and
Barbarians together, men, women, and children, both rich and poor, wise and
simple, not deeming even slaves unworthy of His call. For indeed their Father,
having constituted them all of one essence and nature, rightly admitted them all
to share in His one equal bounty, bestowing the knowledge of Himself and
friendship with Him upon all who were willing to hearken, and who readily
welcomed His grace. This friendship with His Father Christ's word came to preach
to the whole world: for, as the divine oracles teach,

'God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their
trespasses unto them,' and 'He came,' they say, 'and preached peace to them that
were far off, and peace to them that were nigh.' These things the sons of the
Hebrews were long ago inspired to prophesy to the whole world, one crying,

'All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn unto the LORD, and all the
kindreds of the nations shall worship before Him: for the kingdom is the LORD'S,
and He is the ruler over the nations'; and again, 'Tell it out among the heathen
that the LORD is king, for He hath also stablished the world, which shall not be
moved'; and another saith, 'The LORD will appear among them, and will utterly
destroy all the gods of the nations of the earth, and men shall worship Him,
every one from his place.'

These promises, having been long ago laid up in divine oracles, have now shone
forth upon our own age through the teaching of our Saviour Jesus Christ; so that
the knowledge of God among all nations, which was both proclaimed of old and
looked for by those who were not ignorant of these matters, is duly preached to
us by the Word, who has lately come from heaven, and shows that the actual
fulfilment corresponds with the voices of the men of old. But why should we
hasten on to anticipate in our eagerness the due order of intermediate
arguments, when we ought to take up the subject from the beginning, and clear
away all the objections? For some have supposed that Christianity has no reason
to support it, but that those who desire the name confirm their opinion by an
unreasoning faith and an assent without examination; and they assert that no one
is able by clear demonstration to furnish evidence of the truth of the things
promised, but that they require their converts to adhere to faith only, and
therefore they are called 'the Faithful,' because of their uncritical and
untested faith. With good reason therefore, in setting myself down to this
treatise on the Demonstration of the Gospel, I think that I ought, as a
preparation for the whole subject, to give brief explanations beforehand
concerning the questions which may reasonably be put to us both by Greeks and by
those of the Circumcision, and by every one who searches with exact inquiry into
the opinions held among us. For in this way I think my argument will proceed in
due order to the more perfect teaching of the Demonstration of the Gospel, and
to the understanding of our deeper doctrines, if my preparatory treatise should
help as a guide, by occupying the place of elementary instruction and
introduction, and suiting itself to our recent converts from among the heathen.
But to those who have passed beyond this, and are already in a state prepared
for the reception of the higher truths, the subsequent part will convey the
exact knowledge of the most stringent proofs of God's mysterious dispensation in
regard to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Let us then begin the Preparation by bringing forward the arguments which will
probably be used against us both by Greeks and by those of the Circumcision, and
by every one who searches with exact inquiry into the opinions held among us.

CHAPTER II For in the first place any one might naturally want to know who we
are that have come forward to write. Are we Greeks or Barbarians? Or what can
there be intermediate to these? and what do we claim to be, not in regard to the
name, because this is manifest to all, but in the manner and purpose of our
life? For they would see that we agree neither with the opinions of the Greeks,
nor with the customs of the Barbarians.

What then may the strangeness in us be, and what the new-fangled manner of our
life? And how can men fail to be in every way impious and atheistical, who have
apostatized from those ancestral gods by whom every nation and every state is
sustained? Or what good can they reasonably hope for, who have set themselves at
enmity and at war against their preservers, and have thrust away their
benefactors? For what else are they doing than fighting against the gods? And
what forgiveness shall they be thought to deserve, who have turned away from
those who from the earliest time, among all Greeks and Barbarians, both in
cities and in the country, are recognized as gods with all kinds of sacrifices,
and initiations, and mysteries by all alike, kings law-givers and philosophers,
and have chosen all that is impious and atheistical among the doctrines of men?
And to what kind of punishments would they not justly be subjected, who
deserting the customs of their forefathers have become zealots for the foreign
mythologies of the Jews, which are of evil report among all men? And must it not
be a proof of extreme wickedness and levity lightly to put aside the customs of
their own kindred, and choose with unreasoning and unquestioning faith the
doctrines of the impious enemies of all nations? Nay, not even to adhere to the
God who is honoured among the Jews according to their customary rites, but to
cut out for themselves a new kind of track in a pathless desert, that keeps
neither the ways of the Greeks nor those of the Jews?

These then are questions which any Greek might naturally put to us, having no
true understanding either of his own religion or of ours. But sons of the
Hebrews also would find fault with us, that being strangers and aliens we misuse
their books, which do not belong to us at all, and because in an impudent and
shameless way, as they would say, we thrust ourselves in, and try violently to
thrust out the true family and kindred from their own ancestral rights. For if
there was a Christ divinely foretold, they were Jewish prophets who proclaimed
His advent, and also announced that He would come as Redeemer and King of the
Jews, and not of alien nations: or, if the Scriptures contain any more joyful
tidings, it is to Jews, they say, that these also are announced, and we do not
well to misunderstand them.

Moreover they say that we very absurdly welcome with the greatest eagerness the
charges against their nation for the sins they committed, but on the other hand
pass over in silence the promises of good things foretold to them; or rather,
that we violently pervert and transfer them to ourselves, and so plainly defraud
them while we are simply deceiving ourselves. But the most unreasonable thing of
all is, that though we do not observe the customs of their Law as they do, but
openly break the Law, we assume to ourselves the better rewards which have been
promised to those who keep the Law.

CHAPTER III

These being questions which would naturally be the first put to us, let us,
after invoking the God of the universe through our Saviour, His own Word, as our
High Priest, proceed to clear away the first of the objections put forward, by
proving at the outset that they were false accusers who declared that we can
establish nothing by demonstration, but hold to an unreasoning faith. This then
we will disprove at once, and with no long argument, both from the proofs which
we employ towards those who come for instruction in our doctrines, and from our
replies to those who oppose us in more argumentative discussions, and by the
debates, whether written or unwritten, which we are zealous in holding both
privately with each inquirer, and publicly with the multitudes; and especially
by the books which we have in hand, comprising the general treatment of the
Demonstration of the Gospel, in which is included our present discourse
proclaiming to all men the good tidings of all the grace of God and His heavenly
blessing, and accrediting in a more logical way by very many manifest proofs the
dispensation of God concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

It is true that most of those before us have diligently pursued many other modes
of treatment, at one time by composing refutations and contradictions of the
arguments opposed to us, at another time by interpreting p. the inspired and
sacred Scriptures by exegetical commentaries, and homilies on particular points,
or again by advocating our doctrines in a more controversial manner. The
purpose, however, which we have in hand is to be worked out in a way of our own.
The very first indeed to deprecate deceitful and sophistical plausibilities, and
to use proofs free from ambiguity, was the holy Apostle Paul, who says in one
place, 'And our speech and our preaching was not in persuasive words of wisdom,
but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.' To which he adds: 'Howbeit we
speak wisdom among the perfect; yet a wisdom not of this world, nor of the
rulers of this world that come to nought; but we speak God's wisdom in a
mystery, even the wisdom that hath been hidden.' And again: 'Our sufficiency,'
he says, 'is from God, who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new
covenant.'

Rightly then is the exhortation addressed to all of us, 'to be ready to give an
answer to every man that asketh a reason concerning the hope that is in us.'

Hence, by recent authors also, there are, as I have said, demonstrations without
number, which we may carefully read, very able and clear, written in
argumentative form in defence of our doctrine, and not a few commentaries
carefully made upon the sacred and inspired Scriptures, showing by mathematical
demonstrations the unerring truthfulness of those who from the beginning
preached to us the word of godliness.

Nevertheless all words are superfluous, when the works are more manifest and
plain than words,—works which the divine and heavenly power of our Saviour
distinctly exhibits even now, while preaching good tidings of the divine and
heavenly life to all men. For instance, when He prophesied that His doctrine
should be preached throughout the whole world inhabited by man for a testimony
to all nations, and by divine foreknowledge declared that the Church, which was
afterwards gathered by His own power out of all nations, though not yet seen nor
established in the times when He was living as man among men, should be
invincible and undismayed, and should never be conquered by death, but stands
and abides unshaken, settled, and rooted upon His own power as upon a rock that
cannot be shaken or broken—the fulfilment of the prophecy must in reason be more
powerful than any word to stop every gaping mouth of those who are prepared to
exhibit a shameless effrontery. For who would not acknowledge the truth of the
prophecy, when the facts so manifestly all but cry out and say, that it was
indeed the power of God, and not human nature, which before these things came to
pass foresaw that they should happen in this way, and foretold them, and in
deeds fulfilled them?

Certainly the fame of His Gospel has filled the whole world on which the sun
looks down; and the proclamations concerning Him ran through all nations, and
are now still increasing and advancing in a manner corresponding to His own
words. The Church also which He foretold by name stands strongly rooted, and
lifted up as high as the vaults of heaven by prayers of holy men beloved of God,
and day by day is glorified, flashing forth unto all men the intellectual and
divine light of the religion announced by Him, and is in no way vanquished or
subjected by His enemies, nay, yields not even to the gates of death, because of
that one speech uttered by Himself, saying: 'Upon the rock will I build my
Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.'

There are also countless other sayings and prophecies of our Saviour, by
collecting which in a special work, and showing that the actual events agree
with His divine foreknowledge, we prove beyond all question the truth of our
opinions concerning Him. And in addition to all this, there is no small proof of
the truth which we hold in the testimony of the Hebrew Scriptures, in which so
vast a number of years beforehand the Hebrew prophets proclaimed the promise of
blessings to all mortal life, and mentioned expressly the name of the Christ,
and foretold His advent among men, and announced the novel manner of His
teaching, which in its course has reached unto all nations. They predicted also
the future unbelief in Him, and the gainsaying of the Jewish nation, and the
deeds they wrought against Him, and the dismal fate which thereupon immediately
and without delay overtook them: I mean the final siege of their royal
metropolis, and the entire overthrow of the kingdom, and their own dispersion
among all nations, and their bondage in the land of their enemies and
adversaries, things which they are seen to have suffered after our Saviour's
advent in accordance with the prophecies. In addition to this, who can fail to
be astonished at hearing the same prophets preach in clear and transparent
language, that the advent of Christ and the falling away of the Jews would be
followed by the call of the Gentiles? Which call itself also straightway became
a fact in accordance with the prophecies, through the teaching of our Saviour.
For through Him multitudes from every race of mankind turned away from the
delusion of idols, and embraced the true knowledge and worship of Him who is God
over all, wellnigh ratifying the oracles of men of old, and especially that one
which by Jeremy the prophet said 'O Lord my God, unto Thee shall the nations
come from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Our fathers inherited false
idols, and there was no profit in them. Shall a man make unto himself gods,
which yet are no gods?'

CHAPTER IV

All these circumstances then confirm the story of the facts of our religion, and
show that it was not contrived from any human impulse, but divinely foreknown,
and divinely announced beforehand by the written oracles, and yet far more
divinely proffered to all men by our Saviour; afterwards also it received power
from God, and was so established, that after these many years of persecution
both by the invisible daemons and by the visible rulers of each age it shines
forth far more brightly, and daily becomes more conspicuous, and grows and
multiplies more and more. Thus it is plain that the help which comes down from
the God of the universe supplies to the teaching and name of our Saviour its
irresistible and invincible force, and its victorious power against its enemies.

Also the help thence gained towards a happy life for all men, not only from His
express words, but also from a secret power, was surely an indication of His
divine power: for it must have been of a divine and secret power, that
straightway at His word, and with the doctrine which He put forth concerning the
sole sovereignty of the One God who is over all, at once the human race was set
free from the delusive working of daemons, at once also from the multitude of
rulers among the nations. In fact, whereas of old in each nation numberless
kings and local governors held power, and in different cities some were governed
by a democracy, and some by tyrants, and some by a multitude of rulers, and
hence wars of all kinds naturally arose, nations clashing against nations, and
constantly rising up against their neighbours, ravaging and being ravaged, and
making war in their sieges one against another, so that from these causes the
whole population, both of dwellers in the cities, and labourers in the fields,
from mere childhood were taught warlike exercises, and always wore swords both
in the highways and in villages and fields,—when God's Christ was come all this
was changed. For concerning Him it had been proclaimed of old by the prophets,
'In his days shall righteousness flourish, and abundance of peace,' and 'they
shall beat their swords into plow-shares and their spears into pruning-hooks;
and nation shall not take sword against nation, and they shall not learn war any
more.' In accordance with these predictions the actual events followed.
Immediately all the multitude of rulers among the Romans began to be abolished,
when Augustus became sole ruler at the time of our Saviour's appearance. And
from that time to the present you cannot see, as before, cities at war with
cities, nor nation fighting with nation, nor life being worn away in the old
confusion.

Surely there is good cause, when one considers it, to wonder why of old, when
the daemons tyrannized over all the nations, and men paid them much worship,
they were goaded by the gods themselves into furious wars against each other—so
that now Greeks were at war with Greeks, and now Egyptians with Egyptians, and
Syrians with Syrians, and Romans with Romans, and made slaves of each other and
wore each other out with sieges, as in fact the histories of the ancients on
these matters show—but that at the same time with our Saviour's most religious
[and peaceful] teaching the destruction of polytheistic error began to be
accomplished, and the dissensions of the nations at once to find rest from
former troubles? This especially I consider to be a very great proof of the
divine and irresistible power of our Saviour. And of the benefit which visibly
proceeds from His doctrines you may see a clear proof, if you consider, that at
no other time from the beginning until now, nor by any of the illustrious men of
old, but only from His utterances, and from His teaching diffused throughout the
whole world, the customs of all nations are now set aright, even those customs
which before were savage and barbarous; so that Persians who have become His
disciples no longer marry their mothers, nor Scythians feed on human flesh,
because of Christ's word which has come even unto them, nor other races of
Barbarians have incestuous union with daughters and sisters, nor do men madly
lust after men and pursue unnatural pleasures, nor do those, whose practice it
formerly was, now expose their dead kindred to dogs and birds, nor, strangle the
aged, as they did formerly, nor do they feast according to their ancient custom
on the flesh of their dearest friends when dead, nor like the ancients offer
human sacrifices to the daemons as to gods, nor slaughter their dearest friends,
and think it piety. For these and numberless things akin to these were what of
old made havoc of human life.

'It is recorded, for instance, in history that the Massagetae and Derbices
deemed those of their kindred who died a natural death most miserable, and for
this reason hastened to sacrifice and to feast upon the aged among their dearest
friends. The Tibareni used to throw their old kinsmen alive down a precipice;
and the Hyrcanians and Caspians threw them out to birds and dogs, the former
while alive, and the latter when dead. But the Scythians used to bury them
alive, and to slaughter over their funeral pyres those who were most dear to the
deceased. The Bactrians also used to cast those who had grown old alive to the
dogs.' 1

These however were customs of a former age, and are now no longer practised in
the same manner, the salutary law of the power of the Gospel having alone
abolished the savage and inhuman pest of all these evils.

Then there is the fact that men no longer regard as gods either the lifeless and
dumb images, or the evil daemons operating in them, or the parts of the visible
world, or the souls of mortals long since departed, or the most hurtful of
irrational animals; but instead of all these, solely through the teaching of our
Saviour in the Gospel, Greeks and Barbarians together, who sincerely and
unfeignedly adhere to His word, have reached such a point of high philosophy, as
to worship and praise and acknowledge as divine none but the Most High God, the
very same who is above the universe, the absolute monarch and Lord of heaven and
earth, and sun and stars, Creator also of the whole world. They have also
learned to live a strict life, so as to be guided even in looking with their
eyes, and to conceive no licentious thought from a lustful look, but to cut away
the very roots of every base passion from the mind itself.

Must not then all these things help all men towards a virtuous and happy life?

What also of the fact that men, far from perjuring themselves, have no need even
of a truthful oath because of learning from Him to 'swear not at all,' but in
all things to be guileless and true, so as to be satisfied with 'yea' and 'nay,'
making their purpose to be stronger than any oath? 2 And then the fact that even
in simple sayings and common conversation they are not indifferent, but
carefully measure their words even in these, so as to utter by their voice no
lie, nor railing, nor any foul and unseemly word, because again of His
admonition, wherein He said, 'for every idle word ye shall give account in the
day of judgement'—to what a high degree of philosophic life do these things
pertain? 3

Add to this that whole myriads in crowds together of men, women, and children,
slaves and free, obscure and illustrious, Barbarians and Greeks alike, in every
place and city and district in all nations under the sun, flock to the teaching
of such lessons as we have lately learned, and lend their ears to words which
persuade them to control not only licentious actions, but also foul thoughts of
gluttony and wantonness in the mind: and that all mankind is trained in a divine
and godly discipline, and learns to bear with a noble and lofty spirit the
insults of those who rise up against them, and not to repay the wicked with like
treatment, but to get the mastery over anger and wrath and every furious
emotion, and moreover to share their possessions with the helpless and needy,
and welcome every man as of the same race, and to acknowledge the stranger,
commonly so reputed, as being by the law of nature a close kinsman and a
brother.

How then could any one, taking all these things together, refuse to admit that
our doctrine has brought to all men good tidings of very great and true
blessings, and has supplied to human life that which is of immediate advantage
towards happiness? For what thinkest thou of the fact that it induced the whole
human race, not only Greeks, but also the most savage Barbarians and those who
dwell in the utmost parts of the earth, to refrain from their irrational
brutality and adopt the opinions of a wise philosophy? As, for example, the
opinions concerning the immortality of the soul, and of the life laid up with
God for His beloved after their departure hence, for the sake of which they
studied to despise this temporary life; so that they showed those who were at
any former time renowned for philosophy to be but children, and that death that
was so much talked of and celebrated in the mouth of all philosophers to be a
mere trifle; since, among us, females and young children, and barbarians and men
apparently of little worth, by the power and help of our Saviour have shown by
deeds rather than by words that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is
true. Such also as is the fact, that all men universally in all nations are
trained by our Saviour's teachings to sound and steadfast thoughts concerning
God's providence as overseeing the whole world; and the fact that every soul
learns the doctrine concerning the tribunal and judgement of God, and lives a
thoughtful life, and keeps on guard against the practices of wickedness.

CHAPTER V But to understand the sum of the first and greatest benefit of the
word of salvation, you must take into consideration the superstitious delusion
of the ancient idolatry, whereby the whole human race in times long past was
ground down by the constraint of daemons: but from that most gloomy darkness, as
it were, the word by its divine power delivered both Greeks and Barbarians
alike, and translated them all into the bright intellectual daylight of the true
worship of God the universal King. But why need I spend time in endeavouring to
show that we have not devoted ourselves to an unreasoning faith, but to wise and
profitable doctrines which contain the way of true religion? As the present work
is to be a complete treatise on this very subject, we exhort and beseech those
who are fitly qualified to follow demonstrative arguments, that they give heed
to sound sense, and receive the proofs of our doctrines more reasonably, and 'be
ready to give an answer to every man that asketh us the reason of the hope that
is in us.' 4 But since all are not so qualified, and the word is kind and
benevolent, and rejects no one at all, but heals every man by remedies suitable
to him, and invites the unlearned and simple to the amendment of their ways,
naturally in the introductory teaching of those who are beginning with the
simpler elements, women and children and the common herd, we lead them on gently
to the religious life, and adopt the sound faith to serve as a remedy, and
instil into them right opinions of God's providence, and the immortality of the
soul, and the life of virtue. Is it not in this way that we also see men
scientifically curing those who are suffering from bodily diseases, the
physicians themselves having by much practice and education acquired the
doctrines of the healing art, and conducting all their operations according to
reason, while those who come to them to be cured give themselves up to faith and
the hope of better health, though they understand not accurately any of the
scientific theories, but depend only on their good hope and faith? And when the
best of the physicians has come upon the scene, he prescribes with full
knowledge both what must be avoided and what must be done, just like a ruler and
master; and the patient obeys him as a king and lawgiver, believing that what
has been prescribed will be beneficial to him.

Thus scholars also accept the words of instruction from their teachers, because
they believe that the lesson will be good for them: philosophy, moreover, a man
would not touch before he is persuaded that the profession of it will be useful
to him: and so one man straightway chooses the doctrines of Epicurus, and
another emulates the Cynic mode of life, another follows the philosophy of
Plato, another that of Aristotle, and yet another prefers the Stoic philosophy
to all, each of them having embraced his opinion with a better hope and faith
that it will be beneficial to him.

Thus also men pursue the ordinary professions, and some adopt the military and
others the mercantile life, having: assumed again by faith that the pursuit will
supply them with a living. In marriages also the first approaches and unions
formed in the hope of begetting children had their beginnings from a good faith.

Again, a man sails forth on an uncertain voyage, without having cast out any
other anchor of safety for himself than faith and good hope alone: and, again,
another takes to husbandry, and after casting his seed into the earth sits
waiting for the turn of the season, believing that what decayed upon the ground,
and was hidden by floods of rains, will spring up again as it were from the dead
to life: and, again, any one setting out from his own land on a long journey in
a foreign country takes with him as good guides his hope and his faith. And when
you cannot but perceive that man's whole life depends on these two things—hope
and faith—why do you wonder if also the things that are better for the soul are
imparted by faith to some, who have not leisure to be taught the particulars in
a more logical way, while others have opportunity to pursue the actual
arguments, and to learn the proofs of the doctrines advocated? But now that we
have made this short introduction, which will not be without advantage, let us
go back to the first indictment, and give an answer to those who inquire who we
are and whence we come. Well then, that being Greeks by race, and Greeks by
sentiment, and gathered out of all sorts of nations, like the chosen men of a
newly enlisted army, we have become deserters from the superstition of our
ancestors,—this even we ourselves should never deny. But also that, though
adhering to the Jewish books and collecting out of their prophecies the greater
part of our doctrine, we no longer think it agreeable to live in like manner
with those of the Circumcision,—this too we should at once acknowledge.

It is time, therefore, to submit our explanation of these matters. In what other
way then can it appear that we have done well in forsaking the customs of our
forefathers, except by first setting them forth publicly and bringing them under
the view of our readers? For in this way the divine power of the demonstration
of the Gospel will become manifest, if it be plainly shown to all men what are
the evils that it promises to cure, and of what kind they are. And how can the
reasonableness of our pursuing the study of the Jewish Scriptures appear, unless
their excellence also be proved? It will be right also to state fully for what
reason, though gladly accepting their Scriptures, we decline to follow their
mode of life: and, in conclusion, to state what is our own account of the Gospel
argument, and what Christianity should properly be called, since it is neither
Hellenism nor Judaism, but a new and true kind of divine philosophy, bringing
evidence of its novelty from its very name.

First of all then let us carefully survey the most ancient theologies, and
especially those of our own forefathers, celebrated even till now in every city,
and the solemn decisions of noble philosophers concerning the constitution of
the world and concerning the gods, that we may learn whether we did right or not
in departing from them. And in the clear statement of what is to be proved I
shall not set down my own words, but those of the very persons who have taken
the deepest interest in the worship of those whom they call gods, that so the
argument may stand clear of all suspicion of being invented by us.

CHAPTER VI

It is reported then that Phoenicians and Egyptians were the first of all mankind
to declare the sun and moon and stars to be gods, and to be the sole causes of
both the generation and decay of the universe, and that they afterwards
introduced into common life the deifications and theogonies which are matters of
general notoriety.

Before these, it is said, no one made any progress in the knowledge of the
celestial phenomena, except the few men mentioned among the Hebrews, who with
clearest mental eyes looked beyond all the visible world, and worshipped the
Maker and Creator of the universe, marvelling much at the greatness of His
wisdom and power, which they represented to themselves from His works; and being
persuaded that He alone was God, they naturally spake only of Him as God, son
from father successively receiving and guarding this as the true, the first, and
the only religion. The rest of mankind, however, having fallen away from this
only true religion, and gazing in awe upon the luminaries of heaven with eyes of
flesh, as mere children in mind, proclaimed them gods, and honoured them with
sacrifices and acts of worship, though as yet they built no temples, nor formed
likenesses of mortal men with statues and carved images, but looked up to the
clear sky and to heaven itself, and in their souls reached up unto the things
there seen. Not here, however, did polytheistic error stay its course for men of
later generations, but driving on into an abyss of evils wrought even greater
impiety than the denial of God, the Phoenicians and then the Egyptians being the
first authors of the delusion. For from them, it is said, Orpheus, son of
Oeagrus, first brought over with him the mysteries of the Egyptians, and
imparted them to the Greeks; just, in fact, as Cadmus brought to them the
Phoenician mysteries together with the knowledge of letters: for the Greeks up
to that time did not yet know the use of the alphabet.

First, therefore, let us inquire how those of whom we are speaking have judged
concerning the first creation of the world; then consider their opinions about
the first and most ancient superstition found in human life; and, thirdly, the
opinions of the Phoenicians; fourthly, those of the Egyptians; after which,
fifthly, making a distinction in the opinions of the Greeks, we will first
examine their ancient and more mythical delusion, and then their more serious
and, as they say, more natural philosophy concerning the gods: and after this we
will travel over the account of their admired oracles; after which we will also
take a survey of the serious doctrines of the noble philosophy of the Greeks.
So, when these have been thoroughly discussed, we will pass over to the
doctrines of the Hebrews—I mean of the original and true Hebrews, and of those
who afterwards received the name Jews. And after all these we will add our own
doctrines as it were a seal set upon the whole. The history of all these we must
necessarily recall, that so by comparison of the doctrines which have been
admired in each country the test of the truth may be exhibited, and it may
become manifest to our readers from what opinions we have departed, and what
that truth is which we have chosen. But now let us pass to the first point. From
what source then shall we verify our proofs? Not, of course, from our own
Scriptures, lest we should seem to show favour to our argument: but let Greeks
themselves appear as our witnesses, both those of them who boast of their
philosophy, and those who have investigated the history of other nations.

Well then, in recording the ancient theology of the Egyptians from the
beginning, Diodorus, the Sicilian, leads the way, a man thoroughly known to the
most learned of the Greeks as having collected the whole Library of History into
one treatise. From him I will set forth first what he has clearly stated in the
beginning of his work concerning the origin of the whole world, while recording
the opinion of the ancients in the manner following.

CHAPTER VII

[DIODORUS] The full account of the ideas entertained concerning the gods by
those who first taught men to honour the deity, and of the fabulous stories
concerning each of the immortals, I shall endeavour to arrange in a separate
work, because this subject requires a long discussion: but all that we may deem
to be suitable to our present historical inquiries we shall set forth in a brief
summary, that nothing worth hearing may be missed. But concerning the descent of
the whole human race, and the transactions which have occurred in the known
parts of the world, we shall give as accurate an account as may be possible
about matters so ancient, and shall begin from the earliest times. 'With regard
then to the first origin of mankind two explanations have been held among the
most accepted physiologists and historians. For some of them, on the supposition
that the universe is uncreated and imperishable, declared that the human race
also has existed from eternity, their procreation of children having never had a
beginning; while others, who thought the world to be created and perishable,
said that, like it, mankind were first created within definite periods of time.
'For, according to the original constitution of the universe, heaven and earth,
they said, had one form, their nature being mixed: but afterwards, when their
corporeal particles were separated from each other, though the cosmos embraced
in itself the whole visible order, the air was subjected to continual motion.
The fiery part of it gathered towards the highest regions, because fire is
naturally borne upwards by reason of its lightness; and from this cause the sun
and all the multitude of stars were caught and carried off in the general whirl:
but the muddy and turbid part of the air, in its commixture with the moist
parts, settled down together because of its heaviness, and by revolving in
itself and continually contracting made the sea out of the moist parts, and out
of the more solid parts made the earth, muddy and quite soft.

'This was at first hardened from the fire round the sun shining upon it, and
afterwards, when the surface was thrown into fermentation through the warmth,
some of the liquid particles swelled up in many places, and tumours were formed
about them surrounded by thin membranes, a thing which may still be seen going
on in stagnant pools and marshy places, when upon the cooling of the ground the
air becomes suddenly fiery, because the change does not take place in it
gradually.

'The moist parts then being quickened into life by the warmth in the way
mentioned, during the nights they received their nourishment direct from the
mist which falls from the surrounding atmosphere, and during the days became
hardened by the heat; and at last, when the pregnant cells attained their full
growth, and the membranes were thoroughly heated and burst asunder, all various
types of living things sprang up.

'And those of them which had received the largest share of heat went off into
the upper regions, and became birds; while those which retained an earthy
consistency were counted in the order of reptiles and of the other land animals;
and those which had partaken most largely of the watery element ran together to
the place congenial to their nature, and were called aquatic.

'But the earth being more and more solidified both by the fire about the sun and
by the winds, at last was no longer able to quicken any of the larger creatures
into life, but the several kinds of animals were generated from their union one
with another.

'It seems that even Euripides, who was a disciple of the physicist Anaxagoras,
does not dissent from what has been now said concerning the nature of the
universe; for he thus writes in the Melanippe:

"So heaven and earth at first had all one form; But when in place dissevered
each from other, They gave to all things birth, and brought to light Trees,
birds, and beasts, and all the salt sea's brood, And race of mortal men." 5

'Such are the traditions which we have received concerning the first beginnings
of the universe. And they say that the primitive generations of mankind, living
in a disorderly and savage state, used to go wandering out over the pastures,
and procure for food the tenderest herbage, and the fruits of trees that grew
wild: and that when warred on by the wild beasts they were taught by their own
interest to help one another, and from gathering together through fear they
gradually recognized each other's forms.

'And though their speech was originally indistinct and confused, by degrees they
articulated their words, and settling with each other signs for every object
lying before them, they made their interpretation of all things intelligible
among themselves.

'But when such associations came to be formed throughout all the inhabited
world, they had not all a language of the same sounds, because they each
arranged their words as it chanced; and from this cause there were originally
all kinds of languages, and the associations first formed became the progenitors
of all the nations.

'So then the first generations of men, by whom none of the conveniences of life
had been discovered, passed a hard time, being destitute of clothing, and unused
to houses and fire, and altogether without any idea of prepared food. For not
knowing even how to harvest their food that grew wild, they did not lay by any
store of the fruits for their needs: and therefore in the winters many of them
perished of the cold and scarcity of food.

'But afterwards, being gradually taught by experience, they took refuge in their
caves in the winter, and laid by such fruits as could be kept. And when fire
became known, the usefulness of other things was gradually discovered and the
arts also were invented, and all other things that could benefit their common
life.

'For necessity itself became universally men's teacher in all things, naturally
suggesting the knowledge of each to a being well endowed by nature, and having
for all purposes the help of hands, and speech, and ready wit. So concerning the
origin of mankind and the most primitive mode of life we will be content with
what has been said, making brevity our aim.'

Thus much writes the aforesaid historian, without having mentioned God even so
much as by name in his cosmogony, but having presented the arrangement of the
universe as something accidental and spontaneous. And with him you will find
most of the Greek philosophers agreeing, whose doctrines concerning the first
principles of things, with their differences of opinion and of statement, based
on conjectures not on a clear conception, I shall on the present occasion set
forth from Plutarch's Miscellanies.8 And do thou, not casually but leisurely and
with careful consideration, observe the mutual disagreement of the authors whom
I quote.

CHAPTER VIII

[PLUTARCH] 'Thales, it is said, was the first of all who supposed that water was
the original element of the universe, for that all things spring from it and
return to it.

'After him Anaximander, who had been a companion of Thales, said that the
Infinite contained the whole cause of both the generation and decay of all
things, and out of it he says that the heavens, and, generally, all the worlds,
which are infinite in number, have been brought into distinct form. He declared
that decay and, long before that, generation originated in the revolution of all
these worlds from infinite ages. The earth, he says, is in figure cylindrical,
and its depth a third part of its breadth. He says too that the eternal
generative force of heat and cold was separated at the generation of this world,
and that from it a kind of sphere of flame grew round the atmosphere of the
earth as bark round a tree; and that when this flame was rent asunder and shut
off into certain orbits, the sun and moon and stars came into existence.
Further, he says that man at first was generated d from animals of other kinds,
because while the other animals quickly find food of themselves, man alone needs
to be nursed for a long time; and for this reason, being such as he is, he could
not in the beginning have been kept alive. These then are the opinions of
Anaximander.

'But Anaximenes, it is said, declared the air to be the first element of the
universe, and that this is in its generic nature infinite, but is differentiated
by the qualities attached to it, and that all things are generated by virtue of
a certain condensation and subsequent rarefaction of this air. Its motion
however subsists eternally, and when the air was compressed, first, he said, the
earth was produced, and was very broad, and therefore according to reason
floated upon the air; and the sun, and moon, and other heavenly bodies were
originally produced out of earth. He declares, for instance, that the sun is
earth, but because of its swift motion it has a great supply of heat.

'Xenophanes of Colophon has proceeded by a way of his own, diverging from all
who have been previously mentioned, for he leaves neither generation nor decay,
but says that the All is always alike. For, says he, if it were to begin to be,
it must previously not be; but Non-being cannot begin to be, nor can Non-being
make anything, nor from Non-being can anything begin to be.

'He declares also that the senses are fallacious, and with them altogether
disparages even reason itself. Also he declares that the earth being
continuously carried down little by little in time passes away into the sea. He
says also that the sun is formed from a gathering of many small sparks. With
regard to the gods; also he declares that there is no ruling power among them;
for it is not right that any of the gods should be under a master: and none of
them needs anything at all from any; and that they hear and see universally and
not partially.

'Also he declares that the earth is infinite, and not surrounded; by air on
every side; and that all things are produced out of earth: the sun, however, and
the other heavenly bodies he says 'are produced out of the clouds.

'But Parmenides the Eleatic, the companion of Xenophanes, both claimed to hold
his opinions and at the same time tried to establish the opposite position. For
he declares that in real truth the All is eternal and motionless; for he says it
is "Sole, of sole kind, unmoving, uncreated" and that generation belongs to the
things which upon a false assumption are thought to exist, and he denies the
truth of the sensual perceptions. He says too that if anything subsists besides
Being, this is Non-being, and Non-being does not exist in the universe. Thus he
concludes that Being is uncreated. The earth, he says, has arisen from the dense
air having settled down.

'Zeno the Eleatic put forth nothing properly his own, but discussed these
opinions more at large.

'Democritus of Abdera supposed that the All is infinite, because there was none
who could possibly have framed it: he further says that it is unchangeable; and
generally, everything being such as it is, he expressly asserts that the causes
of the processes now going on have no beginning, but all things absolutely,
past, present, and to come, are wholly fixed beforehand by necessity from
infinite time. Of the generation of the sun and moon he says, that they moved in
their separate courses, when as yet they had no natural heat at all, nor
generally any brightness, but on the contrary were assimilated to the nature of
the earth; for each of them had been produced earlier when the world was as yet
in some peculiar rudimentary condition, and afterwards, when the orbit round the
sun became enlarged, the fire was included in it.

'Epicurus son of Neocles, an Athenian, endeavours to suppress the vain conceit
about gods: but also says that nothing is produced out of Non-being, because the
All always was and always will be such as it is; that nothing new is brought to
pass in the All because of the infinite time which has already passed; that all
is body, and not only unchangeable, but also infinite; that the summum bonum is
pleasure.

'Aristippus of Gyrene says that pleasure is the summum bonum, and pain the worst
of evils; but all other physiology he excludes by saying that the only useful
thing is to inquire "What for your home is evil and what good." 6

'Empedocles of Agrigentum made four elements, fire, water, air, and earth, and
their cause friendship and enmity. There was first the mixture of the elements,
out of which, he says, the air was separated and diffused all around; and next
to the air the fire leaped out, and having no other place was driven upwards by
the freezing of the air. And there are two hemispheres, he says, moving in a
circle round the earth, the one wholly of fire, the other of air and a little
fire mixed, which he supposes to be night; and the beginning of their motion
resulted from its having happened when the fire predominated in the combination.
And the sun is in its nature not fire, but a reflexion of fire, like the
reflexion formed from water. The moon, he says, was formed separately by itself
out of the air left by the fire; for this air froze just like hail: but its
light it has from the sun. The ruling power, he says, is neither in the head nor
in the breast, but in the blood; whence also he thinks that in whatever part of
the body this ruling power (the blood) is more largely diffused, in that part
men excel.

'Metrodorus of Chios says that the All is eternal, because if it were created it
would have come from Non-being; and infinite, because eternal, for it had no
first principle to start from, nor any limit, nor end. But neither does the All
partake of motion; for it cannot be moved without changing its place; and a
change of place must of necessity be either into plenum or into vacuum. The air
being condensed makes clouds, then water, which also flowing down upon the sun
extinguishes it: and it is rekindled again by evaporation. And in time the sun
is made solid by the dryness, and forms stars out of the clear water, and from
being extinguished and rekindled makes night and day, and eclipses generally.

'Diogenes of Apollonia supposes that air is the primary element, that all things
are in motion, and that the worlds are infinite. His cosmogony is as follows:
when the All was in motion, and was becoming in one part rare and in another
dense, where the dense part happened to meet it formed a concretion, and so the
other parts on the same principle; and the lightest having taken the highest
position produced the sun.'

Such is the judgement of the all-wise Greeks, those, forsooth, who were entitled
physicists and philosophers, concerning the constitution of the All and the
original cosmogony; in which they did not assume any creator or maker of the
universe, nay, they made no mention of God at all, but referred the cause of the
All solely to irrational impulse and spontaneous motion. So great also is their
mutual opposition; for in no point have they agreed one with another, but have
filled the whole subject with strife and discord. Wherefore the admirable
Socrates used to convict them all of folly, and to say that they were no better
than madmen, that is, if you think Xenophon a satisfactory witness, when in the
Memorabilia he speaks thus:

[XENOPHON] 'But no one ever yet either saw Socrates do, or heard him say,
anything impious or irreligious. For even concerning the nature of all things,
or other such questions, he did not discourse, as most did, speculating what is
the nature of the cosmos, as the sophists call it, and by what necessary forces
the heavenly bodies are each produced, but he even used to represent those who
troubled their minds about such matters as talking folly.'7 And presently he
adds:

'And he used to wonder, that it was not manifest to them, that it is impossible
for men to discover these things; since even those who prided themselves most
highly on discoursing of these subjects did not hold the same opinions one with
another, but behaved to each other like mad people. For as among madmen some do
not fear even things that should be feared, and others fear what is not at all
fearful; ... so of those who trouble themselves about the nature of all things,
some think that Being is one only, others that it is an infinite multitude; and
some that all things are ever in motion, but others that nothing ever can be
moved: and some that all things are created and perish, but others that nothing
ever can either be created or perish.'9 So says Socrates, according to the
testimony of Xenophon. And Plato also agrees with this account in his dialogue
Concerning the Soul, describing him as thus speaking:

[PLATO] 'For in my youth, Cebes, said he, I myself had a wonderful longing for
this kind of wisdom which they call Physical Research: it seemed to me a
magnificent thing to know the causes of everything, why each comes into being,
and why it perishes, or why it exists. And I was constantly turning my mind this
way and that, in examining first such questions as these:—Is it when hot and
cold have assumed a kind of putrefaction, as some used to say,—is it then that
living things are bred and nourished? And is the blood that by which we think,
or the air, or the fire? Or is it none of these, but is the brain that which
supplies the sensation of sight, and hearing, and smell? And from these might
come memory and opinion, and from memory and opinion, when they have reached a
settled state, in the same manner knowledge arises. And then again I speculated
on their decay, and the changes to which the heaven and the earth are subject,
and at last it seemed to me that I was of all things in the world the least
fitted by nature for such speculation. And I will tell you a good proof of it: I
was so utterly blinded by the mere inquiry, that even what I clearly understood
before, at least as I and others thought, I then unlearned,— even what I thought
I knew before.'10 So said Socrates, that very man so celebrated by all the
Greeks. When, therefore, even this great philosopher had such an opinion of the
physiological doctrines of those whom I have mentioned, I think that we too have
with good reason deprecated the atheism of them all, since their polytheistic
error also seems not to be unconnected with the opinions already mentioned.
This, however, shall be proved on the proper occasion, when I shall show that
Anaxagoras is the first of the Greeks mentioned as having set mind to preside
over the cause of the All. But now pass on with me to Diodorus, and consider
what he narrates concerning the primitive theology of mankind.11

CHAPTER IX

[DIODORUS] 'It is said then that the men who dwelled of old in Egypt when they
looked up to the cosmos, and were struck with astonishment and admiration at the
nature of the universe, supposed that the sun and moon were two eternal and
primal gods, one of whom they named Osiris, and the other Isis, each name being
applied from some true etymology.

'For when they are translated into the Greek form of speech, Osiris is "many
eyed"; with reason, for casting his beams in every direction he beholds, as it
were with many eyes, the whole earth and sea: and with this the poet's words
agree:

"Thou Sun, who all things seest, and nearest all." 12

'But some of the ancient mythologists among the Greeks give to Osiris the
additional name Dionysus, and, by a slight change in the name, Sirius. One of
these, Eumolpus, speaks in his Bacchic poems thus:

"Dionysus named, "Bright as a star, his face aflame with rays." 13 And Orpheus
says:

"For that same cause Phanes and Dionysus him they call."14 Some say also that
the fawn-skin cloak is hung about him as a representation of the spangling of
the stars.

'"Isis" too, being interpreted, means "ancient," the name having been given to
the Moon from her ancient and eternal origin. And they put horns upon her, both
from the aspect with which she appears whenever she is crescent-shaped, and also
from the cow which is consecrated to her among the Egyptians. And these deities
they suppose to regulate the whole world.' 15

Such then are the statements on this subject. You find, too, in the Phoenician
theology, that their first 'physical philosophers knew no other gods than the
sun, the moon, and besides these the planets, the elements also, and the things
connected with them'; and that to these the earliest of mankind 'consecrated the
productions of the earth, and regarded them as gods, and worshipped them as the
sources of sustenance to themselves and to following generations, and to all
that went before them, and offered to them drink-offerings and libations.' But
pity and lamentation and weeping they consecrated to the produce of the earth
when perishing, and to the generation of living creatures at first from the
earth, and then to their production one from another, and to their end, when
they departed from life. These their notions of worship were in accordance with
their own weakness, and the want as yet of any enterprise of mind.'

Such are the statements of the Phoenician writings, as will be proved in due
course. Moreover, one of our own time, that very man who gains celebrity by his
abuse of us, in the treatise which he entitled Of Abstinence from Animal Food,
makes mention of the old customs of the ancients as follows in his own words, on
the testimony of Theophrastus:16

[PORPHYRY] 'It is probably an incalculable time since, as Theophrastus says, the
most learned race of mankind, inhabiting that most sacred land which Nilus
founded, were the first to begin to offer upon the hearth to the heavenly
deities not the first-fruits of myrrh nor of cassia and frankincense mingled
with saffron; for these were adopted many generations later, when man becoming a
wanderer in search of his necessary livelihood with many toils and tears offered
drops of these tinctures as first-fruits to the gods.

'"Of these then they made no offerings formerly, but of herbage, which they
lifted up in their hands as the bloom of the productive power of nature. For the
earth gave forth trees before animals, and long before trees the herbage which
is produced year by year; and of this they culled leaves and roots and the whole
shoots of their growth, and burned them, greeting thus the visible deities of
heaven with their offering, and dedicating to them the honours of perpetual
fire.

'For these they also kept in their temples an undying fire, as being most
especially like them. And from the fume (θυμιασις) of the produce of the earth
they formed the words θυμιατηρια (altars of incense), and θυειν (to offer), and
θυσιας (offerings),—words which we misunderstand as signifying the erroneous
practice of later times, when we apply the term θυσια to the so-called worship
which consists of animal sacrifice.

'And so anxious were the men of old not to transgress their custom, that they
cursed (αρωμαι) those who neglected the old fashion and introduced another,
calling their own incense-offerings αρωματα.' After these and other statements
he adds:

'But when these beginnings of sacrifices were carried by men to a great pitch of
disorder, the adoption of the most dreadful offerings, full of cruelty, was
introduced; so that the curses formerly pronounced against us seemed now to have
received fulfilment, when men slaughtered victims and defiled the altars with
blood.' 17 So far writes Porphyry, or rather Theophrastus: and we may find a
seal and confirmation of the statement in what Plato in the Cratylus, before his
remarks concerning the Greeks, says word for word as follows:

[PLATO] 'It appears to me that the first inhabitants of Hellas had only the same
gods as many of the barbarians have now, namely the sun, moon, earth, stars, and
heaven: as therefore they saw them always moving on in their course and running
(θεοντα), from this their natural tendency to run they called them θεουσ
(gods).' 18 But I think it must be evident to every one on consideration that
the first and most ancient of mankind did not apply themselves either to
building temples or to setting up statues, since at that time no art of
painting, or modelling, [or carving], or statuary had yet been discovered, nor,
indeed, were building or architecture as yet established. Nor was there any
mention among the men of that age of those who have since been denominated gods
and heroes, nor had they any Zeus, nor Kronos, Poseidon, Apollo, Hera, Athena,
Dionysus, nor any other deity, either male or female, such as there were
afterwards in multitudes among both barbarians and Greeks; nor was there any
daemon good or bad reverenced among men, but only the visible stars of heaven
because of their running (θεειν) received, as they themselves say, the title of
gods (θεων), and even these were not worshipped with animal sacrifices and the
honours afterwards superstitiously invented. This statement is not ours, but the
testimony comes from within, and from the Greeks themselves, and supplies its
proof by the words which have been already quoted and by those which will
hereafter be set forth in due order. This is what our holy Scriptures also
teach, in which it is contained, that in the beginning the worship of the
visible luminaries had been assigned to all the nations, and that to the Hebrew
race alone had been entrusted the full initiation into the knowledge of God the
Maker and Artificer of the universe, and of true piety towards Him. So then
among the oldest of mankind there was no mention of a Theogony, either Greek or
barbarian, nor any erection of lifeless statues, nor all the silly talk that
there is now about the naming of the gods both male and female. In fact the
titles and names which men have since invented were not as yet known among
mankind: no, nor yet invocations of invisible daemons and spirits, nor absurd
mythologies about gods and heroes, nor mysteries of secret initiations, nor
anything at all of the excessive and frivolous superstition of later
generations.

These then were men's inventions, and representations of our mortal nature, or
rather new devices of base and licentious dispositions, according to our divine
oracle which says, The devising of idols was the beginning of fornication.19 In
fact the polytheistic error of all the nations is only seen long ages
afterwards, having taken its beginning from the Phoenicians and Egyptians, and
passed over from them to the other nations, and even to the Greeks themselves.
For this again is affirmed by the history of the earliest ages; which history
itself it is now time for us to review, beginning from the Phoenician records.

Now the historian of this subject is Sanchuniathon, an author of great
antiquity, and older, as they say, than the Trojan times, one whom they testify
to have been approved for the accuracy and truth of his Phoenician History.
Philo of Byblos, not the Hebrew, translated his whole work from the Phoenician
language into the Greek, and published it. The author in our own day of the
compilation against us mentions these things in the fourth book of his treatise
Against the Christians, where he bears the following testimony to Sanchuniathon,
word for word:

[PORPHYRY] 'Of the affairs of the Jews the truest history, because the most in
accordance with their places and names, is that of Sanchuniathon of Berytus, who
received the records from Hierombalus the priest of the god Ieuo; he dedicated
his history to Abibalus king of Berytus, and was approved by him and by the
investigators of truth in his time. Now the times of these men fall even before
the date of the Trojan war, and approach nearly to the times of Moses, as is
shown by the successions of the kings of Phoenicia. And Sanchuniathon, who made
a complete collection of ancient history from the records in the various cities
and from the registers in the temples, and wrote in the Phoenician language with
a love of truth, lived in the reign of Semiramis, the queen of the Assyrians,
who is recorded to have lived before the Trojan war or in those very times. And
the works of Sanchuniathon were translated into the Greek tongue by Philo of
Byblos.' 20 So wrote the author before mentioned, bearing witness at once to the
truthfulness and antiquity of the so-called theologian. But he, as he goes
forward, treats as divine not the God who is over all, nor yet the gods in the
heaven, but mortal men and women, not even refined in character, such as it
would be right to approve for their virtue, or emulate for their love of wisdom,
but involved in the dishonour of every kind of vileness and wickedness.

He testifies also that these are the very same who are still regarded as gods by
all both in the cities and in country districts. But let me give you the proofs
of this out of his writings.

Philo then, having divided the whole work of Sanchuniathon into nine books, in
the introduction to the first book makes this preface concerning Sanchuniathon,
word for word: 21

[PHILO] 'These things being so, Sanchuniathon, who was a man of much learning
and great curiosity, and desirous of knowing the earliest history of all nations
from the creation of the world, searched out with great care the history of
Taautus, knowing that of all men under the sun Taautus was the first who thought
of the invention of letters, and began the writing of records: and he laid the
foundation, as it were, of his history, by beginning with him, whom the
Egyptians called Thoyth, and the Alexandrians Thoth, translated by the Greeks
into Hermes.'

After these statements he finds fault with the more recent authors as violently
and untruly reducing the legends concerning the gods to allegories and physical
explanations and theories; and so he goes on to say:

'But the most recent of the writers on religion rejected the real events from
the beginning, and having invented allegories and myths, and formed a fictitious
affinity to the cosmical phenomena, established mysteries, and overlaid them
with a cloud of absurdity, so that one cannot easily discern what really
occurred: but he having lighted upon the collections of secret writings of the
Ammoneans which were discovered in the shrines and of course were not known to
all men, applied himself diligently to the study of them all; and when he had
completed the investigation, he put aside the original myth and the allegories,
and so completed his proposed work; until the priests who followed in later
times wished to hide this away again, and to restore the mythical character;
from which time mysticism began to rise up, not having previously reached the
Greeks.' Next to this he says:

'These things I have discovered in my anxious desire to know the history of the
Phoenicians, and after a thorough investigation of much matter, not that which
is found among the Greeks, for that is contradictory, and compiled by some in a
contentious spirit rather than with a view to truth.' And after other
statements:

'And the conviction that the facts were as he has described them came to me, on
seeing the disagreement among the Greeks: concerning which I have carefully
composed three books bearing the title Paradoxical History.' And again after
other statements he adds:

'But with a view to clearness hereafter, and the determination of particulars,
it is necessary to state distinctly beforehand that the most ancient of the
barbarians, and especially the Phoenicians and Egyptians, from whom the rest of
mankind received their traditions, regarded as the greatest gods those who had
discovered the necessaries of life, or in some way done good to the nations.
Esteeming these as benefactors and authors of many blessings, they worshipped
them also as gods after their death, and built shrines, and consecrated pillars
and staves after their names: these the Phoenicians held in great reverence, and
assigned to them their greatest festivals. Especially they applied the names of
their kings to the elements of the cosmos, and to some of those who were
regarded as gods. But they knew no other gods than those of nature, sun, and
moon, and the rest of the wandering stars, and the elements and things connected
with them, so that some of their gods were mortal and some immortal.'

Philo having explained these points in his preface, next begins his
interpretation of Sanchuniathon by setting forth the theology of the Phoenicians
as follows:

CHAPTER X

'The first principle of the universe he supposes to have been air dark with
cloud and wind, or rather a blast of cloudy air, and a turbid chaos dark as
Erebus; and these were boundless and for long ages had no limit. But when the
wind, says he, became enamoured of its own parents, and a mixture took place,
that connexion was called Desire. This was the beginning of the creation of all
things: but the wind itself had no knowledge of its own creation. From its
connexion Mot was produced, which some say is mud, and others a putrescence of
watery compound; and out of this came every germ of creation, and the generation
of the universe. So there were certain animals which had no sensation, and out
of them grew intelligent animals, and were called "Zophasemin," that is
"observers of heaven"; and they were formed like the shape of an egg. Also Mot
burst forth into light, and sun, and moon, and stars, and the great
constellations.'

Such was their cosmogony, introducing downright atheism. But let us see next how
he states the generation of animals to have arisen. He says, then:

'And when the air burst into light, both the sea and the land became heated, and
thence arose winds and clouds, and very great downpours and floods of the waters
of heaven. So after they were separated, and removed from their proper place
because of the sun's heat, and all met together again in the air dashing
together one against another, thunderings and lightnings were produced, and at
the rattle of the thunder the intelligent animals already described woke up, and
were scared at the sound, and began to move both on land and sea, male and
female.' Such is their theory of the generation of animals. Next after this the
same writer adds and says:

'These things were found written in the cosmogony of Taautus, and in his
Commentaries, both from conjectures, and from evidences which his intellect
discerned, and discovered, and made clear to us.' Next to this, after mentioning
the names of the winds Notos and Boreas and the rest, he continues:

'But these were the first who consecrated the productions of the earth, and
regarded them as gods, and worshipped them as being the support of life both to
themselves, and to those who were to come after them, and to all before them,
and they offered to them drink-offerings and libations.'

He adds also:

'These were their notions of worship, corresponding to their own weakness, and
timidity of soul. Then he says that from the wind Colpias and his wife Baau
(which he translates "Night") were born Aeon and Protogonus, mortal men, so
called: and that Aeon discovered the food obtained from trees. That their
offspring were called Genos and Genea, and inhabited Phoenicia: and that when
droughts occurred, they stretched out their hands to heaven towards the sun; for
him alone (he says) they regarded as god the lord of heaven, calling him
Beelsamen, which is in the Phoenician language "lord of heaven," and in Greek
"Zeus."' And after this he charges the Greeks with error, saying:

'For it is not without cause that we have explained these things in many ways,
but in view of the later misinterpretations of the names in the history, which
the Greeks in ignorance took in a wrong sense, being deceived by the ambiguity
of the translation.' Afterwards he says:

'From Genos, son of Aeon and Protogonus, were begotten again mortal children,
whose names are Light, and Fire, and Flame. These, says he, discovered fire from
rubbing pieces of wood together, and taught the use of it. And they begat sons
of surpassing size and stature, whose names were applied to the mountains which
they occupied: so that from them were named mount Cassius, and Libanus, and
Antilibanus, and Brathy. From these, he says, were begotten Memrumus and
Hypsuranius; and they got their names, he says, from their mothers, as the women
in those days had free intercourse with any whom they met.'

Then he says:

'Hypsuranius inhabited Tyre, and contrived huts out of reeds and rushes and
papyrus: and he quarrelled with his brother Ousous, who first invented a
covering for the body from skins of wild beasts which he was strong enough to
capture. And when furious rains and winds occurred, the trees in Tyre were
rubbed against each other and caught fire, and burnt down the wood that was
there. And Ousous took a tree, and, having stripped off the branches, was the
first who ventured to embark on the sea; and be consecrated two pillars to fire
and wind, and worshipped them, and poured libations of blood upon them from the
wild beasts which he took in hunting.

'But when Hypsuranius and Ousous were dead, those who were left, he says,
consecrated staves to them, and year by year worshipped their pillars and kept
festivals in their honour. But many years afterwards from the race of
llypsuranius were born Agreus and Halieus, the inventors of hunting and fishing,
from whom were named huntsmen and fishermen: and from them were bom two
brethren, discoverers of iron and the mode of working it; the one of whom,
Chrysor, practised oratory, and incantations, and divinations: and that he was
Hephaestus, and invented the hook, and bait, and line, and raft, and was the
first of all men to make a voyage: wherefore they reverenced him also as a god
after his death. And he was also called Zeus Meilichios. And some say that his
brothers invented walls of brick. Afterwards there sprang from their race two
youths, one of whom was called Technites (Artificer), and the other Geinos
Autochthon (Earth-born Aboriginal). These devised the mixing of straw with the
clay of bricks, and drying them in the sun, and moreover invented roofs. From
them others were born, one of whom was called Agros, and the other Agrueros or
Agrotes; and of the latter there is in Phoenicia a much venerated statue, and a
shrine drawn by yokes of oxen; and among the people of Byblos he is named
pre-eminently the greatest of the gods.

'These two devised the addition to houses of courts, and enclosures, and caves.
From them came husbandmen and huntsmen. They are also called Aletae and Titans.
From these were born Amynos and Magus, who established villages and sheepfolds.
From them came Misor and Suduc, that is to say "Straight " and "Just": these
discovered the use of salt.

'From Misor was born Taautus, who invented the first written alphabet; the
Egyptians called him Thoyth, the Alexandrians Thoth, and the Greeks Hermes.

'From Suduc came the Dioscuri, or Cabeiri, or Corybantes, or Samothraces: these,
he says, first invented a ship. From them have sprung others, who discovered
herbs, and the healing of venomous bites, and charms. In their time is born a
certain Elioun called "the Most High," and a female named Beruth, and these
dwelt in the neighbourhood of Byblos.

'And from them is born Epigeius or Autochthon, whom they afterwards called
Uranus; so that from him they named the element above us Uranus because of the
excellence of its beauty. And he has a sister born of the aforesaid parents, who
was called Ge (earth), and from her, he says, because of her beauty, they called
the earth by the same name. And their father, the Most High, died in an
encounter with wild beasts, and was deified, and his children offered to him
libations and sacrifices.

'And Uranus, having succeeded to his father's rule, takes to himself in marriage
his sister Ge, and gets by her four sons, Elus who is also Kronos, and Baetylus,
and Dagon who is Siton, and Atlas. Also by other wives Uranus begat a numerous
progeny; on which account Ge was angry, and from jealousy began to reproach
Uranus, so that they even separated from each other.

'But Uranus, after he had left her, used to come upon her with violence,
whenever he chose, and consort with her, and go away again; he used to try also
to destroy his children by her; but Ge repelled him many times, having gathered
to herself allies. And when Kronos had advanced to manhood, he, with the counsel
and help of Hermes Trismegistus (who was his secretary), repels his father
Uranus, and avenges his mother.

'To Kronos are born children, Persephone and Athena. The former died a virgin:
but by the advice of Athena and Hermes Kronos made a sickle and a spear of iron.
Then Hermes talked magical words to the allies of Kronos, and inspired them with
a desire of fighting against Uranus on behalf of Ge. And thus Kronos engaged in
war, and drove Uranus from his government, and succeeded to the kingdom. Also
there was taken in the battle the beloved concubine of Uranus, being great with
child, whom Kronos gave in marriage to Dagon. And in his house she gave birth to
the child begotten of Uranus, which she named Demarus.

' After this Kronos builds a wall round his own dwelling, and founds the first
city, Byblos in Phoenicia.

'Soon after this he became suspicious of his own brother Atlas, and, with the
advice of Hermes, threw him into a deep pit and buried him. At about this time
the descendants of the Dioscuri put together rafts and ships, and made voyages;
and, being cast ashore near Mount Cassius, consecrated a temple there. And the
allies of Elus, who is Kronos, were surnamed Eloim, as these same, who were
surnamed after Kronos, would have been called Kronii.

'And Kronos, having a son Sadidus, dispatched him with his own sword, because he
regarded him with suspicion, and deprived him of life, thus becoming the
murderer of his son. In like manner he cut off the head of a daughter of his
own; so that all the gods were dismayed at the disposition of Kronos.

'But as time went on Uranus, being in banishment, secretly sends his maiden
daughter Astarte with two others her sisters, Ehea and Dione, to slay Kronos by
craft. But Kronos caught them, and though they were his sisters, made them his
wedded wives. And when Uranus knew it, he sent Eimarmene and Hora with other
allies on an expedition against Kronos. and these Kronos won over to his side
and kept with him.

'Further, he says, the god Uranus devised the Baetylia, having contrived to put
life into stones. And to Kronos there were born of Astarte seven daughters,
Titanides or Artemides: and again to the same there were born of Rhea seven
sons, of whom the youngest was deified at his birth; and of Dione females, and
of Astarte again two males, Desire and Love. And Dagon, after he discovered corn
and the plough, was called Zeus Arotrios.

'And one of the Titanides united to Suduc, who is named the Just, gives birth to
Asclepius.

'In Peraea also there were born to Kronos three sons, Kronos of the same name
with his father, and Zeus Belus, and Apollo. In their time are born Pontus, and
Typhon, and Nereus father of Pontus and son of Belus.

'And from Pontus is born Sidon (who from the exceeding sweetness of her voice
was the first to invent musical song) and Poseidon. And to Demarus is born
Melcathrus, who is also called Hercules.

'Then again Uranus makes war against Pontus, and after revolting attaches
himself to Demarus, and Demarus attacks Pontus, but Pontus puts him to flight;
and Demarus vowed an offering if he should escape.

'And in the thirty-second year of his power and kingdom Elus, that is Kronos,
having waylaid his father Uranus in an inland spot, and got him into his hands,
emasculates him near some fountains and rivers. There Uranus was deified: and as
he breathed his last, the blood from his wounds dropped into the fountains and
into the waters of the rivers, and the spot is pointed out to this day.'

This, then, is the story of Kronos, and such are the glories of the mode of
life, so vaunted among the Greeks, of men in the days of Kronos, whom they also
affirm to have been the first and 'golden race of articulate speaking men,' 22
that blessed happiness of the olden time!

Again, the historian adds to this, after other matters:

'But Astarte, the greatest goddess, and Zeus Demarus, and Adodus king of gods,
reigned over the country with the consent of Kronos. And Astarte set the head of
a bull upon her own head as a mark of royalty; and in travelling round the world
she found a star that had fallen from the sky, which she took up and consecrated
in the holy island Tyre. And the Phoenicians say that Astarte is Aphrodite.

'Kronos also, in going round the world, gives the kingdom of Attica to his own
daughter Athena. But on the occurrence of a pestilence and mortality Kronos
offers his only begotten son as a whole burnt-offering to his father Uranus, and
circumcises himself, compelling his allies also to do the same. And not long
after another of his sons by Rhea, named Muth, having died, he deifies him, and
the Phoenicians call him Thanatos and Pluto. And after this Kronos gives the
city Byblos to the goddess Baaltis, who is also called Dione, and Berytus to
Poseidon and to the Cabeiri and Agrotae and Halieis, who also consecrated the
remains of Pontus at Berytus.

'But before this the god Tauthus imitated the features of the gods who were his
companions, Kronos, and Dagon, and the rest, and gave form to the sacred
characters of the letters. He also devised for Kronos as insignia of royalty
four eyes in front and behind . . . but two of them quietly closed, and upon his
shoulders four wings, two as spread for flying, and two as folded.

'And the symbol meant that Kronos could see when asleep, and sleep while waking:
and similarly in the case of the wings, that he flew while at rest, and was at
rest when flying. But to each of the other gods he gave two wings upon the
shoulders, as meaning that they accompanied Kronos in his flight. And to Kronos
himself again he gave two wings upon his head, one representing the all-ruling
mind, and one sensation.

'And when Kronos came into the South country he gave all Egypt to the god
Tauthus, that it might be his royal dwelling-place. And these things, he says,
were recorded first by Suduc's seven sons the Cabeiri, and their eighth brother
Asclepius, as the god Tauthus commanded them.

'All these stories Thabion, who was the very first hierophant of all the
Phoenicians from the beginning, allegorized and mixed up with the physical and
cosmical phenomena, and delivered to the prophets who celebrated the orgies and
inaugurated the mysteries: and they, purposing to increase their vain
pretensions from every source, handed them on to their successors and to their
foreign visitors: one of these was Eisirius the inventor of the three letters,
brother of Chna the first who had his name changed to Phoenix.' Then again
afterwards he adds:

'But the Greeks, surpassing all in genius, appropriated most of the earliest
stories, and then variously decked them out with ornaments of tragic phrase, and
adorned them in every way, with the purpose of charming by the pleasant fables.
Hence Hesiod and the celebrated Cyclic poets framed theogonies of their own, and
battles of the giants, and battles of Titans, and castrations; and with these
fables, as they travelled about, they conquered and drove out the truth.

'But our ears having grown up in familiarity with their fictions, and being for
long ages pre-occupied, guard as a trust the mythology which they received, just
as I said at the beginning; and this mythology, being aided by time, has made
its hold difficult for us to escape from, so that the truth is thought to be
nonsense, and the spurious narrative truth.'

Let these suffice as quotations from the writings of Sanchuniathon, translated
by Philo of Byblos, and approved as true by the testimony of Porphyry the
philosopher. The same author, in his History of the Jews, further writes thus
concerning Kronos:

'Tauthus, whom the Egyptians call Thoyth, excelled in wisdom among the
Phoenicians, and was the first to rescue the worship of the gods from the
ignorance of the vulgar, and arrange it in the order of intelligent experience.
Many generations after him a god Sourmoubelos and Thuro, whose name was changed
to Eusarthis, brought to light the theology of Tauthus which had been hidden and
overshadowed, by allegories.' And soon after he says:

'It was a custom of the ancients in great crises of danger for the rulers of a
city or nation, in order to avert the common ruin, to give up the most beloved
of their children for sacrifice as a ransom to the avenging daemons; and those
who were thus given up were sacrificed with mystic rites. Kronos then, whom the
Phoenicians call Elus, who was king of the country and subsequently, after his
decease, was deified as the star Saturn, had by a nymph of the country named
Anobret an only begotten son, whom they on this account called ledud, the only
begotten being still so called among the Phoenicians; and when very great
dangers from war had beset the country, he arrayed his son in royal apparel, and
prepared an altar, and sacrificed him.'

Again see what the same author, in his translation from Sanchuniathon about the
Phoenician alphabet, says concerning the reptiles and venomous beasts, which
contribute no good service to mankind, but work death and destruction to any in
whom they inject their incurable and fatal poison. This also he describes,
saying word for word as follows:

'The nature then of the dragon and of serpents Tauthus himself regarded as
divine, and so again after him did the Phoenicians and Egyptians: for this
animal was declared by him to be of all reptiles most full of breath, and fiery.
In consequence of which it also exerts an unsurpassable swiftness by means of
its breath, without feet and hands or any other of the external members by which
the other animals make their movements. It also exhibits forms of various
shapes, and in its progress makes spiral leaps as swift as it chooses. It is
also most long-lived, and its nature is to put off its old skin, and so not only
to grow young again, but also to assume a larger growth; and after it has
fulfilled its appointed measure of age, it is self-consumed, in like manner as
Tauthus himself has set down in his sacred books: for which reason this animal
has also been adopted in temples and in mystic rites.

'We have spoken more fully about it in the memoirs entitled Ethothiae, in which
we prove that it is immortal, and is self-consumed, as is stated before: for
this animal does not die by a natural death, but only if struck by a violent
blow. The Phoenicians call it "Good Daemon": in like manner the Egyptians also
surname it Cneph; and they add to it the head of a hawk because of the hawk's
activity.

'Epeïs also (who is called among them a chief hierophant and sacred scribe, and
whose work was translated [into Greek] by Areius of Heracleopolis), speaks in an
allegory word for word as follows:

'The first and most divine being is a serpent with the form of a hawk, extremely
graceful, which whenever he opened his eyes filled all with light in his
original birthplace, but if he shut his eyes, darkness came on.'

'Epeïs here intimates that he is also of a fiery substance, by saying "he shone
through," for to shine through is peculiar to light. From the Phoenicians
Pherecydes also took the first ideas of his theology concerning the god called
by him Ophion and concerning the Ophionidae, of whom we shall speak again.

'Moreover the Egyptians, describing the world from the same idea, engrave the
circumference of a circle, of the colour of the sky and of fire, and a
hawk-shaped serpent stretched across the middle of it, and the whole shape is
like our Theta (θ), representing the circle as the world, and signifying by the
serpent which connects it in the middle the good daemon.

'Zoroaster also the Magian, in the Sacred Collection of Persian Records, says in
express words: "And god has the head of a hawk. He is the first, incorruptible,
eternal, uncreated, without parts, most unlike (all else), the controller of all
good, who cannot be bribed, the best of all the good, the wisest of all wise;
and he is also a father of good laws and justice, self-taught, natural, and
perfect, and wise, and the sole author of the sacred power of nature.

'The same also is said of him by Ostanes in the book entitled Octateuch.' From
Tauthus, as is said above, all received their impulse towards physiological
systems: and having built temples they consecrated in the shrines the primary
elements represented by serpents, and in their honour celebrated festivals, and
sacrifices, and mystic rites, regarding them as the greatest gods, and rulers of
the universe. So much concerning serpents.

Such then is the character of the theology of the Phoenicians, from which the
word of salvation in the gospel teaches us to flee with averted eyes, and
earnestly to seek the remedy for this madness of the ancients. It must be
manifest that these are not fables and poets' fictions containing some theory
concealed in hidden meanings, but true testimonies, as they would themselves
say, of wise and ancient theologians, containing things of earlier date than all
poets and historians, and deriving the credibility of their statements from the
names and history of the gods still prevailing in the cities and villages of
Phoenicia, and from the mysteries celebrated among each people: so that it is no
longer necessary to search out violent physical explanations of these things,
since the evidence which the facts bring with them of themselves is quite clear.
Such then is the theology of the Phoenicians: but it is now time to pass on and
examine carefully the case of the Egyptians.

[Selected footnotes moved to end and numbered] 1. Porphyry, Abstinence from
animal food, iv. 21 2. Matt. v. 34, 37 3. Matt. xii. 36 4. 1 Pet. iii. 15 5.
Euripides, Melanippe the Wise, Fragm. 487 6. Homer, Od. iv. 392 7. Xenophon,
Memorabilia of Socrates, 1.i.11 8. 22 b 1. This fragment of Plutarch's
Stromateis or Miscellanies is known from Eusebius only.

9. Xenophon, Memorabilia of Socrates, 1.1.13 10. Plato, Phaedo 96 A 11. Diodorus
Siculus, I, 11.

12. Homer, Ill. iii. 277 13.27 d 5 The only known Fragment of Eumolpus 14. d 7
Orphica, Fragment, vii. 3 (Hermann), clxviii (Abel) 15. Quoted from Philo
Byblius 16. Porphyry, On Abstinence from Animal Food, ii. 5

17. ibid. 33 18. Plato, Cratylus, 397 19. Deut., iv. 19; Wisdom of Solomon, xiv.
12 20. Porphyry, Against the Christians, a fragment preserved by Eusebius only
21. 31 d 8 - 42 b 2. Philo Byblius, Fragments quoted by Porphyry and preserved
by Eusebius.

22. Hesiod, Works and Days, 109 This text was transcribed by Peter Kirby, with
amendments by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 29: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 10
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 10

BOOK X

CONTENTS

I. How the serious branches of learning passed from Barbarians to Greeks: also
concerning the antiquity of the Hebrews p. 460 a II. Of the plagiarism of the
Greek writers, from Clement p. 461 d III. That the Greeks were plagiarists. From
Porphyry, The Lecture on Literature, Bk. i p. 464 a IV. That, not unreasonably,
we have preferred the theology of the Hebrews to the Greek philosophy p. 468 d
V. That in all things the Greeks have profited by the Barbarians p. 473 d VI. On
the same subject, from Clement p. 475 b VII. On the same subject, from Josephus
p. 477 a VIII. Diodorus, the author of the Bibliotheca, on the same subject p.
480 a IX. On the antiquity of Moses and the Hebrew Prophets p. 483 b X. From
Africanus p. 487 d XI. From Tatian p. 491 c XII. From Clement p. 496 d XIII.
From Josephus p. 500 c XIV. That the times of the Greek Philosophers are more
recent than the whole history of the Hebrews p. 502 c

CHAPTER I

WE have previously explained for what reasons we (Christians) have preferred the
philosophy of the Hebrews to that of the Greeks, and on what kind of
considerations we accepted the sacred Books current among the former people; and
then afterwards we proved that the Greeks themselves were not ignorant of that
people, but mentioned them by name, and greatly admired their mode of life, and
have given a long account both of their royal capital, and other matters of
their history. Now then let us go on to observe how they not only deemed the
record of these things worthy to be written, but also became zealous imitators
of the like teaching and instruction in some of the doctrines pertaining to the
improvement of the soul.

I shall show then almost immediately how, from various sources, one and another
of these wonderful Greeks, by going about among the Barbarians, collected the
other branches of learning, geometry, arithmetic, music, astronomy, medicine,
and the very first elements of grammar, and numberless other artistic and
profitable studies. In the previous part of my discourse I proved that they had
received from Barbarians their opinion concerning a multitude of gods, and their
mysteries and initiations, and moreover their histories, and their fabulous
stories about gods, and their physical explanations of the fables as expressed
in allegory, and the rest of their superstitious error. This, I say, was proved
at the time when we convicted the Greeks of having wandered over much of the
earth, and then set up their own. theology on all points, not indeed without
labour and care, but by contributions from the learning current among
Barbarians: and soon it shall be proved that from no other source than from
Hebrews only could they have procured the knowledge of the worship of the One
Supreme God, and of the doctrines most in request for the benefit of the soul,
which of course would also be most conclusive of their discussions on
philosophy. Or otherwise, if any one should say that they were moved to the same
conclusions by innate conceptions, even this would be in our favour, that we
preferred to be zealous followers of the doctrines delivered not only to Hebrews
from the earliest ages by prophets who spake of God, but also, if not to all,
yet to some, and those certainly the very men who were greatly renowned in
Greece, doctrines carefully examined also in the discussions of the
philosophers.

Now these men you would find to be few in number, because all excellence is
proverbially difficult to attain; but nevertheless they have been honoured with
the first place among the philosophers of Greece, so that through their great
fame they overshadow the reputation of their fellows. But you must not be
surprised if we say that possibly the doctrines of the Hebrews have been
plagiarised by them, since they are not only proved to have stolen the other
branches of learning from Egyptians and Chaldees and the rest of the barbarous
nations, but even to the present day are detected in robbing one another of the
honours gained in their own writings. At all events one after another they
surreptitiously steal the phrases of their neighbours together with the thoughts
and whole arrangement of treatises, and pride themselves as if upon their own
labours. And do not suppose that this is my statement, for you shall again hear
the very wisest of them convicting one another of theft in their writings. And
this very fact, since we have once mentioned it, we must consider as evidence
before all else of the character of the said persons. Our Clement then, in his
sixth Miscellany, has arranged the proof of this point at full length: so take
and read me his words first, such as the following:

CHAPTER II

[CLEMENT] 1 'Now after having shown, that the significance of Greek thought was
illumined on all sides from the truth bestowed on us through the Scripturess
according to the sense which we took in proving that the theft of the truth (if
it be not offensive to say so) came home to them; let us proceed to bring
forward the Greeks as witnesses of the theft against themselves.

'For they who so openly filch their own works one from another establish the
fact that they are thieves, and betray, however unwillingly, that they are
secretly appropriating to their own countrymen the truth borrowed from us. For
if they do not keep their hands off even from one another, it is not likely that
they will from our writers.

'Now of their philosophical doctrines I shall say nothing, since the very men
who have divided themselves into sects, confess in writing, in order that they
may not be convicted of ingratitude, that they have received the most important
of their doctrines from Socrates. But after employing a few testimonies of men
familiarly known and renowned among the Greeks, and exposing their style of
plagiarism, by dealing with various periods, I shall turn to the subjects next
in order.'

After these statements by way of preface, he brings forward his proofs in order,
using all kinds of evidence, and calls the poets first to account as having
stolen the thoughts from other poets, by a comparison of their respective
utterances.

Then next he adds the following:

'In order that we may not allow philosophy, nor history, nor even rhetoric to
pass free from the same charge, it is reasonable to bring forward a few passages
from them also.' 2

Then he successively compares passages of Orpheus, Heracleitus, Plato,
Pythagoras, Herodotus, Theopompus, Thucydides, Demosthenes, Aeschines, Lysias,
Isocrates, and ten thousand others, of whose sayings it is superfluous for me to
make a catalogue, as the author's work is ready at hand, in which, after the
evidences concerning the said authors, he again speaks as follows:

'Let then these specimens of Greek plagiarism in thought suffice, being such as
they are, for a clear example to one who has any power of discernment. But
further they have been detected not only in filching and paraphrasing the
thoughts and the expressions, but, as shall be shown, they have stolen the works
of others wholesale, and brought them out as their own; as Eugamon of Cyrene
stole the entire book Concerning the Thesprotians from Musaeus.' 3 Clement
having afterwards added to these very many proofs of his argument, again at the
end makes this addition:

'Life would fail me, should I attempt to go over in particular detail the proof
of the selfish plagiarism of the Greeks, and how they claim as their own the
discovery of the noblest doctrines current among them, which they have taken
from us.4

'But now they are convicted not only of stealing their doctrines from the
Barbarians, but also of copying our records of deeds so wonderfully wrought of
old by the divine power through men of holy lives for our study, and exhibiting
them in the marvellous stories of Greek mythology.

'And so we shall inquire of them whether these stories which they relate are
true or false. False they would not say; for they would not willingly convict
themselves of the great folly of recording falsehoods; but they would of
necessity confess that they are true.

'But how then do the deeds miraculously exhibited by Moses and the other
prophets any longer appear incredible to them? For the Almighty God in His care
for all men tries to convert them to salvation, some by commandments, some by
threatenings, some by miraculous signs, and some by gentle promises.

'Moreover, once when a drought was for a long time ruining Greece, and a dearth
of food prevailed, the Greeks, those of them who were left, it is said, because
of the famine came as suppliants to Delphi, and asked the Pythoness how they
might be delivered from the danger. And she answered them that there was only
one way of escape from the calamity, that they should employ the prayer of
Aeacus, So Aeacus was persuaded by them, and went up to the Hellenic Mount, and,
stretching out his pure hands to heaven, called upon God as the common Father,
and prayed Him to have pity upon Hellas in her distress.

'And while he was yet praying there was a portentous sound of thunder, and all
the surrounding air grew clouded, and violent and continuous rains burst forth
and filled the whole country. Thence an abundant and rich harvest, produced by
the husbandry of the prayers of Aeacus, is brought to perfection. 5

'"And Samuel (says the Scripture) called upon the Lord, and the Lord gave
thunder and rain in the day of harvest.6 Seest thou that there is One God, who
sendeth rain upon the just and unjust 7 by means of the powers subject to Him?
"' And the rest. To this Clement subjoined countless instances, and convicted
the Greeks of having been plagiarists by indisputable proofs. But if you do not
think him trustworthy, inasmuch as he, like us, has himself preferred the
philosophy of the Barbarians to that of Greece, well then let him be dismissed,
although he conducted his argument not in words of his own, but in those of
Greeks themselves. But what would you say. if you should learn the like facts
even from your noble philosophers themselves? Listen then to their testimonies
also.

CHAPTER III

[PORPHYRY] 8 'WHEN Longinus was entertaining us in Athens at the banquet in
memory of Plato, he had invited among many others Nicagoras the Sophist, and
Major, and Apollonius the Grammarian, and Demetrius the Geometer, and Prosenes
the Peripatetic, and Callietes the Stoic.

'With these reclined the host himself making seven, and while supper was going
on, and some question about Ephorus had arisen among the others, he said, Let us
hear what is this clamour about Ephorus? Now the disputants were Caystrius and
Maximus: for the latter was for preferring him to Theopompus, while Caystrius
called him a plagiarist.

'"For what," said he, "belongs properly to Ephorus, who transfers from the
writings of Daimachus, and Callisthenes, and Anaximenes word for word sometimes
as much as three thousand whole lines?"

'In answer to whom Apollonius the Grammarian said, "Yes, for you are not aware
that even Theopompus, whom you prefer, is infected with the same fault, as
having in the eleventh book of his History of Philip copied word for word from
the Areopagiticus of Isocrates that famous passage, "that nothing good and
nothing evil comes to men quite of itself," 9 and the rest.

'And yet he despises Isocrates, and says that his master was defeated by himself
in the contest in honour of Mausolus. Then he has committed a theft of facts, by
transferring what he found told of some men to others, that in this way he might
also be convicted of falsehood.

'For whereas Andron in The Tripod, writing of the philosopher Pythagoras, had
narrated the story of his predictions, and said that once at Metapontium having
been thirsty, and having drawn up and drunk water from a certain well, he
foretold that on the third day there would be an earthquake. And after adding
some other remarks to these, he proceeds:

'"So whereas Andron had told this story concerning Pythagoras, Theopompus
filched it all. If he had mentioned Pythagoras, perhaps others also would have
known about it, and said, The Master also said that. But now the change of the
name has made the plagiarism manifest; for he has made use of the same facts,
but substituted another name: and he has represented Pherecydes of Syros 10 as
uttering this prediction.

'And not only by this name does he try to conceal the theft, but also by a
change of localities: for the prophecy of the earthquake narrated by Andron as
spoken in Metapontium, Theopompus says was uttered in Syria. And the incident
about the ship was observed, he says, not from Megara in Sicily, but from Samos:
and the capture of Sybaris he has transferred to that of Messene.

'But in order that he might seem to say something more than common, he has also
added the name of the stranger, saying that he was called Perilaus." "I too,"
says Nicagoras, "in reading his Hellenics and Xenophon's, have detected him in
transferring many things from Xenophon; and the mischief is that he has changed
them for the worse.

'"For instance, the account of the conference of Pharnabazus with Agesilaus
through the mediation of Apollophanes of Cyzicus, and their conversations with
each other under a truce, which Xenophon in his fourth Book recorded very
gracefully and in a manner becoming to both, Theopompus has transferred into the
eleventh Book of his Hellenics, and deprived of all vigour, and movement, and
effect.

'"For while, in order to hide his theft, he strives to throw in and to display
forcible and elaborate language, he appears slow, and hesitating, and
procrastinating, and destroys the animation and vigour of Xenophon."

'After Nicagoras had thus spoken, Apollonius said, But what wonder that the vice
of plagiarism infected Theopompus and Ephorus, who were merely very dull men,
when even Menander was full of this infirmity, though in censuring him
Aristophanes the Grammarian, because of his excessive friendship for him, dealt
gently in his parallel extracts from him and from those whom he plagiarised. But
Latinus in six books, which he entitled Of Menander's Appropriations, exposed
the multitude of his plagiarisms.

'In the same way Philostratus of Alexandria began a treatise On the Plagiarism
of Sophocles. And Caecilius, thinking that he has discovered something of great
importance, says that Menander transcribed a whole drama, The Augur of
Antiphaues, from beginning to end, into The Superstitious Man.

'But since, says he, it has seemed good to you, I know not how, to bring forward
the plagiarists, I myself also inform against the charming Hyperides as having
stolen many things from Demosthenes, both in the speech Against Diondas and in
the one Concerning the bribes of Eubulus.

'And that one of them has borrowed from the other is manifest: but as they were
contemporaries it must be your task, Apollonius, says he, to track the
plagiarist from the dates. Now I suspect that the one who has stolen is
Hyperides: but as it is uncertain which it was, I admire Demosthenes, if he
borrowed from Hyperides and made appropriate corrections; but I blame Hyperides
if he borrowed from Demosthenes, and perverted it for the worse.' And soon after
he says:

'"Why need I tell you, how the Barbarian Customs of Hellanicus is a compilation
out of the works of Herodotus and Damastes? Or how Herodotus in his second Book
has transferred many passages of Hecataeus of Miletus from the Geography,
verbally with slight falsifications, as the account of the bird Phoenix, and of
the hippopotamus, and of the hunting of crocodiles?

'Or how the statements in Isaeus concerning torture, in his oration Concerning
the inheritance of Cylon, are found also in the Trapeziticus of Isocrates, and
in the oration of Demosthenes Against Onetor on an action of ejectment are
expressed almost in the same words?

'Or how Dinarchus in his first speech Against Cleomedon in an action for assault
has transferred many things word for word from the speech of Demosthenes Against
Conon for assault?

'Or how this sentiment of Hesiod's,

"Nought can man better than a good wife win, Nor find a worse bane than a
vicious shrew," 11

was borrowed by Simonides in his eleventh Book, who took it thus:

"Of all the prizes man can win, a wife If good is best, if evil far the worst."
12

'And by Euripides in Melanippe the Captive:

"For than a bad wife nought can e'er be worse, Nor aught excel a virtuous
woman's worth; But of their natures there is difference great." 13

'And whereas Euripides said:

"A race most wretched we poor women are," 14

Theodectes says in the Alcmaeon:

"Tis a true proverb in the mouths of men, Than woman nought more wretched e'er
was born." 15

This author has not only taken the suggestion from that passage, but has also
employed the very words; and he craftily preferred to give it a proverbial
character, and to employ it as a saying used by many, rather than to seem to
have taken it from its original author.

'Antimachus too steals Homer's verse, and blunders in correcting it. For Homer
having said:

"Idas was strongest born of men on earth," 16

Antimachus says:

"Idas was strongest of all men on earth." 17

And Lycophron praises the alteration on the ground that the line is thereby
strengthened.

'As to Homer's

"Τὸν δ' ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρείων Διομήδης"

I say nothing, since Homer has been ridiculed in comedy by Cratinus because of
his frequent repetition of

"Τὸν δ' ἀπαμειβόμενος"

which, though so trite, Antimachus did not hesitate to borrow.

'The line,

"The tribes he ruled with mild paternal sway," 18

is Homer's: and again in another place it is written,

"They on either side In closer ranks the deep battalions ranged." 19

But Antimachus, by transferring half-lines, has made the verse

"Of all the tribes they ruled In closer ranks the deep battalions ranged." 20

'But lest while charging others with plagiarism I should be convicted as a
plagiarist myself, I will indicate those who have treated this subject. There
are two books of Lysimachus Concerning the Plagiarism of Ephorus. Alcaeus also,
the poet of the vituperative Iambics and Epigrams, has detected and parodied the
plagiarisms of Ephorus: then there is an epistle of Pollio to Soteridas
Concerning the Plagiarism of Ctesias, and a book of the same author Concerning
the Plagiarism of Herodotus, and in the book entitled The Searchers there are
many statements concerning Theopompus, and there is a treatise of Aretades
Concerning Coincidence, from which works one may learn many examples of this
kind.' After other passages he adds: 21

'Prosenes also said, The other plagiarists you have detected: but that even this
hero Plato himself, after whom the feast which . we are celebrating to-day is
named, makes use of many works of his predecessors (for in his case I feel too
much respect to use the term "plagiarism"), this you have not proceeded to
discover.

'What say you? said Callietes. I not only say, replied Prosenes, but I also
offer the proof of my statement. Now the books of Plato's predecessors are rare:
else perhaps one might have detected more of the philosopher's plagiarisms. As
to one, however, which I myself lighted upon by chance, in reading the discourse
of Protagoras Concerning Being against those who represent "Being " as one, I
find him employing answers of the following kind; for I was careful to remember
wlfat he said in his very words.' And after this preface he sets out the proofs
at large. But I think that out of numberless examples those which have been
mentioned are sufficient to show what was the character of the Greek writers,
and that they did not spare even the exposure one of another. Yet in farther
preparation for showing the benefit which has overflowed to the Greeks from the
Hebrew Scriptures, I think it will be right and necessary for me to prove
generally that all the celebrated learning and philosophy of the Greeks, both
their elementary studies, and their grand system of logical science, have been
collected by them from Barbarians, so that none of them may any longer lay blame
upon us, because forsooth we have preferred the religion and philosophy of the
Barbarians to their grand doctrines.

CHAPTER IV

You may judge that not without sound reason have we given a secondary place to
the doctrines of the Greek philosophy, and preferred the theology of the
Hebrews, when you learn that even among the Greeks themselves those who have
most of all treated philosophy correctly, and thought out something more and
better than the vulgar talk about the gods, have discovered no other true
doctrines than those which had received a previous sanction among the Hebrews.
For some of them, being carried away hither and thither by various false
opinions, were driven about into an abyss of idle prating; while others, who
have in some degree employed candid reasoning, have shown themselves partakers
in the teaching of the Hebrews in those points wherein they attained to the
conception of the truth.

It is probable at all events that having become very learned, and having
curiously investigated both the customs and the learning of the nations, they
were not unacquainted with the philosophy of the people just mentioned, being
younger in time, so to speak, than all men, not Hebrews only, nor yet
Phoenicians and Egyptians only, but also than the ancient Greeks themselves. For
these ancients some doctrines derived from Phoenicia were arranged by Cadmus son
of Agenor; and others concerning the gods from Egypt or elsewhere, mysteries and
rites, the setting up of statues, and hymns, odes, and epodes, either by the
Thracian Orpheus, or some other Greek or Barbarian, who became their leaders in
error: for the Greeks themselves would acknowledge that they know no men more
ancient than these.

They say at least that Orpheus nourished first of all, then Linus, and
afterwards Musaeus about the time of the Trojan war, or a little before. But
certainly in their time nothing more than the theology of the Phoenicians and
Egyptians, with its manifold errors, had a home among the Greeks.

Moreover, among the other nations, in all countries and cities, these very
doctrines and others similar to them were carefully observed in sacrifices and
mysteries. At all events, the aforesaid doctrine concerning the gods largely
prevailed among all mankind: and very beautiful shrines were everywhere
furnished and adorned with all kinds of statues and offerings: moreover, images
of all kinds of material were moulded into every form of mortal animals and
tastefully finished. And further, there was among them all a manifold and
profuse abundance of oracles. Indeed a certain god especially revered and mighty
among the Greeks was at that time most nourishing, the Pythian, Clarian, and
Dodonaean god: and then Amphiaraus, and Amphi-lochus, and after these flowed on
a countless multitude of soothsayers rather than of poets and rhapsodists. But
at length, long ages after them, philosophy arrived among the Greeks, and found
among their forefathers nothing that properly belonged to herself, but
discovered that the sanctities and antiquities of the theology which had come to
them from their fathers, and even the marvellous and universally famous
divinities and oracles, were in reality superfluous and unprofitable.

Wherefore she proceeded to put these back into a secondary place, as they could
not be of any use to her for the discovery of things necessary and true: and
thenceforth, as one naked and destitute of any reasonings or learning of her
own, she went about examining the foreign and barbarous systems, and providing,
collecting, and borrowing what was useful to her from all sides, whatever she
found among the several nations. For indeed she began to discover that not only
the true theology was lacking to the Greeks, but also the most useful in daily
life of all the other arts and sciences. Indeed the Greeks themselves confess
that it was after Orpheus, Linus, and Musaeus, the most ancient of all their
theologians and the first to introduce among them the error of polytheism, that
their seven men whom they surnamed Sages were celebrated for wisdom. And these
nourished about the time of Cyrus king of Persia.

Now this was the time in which the very latest of the Hebrew prophets were
prophesying, who lived more than six hundred years after the Trojan war, and not
less than fifteen hundred years after the age of Moses: and this will be
manifest to you when presently going through the records of the chronology.

Born somewhere about this recent period the Seven Sages are remembered for a
reform of moral conduct, but nothing more is recorded of them than their
celebrated maxims. But somewhat late, and lower down in time, the philosophers
of the Greeks are reported to have flourished.

First among these Pythagoras the pupil of Pherecydes, who invented the name
'philosophy,' was a native, as some say, of Samos, but according to others of
Tyrrhenia; while some say that he was a Syrian or Tyrian, so that yon must admit
that the first of the philosophers, celebrated in the mouth of all Greeks, was
not a Greek but a Barbarian.

Pherecydes also is recorded to have been a Syrian, and Pythagoras they say was
his disciple. He is not, however, the only teacher with whom, as it is said,
Pythagoras was associated, but he spent some time also with the Persian Magi;
and became a disciple of the Egyptian prophets, at the time when some of the
Hebrews appear to have made their settlement in Egypt, and some in Babylon. In
fact the said Pythagoras, while busily studying the wisdom of each nation,
visited Babylon, and Egypt, and all Persia, being instructed by the Magi and the
priests: and in addition to these he is related to have studied under the
Brahmans (these are Indian philosophers); and from some he gathered astrology,
from others geometry, and arithmetic and music from others, and different things
from different nations, and only from the wise men of Greece did he get nothing,
wedded as they were to a poverty and dearth of wisdom: so on the contrary he
himself became the author of instruction to the Greeks in the learning which he
had procured from abroad.

Such then was Pythagoras. And first in succession from him the so-called Italian
philosophy was formed, which derived its title to the name from its abode in
Italy: after this came the Ionic school, so called from Thales, one of the seven
Sages: and then the Eleatic, which claimed as its founder Xenophanes of
Colophon. '

Even Thales, however, as some relate, was a Phoenician, but as others have
supposed, a Milesian: and he too is said to have conferred with the prophets of
the Egyptians.

Solon also who was himself one of the Seven Sages, and is said to have
legislated for the Athenians, is stated by Plato to have resorted in like manner
to the Egyptians, at the time when Hebrews were again dwelling in Egypt. At
least he introduces him in the Timaeus as receiving instruction from the
Barbarian, in the passage where the Egyptian says to him, 'O Solon, Solon, you
Greeks are always children, and there is not one old man among the Greeks, ....
nor is there among you any learning grown hoary with time.' 22 This same Plato,
too, after having attended the teaching of the Pythagoreans in Italy, was not
contented with his studying with them only, but is said to have sailed to Egypt
and devoted a very long time to their philosophy. This testimony indeed he
himself bears to the Barbarians in many passages of his own discourses, and
therein, I think, does well, and candidly confesses that the noblest doctrines
are imported into philosophy from the Barbarians. Accordingly in many places,
and especially in the Epinomis, you may hear him mentioning both Syrians and
Egyptians in the following manner:

[PLATO] 23 'The cause of this is that he who first observed these phenomena was
a Barbarian: for it was a very ancient region which bred those who first took
notice of these things because of the beauty of the summer season, which both
Egypt and Syria fully enjoy. . . . Whence the knowledge has reached to all
countries, including our own, after having been tested by thousands of years and
time without end.' And lower down he next adds:

'Let us take it then that, whatever Greeks may have received from Barbarians,
they work out and finish it with greater beauty.' 24 So says Plato. But
Democritus also, still earlier, is said to have appropriated the ethical
doctrines of the Babylonians. And somewhere, boasting about himself, he says:

[DEMOCRITUS] 25 'But of the men of my time I have wandered over the most land,
investigating the most distant parts, and have seen the most climates and soils,
and listened to the greatest number of learned men, nor did any one ever yet
surpass me in the construction of lines accompanied by demonstration, nor yet
those Egyptians who are called Arpedonaptae, for all which purposes I passed as
much as five years in foreign lands.' For this man also visited Babylon, and
Persia, and Egypt, and was a disciple of the Egyptians and their priests.

What if I were to count up to you Heracleitus and all the other Greeks, by whom
civil life among the Greeks is proved to have been left for long ages very poor,
and devoid of all learning.

It was embellished indeed with temples of the gods, and images and statues, and
prophecies and oracles, and the manifold pomp of the fraudulent daemons, but of
true wisdom and of useful science it was utterly destitute. Nor did their
useless oracles contribute aught to the discovery of good counsels: but even
their wonderful Pythian god did not help them at all in philosophy, nor did any
other deity assist them in the pursuit of any needful good. But wandering hither
and thither, and running about all their life they bedecked themselves,
according to the fable, with borrowed plumes; so that now their whole philosophy
consisted of what they begged. For by copying different sciences from different
nations, they got geometry from the Egyptians, and astrology from the Chaldeans,
and other things again from other countries; but nothing among any other nations
like the benefit which some of them found from the Hebrews. For this was the
knowledge of the God of the universe, and the condemnation of their own gods,
which our argument as it proceeds a little farther will prove. But thus much at
present it indicates to the readers, that the ancient Greeks were destitute not
only of true theology, but also of the sciences which are profitable to
philosophy; and not of these only, but also of the common habits of civil life.
And I believe that this indication will assist me in the demonstration of the
object which I have proposed; inasmuch as my proposal is to uphold the plea,
that we have not unreasonably preferred the theology of the Hebrews, and that of
the Barbarians, as they would call it, to the philosophy of the Greeks.

If then it should be seen they have themselves gathered it all long before from
Barbarians, and have received from their own gods no help at all in philosophy,
but have even found fault justly with their gods; and if some of them for these
reasons have preferred atheism to the worship of the gods, then what right have
they any more to find fault with us, instead of welcoming and commending us,
because from having loved the better part, or rather from having found and
recovered that which alone is true, we have withdrawn from the falsehood,
without either turning round like the wise men of the Greeks to atheistic
reasoning, or on the other hand mixing up the error of polytheism with the
knowledge of the Supreme God, in a similar way to their admirable philosophers,
nor yet have confused the falsehood with the truth?

Let us not, however, discuss these points yet, but first let me ask you to
consider those proofs by which, the Greeks are convicted of having stolen
everything from Barbarians, not only their philosophical science, but also the
common inventions which are useful in daily life.

CHAPTER V

FIRST therefore he who introduced to the Greeks the common letters, even the
very first elements of grammar, namely Cadmus, was a Phoenician by birth, from
which circumstance some of the ancients have surnamed the alphabet Phoenician.
But some say that the Syrians were the first who devised letters. Now these
Syrians would be Hebrews who inhabited the neighbouring country to Phoenicia,
which was itself called Phoenicia in old times, but afterwards Judaea, and in
our time, Palestine. And it is evident that the sound of the Greek letters is
very closely connected with these. For example, each letter among the Hebrews
has its name from some significant idea, a circumstance which it is not possible
to trace among the Greeks: on which account especially it is admitted that the
letters are not originally Greek.

Now the Hebrews have in all twenty-two letters: of which the first is 'Alph,'
which translated into the Greek language would mean 'learning': and the second
'Beth,' which is interpreted 'of a house': the third is 'Gimel,' which is
'fullness': the fourth 'Delth,' which signifies 'of tablets': the fifth 'He,'
which is 'this.' And all these together make up a meaning of this kind,
'Learning of a house, fullness of tablets this.'

Then after these is a sixth letter called among them 'Wau,' which is 'in it':
then 'Zai',' which is 'liveth': after which comes 'Heth,' which is 'the living':
that the whole may be 'in it liveth the living.'

After these a ninth letter, 'Teth,' which is 'good': then 'Yoth,' which is
interpreted 'beginning'; the two together, 'good beginning.' After these
'Chaph,' which is 'nevertheless': then 'Labd,' which is 'learn': the whole being
'nevertheless learn.'

'After these is a thirteenth letter 'Mem,' which is 'from them': then 'Nun,'
which is 'eternal.' Then 'Samch,' which is interpreted 'help': that the meaning
may be, 'from them eternal help.'

After these is 'Am,' which being translated signifies 'fountain,' or 'eye': then
'Phe,' 'mouth.' Then next 'Sade,' 'righteousness': of which the meaning is
'fountain (or 'eye') and mouth of righteousness.'

After these is a letter 'Koph,' which is interpreted 'calling': then 'Res,'
which is 'head': and after these 'Sen,' which is 'teeth': last of all the
twenty-second letter is called with them 'Thau,' which means 'signs.' And the
sense would be, 'calling of the head, and signs of the teeth.'

Among the Hebrews such is the paraphrase and interpretation of the letters,
making up a meaning in words appropriate to the learning and promise of the
letters. But the like you cannot find among the Greeks, whence, as I said, it
must be acknowledged that they do not belong originally to the Greeks, but have
been imitated directly from the language of the Barbarians. This is also proved
from the very name of each letter. For in what does 'Alpha' differ from 'Alph'?
Or 'Beta' from 'Beth'? Or 'Gamma' from 'Gimel'? Or: Delta' from 'Delth'? Or
'Epsilon' from 'He'? Or 'Zeta' from 'Zai'? Or 'Theta' from 'Teth'? And all the
like cases. So that it is indisputable that these names belong not originally to
the Greeks: therefore they belong to the Hebrews, among whom each of them shows
some signification. And having originated with them the letters passed on to
other nations, and so to the Greeks. About the letters of the alphabet I have
said enough: but you must hear also what Clement says in dealing with the
subject before us.

CHAPTER VI

[CLEMENT] 26 'THE healing art is said to have been invented by Apis the Egyptian
. . . and afterwards improved by Aesculapius. Atlas the Libyan was the first who
built a ship, and sailed the sea. . . .

'Astrology also was first made known among men by the Egyptians and Chaldeans. .
. . Some, however, say that prognostication by the stars was devised by the
Carians. The Phrygians were the first to observe the flights of birds.

'The inspection of sacrificial victims was accurately practised by the Tuscans
who border on Italy. The Isaurians and Arabians perfected augury, and the
Telmessians, doubtless, divination by dreams.

'The Tyrrhenians invented the trumpet, and Phrygians the flute; for both Olympus
and Marsyas were Phrygians. . . . The Egyptians again first taught men to burn
lamps, and divided the year into twelve months, and forbade intercourse with
women in temples, and enacted that none should enter temples after intercourse
without bathing.

'The same people again were the inventors of geometry. . . . Kelmis and
Damnameneus, the Idaean Dactyls, first discovered iron in Cyprus. And the
tempering of bronze was invented by Delas, another Idaean, or, as Hesiod says, a
Scythian. 'Certainly Thracians were the first who invented the so-called
scimitar, which is a curved sword, and they first used targes on horseback: in
like manner the. Illyrians invented the so-called targe (πέλτη). Further they
say that the Tuscans invented the art of moulding clay: and Itanus, who was a
Samnite, fashioned the long shield.

'Cadmus the Phoenician invented stone-cutting, and discovered the gold mines
near Mount Pangaeus. Moreover another nation, the Cappadocians, first invented
the so-called "nabla," as the Assyrians the lyre of two strings.

'The Carthaginians were the first to fit out a quadrireme, and it was built off
hand by Bosporus. Medea of Colchis, the daughter of Aeetes, first devised the
dyeing of the hair.

'The Noropes (a Paeonian tribe, now called Noricum) worked copper, and were the
first to refine iron. Amyous, the king of the Bebryces, invented boxing-thongs.

'With regard to music, Olympus the Mysian was fond of practising the Lydian
harmony: and the so-called Troglodytes invented a musical instrument, the
sambuca.

'They say also that the slanting pipe was invented by Satyrus the Phrygian, and
in like manner the trichord, and the diatonic harmony by Hyagnis who also was a
Phrygian: notes likewise by Olympus the Phrygian; as the Phrygian harmony and
the Mixo-Phrygian, and the Mixo-Lydian by Marsyas, fellow countrymen of those
just named: and the Dorian was invented by Thamyris the Thracian.

'We have heard too that the Persians were the first who made a carriage, and
couch, and footstool, and that the Sidonians first built a trireme. The
Sicilians who are close to Italy were the first to invent a lyre, not far
inferior to the harp, and devised castanets.

'Robes of fine linen are said to have been invented in the time of Semiramis,
queen of the Assyrians: and Atossa who reigned over the Persians is said by
Hellanicus to have been the first to use folded letters.

'These things then were related by Scamon of Mitylene, and Theophrastus of
Ephesus, and Cydippus of Mantinea, also by Antiphanes, and Aristodemus, and
Aristotle, and besides these by Philostephanus, and Straton the Peripatetic in
the books Concerning Inventions. And I have quoted a few of them in confirmation
of the inventive and practical genius of Barbarians, from whom the Greeks have
received the benefit of their institutions.'

These things Clement states in these very words in the Miscellanies. And to what
has now been mentioned I think it well to append also the extracts from the
writing of Josephus the Hebrew, which he composed in two books, Of the Antiquity
of the Jews, on the point that the Greeks are a young nation, and have received
help from the Barbarians, and have dissented from each other in their writings.
This too will contribute to the accurate and sure confirmation of my statements.
Hear therefore what he also writes, word for word.

CHAPTER VII

[JOSEPHUS] 27 'MY first thought then is of utter astonishment at those who think
it right to attend to none but Greeks concerning the most ancient facts, and to
seek to learn the truth from them, but to disbelieve us and the rest of mankind.

'For I see that the very opposite is the case, if at least we are not to follow
vain opinions, but draw the just conclusion from the facts themselves. For you
will find all things among the Greeks to be recent, having come into existence,
as one might say, yesterday or the day before; I mean the foundation of their
cities, and their invention of the arts, and the registration of their laws: and
the writing of their histories is almost the latest object of their attention.

'Doubtless, however, they themselves admit that the most ancient and most
constant traditional record is that of the events which have occurred among the
Egyptians, and Chaldeans, and Phoenicians (for at present I omit to include
ourselves with these).

'For they all inhabit regions which are least subject to destruction from the
surrounding atmosphere, and have taken much care to leave none of the facts of
their history unrecorded, but to have all continually enshrined by their wisest
men in public registers.

'But the region about Greece has been invaded by thousands of destructive
plagues, which blotted out the memory of past events: and as they were always
setting up new modes of life, they each of them supposed that their own was the
beginning of all.

'Tardily and painfully they learned the nature of letters. Those at least who
assign the greatest antiquity to their use of them boast of having learned it
from the Phoenicians and Cadmus.

'Nevertheless no one could show any record that is preserved even from that time
either in temples or on public monuments: seeing that there has been great doubt
and inquiry, whether even those who so many years later went on the expedition
to Troy, made use of writing; and the true opinion is rather that they were
ignorant of the use now made of written letters.

'In short, there is no undisputed writing found among the Greeks older than
Homer's poetry: and he was evidently later than the Trojan war. They say too
that even he did not leave his poetry in writing, but that it was transmitted by
memory and afterwards put together from the songs, and that this is the cause of
its many discrepancies.

'Those, however, among them who undertook to write histories ----I mean Cadmus of Miletus and Acusilaus of Argos, and any others who are said to have come after him----lived but a short time before the expedition of the Persians against Greece.

'Moreover all with one voice acknowledge, that the first among the Greeks who
philosophized about things celestial and divine, as Pherecydes the Syrian, and
Pythagoras, and Thales, got their learning from Egyptians and Chaldeans, and
wrote but little: and these writings are thought by the Greeks to be the oldest
of all, and they do not quite believe that they were written by those authors.

'Is it not then necessarily unreasonable for the Greeks to have been puffed up,
as though they alone understood the events of early times, and handed down the
truth concerning them correctly? Or who could not easily learn from the same
historians, that they had no certain knowledge of anything which they wrote, but
gave each their own conjectures about the facts?

'Accordingly in their books they frequently refute one another, and do not
hesitate to make the most contrary statements concerning the same events. But it
would be superfluous labour for me to teach those who know better than myself on
how many points Hellanicus has dissented from Acusilaus in regard to the
genealogies, and how often Acusilaus sets Hesiod right; or in what fashion
Ephorus exposes Hellanicus as making very many false statements, and Ephorus is
exposed by Timaeus, and Timaeus by those who came after him, and Herodotus by
them all.

'Nor did Timaeus deign to agree with Antiochus and Philistus or Callias about
Sicilian history, nor again have the authors of Athenian histories followed each
other's statements about the affairs of Attica, nor the historians of Argos
about the affairs of Argolis.

'And why need I speak about the smaller affairs of the several states, seeing
that the most celebrated authors have disagreed about the Persian invasion and
the events which happened therein? And on many points even Thucydides is accused
by some of falsehood, although he is thought to write the history of his own
time with the greatest accuracy.

'Now of dissension such as this many other causes might perhaps be brought to
light by those who wish to seek for them; but I myself attach the greatest
importance to two causes which shall now be set forth.

'And I will mention first that which seems to me to be the more decisive. For the fact that from the beginning there was no zealous care among the Greeks to have public records kept of contemporary events----this most of all was the cause of error, and gave impunity for falsehood to those who afterwards wished to write about ancient history.

'For not only among the other Greeks was the care of the records neglected, but
even among the Athenians themselves, who are said to be aborigines and studious
of culture, nothing of this kind is found to have been done: but the oldest of
their public records they say are the laws about murder written for them by
Draco, a man born a little before the tyranny of Peisistratos.

'What need is there to speak of the Arcadians, who boast of antiquity? For they
even at a later period were scarcely instructed in the use of letters.

'Inasmuch therefore as no record had been published, which would have taught
those who wished to learn, and convicted those who were guilty of falsehood,
there ensued the great disagreement of the historians among themselves.

'But besides this there is that other second cause to be assigned. For those who set themselves to write made no serious study of the truth----although they have always this profession ready at hand----but tried to display their power of language; and adapted themselves to any style in which they thought to surpass the rest in reputation on this point; and some of them turned to writing mythical tales, and some, to gain favour, took to eulogizing cities or kings; while others had recourse to censuring men's actions or those who had described them, thinking that they should gain reputation herein.

'In short they are constantly doing what is of all things the most contrary to
history. For it is a test of true history, whether all spake and wrote the same
accounts of the same events; but these men imagined that if they wrote different
accounts from others, they should thus appear to:be themselves;most truthful of
all.' So much, says Josephus. And these statements may be confirmed by the
testimony of Diodorus, which I shall quote from the first Book of the
Bibliotheca compiled by him, and which is word for word as follows:

CHAPTER VIII

[DIODORUS] 28 'AFTER having thoroughly explained these points, I must state how
many of those who have been famed among the Greeks for intelligence and culture
made a voyage to Egypt in ancient times, in order that they might gain some
knowledge of its customs and culture.

'For the priests of the Egyptians report from the records in their sacred books
that they were visited by Orpheus, and Musaeus, and Melampus, and Daedalus, and
besides these by the poet Homer, and Lycurgus the Spartan; also by Solon the
Athenian, and Plato the philosopher; and that there came also Pythagoras of
Samos, and Eudoxus the mathematician, Democritus of Abdera also, and Oenopides
of Chios.

'And as evidences of all these they point to the images of some, and the names
of places or buildings called after others. Also from the branch of learning
studied by each the priests bring proofs of the fact that they had brought over
from Egypt everything whereby they gained admiration among the Greeks.

'Thus Orpheus, they say, brought away from the Egyptians most of the mystic
rites, and the orgiastic celebration of his own wandering, and the fable
concerning those in Hades. For the rite of Osiris is the same as that of
Dionysus: and that of Isis is very similar to that of Demeter, with only the
change of names. And the punishments of the ungodly in Hades, and the meadows of
the godly, and the making of moulded images (of the shades) common among the
multitude he is said to have introduced in imitation of the Egyptian customs in
regard to burial.

'For Hermes the conductor of souls, according to the ancient custom among the
Egyptians, having brought up the body Of Apis to a certain place gives it over
to him who wears the face of Cerberus. And after Orpheus had made this known
among the Greeks, Homer, it is said, following him wrote in his poem:

''Cyllenian Hermes waved his golden wand, And summoned forth the souls of heroes
slain."' 29

Then again farther on he adds: 30

'They say that Melampus brought from Egypt the customary rites performed in
honour of Dionysus among the Greeks, and the mythological tales concerning
Kronos, and those concerning the war of the Titans, and the entire history of
the sufferings of the gods.

'Daedalus, it is said, imitated the winding of the labyrinth which remains up to
the present time, but was built, as some say, by Mendes, or, as others say, by
king Marus many years before the reign of Minos: the proportion too of the
ancient statues in Egypt is said to be the same with that of the statues made by
Daedalus in Greece.

'Daedalus was also said to have been the architect of the very beautiful
vestibule of Hephaestus in Memphis, for which he was admired, and received a
wooden statue in the said temple, wrought by his own hands. And at last being
held in great honour for his genius, and having made many more discoveries, he
received divine honours. For in one of the islands near Memphis there is still a
temple of Daedalus venerated by the inhabitants.

'Of Homer's visit to Egypt they bring forward among other proofs especially the
drugging of Telemachus by Helen in the house of Menelaus, and his oblivion of
the evils that had befallen him.31 For it is evident that the poet had carefully
examined the soothing drug which he says that Helen had obtained from Egypt,
from Polydamna the wife of Thon.

'Even at the present time they still say that the women in this country use the
same medicine, and they assert that a remedy for anger and sorrow has been
discovered from ancient times among the women of Diospolis only: and that Thebes
and Diospolis are the same city: also that among the inhabitants Aphrodite is
called the "golden" from an ancient tradition, and that near the city named
Momemphis there is a so-called "plain of golden Aphrodite."

'Also the mythical tales concerning Zeus and Hera and their intercourse, and
their travelling to Ethiopia, Homer is said to have brought thence. For among
the Egyptians, year by year, the shrine of Zeus is carried across the river into
Libya, and after some days it returns again, as if the god were come from
Ethiopia: and that the intercourse of these deities takes place when at their
festivals both their shrines are carried up into a mountain crowned with all
kinds of flowers by the priests.

'They say that Lycurgus also, and Plato, and Solon, inserted many of the customs
of Egypt in, their codes of law, and that Pythagoras learned from the Egyptians
the doctrines of the Sacred Word, and the theories of geometry, and the science
of numbers, and besides these the migration of the soul into every kind of
animal.

'They suppose also that Democritus spent five years among them, and was taught
many of the principles of astrology; and that Oenopides in like manner lived
with the priests and astrologers and learned, among other things, that the sun's
orbit has an oblique path, and that he is carried in the opposite direction to
the other heavenly bodies.

'In like manner also it is said that Eudoxus studied astrology with them, and
published much useful information to the Greeks, whereby he acquired a notable
reputation.

'And of; all the ancient statuaries those whose names are most widely known had
sojourned with them, Telecles and Theodorus the sons of Rhoecus, who had -made
the statue of the Pythian Apollo for the Samians.'

Thus far Diodorus. But here I must let this argument, with such proof as has
been given, come to an end. Henceforth then we ought not to be charged with
unreasonableness, if in our desire for the true religion we have ourselves
resorted to the teachers of the wise Greeks and even of their philosophers, I
mean the Barbarians, if at least the Hebrews, are Barbarians.

Now it would be well to examine their chronology, I mean the dates at which
Moses and the prophets after him nourished: since this would be one of the most
conclusive evidences for the argument before us, that before dealing with the
learned men among the people we should first decide about their antiquity; in
order that, if the Greeks should be found to hold the same doctrines with the
prophets and theologians of the Hebrews, you may no longer be in doubt who were
likely to have borrowed from the others; whether the elder from the younger,
Hebrews from Greeks, and Barbarians from philosophers, whose language even they
were not likely to understand; or, what is more likely, that the younger
borrowed from, the elder, and that those Greeks who had most busily studied the
history of the various nations were not unacquainted with the writings of the
Hebrews, which had been long before translated into the Greek language.

CHAPTER IX WITH regard to Moses and the antiquity of the prophets who came after
him, very many others have carefully laid down the evidence in their own
writings, from which I shall presently make some few quotations. But I myself
shall take a more novel course than the said authors, and shall adopt the
following method. As there is an acknowledged agreement between the times of the
Roman emperor Augustus and the birth of our Saviour, and as Christ began to
teach the gospel in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, any one who may
choose to count up the number of the years from this point proceeding to the
earlier times, until Darius king of the Persians, and the restoration in his
time of the temple in Jerusalem, which took place after the return of the Jewish
nation from Babylon, will find that from Tiberius to the second year of Darius
there are five hundred and forty-eight years. For the second year of Darius
coincides with the first year of the sixty-fifth Olympiad: and the fifteenth of
the reign of Tiberius at Rome falls in with the fourth year of the two hundred
and first Olympiad, The Olympiads therefore between Darius the Persian and
Tiberius the Roman emperor are a hundred and thirty-seven, which make up a
period of five hundred and forty-eight years, four years being counted to the
Olympiad. But since the seventieth year of the desolation of the temple in
Jerusalem was in the second year of Darius, as the records of Hebrew history
show, if we run back from this point again, from the second year of Darius to
the first Olympiad there would be made up two hundred and fifty-six years,
sixty-four Olympiads: and the same you would find to be the number of years from
the last year of the desolation of the said temple going back to the fiftieth
year of Uzziah king of Judah, in whose time prophesied Isaiah and Hosea, and all
who were contemporary with them. So that the first Olympiad of the Greeks falls
in with the time of the prophet Isaiah and his contemporaries.

Again, going back from the first Olympiad to the previous times as far as the
capture of Troy, you will find a sum of four hundred and eight years, as
contained in the chronological records of the Greeks. And according to the
Hebrews, from the fiftieth year of Uzziah king of Judah going back to the third
year of Labdon as judge of Israel, you will make up the same number of years,
four hundred and eight; so that the capture of Troy was in the times of Labdon
the judge, seven years before Samson ruled over the Hebrews, who is said to have
been irresistible in strength of body, like the famous Hercules among the
Greeks.

If from this point also you go back to the earlier generations, and count up to
yourself four hundred years, you will find among the Hebrews Moses, and among
the Greeks Cecrops the earthborn.

Now the history of the events so celebrated among the Greeks is later than the
times of Cecrops. For after Cecrops comes the deluge in the time of Deucalion,
and the conflagration in the time of Phaethon, and the birth of Erichthonius,
and the rape of Persephone, and the mysteries of Demeter, the establishment of
the Eleusinian mysteries, the husbandry of Triptolemus, the abduction of Europa
by Zeus, the birth of Apollo, the arrival of Cadmus at Thebes, and, still later
than these, Dionysus, Minos, Perseus, Asclepius, the Dioscuri, and Hercules.

Now Moses is proved to have been older than all these, as having been in the
prime of life at the time of Cecrops. And going back again from Moses to the
first year of the life of Abraham, you will find five hundred and five years.
And counting up as many for the earlier time from the aforesaid year of the
reign of Cecrops, you will come to Ninus the Assyrian, who is said to have been
the first ruler of all Asia except India: after him was named the city Ninus,
which among the Hebrews is called Nineve; and in his time Zoroastres the Magian
reigned over the Bactrians. And the wife of Ninus and his successor in the
kingdom was Semiramis; so Abraham was contemporary with these.

Now in the Canons of Chronology composed by us these events were proved to
demonstration to be as I have said. But on the present occasion in addition to
what has been stated I shall adduce as witness of the antiquity of Moses the
very bitterest and fiercest enemy both of the Hebrews and of us Christians, I
mean that philosopher of our time, who having in his excessive hatred published
his compilation against us, subjected not us only, but also the Hebrews and
Moses himself and the prophets after him, to the like slanders. For I believe
that I shall thus confirm my promise beyond controversy by the confession of our
enemies.

Well then in the fourth Book of his compilation against us Porphyry writes what
follows, word for word:

[PORPHYRY] 32 'The truest history of the Jews, as being that which most
perfectly accords with their localities and names, is that of Sanchuniathon of
Berytus, who received their records from Hierombalus the priest of the God Jevo;
he dedicated his history to Abelbalus king of Berytus, and was approved by him
and by his examiners of truth. Now the times of these men fall before the date
of the Trojan war, and approach closely to that of Moses, as is shown by the
successions of the kings of Phoenicia. And Sanchuniathon, who with careful
regard to truth made a collection of all ancient history from the records of
each city and the registers of the temples, and wrote it in the language of the
Phoenicians, lived in the time of Semiramis queen of Assyria.' So says Porphyry.
We must then calculate the proposed dates as follows. If Sanchuniathon lived in
the time of Semiramis, and she is acknowledged to have been, long before the
Trojan war, Sanchuniathon also must be older than the Trojan war. But he is said
to have received the records from others older in time than himself: and they
being themselves older than he are said to have approached closely to the times
of Moses, though not even themselves contemporary with Moses, but approaching
closely to his times: so that Sanchuniathon was as much younger than Moses, as
he was later than his own predecessors who were acknowledged to approach near to
Moses.

It is difficult, however, to say by how many years Moses probably preceded those
of whom I speak: for which reason I think it well to pass over this point. But
granting that Moses lived in the very time of this Sanchuniathon, and no
earlier, I shall follow up the proof in this way.

If Sanchuniathon was becoming well known in the time of Semiramis queen of
Assyria, even granted that Moses was no earlier, but nourished in his time, then
he too would be contemporary with Semiramis, But whereas our calculation went to
show that Abraham was in her time, our philosopher's calculation proves that
even Moses was older. Now Semiramis is shown to have been full eight hundred
years before the Trojan war. Therefore Moses also will be as many years earlier
than the Trojan war according to the philosopher.

Now the first king of Argos is Inachus, the Athenians at that time having as yet
no city and no name. But the first ruler of the Argives is contemporary with the
fifth king of Assyria after Semiramis, a hundred and fifty years after her and
Moses, in which time nothing remarkable is recorded to have happened among the
Greeks. But at this period of time the Judges were ruling among the Hebrews.

Then again more than three hundred years later, when more than four hundred were
now completed from the time of Semiramis, the first king of the Athenians is
Cecrops their celebrated Autochthon when Triopas was ruler of Argos, who was
seventh from Inachus the first Argive king. And in the interval between these
the flood in the time of Ogyges is recorded, and Apis was the first to be called
a god in Egypt, and Io the daughter of Inachus, who is worshipped by the.
Egyptians under the altered name of Isis, became known, as also Prometheus and
Atlas. From Cecrops to the capture of Troy are reckoned little short of other
four hundred years, in which fall the marvellous tales of Greek mythology, the
flood in the time of Deucalion, and the conflagration in the time of Phaethon,
there having been, probably, many catastrophes on the earth in various places.

Now Cecrops is said to have been the first to call God Zeus, He not having been
previously so named among men: and next to have been the first to found an altar
at Athens, and again the first to set up an image of Athena, as even these
things were not existing of old.

After his time come the genealogies of all the gods among the Greeks. But among
the Hebrews at this time the descendants of David were reigning, and the
prophets who succeeded Moses were flourishing: so that according to the
published testimony of the philosopher there are more than eight hundred years
reckoned in all from Moses to the capture of Troy. But far more recent still
than the Trojan war are the traditional times of Homer and Hesiod and the rest.
And after these, only yesterday as it were, about the fiftieth Olympiad,
Pythagoras and Democritus and the subsequent philosophers gained a name,
somewhere about five hundred years after the Trojan war.

Moses therefore and the Hebrew prophets who succeeded him are proved to be
fifteen hundred years earlier than the philosophers of the Greeks, according to
the confession of the aforesaid author.

Such, then is in brief my statement. But it is time to examine also the
arguments upon the same subject of those who have preceded me. There have been
then among us men of learning, second to none of the cultivated class, who have
also devoted themselves with no little care to sacred literature, and who, after
an accurate examination of the present subject, defended the antiquity of the
Hebrews by the use of a rich and varied arrangement of proof. For some of them
computed the times from certain well acknowledged histories, and others
confirmed their testimony by quotations of an earlier date. And some made use of
Greek authors, and others of those who had recorded the history of the
Phoenicians and of the Chaldeans and Egyptians. But all of them together, having
collected the Greek and the Barbarian records and those of the Hebrews
themselves, and having set all their histories side by side, and, as it were,
shaken them together one against the other, have made a combined examination of
the things done about the same periods in all those nations.

Then, after each had made his arrangement of the events to be proved by methods
of his own, they brought forward their proof with common consent and agreement.
And for this reason especially I thought it right to give place in the present
discussion to their own words, in order that the authors of the arguments might
not be deprived of their due rewards, and at the same time the maintenance of
the truth might receive indisputable confirmation not by one witness but by
many.

CHAPTER X

[AFRICANUS] 33 'UNTIL the beginning of the Olympiads no accurate history has
been written by the Greeks, the earlier accounts being all confused and in no
point agreeing among themselves: but the Olympiads have been accurately recorded
by many, because the Greeks compared the registers of them at no long interval
of time, but every four years.

'For which, reason I shall collect and briefly run over the most celebrated of
the mythical histories down to the first Olympiad: but of the later any which
are remarkable I shall combine together in chronological order each to each, the
Hebrew with the Greek, carefully examining the Hebrew and touching upon the
Greek, and shall fit them together in the following manner. By seizing upon one
action in Hebrew history contemporary with an action narrated by Greeks, and
adhering to it, while either deducting or adding, and indicating what Greek or
Persian or any one else synchronized with the Hebrew action, I shall perhaps
succeed in my aim.

'Now a most remarkable event is the migration of the Hebrews, when carried
captive by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, which continued seventy years,
according to the prophecy of Jeremiah. Now Nebuchadnezzar is mentioned by
Berossus the Babylonian.

'After the seventy years of the Captivity Cyrus became king of Persia, in the
year in which the fifty-fifth Olympic festival was held, as one may learn from
the Bibliotheca of Diodorus, and the histories of Thallus and Castor, also from
Polybius and Phlegon, and from others too who were careful about Olympiads: for
the time agreed in all of them.

'So then Cyrus in the first year of his reign, which was the first year of the
fifty-fifth Olympiad, made the first partial dismissal of the people by the hand
of Zerubbabel, contemporary with whom was Jesus the son of Josedek, after the
completion of the seventy years, as is related in the Book of Ezra among the
Hebrews. 34

'The narratives therefore of the reign of Cyrus and of the end of the Captivity
synchronize: and the calculations according to the Olympiads will thus be found
to agree down to our time; for by following them we shall fit the other
histories also one to another according to the same principle.

'And the Athenian chronology computes the earlier events in the following way;
from Ogyges, who was believed among them to be an aboriginal, in whose time that
great and first flood occurred in Attica, when Phoroneus was king of Argos, as
Acusilaus relates, down to the first Olympiad from which the Greeks considered
that they calculated their dates correctly, a thousand and twenty years are
computed, which agrees with what has been stated before, and will be shown to
agree also with what comes after.

'For both the historians of Athens, Hellanicus and Philochorus who wrote The
Attic Histories, and the writers on Syrian history, Castor and Thallus, and the
writer on universal history, Diodorus the author of the Bibliotheca, and
Alexander Polyhistor, and some of our own historians recorded these events more
accurately even than all the Attic writers. If therefore any remarkable
narrative occurs in the thousand and twenty years, it shall be extracted as may
be expedient.' And soon after he proceeds: 35

'We assert therefore on the authority of this work that Ogyges, who has given
his name to the first deluge, as having been saved when many perished, lived at
the time of the Exodus from Egypt of the people with Moses, proving it in. the
following way.

'From Ogyges to the first Olympiad aforesaid there will be shown to be a
thousand and twenty years: and from the first Olympiad to the first year of the
fifty-fifth, that is the first year of the reign of Cyrus, which was the end of
the Captivity, two hundred and seventeen years. From Ogyges therefore to Cyrus
there were one thousand two hundred and thirty-seven years. And if any one would
carry back a calculation of one thousand two hundred and thirty-seven years from
the end of the Captivity, there is found by analysis the same distance to the
first year of the Exodus of Israel from Egypt by the hand of Moses, as from the
fifty-fifth Olympiad to Ogyges who founded Eleusis. Which is the more notable
point to take as the commencement of the Athenian chronology.' Again after an
interval: 36

'So much for events prior to Ogygea. Now about his times Moses came out of
Egypt: and that there is no reason to disbelieve that these events occurred at
that time, we show in the following manner.

'From the Exodus of Moses to Cyrus, who reigned after the Captivity, there were
one thousand two hundred and thirty-seven years. For the remaining years of
Moses' life were forty: of Joshua, who became the leader after him, twenty-five
years: of the elders who were judges after him, thirty years; and of those
included in the Book of Judges, four hundred and ninety years. Of the priests
Eli and Samuel, ninety years. Of the kings of the Hebrews, who came next, four
hundred and ninety years: and seventy of the Captivity, the last year of which
was, as we have said before, the first year of the reign of Cyrus.

'From Moses to the first Olympiad there were one thousand and twenty years,
since there were one thousand two hundred and thirty-seven years to the first
year of the fifty-fifth Olympiad: and the time in the Greek chronology agreed
with this.

'But after Ogyges, on account of the great destruction caused by the flood, what
is now called Attica remained without a king one hundred and eighty-nine years
until the time of Cecrops. For Philochorus asserts that that Actaeon who comes
after Ogyges, and the fictitious names, never even existed.' And again: 37

'From Ogyges therefore to Cyrus there were as many years as from Moses to the
same date, namely one thousand two hundred and thirty-seven. And some of the
Greeks also relate that Moses lived about those same times; as Polemon in the
first book of his Hellenic histories says, that "in the time of Apis son of
Phoroneus a part of the Egyptian army was expelled from Egypt, who took up their
abode not far from Arabia in the part of Syria called Palestine," being
evidently those who went with Moses.

'And Apion the son of Poseidonius, the most inquisitive of grammarians, in his
book Against the Jews, and in the fourth Book of his Histories, says that in the
time of Inachus king of Argos, when Amosis was reigning in Egypt, the Jews
revolted, with Moses as their leader.

'Herodotus also has made mention of this revolt and of Amosis in his second
Book;38 and, in a certain way, of the Jews themselves, enumerating them among
those who practise circumcision,39 and calling them the Assyrians in Palestine,
perhaps on account of Abraham.

'And Ptolemaeus of Mendes, in writing the history of the Egyptians from the
beginning, agrees with all these, so that the variation of the dates is not
noticeable to any great extent.40

'But it is to be observed that whatever especial event is mentioned in the
mythology of the Greeks because of its antiquity, is found to be later than
Moses, their floods, and conflagrations, their Prometheus, Io, Europa, Sparti,
Rape of Persephone, Mysteries, Legislations, exploits of Dionysus, Perseus,
labours of Hercules, Argonauts, Centaurs, Minotaur, tale of Troy, return of the
Heracleidae, migration of Ionians, and Olympic Festivals.

'It seemed good then to me, when about to compare the Hellenic histories with
the Hebrew, to explain the aforesaid date of the monarchy in Athens: for it will
be open to any one who will, by taking his starting-point from me, to calculate
the number of years in the same way as I do.

'So then in the first year of the thousand and twenty years set forth from the
time of Moses and Ogyges to the first Olympiad there occurs the Passover, and
the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt, and in Attica the flood in the reign of
Ogyges; and very naturally.

'For when the Egyptians were being scourged by the wrath of God with hailstorms
and tempests, it was natural that some parts of the earth should suffer with
them; and that the Athenians should experience the same fate with the Egyptians
was natural, being supposed to be emigrants from them, as is asserted, among
others, by Theopompus in the Three-headed.41

'The intermediate time, in which no special event has been recorded by the
Greeks, is passed by. But after ninety-four years, as some say, came Prometheus,
who was said in the legend to form men; for being a wise man he tried to reform
them out of their extreme uncouthness into an educated condition.' Thus writes
Africanus. And now let us pass on to another.

CHAPTER XI

[TATIAN] 42 'BUT now I think it behoves me to prove that our philosophy is older
than the institutions of the Greeks. And Moses and Homer shall be set as our
limits: for since each of them is very ancient, and the one the oldest of poets
and historians, and the other the founder of all Barbaric wisdom, let them now
be taken into comparison by us.

'For we shall find that our doctrines are older not only than the learning of
the Greeks, but even than the invention of letters. And I shall not adopt our
own native witnesses, but rather make use of Greeks as my allies. For the one
course would be injudicious, because it would not be accepted by you; but the
other, if proved, would be admirable, if at any time by opposing you with your
own weapons I should bring against you proofs beyond suspicion.

'For concerning the poetry of Homer, and his parentage, and the time at which he
flourished, previous investigations have been made by very ancient writers, as
Theagenes of Ehegium who lived in the time of Cambyses, and Stesimbrotus of
Thasos, and Antimachus of Colophon, Herodotus also of Halicarnassus, and
Dionysius of Olynthus: and after them Ephorus of Cumae, and Philochorus of
Athens, and Megacleides and Chamaeleon the Peripatetics: then the grammarians,
Zenodotus, Aristophanes, Callimachus, Crates, Eratosthenes, Aristarchus,
Apollodorus.

'Now of these Crates says that he flourished before the return of the
Heracleidae, within eighty years after the Trojan war; but Eratosthenes says,
after the hundredth year from the capture of Troy; while Aristarchus says, at
the time of the Ionian migration, which is a hundred and forty years after the
Trojan war; and Philochorus says, forty years after the Ionian migration, in the
archonship at Athens of Archippus, a hundred and eighty years after the Trojan
war; and Apollodorus says, a hundred years after the Ionian migration, which
would be two hundred and forty years after the Trojan war: but some said that he
lived before the Olympiads, that is four hundred years after the capture of
Ilium; while others brought down the time, and said that Homer had been
contemporary with Archilochus; now Archilochus flourished about the twenty-third
Olympiad, in the time of Gyges king of Lydia, five hundred years after the
Trojan war.

'With regard then to the times of the aforesaid poet, I mean Homer, and the
dispute and disagreement among those who gave an account of him, let this our
summary statement suffice for those who are able to examine the matter
carefully. For it is in every man's power to show that their opinions also about
the historical statements are false; for with those authors whose record of
times is inconsistent, the history cannot possibly be true.' Again shortly
after: 43

'Granted, however, that Homer was not only not later than the Trojan war, but
let him be supposed to have lived at that very time of the war, and further even
to have shared in the expedition, with Agamemnon, and, if any wish to have it
so, to have lived even before the invention of letters had taken place: for the
aforesaid Moses will be shown to be very many years older than the actual
capture of Troy, much more ancient too than the building of Troy was, and than
Tros and Bardanus.

'And for proof of this I will employ the testimony of Chaldeans, Phoenicians,
and Egyptians. But why need I say much? For one who professes to persuade ought
to make his narration of the facts to his hearers very brief.

'Berossus, a Babylonian, a priest of their god Belus, who lived in the time of
Alexander, composed the history of the Chaldaeans in three Books for Antiochus
the third successor of Seleucus; and in setting forth the account of the kings
he mentions the name of one of them Nabuchodonosor, who made an expedition
against the Phoenicians and Jews; events which we know to have been announced by
our prophets, and which took place long after the age of Moses, and seventy
years before the Persian supremacy.

'Now Berossus is a most competent man, and a proof of this is given by Iobas,
who writing Concerning the Assyrians says that he has learned their history from
Berossus: he is the author of two books Concerning the Assyrians,

'Next to the Chaldaeans, the case of the Phoenicians is as follows. There have
been among them three authors, Theodotus, Hypsicrates, Mochus. Their books were
rendered into the Greek language by Laetus, who also wrote an accurate treatise
on the lives of the philosophers.

'In the histories then of the aforesaid authors the rape of Europa is shown to
have taken place in the time of one of the kings, also the arrival of Menelaus
in Phoenicia, and the story of Hiram, who gave his daughter in marriage to
Solomon king of the Jews, and presented him with timber of all kinds for the
building of the Temple.

'Menander also of Pergamus wrote the record of the same events. Now the date of
Hiram approaches somewhat near to the Trojan war; and Solomon the contemporary
of Hiram is much later than the age of Moses.

'Then the Egyptians have accurate registers of dates. And Ptolemy, not the king
but a priest of Mendes, the translator of their writings, in narrating the
actions of their kings says that the journey of the Jews from Egypt to whatever
places they chose, under the leadership of Moses, took place in the time of
Amosis king of Egypt.

'And this is how he speaks: "Now Amosis lived in the time of king Inachus."
After him Apion the grammarian, a man of great reputation, in the fourth Book of
his Egyptian History (there are five of his Books) among many other things says
that Amosis demolished Avaris, and that he lived in the time of Inachus the
Argive, as Ptolemy of Mendes recorded in his Chronology.

'Now the time from Inachus to the capture of Troy makes up twenty generations;
and the mode of the proof is as follows:

'The kings of the Argives have been these:----Inachus, Phoroneus, Apis, Argeius, Criasus, Phorbas, Triopas, Crotopus, Sthenelaus, Danaus, Lynceus, Abas, Proetus, Acrisius, Perseus, Eurystheus, Atreus, Thyestes, Agamemnon, in the eighteenth year of whose reign Troy was taken.

'Also the intelligent reader must understand quite distinctly that according to
the tradition of the Greeks there was no written record of history among them.
For Cadmus, who taught the aforesaid people the alphabet, landed in Boeotia many
generations afterwards.

'After Inachus Phoroneus with difficulty put an end to their savage and
wandering mode of life, and the people were brought into a state of order.
Wherefore if Moses has been shown to have been contemporary with Inachus, he is
four hundred years earlier than the Trojan war.

'And this is proved to be so both from the succession of the kings of Athens,
and Macedonia, and the Ptolemies, and also those of the dynasty of Antiochus;
"whence it is manifest that if the most illustrious deeds among the Greeks were
recorded in writing and begin to be known after the time of Inachus, they were
also later than the time of Moses.

'For as contemporary with Phoroneus who followed Inachus the Athenians mention
Ogyges, in whose time the first flood occurred: and as contemporary with Phorbas
Actaeus, from whom Attica was called Actaea: and as contemporary with Triopas
Prometheus, and Epimetheus, and Atlas, and Cecrops of double sex, and Io.

'In the time of Crotopus there was Phaethon's conflagration, and Deucalion's
flood: in the time of Sthenelaus was the reign of Amphictyon, and the arrival of
Danaus in the Peloponnese, and the colonization of Dardania by Dardanus, and the
abduction of Europa from Phoenicia to Crete.

'In the time of Lynceus there was the rape of Persephone, and the foundation of
the sanctuary at Eleusis, and the husbandry of Triptolemus, and the arrival of
Cadmus at Thebes, and the reign of Minos.

'In the reign of Proetus occurred the war of Eumolpus against the Athenians; and
in that of Acrisius the crossing of Pelops from Phrygia, and the arrival of Ion
at Athens, and the second Cecrops, and the exploits of Perseus. And in the reign
of Agamemnon Troy was taken.

'Therefore from what has been said above Moses is shown to be older than all
heroes, cities, or daemons: and he who preceded them in age ought rather to be
believed, than the Greeks who drew his doctrines from the fountain-head without
fully understanding them.

'For there were many sophists among them, who indulged a meddling curiosity, and
these attempted to put a false stamp on all that they had learned from Moses and
those who agreed, with his philosophy, in order first that they might be thought
to say something original; and secondly that, disguising what they did not
understand by a kind of rhetorical artifice, they might misrepresent the truth
as being a mere fable.

'With regard, however, to our polity, and the history of our laws, and all that
the learned among the Greeks have said, and how many and who they are that have
mentioned us, proof shall be shown in my "Answer to those who have set forth
opinions concerning God."

'But for the present I must endeavour with all accuracy to make it clear that
Moses is earlier not only than Homer, but also than the writers before him,
Linus, Philammon, Thamyris, Amphion, Orpheus, Musaeus, Demodocus, Phemius, the
Sibyl, Epimenides the Cretan, who came to Sparta, Aristaeus of Pro-connesus, who
wrote the Arimaspia, and Asbolus the Centaur, and Basis, and Drymon, and Euclus
of Cyprus, and Horus of Samos, and Pronapides of Athens.

'For Linus was the teacher of Hercules, and Hercules has been shown to be one
generation earlier than the Trojan war; and this is manifest from his son
Tlepolemus, who joined the expedition against Troy.

'Orpheus was contemporary with Hercules; moreover, the writings afterwards
attributed to him are said to have been composed by Onomacritus of Athens, who
lived during the government of the Pisistratidae about the fiftieth Olympiad.

'Musaeus was a disciple of Orpheus. And as Amphion was two generations earlier
than the Trojan war, this prevents our collecting more about him for the
information of the studious. Demodocus too and Phemius lived at the very time of
the Trojan war; for they abode, the one among the suitors, the other with the
Phaeacians. Thamyris also and Philammon are not much more ancient than these.

'So then with regard to their work of various kinds and their dates and record,
I think I have described them to you with all possible accuracy. But that we may
also complete what is as yet deficient, I will further set forth the evidence
concerning those who are considered the Sages.

'For Minos, who was considered to be pre-eminent in all wisdom, and sagacity,
and legislation, lived in the time of Lynceus who reigned after Danaus, in the
eleventh generation after Inachus. And Lycurgus, born long after the capture of
Troy, made laws for the Lacedaemonians a hundred years before the commencement
of the Olympiads.

'Draco is found to have lived about the thirty-ninth Olympiad, and Solon about
the forty-sixth, and Pythagoras about the sixty-second. Now we showed that the
Olympiads began four hundred and seven years after the Trojan war.

'So then, after these facts have been thus proved, a few more words will suffice
to record the age of the Seven Sages. For as Thales the eldest of them lived
about the fiftieth Olympiad, the approximate dates of those who came after him
are thus stated concisely.

'This is what I have composed for you, O men of Greece, I, Tatian, a follower of
the Barbarians in philosophy, born in the land of the Assyrians, but instructed
first in your doctrines, and afterwards in such as I now profess to preach. And
knowing henceforward who God is, and what is the doing of His will, I present
myself to you in readiness for the examination of my doctrines, while my mode of
life according to God's will remains incapable of denial.' Thus much says
Tatian. But let us now pass on to Clement.

CHAPTER XII

[CLEMENT] 44 'THE subject has indeed been carefully discussed by Tatian in his
Discourse to the Greeks, and by Cassian in the first book of his Exegetics. But
nevertheless my commentary demands that I also should run over what has been
said upon the topic.

'Apion then the grammarian, who was surnamed Pleistonices, in the fourth Book of
his Egyptian Histories, although being an Egyptian by birth he was so spitefully
disposed towards the Hebrews as to have composed a book Against the Jews, when
he mentions Amosis the king of Egypt and the transactions of his time, brings
forward Ptolemaeus of Mendes as a witness.

'And his language is as follows:

'"But Avaris was demolished by Amosis, who lived in the time of Inachus the
Argive, as Ptolemaeus of Mendes recorded in his Chronology."

'Now this Ptolemaeus was a priest, who published The Acts of the Kings of Egypt
in three whole books, and says that the departure of the Jews out of Egypt under
Moses as their leader took place in the time of Amosis king of Egypt; from
which, it is clearly seen that Moses flourished in the time of Inachus.

'Now Dionysius of Halicarnassus teaches us in his Chronology that the history of
Argos, I mean the history from Inachus downwards, is mentioned as older than any
Hellenic history.

'Forty generations later than this is the Athenian history, beginning from
Cecrops the so-called aboriginal of double sex, as Tatian says in so many words:
and nine generations later the history of Arcadia from the time of Pelasgus, who
also is called an aboriginal.

'More recent than this last by other fifty-two generations is the history of
Phthiotis from the time of Deucalion. From Inachus to the time of the Trojan war
twenty or twenty-one generations are reckoned, four hundred years, we may say,
and more.

'And whether the Assyrian history is many years earlier than the Hellenic, will
appear from what Ctesias says. In the four hundred and second year of the
Assyrian empire, and in the thirty-second year of the reign of Beluchus the
eighth, the movement of Moses out of Egypt took place in the time of Amosis king
of Egypt, and of Inachus king of Argos.

'And in Hellas in the time of Phoroneus the successor of Inachus the flood of
Ogyges occurred, and the reign in Sicyon, of Aegialeus first, then of Europs,
and then of Telchis, and in Crete the reign of Cres.

'For Acusilaus says that Phoroneus was the first man: whence also the author of
the poem "Phoronis" says that he was "the father of mortal men."

'Hence Plato in the Timaeus, following Acusilaus, writes: "And once when he
wished to lead them on to a discussion about antiquity, he said that he
attempted to speak of the most ancient things in this city, about Phoroneus who
was called 'the first' man, and about Niobe, and the events that followed the
flood." 45

'Contemporary with Phorbas was Actaeus, from whom Attica was called Actaea: and
contemporary with Triopas were Prometheus, and Atlas, and Epimetheus, and the
biform Cecrops, and Io: in the time of Crotopus there was Phaethon's
conflagration, and the flood of Deucalion: and in the time of Sthenelaus was the
reign of Amphictyon, and the arrival of Danaus in the Peloponnese, and the
colonization of Dardania by Dardanus, whom Homer calls

"The first-born son of cloud-compelling Zeus," 46

and the abduction of Europa from Crete to Phoenicia.

'In the time of Lynceus was the rape of Core, and the foundation of the
sanctuary at Eleusis, and the husbandry of Triptolemus, and the arrival of
Cadmus in Thebes, and the reign of Minos. In the time of Proetus there was the
war of Eumolpus against the Athenians: and in the time of Acrisius the migration
of Pelops from Phrygia, and the arrival of Ion in Athens, and the second
Cecrops, and the exploits of Perseus and Dionysus, and also Orpheus and Musaeus.

'And in the eighteenth year of the reign of Agamemnon Troy was taken, in the
first year of the reign in Athens of Demophon son of Theseus, on the twelfth day
of the month Thargelion, as Dionysius the Argive says.

'But Agius and Dercylus in their third Book say, on the eighth day of the last
decade of the month Panemus: Hellanicus says, on the twelfth of Thargelion; and
some of the writers of Athenian history say, on the eighth of the last decade,
in the last year of the reign of Menestheus, at the full moon. The poet who
wrote The Little Iliad says:

"At midnight, when the moon was rising bright." 47

But others say, on the same day of the month Scirophorion.

'Now Theseus, who was a rival of Hercules, is older than the Trojan war by one
generation: Homer at least mentions Tlepolemus, who was the son of Hercules, as
having joined in the expedition against Troy.

'Moses therefore is shown to be six hundred and four years older than the
deification of Dionysus, if at least he was deified in the thirty-second year of
the reign of Perseus, as Apollodorus says in his Chronicles.

'And from Dionysus to Hercules and the chiefs who sailed in the Argo with Jason,
there are sixty-three years comprised. Asclepius too and the Dioscuri sailed
with them, as Apollonius Rhodius testifies in the Argonautica.48

'From the reign of Hercules in Argos to the deification of Hercules himself and
of Asclepius there are comprised thirty-eight years, according to Apollodorus
the chronicler: and from that point to the deification of Castor and Pollux
fifty-three years: and somewhere about this time was the capture of Troy.

'And if we are to believe the poet Hesiod, let us hear what he says:

"Admitted to the sacred couch of Zeus, Fairest of Atlas' daughters, Maia bare
Renowned Hermes, herald of the Gods. And linked with Zeus in sweetest bonds of
love Fair Semele conceived a glorious son, Great Dionysus, joy of all mankind."
49

'Cadmus the father of Semele came to Thebes in the reign of Lynceus, and became
the inventor of the Greek letters. And Triopas was contemporary with Isis in the
seventh generation from Inachus.

'But there are some who say that she was called Io from her going (ἰένα) through
all the earth in her wanderings: and Istrus in his book Of the migration of the
Egyptians says that she was the daughter of Prometheus: and Prometheus was
contemporary with Triopas, in the seventh generation after Moses; so that Moses
would be earlier even than the origin of mankind was according to the Greeks.

'Now Leon, who wrote a treatise On the gods of Egypt, says that Isis was called
by the Greeks Demeter, who is contemporary with Lynceus in the eleventh
generation after Moses.

'Apis also the king of Argos was the founder of Memphis, as Aristippus says in
the first Book of the Arcadica.

'Moreover Aristeas of Argos says that this Apis was surnamed Sarapis, and that
it is he whom the Egyptians worship.

'But Nymphodorus of Amphipolis, in the third Book of The Customs of Asia, says
that when Apis the bull died and was embalmed, he was deposited in a coffin
(σορός) in the temple of the daemon who was worshipped there, and thence was
called Soroapis and afterwards Sarapis. And Apis is the third from Inachus.
'Moreover Latona is contemporary with Tityus:

"For Leto erst he strove to violate, The noble consort of immortal Zeus." 50

'And Tityus was contemporary with Tantalus. With good reason therefore the
Boeotian Pindar writes:

"For late in time Apollo too was born." 51

'And no wonder, since he is found in company with Hercules serving Admetus

"A whole long year." 52

'Zethus too and Amphion, the inventors of music, lived about the age of Cadmus.
And if any one tell us that Phemonoe was the first who uttered an oracle in
verse to Acrisius, yet let him know that twenty-seven years after Phemonoe came
Orpheus, and Musaeus, and Linus the teacher of Hercules.

'But Homer and Hesiod were much later than the Trojan war, and after them far
later were the lawgivers among the Greeks, Lycurgus and Solon, and the Seven
Sages, and Pherecydes of Syros, and the great Pythagoras, who lived some time
later about the beginning of the Olympiads, as we proved.

'So then we have demonstrated that Moses was more ancient than most of the gods
of the Greeks, and not merely than their so-called Sages and poets.' So far
Clement. But since the question before us was carefully studied before our
Christian writers by the Hebrews themselves, it would be well to consider also
what they have said: and I shall use the language of Flavius Josephus as
representative of them all.

CHAPTER XIII

[JOSEPHUS] 53 'I WILL begin then first with the writings of the Egyptians. It is not possible, however, to quote their own actual words; but Manetho an Egyptian by birth, a man who had a knowledge of
Hellenic culture, as is evident from his having written the history . of his own country in the Greek language, and translated it, as he says himself, out of the sacred books, who also convicts Herodotus of having from ignorance falsified many things in Egyptian history----this Manetho then, I say, in the second Book of his Egyptian History writes concerning us as follows: and I will quote his words, just as if I brought himself forward as a witness.

'"We had a king whose name was Timaeus. In his time God was angry with us, I
know not why, and men from the Eastern parts, of obscure origin, were strangely
emboldened to invade the country, and easily took possession of it by force
without a battle." ' And soon after he adds:

'"The name of their whole nation was Hycsos, that is 'shepherd-kings.' For 'Hyc'
in the sacred language means 'king,' and Sos is 'shepherd,' and 'shepherds' in
the common dialect: and thus combined it becomes 'Hycsos.' But some say that
they were Arabs."

'But in another copy 54 he says that "kings" are not meant by the name "Hyc,"
but on the contrary "captive-shepherds" are signified. For Hyc in Egyptian, and
Hac, aspirated, expressly means "captives." And this seems to me more probable,
and in agreement with ancient history.

'Now these before-named kings, both those of the so-called "Shepherds," and
their descendants, ruled over Egypt, he says, five hundred and eleven years.

'But after this, he says, there was a revolt of the kings from the Thebaid and
the rest of Egypt against the Shepherds, and a great and long war broke out. But
in the time of a king 'whose name was Misphragmuthosis, he says that the
Shepherds were defeated, and though, driven out of the rest of Egypt, they were
shut up in a place having a circumference of ten thousand arurae: the name of
the place was Avaris.

'The whole of this. Manetho says, the Shepherds surrounded with a great and
strong wall, that so they might have all their possessions and their booty in a
stronghold.

'But Thmouthosis the son of Misphragmouthosis attempted to subdue them by a
siege, having sat down against their walls with four hundred and eighty thousand
men: but after giving up the siege in despair, he made terms of agreement with
them, that they should leave Egypt, and all go away uninjured whithersoever they
chose. And upon these conditions they with their whole families and possessions,
being not less in number than two hundred and forty thousand, made their way
from Egypt across the desert into Syria.

'But being afraid of the power of the Assyrians (for they were at that time the
rulers of Asia), they built a city in what is now called Judaea, to suffice for
so many thousands of inhabitants, and called it Jerusalem.' Next to this he
recounts the succession of the kings of Egypt, together with the duration of
their reigns, and adds: 55

'So says Manetho. And when the time is calculated according to the number of
years mentioned, it is evident that the so-called Shepherds, our ancestors,
departed from Egypt and colonized this country three hundred and ninety-three
years before Danaus arrived in Argos: and yet he is considered by the Argives as
very ancient.

'Two things therefore of the greatest importance Manetho has testified in our
favour out of the writings of the Egyptians. First their arrival in Egypt from
some other country, and afterwards the departure thence at so ancient a date as
to be nearly a thousand years before the Trojan war.' The extracts from Egyptian
history have been recorded thus somewhat at large by Josephus. But from
Phoenician history, by employing the testimony of those who have written on
Phoenician affairs, he proves that the Temple in Jerusalem had been built by
King Solomon a hundred and forty-three years and eight months earlier than the
foundation of Carthage by the Tyrians: then he passes on, and quotes from the
history of the Chaldaeans their testimonies concerning the antiquity of the
Hebrews.

CHAPTER XIV BUT why need I heap up proofs upon proofs, when every one who is a
lover of truth, and not of spitefulness, is satisfied with what has been stated,
as containing varied confirmation of the proposed argument? For our proposal was
to prove that Moses and the Prophets were more ancient than Greek history.

Since therefore Moses has been proved to have lived long before the Trojan war,
let us look also at all those who came after him. Now that Moses appeared in the
world later in time than those former true Hebrews, Heber and Abraham, from whom
the derived name has been applied to the people, and than all the other godly
men of old, is manifest from his own history.

Next to Moses therefore Jesus ruled the nation of the Jews thirty years, as some
say: then, as the Scripture says, foreigners ruled eight years. Then
Gothoniel,56 fifty years: after whom Eglom king of Moab eighteen years: after
whom Ehud eighty years. After him strangers again twenty years: then Debbora and
Barak forty years. Then the Madianites seven years: then Gredeon forty years.
Abimelech three years. Tola twenty-three years: Jair twenty-two years: the
Ammonites eighteen years: Jephtha six years: Esbon seven years: Aealon ten
years:57 Labdon eight years: strangers forty years: Samson twenty years: then
Eli the Priest, as the Hebrew says, forty years; about whose time the capture of
Troy occurred. And after Eli the Priest Samuel was the ruler of the people.

After him their first king Saul reigned forty years: then David forty years:
then Solomon forty years; who also was the first to build the Temple in
Jerusalem. After Solomon Soboam reigns seventeen years: Abia three years: Asa
forty-one years: Jehoshaphat twenty-five years: Joram eight years: Ahaziah one
year: Athaliah seven years: Joash forty years: Amaziah twenty-seven years:
Uzziah fifty-two years; in whose reign prophesied Hosea, Amos, Esaias, Jonah:
and after Uzziah Jotham reigned sixteen years: after whom Ahaz sixteen years. In
his time was held the first Olympic festival, in which Coroebus of Elis won the
foot-race.

Hezekiah succeeds Ahaz for twenty-nine years; and in his time Romulus built Home
and became king. And after Hezekiah Manasses reigned fifty-five years: then Amon
two years: then Josiah thirty-one years; in whose time prophesied Jeremiah,
Baruch, Huldah, and other prophets.

Then Jehoahaz three months: after whom Jehoiachim eleven years; and after him
last of all Zedekiah twelve years. In his time Jerusalem having been besieged by
the Assyrians, and the Temple burned, the whole nation of the Jews is carried
away to Babylon, and there Daniel prophesies, and Ezekiel. And after the number
of seventy years Cyrus becomes king of Persia, and he remitted the captivity of
the Jews, and allowed those of them who would to return to their own land, and
to raise up the Temple again: at which time Jesus the son of Josedek returned,
and Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel, and they laid the foundations, when Haggai,
and Zechariah, and Malachi prophesied last of all, after whom there has been no
more a prophet among them. In the time of Cyrus Solon of Athens was flourishing,
and the so-called Seven Sages among the Greeks, than whom their records mention
no more ancient philosopher. Of these seven then Thales of Miletus, who was the
first natural philosopher among the Greeks, discoursed concerning the solar
tropics and eclipse, and the phases of the moon, and the equinox. This man
became most distinguished among the Greeks. A pupil of Thales was Anaximander,
the son of Praxiades, himself also a Milesian by birth. He was the first
designer of gnomons for distinguishing the solar tropics, and times and seasons,
and equinox. And a pupil of Anaximander was Anaximenes son of Eurystratus of
Miletus; and his pupil was Anaxagoras, son of Hegesibulus, of Clazomenae. He was
the first who clearly defined the subject of first principles. For he not only
published his opinions concerning the essence of all things, like his
predecessors, but also concerning the moving cause thereof. 'For in the
beginning,' he says, 'all things were confused together. But mind entered and
brought them out of disorder into order.' 58

Anaxagoras had three pupils, Pericles, Archelaus, and Euripides. Pericles became
the first man of Athens, and excelled his contemporaries both in wealth and
birth: Euripides turned to poetry, and was called by some 'the philosopher of
the stage':59 and Archelaus succeeded to the school of Anaxagoras in Lampsacus,
but migrated to Athens and lectured there, and had many Athenians as pupils, and
among them especially Socrates. At the same time with Anaxagoras there
flourished the physical philosophers Xenophanes and Pythagoras. Pythagoras was
succeeded by his wife Theano, and his sons Telauges and Mnesarchus. A pupil of
Telauges was Empedocles, in whose time Heracleitus 'the obscure' became famous.
Xenophanes is said to have been succeeded by Parmenides, and Parmenides by
Melissus, and Melissus by Zeno the Eleatic, who, they say, concocted a plot
against the tyrant of that time, and was caught, and when tortured by the tyrant
that so he might give a list of those who were his accomplices, paid no regard
to the tyrant's punishments, but bit through his tongue, and spat it at him, and
died in this obstinate endurance of the tortures.

He had for his pupil Leucippus, and Leucippus Democritus, and he Protagoras, in
whose time Socrates flourished. One may also find scattered here and there other
physical philosophers who lived before Socrates: all, however, beginning with
Thales appear to have flourished later than Cyrus king of Persia: and it is
manifest that Cyrus lived long after the carrying away of the Jewish nation into
captivity at Babylon, when the Hebrew prophets had already ceased, and their
holy city had been besieged. So you must admit that Greek philosophy was much
later than Moses and the Prophets who came after him; and especially the
philosophy of Plato, who having been at first a hearer of Socrates, afterwards
associated with the Pythagoreans, and shot far beyond all his predecessors both
in eloquence and wisdom and in his philosophical doctrines.

Now Plato lived about the end of the Persian monarchy, a little earlier than
Alexander of Macedon, and not much more than four hundred years before the
Emperor Augustus.

If therefore it should be shown to you that Plato and his successors have agreed
in their philosophy with the Hebrews, it is time to examine the date at which he
lived, and to compare the antiquity of the Hebrew theologians and prophets with
the age of all the philosophers of Greece. But since this has been already
proved, it is now the proper time to turn back and observe that the wise men of
the Greeks have been zealous imitators of the Hebrew doctrines, so that our
calumniators can no longer reasonably find fault with us, if we ourselves,
admiring the like doctrines with their philosophers, have determined to hold the
Hebrew oracles in honour.

[Footnotes numbered and moved to the end] 1. 461 d 4 Clement, Miscellanies, vi.
c. 2, § 4 2. 462 c 2 Clement, Miscellanies, vi. c. 2, § 16 3. d 3 ibid. § 25 4.
d 14 Clement, Miscellanies, vi. c. 2, § 27 5. 463 a 1 ibid. c. 3, § 28 6. 463 d
5 I Sam. xi. 18 7. d 7 Matt. v. 45 8. 464 a 1 Porphyry, Lecture on Literature,
Bk. i, Fragment preserved by Eusebius 9. c 5 Isocrates, Areopagiticus, p. 140 d
10. 465 a 3 Or 'Pherecydes the Syrian' 11. 466 c 10 Hesiod, Works and Days, 702
12. d 3 Simonides, Fr. 6 (Bergk), 224 (Gaisf.) 13. d 6 Euripides, Fr. 29 (511)
14. d 10 Euripides, Medea, 231 15. d 12 Theodectes, Fr. 2 (Wagner) 16. 467 a 7
Hom. Il. i. 558 17. b 1 Antimachus, Fr. 34 (Dubner) 18. c 2 Hom. Od. ii. 334 19.
c 4 Hom. Il. xvi. 563 20. c 7 Antimachus, Fr. 34 21. d 14 Porphyry, Lecture on
Literature, Bk. i 22. 471 c 10 Plato, Timaeus, 22 B; cf. Clement, Miscellanies,
i. c. 15.

23. 471 d 12 Pseudo-Plato, Epinomis, 986 E 24. 472 a 6 ibid. 987 E 25. b 1
Clement, l. c.

26. 475 b 3 Clement, Miscellanies, i. c. 16 27. 477 a 3 Josephus, Against Apion,
i. 2 28. 480 a 5 Diodorus Siculus, i. 96 29. 481 a 1 Homer, Od. xxiv. 1 30. a 4
Diod. Sic. i. 97 31. c 6 Homer, Od. iv. 220-230 32. 485 b 1 Porphyry, Against
the Christians, bk. iv; cf. p. 31 a 33. 487 d 6 Africanus, Chronography, bk.
iii. Cf. Routh, Rell. Sacr. ii. p. 269 34. 488 d 1 Ezra 1 35. 489 b 1 Cf. Routh,
Rell. Sacr. ii. p. 272 36. c 10 Cf. ibid. ii. 374 37. 490 a 11 Cf. Routh, l. c.,
ii. p. 275 38. c 1 Cf. Herod, ii. c. 162 39. c 3 ibid. c. 104 40. 490 c 5 Cf.
497 a 6 41. 491 a 10 Cf. Pausanias, vi. c. 18 42. c 1 Tatian, Address to the
Greeks, c. 31 43. 492 d 6 Tatian, l. c., c. 36 44. 496 d 1 Clement of
Alexandria, Miscellanies, i. c. 21 45. 497 d 9 Plato, Timaeus, 22 A 46. 498 a 8
Hom. Il. xx. 215 47. c 7 Little Iliad, Fr. 6 48. d 12 Cf. Apollonius Rhodius,
Argonautica, i. 146 49. 499 a 5 Hesiod, Theogony, 938 50. 499 d 6 Hom. Od. xii.
579 51. d 10 Pind. Fr. 11 (114) 52. d 13 Cf. Hom. Il. xxi. 443 53. 500 c 1
Josephus, Against Apion, i. 14 54. 501 a 1 Josephus, l. c.

55. 501 d 8 Josephus, Against Apion, c. 15 56. 502 d 8 Cf. Judges iii. 8, ibid.
9 'Othniel' 57. 503 a 5 Judges xii. 10-13 58. 504 b 4 cf. Diogenes, Laortius,
ii. 6.

59. c 1 Cf. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, v. 71 This text was transcribed
by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy
freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 30: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 11
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 11

BOOK XI

CONTENTS Preface concerning the argument. p. 507 c I. How the philosophy of
Plato followed that of the Hebrews in the most essential points p. 508 d II.
Atticus on the threefold division, of Plato's philosophy p. 509 b III.
Aristocles on the philosophy of Plato p. 510 b IV. On the ethical doctrines of
the Hebrews p. 511 d V. On the logical method of the Hebrews p. 513 a VI. On the
correctness of Hebrew names p. 514 d VII. On the natural philosophy of the
Hebrews p. 521 a VIII. On the philosophy of the intelligible world p. 523 b IX.
Moses and Plato on true being p. 523 d X. Extract from Numenius, the
Pythagorean, Concerning the good, Bk. ii p. 525 c XI. From Plutarch's treatise
entitled On the Εἶ at Delphi p. 527 d XII. That the divine nature is ineffable
p. 529 d XIII. That God is One only p. 530 c XIV. On the Second Cause p. 531 d
XV. Philo on the Second Cause p. 533 b XVI. Plato on the Second Cause p. 534 b
XVII. Plotinus on the same p. 535 b XVIII. Numenius on the Second Cause p. 536 d
XIX. Amelius on the theology of our Evangelist John p. 540 b XX. On the three
primary Hypostases p. 541 b XXI. On the essence of the good p. 542 a XXII.
Numenius on the good p. 543 b XXIII. On the Ideas in Plato p. 545 a XXIV. Philo
on the Ideas in Moses p. 546 d XXV. Clement on the same p. 548 d XXVI. The
Hebrews and Plato on the adverse powers p. 549 c XXVII. The Hebrews and Plato on
the immortality of the soul. p. 550 c XXVIII. Porphyry on the same p. 554 b
XXIX. That the world is created p. 557 c XXX. On the luminaries in heaven p. 558
b XXXI. That all the works of God are good p. 558 d XXXII. On the alteration and
change of the world p. 559 a XXXIII. On the return of the dead to life, from the
same p. 561 b XXXIV. Again concerning the end of the world p. 562 a XXXV. That
Plato records that dead have been raised in accordance with the statements of
the Hebrews p. 562 d XXXVI. Plutarch on the like matter p. 563 d XXXVII. That
Plato describes the so-called celestial earth in like manner as the Hebrews p.
564 d XXXVIII. That Plato agrees with the Hebrews in believing that there will
be the judgement after death p. 567 b PREFACE CONCERNING THE ARGUMENT THE
preceding Book, which is the tenth of the Evangelical Preparation, was intended
to prove by no statements of my own, but by external testimonies, that as the
Greeks had contributed no additional wisdom from their own resources, but only
their force and elegance of language, and had borrowed all their philosophy from
Barbarians, it was not improbable that they were also not unacquainted with the
Hebrew Oracles, but had in part seized upon them also; seeing that they did not
keep their hands clean from theft even of the literary efforts of their own
countrymen. For, as I said, it was not my statement but their own that proved
them to be thieves.

Moreover in the same Book we learned by the comparison of dates that they were
very young in age as well as in wisdom, and fell very far short of the ancient
literature of the Hebrews.

Such were the contents of the preceding Book: but in this present one we hasten
on at once to pay as it were a debt, I mean the promise which was given, and to
exhibit the agreement of the Greek philosophers with the Hebrew Oracles in some
if not in all their doctrinal theories. Dismissing therefore those of whom it is
superfluous to speak, we call up the leader of the whole band, deeming it right
to adopt as umpire of the question Plato alone as equivalent to all: since it is
likely that as he surpassed all in reputation he will be sufficient by himself
for the settlement of our question. But if at any point it should be necessary,
for the sake of giving clearness to his thought, I shall also make use of the
testimony of those who have studied his philosophy, and shall set forth their
own words for the settlement of the question before us.

Let me, however, make this reservation, that not every matter has been
successfully stated by the master, although he has expressed most things in
accordance with truth. And this very point also we shall prove at the proper
season, not in order to disparage him, but in defence of the reason for which we
confess that we have welcomed the Barbarian philosophy in preference to the
Greek.

CHAPTER I

WHEREAS Plato divided the whole subject of philosophy into three branches,
Physics, Ethics, Logic, and then again divided his Physics into the examination
of sensibles, and the contemplation of incorporeals, you will find this
tripartite form of teaching among the Hebrews also, seeing that they had dealt
with the like matters of philosophy before Plato was born.

It will be right then to hear Plato first, and so afterwards to examine the
doctrines of the Hebrews. And I shall quote the opinions of Plato from those who
give the highest honour to his system; of whom Atticus, a man of distinction
among the Platonic philosophers, in the work wherein he withstands those who
profess to support the doctrines of Plato by those of Aristotle, recounts the
opinions of his master in the following manner:

CHAPTER II

[ATTICUS] 1 'SINCE therefore the entire system of philosophy is divided into
three parts, the so-called Ethical topic, and the Physical,and also the Logical;
and whereas the aim of the first is to make each one of us honourable and
virtuous, and to bring entire households to the highest state of improvement,
and finally to furnish the whole commonalty with the most excellent civil polity
and the most exact laws; while the second pertains to the knowledge of things
divine, and the actual first principles and causes, and all the other things
that result from them, which part Plato has named Natural Science; the third is
adopted to help in determining and discovering what concerns both the former.
Now that Plato before and beyond all others collected into one body all the
parts of philosophy, which had till then been scattered and dispersed, like the
limbs of Pentheus, as some one said, and exhibited philosophy as an organized
body and a living thing complete in all its members, is manifestly asserted by
every one.

'For it is not unknown that Thales, and Anaximenes, and Anaxagoras, and as many
as were contemporary with them spent their time solely on the inquiry concerning
the nature of existing things. Nor moreover is any one unaware that Pittacus,
and Periander, and Solon, and Lycurgus, and those like them, applied their
philosophy to statemanship. Zeno too, and all this Eleatic School, are also well
known to have studied especially the dialectic art. But after these came Plato,
a man newly initiated in the mysteries of nature and of surpassing excellence,
as one verily sent down from heaven in order that the philosophy taught by him
might be seen in its full proportions; for he omitted nothing, and perfected
everything, neither falling short in regard to what was necessary, nor carried
away to what was useless.

'Since therefore we asserted that the Platonist partakes of all three, as
studying Nature, and discussing Morals, and practising Dialectic, let us now
examine each point separately.' So speaks Atticus, And the Peripatetic
Aristocles also adds his testimony to the same effect, in the seventh Book of
the treatise which he composed Of Philosophy, speaking thus word for word:

CHAPTER III

[ARISTOCLES] 2 'IF any man ever yet taught a genuine and complete system of
philosophy, it was Plato. For the followers of Thales were constantly engaged in
the study of Nature: and the school of Pythagoras wrapped all things in mystery:
and Xenophanes and his followers, by stirring contentious discussions, caused
the philosophers much dizziness, but yet gave them no help.

'And not least did Socrates, exactly according to the proverb, add fire to fire,
as Plato himself said. For being a man of great genius, and clever in raising
questions upon any and every matter, he brought moral and political speculations
into philosophy, and moreover was the first who attempted to define the theory
of the Ideas: but while still stirring up every kind of discussion, and
inquiring about all subjects, he died too early a death.

'Others took certain separate parts and spent their time upon these, some on
Medicine, others on the Mathematical Sciences, and some on the poets and Music.
Most of them, however, were charmed with the powers of language, and of these
some called themselves rhetoricians and others dialecticians.

'In fact the successors of Socrates were of all different kinds, and opposed to
each other in their opinions. For some sang the praises of cynical habits, and
humility, and insensibility; but others, on the contrary, of pleasures. And some
used to boast of knowing all things, and others of knowing absolutely nothing.

'Further some used to roll themselves about in public and in the sight of all
men, associating with the common people, while others on the contrary could
never be approached nor accosted.

'Plato however, though he perceived that the science of things divine and human
was one and the same, was the first to make a distinction, asserting that there
was one kind of study concerned with the nature of the universe, and another
concerned with human affairs, and a third with dialectic.

'But he maintained that we could not take a clear view of human affairs, unless
the divine were previously discerned: for just as physicians, when treating any
parts of the body, attend first to the state of the whole, so the man who is to
take a clear view of things here on earth must first know the nature of the
universe; and man, he said, was a part of the world; and good was of two kinds,
our own good and that of the whole, and the good of the whole was the more
important, because the other was for its sake.

'Now Aristoxenus the Musician says that this argument comes from the Indians:
for a certain man of that nation fell in with Socrates at Athens, and presently
asked him, what he was doing in philosophy: and when he said, that he was
studying human life, the Indian laughed at him, and said that no one could
comprehend things human, if he were ignorant of things divine.

'Whether this, however, is true no one could assert positively: but Plato at all
events distinguished the philosophy of the universe, and that of civil polity,
and also that of dialectic.'

Such being the philosophy of Plato, it is time to examine also that of the
Hebrews, who had studied philosophy in the like manner long before Plato was
born. Accordingly you will find among them also this corresponding tripartite
division of Ethical, and Dialectical, and Physical studies, by setting yourself
to observe in the following manner:

CHAPTER IV As to Ethics then, if you thoroughly examine what the Hebrews taught,
you will find that this subject before all others was zealously studied among
them in deeds much earlier than in words. Since as the end of all good, and the
final term of a happy life, they both admired and pursued religion and that
friendship with God which is secured by the right direction of moral habits; but
not bodily pleasure, like Epicurus; nor again the threefold kinds of good,
according to Aristotle, who esteems the good of the body, and external good on
an equality with the good of the soul; no, nor yet the utter void of knowledge
and instruction, which some have announced by a more respectable name as
'suspension of judgement'; nay, nor even the virtue of the soul; for how much is
there of this in men, and what can it contribute by itself without God to the
life that knows no sorrow? For the sake of that life they fastened their all on
hope in God, as a cable that could not break, and declared that the friend of
God was the only happy man: because God the dispenser of all good, the purveyor
of life and fountain of virtue itself, being the provider of all good things for
the body, and of outward fortune, must be alone sufficient for the happy life to
the man who by thoroughly true religion has secured His friendship.

Hence Moses, the wisest of men and the first of all to commit to writing the
life of the godly Hebrews before his time, has described in an historical
narrative their mode of life both political and practical. In beginning that
narrative he drew his teaching from universal principles, assuming God as the
cause of the universe, and describing the creation of the world and of man.

Thus from universal principles he next advanced in his argument to particulars,
and by the memory of the men of old urged his disciples on to emulation of their
virtue and piety; and moreover being himself declared the author of the holy
laws enacted by him, it must be manifest that on all points he was careful to
promote the love of God by his attention to moral habits, a point which in fact
our argument anticipated and made clear in what has gone before.

It would be too long to set down in this place the prophets who came in
succession after Moses, and their arguments to encourage virtue, and dissuade
from all kinds of vice. But what if I were to bring before you the moral
precepts of the all-wise Solomon, to which he devoted a special treatise and
called it a book of Proverbs, including in one subject many concise judgements
of the nature of apophthegms? And in this way from old times, before the Greeks
had learned even the first letters, the Hebrews were both themselves instructed
in the ethical branch, and freely imparted of the same instruction to those who
came to them.

CHAPTER V

ALSO the dialectic branch of Hebrew philosophy they thought it right to pursue
not, as the Greeks were wont, with clever sophistries, and arguments cunningly
framed to deceive, but by the conception of actual truth, which with souls
illumined by divine light their religious philosophers discovered, and were by
it enlightened. And to make those who were being instructed in the learning of
their country more keen in pursuit of this truth, they used even from the age of
infancy to deliver to them recitations of holy words, and tales from sacred
histories, and metrical compositions of psalms and canticles, problems also and
riddles, and certain wise and allegorical theories, combined with beauty of
language, and eloquent recitation in their own tongue.

Moreover they had certain expositors (δευτερωταί) of primary instruction (for so
it pleases them to name the interpreters of their scriptures), who by
translation and explanation made clear what was obscurely taught in riddles, if
not to all, at least to those who were fitted to hear these things.

Thus again Solomon the wisest among them started from this principle in the
beginning of his book of Proverbs, teaching us that this was mainly the cause of
his writing, by stating in express terms that every man ought to know wisdom,
and instruction, and to discern the words of understanding, and to perceive the
turns of language, and understand true righteousness, and give right judgement.
'That I may give,' he says, 'subtilty to the simple, and to the young man
perception and thoughtfulness. For the wise man will hear these things and be
wiser, and the man of understanding will obtain guidance: he will understand a
proverb and a dark saying, the words of the wise, and riddles.' 3

Suet were the terms of the promise of the said book: and the particular
Questions proposed and their solutions, and the dialectic treatment carried
through all their prophetic scriptures in a manner proper to the wisdom and
language of the authors, any one who wishes may learn by taking in hand and
studying at leisure the books of their discourse. And if any one were also to
study the language itself with critical taste, he would see that, for
Barbarians, the writers are excellent dialecticians, not at all inferior to
sophists or orators in his own language.

There would also be found among them poems in metre, like the great Song of
Moses and David's 118th Psalm, composed in what the Greeks call heroic metre. At
least it is said that these are hexameters, consisting of sixteen syllables:
also their other compositions in verse are said to consist of trimeter and
tetrameter lines, according to the sound of their own language.

While such is the relation of their diction to its logical sense, the thoughts
must not be brought into comparison with those of men. For they comprise the
oracles of God and of absolute truth to which they have given utterance,
prophecies, and predictions, and religious lessons, and doctrines relating to
the knowledge of the universe. And of the authors' accuracy in reasoning you may
find indications from their correctness in the application of names, concerning
which it will be evident that Plato also bears witness to the opinion of the
Hebrews, and is on this very point in agreement with the philosophy of their
authors, as indeed it is easy to discern from what follows.

CHAPTER VI

LONG before the name of philosophy was known to the Greeks, Moses had been the
first throughout all his writing to treat in numberless instances of the giving
of names, and sometimes had arranged the names of all things about him in exact
accordance with their nature, and at other times referred to God the decision of
the new name given to devout men, and had taught that names are given to things
by nature and not conventionally; Plato in following him assents to the same
opinions, and does not omit to mention Barbarians, and affirm that this custom
is maintained among them, hinting probably at the Hebrews, since it is not easy
to observe a theory of this kind among other Barbarians.

He says, at all events, in the Cratylus:

[PLATO] 'The name of anything is not whatever men agree to call it, pronouncing
over it some small portion of their own language, but there is a kind of natural
correctness in names, the same for all both Greeks and Barbarians.' 4 And then
farther on he says:

'So then as long as the legislator, whether here or among the Barbarians,
assigns to each thing the form of name that properly belongs to it, whatever
syllables he may use, you will not deem him to be a worse legislator, whether in
this country or anywhere else.' 5

Then again after asserting that the man who understands the correctness of names
is a dialectician and a legislator, he next speaks thus: 6 'A carpenter's work
then is to make a rudder under the superintendence of a pilot, if the rudder is
to be a good one.

'Evidently.

'And a legislator's work, as it seems, is to give a name, having a dialectician
to direct him, if the name is to be rightly given.

'That is true.

'The giving of names then, Hermogenes, is likely to be no light matter, as you
suppose, nor a work for light persons, nor for chance comers: and Cratylus
speaks truly, when he says that things have their names by nature, and that not
every one is an artist in names, but only that man who looking to the name which
by nature belongs to each thing is able to impose its form upon both the letters
and the syllables.'

After these statements, and many more, he again brings up the mention of the
Barbarians, and then expressly acknowledges that most of the names have come to
the Greeks from the Barbarians, saying in exact words: 7 'I have an idea that
the Greeks, and especially those who live under the Barbarians, have taken many
names from them.

'Well, what then?

'If any one should try to find how these names are fitly given according to the
Greek language, and not according to that language from which each name happens
to be derived, you know that he would be in difficulty.

'Naturally.' So says Plato. He is anticipated, however, by Moses; for hear what
he says, as being a wise legislator and withal a dialectician. 'And out of the
ground God formed all the beasts of the field and all the fowls of the heaven,
and brought them to Adam, to see what he would call them. And whatsoever Adam
called a living being, that was the name thereof.' 8 For by saying 'that was the
name thereof does he not show that the appellations were given in accordance
with nature? For the name just now given, he says, was long before contained in
the nature, and that in each of the things named there existed from the
beginning this name which the said man inspired by a superior power has given
it.

Moreover the very name Adam, being originally a Hebrew noun, would become with
Moses an appellation of the earth-born man, because among the Hebrews the earth
is called Adam, wherefore also the first man made out of the earth is with true
etymology called by Moses Adam. But the name may also have another meaning,
being otherwise taken for 'red,' and representing the natural colour of the
body. However, by the appellation 'Adam' he signified the earthlike, and
earthly, and earthborn, or the man of body and of flesh. But the Hebrews also
call man otherwise, giving him the name 'Enos,' 9 which they say is the rational
man within us, different in nature from the earthlike 'Adam.' Enos also has a
meaning of its own, being in the Greek language interpreted 'forgetful.' And
such the rational part within us is by nature apt to be, on account of its
combination with the mortal and irrational part. For the one being altogether
pure, and incorporeal, and divine, and rational, comprehends not only the memory
of the things that are past, but also the knowledge of the things that are to
come, through the supreme excellence of its vision. While the other close-packed
in flesh, pierced through with bones and nerves, and laden with the great and
heavy burden of the body, was seen by the Hebrew Scripture to be full of
forgetfulness and ignorance, and called by an apt designation 'Enos,' which
means 'the forgetful.'

It is written at least in a certain Prophet 'What is man, that Thou art mindful
of him? Or the son of man, that Thou visitest him?' 10 For which the Hebrew, in
the first naming of 'man,' contains the word 'Enos': as if he said more plainly,
What is this forgetful one, that Thou, O God, rememberest him, forgetful though
he is? And the other clause, 'Or the son of man that Thou visitest him? is read
among the Hebrews, 'Or the son of Adam': so that the same man is both Adam and
Enos; the fleshly nature being represented by Adam, and the rational by Enos. In
this way do the Hebrew oracles distinguish the etymology of the two words. But
Plato asserts that man is called ἄνθρωπος in the Greek language from looking
upward, saying:

'But man no sooner sees, that is the meaning of ὄπωπε, than he both looks up
(ἀναθρεῖ), and considers that which he has seen, that he may be one who looks up
at what he sees (ἀναθρῶν ἂ ὄπωπε).' 11

Again the Hebrews call the man 'Ish' (Εἷς): and the name is derived by them from Ἔς, by which they signify fire, that the man may be so named because of the hot and fiery temper of the masculine nature. But the woman, since she is said to have been taken out of man, also shares the name in common with the man: for the woman is called among them 'Issha,' as the man is 'Ish.' But Plato says that the man (ἀνήρ) is so named because of the upward flux (τὴν ἄνω ῥοήν); and he adds---- 'And γυνή (woman) seems to me to be the same as γονή (birth).' 12

Again Moses calls the heaven in the Hebrew tongue the firmament etymologically,
because the first thing after the incorporeal and intellectual essence is the
firm and sensible body of this world. But Plato says that the name οὐρανός is
rightly given to the heaven, because it makes us look upward (ὁραν ἄνω). 13

Again the Hebrews say that the highest and proper name of God may not be spoken
or uttered, nor even conceived in the imagination of the mind: but this actual
name by which they speak of God, they call Elohim, from El, as it seems: and
this they interpret as 'strength,' and 'power'; so that among them the name of
God has been derived by reasoning from His power and strength, by which He is
conceived as Allpowerful and Almighty, as having established all things. But
Plato says that the names θεός and θεοί (god and gods) were given because the
luminaries in heaven are always running (θέειν). 14 Of some such kind, to speak
generally, are the investigations of the Hebrews and those of Plato on the
correctness of names. The names also among men, Plato says, have been given with
some meaning, and he tries to render the reason of them: for he says that Hector
somehow or other is named from having and ruling (ἔχειν καὶ κρατεῖν) because he
was king of the Trojans;15 and Agamemnon because he was very persistent (ἄγαν
μένειν), and persevered vigorously and constantly in his determinations about
the Trojans;16 Orestes because of the mountainous (ὀρεινόν) and fierce and
savage quality of his disposition;17 and Atreus, because of his having been a
mischievous (ἀτηρόν) sort of person in character;18 and Pelops as one who saw
nothing at a distance, but only the things that were close and near (πέλας).19
Tantalus, he says, means a most miserable man (ταλάντατον) because of the
misfortunes which beset him.20

These examples and countless others such as these you will find stated by Plato,
in endeavouring to teach that the first men had their names given to them by
nature and not by convention. But you would not say that the explanations found
also in Moses are forced, nor framed according to any sophistical invention of
words, when you have learnt that the Hebrew 'Cain' is translated among the
Greeks as 'jealousy'; and the person in question was judged deserving of this
appellation because he was jealous of his brother Abel. 21

'Abel' also is interpreted 'sorrow,' because he too became the cause of such
suffering to his parents, who by some diviner foresight gave these names to
their children at birth. But what if I should quote Abraham to you? He was a
kind of meteorologist, and formerly, while he was acquiring the wisdom of the
Chaldees, he had become learned in the contemplation of the stars and in the
knowledge of the heavens, and was called Abram; and this in the Greek language
means 'high father.' But God leading him on from things of this world to things
invisible and lying beyond the things that are seen, employs an appropriate
change of name, saying, 'Thy name shall no more be called Abram, but Abraham
shall be thy name; for a father of many nations have I made thee.' 22

Now it would be long to tell with what thought this is connected: but it is
sufficient in this matter also to adopt Plato as a witness to my statement, when
he says that some names have been given by a more divine power.

He says indeed in express words:

'For here most of all ought care to have been taken in the giving of names: and
perhaps some of them may even have been given by a higher power than that of
men.' 23 This very point is also certified by many examples in the sacred
Scriptures of the Hebrews; and first of all by Moses, who taught that Abraham,
and his son Isaac, and also Israel, received their names from a diviner power.
'Isaac' is interpreted 'laughter,' bringing with it the token of the virtuous
joy, which God has promised to give as a special reward to the friends of God.
His son Israel had formerly borne the name of 'Jacob,' but instead of 'Jacob'
God bestows upon him the name 'Israel,' transforming the active and practical
man into the contemplative. 24 For 'Jacob' is interpreted 'supplanter,' as one
who strives in the contest of virtue:25 but 'Israel' is interpreted 'seeing
God,' a description which would suit the mind in man that is capable of
knowledge and contemplation.26

Why need I now refer to the perfect wisdom of Moses, or to the sacred oracles of
the Hebrews, to explain, by countless other examples, the correctness of their
imposition of proper names, when the details of the subject require longer
leisure? To go no farther, the Greeks would be unable to state the etymologies
even of the letters of the alphabet, nor could Plato himself tell the meaning or
the reason of the vowels or the consonants. But the Hebrews would tell us the
reason of 'Alpha,' which with them is called 'Al'ph,' and this signifies
'learning':27 and of 'Beta,' which it is their custom to call 'Beth,' which name
they give to a house; so as to show the meaning, 'learning of a house,' or as it
might be more plainly expressed, 'a kind of teaching and learning of household
economy.'

'Gamma' also is with them called 'Gimel': and this is their name for 'fullness.'
Then since they call tablets 'Delth,' they gave this name to the fourth letter,
signifying therewith by the two letters, that 'written learning is a filling of
the tablets.' And any one going over the remaining letters of the alphabet,
would find that they have been named among the Hebrews each with some cause and
reason. For they say also that the combination of the seven vowels contains the
enunciation of one forbidden name, which the Hebrews indicate by four letters
and apply to the supreme power of God, having received the tradition from father
to son that this is something unutterable and forbidden to the multitude. And
one of the wise Greeks having learned this, I know not whence, hinted it
obscurely in verse, saying as follows:

'Seven vowels tell My Name,----the Mighty God, The everlasting Father of mankind: The immortal lyre am I, that guides the world, And leads the music of the circling spheres.' 28

You would find also the meanings of the remaining Hebrew letters, by fixing your attention on each; but this we have already established by our former statements, when we were showing that the Greeks have received help in everything from the Barbarians. And any one diligently studying the Hebrew language would discover great correctness of names current among that people: since the very name which is the appellation of the whole race has been derived from Heber; and this means the man that 'passes over,' since both a passage and the one who passes over are called in the Hebrew language 'Heber.' 29 For the term teaches us to cross over and pass from the things in this world to things divine, and by no means to stay lingering over the sight of the things that are seen, but to pass from these to the unseen and invisible things of divine knowledge concerning the Maker and Artificer of the world. Thus the first people who were devoted to the one All-ruler and Cause of the Universe, and adhered to Him with a pure and true worship, they called Hebrews, naming men of this character as travellers who had in mind passed over from earthly things. But why should I spend more time in collecting all the instances of the propriety and correctness of the Hebrew names, when the subject requires a special treatise of its own. However, speaking generally, I think that even by what has been said I have supplied the evidence of the art of reasoning among the Hebrews: if indeed, as Plato said, it is a task for no mean or ordinary men, but for a wise lawgiver and dialectician, to discover the kind of names naturally belonging to things,----a man such as Moses who has made known to us the Hebrew oracles. So then what follows next after the subject of Dialectics, but to examine what was the condition of the Hebrew people in regard to Physics?

CHAPTER VII THIS third branch also of Hebrew philosophy which, we said, is
Physics, was divided among them also into the contemplation of things
incorporeal and discerned only by the mind, and the Natural Science of things
sensible. This too their all-accomplished Prophets knew, and mingled in their
own discourses, when the occasion required; for they had not learned it by
conjectures and by application of human thought, nor did they boast of men as
their teachers, but ascribed their knowledge to the inspiration of a Higher
Power, and the afflatus of a divine Spirit. From this source came their
countless prophecies concerning future events, and countless physical
explanations of the constitution of the world, and descriptions likewise
countless of the nature of animals, and very many things concerning plants which
each set down in his own prophecies. And Moses, understanding also the qualities
of precious stones extremely well, exercises a very careful consideration of
them in the case of the High Priest's dress. Again that Solomon, above all
others, excelled in knowledge of the nature of such things is testified by the
sacred Scripture in the following words:

'And Solomon spake three thousand proverbs, and his songs were five thousand;
and he spake of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop
that springeth out of the wall: he spake also of beasts, and of fowl, and of
creeping things, and of fishes. And there came all peoples to hear the wisdom of
Solomon, and from all the kings of the earth, as many as heard his wisdom.' 30

Starting from this description the author who ascribed to his person the
perfection of wisdom, spake also thus: 'For Himself gave me an unerring
knowledge of the things that are, to know the constitution of the world, and the
operation of the elements; the beginning and end and middle of times, the
alternations of the solstices and the changes of seasons, the circuits of the
year and the positions of stars; the natures of living creatures and the ragings
of wild beasts, the violences of winds and the thoughts of men, the diversities
of plants, and the virtues of roots; and all things that are either secret or
manifest I learned, for Wisdom the artificer of all things taught me.' 31 And
again the same Solomon, explaining the nature of the fleeting substance of
bodies, says in Ecclesiastes: 'Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. What profit
hath man in all his labour, wherein he laboureth under the Sun.' 32 And he adds:
'What is that which hath been? The very thing that shall be. And what is that
which hath been done? The very thing that shall be done. And there is nothing
new under the sun.' 33 For these and such as these were his physiological
conclusions concerning corporeal substance. And you will find, if you go on,
that the other wise Hebrews were not without a share of the like science. At all
events, as I said before, there are numberless sayings of theirs about plants
and animals, whether of the land or of the water, and moreover about the nature
of birds.

Nay further, about the constellations in the heaven also: since there is
conveyed in the writings of the said authors especial mention of Arctos and
Pleias, Orion and Arcturus, which the Greeks are wont to call Arctophylax and
Bootes.

Also concerning the constitution of the world, and the revolution and change of
the universe, and concerning the essence of the soul, and the creation of the
nature both visible and invisible, of all rational beings, and the universal
Providence, and still earlier than these, the . opinions concerning the First
Cause of the universe, and the doctrine of the divinity of the Second Cause, and
the arguments and speculations about the other things thai can be perceived only
by thought, they have comprehended accurately and well: so that one would not
err in saying, that those among the Greeks who have afterwards investigated the
nature of these things have been like younger men following the guidance of the
old. This then is what we have to say of their Natural Science of the Universe.
But as they divided this subject into two parts, the one which concerns things
perceived by the senses they did not think it necessary to make known accurately
to the multitude, nor to teach the common people the causes of the nature of
existing things, except only so far as it was necessary for them to know that
the universe has not been self-created, and has not been produced causelessly
and by chance from an irrational impetus, but is led on by the Divine Reason as
its guide, and governed by a power of ineffable Wisdom. With regard, however, to
things seen only by the mind, that they exist, and what they are, and what their
condition is in regard to arrangement, power, and diversity, has been already
mentioned and is laid down in the Sacred Books, and has been audibly delivered
to all men, so far as the knowledge was necessary for those who profess
religion, with a view to the recovery of a pious and sober life. But the deep
and occult reason of these things they left to be sought out and learned in
secret communications by those who were capable of being initiated in matters of
this kind. It will be well, however, to describe in a general way a few points
in the contemplation of these matters, and to show that herein also Plato
entertained the sentiments which were dear to the said people.

CHAPTER VIII BUT in fact it is manifest from his own words that the admirable
Plato followed the all-wise Moses and the Hebrew Prophets in regard also to the
teaching and speculation about things incorporeal and seen only by the mind;
whether it were that he learned from hearsay which had reached him (since he is
proved to have made his studies among the Egyptians at the very time when the
Hebrews, having been driven the second time out of their own country, were in
the habit of visiting Egypt during the Persian supremacy), or whether of himself
he hit upon the true nature of the things, or, in whatever way, was deemed
worthy of this knowledge by God. 'For God,' says the Apostle, 'manifested it
unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are
clearly seen, being perceived by means of the things that are made, even His
eternal power and divinity, that they may be without excuse.' 34 And you may
learn what I have stated by examining the matter as follows:

CHAPTER IX

MOSES in his declarations of sacred truth uttered a response in the person of
God: 'I AM THAT I AM. Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath
sent me unto you,' 35 and so represented God as the sole absolute Being, and
declared Him to have been properly and fitly honoured with this name. And
Solomon again spake concerning the origin and the decay of things corporeal and
sensible: 'What is that which hath been? The very thing that shall be. And what
is that which hath been done? The very thing that shall be done. And there is
nothing new under the sun, whereof a man shall speak and say, See, this is new.
It hath been already, in the ages which were before us.' 36 In accordance with
them we also divide the All into two parts, that which can be perceived only by
the mind, and that which can be perceived by the senses: and the former we
define as incorporeal and rational in its nature, and imperishable and immortal;
but the sensible as being always in flux and decay, and in change and conversion
of its substance. And all things being summed up and referred to one beginning,
we hold the doctrine that the uncreate, and that which has proper and true
being, is One, which is the cause of all things incorporeal and corporeal.

Now see in what manner Plato, having imitated not only the thought, but also the
very expressions and words of the Hebrew Scripture, appropriates the doctrine,
explaining it more at large, as follows:

'What is that which always is and has no becoming? And what is that which is
always becoming and never is? The former is that which may be comprehended by
intelligence combined with reason, being always in the same conditions. The
latter is that which may be conjectured by opinion with the help of unreasoning
sensation, becoming and perishing but never really being.' 37 Does it not
plainly appear that the admirable philosopher has altered the oracle which in
Moses declared 'I AM THAT I AM' 38 into 'What is that which always is and has no
becoming?' And this he has made still clearer when he says that true 'being' is
nothing else than that which is not seen by eyes of flesh, but is conceived by
the mind. So having asked, What is 'being'? he makes answer to himself, saying:
'That which may be comprehended by intelligence combined with reason.' And as to
Solomon's maxim which said, 'What is that which hath been? The very thing that
shall be. And what is that which hath been done? The very thing that shall be
done,' 39 it must be evident that he translated this almost in the very words,
saying, 'But that which may be conjectured by means of irrational sensation is
becoming and perishing, but never really "being."' To which he also adds: 40

'For all these are parts of time, the "was" and "shall be"; which we
unconsciously but wrongly transfer to the eternal essence. For we say that "It
was, and is, and shall be." But to this essence the "is" alone is truly
appropriate; and the "was" and the "will be" are proper to be spoken of the
generation in time, for they are movements. But to that which is always
immovably in the same conditions it belongs not to become either older or
younger through time: nor that it ever became, nor has now become, nor will be
hereafter at all, nor be subject to any of the conditions which becoming
attaches to the things which pass to and fro in sensation: but these are forms
of time, imitating eternity and moving by number in a circle. And besides these
there are such expressions as the following; what has become is become, and what
becomes is becoming, and what will become is about to become.' And lest any one
should suppose that I am misinterpreting the philosopher's words, I will make
use of commentaries which explain the meaning of these statements. There are
indeed many who have set themselves to the consideration of these matters; but
at present it is enough for me to quote the expressions of an illustrious man,
Numenius the Pythagorean, which he uses in his second Book Concerning the Good,
as follows:

CHAPTER X

[NUMENIUS] 41 'COME then, let us mount up as nearly as we possibly can to true
"being," and let us say that "being" neither at any time "was," nor ever can
"become," but always "is" in a definite time, the present only.

'If, however, any one wishes to rename this present time eternity, I too am
willing. But the time past we ought to consider altogether gone, already so gone
away and escaped as to exist no longer: and on the other hand the time to come
as yet is not, but professes to be able at some future time to come into being.

'It is not therefore reasonable to suppose "being," at least in one and the same
sense, either not to be or to be no longer, or not yet. Since when this is so
stated, there arises in the statement one great impossibility, that the same
thing at the same time should both be and not be.

'For if this were so, scarcely would it be possible for anything else to be, if
"being" itself in regard to its very "being" be not. For "being" is eternal and
constant, ever in the same condition, nor has it been generated and destroyed,
nor increased and diminished: nor did it ever yet become more or less: and
certainly neither in other senses nor yet locally will it be moved.

'For it is not right for it to be moved, either backward or forward: nor upward
ever, nor downward: neither to the right hand nor to the left shall "being" ever
pass: nor shall it ever be moved around its own centre; but rather it shall
stand fast, and shall be fixed and set firm, ever in the same conditions and
same mode.' And then, after other statements, he adds:

'So much then for my introduction. But for my own part I will no longer make
pretences, nor say that I do not know the name of the incorporeal; for now at
length it seems likely to be pleasanter to speak than not to speak it. And so
then I say that its name is that which we have so long been examining.

'But let no one laugh, if I affirm that the name of the incorporeal is "essence"
and "being." And the cause of the name "being" is that it has not been generated
nor will be destroyed, nor is it subject to any other motion at all, nor any
change for better or for worse; but is simple and unchangeable, and in the same
idea, and neither willingly departs from its sameness, nor is compelled by any
other to depart.

'Plato too said in the Cratylus 42 that names are exactly adapted to a likeness
of the things. Be it granted then and agreed that "being" is the incorporeal.'
Then lower down he adds:

'I said that "being" is incorporeal, and that this is that which can be
perceived by the mind only. Their statements then, so far as I can remember,
were certainly of this kind: but any one who feels the want of an explanation I
am willing to encourage with just this suggestion, that if these statements do
not agree with the doctrines of Plato, yet at least he must consider them to be
those of some other great man of the highest ability, such as Pythagoras.

'Plato at all events says 43 ----come, let me remember how he says it----What is that which, always is and has no becoming? And what that which is always becoming, and never is? The first that which may be comprehended by intelligence combined with reason, and the other that which may be conjectured by opinion with the aid of unreasoning sensation, becoming and perishing, but never really "being."

'For he was inquiring what is "being," and saying that it is unquestionably
without beginning. For he said that for "being" there is no becoming: for then
it would be changed, but that which is liable to change is not eternal.' Then
below he says:

'If then "being" is altogether and in every way eternal and unchangeable, and by
no means departs in any way from itself, but abides in the same conditions, and
remains fixed in the same manner, this surely must be that which can be
comprehended by intelligence combined with reason.

'But if body is in flux and is carried off by the change of the moment, it
passes away and no longer exists. Wherefore is it not utter folly to deny that
this is something undefinable, and that can only be conjectured by opinion, and,
as Plato says, becoming and perishing, but never really "being"? '

Thus then speaks Numenius, explaining clearly both Plato's doctrines and the much earlier doctrines of Moses. With reason therefore is that saying currently attributed to him, in which it is recorded that he said, 'For what else is Plato than Moses speaking Attic Greek?' But see, besides this, whether Plutarch in further unfolding the same thought may not agree both with the statements of philosophers which have been brought forward, and the theological doctrines of the Hebrews set forth again in other places, whereby at one time the God who makes answer is introduced as saying: 44 'For I am the LORD your God, and I am not changed': and at another time the Prophet directs his speech with a view to Him, saying that the things which are seen would all some time be changed and removed, 'but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.' 45 Observe then whether----when He who spake in Moses, as if proposing a question, said,'I AM THAT I AM,' and, 'I am the LORD your God, and I am not changed': and again, 'But Thou art (εἶ) the same'----whether, I say. Plutarch would not seem to be interpreting the meaning of this in his treatise Concerning the Εἶ at Delphi, when he speaks word for word thus: 46

CHAPTER XI

'NEITHER number therefore, nor order, nor conjunction, nor any other of the
non-significant particles, does the letter seem to indicate. But it is an
address and appellation of the god complete in itself, which as soon as the word
is uttered sets the speaker thinking of the power of the god.

'For the god, welcoming as it were each of us who approach him here, addresses
to us the words "Know thyself," which is nothing less than "Hail": and we
answering the god again say "Thou art" (Εἶ), rendering to him the appellation of
"being" as his true and unerring and solely appropriate name.

'For we have in reality no share in "being," but every mortal nature is set in
the midst between becoming and perishing, and presents a phantom and a faint and
uncertain seeming of itself.

'And if any one closely press the thought, from wishing to grasp it, then just
as the violent grasping of water by pressing and squeezing it together causes
what was enclosed to slip through and be lost, so when Reason seeks too much
actuality in any thing passible and subject to change, it goes astray on this
side to the part that is becoming, and on that to the part that is perishing,
being unable to lay hold of anything permanent, or of any true "being."

'For it is not possible, according to Heracleitus,47 to step twice into the same
river, nor to touch a mortal substance twice in the same condition, but by the
swiftness and suddenness of its change it scatters and again collects, or rather
we must not say "again" nor "afterwards," but it is at the same time both
combining and passing away, both coming on and going off.

'Wherefore neither does the part that is becoming attain to being, because the
becoming never ceases nor stands still; but from a seed by constant change it
makes an embryo, then a babe, then a child, in due order a youth, a young man, a
man, an elder, an old man, destroying the first becomings and ages by those
which come after.

'We, however, are ridiculously afraid of one death, although we have already
died and are dying so many. For not only, as Heracleitus used to say, is "the
death of fire the birth of air," 48 but still more manifestly in our own case
the man in his prime perishes when the old man is coming, and the young man has
passed away into the man in his prime, and the child into the young man, and the
infant into the child, and the man of yesterday has died into the man of to-day,
and the man of to-day (is dying) into the man of to-morrow; and not one abides
nor is one, but we become many, while matter is circulating around some one
phantom and common mould, and then slipping away.

'Else how is it, if we remain the same, that we delight now in some things,
formerly in others, that we love and hate the contrary things, and praise and
blame, use different language, have different feelings, retain no more the same
appearance, form, or thought?

'For neither is it natural to have different feelings without a change, nor can
one who changes be the same. But if he is not the same, he is not, but is
changing from this, and becoming other from other: and our sense, through
ignorance of true "being," falsely declares the apparent to "be."

'What then is true "being"? The eternal and uncreate, and imperishable, to which
no time brings change. For time is something moveable, and imagined in connexion
with the movement of matter, and ever flowing and not holding water, as it were
a vessel of perishing and becoming. And so when it is said of time "after" and
"before," and "will be" and "has been," there is at once an acknowledgement of
"not-being."

'For to say of that which has not yet come into being, or has already ceased
from being, that it "is" is silly and absurd. But at the very moment when,
trying to fix our perception of time, we say "it is present," "it is here," and
"now," our reason slips away again from this and loses it. For it is thrust
aside into the future and into the past, just as a visual ray is distorted with
those who try to see what is necessarily separated by distance.

'And if the nature which is measured is subject to the same conditions as the
time which measures it, this nature itself has no permanence, nor "being," but
is becoming and perishing according to its relation to time.

'Hence nothing of this kind may be said of "being," such as "was" or "will be":
for these are a kind of inflexions, and transitions, and alternations of that
which is not fitted by nature to continue in ''being."

'But we ought to say of God, HE is, and is in relation to no time, but in
relation to eternity the motionless, and timeless, and changeless, in which is
no "before" nor "after," nor future, nor past, nor elder nor younger: but being
One He has filled the "Ever" with the one "Now"; and is the sole self-dependent
real "Being," having neither past nor future, without beginning and without end.

'Thus then ought we in worship to salute and address Him, or even indeed as some
of the ancients did, THOU ART ONE, For the Deity is not many, as each of us is,
a promiscuous assemblage of all kinds compounded of numberless differences
arising in its conditions: but "being" must be One, just as One must be "being":
for otherness, as a differentia of "being," inclines towards a becoming of
"not-being."'

CHAPTER XII

WHEREAS Moses and all the Hebrew Prophets teach that the Divine nature is
ineffable, and indicate the symbol of the ineffable Name by the notation which
may not be pronounced among them, hear how Plato also in agreement with them
speaks in his great Epistle word for word.

[Ps.-PLATO] 'For it can by no means be defined in words as other branches of
learning, but from long converse on the subject itself, and from living with it,
on a sudden a light, as it were kindled from a spark leaping out of the fire,
comes to the soul, and thenceforth is self-sustained.' 49 This example also of
'light' another Hebrew Prophet had previously set forth, saying, 'The light of
Thy countenance, O Lord, was shown upon us.' 50 And again another, 'In Thy light
shall we see light.' 51

CHAPTER XIII As Moses declared concerning the God of all the world, 'Hear, O
Israel, the LORD our God is one LORD,' 52 Plato again concurring with him
teaches that there is one God as also one heaven, speaking thus in the Timaeus:

[PLATO] 'Have we then been right in speaking of one heaven, or was it more
correct to say that there are many and infinite? One, if indeed it is to have
been created according to the pattern. For that which includes the ideals of all
living creatures whatsoever cannot possibly be second to another.' 53 But that
he has a knowledge of one God, even though in accordance with the custom of the
Greeks he commonly speaks of them as many, is evident from the Epistle to
Dionysius, in which, giving marks to distinguish his letters written in earnest
from those thrown off at random, he said that he would put the name of 'The
gods' as a sign at the head of those which contained nothing serious, but the
name of 'God' at the head of those which were thoughtfully composed by him.
Accordingly he thus speaks word for word: 54

[PS.-PLATO] 'With regard then to the distinctive mark concerning the letters
which I may write seriously, and which not, though I suppose you remember it.
nevertheless bear it in mind and give great attention to it. For there are many
who bid me to write, whom it is not easy for me openly to refuse. So then the
serious letter begins with "God," and the less serious with "gods." ' And the
same author expressly acknowledges that he has learned the doctrine of the one
'God' from men of old, as he says in the Laws:

'God then, as the old tradition says, holding the beginning and end and middle
of all things that exist, passes straight through while travelling round in
nature's course. Justice is ever His companion, taking vengeance on those who
depart from the divine law: and the man who is to be happy holds fast to her and
follows on humbly in orderly array. But if any man lifted up by arrogance, or
elated by riches or honours, or personal beauty, has his soul inflamed with
youthfulness and folly combined with insolence, as feeling no need of a ruler or
guide, but being competent even to guide others, he is left forsaken of God: and
when he is thus forsaken, and has also taken to himself others of like mind, he
prances about and throws all things into confusion, and to many he seems to be
somebody, but after no long time pays to justice no contemptible penalty, and
brings utter destruction upon himself as well as on his family and city.' 55

Thus Plato writes. And now beside the description, 'God holding the beginning
and end and middle of all things that exist,' set thou this from Hebrew
prophecy, 'I God am first and I am with the last':56 and beside the sentence,
'passes straight through while travelling on in nature's course,' set this, 'His
countenance doth behold uprightness.' 57

Also with the phrase, 'Justice is ever His companion, taking vengeance on those
who depart from the divine law,' compare this, 'Righteous is the LORD, and He
loveth righteousness';58 and this, 'Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, saith the
LORD ';59 and this, 'For the Lord is an avenger, and repayeth them that work
exceeding proudly';60 and with this, 'the man who is to be happy holds fast to
her and follows on humbly in orderly array,' there agrees,'Thou shalt walk after
the LORD thy God.' 61 And with this, 'But he that is lifted up by pride is left
forsaken of God,' agrees, 'God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the
humble';62 and, 'But the joy of the ungodly is a sudden fall.' 63 These then are
a few out of countless passages concerning Him who is God over all. But observe
also the passages concerning the Second Cause.

CHAPTER XIV IN regard then to the First Cause of all things let this be our
admitted form of agreement. But now consider what is said concerning the Second
Cause, whom the Hebrew oracles teach to be the Word of God, and God of God, even
as we Christians also have ourselves been taught to speak of the Deity.

First then Moses expressly speaks of two divine Lords in the passage where he
says, 'Then the LORD rained from the LORD fire and brimstone upon the city of
the ungodly ': 64 where he applied to both the like combination of Hebrew
letters in the usual way; and this combination is the mention of God expressed
in the four letters, which is with them unutterable. In accordance with him
David also, another Prophet as well as king of the Hebrews, says, 'The LORD said
unto my Lord, sit Thou on My right hand,' 65 indicating the Most High God by the
first LORD, and the second to Him by the second title. For to what other is it
right to suppose that the right hand of the Unbegotten God is conceded, than to
Him alone of whom we are speaking? This is He whom the same prophet in other
places more clearly distinguishes as the Word of the Father, supposing Him whose
deity we are considering to be the Creator of the universe, in the passage where
he says, 'By the Word of the LORD were the heavens made firm.' 66

He introduces the same Person also as a Saviour of those who need His care,
saying, 'He sent His Word and healed them.' 67 And Solomon, David's son and
successor, presenting the same thought by a different name, instead of the
'Word' called Him Wisdom, making the following statement as in her person:

'I Wisdom made prudence my dwelling, and called to my aid knowledge and
understanding.' 68 Then afterwards he adds, 'The LORD formed me as the beginning
of His ways with a view to His works: from everlasting He established me, in the
beginning before He made the earth, . . . before the mountains were settled, and
before all hills He begat me. . . . When He was preparing the heaven, I was
beside Him.' 69 And there is this again of the same author, 'God by Wisdom
founded the earth, and by understanding He prepared the heavens.' 70 The
following also is said to be the same author's: 'And all things that are either
secret or manifest I learned: for Wisdom, the artificer of all things, taught
me.' 71

Then he adds, 'But what wisdom is, and how she came into being, I will declare,
and will not hide mysteries from you, but will trace her out from the beginning
of creation.' 72 And afterwards he gives such explanations as the following:
'For she is a spirit quick of understanding, holy, alone in kind, manifold,
subtil, freely moving, clear in utterance, unpolluted, . . . all-powerful,
all-survey ing, and penetrating through all spirits, that are quick of
understanding, pure, most subtil. For wisdom is more mobile than any motion;
yea, she pervadeth and penetrateth all things by reason of her pureness. For she
is a breath of the power of God, and a clear effluence of the glory of the
Almighty. Therefore can nothing defiled find entrance into her. For she is an
effulgence from everlasting light, and an unspotted mirror of the operation of
God, and an image of His goodness.73 . . . And she reacheth from end to end with
full strength, and ordereth all things graciously.'74 Thus the Scripture speaks:
but Philo the Hebrew, explaining the meaning of the doctrine more clearly,
represents it in the manner following:

CHAPTER XV

[PHILO] 75 'FOR it becomes those who have made companionship with knowledge to
desire to behold the true Being, but should they be unable, then at least to
behold His image, the most holy Word.' Also in the same treatise he says this:
76

'But even if one be not as yet worthy to be called the son of God, let him
strive earnestly to be adorned after the likeness of His first-begotten Word,
who is the eldest of the Angels, and as an Archangel has many names.

'For He is called the Beginning, and the Name of God, and the Word, and the Man
after God's image, and He who seeth Israel. For which cause I was induced a
short time ago to praise the virtues of those who assert that we are all sons of
one Man.77

'For even if we have not yet become fit to be deemed children of God, yet surely
we may be children of His eternal Image, the most holy Word: for His eldest Word
is the Image of God.' And again he adds: 78

'I have, however,heard also one of the companions of Moses utter an oracle of
this kind: Behold I the man whose name is the East.79 A very strange
appellation, if you suppose the man who is composed of body and soul to be
meant: but if you mean that incorporeal Being who wears the divine form, you
will fully acknowledge that the 'East' was happily given to Him as a most
appropriate name: for the Universal Father made Him rise as His eldest Son, whom
elsewhere He named "First-begotten." And indeed He that was begotten, imitating
the ways of His Father, looked to His archetypal patterns in giving form to the
various species.'

Let it suffice at this point to have made these quotations from, the Hebrew
Philo, taken from the treatise inscribed with the title, On the worse plotting
against the better.80 But already in an earlier part of The Preparation for the
Gospel, in setting forth the doctrines of the religion of the ancient Hebrews, I
have also sufficiently discussed those which relate to the Second Cause, and to
those passages I will now refer the earnest student. Since therefore these have
been the theological opinions held among the Hebrews in the way that I have
described concerning the Second Cause of the Universe, it is now time to listen
to Plato speaking as follows in the Epinomis:

CHAPTER XVI

[PLATO] 81 'AND let us not, in assigning offices to them, give to this one a
year, and to that a month, and to others appoint no portion, nor any time in
which to perform his course, and help to complete the order, which Reason
(λόγος), of all things most divine, appointed; Reason, which the happy man at
first admires, and then gets a desire to understand, as much as is possible for
mortal nature.'

Also in the Epistle to Hermeias, and Erastus, and Coriscus, he has laid down the
doctrine with excellent caution, writing as follows word for word: 82

'This letter you three must all read, together if possible; but if not, by two
and two together, as you can, as often as possible: and must make an agreement
and valid law, adding an oath as is right, and with earnestness not unworthy of
the Muses, and with culture the sister of earnestness, invoking the God who is
the Ruler of all things that are and that shall be, and Father and Lord of Him
who is the Ruler and the Cause: Whom, if we rightly study philosophy, we all
shall know clearly as far as is possible for favoured mortals.' Does it not seem
to you that in speaking thus Plato has followed the doctrines of the Hebrews? Or
from what other source did it occur to him to name another God who is mightier
than the cause of all things, whom also he calls Father of the All-ruler? And
whence came his idea of setting the name of Lord on the Father of the Demiurge,
though never before him had any one brought this to the ears of the Greeks, nor
even set it down in. his own mind. And if we yet want other witnesses for an
indisputable confirmation of the philosopher's meaning, and of the construction
of our argument, hear what explanations Plotinus gives in the treatise which he
composed Concerning the three Primary Hypostases, writing as follows:

CHAPTER XVII

[PLOTINUS] 83 'IF any one admires this world of sense, beholding at once its
greatness and beauty and the order of its eternal course, and the gods that are
therein, some visible, and some invisible, the daemons, and animals and all
kinds of plants, let him mount up to its original pattern and to the more real
world, and there let him see all intelligible things, and things which are of
themselves eternal in their own understanding and life, see also the pure
intelligence and the infinite wisdom that presides over them.' Then afterwards
in addition to this he says:

'Who then is He that begat Him? He who is simple, and prior to a plurality of
this kind, who is the cause both of His being, and of His plurality. For number
came not first: since before the duad is the one; and the duad is second, and
produced from the one.' 84 And again he goes on and adds: 85

'How then and what must we conceive concerning that abiding substance? A light
shining around and proceeding from it, while it remains itself unchanged, as
from the sun proceeds the bright surrounding light that runs around it, ever
produced out of it, while it remains unchanged itself.

'And all existing things, so long as they remain, give forth necessarily from
their own essence and from the power present in the substance which surrounds
them externally and is dependent upon them, being as it were an image of the
archetypes from which it sprang.

'Thus fire gives forth the heat which proceeds from it, and snow does not merely
retain its cold within itself. And especially all fragrant things bear witness
to this fact: for as long as they exist, a something from them goes forth around
them, which is enjoyed by whatever is near.

'Moreover all things as soon as they are perfect begin to generate: so that
which is always perfect is always generating a something eternal, and what it
generates is less than itself.

'What then must we say concerning the Most Perfect? That He either generates
nothing from Himself, or the things which are the greatest next to Himself. But
after Him mind is the greatest and the second. For the mind beholds Him and has
need of Him alone, but He has no need of it: and that which is begotten from a
superior mind, must be mind; and mind is superior to all things, because all the
rest come after it.' After this he says further: 86

'Now everything desires and loves that which begat it, and especially when that
which begat and that which is begotten exist alone. And when that which begat is
also the very best, the begotten is necessarily so joined with it, as to be
separated only by its otherness. But, since it is necessary to speak more
plainly, I mean that mind is His image.' And to this again he adds: 87

'This is the reason also of Plato's trinities: for he says that around the King
of all are all the primaries, and around the second the secondaries, and around
the third the tertiaries. He says also that the Cause has a Father, meaning that
Mind is the Cause, for with Plato Mind is the Creator.

'And Mind, he says, makes the Soul in that cup of his. And the Cause which is
Mind has for its Father, he says, the Good, and that which transcends both Mind
and essence. But in many places he speaks of Being and of Mind as the Idea. So
that Plato recognizes Mind as proceeding from the Good, and the Soul from Mind:
and these are no new doctrines, nor now first stated, but long since, though not
publicly divulged: and the doctrines of the present time have been
interpretations of the former, which by the testimony of Plato's own writings
have confirmed the antiquity of these opinions.' This is what Plotinus says. And
Numenius highly commending Plato's doctrines in his treatise Of the Good gives
his own interpretation of the Second Cause, as follows:

CHAPTER XVIII

[NUMENIUS] 88 'THE man who is to understand about the First and Second God must
previously distinguish the several questions by some orderly arrangement: and
after this seems to be set right, he must then endeavour also to discuss the
matter in a becoming manner, or otherwise not at all. Else he who handles it
prematurely, before the first steps have been taken, will find his treasure
become dust, as the saying is.

'Let us then not suffer the same; but after invoking God to be the guide of our
discussion concerning Himself, and to show us the treasure of His thoughts, so
let us commence. At once we must offer our prayer, and then make our
distinction.

'The First God, being in Himself, is simple, because, being united throughout
with Himself, He can never be divided. God however the Second and Third is one:
but by being associated with matter which is duality, He makes it one, but is
Himself divided by it, because it has a tendency to concupiscence, and is always
in flux.

'Therefore by not adhering to the intelligible (for so He would have been
adhering to Himself), because He regards matter and gives attention to it, He
becomes regardless of Himself.

'And He lays hold of the sensible and busies Himself with it, and moreover from
setting His desire upon matter He takes it tip into His own moral nature.' And
after other statements he says:

'For it is not at all becoming that the First God should be the Creator; also
the First God must be regarded as the father of the God who is Creator of the
world.

'If then we were inquiring about the creative principle, and asserting that He
who was pre-existent would thereby be preeminently fit for the work, this would
have been a suitable commencement of our argument.

'But if we are not discussing the creative principle, but inquiring about the
First Cause, I renounce what I said, and wish that to be withdrawn, but will
pass on in pursuit of my argument, and hunt it out from another source.

'Before capturing our argument, however, let us make an agreement between
ourselves such as no one who hears it 'can doubt, that the First God is free
from all kinds of work and reigns as king, but the Creative God governs, and
travels through the heaven.

'And by Him comes also our equipment for the chase, mind being sent down in
transmission to all who have been appointed to partake of it. .

'So when God is looking at and turned towards each of us, the result is that our
bodies then live and revive, while God cherishes them with His radiations. But
when He turns away to the contemplation of Himself, these bodies become
extinguished, but the mind is alive and enjoying a life of blessedness.' This is
what Numenius writes. And now do you set beside it the passages from David's
prophecy, sung of old among the Hebrews in the following fashion: 'How mighty
are Thy works, O Lord: in wisdom hast Thou made them all. The earth is filled
with Thy creation.89 ... All things wait upon Thee, to give them their meat in
due season. When Thou givest it them, they will gather it; and when Thou openest
Thine hand, they all will be satisfied with goodness. But when Thou turnest away
Thy face, they will be troubled: if Thou takest away their breath, they will
die, and turn again to their dust. Thou wilt send forth Thy Spirit, and they
will be created, and Thou wilt renew the face of the earth.' 90 For in what
would this differ from the thought of the philosopher, which declares, as we
saw, that 'When God is looking at and turned towards each of us, the result is
that our bodies then live and revive, while God cherishes them with His
radiations; but when God turns to the contemplation of Himself, these become
extinguished.' And again, whereas with us the Word of Salvation says, 'I am the
vine, . . . My Father is the husbandman, ... ye are the branches,'91 hear what
Numenius says concerning the deity of the Second Cause.

[NUMENIUS] 92 'And as again there is a relation between the husbandman and him
that planteth, exactly in the same way is the First God related to the Demiurge.
The former being the seed of all soul sows it in all things that partake of
Himself. But the Lawgiver plants, and distributes, and transplants into each of
us the germs which have been previously deposited from that higher source.' And
afterwards again he speaks as follows of the mode in which the Second Cause
arose out of the First.93

'Now all things which, when given, pass to the receiver, and have left the giver, such as are attendance, property, silver unstamped or coined,----these things, I say, are mortal and human: but divine things are such as, when they are distributed and have come from one to another, have not forsaken the former, and have brought with them benefit to the latter, without hurting the other; nay, have brought him a further benefit by recalling to memory what he understood before.

'Now this excellent thing is that good knowledge which brings profit to the
receiver and is not lost to the giver. Just as you may see a lamp lit from
another lamp shining with a light of which it did not deprive the former, but
had its own material kindled at the other's flame.

'Such a thing is knowledge, which when given and received remains the same with
the giver, and is communicated to the receiver.

'And the cause of this, my friend, is not anything human; but that the state and
essence which possesses knowledge is the same both in God who has given, and in
you and me who have received it.

'Wherefore also Plato said that wisdom was brought to mankind "with a brilliant
flame of fire by Prometheus."' 94 And again afterwards lower down he says:

'Now the modes of life of the First God and of the Second are these: evidently
the First God will be at rest, while the Second on the contrary is in motion. So
then the First is engaged with intelligibles, and the Second with both
intelligibles and sensibles. 'And be not surprised at my saying this, for you
are going to hear something far more surprising. For instead of that motion
which belongs to the Second I assert that the rest which belongs to the First is
His natural motion, from which both the order of the world, and its eternal
continuance, and its safety is diffused throughout the universe.' 95 After this
in the sixth Book also he adds the following: 96

'Since Plato knew that the Creator alone was known among men, but that the First
Mind, which is called Absolute Being, is altogether unknown among them,
therefore he spoke in this way, just as if one were to say; The First Mind, my
good sirs, is not that which you imagine, but another mind before it, more
ancient and more divine.' And after other passages he adds:

'A pilot when driven along in mid ocean, sits high above the helm, and steers
the ship by the tillers, but his eyes and mind are strained directly at the sky,
looking at things aloft, as his course passes across the heaven above, while he
sails upon the sea below. So also the Creator having bound matter together in
harmony that it may neither break out nor slip away, is Himself seated above
matter, as above a ship on the sea: and in directing the harmony He steers by
the ideas, while instead of the sky He looks to the High God who attracts His
eyes, and takes His judgement from that contemplation, and His energy from that
impulse.'

Also the Word of our Salvation says, 'The Son can do nothing of Himself, but
what He seeth the Father doing.' 97 Enough, however, has been said by Numenius
on this subject: and there is no need to add anything to his own words to show
that he was explaining not his own opinions but Plato's. And that Plato is not
the first who has made these attempts, but has been anticipated by the Hebrew
sages, has been proved by the examples already set forth. Naturally therefore
Amelius also, who was distinguished among recent philosophers, and above all
others an admirer of Plato's philosophy, who moreover called the Hebrew
theologian a Barbarian, even though he did not deign to mention John the
Evangelist by name, nevertheless bears witness to his statements, writing
exactly what follows word for word:

CHAPTER XIX

[AMELIUS] 98 'AND this then was the Word, on whom as being eternal depended the
existence of the things that were made, as Heracleitus also would maintain,99
and the same forsooth of whom, as set in the rank and dignity of the beginning,
the Barbarian maintains that He was with God and was God: through whom
absolutely all things were made; in whom the living creature, and life, and
being had their birth: and that He came down into bodies, and clothed Himself in
flesh, and appeared as man, yet showing withal even then the majesty of His
nature; aye, indeed, even after dissolution He was restored to deity, and is a
God, such as He was before He came down to dwell in the body, and the flesh, and
Man.'

This, it must be evident, is paraphrased from the Barbarian's theology, no
longer under any veil, but openly at last and 'with forehead bold and bare.' 100
And who was this Barbarian of his but our Saviour's Evangelist John, a Hebrew of
the Hebrews? Who in the beginning of his own Scripture states the doctrine of
the deity thus, 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made
by Him, and without Him was not anything made that hath been made. In Him was
life, and the life was the light of men.101 . . . And the Word became flesh, and
dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the Only-begotten from the
Father.'102

Hear also what another Hebrew theologian says concerning the same Person: 'Who
is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation: for in Him
were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, whether visible or
invisible,... and by Him all things consist, and in Him were they all created.'
But since we have found such agreement between the philosophers of the Greeks
and the doctrines of the Hebrews concerning the constitution and substantiation
of the Second Cause, let us then pass on to other matters.

CHAPTER XX

WHEREAS next to the doctrine of Father and Son the Hebrew oracles class the Holy
Spirit in the third place, and conceive the Holy and Blessed Trinity in such a
manner as that the third Power surpasses every created nature, and that it is
the first of the intellectual essences constituted through the Son, and third
from the First Cause, observe how Plato also intimated some such thoughts,
speaking thus in his Epistle to Dionysus:

[PLATO] 103 'I must explain it to you then in riddles, that if the tablet suffer
any harm in the remote parts of sea or land, the reader may learn nothing. For
the matter is thus: Around the King of the Universe are all things, and all are
for His sake, and that is the cause of all things beautiful: and around the
Second are the secondary things, and around the Third the tertiary. The soul of
man therefore strains after them to learn what sort of things they are, looking
upon the things akin to its own nature.'

These statements are referred, by those who attempt to explain Plato, to the
First God, and to the Second Cause, and thirdly to the Soul of the Universe,
defining it also as a third God. But the sacred Scriptures regard the Holy and
Blessed Trinity o'f Father and Son and Holy Ghost as the beginning, according to
the passages already set forth. The next point to this is to examine the nature
of the Good.

CHAPTER XXI THE Sacred Scripture of the Hebrews explains the nature of the Good
in various ways, and teaches that the Good itself is nothing else than God, both
in the statement, 'The LORD is good to all them that wait for Him, to the soul
that will seek Him,'104 and in this, 'O give thanks unto the LORD; for He is
good: for His mercy endureth for ever';105 and also by what the Word of our
Salvation declared to the man who asked Him concerning this, saying,'Why askest
thou Me concerning that which is good? None is good save one, even God.'106 Now
then listen to what Plato says in the Timaeus: 107

'Let me then tell you for what cause the Creator formed a creation, and made
this universe. He was good. And in one who is good no jealousy of anything ever
finds place: and being free from jealousy He desired that all things should be
made as like to Himself as possible.' In the Republic also he speaks thus: 108

'Is it not true then that the sun though not itself sight, is yet the cause of
sight, and is itself discerned by this very sight? It is so, said he. Well then,
said I, you may say that this is he whom I call the offspring of the good, whom
the good begat as analogous to itself, that this should be in the visible world
in relation to sight and the things of sight, what the good is in the
intellectual world in relation to mind and the things of mind.' And afterwards
he adds:

'Well then, this which imparts truth to the things which are known, and bestows
on the knower his faculty of knowledge, this you may call the idea of the good.'
109 And again he says:

'You would say, I suppose, that the sun imparts to visible things not only their
power of being seen, but also their generation, growth, and nourishment, though
he is not himself generation. How could it be otherwise? You would also say then
that things which become known receive from the good not only the property of
being known, but also their existence and their essence, though the good is not
an essence, but far transcends essence in dignity and power.' 110

Herein Plato says most distinctly that the intellectual essences receive from
'the good,' meaning of course from God, not merely the property of being known,
but also their existence and essence; and that'the good ' is 'not an essence,
but far transcends essence in dignity and power.' So that he does not regard the
ideas as co-essential, nor yet suppose that they are unbegotten, because they
have received their existence and their essence from Him who is not an essence,
but far transcends essence in dignity and power, whom alone the Hebrew oracles
with good reason proclaim as God, as being the cause of all things. So then
things which have neither their existence nor their essence from themselves, nor
yet are of the nature of the good, cannot reasonably be regarded as gods, since
the good does not belong to them by nature: for to One only and to no other can
this be ascribed, to the Only Good, which Plato admirably proclaimed as 'far
transcending all essence both in dignity and power.' Again Numenius also in his
treatise Of the Good, in explaining Plato's meaning, discourses in the following
manner:

CHAPTER XXII

[NUMENIUS] 111 'BODIES, therefore, we may conceive by inferences drawn from
observing similar bodies, and from the tokens existing in the bodies before us:
but there is no possibility of conceiving the good from anything that lies
before us, nor yet from anything simil'ar that can be perceived by the senses.
For example, a man sitting on a watch-tower, having caught a quick glimpse of a
small fishing-boat, one of those solitary skiffs, left alone by itself, and
caught in the troughs of the waves, sees the vessel at one glance. Just so,
then, must a man withdraw far from the things of sense, and commune in solitude
with the good alone, where there is neither man nor any other living thing, nor
body great or small, but a certain immense, indescribable, and absolutely divine
solitude, where already the occupations, and splendours of the good exist, and
the good itself, in peace and benevolence, that gentle, gracious, guiding power,
sits high above all being.

'But if any one, obstinately clinging to the things of sense, fancies that he
sees the good hovering over them, and then in luxurious living should suppose
that he has found the good, he is altogether mistaken. For in fact no easy
pursuit is needed for it, but a godlike effort: and the best plan is to neglect
the things of sense, and with vigorous devotion to mathematical learning to
study the properties of numbers, and so to meditate carefully on the question,
What is being? ' This is in the first Book. And in the fifth he speaks as
follows: 112

'Now if essence and the idea is discerned by the mind, and if it was agreed that
the mind is earlier than this and the cause of it, then mind itself is alone
found to be the good. For if God the Creator is the beginning of generation, the
good is the beginning of essence. And God the Creator is related to the good, of
which He is an imitator, as generation is to essence, of which it is a likeness
and an imitation.

'For if the Creator who is the author of generation is good, the Creator also of
essence will doubtless be absolute good, innate in essence. For the second god,
being twofold, is the self-maker of the idea of Himself, and makes the world as
its Creator: afterwards He is wholly given to contemplation.

'Now as we have by our reasoning gathered names for four things, let them be
these four. The first, God, absolute good; His imitator, a good Creator: then
essence, one kind of the first God, another of the Second; and the imitation of
this essence, the beautiful world, adorned by participation in the beautiful.'
Also in the sixth Book he adds:

'But the things which partake of Him participate in nothing, else, but only in
wisdom: in this way then, but in no other, they may enjoy the communion of the
good. And certainly this wisdom has been found to belong to the First alone. If
then this belongs exclusively to Him alone, from whom all other things receive
their colouring and their goodness, none but a stupid soul could doubt any
longer.

'For if the second God is good, not of Himself but from the First, how is it
possible that He, by communion with whom this Second is good, should not Himself
be good, especially if the Second has partaken of Him as being good?

'It is in this way that Plato has shown by syllogistic reasoning to any one who
is clear-sighted that the good is one.' And again afterwards he says:

'But Plato represented these things as true differently in different places; for
in the Timaeus peculiarly he wrote the common inscription on the Creator,
saying, "He was good." 113 But in the Republic he called the good the idea of
good: meaning that the idea of the Creator was the good, because to us He is
manifested as good by participation in the First and only Good.

'For as men are said to have been fashioned by the idea of man, and oxen by that
of an ox, and horses by the idea of a horse; so also naturally if the Creator is
good by participation in the First Good, the first Mind would be an idea, as
being absolute good.'

CHAPTER XXIII

[PLATO] 'AND having been created in this way' (evidently the world is meant) 'it
has been framed with a view to that which is apprehended by reason and thought
and which is unchangeable. And if this be so, it necessarily follows that this
world is an image of something.114 . . . For that contains in itself all
intelligible beings, just as this world contains us.'115 So Plato speaks in the
Timaeus. And the meaning of his statements I will set forth from the collections
of Didymus Concerning the Opinions of Plato: and this is how he writes:

[DIDYMUS] 116 'He says that the Ideas are certain patterns arranged class by
class of the things which are by nature sensible, and that these are the sources
of the different sciences and definitions. For besides all individual men there
is a certain conception of man: and besides all horses, of a horse; and
generally, besides the animals, a conception of an animal uncreated and
imperishable.

'And in the same way as many impressions are made of one seal, and many images
of one man, so from each single idea of the objects of sense a multitude of
individual natures are formed, from the idea of man all men, and in like manner
in the case of all other things in nature.

'Also the idea is an eternal essence, cause, and principle, making each thing to
be of a character such as its own.

'As, therefore, the particular archetypes, so to say, precede the bodies which
are perceived by sense, so the Idea which includes in itself all Ideas, being
most beautiful and most perfect, exists originally as the pattern of this
present world; for that has been made by its Creator like this Idea, and wrought
according to the providence of God out of the universal essence.'

These are extracts from the aforesaid author. Moses, however, the all-wise,
anticipates even these doctrines, teaching us that before the visible sun and
stars and before the heaven that we behold, which he calls the firmament, and
before this our dry land, and before our day and night, another light besides
the light of the sun, and day and night, and the rest, had been made by God the
universal Ruler and Cause of all.

Moreover the Hebrews who came after Moses declare that there is a certain
incorporeal sun not visible to all, nor subjected to mortal eyes, as says the
Prophet speaking in the person of God, 'And to them that fear Me shall the Sun
of righteousness arise.' 117

Also righteousness itself, not that of a certain kind among men, but the Idea of
that, is known to another Hebrew Prophet, who said concerning God,'Who raised up
righteousness from the East? He called it before His face, and it shall go forth
as it were before the nations.' 118

Also a divine Word, incorporeal and essential, was just lately shown to us by
our ordinary word in the previous quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures:
concerning which Word there is also the following statement among the same
people: 'Who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and
sanctification, and redemption.' 119

He is called also Life, He is called Wisdom, and Truth. Also the Scriptures of
the Hebrews (since the Apostles also and disciples of our Saviour are Hebrews)
make known to us all things which have essential being and subsistence, nay
more, they show us myriads of other incorporeal powers beyond both heaven and
all material and fleeting essence; and the images of these powers, they say, He
expressed in things sensible, after which they have now received the name each
of its image.

Man, for instance, they have expressly stated to be the image of an ideal
pattern, and the whole life of men passeth on in an image. Moses in fact says,
'And God created man, in the image of God created He him.' 120 And again another
Hebrew writer, following the philosophy of his forefathers, says, 'Surely man
walketh in an image.' 121 And now hear how the interpreters of the sacred laws
explain the thought contained in the writings of Moses. The Hebrew Philo, in
fact, speaks thus word for word in interpreting the doctrines of his
forefathers.

CHAPTER XXIV

[PHILO] 122 'Now if any one should wish to use names in a plainer way, he would
not call the intelligible world anything else than the Word (or, Reason) of God
already engaged in the creation of a world. For neither is the intelligible city
anything else than the reasoning of the architect, when already designing to
build the visible city [by help of the intelligible].

'But this is Moses' doctrine, not mine. For instance, in recording the creation
of man he expressly avows, in what follows, that he was fashioned after the
image of God.123

'Now if the part (man) is an image of an image, evidently also the whole
species, I mean the whole of this visible world, which is greater than the human
image, is a copy of a divine image; and the archetypal seal, as we call the
intelligible world, must itself evidently be the archetypal pattern, the Idea of
the Ideas, the Word (Reason) of God.

'He says too that "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth";124
taking the beginning to be not, as some suppose, the beginning in time; for time
was not before the world, but either has begun with it, or after it.

'For since time is the interval of the motion of the universe, and motion could
not begin before that which was to be moved, but must necessarily be established
either after it or with it, so time also must necessarily either have been of
the same age as the universe or younger than it, and to venture to represent it
as older is unphilosophical.

'But if in the present passage the beginning is not taken to be the beginning in
time, then the beginning according to number would naturally be signified, so
that in the beginning God created would be equivalent to "first He created the
heaven." ' Then afterwards he says: 125

'First, therefore, the Maker proceeded to make an immaterial heaven, and an
invisible earth, and an ideal form of air and of empty space, the former of
which He called darkness, because the air is by nature black, and the latter He
called the deep, for the empty space is very deep and vast.

'Then He made the incorporeal essence of water and of wind, and over all the
essence of light, the seventh in order, which again was incorporeal, and then an
intelligible model of the sun. and of all stars that were destined to be
established as luminaries in the heaven.

'And the wind and the light were honoured with special privilege: for the one he
called the Spirit of God, because spirit is the most life-giving thing, and God
is the author of life; and light, because it excels in beauty. For the
intelligible is, I suppose, as much more brilliant and radiant than the
sensible, as the sun is than darkness, and day than night, and the mind, which
is the guide of the whole soul, than the criteria of sense, and the eyes than
the body.

'But that invisible and intelligible light is made an image of the Divine Word,
which explained its origin; and it is a super-celestial star the source of the
visible stars, which one would not be wrong in calling "universal light," from
which sun and moon and the other planets and fixed stars draw their appropriate
splendours in proportion to the power of each, while that unmingled and pure
light becomes obscured, whenever it begins to turn in direction of the change
from intelligible to sensible; for of the things subject to sense none is pure.'
Also after a few words he adds: 126

'But when light came, and darkness yielded and retired, and bounds were set in
the intervals between them, namely evening and morning, there was at once
completed, according to the necessary measure of time, that which the Creator
rightly called "day," and not the first day but one day, which it is called
because of the singleness of the intelligible world, which has the nature of
unity.

'So then the incorporeal world was now complete, being founded in the divine
Reason (Word); and after the model thereof the sensible world was now to be
produced in its perfection: so the Creator proceeded to make first that which
was also the best of all its parts, namely the heaven, which He rightly named
the firmament, as being corporeal. For body is by nature solid, because it is of
three dimensions: and what other idea is there of a solid and a body, except
extension in every direction? Naturally therefore He called this the firmament,
as contrasting the sensible and corporeal world with the intelligible and
incorporeal.' So writes Philo. And Clement also agrees with him, speaking as
follows in the Fifth Miscellany.

CHAPTER XXV

[CLEMENT] 127 'AND again the Barbarian philosophy knows one world of thought,
and another of sense, the one an archetype, and the other an image of the fair
model. And the former it assigns to Unity, as being perceptible to thought only;
but the sensible it assigns to the number six: for among the Pythagoreans six is
called marriage, as a number that generates.

'And in the Unity it establishes an invisible heaven, and a holy earth, and an
intellectual light. For "In the beginning," says Moses, "God created the heaven
and the earth: and the earth was invisible."128 Then he adds, "And God said, let
there be light, and there was light."129 But in the cosmogony of the sensible
world He creates a solid heaven (and the solid is sensible), and a visible
earth, and a light that is seen.

'Does it not seem to you from this passage that Plato leaves the idsas of living
creatures in the intelligible world, and creates the sensible species after
their kinds in the intelligible world?

'With good reason then Moses says that the body was fashioned out of earth,
which Plato calls an "earthly tabernacle,"130 but that the reasonable soul was
breathed by God from on high into man's face.131

'For in this part, they say, the ruling faculty is seated, interpreting thus the
accessory entrance of the soul through the organs of sense in the case of the
first-formed man; for which reason also man, they say, is made after the image
and likeness of God. For the image of God is the divine and royal Word, the
impassible Man; and an image of that image is the human mind.' But let us now
listen to what remains to be said.

CHAPTER XXVI

FURTHER than this Plato follows the doctrines of the Hebrews, when he says that
there are not only good incorporeal powers but also those of opposite nature,
writing as follows in the tenth Book of the Laws:

[PLATO] 132 'As then the soul directs and inhabits all things that move in any
direction, must we not say that it also directs the heaven? Of course. One soul,
or more? More, I will answer for you. Less than two surely we must not suppose,
the one that does good, and the other that has power to work evil.' Then lower
down he says: 133

'For since we have agreed that the heaven is full of many good things and also
of many evil things, and these the more numerous, a conflict of this kind, we
say, is immortal, and requires marvellous watchfulness. But gods and daemons are
our allies, and we are their possessions.'

Whence these ideas came to Plato, I cannot explain: but what I can truly say is
that thousands of years before Plato was born this doctrine also had been
acknowledged by the Hebrews.

Accordingly their Scripture says,134 'And there was, as it were, this day when
the angels of God came to stand before God; and the devil came in the midst of
them, after going round the earth and walking about in it'; where it calls the
adverse power devil, and the good powers angels of God. And these good powers it
also calls divine spirits, and God's ministers, where it says, 'Who maketh His
angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire.' 135

Moreover the conflict of the adverse powers is thus represented by him who said,
'Our wrestling is not against Wood and flesh, but against the principalities,
against the powers, against the world-rulers of the darkness of this age,
against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.' 136

Also the oracle of Moses which said, 'When the Most High was dividing the
nations, when He was separating the children of Adam, He set the bounds of the
nations according to the number of the angels of God,' 137 seems to be directly
paraphrased by Plato in the words whereby he defined the whole human race to be
'the possessions of gods and daemons.'

CHAPTER XXVII IN the doctrine of the immortality of the soul Plato differs not
at all in opinion from Moses. For Moses was the first to define the soul in man
as being an immortal essence, when he said that it is originally an image of
God, or rather has been made 'after the image of God.' For his words were, 'God
said, Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness. . . . And God
made man, in the image of God made He him.' 138 And afterwards dividing the
compound man in his description into the visible body and the man of the soul
that is discerned only by the mind, he adds, 'And God took dust from the earth
and formed man, and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a
living soul.' 139

Moreover he says that man was made fit to be ruler and king of all the creatures
upon earth. So he says,140 'And God said, Let us make man after our image, and
after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and
over the fowls of the heaven, and over the cattle, and over all the earth. . . .
And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him.'

Now in what other way could an image and likeness of God be conceived than in
reference to the powers that are in God, and to the likeness of virtue? Hear
then how in the Alcibiades Plato speaks on this point also as one who had been
taught by Moses:

[PLATO] 141 'Can we then mention any part of the soul that is more divine than
that with which knowledge and wisdom have to do?

'We cannot.

'This then is the part of it like God; and any one who by looking upon this has
learned all that is divine, both God and wisdom, will thus get to know himself
also most perfectly.

'It is evident.

['So then, just as there are mirrors clearer than the mirror in the eye, and
purer and brighter, so God is something purer and brighter than the best that is
in our soul.

'It seems so, Socrates.

'In looking then on God, we should be using that noblest mirror of man's nature
also for looking into the virtue of the soul; and in this way should best see
and learn to know ourselves. Certainly.'] 142 This is in the Alcibiades. But in
the dialogue On the Soul observe how he explains these topics more at length.
143 'May we then, said he, assume two kinds of existing things, one visible and
the other invisible?

'Let us assume it, said he.

'And the invisible constant and immutable, but the visible never constant?

'This also let us assume.

'Well then, said he, is not the one part of ourselves body, and the other soul?

'Exactly so, said he.

'To which class then should we say that the body is more like and more akin?

'Oh, that is manifest to every one, said he; to the visible.

'And what of the soul? Is it visible or invisible?

'Not visible at any rate by men, Socrates.

'But we surely were speaking of the things that are visible or not visible to
the nature of man; or was it, think you, to some other nature?

'To man's nature.

'What do we say then about the soul? Is it visible or invisible?

'Invisible.

'Then it is unseen?

'Yes.

'Soul then is more like the unseen than body is, and body like the visible?

'It must certainly be so, Socrates.

'Well then, were we not also saying long ago, that whenever the soul uses the
help of the body to examine anything, either by sight, or by hearing, or by any
other sense (for this is what is meant by "the help of the body," to examine a
thing by the help of sense), that then she is dragged by the body into the midst
of these ever-changing objects, and loses her own way, and becomes confused, and
giddy as if drunken, from trying to lay hold of things of this same kind?

'Quite so.

'But whenever she is contemplating anything by herself alone, she passes at once
into yonder world, to the pure, and eternal, and immortal, and unchangeable, and
there and with that world she ever communes as one of kindred nature, whenever
she can be alone, and have opportunity; and so she has rest from her wandering,
and with that world she is constant and unchangeable, as trying to lay hold of
things of this same kind. And this condition of the soul is called
thoughtfulness.

'Very nobly and truly spoken, Socrates, said he.

'To which class then does it now seem to you, from both our former and our
present arguments, that the soul is more like and more akin?

'Every one, I think, Socrates, said he, even the most stupid, would from this
method of inquiry agree that soul is in every way much more like to that which
is ever constant than to that which is not.

'And what of the body?

'More like the other.

'Look at it then again in this way; that, when soul and body are combined in
one, nature orders the body to serve and to obey, and the soul to rule and to
govern. Now in these respects again which of the two seems to you to be like the
divine, and which like the mortal? Do you not think that the divine is naturally
fitted to rule and to lead, and the mortal to be ruled and to serve?

'I think so.

'To which of the two then is the soul like?

'Evidently, Socrates, the soul is like the divine, and the body like the mortal.

'Consider then, Cebes, said he, whether from all that has been said we obtain
these results: that soul is most like the divine, and immortal, and
intelligible, and uniform, and indissoluble, and ever unchangeable and
self-consistent; and the body on the other hand most like the human, and mortal,
and unintelligible, arid multiform, and dissoluble, and never consistent with
itself.

'Have we anything else to say against this, my dear Cebes, to show that it is
not so?

'We have not.

'Well then? This being so, is it not a property of body to be quickly dissolved,
but of soul on the other hand to be altogether indissoluble, or nearly so?

'Certainly.

'Do you then observe, that after a man is dead, the body, the part of him which is visible and lies in the visible world, and is called a corpse, the property of which is to be dissolved, and decomposed, and scattered by the winds, does not at once suffer any change of this kind, but remains for a considerable time----if the man die with his body in a vigorous state and at a vigorous time of life, for a very considerable time indeed. For when the body has shrunk and been embalmed, like those who were embalmed in Egypt, it remains almost entire an incredible time. And even if the body be decayed, some parts of it, bones and sinews and all such parts, are nevertheless, so to say, immortal, are they not?

'Yes.

'But then the soul, the unseen, that has passed to another place like herself, noble, and pure, and unseen, the true Hades, to the presence of the good and wise God, whither, if it be God's will, my own soul is presently to go----is then, I say, this soul of ours, such as she is and so endowed by nature, on being released from the body, immediately scattered to the winds and lost, as most men say?

'Far from it, my dear Cebes and Simmias; but the truth is much rather this. If the soul is pure when released, drawing nothing of the body after her, as she never during this life had any communication with it willingly, but shrank from it, and was gathered up into herself, as making this her constant study, and this is nothing else than practising true philosophy, and preparing in reality to die cheerfully,----Or would not this be a preparation for death?

'Certainly.

'In this condition then the soul departs to that world which is like herself,
the unseen, the divine, and deathless, and wise: and on arriving there she finds
ready for her a happy existence, released from error, and folly, and fears, and
wild desires, and all other human ills, and, as they say of the initiated, she
truly passes the rest of her time with the gods. Is it thus, Cebes, that we
ought to speak, or otherwise?

'Thus assuredly, said Cebes.

'But, I suppose, if when she departs from the body she is polluted and impure, from being in constant communion with the body, and cherishing it, and loving it, and having been so bewitched by it, I mean by its desires and pleasures, as to think that nothing else is true except the corporeal, just what a man might touch, and see, and eat, and drink, and use for his lusts----but accustomed to hate and fear and shun what to the eyes is dark and invisible, but intelligible to thought and attainable by philosophy----in this condition then do you suppose that a soui will depart pure in herself and unalloyed?

'By no means, said he.' This is what Plato says. And his meaning is explained by
Porphyry in the first Book of his Answer to Boethus Concerning the Soul, where
he writes in the following manner:

CHAPTER XXVIII

[PORPHYRY] 144 'FOR example, he said, the argument from similarity was thought
by Plato to be forcible in proof of the immortality of the soul. For if she is
like that which is divine, and immortal, and invisible, and inseparable, and
indissoluble, and essential, and firmly established in incorruption, how can she
fail to be of the corresponding class to the pattern?

'For whenever there are two extremes manifestly contrary, as rational and
irrational, and it is a question to which side some third thing belongs, this is
one mode of proof, by showing to which of the opposites it is like. For thus,
although the human race in the first stage of life is held down in an irrational
condition, and although many even to old age are full of the errors of unreason,
nevertheless, because it has many similarities to that which is purely rational,
this race was believed to be from the beginning rational.

'Since therefore there is a divine constitution manifestly incapable of
admixture and of damage, namely that of the gods, and since there is evidently
on the other hand the earthly, and soluble, subject to corruption, and since
with some it is doubted to which side of the said opposition the soul is
attached, Plato's opinion was that we should trace out the truth from
similarity.

'And since she is in no way like to the mortal and soluble and irrational and inanimate, which is therefore also tangible, and sensible, and becoming, and perishing, but like the divine, and immortal, and invisible, and intelligent, which partakes of life, and is akin to truth, and has all the properties which he enumerates as belonging to her,----since this is so, he thought it not right, while granting that she had the other points of likeness to God, to consent to deny her the similarity of essence, which is the cause of her having received these very properties.

'For as the things which were in their operations unlike God were at once found
to differ also in the constitution of their essence, so he thought it followed,
that the things which partook in a measure of the same operations had previously
possessed the similarity of essence. For because of the quality of the essence
the operations also were of a certain quality, as flowing from it, and being
offshoots of it.'

Hear then what Boethus, in detracting from the force of this argument, has
written in the very beginning of his treatise, as follows:

[BOETHUS] 145 'To show whether the soul is immortal, and is a nature too strong
for any kind of destruction, a man must persistently travel round many
arguments.

'But one would not need much discussion to believe that nothing about us is more
like God than the soul, and that, not only because of the continuous and
incessant motion which she generates within us, but also because of the mind
belonging to her.

'In view of which fact the physical philosopher of Crotona said that the soul as
being immortal naturally shrank from all quiescence, like the bodies that are
divine.

'But also to the man who had once discerned the idea of the soul, and especially
how great purposes and what impulses the mind that rules within us often sets in
motion, there would gradually appear a great likeness to God.' And afterwards he
adds:

'For if the soul is shown to be of all things most like to the divine, of what
further use is it to require by way of preface all the other arguments in proof
of her immortality, instead of reckoning this as one among the many, sufficient
as it is to convince the fair-minded, that the soul would not have participated
in the activities which are similar to those of the divine, if she were not also
divine herself.

'For if, although buried in the body which is mortal, and soluble, and
unintelligent, and by itself dead, and constantly perishing and wasting away
towards its change of final destruction, the soul both forms it and holds it
together, and displays her own divine essence, although she is obstructed and
impeded by the all-ruinous mould which lies around her, must she not, if by our
hypothesis she were separated as gold from the clay plastered round it, at once
display her own specific form as being like God alone, and moreover preserving
through her participation in Him the similarities in her operations, and even in
her most mortal condition (as she is when imprisoned in the mortal body)
escaping dissolution for this reason, that she is, as we said, of the nature
which has nothing in common with decay? ' And lower down he says:

'But naturally she appears to be both divine from her assimilation to the
Indivisible, and mortal from her approaches to the mortal nature: and she
descends and ascends, and is both akin to the mortal, and yet like the
immortals.

'For even he who stuffs himself full and hastes to be surfeited like the cattle
is a man: and he too is a man, who by knowledge is able in perils by sea to save
the ship, and he who can save life in diseases, and he who discovers truth, and
has devised methods for the attainment of knowledge, and inventions for kindling
fire, and observations of horoscopes, and manufactures imitations of the works
of the Creator.

'For it was a man who thought of fashioning upon earth the conjunctions of the
seven planets together with their motions, imitating by mechanism the phenomena
in heaven. And in fact what did not man devise, showing thereby the mind within
him that is divine and on a par with God?

'And though thereby he displayed the daring efforts of an Olympian and divine
and altogether immortal being, yet because the multitude through the selfishness
of their own downward inclination were not able to discern his character, he
misled them into supposing from the outward appearances that he was like
themselves of mortal nature: there being but this one mode of deriving
consolation from their baseness, that because of external appearances they found
satisfaction in seeing others share equally in their wretchedness, and persuaded
themselves that as in external things so also in their inner nature all men are
alike.' Of all these doctrines Moses has been seen to be the teacher, for in
describing the first creation of man in the language already quoted, he by his
assimilation to the divine confirmed the arguments concerning the immortality of
the soul. But since the opinions of Moses and Plato were in full harmony and
accord concerning the incorporeal and invisible essence, it is time to review
the remaining portions of Plato's philosophy, and to show that he was friendly
to the Hebrews on all points, except where perchance he was led astray and
induced to speak more after the manner of man, than in accordance with the word
of truth. For instance, all the philosopher's sayings which have been rightly
expressed will be found to agree with the doctrines of Moses, but in whatever he
assumed that did not agree with Moses and the prophets, his argument will not be
well established. And this we shall prove at the proper season. But meanwhile,
since his positions in the contemplation of the intelligible world have been
discovered to be in perfect agreement and harmony, it is time to go back again
to the physical theory of the sensible world, and briefly run over the
philosopher's agreement with the doctrines of the Hebrews.

CHAPTER XXIX

MOSES declared that this universe had a beginning as having been made by God; he
says at all events in the commencement of his own writing, 'In the beginning God
created the heaven and the earth,' 146 and after the particulars he adds, 'This
is the book of the generation of heaven and earth, when they were created, in
the day that God made the heaven and the earth.' 147 And now listen to Plato,
how close he keeps to the thought, when himself writing as follows: 148

'And again all that comes into existence must of necessity proceed from some
cause; for it is impossible for anything to have been generated without a
cause.' And he adds: 149

'The whole heaven then or world, or by whatever other name it would most acceptably be called, so let us call it----we have first to ask a question concerning it, which it is assumed that one must ask on every subject at the outset----did it always exist, without any beginning of generation, or has it been generated and had some beginning?

'It has been generated: for it is visible, and tangible, and has a body; and all
such things are sensible: and all sensible things were shown to be apprehensible
by opinion and generated. But that which is generated must, we say, have been
generated by some cause. It is a hard task, however, to discover the maker and
artificer of this universe, and after discovering Him it is impossible to speak
of Him to all men.' And again afterwards he says: 150

'Thus therefore we must say, according to probable reason, that this world was
in truth made through the providence of God a living being endowed with soul and
mind.'

CHAPTER XXX

AGAIN Moses, by what he said of the heavenly bodies, taught that they also are
created: 'And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to
give light upon the earth; . . . and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and
for days and for years. . . . And God made the two great lights, ... and the
stars; and set them in the firmament of the heaven.' 151 In like manner Plato
speaks: 152

'Such then being the reason and the thought of God in regard to the generation
of time, in order that time might be brought into existence there have been
created the sun and moon and five other bodies which are called planets, for
distinguishing and preserving the numbers of time. And when He had made their
bodies, God set them in their orbits.'

Now observe whether Plato's expression,'Such then being the reason (λόγου) and
thought of God,' must not be like that of the Hebrew who says, 'By the word
(λόγῳ) of the LORD were the heavens established, and all the powers thereof by
the breath of His mouth.' 153 Moreover as Moses said, 'And He set (ἔθετο) them
in the firmament,' Plato has used a like word, 'set,' when he says, 'And when He
had made their bodies, God set (ἔθηκεν) them in their orbits.'

CHAPTER XXXI As the Hebrew Scripture after each of the creations adds the
phrase, 'And God saw that it was good,' and after the summing up of all says,
'And God saw them all, . . . and behold they were very good';154 now hear how
Plato speaks:

'If then indeed this world is fair, and its Creator good, it is evident that he
was looking to that pattern which is eternal.' 155 And again:

'For the world is the fairest of things created, and He the best of causes.' 156

CHAPTER XXXII ON this point also the whole Hebrew Scripture speaks throughout,
at one time saying, 'And the heaven shall be rolled together as a scroll,' 157
and at another adding, 'And the heaven shall be new, and the earth new, . . .
which I make to remain before Me, saith the LORD ';158 and again at another time
saying, 'For the fashion of this world passeth away.'159 Hear then how Plato
also confirms the doctrine, saying in the Timaeus:

[PLATO] 160 'And He established a visible and tangible heaven: and for these
reasons, and out of these elements such as I have described, being four in
number, the body of the world was formed in harmony by due proportion, and
gained from them a friendly union, so that having entered into unity with itself
it became indissoluble by everything else except Him who bound it together.'
Then afterwards he says:

'So then time has come into existence together with the heaven, that having been
produced together they may also be dissolved together, if there should ever be
any dissolution of them.' 161 And again he adds:

'Ye gods and sons of gods, the works whereof I am the Creator and Father are
indissoluble save by my will.' 162 Afterwards he adds:

'Therefore though all that is bound may be dissolved, yet only an evil being
would wish to dissolve that which is well combined and in right condition.
Wherefore also since ye have been created, though ye are not altogether immortal
nor indissoluble, nevertheless ye shall not be dissolved, nor incur the fate of
death, since in my will ye have found a still stronger and more valid bond than
those by which ye were bound together at the time of your creation.' 163 Also in
the Politicus or Statesman the same author speaks as follows: 164

'For there is a time when God Himself goes round with the universe, which He
helps to guide and wheel; and there is a time when the revolutions having now
completed their proper measure of time, He lets it go, and the universe, being a
living creature and having received intelligence from Him who arranged it at
first, revolves again of its own accord in the opposite direction. And this
retrogression has of necessity been implanted in its nature for the following
reason.

'For what reason, pray?

'Because it is a property of none but the most divine things to be always
changeless in condition and self-consistent and the same, and bodily nature is
not of this class. And though that which we have called the heaven and the world
has been endowed by its Creator with many blessings, nevertheless it also
partakes of body; whence it is impossible for it to be always free from change;
as far as possible however, and in a very great degree, it moves in the same
orbit in one and the same relative course, because the reversal to which it is
subject is the least possible alteration of its proper motion.

'But it is almost impossible for anything to continue for ever turning itself,
except for the Ruler of all things that are moved. And for Him to move anything
now one way, and now again in the opposite way, would not be right. From all
this then we must neither say that the world always turns itself, nor that it is
all turned by God in two opposite courses, nor again that some two gods, who are
of opposite minds, turn it, but, as was said just now, and this alone remains
possible, that at one time it is guided in its course by another divine cause,
acquiring again its life, and receiving from its Creator a restored immortality,
and at another time when let go it moves of itself, having been let go at such a
time that it travels backwards during countless periods, because being of vast
size and most perfectly balanced it moves upon the smallest pivot.

'Certainly all the details which you have described seem to be very probable.

'Let us then draw our conclusions and consider closely the effect produced from
what I have just mentioned, which effect we said was the cause of all the
wonders: for surely it is this very thing.

'What thing?

'The fact that the course of the world at one time is guided in the direction of
its present revolution, and at another time in the opposite direction.

'How then?

'This change we must believe to be the greatest and most complete of all
variations in the heavenly motions.

'It seems so indeed.

'We must suppose therefore that very great changes occur at that time to us who
dwell under the heaven.

'This too is probable.

'But do we not know that animal nature ill endures many great and various
changes occurring at the same time?

'Of course.

'Very great destruction therefore of all other animals necessarily occurs at
that time, and moreover very little of the human race survives. And with regard
to these survivors, among many other marvellous and strange effects which occur
the greatest is this, which also follows immediately upon the reversal of the
motion of the universe at the time when the revolution opposite to that which is
at present established takes place.'

Afterwards lower down he adds to all this the following remarks on the
restoration of the dead to life, taking a similar course to the opinions of the
Hebrews.165

CHAPTER XXXIII 'BUT how were animals produced in those days, Stranger, and in
what way were they begotten one of another?

'It is evident, Socrates, that the generation of one animal from another did not exist in the order of nature at that time, but the earth-born race which was said to exist formerly----this it was that in this other period sprang up out of the earth again. The tradition was recorded by our earliest ancestors, who in the following period were not far from the end of the former revolution, but were born in the beginning of the present: for they were the heralds to us of these traditions, which are now disbelieved by many without good reason.

'For we ought, I think, to observe what follows therefrom. With the fact that
old men pass on to the natural condition of the child it is consistent, that
from those who have died and been laid in the earth, some being brought together
again there and restored to life should follow the changed order, the wheel of
generation being at the same time turned back in the opposite direction: and so
in this manner necessarily springing up out of the earth they are thus named and
accounted earth-born, except any whom God reserved for another destiny.

'This is certainly quite consistent with what was said before.'

Then again, as he goes on further, he discourses in the following manner
concerning the consummation of the world, in agreement with the doctrines of the
Hebrews:

CHAPTER XXXIV

[PLATO] 166 'FOR when the period of all these events was completed, and a change
was to take place, and moreover the earth-born race had now all perished, each
soul having fulfilled all its generations, and fallen into the earth for as many
sowings as were appointed for each, then at length the pilot of the universe let
go, as it were, the handle of the rudder, and withdrew into his own watch-tower,
and Fate and an innate desire began to turn the course of the world back again.

'So all the gods who locally share the government of the chief divinity, as soon
as they learnt what was going on, let go in turn the portions of the world
belonging to their charge. And the world turning back and clashing together, as
having received an opposite impulse from before and from behind, was mightily
convulsed in itself, and wrought another destruction of animals of all kinds.

'And after this in long process of time the world ceasing from tumults and
confusion and convulsions welcomed a calm, and entered in orderly array upon its
own accustomed course, having charge and control over itself and all things in
it.' Again after a little while he says:

'Wherefore God, who had first set the world in order, when at length He saw that
it was in helpless strait, being anxious that it should not be shattered in the
confusion of the storm, and sink down into the infinite gulf of disorder, again
takes His seat at the helm, and having turned back what had suffered harm and
dissolution into the former circuit appointed by Himself, He arranges and
restores it, and endows it with immortality and perpetual youth. Here then the
story of the end of all things is told.' 167

CHAPTER XXXV

[PLATO] 168 'THESE things, then, said I, are nothing in number nor in greatness
in comparison with those other rewards which await each of them after death. And
you ought to hear them, in order that each may receive in full what is due to be
told to them by our argument.

'You may speak, said he, as to one who will not find the story too long, but
listen all the more gladly.

'But indeed, said I, it is not the story of Alcinous that I am going to tell
you, but that of a brave man Er the son of Armenius, a Pamphylian by birth, who
was killed in battle, and when the dead were gathered up after ten days in a
state of putrefaction, his body was taken up undecayed and carried home to be
buried, and on the twelfth day when laid on the funeral pile, he came back to
life, and after his revival told what he had seen in the other world.

'And he said that when his soul had departed from his body, it travelled with
many others, until they came to a certain wonderful place, in which were two
chasms in the earth close to each other, and others opposite to them in the
heaven above.

'And between them there sat judges, who, after they had decided each case,
commanded the just to proceed by the way on the right hand leading upward
through the heaven, having hung around them on their breast the records of the
judgements given, and the unjust by the way leading downwards on the left, these
also having on their backs the records of all their deeds.

'And when he himself came forward, they said that he must be the messenger to
mankind of what was done there, and they commanded him to hear and see
everything in that place.' So Plato speaks. And Plutarch also in the first Book
Concerning the Soul tells a story similar to this:

CHAPTER XXXVI

[PLUTARCH] 169 'WE were present ourselves with this Antyllus: but let me tell
the story to Sositeles and Heracleon. For he was ill not long ago, and the
physicians thought that he could not live: but having recovered a little from a
slight collapse, though he neither did nor said anything else showing
derangement, he declared that he had died and been set free again, and was not
going to die at all of that present illness, but that those who had carried him
away were severely reproved by their lord; for having been sent for Nicandas,
they had brought him back instead of the other. Now Nicandas was a shoemaker,
besides being one of those who frequent the palaestrae, and familiar and well
known to many. Wherefore the young men used to come and mock him, as having run
away from his fate, and as having bribed the officers sent from the other world.
It was evident, however, that he was himself at first a little disturbed and
disquieted; and at last he was attacked by a fever, and died suddenly on the
third day. But this Antyllus came to life again, and is alive and well, and one
of our most agreeable friends.'

I wish to quote these statements because of the fact that in the Hebrew
Scriptures there are cases mentioned of restoration to life. But since in their
promises it is also contained that a certain land shall be given to the friends
of God only, according to the oracle which says, 'But the meek shall inherit the
land,'170 and that this is a heavenly land is made clear by the saying which
declares, 'But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us
all';171 the prophet also intimates in an allegorical way that this same city
consists of costly and precious stones, saying, 'Behold, I prepare for thee a
carbuncle for thy stone, and will make thy battlements jasper, and thy
foundations sapphire . . . and thy border choice stones':172 now see how Plato
also confesses in the dialogue Concerning the Soul that he is persuaded of the
truth of these very things, or the like. He assigns the statement to Socrates in
the following manner:

CHAPTER XXXVII

[PLATO] 173 'BUT indeed, Simmias, I do not think it requires the skill of
Glaucus to describe to you what it is: but to decide whether it be true, appears
to me too hard even for Glaucus' skill. And not only should I perhaps find
myself unable to do so, but even if I knew how, my life seems hardly long
enough, Simmias, for an argument of such length. Nevertheless there is nothing
to prevent my describing to you the figure of the earth, such as I am convinced
it is, and its various regions. 'Well, said Simmias, even that is enough. 'My
own conviction, then, said he, is first of all that, if the earth is spherical
and placed in the centre of the heaven, it has no need either of air to prevent
its falling, or of any other similar sustaining force, but that the perfect
uniformity of the heaven in all its parts, and the very equilibrium of the
earth, are sufficient to sustain it: for a thing in equilibrium placed in the
centre of a similar body, will have no reason to incline more or less in any
direction, but being evenly balanced will remain undeflected. This then, said
he, is my first conviction. 'And quite correct, said Simmias.

'Further then, said he, I am persuaded that it is of vast size, and that we who
live between the Pillars of Hercules and the Phasis occupy a very small part of
it, dwelling round the sea, just as ants or frogs round a pond, and that there
are many others elsewhere living in many like regions.

'For in every direction round the earth there are many hollows of various kinds
both in shape and size, into which the waters and the mist and the air have
flowed together; but the earth itself is pure and situated in a pure part of the
heaven, wherein are the stars, and which most of those who are accustomed to
speak of such things call the ether, of which these three (water, mist, and air)
are a sediment, and are always flowing together into the hollows of the earth.

'We therefore are unconscious that we live in the hollows, and suppose that we
are living above on the surface of the earth, just as if any one living in the
midst of the bottom of the sea should suppose that he was living on the surface,
and seeing the sun and the other luminaries through the water should imagine the
sea to be heaven, but through sluggishness and weakness had never come up to the
top of the water, nor, by rising and lifting his head up out of it into this
region of ours, had ever seen how much purer and fairer it is than their own,
nor had ever heard this from any one who had seen it. .

'We then are in this very same case: for while living in some hollow of the
earth we imagine that we are living on the surface, and call the air heaven, as
if this were the heaven through which the stars run their courses. But the fact
is the same, that from weakness and sluggishness we are not able to pass out to
the surface of the air: for if any one were to reach the top of it, or take
wings and fly up to it. he would put out his head, and, just as the fishes here
who jump up out of the water and see the objects on earth, so would a man survey
the world beyond: and, if his nature were strong enough to endure the sight, he
would learn that yonder is the true heaven, and the true light, and the true
earth.

'For this earth and the stones and the whole region here are decayed and
corroded, as the things in the sea by the brine: and there is nothing worth
mentioning that grows in the sea, nor anything that is, so to say, perfect; but
there are caves, and sand, and vast slime and mud-banks wherever there is land,
all utterly unworthy to be compared with the beautiful things of our world.

'But on the other hand yonder world would be seen far more to surpass everything
of ours. For if I must tell you a pretty fable, it is worth your while, Simmias,
to hear what is the nature of the objects on that earth which lie close under
the heaven.

'We certainly, Socrates, said Simmias, should be delighted to hear this fable.

'Well then, my friend, said he, it is said in the first place that the earth
itself, if any one were to see it from above, is just such to look upon as the
balls which are covered with twelve pieces of leather, variegated and marked by
different colours, of which the colours used by our painters here on earth are,
as it were, samples. But there the earth is wholly made up of colours such as
these, and far more brilliant and pure.

'For part of it is purple and of marvellous beauty, and part like gold, and the
part that is white is whiter than chalk or snow, and in like manner it is made
up of all the other colours, and yet more in number and more beautiful than all
that we have ever seen.

'For even these mere hollows of it, filled as they are with water and air,
present a certain species of colour, as they gleam amid the diversity of the
other colours, so that its form appears as one continuous variegated surface.

'And in this earth such as I have described it, the plants that grow are in like
proportion, both trees and flowers, with their fruits; and the mountains again
in like manner, and the stones have their smoothness and transparency greater in
the same proportion, and their colours more beautiful: and of these the gems
here, these that are so prized, are fragments, carnelians, and jaspers, and
emeralds, and all such as these: but there everything without exception is of
this kind, and still more beautiful than these.

'And the cause of this is that those stones are pure, and not eaten away or
spoiled, like those here, by decay and brine, and by the sediments collected
here, which cause ugliness and diseases in stones and earth, and in animals and
plants as well. But the real earth is adorned with all these jewels, and with
gold and silver besides, and all other things such as these. For they shine out
on the surface, being many in number and of great size and in many places of the
earth, so that to see it must be a sight for the blessed to behold.'

CHAPTER XXXVIII THE Hebrew Scripture foretells that there shall be a tribunal of
God and a judgement of souls after their departure hence, in countless other
passages, and where it says: 'The judgement was set, and the books were opened,
. . . and the Ancient of days did sit. ... A river of fire flowed before Him;
ten thousand times ten thousands ministered unto Him, and thousand thousands
stood before Him.' 174 Now hear how Plato mentions the divine judgement, and the
river even by name, and how he describes the many mansions of the pious, and the
various punishments of the impious, in agreement with the language of the
Hebrews. For he speaks as follows in the dialogue Concerning the Soul: 175

'And midway between these a third river issues forth, and near its source falls
into a vast region burning with a great fire, and forms a lake larger than our
sea, boiling with water and mud: and thence it proceeds in a circular course
turbid and muddy, and as it rolls round the earth, arrives, among other places,
at the extremity of the Acherusian lake, but does not mingle with its water; and
after making many circuits underground, it pours into a depth below Tartarus.

'Now this is it which they call Pyriphlegethon, fragments of which are thrown up
by our volcanoes, wherever they occur in the earth. Opposite again to this the
fourth river falls out first, as the tale goes, into a fearful and savage
region, which is wholly of a colour like lapis lazuli; this is called the
Stygian region, and the lake which the influx of the river forms is called Styx.
Then after falling into the lake, and receiving strange properties in its water,
the river sinks under the earth, and is whirled round in its course in the
opposite direction to Pyriphlegethon, and meets it from the opposite side in the
Acherusian lake; and its water also mingles with no other, but after flowing
round in a circle this river too falls into Tartarus opposite to Pyriphlegethon:
and its name is, as the poets say, Cocytus.

'Such being the nature of these regions, as soon as the dead have arrived at the place to which each is conveyed by his genius, first of all they undergo a trial, both those who have lived good and holy and just lives, and those who have not. And those who are found to have led tolerable lives proceed to Acheron, and embarking on such vessels as there are for them, they arrive on board these at the lake; and there they dwell, and by undergoing purification and suffering punishment for their evil deeds they are absolved from any wrongs they have committed, or receive rewards for their good deeds, each according to his deserts. But any who are found to be incurable by reason of the greatness of their sins, having either perpetrated many great acts of sacrilege, or many nefarious and lawless murders, or any other crimes of this kind----these are hurled by their appropriate doom into Tartarus, whence they never come forth.

'But those who are found to have committed sins which are great though not
incurable, as for instance if in anger they have done any violence to father or
mother, and passed the rest of their life in penitence, or have committed
homicide in any other similar way, these must also be thrown into Tartarus, but
after they have been thrown in and have continued there a year, they are cast
out by the wave, the homicides by way of Cocytus, and the parricides by way of
Pyriphlegethon: and when they arrive all on fire at the Acherusian lake, there
with loud cries they call upon those whom they either slew or outraged; and
having summoned them they intreat and beseech them to let them come out into the
lake, and to receive them kindly: and if they persuade them, they come out, and
cease from their troubles; but if not, they are carried again into Tartarus, and
thence back into the rivers, and never have rest from these sufferings, until
they have won over those whom they wronged; for this was the sentence appointed
for them by the judges.

'But any who are found to have been pre-eminent in holiness of life----these are they who are set free and delivered from these regions here on earth, as, from prison-houses, and attain to the pure dwelling place above, and make their abode upon the upper earth. And of this same class those who have fully purified themselves by philosophy live entirely free from troubles for all time to come, and attain to habitations still fairer than these, which it is neither easy to describe, nor does the time suffice at present. But for the sake of these things which I have described we ought, Simmias, to make every effort to gain a share of virtue and of wisdom in our lifetime: for fair is the prize, and great the hope.' So speaks Plato. And now with that passage, 'And they attain to fairer habitations, which it is neither easy to describe, nor does the time suffice at present,' you will compare that which with us runs as follows:

'For eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, Neither have entered into the heart of
man, The things which God hath prepared for them that love Him.' 176

And with the 'habitations' mentioned compare the statement that 'in the Father's
house are many mansions,' 177 promised to those beloved of Him. And with what is
said about Pyriphlegethon compare the eternal fire threatened to the ungodly,
according to the Hebrew prophet who says to them, 'Who shall announce to us that
the fire is kindled? Who shall announce to us the place of eternity?' 178 And
again, 'Their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they
shall be for a spectacle to all flesh.' 179

Now observe how Plato also, after saying in agreement with this that the impious
will go into Tartarus, adds, 'whence they never come out.' And again after
saying that the pious shall live in abodes of bliss, he adds the words,
'entirely and for all time to come.' Moreover the expression used by him 'free
from troubles' is like 'pain and sorrow and sighing flee away.' 180 And when he
says that those who go away to Acheron not simply arrive there, but 'embarking
first in what vessels there are for them,' what vessels then does he mean to
indicate but their bodies, in which the souls of the deceased embark, and share
their punishment, according to the established opinions of the Hebrews? But now
as this subject has been sufficiently discussed, I will pass on to the twelfth
Book of the Preparation for the Gospel.

[Footnotes numbered and placed at the end] 1. 509 b 1 Atticus, Fragment
preserved by Eusebius. Cf. Mullach, fr. Phil. Gr. iii. 185 2. 510 b 2
Aristocles, De Philosophia; cf. Mullach, iii. p. 206 3. 513 d 4 Prov. i. 2 4.
515 a 8 Plato, Cratylus, 383 A 5. b 1 ibid. 390 A 6. b 9 ibid. 390 D 7. d 6
Plato, Cratylus, 409 D 8. 616 a 1 Gen. ii. 19 9. 516 c 4 Gen. vi. 4 10. d 8 Ps.
viii. 4 11. 517 a 9 Plato, Cratylus, 399 C 12. b 11 ibid. 414 A 13. c 5 ibid.
396 C 14. d 5 ibid. 397 D 15. 517 d 13 Plato, Cratylus, 393 A 16. 518 a 1 395 A

17. a 4 394 E

18. a 6 395 B

19. a 8 395 C

20. a 9 395 E 21. b 5 Gen. iv. 1 22. d 1 Gen. xvii. 5 23. d 9 Plato, Cratylus,
397 B 24. 519 a 6 Gen. xxxii. 28 25. a 9 Gen. xxvii. 36 26. a 10 Gen. xxxii. 28
27. 519 c 2 Cf. p. 474 b 28. 520 a 1 Cf. Jacobs, Greek Anthology, vol. xii. p.
34 29. 620 b 5 Gen. xiv. 13 30. 521 c 6 i Ki. iv. 32 31. d 6 Wisdom vii. 17 32.
522 a 4 Eccles. i. 1

33. a 6 ibid. 9 34. 523 c 8 Rom. i. 20 35. d 2 Ex. iii. 14 36. 524 a 2 Eccles.
i. 9 37. 524 b 8 Plato, Timaeus, 27 D 38. c 2 Ex. iii. 14 39. c 9 Eccles. i. 9
40. d 6 Plato, Timaeus, 37 E 41. 525 c 1 Numenius, a Fragment preserved by
Eusebius only 42. 526 c 1 Plato, Cratylus, 430 A, and frequently.

43. d 1 Plato, Timaeus. 27 D; see p. 524 b above 44. 527 b 6 Malachi iii. 6 45.
527 b 10 Ps. ci. 28 46. d 1 Plutarch, Moralia, 391 F 47. 528 b 3 Heracleitus,
Fr. xii, xlii (Bywater) 48. c 5 Heracleitus, Fr. xxv.

49. 530 a 6 Ps.-Plato, Ep. vii. p. 341 C 50. b 2 Ps. iv. 7 51. b 3 Ps. xxxvi. 9
52. c 2 Deut. vi. 4 53. c 5 Plato, Timaeus, 31 A 54. d 1 Ps.-Plato, Ep. xiii. p.
363 B 55. 531 a 2 Plato, Laws, iv. 715 E 56. b 10 Is. xli. 4 57. c 2 Ps. xi. 7
58. c 5 Ps. xi. 7 59. c 6 Rom. xii. 20; (cp. Beat, xxxii. 35) 60. c 71 Thess.
iv. 6, and Ps. xxxi. 23 61. d 1 Deut. xiii. 4 62. d 3 Ja. iv. 6 63. d 4 Job xx.
5 (Sept.) 64. 532 a 7 Gen. xix. 24 65. b 4 Ps. cx. 1 66. c 3 Ps. xxxiii. 6 67.
532 c 6 Ps. cvii. 20 68. c 12 Prov. viii. 12 69. d 2 Prov. viii. 22 70. d 7
Prov. iii. 19 71. d 10 Wisdom vii. 21 72. d 12 Wisdom vi. 22 73. d 16 Wisdom
vii. 22 74. 533 a 7 Wisdom viii. 1 75. b 3 Philo Iudaeus, On the Confusion of
Tongues, c. xx 76. c 2 ibid. c. xxviii 77. c 9 Gen. xlii. 11.

78. d 5 Philo Iudaeus, l.c., c. xiv 79. d 6 Zech. vi. 12 80. 534 a 5 A wrong
reference; the quotations are from The Confusion of Tongues 81. b 6 Ps.-Plato,
Epinomis, 986 C 82. c 10 Ps.-Plato, Ep. vi. 323 C 83. 535 b 1 Plotinus, Ennead,
v. bk. i. p. 484 D 84. c 4 ibid. p. 486 A 85. c 10 ibid. p. 487 D 86. 536 a 10
Plotinus, ibid. p. 488 87. b 7 ibid. p. 489.

88. d 5 Numenius, Of the Good, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius. Cf. Mullach,
iii. 167 89. 537 d 8 Ps. (ciii) civ. 24 90. 538 a 2 ibid. 27 91. b 7 John xv. 1,
5 92. c 1 Numenius, Fr. 10.

93. c 9 Numenius, ibid.

94. 539 a 5 Plato, Philebus, 16 C 95. a 8 Numenius, Fr. 10 96. b 11 Numenius,
ibid.

97. d 10 John v. 19 98. 540 b 2 Amelius, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 99. b
4 Heracleitus, Fr. ii 100. d 4 Plato. Phaedrus, 243 B (Jowett) 101. 540 d 8 John
i. 1 102. 541 a 2 Col. i. 15 103. c 6 Ps.-Plato, Ep. ii. 312.

104. 542 a 4 Lam. iii. 25. Nahum i. 7 105. a 5 Ps. cvi. 1 106. a 8 Matt. xix. 7
107. b 4 Plato, Timaeus, 29 E 108. b 10 ibid. Republic, 508 B 109. 542 c 6
Plato, Republic, 508 E 110. c 10 ibid. 509 B 111. 643 b 4 Numenius, Fragment
preserved by Eusebius. Cf. Mullach, iii. p. 170 112. 544 a 3 Numenius, ibid.

113. 544 d 4 Plato, Timaeus, 29 E 114. 545 a 1 Plato, Timaeus, 29 A 115. a 5
ibid. 30 E 116. b 6 Areius Didymus, De Platonis opiniombus, a Fragment preserved
by Eusebius 117. 546 a 4 Mal. iv. 2 118. a 8 Isa. xli. 2 119. b 6 I Cor. i. 30
120. c 9 Gen. i. 27 121. d 2 Ps. xxxix. 7 122. d 7 Philo Judaeus, On the
Creation of the World, § 5 123. 547 a 5 Gen. i. 27 124. b 2 Gen. i. 1 125. 547 c
8 Philo Judaeus, ibid. § 6 126. 548 b 3 ibid. § 7 127. d 1 Clement of
Alexandria, Miscellany, v. 14 128. 549 a 2 Gen. i. 1 129. a 4 ibid. i. 3 130. b
1 Plato, Phaedrus, 246 C; Timaeus, 64 C 131. 549 b 2 Gen. ii. 7 132. d 1 Plato,
Laws, x. 896 D 133. d 7 ibid. x. 906 A 134. 650 a 4 Job i. 13 a, 6 b 135. a 10
Ps. civ. 4, Heb. i. 7 136. b 3 Eph. vi. 12 137. b 7 Deut. xxxii. 8 138. d 6 Gen.
i. 26 139. d 11 Gen. ii. 7 140. 651 a 3 Gen. i. 26 141. 551 b 1 Ps-Plato,
Alcibiades, i. 133 C 142. b 8 The passage in brackets is not in the MSS. of
Plato 143. c 6 Plato, Phaedo, 79 A 144. 554 c 1 Porphyry, Answer to Boethus
Concerning the Soul 145. 555 b 10 Boethus, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 146.
557 d 1 Gen. i. 1 147. d 3 ibid. ii. 4 148. d 7 Plato, Timaeus, 28 A 149. 557 d
11 Plato, Timaeus, 28 B 150. 558 a 8 ibid. 30 B 151. b 3 Gen. i. 14 152. c 5
Plato, Timaeus, 38 C 153. d 2 Ps. xxxiii. 6 154. 559 a 2 Gen. i. 31 155. a 4
Plato, Timaeus, 29 A

156. a 7 ibid.

157. b 2 Isa. xxxiv. 4 158. b 3 Isa. Ixv. 17, lxvi. 32 159. b 6 i Cor. vii. 31
160. c 1 Plato, Timaeus, 32 B 161. 550 c 9 Plato, Timaeus, 38 B 162. c 14 ibid.
41 A

163. d 2 ibid.

164. d 12 Plato, Politicus, 269 C 165. 561 b 2 Plato, Politicus, 271 A 166. 562
a 1 Plato, Politicus, 272 D 167. c 8 ibid. 273 D 168. d 7 Plato, Republic, x.
614 A 169. 563 d 1 Plutarch, On the Soul, Fragment iii, preserved by Eusebius
170. 564 b 3 Ps. xxxvii. 11, Matt. v. 5 171. b 5 Gal. iv. 26 172. b 8 Isa. liv.
13 173. d 1 Plato, Phaedo, 108 D 174. 567 b 4 Dan. vii. 10, 9 175. c 6 Plato,
Phaedo, 113 A 176. 568 b 5 1 Cor. ii. 9 177. b 9 John xiv. 3 178. c 2 Isa.
xxxiii. 14 179. c 4 ibid. lxvi. 24 180. d 2 Isa. xxxv. 10 This text was
transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 31: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 12
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 12

BOOK XII

CONTENTS

I. That the Hebrews, according to Plato, were right in imparting to beginners
the belief in their instructions in a simple form because of their incapacity p.
573 b II. That faith, according even to Plato, is the greatest of virtues p. 574
b

III. That we ought to believe what is said concerning the soul, and the other
statements concerning things of this kind. From the eleventh Book of The Laws p.
575 b

IV. That it will be necessary to deliver the first introductory lessons to
children in the form of fables. From the second Book of The Republic p. 575 d V.
That no hurtful fables must be recited to children, but only those that are
beneficial p. 576 b

VI. That Plato accepted the Faith not only in word, but also confessed that with
true disposition of mind he believed and was persuaded of these things which we
also believe p. 577 b VII. That it would not be right to publish the solemn
doctrines of the truth to all p. 581 a

VIII. What kind of rulers Plato says should be appointed: simple and illiterate
men, if only they were well ordered in moral character. From the sixth Book of
The Laws p. 581 c IX. That one should decline offices. From the first Book of
The Republic p. 582 c X. On Plato's idea of Justice p. 583 a XI. On the Paradise
described by Moses p. 584 c XII. How the woman is said to have been taken out of
the man p. 585 b XIII. On the mode of life of mankind at first p. 586 a XIV.
That they associated even with irrational animals p. 586 d XV. How they mention
the Flood p. 587 b

XVI. That the course of doctrine rightly begins with things divine and ends with
things human. From Plato's first Book of The Laws p. 588 d XVII. That it is good
to train children from a still early age in habits of religion p. 590 c

XVIII. That we should regard as education only that which leads to virtue, not
that which leads to money-making or any pursuit for earning a livelihood p. 591
b XIX. That Plato agreed with the Hebrews in thinking that this world is an
image of one more divine p. 592 d

XX. That the young should be prepared for the acquirement of virtue by learning
proper hymns and odes. From the second Book of The Laws p. 594 a XXI. What kind
of thoughts the odes should contain p. 594 d

XXII. That it is not every one that can compose the proper odes and songs, but
either God alone, or some godlike man p. 596 b XXIII. Concerning those who are
capable of judging the odes composed according to the mind of God p. 596 d XXIV.
That even in banquets the odes should be adopted for laws as it Were of the
banquet p. 597 d XXV. That drinking of wine is not to be permitted to all p. 598
c XXVI. That Plato was not ignorant that his enactments were in use among
certain Barbarians p. 599 d XXVII. That our warfare is against ourselves and our
inward passions p. 600 b XXVIII That it is not the body but the soul that is the
cause of our evil deeds p. 601 d XXIX. Of the pure philosopher. From the
Theaetetus p. 602 b XXX. Of all the sophistry in man p. 606 d

XXXI. That it will be necessary sometimes to use falsehood as a remedy for the
benefit of those who require such a mode of treatment p. 607 d

XXXII. That not men only, but also women and every race of mankind, ought to be
admitted to the education above described p. 608 b XXXIII. That it is not right
to accuse the whole nation from the cases of those who live disorderly among us
p. 609 e XXXIV. How Plato changed the oracles in Proverbs into a more Hellenic
form p. 610 a XXXV. Of riches and poverty p. 610 c XXXVI. Of honour to parents
p. 610 d XXXVII. Of purchasing slaves p. 611 b XXXVIII. How he altered the
saying, 'Remove not ancient landmarks which were set by thy fathers' p. 611 c

XXXIX. A saying like, Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto
the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me p. 611 d XL. Of thieves p.
612 a XLI. Of slaying a thief p. 612 c XLII. Of a beast of burden p. 612 d
XLIII. That Plato uses the same examples as the Hebrew Scriptures p. 613 a XLIV.
Further concerning the like examples p. 614 a XLV. Further concerning the same
p. 615 a XLVI. Further concerning the same p. 615 b

XLVII. That Plato also enacts that the citizens should be divided into twelve
tribes in imitation of the Hebrew nation p. 616 d

XLVIII. In what kind of place Plato enacts that the city should be founded : he
describes certain features like the site of Jerusalem p. 617 a XLIX. How Plato
deprecates the preparatory teaching of the Greeks as being injurious p. 618 c L.
On the opinion of the Atheists, from the tenth Book of The Laws p. 621 a LI. How
Plato arranges the argument concerning God p. 623 c LII. How he discourses on
God's universal providence. In the tenth Book of The Laws p. 630 c

CHAPTER I OUR twelfth Book of the Preparation for the Gospel will now from this
point supply what was lacking in the preceding Book in proof of Plato's
accordance with the Hebrew Oracles, like the harmony of a well-tuned lyre. We
shall begin with a defence of our Faith, that is reviled among the multitude.

[PLATO] 1 'It would be another question therefore whether one is right or wrong
in finding fault with the constitutions of Lacedaemon and Crete: perhaps,
however, I should be better able than either of you to tell what most people say
of them. For if your laws are even moderately well framed, one of the best of
them must be a law allowing none of the young to inquire what is right or wrong
in them, but bidding all with one Yoice and one mouth to agree that everything
is well settled by the appointment of the gods; and if any one says otherwise,
they must not endure to listen to him at all. But if an old man observes any
fault in your laws, he may discuss such subjects with a ruler and one of his own
age, no young man being present.' 'What you enjoin, Stranger, is perfectly
right.' With good reason then the Hebrew Scriptures at an earlier time require
faith before either the understanding or examination of the sacred writings,
where it says, 'If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not understand,' 2 and
again, 'I believed, and therefore have I spoken.' 3 For which cause also among
us those who are newly admitted and in an immature condition, as if infants in
soul, have the reading of the sacred Scriptures imparted to them in a very
simple way, with the injunction that they must believe what is brought forward
as words of God. But those who are in a more advanced condition, and as it were
grown grey in mind, are permitted to dive into the deeps, and test the meaning
of the words: and these the Hebrews were wont to name 'Deuterotists,' as being
interpreters and expounders of the meaning of the Scriptures.

CHAPTER II

[PLATO] 4 'IN the next place therefore we should say: It seems, Tyrtaeus, that
you praise most highly those who distinguish themselves in foreign and external
war. He would admit this, I suppose, and agree?

'Of course.

'But we say that, though these are brave, those are far braver who show their
valour conspicuously in the greatest of all wars. And we too have a poet as
witness on our side, Theognis, a citizen of Megara in Sicily, who says:

"Cyrnus, when factions rage, a faithful man Is worth his weight in silver and in
gold." 5

'Such a man then, we say, is very much braver than the other in a harder
warfare, almost as much as justice and temperance and wisdom combined with
valour are better than valour by itself alone. For a man would never be found
faithful and true in civil wars without possessing all virtue. But there are
very many mercenaries who are willing to die in war, standing firm and fighting,
as Tyrtaeus says,6 the greater part of whom, with very few exceptions, are
violent and unjust and insolent and the most senseless of mankind.

'To what conclusion then does our present argument lead? And what does it wish
to make clear by these statements? Evidently this, that before all things both
the heaven-sent lawgiver in this country, and every other of the least
usefulness, will always enact his laws with a view chiefly to the greatest
virtue: and this is, as Theognis says, faithfulness in dangers, which one might
call perfect justice.'

Among us also the Word of salvation, joining wisdom with faith, commends the man
who is adorned with both, saying, in His own words: 'Who then is the faithful
and wise steward?' 7 and again, 'Well done, good and faithful servant, thou hast
been faithful over a few things, I will set thee over many things.' 8 Certainly
in these passages He clearly shows that He approves not unreasoning faith, but
that which is combined with the greatest virtues, such certainly being wisdom
and goodness.

CHAPTER III

[PLATO] 9 'FOR indeed it seems to me that in our former arguments we stated
opportunely that the souls of the dead have a certain power after death, and
take an interest in human affairs. There are tales treating of these matters,
which are tedious though true: but on such subjects besides the other reports
which we ought to believe, as being so many and so ancient, we must also believe
the lawgivers who say that these things are true, unless they are shown to be
utter fools.' In the Book of the Maccabees also it is said that Jeremiah the
Prophet after his departure from life was seen praying for the people, as one
who took thought for men upon earth.10 And Plato also says that we ought to
believe these stories.

CHAPTER IV [PLATO] 11 'THERE are two kinds of stories, the one true, and the
other false?

'Yes.

'And we must instruct children in both, and in the false first?

'I do not understand, said he, what you mean.

'Do you not understand, said I, that what we first tell children is a fable? And
this, I suppose, is, generally speaking, fiction, though there is also some
truth in it. And we use fables with children earlier than gymnastics.

'That is true.' So Plato writes. And among the Hebrews also it is the custom to
teach the histories of the inspired Scriptures to those of infantine souls in a
very simple way just like any fables, but to teach those of a trained mental
habit the more profound and doctrinal views of the histories by means of the
so-called Deuterosis and explanation of the thoughts that are unknown to the
multitude.

CHAPTER V

[PLATO] 12 'Do you not know then that the beginning is the chief part of every
work, especially for any young and tender mind? For at that age any character
that one wishes to impress on each is most easily formed and imparted.

'Quite so.

'Shall we then just carelessly permit our children to listen to casual fables
(composed by casual persons), and to receive into their souls opinions for the
most part opposite to those which, when they are grown up, we shall think they
ought to hold?

'We must by no means permit it.

'In the first place then, it seems, we must supervise the writers of fables, and
approve any good fable they may compose, and reject any that are not good. And
we must persuade nurses and mothers to tell their children those which are
approved, and to form their souls by the fables much more carefully than their
bodies with their hands. But the greater number of the tales which they tell
them now must be rejected.'

These precautions also had been taken by the Hebrews before Plato's time. For
those who had a divine spirit fit for discerning of spirits approved what was
rightly said or written with help from the Holy Spirit, and the contrary they
rejected, just as they rejected the words of the false prophets. Moreover it was
the custom of parents and nurses to soothe their infant children by singing the
most edifying narratives from the divine Scriptures, just like any fables, for
the sake of preparing beforehand for the religion which they were to learn when
approaching to manhood.

CHAPTER VI

[PLATO] 13 'LISTEN then, as they say, to a very pretty story, which you, I
suppose, will regard as a myth, but I as a true story, for what I am going to
say I shall tell you as being true.' And after a little more:

'(There was a law) that he who had lived a just and holy life should depart
after death to the Islands of the Blessed, and dwell in perfect happiness beyond
the reach of all evils. But the man who had lived an unjust and ungodly life
must go away to the prison-house of vengeance and punishment, which they call
Tartarus.' And again a little farther on:

'Next they must be stripped of all these wrappings and so tried, for their
judgement must be after death. The judge also must be naked, that is to say,
dead, examining by his very soul the very soul of each immediately after death,
when it is bereft of all its kindred, and has left all that apparel behind on
earth, in order that the judgement may be just.' And afterwards he adds: 14

'This, Callicles, is what I have heard and believe to be true, and from these
stories I gather the following conclusion: death, as it seems to me, is nothing
else than the separation from each other of two things, the soul and the body.

'And after they are separated, each of them retains its own condition almost the
same as it had when the man was alive, the body having its own nature and the
results of its treatment and sufferings all plainly visible. For instance, if a
man's body was large either by nature or by training or both while he was alive,
his corpse also after death will be large; and if it was fat, it will be fat
also after death, and so on.

'And again, if it was his custom to wear long hair, his corpse also will have
long hair; or if a man was often whipped, and bore traces of the stripes in
scars on his body either from scourges or from wounds of other kinds, when
alive, his body after death may be seen to have these marks. Or if a man's limbs
were broken or distorted during life, the same will be visible also after death.
'And in a word, whatever was a man's condition of body during life, the same
conditions are also plainly visible after death, either all or most of them for
a certain time. This same then seems to me to be the case, Callicles, with
reference to the soul also. When it is stript of the body, all things are
visible in the soul, both its natural qualities, and the effects due to the
habits of every kind which the man had contracted in his soul.

'When therefore they have come before the judge, those from Asia before
Rhadamanthus, he stops them, and examines the soul of each, without knowing
whose it is; but often when he has laid hands on the Great King or some other
king or potentate, he discerns that his soul has no sound part in it, but is
scored with scourges, and full of scars from perjuries and injustice, of which
each man's deeds have left the print upon his soul, and all crooked from
falsehood and imposture, with nothing straight, because it has been reared with
no sense of truth: and from power, and luxury, and insolence, and intemperance
of conduct he sees the soul full of deformity and ugliness; at sight of which he
sends it off straight to prison in disgrace, where on its arrival it will have
to endure its befitting punishments,

'Now every man who is under punishment, if punished rightly by another, ought
either to become better and profit by it, or to be made an example to the rest,
that others, seeing the sufferings which he endures, may be brought by terror to
amendment.

'Those who receive benefit when they are punished by gods and men are they whose
sins are remediable; but nevertheless it is by pain and suffering that they
receive the benefit both here and in Hades, for in no other way is it possible
to be delivered from iniquity.

'But if any have been guilty of the worst crimes, and have become incurable by
reason of such iniquities, of these the examples are made; and inasmuch as they
are incurable, they can no longer receive any benefit themselves, but others are
benefited, who see them enduring for ever the greatest and most painful and
terrible sufferings for their sins, hung up there in the prison-house in Hades
as signal examples, a spectacle and a warning to the wicked who from time to
time arrive there. And if what Polus says is true, I foretell that Archelaus
will be one of these, and every other tyrant who is like him.15

'I suppose that the majority of these examples have been taken from among
tyrants and kings and potentates, and those who have managed the affairs of
states; for these because of their power commit the greatest and most impious
crimes.

'Homer too bears witness to this.16 For he has represented those who are
suffering eternal punishment in Hades as kings and potentates, a Tantalus, and
Sisyphus, and Tityus. But Thersites, or any other common villain, no poet has
represented as involved in extreme punishments as being incurable: for, I
suppose, he had not the power, and therefore was happier than those who had it.
In fact, however, Callicles, the men who become excessively wicked are of the
class who have power. Yet there is nothing to prevent good men from being found
even among these; and those who are so found are very worthy of admiration. For
it is a difficult thing, Callicles, and very praiseworthy for a man who has
great power of doing wrong to live always a just life, and few there be of this
kind. Some there have been both here and elsewhere, and I doubt not there will
be others, endowed with this virtue of administering justly whatever may be
entrusted to them; and one there has been very celebrated over all Greece,
Aristides son of Lysimachus: yet for the most part, my good friend, men in power
turn out bad. As I was saying therefore, when Rhadamanthus gets hold of such a
man, he knows nothing else about him, neither who he is, nor of what family, but
only that he is a villain: and on seeing this, he sends him off to Tartarus,
with a badge upon him to show whether he seems to be curable or incurable; and
on arrival there he undergoes the treatment proper to his case.

'But sometimes after looking upon another soul that has lived a holy life in
company with truth, a private man's or any other's (most likely, I venture to
say, Callicles, the soul of a philosopher who minded his own work and did not
busy himself in affairs during his life), he is delighted and sends it off to
the Islands of the Blessed.

'Aeacus also does just the same, and each of these two sits in judgement with a
rod in his hand. But Minos as superintending sits alone, and holds a golden
sceptre, as Ulysses in Homer says that he saw him,

"Holding a sceptre of gold, as he utters the doom of the dead." 17

'For my part therefore, Callicles, I am convinced by these stories, and consider
how I shall present my soul before the judge in the healthiest condition
possible. So renouncing what most men deem honours, I shall try by really
practising truth both to live the best life in my power, and so, when death
comes, to die.

'All other men also I exhort to the best of my ability. And you especially I in
my turn invite to enter upon this mode of life and this conflict, which I
declare to be worth all other conflicts here on earth.

'And I make it a reproach to you that you will not be able to help yourself,
when the trial and the judgement of which I was just now speaking come upon you.
But on coming before that judge, the son of Aegina, when he lays hold of you and
leads you forward, you will stand agape and turn dizzy there, just as much as I
should here. And perhaps some one will smite you even to your shame upon the
cheek, and will insult you in every way.

'Perhaps, however, this appears to you a fable, like an old wife's tale, and so
you despise it. And there would be nothing strange in despising it, if by any
searching we could find something better and truer.

'But as it is you see that though there are three of you, who are the wisest of
the Greeks of the present time, yourself and Polus and Gorgias, you are not able
to show that we ought to live any other life than this, which appears to be of
advantage in the other world as well. But amid so many arguments, while all the
rest were refuted, this alone remains unshaken, that to do wrong is to be more
carefully avoided than to suffer wrong, and above all a man must study not to
seem but to be good, both in private and in public life.' So then Plato supposed
that Aeacus and Minos and Rhadamanthus would be judges of the dead: but the word
of God protests that 'all must appear before the judgement-seat of God; that
each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath
done, whether it be good or bad.' 18 And again it says, 'In the day when God
shall judge the secrets of men, . . . who will render to every man according to
his works: to them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and
honour and immortality, eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, and
obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there shall be wrath and
indignation, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil,
of the Jew first, and also of the Greek;19 . . . for there is no difference.'20

CHAPTER VII

[PLATO] 21 'TAKE care, however, that these things come not to the knowledge of
uneducated men: for there are, I think, hardly any tales more ridiculous than
these to the multitude, nor on the other hand any more admirable and inspiring
to the well disposed. But though often repeated and constantly heard even for
many years, they, like gold, hardly become thoroughly purified with much careful
treatment.' Among us also the Word of salvation says:

'Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before
swine.' 22 And again, 'For the natural man receiveth not the things of the
Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him.'23

CHAPTER VIII

[PLATO] 24 'AND indeed (I call it folly) also in the individual, when good
reasons that are present in his soul produce no good effect, but what is quite
contrary to them. All these I should class as the worst kinds of ignorance both
in a state and in each individual citizen, and not the ignorance of the
craftsmen, if you understand, Strangers, what I mean.

'Yes, we understand, friend, and admit what you say.

'Let this then be thus laid down as agreed on and stated, that nothing connected
with government must be entrusted to those citizens who are ignorant of these
things, and they must be reproached for ignorance, even though they may be very
clever in argument and thoroughly trained in all accomplishments, and all that
naturally tends to quickness of understanding: while those who are of the
opposite character to them must be called wise, even though, according to the
proverb, they know neither how to read nor how to swim; and offices of authority
must be given to them as sensible men.

'For, my friends, how can there be even the smallest kind of wisdom without
harmony? It is not possible. But the finest and greatest of harmonies may most
justly be called the greatest wisdom; and of this that man partakes who lives
according to reason, whereas he who lacks wisdom is the ruin of his family, and
by no means a saviour to the state, but on the contrary he will on every
occasion be found ignorant in such affairs.'

Let this suffice for my quotation from the Laws, But in the Statesman also the
same author speaks as follows on the subject of not being at all anxious about
names and phrases:

'Very good, Socrates; and if you continue to guard against being anxious on
account of names, you will turn out to be richer in wisdom in your old age.' 25

CHAPTER IX THE Hebrew Scripture introduces Moses at first as deprecating the
leadership of the people by what he said to Him who conversed with him, 'I
beseech Thee, O Lord, appoint some other that is able, whom Thou shalt send' 26:
and afterwards it represents Saul as hiding himself to avoid assuming the
kingdom, and the prophet Jeremiah as humbly deprecating his mission. Now hear
how Plato also confirms the reasonableness of declining office, speaking as
follows:

[PLATO] 27 'This then, O Thrasymachus, is now clear, that no art nor government
provides for its own benefit, but as I said before, both provides and enjoins
what is profitable to the governed, having regard to his advantage though he is
the weaker, and not to that of the stronger.

'It was for these reasons then, my dear Thrasymachus, that I said just now that
no one is ready to accept office of his own free will, and take in hand other
people's troubles to set right, but all demand a recompense, because he who
intends to do j ustice to his art never practises nor enjoins what is best for
himself, if he follows the rules of art, but what is best for the governed. For
which reasons, as it seems, there must be a payment for those who are expected
to be willing to take office, either money, or honour, or a penalty if he
refuse.'

CHAPTER X

WHEREAS the oracles of the Hebrews teach that their prophets and righteous men
bravely endured the most extreme insults and outrages and every kind of danger,
you may learn the agreement of Plato's opinion on this point also from these
words of his, which he has set down in the second Book of the Republic:

[PLATO] 28 'Such then being our representation of the unjust man, let us now in
our argument set the just man beside him "in his nobleness and simplicity," a
man, as Aeschylus says:

"Whose will is not to seem good, but to be." 29

'We must take away the seeming. For if he is to seem just, he will have honours
and rewards for seeming to be so: and then it will be uncertain whether he is
just for the sake of justice, or for the sake of the rewards and honours.

'We must strip him then of everything except justice, and make his condition the
reverse of the former. Though never doing wrong, he must have the reputation of
the worst wrongdoing, that his justice may be strictly tested by his being proof
against infamy, and its consequences: and he must be immovably steadfast even
unto death, being in reality just but "with a life-long reputation for
injustice." ' And soon after he adds:

'Let me therefore describe it; and so, Socrates, if my speech be somewhat
coarse, imagine the speaker to be not me, but those who praise injustice above
justice. And they will tell you as follows, that in these circumstances the just
man will be scourged, racked, fettered, will have both eyes torn out, and at
last after suffering every kind of torture he will be crucified, and will learn
that a man should wish not to be, but to seem, just.'

Such is Plato's description in words, but the righteous men and prophets among
the Hebrews are recorded long before to have suffered in deed all that he
describes. For though most just, yet as if the most unjust, 'they were stoned,
they were sawn asunder, they were slain with the sword, they wandered about in
sheep-skins and goat-skins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented,... wandering
in deserts, and mountains, and caves, and the holes of the earth, of whom the
world was not worthy.' 30 The Apostles also of our Saviour, though following the
highest path of justice and piety, were by the multitude involved in the
reputation of injustice, and what they suffered we may learn from themselves
when they say, 'We are made a spectacle unto the world, both to angels and to
men 31 . . . And even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are
naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling-place: 32 . . . being
reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we endure; being defamed, we intreat: we
are made as the filth of the world.'

Nay, even unto this present time the noble witnesses of our Saviour throughout
all man's habitable world, while exercising themselves 'not to seem but to be'
both just and pious, have endured all the sufferings which Plato enumerated: for
they were both scourged, and endured bonds and racks, and even had their eyes
torn out, and at last after suffering all terrible tortures they were crucified.
None like them will you find by any searching among the Greeks, so that one may
naturally say that the philosopher did no less than prophesy in these words
concerning those who among us were distinguished in piety and true
righteousness.

CHAPTER XI As Moses in some mystic words says that in the beginning of the
constitution of the world there had been a certain Paradise of God, and that
therein man had been deceived by the serpent through the woman, hear now what
Plato, all but directly translating the words, and on his part also speaking
allegorically, has set down in the Symposium. Instead of the Paradise of God he
called it the garden of Zeus, and instead of the serpent and the deception
wrought by it he supposed Penia (Poverty) to lay the plot, and instead of the
first man, whom the counsel and providence of God had set forth as it were for
His new-born son, he spake of a son ot Metis (Counsel) called Poros (Plenty),
and instead of saying 'when this world was being constituted,' he said 'when
Aphrodite was born,' speaking in this allegorical way of the world, because of
the beauty with which it is clothed. He speaks, however, word for word as
follows:

[PLATO] 33 'When Aphrodite was born, the gods were holding a feast, and among
the rest was Poros the son of Metis. And after dinner, Penia, as there was a
feast, came to beg and stood about the doors. So Poros being drunk with nectar,
for there was no wine as yet, went into the garden of Zeus, where he was weighed
down with sleep. So then Penia, to relieve her destitution, plotted to get a
child by Poros, and lay down beside him, and conceived Eros.' Such then were the
thoughts which in this passage also Plato obscurely hinted in imitation of
Moses.

CHAPTER XII

AGAIN Moses had said, 'But for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
And God caused a trance to fall upon Adam, and cast him into a sleep, and He
took one of his ribs, and filled up the flesh instead thereof. And the Lord God
builded the rib, which He had taken from Adam, into a woman.' 34

Plato, though he did not understand in what sense the story is told, was
evidently not ignorant of it. But he assigns it to Aristophanes, as a comedian
accustomed to scoff even at holy things, introducing him in the Symposium as
speaking thus:

'Now you must first become acquainted with human nature and its affections. For
our original nature of old was not the same as now, but of a different kind. In
the first place the sexes of mankind were three, not two as now, male and
female, but there was also a third combining them both, of which the name
remains now, but the thing itself has disappeared. For Hermaphrodite was then
both a real form and a name combined of both, the male and the female.' 35 Then
after his usual sarcasms, he adds:

'After this speech his Zeus proceeded to cut the men in two, like those who cut
sorb-apples for pickling, or eggs with hairs. And of each whom he cut he bade
Apollo turn round the face and half of the neck towards the cutting, that by
contemplating the section of himself the man might be more obedient to order: he
also bade him heal the other parts.' 36

CHAPTER XIII

MOSES described the original life of the earth-born as having been spent in the
Paradise of God, and God as guiding them in a course of life without money or
possessions, and all things as growing up for them without sowing or ploughing,
and themselves as bare of the clothing afterwards adopted: and now listen to the
philosopher all but translating these very statements into the Greek language.
He says then:

[PLATO] 37 'God Himself was their shepherd and guardian, just as now man being
another animal of more divine nature tends other kinds inferior to himself. And
while God was their ruler, there were no states, nor any possessions of wives
and children; for they all sprang up out of the earth into a new life with no
remembrance of their former state: and there were no things of this present
kind, but they had fruits in abundance both from trees and many various plants,
not growing from cultivation, but sent up spontaneously by the earth. They dwelt
for the most part in the open air, without clothes and without bedding; for
their seasons were so tempered as to cause them no trouble, and they had soft
couches, where grass sprang up in abundance out of the earth. The life of which
I speak, Socrates, was that of the age of Kronos: but the present life, which is
said to be in the reign of Zeus, you know by your own experience.'

CHAPTER XIV

AGAIN as Moses has recorded that 'the serpent was more subtle than all the
beasts,' 38 and how the serpent talked to the woman and the woman to the
serpent, and has set forth the persuasions used by the serpent, now listen to
what Plato writes:

[PLATO] 39 'If therefore the children of Kronos, with so much leisure and
ability to hold intercourse by words not only with men but with beasts also,
used all these advantages with a yiew to philosophy, conversing with the beasts
as well as with one another, and inquiring from every nature which by the
possession of any special faculty discerned anything different from the rest to
add to the store of wisdom, it is easy to decide that the men of that age were
ten thousand times better than the present in respect of happiness. 'But if
filling themselves to the full with meat and drink they discoursed to one
another and to the beasts of fables such as now are told of themselves, this
also, just simply to declare my own opinion, is very easy to decide.
Nevertheless let us leave these questions, until there appear some informer
competent to tell us in which way the men of that age were inclined in regard to
knowledge and the use of language.'

CHAPTER XV WHEN Moses had laid down a plan of legislating for men, he thought
that he must have in his preface an account of ancient times: and he makes
mention of the Flood, and of the subsequent life of mankind, and then he
describes the social life of the men of old among the Hebrews who were friends
of God, and also of those who were proved otherwise in offences, because he
considered that the narration of these things would be a parallel to his
legislation. And in like manner Plato also, when he proceeds to write down laws,
affects the same method with Moses. In the preface, for instance, of the Laws,
he has made use of his account of ancient times, making mention of a flood, and
of the mode of life after the flood. Listen at least to what he says at the
beginning of the third Book of the Laws:40 'Do you think then that there is any
truth in the ancient traditions?

'What traditions?

'That mankind has often been destroyed by floods and diseases and many other
calamities, in which only some small portion of the human race was left.

'Certainly every one thinks all this very probable.

'Come then, let us consider one of the many destructions, namely this which was
caused by the flood.

'What point are we to observe in regard to it?

'That those who escaped the destruction at that time would be chiefly
mountain-shepherds, small sparks of the human race preserved on the hill-tops.

'Evidently.

'Moreover such men must necessarily be unacquainted both with other arts and
especially with the devices of men in towns against each other with regard to
selfish advantage and rivalry, and all other evil deeds which they contrive one
against another.

'Certainly it is probable.

'Let us suppose then that the cities settled on the plains and by the sea were
utterly destroyed at that time.

'Suppose so.

'Must we not say then that all implements were lost, and every excellent
invention connected with art, whether of political or any other kind of wisdom,
must all have perished at that time? ' And further on he says: 41

'Let us say then that, at the time when the destruction had just taken place,
the condition of mankind was this, a boundless and fearful desolation, and a
very great expanse of fertile land.'

After these and other such statements, he goes on to describe the lives of
mankind after the flood, and then, just as Moses appends to the history after
the flood the civil state of the godly Hebrews of old, in like manner Plato
also, next to the lives of those who followed the flood, tries to describe the
ancient times of Greek history, as Moses does of the Hebrews, mentioning the
Trojan war, and the first constitution of Lacedaemon, and the Persians, and
those who had lived among these events whether well or ill: and then after the
narration of these things he begins his arrangement of the laws, following Moses
in this also.

CHAPTER XVI

MOSES made all his legislation and the constitution of his state dependent on
piety towards the God of the universe, and inaugurated his legislation with the
Creator of all, and then taught that from the good that is divine proceeds all
good for man, and referred the divine to the ruling mind of the world, that is
the very God of all. Now see how our philosopher also, treading in the same
steps, finds fault with the lawgivers of the Cretans and Lacedaemonians, and
teaches throughout the law approved by Moses, speaking as follows:

[PLATO] 42 'May I then explain how I should have liked to hear you define the
matter further?

'By all means, Stranger.

'You ought to have spoken thus: It is not without reason that the laws of the
Cretans are especially celebrated among all the Greeks: for they are rightly
framed in that they render those who use them happy; for they provide all good
things for them.

'Now goods are of two kinds: some human, and some divine; and the former are
dependent on the divine; and if a city accept the greater, it gains the less
also; but otherwise, it is deprived of both. Now there are first the lesser
goods, of which the chief is health, and beauty second, and the third strength
of body for running and all other movements, and wealth fourth, not blind but
keen-sighted wealth, if it accompany wisdom.

'For this indeed is the first and chief of divine goods, wisdom I mean, and next
a temperate habit of soul joined with intelligence, and from these combined with
courage a third good would be justice, and a fourth courage. Now all these are
by nature set in higher rank than those bodily goods, and the lawgiver too must
give them this rank.

'And next he must direct that all the other ordinances for his citizens are to
be regarded by them as looking towards these goods, and among these the human to
look to the divine, and all the divine to the ruling mind.

'With regard also to mutual contracts of marriage, and then in the procreation
and nurture of children, both male and female, he must take care of his citizens
in youth and maturer years even till old age, duly awarding honour or disgrace,
and after having observed and watched over their pains and pleasures and desires
in all these kinds of intercourse, and their pursuit of love of all kinds, he
must rightly distribute praise or blame by means of the laws themselves.' Also a
little afterwards he says: 43

'After careful observation the legislator will appoint guardians over all these
matters, some guiding their course by wisdom, and some by true opinion, so. that
intelligence may bind all these ordinances together and render them, subservient
to temperance and justice, not to wealth or ambition.

'It is in this way that I, O Strangers, should have wished, and still do wish
you to describe how in the so-called laws of Zeus, and those of the Pythian
Apollo, which Minos and Lycurgus enacted, all these provisions are contained,
and what orderly arrangement in them is discernible to one who by skill and
habits has experience about laws, although to the rest of us this is by no means
clear.'

Among us also it is said, 'Seek ye first the kingdom (of God) and (His)
righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you.' 44 But long before
this Moses also having commenced with the doctrine concerning God, and having
next adapted to it his constitution of the state, and the rules about contracts,
and the customs of social life, appoints as rulers and guardians over them all
those who are consecrated to God, as the scriptures also teach, just men, haters
of arrogance, 'some guiding their course by wisdom and some by true opinion.'

CHAPTER XVII

[PLATO] 45 'I TELL you then; and I affirm that the man who is to excel in
anything must practise that very thing from his earliest youth, both in sport
and in earnest, in every particular pertaining to the subject. Take for
instance, the man who is to be a good husbandman or a builder of some kind; the
one must play at building children's houses, and the other at tilling the
ground, and be who brings up either of them must provide small copies of the
real tools for him; and whatever branches of knowledge must be learnt beforehand
they must begin to learn; the carpenter for instance must learn to measure by
rule or line, and the soldier to play at riding or some other such exercise; and
by their sports the teacher must try to turn the children's pleasures and
desires to the point which they must reach to attain their end in life.

'The chief point then in education, we say, is the right "training in the
nursery," which will best lead the soul of the child in his play to the love of
that, in which, when he has become a man, he will need to be perfect in the
excellence of his work.' This also Moses had previously enacted, saying, 'And
these words, which I command thee this, day, shall be in thy heart and in thy
soul, and thou shalt enforce them upon thy sons.' 46 This the Hebrews are
accustomed to do, training up all their young children from a tender age in the
precepts of religion: and this is zealously practised to the present time in
accordance with an ancestral custom in the Jewish nation.

CHAPTER XVIII

[PLATO] 47 'LET not therefore that which we call education be indefinite. For at
present when we blame, or praise the mode in which each has been brought up we
speak of one of us as educated, and another as uneducated, although sometimes
they are men extremely well educated for retail trade or a ship-master's life or
any other such calling. For in our present discourse, as it seems, we do not
regard this as education, but that training to virtue from childhood, which
makes a man desire and long to become a perfect citizen, knowing how to rule and
to obey with justice.

'This is the training which, as it seems to me, our present mode of speaking
designates, and which alone it would allow us to call education; but that which
aims at wealth or at strength or even at any kind of cleverness apart from
intelligence and justice (it deems) mechanic and illiberal and not worthy to be
called education at all.

'Let us then have no difference with them about a name, but let the present mode
of speaking continue as agreed on between us, namely that those who have been
rightly educated generally become good men. And so we must never disparage
education, as it is of all noblest things the first that comes to the best of
men: and if ever it transgresses, but may possibly be reformed, that is what
every man should do to the utmost of his power throughout life.'

Also in the second Book of the Laws he adds: 'By education then I mean the
virtue that comes first to children, that is, if pleasure and friendship and
pain and hatred are rightly engendered in their souls when as yet they are
incapable of reason, and, when they have attained to reason, agree with their
reason that they have been rightly trained by suitable habits. This harmonious
agreement is virtue as a whole, but the part of it due to right training in
regard to pleasures and pains, so as to hate what one ought to hate, from the
very beginning unto the end, and to love what one ought to love, if you cut off
just this part by your argument and call it education, according to my judgement
you would use the name rightly.' 48 So speaks Plato. But he is anticipated by
David in the Psalms, when in teaching us 'to hate what we ought to hate, and
love what we ought to love' 49 he speaks as follows: 'Come, ye children, hearken
unto me: I will teach you the fear of the Lord. What man is he that desireth
life, and would fain see good days? Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips that
they speak no guile. Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.'

Solomon too says in like manner: 'Hear, ye children, the instruction of a
father. For I give you a good gift: forget not my laws.' 50 And again: 'Get
wisdom, get understanding; forget it not.' 51 And: 'Say that wisdom is thy
sister; and gain understanding for thy familiar friend.' 52 Again: 'Enter not
upon the paths of the ungodly, and envy not the ways of transgressors.' 53 And
numberless other such, passages you will find in the Hebrew Scriptures, fitted
for teaching the acquisition of piety and virtue, and suited alike to the young
and to those of full age.

CHAPTER XIX THE answer of God said to Moses: 'See, thou make all things after
the pattern which was shown to thee in the mount.' 54 And the sacred word stated
more plainly, 'Who served a copy and shadow of the heavenly things;' 55 and
taught that the symbols in the writings of Moses plainly contain an image of the
more divine realities in the intelligible world. Now then listen how Plato also
gives similar interpretations in the sixth Book of the Republic, writing as
follows;

[PLATO] 56 'The philosopher then by communing with God and with the order of the
world becomes both orderly and divine, as far as is possible to man: slander
however is rife in all things.

'In all indeed.

'If therefore, said I, it ever becomes necessary for him to study how to
introduce what he sees in yonder world into the habits of mankind both in
private and in public life, and so to mould others as well as himself, do you
think that he will be found a bad artificer of temperance and justice and civic
virtue in general?

'Certainly not, said he.

'But then if the multitude understand that what we say about him is true, will
they be angry with the philosophers? And will they disbelieve us when we say
that a State can never be prosperous, unless it be planned by artists who follow
the divine pattern?

'They will not be angry, said he, if they understand it. But now what kind of
plan do you mean?

'They would take, said I, a State and the moral nature of man for a tablet, and
first of all would make a clean board, which is not at all an easy matter. You
know, however, that the philosophers would differ at once from other men on this
point, that they would be unwilling to touch either individual or State, or to
frame laws, before they had either received a clean board, or themselves had
made it so, 'Yes, and rightly, said he.

'Next then do you not think they would sketch out the plan of the constitution?

'Of course.

'Then, I suppose, in working it out, they would frequently look to this side and
to that, both to what is essentially just and beautiful and temperate and
everything of that kind, and then to. the other side, to what is found in men,
and would put upon their tablet the likeness of a man by making a combination
and mixture of the various ways of life, and taking their design from that
which, when embodied in man, Homer called the form and likeness of God.57
'Rightly, said he.

'And one feature, I suppose, they would wipe out, and paint in another, until
they made the human characters as pleasing as possible to God.'

CHAPTER XX

[PLATO] 58 'IT seems to me that for the third or fourth time our argument has
been brought round to the same point, namely that education is the drawing and
leading of children to that which has been declared by the law to be right
reason, and which has been approved by the best and eldest men from experience
to be truly right.

'In order therefore that the soul of the child may not be accustomed in its joys and sorrows to go contrary to the law and to the rules laid down by the law, but may comply with it by
rejoicing and sorrowing at the same things as the old man,----for this purpose, let these, which we call songs, be now in reality charms for the soul, seriously designed with a view to harmony such as we speak of; but because the souls of the young are unable to bear seriousness, let them be called and treated as plays and songs, just as those who are in charge try to offer to the sick and enfeebled in body the nutriment that is good for them in some kinds of pleasant food and drink, but that which is unwholesome in unpleasant things, in order that they may like the one, and be rightly trained to dislike the other.

'And in the same way the good lawgiver will persuade, and, failing to persuade,
will compel the poet rightly to represent by noble and praiseworthy language
both the gestures in his rhythms and the music in his harmonies of the temperate
and brave and thoroughly good men.' With good reason then among us also the
children are trained to practise the songs made by divine prophets and hymns
addressed to God.

CHAPTER XXI

[PLATO] 59 'You compel your poets to say that the good man, as being temperate
and just, is happy and blessed, whether he be tall and strong, or small and
weak, and whether he be rich or poor: but if he should perchance

"Midas and Cinyras in wealth surpass," 60

and be unjust, he would be miserable and live a wretched life.

'Also your poet, if he speaks rightly, says,

"Ne'er would I praise, nor count for aught, a man" 61

who did not combine justice with the practice and attainment of all things
accounted honourable; and, being a just man,

"Close should he stand and strive to reach the foe:" 62

but if unjust he should

"Not dare to look on battle's bloody death, 63 Nor outstrip Thracian Boreas in
the race," 64

nor ever have any other of the so-called good things, for the things called good
by the many have no right to the name.

'For health is called the best, and beauty the second, and wealth the third; and
numberless other things are called good, such as quick sight and hearing, and
the sensitive and sound condition of all organs connected with the senses, and
again to be a tyrant and do whatever one likes, and then it is said the
consummation of all blessedness is to have acquired all these things and then
come to be immortal as soon as possible.

'But you and I say this, I suppose, that to just and holy men these are all
excellent possessions, but to the unjust great evils all of them, beginning with
health. For indeed to have sight and hearing and sensation and to live at all
are the greatest of evils for a man who possesses all the so-called goods
without justice and virtue in general if he is to be immortal for ever, but a
less evil if such a one survive as short a time as possible.

'These then are the things which I suppose you will persuade and compel your
poets to say, as I do, and also by making their rhythms and harmonies correspond
thereto, so to train your youths. Do you not see? For I say plainly that evil
things so-called are to the unjust good, but evil to the just: and good things
to the good are really good, but evil to the evil. As I was asking then before,
do you and I agree, or how say you?'

These thoughts are not much unlike David's Psalms, which he had previously
composed by divine inspiration, teaching by songs and hymns who is the truly
blessed man, and who the contrary. This, at least, is the thought with which his
Book begins, where he says: 'Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel
of the ungodly,' 65 and so on. This is what Plato has altered when he declares
that the poets ought to say, 'that the good man being temperate and just is
happy and blessed, and if a man be rich but unjust, he is miserable.' And the
very same thought David again expressed thus in the Psalms, saying: 'If riches
abound, set not your heart upon them.'66 And again: 'Be not thou afraid when a
man is made rich, and when the glory of his house is increased.'67 And at your
leisure you may find each of the philosopher's sayings stated word for word
throughout the whole sacred writing of the Psalms.

CHAPTER XXII

[PLATO] 68 'NAY rather, how surpassingly worthy of a lawgiver and a statesman.
But other things there you would find to be less worthy: this point, however,
about music is both true and worthy of consideration, that it was possible, as
it seems, on such subjects for a man of firm courage to get songs established by
law which naturally produce right conduct. But this will be work for a god or
some godlike man.' With good reason therefore it had been enacted among the
Hebrews also that they should admit no other hymns and songs in religious
instructions than those which had been made under the influence of the Divine
Spirit by men of God and prophets, and the music corresponding to these sung in
the manner customary among them.

CHAPTER XXIII

[PLATO] 69 'So far I myself agree with the multitude, that music must be judged
by pleasure, not however by the pleasure of chance persons, but that the best
music generally is that which gives delight to the best persons who are well
educated, and especially that which delights the one man pre-eminent both in
virtue and education.

'And the reason why I say that the judges of this matter must be virtuous is
this, that they ought to be endowed with wisdom in general, and especially with
courage.

'For the true judge ought not to judge by what he learns from the theatre, when
driven out of his senses by the tumult of the multitude and his own ignorance;
nor if, on the other hand, he knows right, ought he through unmaniiness and
cowardice carelessly to deliver a false judgement out of the same mouth with
which he invoked the gods before proceeding to give judgement. For the judge
sits there not as the learner but rather, according to right, as the teacher of
the spectators, and to oppose those who neither properly nor rightly give
pleasure to the spectators.'

Among the Hebrews also in old times it was not the part of the multitude to
judge the discourses pronounced from divine inspiration, and the inspired songs,
but they were few and rare persons, themselves partakers of a divine spirit, fit
to judge of what was said, who alone were permitted to approve and consecrate
the books of the prophets, and to reject those of men unlike them in character.

CHAPTER XXIV

[PLATO] 70 'Now the original purpose of my argument, to exhibit in becoming
language the aid that should be given to the Chorus of Dionysus, has been stated
to the best of my power. Let us then consider whether this has been rightly
done. I suppose that an assembly of this kind necessarily ends by becoming ever
more tumultuous as the drinking goes on, just what we supposed at the outset
must necessarily occur in the circumstances now under discussion.

'Necessarily.

'Yes, and every man is lifted with lighter heart above himself, and is
gladdened, and grows full of loud confidence, and of unwillingness in such a
state to listen to his neighbours, and claims to be competent to govern both
himself and every one else.

'Certainly.

'Did we not say then that in these circumstances the souls of the drinkers,
becoming like iron heated in the fire, grow softer and younger, so as to be
found tractable by one who has both the knowledge and the power to train and
mould them just as when they were young? And that this modeller is the same as
in their youth, namely the good legislator, who must make laws for the banquet,
able to give an entirely opposite turn to the will of the man who is growing
confident and bold and impudent beyond bounds, and refuses to submit to order
and to his turn of silence, and speech, and drinking, and singing; laws able
also justly to inspire that noblest fear, which stoutly resists the entrance of
unbecoming boldness, that divine fear to which we have given the names of
reverence and shame?

'That is true.

'We said too that the quiet and sober must be guardians of these laws and aid
their operation.' With good reason therefore it has been made a traditional
custom for us also in our feasts to sing songs and hymns composed in honour of
God, the proper order being under the charge of those who are guardians among
us.

CHAPTER XXV

[PLATO] 71 'IF, as a serious matter, any city means to practise the custom now
mentioned in a lawful and orderly fashion, as taking anxious care for the sake
of temperance, and in like manner and for the same reason will not hold aloof
from other pleasures, but form plans for the sake of controlling them, in this
way they may all be used: but if it is to be for sport, and with permission for
any one to drink who will, and whenever he will, and with whomsoever he will,
with the accompaniment of whatever other customs he will, I should never join in
the vote, that this city or this man ought ever to indulge in drinking; but
going even farther than the usage of the Cretans and Lacedaemonians I should
vote for the law of the Carthaginians, that no one when in camp should ever
taste wine, but accustom himself to water-drinking the whole time; and that in
any city neither male nor female slave should ever taste wine, nor magistrates
during the year in which they may be in office, nor again should pilots or
judges while on duty taste wine at all, nor any one who is coming to deliberate
in any important council, nor any one at all in the daytime, unless on account
of bodily training or sickness; nor again at night, when any one whether man or
woman thinks of getting children. One might also mention many other reasons, why
those who hold to reason and law should not drink wine, so that on this
principle no city whatever would have need of many vineyards, but the other
forms of husbandry and the whole mode of life would be duly regulated.'

Moses also anticipates this by enacting that the priests must not taste wine at
the time of their religious service, saying: 'And the Lord spake to Aaron,
saying, Ye shall drink no wine nor strong drink, thou and thy sons with thee,
whenever ye go into the tent of the testimony, or when ye approach to the altar,
so shall ye not die: a statute for ever throughout your generations.' 72 The
same author also gives a law to those who make a vow, saying: 'Whosoever,
whether man or woman, shall make a special vow of self-dedication to purity unto
the Lord, he shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and vinegar of
wine and vinegar of strong drink shall he not drink.' 73 Solomon too forbids the
use of wine to rulers and judges, saying: 'Do all things with deliberation;
drink wine with deliberation: princes are passionate, let them not drink wine,
lest they drink and forget wisdom... and troubles.' 74 The apostle also gives
permission to Timothy on account of sicknesses, saying: 'Use a little wine for
thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.' 75

CHAPTER XXVI

[PLATO] 76 'IF therefore there has either been in the boundless ages of the
past, or is even now in some barbarous region lying far away out of our sight,
or shall hereafter be a necessity for men eminent in philosophy to take charge
of a State, I am ready to argue to the death in defence of this assertion, that
the constitution which I have described has existed, and still exists, and will
exist, whenever the Muse herself becomes mistress of the State: for it is not
impossible that she should become mistress, nor are my descriptions impossible.'

CHAPTER XXVII

[PLATO] 77 'But how for a man in relation to himself? Must he be disposed as an
enemy towards an enemy, or what do we say in this case?

'O Athenian stranger, Attic I should not like to call you, since you seem to me
worthy rather to be called after the name of the goddess, because you have made
the argument clearer by rightly bringing it back to its first principle, so that
you will more easily recognize that we were quite right just now in saying that
all men are enemies to all, both in public and in private, and every one an
enemy to himself.

'What do you mean, my good sir?

'In this last case also, my friend, a man's conquest over himself is the first
and noblest of all victories, but to be defeated by himself is at once the
basest and worst defeat of all. For this is a sign that there is a war against
ourselves going on in every one of us.' And after other passages he adds to this
and says: 78 'Must we not then reckon each of ourselves as one?

'Yes.

'But as possessing in himself two counsellors, antagonistic and foolish, which
we call pleasure and pain?

'That is true.

'And in addition to both these certain opinions of things future, which in
common are called expectation, but severally the expectation of pain is called
fear, and the expectation of the contrary is confidence. And further with all
these there is a calculation, which of them is better or worse, and when this
calculation has become a common decree of a State it is called law.' And
presently he says: 79

'But this we know, that these affections in us are like cords and strings which
pull us inwardly, and being opposite to each other draw us different ways
towards opposite actions; and herein lies the distinction between virtue and
vice. For reason affirms that there is one of these drawings to which every man
ought always to yield, and never let it go, but pull against the other cords;
and that this one is the golden and sacred guidance of reason, called the public
law of the State; and that others are hard and of iron, but this one soft, as
being of gold (and of one form), while the others are like all kinds of forms.
We ought therefore always to take part with the best guidance, that of the law.
For inasmuch as reason is beautiful and gentle and not violent, its guidance
needs assistants, in order that in us the golden kind of motive may prevail over
the other kinds.

'And so in this way the fable about virtue, speaking of us as being puppets,
would be maintained, and the meaning of the expression about a man being "better
or worse than himself" would in a certain way be made clearer; and that in
regard to a State or an individual, the latter having found in his own case a
true principle with regard to this drawing by cords should live in obedience to
it, and a State, having learned the principle either from some god or from this
very individual thus informed, should establish it as a law for dealing both
with herself and with all other states. Thus vice and virtue would be more
clearly distinguished for us.'

Among us also the word of God teaches the like doctrines, saying: 'I delight in
the law of God after the inward man, but I see another law in my members warring
against the law of my mind.' 80 And again: 'Their thoughts one with another
accusing or else excusing them.' 81 And other passages which are similar to
these.

CHAPTER XXVIII

[PLATO] 82 'We remember, however, that in the former part of our discussion we
agreed that, if the soul should be found to be older than the body, the
properties also of the soul would be older than those of the body.

'Yes, certainly.

'Then tempers, and dispositions, and wishes, and reasonings, and true opinions,
and meditations, and remembrances must hare been prior to length and breadth and
thickness and strength of bodies, if soul is prior to body.

'Necessarily.

'Must we not then necessarily grant what follows immediately from this, that the
soul is the cause of all that is good and evil, and noble and base, and just and
unjust, and of all opposites, if we suppose her to be the cause of all things?'

Let these quotations suffice from the tenth Book of the Laws. Now with these
Moses frequently agrees in his laws, saying: 'And if a soul sin and commit a
transgression,' 83 and all other passages expressed by him in like manner to
this.

CHAPTER XXIX THE Hebrew Scripture says of the earnest philosopher: 'It is good
for a man to bear the yoke in his youth: he will sit alone, and keep silence,
because he hath taken it upon him:' 84 and of the prophets beloved by God, that
they passed their lives in deserts, and mountains, and caves,85 for the sake of
attaining the height of philosophy, fixing their thought upon God alone; and now
hear Plato, how he too makes this mode of life divine, giving the following
description of one who aspires to the height of philosophy:

[PLATO] 86 'We are to speak then, it seems, since this is your pleasure, of the
leaders: for why should one talk about those who spend their time to bad purpose
in philosophy? But these leaders, I suppose, in the first place from their youth
up have never known the way to the Agora, nor where the court of justice is, or
the council-chamber, or any other public assembly of the State: and laws and
decrees, whether read or written, they neither see nor hear. The strivings of
political clubs to gain offices, and meetings and banquets and revellings with
flute-girls, are practices which do not occur to them even in dreams.

'And what has happened well or ill in the city, or what evil has come to any one
from his ancestors male or female, is less known to him than, as the proverb
says, the number of gallons in the sea. And as to all these things he knows not
even that he does not know them, for he does not abstain from them for the sake
of gaining reputation; but in fact it is only his body that has its place and
home in the city, but his mind esteeming all these things as little or nothing,
disdains them and is "flying all abroad," 87 as Pindar says, measuring both the
things beneath the earth and on its surface, and studying the stars above the
sky, and scrutinizing in all ways the whole nature of existing things each as a
universal, but not condescending to anything close at hand.

'How do you mean this, Socrates?

'Just as, when Thales was star-gazing, Theodorus, and looking upward fell into a
well, a clever and witty Thracian handmaid is said to have made a jest upon him,
that he was eager to know about things in heaven, but took no notice of what was
before his face and at his feet.

'And the same jest holds good against all who pass their lives in philosophy.
For in fact a man of this kind knows nothing of his nearest neighbour, not
merely as to what he is doing, but hardly even knows whether he is a man or some
other kind of animal. But what man is as man, and what is becoming to such a
nature to do or to suffer different from all others, this he is investigating,
and takes much trouble in searching it out. You understand, I suppose,
Theodorus, do you not?

'Yes, I do, and what you say is true.

'Therefore, my friend, the man of this character both in his private intercourse
with every one, and in public life, as I said at first, whenever he is compelled
either in a law-court or anywhere else to talk about the things at his feet and
before his eyes, becomes a laughing-stock not only to Thracian girls but also to
the rest of the rabble, by falling into wells and every kind of trouble from
want of experience: and his awkwardness is shocking and makes him seem no better
than a fool.

'For when scandal is going on he has nothing personal wherewith to reproach
anybody, inasmuch as he knows no harm of any one from having paid no attention
to it: so he appears ridiculous in his perplexity. And amidst the praises and
loud boastings of others it is evident that he is laughing not in pretence but
in reality, and so he is thought to be silly.

'For when either a tyrant or a king is eulogized, he fancies that it is some
kind of herdsman, as a swineherd, or a shepherd, or cowherd that he hears
congratulated for drawing much milk; but he supposes that they have a more
ill-tempered and more treacherous animal than those to tend and to milk.

'He supposes also that a man in this position must become from want of leisure
no less boorish and uneducated than the herdsmen, being shut in by his citywall
as by a fold on the mountain. And when he hears how some one or other,
possessing ten thousand plethra of land or yet more, possesses a wonderful
amount, he thinks that what he hears of is very little, being accustomed to look
at the earth as a whole.

'And when men sing the praises of family, saying that some man of birth can show
seven wealthy ancestors, he regards the commendation as that of very dull and
short-sighted persons, who from want of education cannot look always to the
whole, nor calculate that every man has had countless myriads of ancestors and
forefathers, among whom any man whatever has had many times over thousands and
thousands of rich and poor, and kings and slaves, barbarians and Greeks: but
when men pride themselves upon a pedigree of five and twenty ancestors, or trace
back to Hercules son of Amphitryon, their narrow-mindedness seems to him
extraordinary, and he laughs at their being unable to calculate that the
twenty-fifth upwards from Amphitryon, and the fiftieth from him, was such as
fortune made him, and so to shake off the vanity of an unintelligent soul.

'In all these matters then such a philosopher is derided by the multitude, on
the one hand as seeming to be arrogant, and on the other as ignorant of what is
before his feet, and at a loss on every occasion.

'You state exactly what takes place, Socrates.

'But when the philosopher himself, O my friend, draws a man upwards, and the other is willing to escape with him from the question, "In what do I wrong you, or, you me," into the
contemplation of abstract justice and injustice, and what is the essence of each of them, and in what they differ from other things or from each other; or from the question, whether a king possessing much wealth is happy, to the contemplation of abstract monarchy and human happiness and misery in general, of what nature "they are, and in what way it is befitting to human nature to acquire the one of them, and avoid the other,----when in turn that narrow-minded, shrewd and pettifogging creature is required to explain all these subjects, he gives the philosopher his revenge. Turning giddy where he hangs on high, and looking down, unaccustomed as he is, from the upper air, dismayed and perplexed and stammering a barbarous jargon, he makes himself a laughing-stock not to Thracian girls, nor to any other uneducated person, for they do not understand it, but to all who have been brought up otherwise than as slaves.

'This then, O Theodorus, is the character of each. The one is the character of
the man who has been really brought up in freedom and leisure, whom you call a
philosopher, with whom we need not be indignant at his seeming to be a simpleton
and a nobody, when he is thrown into any servile offices, as for instance if he
does not understand how to tie up a bundle of bed-clothes, nor to sweeten a
sauce or a flattering speech. But the other is the character of the man who is
able to render all such services as these smartly and quickly, but does not
understand how to throw his cloak over his right shoulder like a gentleman, nor
in just harmony of language to hymn the praises of the true life of gods and of
divinely favoured men.

'If, Socrates, you could persuade all men, as you do me, of the truth of what
you say, there would be more peace and fewer evils among men.

'But it is not possible, O Theodorus, either that evils should disappear (for
there must always be something antagonistic to good), or that they should be
settled among the gods, but they necessarily haunt our mortal nature and this
our place of abode.

'Wherefore also we should try to escape from this world to the other as speedily
as possible. And escape means assimilation to God as far as is possible, and
assimilation means to become just and holy and wise withal. But in fact, my good
friend, it is not at all an easy thing to persuade men that the reasons for
which the multitude say that we ought to shun wickedness and pursue virtue are
not the right reasons for practising the one and avoiding the other, I mean the
wish not to seem to be bad, but to seem to be good.

'For this, as it seems to me, is the proverbial old wives' gossip: but the truth
we may state as follows: God is never in any way unrighteous, but most perfectly
righteous: and nothing is more like Him than any one of us who may likewise
become most righteous. On this depends a man's true ability, or his nothingness
and cowardice.

'For to know this is wisdom and genuine virtue, but not to know it is manifest
ignorance and vice: and all other kinds of seeming cleverness and wisdom, when
they display themselves in political power, are vulgar, and in arts mechanical.
With the man then who does wrong, and says or does unholy things, it is far best
not to admit that villany makes him a clever man.

'For such men glory in their shame, and suppose that they are spoken of as no
fools, nor mere cumberers of the ground, but men of the right sort to prosper in
a State. We ought therefore to tell them the truth, that they are all the more
what they think they are not, because they think they are not. For they are
ignorant of the penalty of injustice, the last thing of which they ought to be
ignorant. For it is not the penalty which they fancy, stripes and death, which
wrong-doers sometimes escape altogether, but a penalty which it is not possible
to escape.

'What penalty then do you mean?

'Though there are two examples set forth in the world of reality, the divinity
being the example of the greatest happiness, and the godless of the greatest
misery, they do not see that this is true, but from silliness and the extreme of
folly they are not conscious of growing like to the one and unlike the other
because of their evil deeds: and they pay the penalty for this by living the
life fitted for the pattern to which they are growing like.

'And if we tell them that unless they get rid of their cleverness, the place
that is free from all evil will not receive them after death, but that they will
always have a life here on earth corresponding to their own character by a
continual association with evil, being evil themselves, they will listen to
this, as men of the utmost cleverness and cunning listening to fools.

'Quite so, Socrates.

'I know it indeed, my friend. There is, however, just one circumstance in their
case, whenever they are obliged to give and to receive an explanation in private
about the studies which they condemn, and are willing to stand their ground
manfully for a long time, and not run away like cowards, then at last, my good
sir, they are strangely dissatisfied with themselves and their arguments, and
their fine rhetoric somehow fades away, so that they seem to be no better than
children.'

CHAPTER XXX

AMONG us also there is this saying concerning all sophistry practised among men:
'For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, I will
destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will set at nought the prudence of the
prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this
world?' 88,89

Moreover that those who study a divine philosophy ought to have no narrow-minded
thoughts, we are taught in the saying: 'While we look not at the things which
are seen, but at those which are not seen: for the things which are seen are
temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.'90 And of the fact that
wickedness gathers close around the earth and this mortal life, the word of God
says somewhere: 'Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.'91 And:
'Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.'92 The prophet also says:
'Cursing, and stealing, and adultery, and murder, are poured out upon the earth,
and they mingle blood with blood.'93 And with regard to escaping from this world
to God, Moses says: 'Thou shalt walk after the Lord thy God, and to Him shalt
thou cleave.'94 And the same Moses teaches us to imitate God, saying: 'Ye shall
be holy, for the Lord your God is holy.'95

David also knowing that God is righteous, and urging us to become imitators of
Him ourselves, says: 'Righteous is the Lord, and loveth righteousness.'96 The
same David taught us to despise wealth, saying: 'If riches increase, set not
your heart upon them';97 and, 'Be not thou afraid, when a man is made rich, and
when the glory of his house is increased: for when he dieth, he shall carry
nothing away, nor shall his glory descend with him.'98

Also in the following words he taught us not to admire the ruling powers among
mankind: 'Put not your trust in princes, nor in any sons of men, in whom there
is no safety. His breath will go forth, and he will return to his earth: in that
day shall all his thoughts perish.'99

CHAPTER XXXI

[PLATO] 100 'But even if the case were not such as our argument has now proved
it to be, if a lawgiver, who is to be of ever so little use, could have ventured
to tell any falsehood at all to the young for their good, is there any falsehood
that he could have told more beneficial than this, and better able to make them
all do everything that is just, not by compulsion but willingly?

'Truth, O Stranger, is a noble and an enduring thing; it seems, however, not
easy to persuade men of it.'

Now you may find in the Hebrew Scriptures also thousands of such passages
concerning God as though He were jealous, or sleeping, or angry, or subject to
any other human passions, which passages are adopted for the benefit of those
who need this mode of instruction.

CHAPTER XXXII [PLATO] 101 'ARE we then agreed as to our former statements?

'About what?

'That every one, man and boy, free and slave, male and female, and the whole
city, should never cease from reciting to themselves these charms which we have
just described, changed from time to time in some way or other, and presenting
every kind of variation, so that the singers may have an insatiable desire for
the hymns, and pleasure in them.

'How could there be any doubt that this practice ought to be adopted?' In the
fifth Book also of the Republic he writes to the like effect, saying as follows:

[PLATO] 102 'Do you then know any human occupation, in which the male sex is not
superior in all these respects to the female? Or need we waste time by
mentioning the art of weaving, and the making of pancakes and preserves, in
which the female sex is thought forsooth to be great, and in which their utter
inferiority is most ridiculous?

'You say with truth, said he, that the one sex is far surpassed by the other, I
might almost say, in everything. Many women, no doubt, are better than many men
in many points, but the general truth is as you say.

'No occupation then, my friend, of those who manage the affairs of the state
belongs to a woman as woman nor to a man as man; but the natural qualities are
found here and there in both sexes alike, and while woman has by nature a share
in all pursuits, and man in all, yet woman is in all weaker than man.

'Yes, certainly.

'Are we then to assign all employments to men, and none to women?

'How can we?

'In fact, we shall say, I suppose, that among women also one has a natural gift
of healing and another has not, and one is musical and another unmusical?

'Certainly.

'Also one fit for gymnastics and for war, and another unwarlike and with no
taste for gymnastics?

'So I suppose.

'Again, one woman is a philosopher, another hates philosophy? And one is
high-spirited, another spiritless?

'This too is true.

'So there is one woman fit for a guardian, and another unfit. Or was not such
the nature which we selected as that of men who were fit for guardians?

'Yes, it was such.

'Both woman and man therefore have the same natural fitness for guardianship of
the state, except in so far as one is weaker and another stronger.

'So it appears.

'We must then select women also who are of this character to live with men of
the same character, and to share in their guardianship, since they are
competent, and akin to them in nature.' With good reason then our Word also
admits to its divine instruction and philosophy every class not only of men but
also of women, and not only of free men and slaves, but also of Barbarians and
Greeks.

CHAPTER XXXIII

[PLATO] 103 'LET us look at it then in this way. Now suppose some one were to
praise the breeding of goats, and the animal itself as a fine property; and some
one else, having seen goats feeding without a goatherd in cultivated ground and
doing mischief, should find fault with them, and on seeing any kind of cattle
without a keeper or with bad keepers, should in this case blame them, do we
think that such a man's censure would convey any just blame whatever?

'How should it? ' Also after a few sentences:

'And what would you say of one who praises or blames any kind of community,
which ought naturally to have a ruler, and which with his aid is useful, whereas
the critic had never seen it in its rightful association with a ruler, but
always without rule, or with bad rulers? Do we suppose that observers such as
these could pronounce any useful censure or praise on communities of this kind?

'How could they?'

If then among us also it should appear that some without any president and
ruler, or with evil rulers, were doing evil, one ought not to find fault with
our whole school, but rather to admire our religious constitution from the
conduct of those who follow it rightly.

CHAPTER XXXIV IN the Proverbs of Solomon it is briefly stated: 'The memory of
the just is associated with praises, but the name of the ungodly is
extinguished';104 and again it is said: 'Call no man blessed before his
death'105: so now hear how Plato interprets the thought in the seventh Book of
the Laws, saying:

[PLATO] 106 'Whosoever of the citizens should reach the end of their life after
having wrought good and laborious works either in body or soul, and been
obedient to the laws, it would be fitting that they should receive eulogies.

'By all means.

'It is not safe, however, to honour those who are still alive with eulogies and
hymns, before a man has finished his whole course of life, and crowned it with a
noble end. And let us have all these honours common to men and to women who have
been conspicuously good.'

CHAPTER XXXV As Solomon had said in Proverbs: 'Give me neither poverty nor
riches,' 107 so Plato says in the fourth Book of the Republic:

[PLATO] 108 'But we have found, it seems, some other things for the guardians,
against which they must watch in every way, that they may not creep in
unobserved into the state.

'What kind of things?

'Riches, said I, and poverty; as the one engenders luxury, and idleness, and
revolution, and the other meanness and mischievousness, as well as revolution.'
By mischievousness is meant every disgraceful action.

CHAPTER XXXVI

AGAIN Moses says in his laws: 'Let every man fear his father and his mother,'109
and 'Honour thy father and thy mother, that it may be well with thee'110; and
Plato, like Moses, bids us both honour and fear them, speaking thus in the Laws:

[PLATO] 111 'Every man of sense fears and honours the prayers of his parents,
knowing that many times and for many persons they have been accomplished.' And
again in another place he says:

[PLATO] 112 'We would have every one reverence his elder both in word and deed.
And any one who is twenty years older than himself, whether male or female, let
him regard as father or mother, and treat with reverence.'

CHAPTER XXXVII

MOSES in his laws forbade Hebrews to have Hebrews as slaves, and said: 'If thou
buy an Hebrew servant, six years shall he serve thee: and in the seventh year
thou shalt send him away free.' 113 And in like manner Plato says in the
Republic:

[PLATO] 114 'They should therefore themselves own no Greek as a slave, and
advise the other Greeks to the same effect.

'Certainly, said he.

'Thus then they would be more ready to turn their arms against Barbarians, and
abstain from war against each other.'

CHAPTER XXXVIII

[PLATO] 115 'LET no man move landmarks, either of his own fellow citizen who is
a neighbour, or of one whose property marches with his on the borders, if he be
neighbour to a foreigner, considering that this is really to move what should be
immoveable.' And presently he says:

[PLATO] 116 'Whosoever ploughs over his neighbour's lands, encroaching upon the
boundaries, let him repay the damage, and as a cure for both his impudence and
his meanness let him pay besides double of the damage to the person injured.'

CHAPTER XXXIX

[PLATO] 117 'And in a word, let not the disgrace and punishment of a father
follow upon any of the children, except when any one's father and grandfather
and great-grandfather in succession have paid the penalty of death.'

CHAPTER XL A LAW of Moses says: 'If a man steal a calf, or a sheep, and slay it,
or sell it, he shall repay five calves for the calf, and four sheep for the
sheep. . . . But if he be caught, and the theft be found in his hand alive, from
a calf or an ass to a sheep, he shall repay double.' 118 Now hear how Plato
follows this, saying:

[PLATO] 119 'But whether a thief steal much or little, let there be one law and
one punishment imposed for all alike. For in the first place he must pay double
the amount stolen, if he be convicted in a suit of this kind, and if the rest of
his substance suffice to pay it, beyond his lot of land; and if not, he must be
kept in prison until he has paid it, or persuaded the man who gained sentence
against him to release him.'

CHAPTER XLI

AGAIN when Moses says: 'But if the thief be found breaking in, and be smitten
that he die, it is not murder,'120 Plato agrees in this also, saying:

[PLATO] 121 'If a man catch a thief coming into his house by night to steal his
goods, and slay him, let him be guiltless: also if he kill a footpad in
self-defence, let him be guiltless.'

CHAPTER XLII

[PLATO] 122 'AND so if a beast of burden or any other animal kill a man, except
any animals which, when struggling in any contest of the public games, do such a
thing, let the relatives prosecute the slayer for murder, and let the suit be
decided by the country guardians, such and so many as the relative shall
appoint, and let the beast which is condemned by them be slain and cast outside
the borders of the country.' So says Plato. And Moses in anticipation says: 'But
if a bull gore a man or a woman and they die, the bull shall be surely stoned,
and his flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the bull shall be quit.'123

CHAPTER XLIII THE prophetic scripture says: 'Son of man, behold, the house of
Israel are all of them become unto Me a mixture of copper, and tin, and iron,
and lead, in the midst of the furnace are they made a mixture of silver.
Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord; because ye are all become one mixture,
therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem, even as silver
is gathered, and copper, and iron, and lead, and tin, into the midst of the
furnace, to blow fire upon them, that they may be melted' 124: and now hear what
Plato says in like manner:

[PLATO] 125 'Listen then to the rest of the fable. For we in the city are of
course all brothers, as we shall say to them in telling the fable, but the god,
in forming as many of you as are fit to rule, mixed gold in their composition;
wherefore they are the most to be honoured; and for all the auxiliaries, silver;
but iron and copper for the husbandmen and other operatives.

'Inasmuch then as you are all of one family, you will generally beget children
like yourselves, but sometimes from a golden parent a silver child will be born,
and a golden child from a silver parent, and all the rest in this way, one from
another.

'And this is the first and chief command that God lays upon the rulers, that
they be above all good guardians of their children and watch over them with
strictest care, to see what metal is mingled in their souls; and if one of their
own children be found to be partly of copper or iron, they must by no means have
pity on him, but assign to him the rank befitting his nature, and thrust him
down either among the operatives or the husbandmen; and if, on the other hand,
from these classes there be born a child with a mixture of gold or silver, they
will value them and promote them, some to the rank of guardian, others to that
of auxiliary: for there is an oracle that the state will be destroyed, whenever
the man of iron or of copper has become its guardian. Do you know any device
then by which they might be brought to believe this fable?'

CHAPTER XLIV THE Hebrew prophecy says to the princes of the people: 'O ye
shepherds of Israel, do shepherds feed themselves? Do not the shepherds feed the
sheep? Behold, ye devour the milk, and the fat ye slay, and clothe you with the
wool, and ye feed not My sheep.... And ye sought not the lost, and the broken ye
bound not up, and brought not back that which was going astray.'126 Moreover the
Word of our salvation says: 'The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep:
but he that is an hireling and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not,
forsaketh them.'127 Now listen also to Plato, in the first Book of the Republic,
how he translates these sayings:

[PLATO] 128 'But as it is, Thrasymachus (for we must still look back upon our
former statements), you see that though at first you defined the true physician,
you did not afterwards think it necessary to keep strict watch over the
definition of the true shepherd; but you suppose that, in so far as he is a
shepherd, he fattens the sheep not with a view to what is best for the sheep,
but with a view to the good cheer, just as a banqueter who is going to have a
feast, or on the other hand with a view to selling them, as a money-maker and
not a shepherd. But surely the art of the shepherd is concerned with nothing
else than how to provide what is best for the flock over which he is set: for
surely it has sufficiently provided all that is required for its own perfection,
as long as it lacks nothing of the shepherd's art. Thus then I was supposing
just now, that we must necessarily admit that every government, in so far as it
is a government, looks solely to what is best for that which is governed and
tended by it, in the case both of public and private government. But is it your
opinion that the rulers in states, I mean the true rulers, hold office
willingly?'

CHAPTER XLV THE Hebrew prophecy says: 'From fear of thee, O Lord, we have been
with child, and we have been in pain, and have brought forth wind [of
deliverance]'129: and Plato in the Theaetetus represents Socrates as speaking
thus:

[PLATO] 130 'Those who associate with me are in fact affected in the same way as
women in childbirth: for they travail in pain and are full of perplexity night
and day far more than the women. And this pain my art is able both to arouse and
to allay.'

CHAPTER XLVI THE prophet Ezekiel said: 'And the hand of the Lord came upon me,
and I saw, and, behold, an uplifting wind came from the north.'131 And presently
he said: 'And in the midst was the likeness as of four living creatures. And the
appearance of them was as the likeness of a man upon them, and each one had four
faces. And the likeness of their faces was as the face of a man: and they four
had the face of a lion on the right side; and they four had the face of a calf
on the left side; they four had also the face of an eagle.' Hear now what Plato
also says in like manner:

[PLATO] 132 'Now then, said I, let us discuss it with him, since we have come to
an agreement as to the effect of a course of injustice and a course of justice
respectively.

'How discuss it? said he.

'By forming in words an image of the soul, that the author of those remarks may
know how he described it.

'What sort of image? said he.

'One of such a kind, said I, as the creatures which, according to the legend,
were naturally produced in old times, the Chimaera and Scylla and Cerberus, and
many others in which several forms are said to have grown together into one.

'So they say, said he.

'Mould then, first, a single form of a motley many-headed beast, having a ring
of heads of tame and wild beasts, and able to change all these and to produce
them out of itself.

'The task, said he, needs a cunning artist: but nevertheless, since language is
more easily moulded than wax and substances of that kind, suppose the model
made.

'Now then model a second form of a lion, and a third of a man: but let the first
be far the greatest, and the second next to it.

'These, said he, are easier, and are already done.

'Well, then, join the three in one, so that they may in a manner be grown
together.

'They are so joined, said he.

'Now mould around them on the outside a likeness of 'one of them, that of the
man, so that to one who cannot see the inside, but only the outer cover, there
may appear to be one single animal, a man.

'The cover is moulded, said he.

'To the man, then, who says that it is profitable for this human creature to do
wrong and not for his interest to do right, let us reply, that his assertion can
only mean, that it is profitable for him by feeding the multiform beast well to
strengthen both the lion and the lion's members, but to starve and weaken the
man, so that he may be dragged whichever way either of the others draws him. and
not to familiarize them at all or make them friendly one to another, but leave
them to bite and struggle among themselves and devour one another.

'Certainly, said he, this is what the eulogist of injustice must say.

'On the other hand, then, would not he who says that justice is profitable
assert that the creature ought so to act and speak, that his inner man shall
have the chief control over the whole man, and take charge of the many-headed
beast like a husbandman, nourishing and taming the gentle parts and hindering
the growth of the wild, having taken the lion's nature for his ally, and by his
common care for all make them friendly to each other and to himself, and so
train them?

'Yes, this again is quite what the advocate of justice has to say.'

CHAPTER XLVII THE whole nation of the Hebrews having been divided into twelve
tribes, Plato also in like manner enjoins by law the necessity of maintaining
the propriety of this in the case of his own citizens, speaking as follows:

[PLATO] 133 'Let our whole country be divided into twelve parts as equal as
possible, and for each part let one tribe assigned by lot furnish annually five
men as guardians of the public lands and commanders of cavalry.' And again he
says:134 'Let the generals elected propose for themselves twelve commanders of
infantry, one for each tribe.'

CHAPTER XLVIII As the royal metropolis established long before among the Hebrews
was far from the sea, and situated among the mountains, and possessed of very
fruitful land; so Plato says that the metropolis to be founded by him in his
Laws ought to be something of this kind. His words are as follows:

[PLATO] 135 'But what I am more desirous of asking concerning it is this,
whether it will be a city on the sea-coast or inland.

'The city of which we spake just now, Stranger, is about eighty stadia distant
from the sea.

'How then? Are there harbours on this side of it, or is it altogether without
harbours?

'Nay, on this side, O Stranger, it is as well provided with harbours as
possible.

'Wonderful! You don't say so! Further, then, does the country about it produce
everything, or does it need anything besides?

'It hardly needs anything more.

'And will it have any neighbouring city close to it?

'None at all, and that is why it is to be founded there: for some emigration
that occurred in the place in old times has left this region uninhabited for an
immense time.

'Well, again? As to hills, and plains, and forest, what proportion has it of
each?

'It is like the general character of the rest of Crete.

'Should you call it rocky rather than level?

'Yes, certainly.

'It cannot then be hopelessly bad for the attainment of virtue. For if it was to
have been on the coast, and with good harbours, and in need of many things more
than it could produce, it would have needed some mighty saviour and lawgivers
more than mortal, if, under such natural conditions, its moral tendencies were
not to be very promiscuous and evil; but as it is there is some consolation in
the eighty stadia. It lies indeed nearer to the sea than it should, considering
how very well you say it is provided with harbours; nevertheless we may be
content even with this. For when the sea is close to a country, its daily
neighbourhood is pleasant, but in reality it is very brackish and bitter: for by
filling the city with commerce and retail trade, it engenders shifty and
faithless habits in men's souls, and makes the city unfaithful and unfriendly
both to herself, and likewise to all other nations. Against this, however, it
possesses a consolation in producing all things; yet being rocky it evidently
cannot be at the same time productive in abundance and in variety. For if it had
both, it would provide large exports, and in return be filled with gold and
silver coin; than which, I may say, there could be no greater evil, taken
singly, for a city in regard to the attainment of just and noble sentiments.'
But now after so many proofs as we have hitherto given, let us observe how,
after approving the mode of education among the Hebrews in the passages which we
have mentioned, he deprecates the Greek method, writing as follows in the tenth
Book of the Republic:

CHAPTER XLIX

[PLATO] 136 'LET me say to you in confidence (for you will not tell of me to the
tragic poets and all the rest of the imitative tribe), all such poetry seems to
be hurtful to the understanding of those hearers who do not possess an antidote
in the knowledge of its real nature.

'Pray what is the purport of your remarks? said he.

'I must speak, said I, although a certain fondness and reverence which I have
felt from boyhood for Homer restrains my speech. For of all those charming
tragic poets he seems to have been the first teacher and leader: nevertheless we
must not respect a person in preference to the truth, but, as I said, I must
speak out.

'Quite so, said he.' Then afterwards he adds:

[PLATO] 137 'As to other matters, then, let us demand no explanation from Homer,
or any other of the poets, by asking why, if any of them was skilful in healing,
and not a mere imitator of medical language, none of the poets ancient or modern
is said to have made cures, as Asclepius did, or to have left any school of
medical art behind him, as Asclepius left his descendants: and let us not ask
him about other arts, but let them pass.

'With regard, however, to those grandest and noblest subjects of which Homer
undertakes to speak, such as war, and strategy, and administration of states,
and the education of mankind, it is fair, I suppose, to ask him this question:
"My dear Homer, if in the representation of virtue you were not a mere
image-maker twice removed from the truth, as we defined an imitator to be, but
only once removed, and capable of knowing what pursuits make men better or worse
both in private and in public, tell us which of our states owed a better
government to you, as Lacedaemon to Lycurgus, and many both small and great
states to many other legislators? What state alleges that you have been a good
lawgiver to them and have conferred a benefit upon them? For Italy and Sicily so
speak of Charondas, and we of Solon: but who says this of you?" Will he be able
to mention any?

'I think not, said Glaucon. At least no one says so, not even the Homeridae
themselves.

'Well, but what war in the time of Homer is recorded to have been waged
successfully under his command or advice?

'Not one.

'But are there said to have been many ingenious inventions applicable to arts or
any other pursuits, as in the case of a man who is wise in practical work, such
as Thales the Milesian, and Anacharsis the Scythian?

'Nothing of the kind whatever.

'Well, then, if not publicly, yet in private, is Homer said during his lifetime
to have guided the education of any persons, who loved him for his society, and
handed down a certain Homeric way of living to those who came after; just as
Pythagoras was wonderfully beloved himself for this kind of association, and his
successors, who to this day call their mode of life Pythagorean, seem to be in a
manner distinguished among other men?

'Nothing of this kind either is reported of him. For surely, Socrates, the
education of Creophylus, the companion of Homer, would appear even more
ridiculous than his name, if the stories told about Homer are true: for it is
said that in his lifetime he was much neglected by this very man.

'Yes, so indeed it is said, I replied.

'But do you suppose, O Glaucon, that if Homer had been really able to educate
men and make them better, as being himself capable not merely of imitating but
of knowing such subjects, he would have failed to gain many companions, by whom
he would have been honoured and beloved? So then Protagoras of Abdera, and
Prodicus of Ceos, and very many others are able in private intercourse to
persuade the men of their day, that they will not be able to manage either their
own house or their state, unless they preside over their education, and are so
much beloved for this their wisdom as to be almost carried about on the heads of
their companions. Can we then suppose that, if Homer or Hesiod was really
capable of improving men in virtue, their contemporaries would have allowed them
to wander about as rhapsodists, and would not rather have hugged them closer
than gold, and constrained them to stay with them at home, or, if they could not
persuade them, would themselves have escorted them wherever they went, until
they had received sufficient education?

'It seems to me, Socrates, said he, that what you say is entirely true.

'Then must we not assume that all the poets, from Homer downwards, only copy
images of virtue and of the other subjects of their poetry, and do not touch the
truth? But, as we were saying just now, the painter, though he knows nothing
himself about shoemaking, will make what seems to be a shoemaker to those who
likewise know nothing about it, but judge by the colours and forms?

'Yes, certainly.

'In the same way, then, I suppose, we may say that the poet also by his names
and phrases lays on certain colours proper to the several arts, of which he
knows nothing himself except how to imitate them, so that to others like him,
judging only from the words, whether he speaks about shoemaking, or generalship,
or any other subject whatever, in metre and rhythm and harmony, it seems to be
extremely well spoken.

'So powerful a charm these musical forms have naturally in themselves: but when
stripped of their musical colouring, you know, I imagine, how poor the poets'
works appear when read in bare simplicity as prose. Have you observed it, or
not?

'I have, said he.'

Now these things being so, it seems good to me to go through some short passages
of Plato, wherein he maintains the doctrine of God and of providence in a more
logical manner, adhering in this also to the Hebrew dogmas. And first let us
observe how he sets forth the opinions of the atheists.

CHAPTER L

[PLATO] 138 'THERE are some who say that all things come, and have come, and
will come into existence some by nature, some by art, and some by chance.

'Do they not say well then?

'Yes, it is probable, I suppose, that wise men are right in what they say.
Nevertheless let us follow them up, and inquire what they on that side mean.

'By all means.

'It seems, they say, that the greatest and fairest things are wrought by nature
and chance, and the less important by art, which receiving from nature the great
original works of creation moulds and frames all the smaller, which we all call
artificial.

'What do you mean?

'I will state it still more plainly thus. Fire and water and earth and air, they
say, all exist by nature and chance, and none of them by art. And the bodies
which come next to these, the earth, and sun, and moon, and stars, have been
created by help of these elements, which are absolutely inanimate. And being
severally carried by the chance with which they meet from their several forces,
they combine in some intimate way, hot with cold, or dry with moist, and soft
with hard, and all other principles which by chance were yet necessarily
combined with a mixture of their opposites, and in this way and according to
these conditions they have thus created both the whole heaven and all things in
the heaven, and all animals too and plants, all seasons being produced, they
say, from these elements, not by virtue of intelligence, nor any god, nor art,
but, as we say, by nature and chance.

'And afterwards from these mortal elements art sprang up later, mortal like
them, and has since produced certain playthings, not partaking much of truth,
but certain images akin, one to another, such as are produced by painting and
music and all their assistant arts. And the arts which do produce anything good,
are those which combine their own power with that of nature, as for example
medicine, and husbandry, and gymnastics. Moreover it is said that political
science also cooperates in some small measure with nature, but for the most part
with art: and thus that all legislation allies itself not with nature but with
art, the assumptions of which are not true.

'How do you mean?

'In the first place, my excellent friend, these people say that gods exist not
by nature but by art and by certain laws, and that these laws differ in various
ways, according as the several states agreed among themselves in establishing
their legislation: and moreover that what is honourable by nature is one thing,
but by law another; and that principles of justice have no existence at all by
nature, but that men go on disputing with one another, and are always changing
them; and whatever alterations they make are severally valid at the time when
they make them, being made by art and laws, and not by any natural principle.

'All these, my friends, are doctrines of men whom the young think wise, both
poets and prose writers, who say that conquest by force is the best right. And
from this cause young men are assailed by impious thoughts, as that there are no
gods such as the law commands them to believe in, and therefore dissensions
arise, from their drawing men towards what they call the right life of nature,
which is in reality to live in mastery over all others, and not as serving
others according to law.

'What a description you have given, O Stranger, and what injury by young men
both publicly to states and to private families!' Also after other passages he
says: 139

'But now, Cleinias, answer me again, since you too must take part in the
discussion. For the man who talks thus probably believes fire, and water, and
earth, and air to be the first elements of all things, and these are what he
calls nature, and believes the soul to be made out of them afterwards: and this
not only seems to be probable, but he really tries to prove it to us by his
argument.

'Yes, certainly.

'Is it possible then that we have discovered a source, as it were, of the
senseless opinion of all men who ever meddled with physical inquiries? Consider
and examine every argument: for indeed it is a matter of no small importance, if
those who take up impious arguments, and lead others, should be found to be
using their arguments not at all rightly, but in a mistaken manner. This seems
indeed to me to be the case.

'You say well; but try now to explain how it is.

'It is likely then that we shall have to deal with rather unusual arguments.'
Also soon after he adds this:140

'Nearly all of them, my friend, seem to have been ignorant both of the nature
and of the power of the soul, and especially of its origin, that it is the first
of all things, created before all bodies, and the chief ruling principle of all
their change and rearrangement. Now if this is so, must not the things which are
akin to the soul have of necessity been created before those which belong to the
body, if the soul itself is older than the body?

'Necessarily.

'Then thought, and attention, and mind, and art, and law must be prior to hard
and soft, and heavy and light: and moreover the great primal works and actions
must be works of art, as being first of all; and natural products and nature,
which they are wrong in calling by this name, must come afterwards and take
their beginning from art and mind.

'How wrong?

'By "nature" they mean the generation of the first principles. But if the soul
shall be found to be first, not fire nor air, then the soul having been the very
first generated would most rightly be said to exist pre-eminently by nature.
This is true, if one has proved soul to be older than body, but not otherwise.
'What you say is most true.'

CHAPTER LI

'COME then, if we ought ever to invoke divine aid, let us do so now: let the
gods be invoked with all earnestness to come to the demonstration of their own
existence; and let us hold fast to this as a sure cable in embarking upon our
present argument. When I am questioned upon matters of this kind, it seems to be
the safest course to answer such questions in the following manner.

'When any one says to me, Stranger, are all things at rest, and nothing in
motion, or the very contrary? Or are some of them in motion, and some at rest?
Some I suppose are in motion, I shall say, and some at rest. Is there not then
some place in which the fixed are at rest, and the moving move?

'Of course.

'And some, I suppose, would move in one single place, and others in more than
one.

'Do you mean, I shall say, that the things which are in the condition of rest at
the centre move in one single place, just as the circumference of circles
revolves, though the circles are said to be at rest?

'Yes.' And afterwards he adds:141

'Let us further state it in the following way, and answer ourselves again. If
all things were somehow combined in one mass at rest, as most of such
philosophers are bold enough to say, which of the above-mentioned kinds of
motion must first arise among them?

'Of course the self-moving: for unless there were previously some change in
themselves, they could never begin to change from any external cause.

'As the beginning then of all motions, and the first which arises in things at
rest and continues in things in motion, the self-moving, we must say, is
necessarily the eldest and mightiest of all changes; and that which is changed
by another, and itself moves others, is the second.

'Most true.

'Since therefore we have reached this stage of the argument, let us make the
following answer.

'What answer?

'If we see this self-motion take place anywhere in the element of earth, or
water, or fire, whether separate or combined, what condition shall we say exists
in such element?

'Do you ask me whether we shall say that it is alive, when it moves itself?

'Yes.

'It is alive, of course.

'And again, when we see soul in any thing, must we admit that this has a
different or the same life as the former?

'The same, and no other.

'Stay then, in heaven's name. Should you not wish to understand three points
about every thing?

'What do you mean?

'One, the essence; and one, the definition of the essence; and one, the name:
and further, that there are two questions concerning everything that exists.

'How two?

'Sometimes one puts forward the name alone and asks for the definition, and at
another time one puts forward the definition alone and asks the name. Are we
then willing now again to make a statement of the following kind?

'Of what kind?

'There is, I suppose, something divisible into two equal parts in other things
as well as in number. And the name of this that is divisible in number is
"even," and its definition is "number divisible into two equal parts."

'Yes.

'It is something of this kind that I am trying to explain. 'Is it not the same
thing of which we speak in either way, whether on being asked for the definition
we give the name, or being asked for the name we give the definition, since it
is the same thing that we speak of by name as "even," and by definition as
"number divisible into two equal parts "?

'Yes, certainly.

'What then is the definition of that which has the name "soul"? Have we any
other except that which was stated just now, "the motion which has the power of
moving itself "?

'Do you mean to say that the definition "self-moving " implies the same essence
as the name, which we all call "soul "?

'That is what I say. And if this is so, do we any longer feel the want of a
sufficient proof that soul is the same as the first creative and moving
principle of all things that are, and have been, and shall be, and again of all
their contraries, since it has been shown to be the cause of all change and
motion?

'We want no more: but it has been most satisfactorily proved that soul is the
oldest of all things, as having been the beginning of motion.

'Is not then the motion which is produced in one thing because of another, but
never presents any self-motion, being in reality a change of a soul-less body,
of secondary rank or of a rank as far removed as any number by which one may
choose to reckon it?

'Rightly so.

'Should we then have said rightly and properly and with the most perfect truth
that soul has existed before body, or not, and that body is secondary and comes
after soul, as according to nature the governed comes after the governing
principle?

'Yes, with the most perfect truth.

'Do we however remember that we admitted in the former part, that, if soul
should be found to be older than body, the things of the soul would also be
older than those of the body?

'Yes, certainly.

'Then characters, and moral habits, and wishes, and reasonings, and true
opinions, and acts of attention and memory must have existed earlier than
length, and breadth, and depth, and strength of bodies, if soul was prior to
body.

'Necessarily.

'Must we then necessarily admit what follows immediately on this, that soul is
the cause of good and evil, and honourable and base, and just and unjust, and of
all opposites, if at least we are to assume it to be the cause of all things?

'Of course.

'Must we not say then that, as soul governs and inhabits all things that move in
any way, it governs the heaven also?

'Certainly.

'One soul, or more? More than one, I will answer for you both. Not less than two
at least we must suppose, the beneficent, and that which has power to work evil.
You have spoken very rightly.

'Well, to proceed. Soul then conducts all things in heaven, and earth, and sea
by her own movements, the names of which are will, consideration, attention,
deliberation, opinion right or wrong, joy, sorrow, confidence, fear, hatred,
affection, and all movements either akin to these or primary, which again taking
with them the secondary movements of bodies lead all things to growth and decay,
and separation and combination, and their attendant conditions of heat and cold,
heaviness and lightness, hard and soft, white and black, bitter and sweet, and
all things by use of which the soul, which is divine, taking ever with her the
divine mind, conducts all things rightly and happily, but, if she allies herself
with folly, works all the contrary effects to these. Are we to assume that these
things are so, or have we still a doubt whether they may not be otherwise?

'By no means.

'Which kind then of soul, are we to say, rules over heaven and earth and their
whole circuit? That which is full of wisdom and virtue, or that which possesses
neither? Are you willing that we should answer this as follows?

'How?

'If on the one hand, my excellent friend, we are to say, the whole path of
heaven and the course of all things therein has a nature similar to the movement
and revolution and reasonings of mind, and proceeds in a manner akin thereto, we
must evidently say, that the best kind of soul takes care of the whole world,
and guides it on that best path.

'True.

'But if it proceeds in an insane and disorderly manner, we must say that the
evil soul is guiding it.

'This too is most true.

'What then is the nature of the movement of mind? Now in answering this
question, my friends, it is difficult to speak wisely. And for this reason it is
fair that I too should help you now in the answer.

'You say well.

'Let us then not frame our answer as if looking straight at the sun and bringing
on ourselves darkness at noonday, by supposing that we shall ever see mind with
mortal eyes, and know it thoroughly. It is safer to observe the subject of our
inquiry by looking upon an image of it.

'How do you mean?

'Of those ten kinds of motion let us take as its image that which mind
resembles; and when I have helped you to remember this, I will frame our common
answer.

'You could not speak better.

'Well then of our former discourse we remember thus much at least, that of all
things we supposed some to be in motion, and some at rest.

'Yes.

'And again of those that were in motion we supposed some to more in one place
only, and others in more than one, as they were carried along.

'That is so.

'Of these two motions then that whose course is always in one place must
necessarily move round some centre, like the wheels on a lathe, and must be in
every way as much as possible akin and similar to the revolving motion of the
mind.

'How do you mean?

'Surely if we say that mind and the motion which goes on in one place both move
according to the same conditions, and in the same manner, and in the same
course, and round the same centres, and towards the same direction, and
according to one law and one order, like the motions of a top, we should never
be shown to be bad word-painters of beautiful images.

'What you say is very right.

'Well then this other motion which never proceeds in the same manner, nor
according to the same conditions, nor in the same course, nor round the same
centres, nor towards the same direction, nor in one place, nor in proportion,
nor order, nor any law, must be akin to every kind of folly.

'Most truly it must.

'Now then there is no longer any difficulty in saying expressly, that since soul
is that which carries all things round for us, we must of necessity affirm that
the revolution of the heaven is carried on by the care and arrangement either of
the best soul or of the worse.

'But according to what has now been said, O Stranger, it would be impious to say
otherwise than that soul or souls endowed with every virtue carry them round.

'You have paid admirable attention to my arguments, Cleinias. But listen further
to the following.

'What?

'If soul carries all things round, sun and moon and the stars too, does she not
also carry round each one of them?

'Of course.

'Then concerning one of them let us argue in a manner which we shall find
applicable to all the heavenly bodies.

'Which one?

'Every man sees the sun's body, but no one sees his soul, nor yet the soul of
any animal's body, either in life or after death. There is, however, much reason
to suppose that this nature of soul invests all our bodily senses though utterly
imperceptible thereby to us, but is apprehended by mind alone. By mind therefore
and by thought let us grasp the following notion of it.

'What kind of notion?

'If soul carries the sun round, we shall not be far wrong in saying that it does
one of three things.

'What three?

'That either dwelling within this circular body that we see the soul carries it
such as it is safely through in every direction, as our soul carries us about
every way; or having from some external source provided herself with a body of
fire or a kind of air, as some say, she forcibly drives body by body; or
thirdly, being herself without a body, but endowed with certain other
exceedingly wonderful powers, she so guides his course.

'Yes.

'This so far must be true, that soul directs all things by one or other of these
operations.'

These then are the statements of our philosopher in the tenth Book of the Laws.
But hear how he arranges the same thought in the Philebus also:

[PLATO] 142 'All the wise men say with one voice, in reality magnifying
themselves, that mind is our king of heaven and earth. And perhaps they are
right. But, if you please, let us conduct our examination of the general nature
of mind more at length.

'Speak in whatever way you please, Socrates, thinking nothing of length on our
account, as you will not be wearisome, to us.

'You say well. Let us then begin our further inquiries in the following manner.

'How?

'Whether ought we to assert, Protarchus, that all things and this so-called
universe are under the guardianship of the irrational and purposeless force, and
mere hap-hazard; or that, on the contrary, as those before us used to say, mind
and wisdom of some marvellous kind arrange and govern them?

'They are utterly different assertions, O noble Socrates. For the opinion which
you mention seems to me to be impious. But the assertion that mind arranges them
all is worthy of the aspect of the world, and of sun and moon and stars and the
whole circuit of heaven, and for my part I would never speak nor even think of
them otherwise.

'Are you willing then that we also should assent to what was agreed on by those
before us, that these things are so? And not merely think that we must state the
opinions of others without risk to ourselves, but also share the danger and bear
part of the blame, when some clever man asserts that these things are not as we
say but all in disorder?

'Of course I should be willing.

'Come then, scan carefully the argument on this subject which now encounters us.

'Only state it.

'Do we discern in the constitution of the world the elements belonging to the
nature of the bodies of all living things, fire and water and air and "land," as
the storm-tossed sailors say?

'Certainly. For we are verily tossed by storms of perplexity in our present
discussions.

'Well then, concerning each of the elements existing in us, take a statement of
this kind.

'What?

'That each of these as existing in us is small, and weak, and in no respect at
all pure, and without a power worthy of its nature: and having admitted this in
one, conceive the same of all. As for instance there is fire, I suppose, in us,
and fire in the universe.

'Of course.

'Is not then the part that is in us small and weak, and mean, but that which is
in the universe wonderful both in quantity and beauty, and in every kind of
power that belongs to fire?

'What you say is very true.

'Again, is the fire of the universe generated and fed and ruled by this fire
that is in us, or on the contrary is it from that fire that mine and yours and
that of all other animals receives all these services?

'This question does not even require an answer.

'Quite right. You will say the same then, I suppose, concerning the earth that
is here in the animals and that which is in the universe; and so of all the
other elements about which I asked just now you will give this same answer.

'Yes, for who would ever be thought to be in his right mind, if he answered
otherwise?

'No one probably. But now follow the next point. For when we saw all these
elements now mentioned combined in one, did we not call it a body?

'Of course.

'Assume the same then in regard also to this which we call the world: for
because of the same process it must be a body, being composed out of the same
elements.

'What you say is very right.

'Is then our body nourished wholly from this body, or does this receive from
ours its nourishment and all the further services which we just now mentioned in
reference to them?

'This is another question, Socrates, not worth asking.

'But what of the following? Is it worth asking? Or what will you say?

'Say what it is.

'Shall we not say that this body of ours has a soul?

'Of course we shall say so.

'Whence, my dear Protarchus, did it get a soul, unless indeed the body of the
universe had a soul, inasmuch as it has all things the same as our body, and in
every way more beautiful?

'Evidently from no other source, Socrates.

'For surely we do not think, O Protarchus, that those four classes, the finite, the infinite, their compound, and cause
which exists as a fourth class in all things,----that this, which in our bodies supplies a soul, and endows it with the art of exercising the body and healing it when it has fallen ill, and makes various arrangements and remedies in various parts, is to be called entire and complete wisdom; but that, though these same elements exist in the heaven as a whole, and in its great divisions, in more beauty and purity, it has not contrived to create in these the nature of all that is most beautiful and noble.

'Nay, this would be in every way unreasonable.

'If then this is denied, would it not be better for us, with that other argument
as our guide, to say, that, as we have often said, there is in the world a vast
infinity and an efficient limit, and over them a cause of no little power,
ordering and arranging years, and seasons, and months, which cause is most
justly called wisdom and mind?

'Most justly indeed.

'Wisdom however and mind could never exist without soul.

'No indeed.

'Will you not say then that through the power of the cause there is implanted in
the nature of Zeus a kingly soul and a kingly mind: and in other gods other
noble qualities, according to the names by which they like each to be called?'

CHAPTER LII

[PLATO] 143 'To the man who believes that there are gods, but that they take no
heed of human affairs, we must speak words of encouragement. O best of men, let
us say, your believing in gods is perhaps due to some divine affinity that draws
you towards your kindred, to honour and believe in them. But the fortunes of
evil and unjust men both in private and in public life, though not really happy,
yet being in the opinions of men vehemently but unduly commended as happy, and
wrongfully celebrated both in poetry and in literature of every kind, tend to
draw you towards impiety.

'Or perhaps from seeing unrighteous men at last reach old age, and leave behind
them children's children in the greatest dignities, you are now disturbed, when,
after seeing them in all these conditions or after hearing or having been
yourself an actual eye-witness of some of them, when many terrible impieties
were committed, you see them in consequence of these very deeds attain from
small beginnings to despotic powers and highest dignities: then it is evident
that because of all such things, though you would riot like to blame the gods as
the causes of them, because they are your kindred, yet being at the same time
led astray by false reasoning and unable to be angry with the gods, you have
come to this your present condition of thinking that, though they exist, they
despise and disregard the affairs of men.

'In order therefore that your present doctrine may not grow into a stronger
tendency towards impiety, but that, if it be at all possible, we may be enabled
to avert its progress by arguments, let us add the sequel to the argument by
which at the outset we reached our conclusion against the man who did not
believe in gods at all, and try now to make further use of it. And do you, O
Cleinias, and you, Megillus, take turns in answering for the young man, as
before. And if any difficult point arise in the arguments, I will take it from
you, and carry you across the river, as I did just now.

'You speak well: and if you do this, we to the best of our ability will do as
you say.

'But probably it will not be difficult to prove at least this, that the gods are
not less careful over small matters than over those of great importance. For he
was present, I suppose, and heard what we were saying just now, that being
endowed with every virtue they hold the care of all things as their own peculiar
right.

'Yes, and he listened attentively.

'Let us then examine the next point together, namely what virtue we ascribe to
them, when we agree that they are good. Do we say, pray, that prudence and the
possession of mind is proper to virtue, and the contrary to vice?

'We do say so.

'Again? That manliness is part of virtue, and cowardice of vice?

'Yes, certainly.

'Shall we also say that of these qualities one class is disgraceful, and the
other honourable?

'We must.

'And of these shall we say that all the bad belong, if so be, to us, but the
gods have no part either great or small in such qualities?

'This also every one must admit.

'Again? Shall we class carelessness, and idleness, and luxury as a virtue of the
soul? How say you?

'How could we?

'Well then on the opposite side?

'Yes.

'The contraries to these therefore we must set on the other side?

'Yes, on the other side.

'What then? Luxurious, and careless, and idle, every one of this character would
be in our opinion a man whom the poet declared to be most like to stingless
drones?144 'Most truly the poet spake.

'We must not say then that god is of a character such as this, which he himself
hates: nor if any one attempts to utter anything of this kind must it be
allowed.

'Surely not. How could it be allowed?

'If then it is a man's especial duty to manage and attend to some work, but he
attends to the great and neglects the small parts of this kind of work, on what
principle can we praise such a man without going altogether wrong? Let us,
however, look at it thus. Does not he who acts in this way, whether god or man,
act on one of two principles?

'What two principles?

'Either as thinking that it is of no consequence to the whole, if the small
matters are neglected, or from slothfulness and luxury, if it is of consequence
and he neglects them. Is there any other way in which negligence occurs? For of
course, when it is impossible to attend to all, there will then be no negligence
on the part of one who fails to attend to any matters either small or great, to
which a god or any inferior person deficient in power may be unable to attend.

'Of course not.

'Now then to answer us three there are two, who both admit that gods exist,
though one says that they may be appeased by prayer, and the other that they are
careless of small matters. In the first place you both say that gods know and
see and hear all things, and that of all the objects of sensation or knowledge
nothing can possibly escape their notice. Do you say this is so, or how?

'It is so.

'Well, again? Can they do all things which are possible for mortals and
immortals?

'How can they refuse to admit that this also is true?

'Moreover we have agreed, all five of us, that they are not only good but as
good as possible.

'Yes, certainly.

'Is it not impossible then to admit that they do anything whatever from
indolence and luxury, if they are such as we say? For in us idleness is the
offspring of cowardice, and carelessness of idleness and luxury.

'You speak most truly.

'No god then is ever negligent from idleness and carelessness, for of course
there is no cowardice in him.

'Most true.

'If then they neglect the small and trifling concerns of the universe, the alternative is that they must do this, either from knowing that there is no need to attend to any such things at all; or----what is the remaining alternative except that they know the contrary?

'There is none.

'Are we then to suppose, O excellent and best of men, that you mean to say that
they are ignorant and, though they ought to attend, are negligent from
ignorance, or that they know they ought, just as the worst of men are said to
do, when they know that it would be better to do differently from what they
really do, and do it not, because of some yielding to pleasures or pain?

'How is it possible?

'Do not then human affairs partake of the nature endowed with soul, and is not
man himself of all animals the most religious?

'It seems so indeed.

'We say, however, that all mortal animals are the "possessions of the gods," to
whom also the whole heaven belongs. 'Of course.

'Now therefore any one may say that these things are either small or great to
the gods; for in neither case can it become our owners to neglect us, being, as
they are, most careful and benevolent. Besides this let us consider the
following point also.

'What point?

'About sensation and power. Are they not naturally opposed to each other in
regard to ease and difficulty?

'How do you mean?

'It is surely more difficult to see and to hear the small than the great; but on
the other hand it is easier for any one to carry, and hold, and take care of the
small and light, than the opposites.

'Very much more.

'If then a physician who is willing and able to cure a whole body committed to
his charge, attend to the great but neglect the small parts, will the whole do
well with him?

'By no means.

'No, nor yet with pilots, nor generals, nor stewards, nor statesmen, nor any
such officials, would the many or the great things do well apart from the few or
small. For as the stonemasons say, the large stones do not lie well without the
small.

'How could they?

'Let us therefore never think that God is inferior to mortal workmen, who, the
better they are themselves, finish their proper works the more exactly and
perfectly, both small and great with the same skill; but that God, most wise as
He is, and both willing and able to care for all, takes no care at all for those
which it is easier to care for, as being small, but only of the great, just like
some idle or cowardly workman giving up work because of the labour.

'By no means, O Stranger, let us admit such a thought as this concerning gods:
for our thought in that case would be by no means either pious or true.

'It seems to me that we have now at last had quite sufficient discussion with
the censorious young man about the negligence of gods.

'Yes.

'In forcing him at least by our arguments to confess that he was wrong in what
he said. I think, however, that he is still in need of some consoling words.

'Of what nature, my good friend?

'Let us persuade the young man by our arguments, that all things have been
arranged by the guardian of the universe with a view to the safety and
excellence of the whole, and that each part thereof does and suffers its proper
share according to its power. And for each of these parts there are rulers
appointed over the very smallest portion of action and suffering, by whom
perfection is wrought out even to the minutest subdivision.

'And as one of these thy own portion, O bold man, small indeed though it is,
ever looks and tends towards the whole. But of this very fact thou art ignorant,
that all creation takes place for the sake of that whole, in order that the life
of the universe may have a constant supply of happy being, created not for thy
sake, but thou for the sake of that whole. For every physician and every skilful
workman makes every thing for the sake of all, aiming at that which is most for
the common good: each part he makes for the sake of a whole, and not a whole for
the sake of a part.

'But thou art discontented, because thou knowest not in what way that which is
best for thee is expedient both for the whole and for thyself, as far as the law
of your common origin admits. But since a soul combined now with one body, and
now with another, is always undergoing changes of all kinds, either of itself or
through some other soul, nothing is left for the player to do but to shift the
pieces, moving the disposition that is growing better into a more favourable
place, and that which is growing worse into the worse place, in order that each
may obtain the lot appropriate to its destiny.

'How do you mean?

'I think I am explaining it in the way in which it would naturally be easy for
the gods to take care of all. For if one were to form and to refashion all
things without constantly looking to the whole, as for instance to make living
water out of fire, instead of so forming many things out of one, or one out of
many, that they partook of a first, or second, or third birth, the contents of
the ever-changing arrangement would be infinite in multitude. But now there is
wonderful facility for the guardian of the universe.

'How do you mean again?

'In this way. Our King saw that all actions were full of life, and that there
was much virtue in them and much vice, and that soul and body had become
indestructible, but not eternal, like those who are gods according to law; for
if either of these two, soul and body, had perished, there would never have been
any generation of living beings; he also discerned that it was the constant
nature, of one part, the good in the soul, to be beneficial, and of the evil
part to do harm; and when He considered all this, He contrived the place of each
part so that it would render virtue victorious in the whole being, and vice
overpowered, in the fullest and easiest and best manner.

'With a view then to all this, He has arranged what quality each must be
constantly acquiring, and what seat and what regions it must inhabit in its
transmutations: but the causes of the production of a certain quality He left to
the will of each of us. For every one of us becomes for the most part such at
each time as is the tendency of his desires and the quality of his soul.

'Naturally so.

'All things therefore which are endowed with a soul are liable to change, as
possessing the cause of change in themselves; and in changing they follow the
order and law of destiny. If they make only slight changes of moral character,
their changes of place are less and on the level surface of their country; but
those which make more and worse changes of character are cast down into the
abyss, and the so-called infernal regions, all which under the name of Hades and
other similar names men greatly dread and dream about, both in life and after
they are separated from their bodies. Whenever therefore a soul undergoes great
changes of vice or virtue, through her own will and the strong influence of
association, if in the one case from communion with divine virtue she becomes
eminently virtuous, she passes into an excellent and all-holy place, being
carried away to some other and better region than this; but in the contrary
case, she transfers her life to places of the opposite kind.

' "Such the just doom the Olympian gods decree," for you, O boy, or youth, who
think the gods care nothing for you; namely, that if you are growing worse you
must pass on to the worse souls, and if better to the better, and both in life
and in every successive death must do and suffer what it is fitting for like to
do to like.

'Neither shall you nor any other ever boast of having got the better of the gods
by escaping this doom, which is the most strictly ordained of all dooms by those
who ordained it, and of which you must most carefully beware: for it will never
lose sight of you. Neither will you be so little as to sink into the depth of
the earth, nor so high as to fly tip into heaven; but you shall pay the fitting
penalty, whether while abiding here, or after you have passed into Hades, or
been carried away into some yet more savage place than these.

'You must also take the same account of those others, those, I mean, whom you
saw grown from small to great by unholy deeds or any such practices, and
supposed that they had passed from misery to happiness, and thought that in
their deeds, as in. a mirror, you had seen the universal carelessness of the
gods, not knowing in what way their share contributes to the whole. But think
you, O boldest of men, that it is of no importance to know this, without knowing
which a man can never have an idea of life nor be able to join in a discussion
thereon, in regard to a happy or unhappy lot.

'If you can be persuaded of this by Cleinias here, and by all this our company
of reverend seniors, that you know not what you say about the gods, God Himself
will give you good help: but if you should be in need of any further argument,
listen to what we say to the third opponent, if you have any sense at all.' The
meaning of this, if not the actual words, has been previously set down very
briefly in the oracles of the Hebrews, the thought being comprised in few words.
For the sentence, 'You will neither be so little as to sink into the depth of
the earth, nor so high as to fly up into heaven,' must be similar to the passage
in David, which runs thus:145 'Whither shall I go from Thy spirit, and whither
shall I flee from Thy presence? If I go up into heaven, Thou art there. If I go
down into Hades, Thou art there.

'If I should take wings, and abide in the utmost parts of the sea; there also
shall Thy hand lead me.' Also this: 'The heavens declare the glory of God, and
the firmament sheweth His handy-work.'146 And again, this in Isaiah: 'Lift up
your eyes on high, and behold who shewed all these things.'147 Also this: 'From
the greatness and beauty of created things in like proportion is their first
maker beheld.'148 And this: 'For the invisible things of Him from the creation
of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
even His eternal power and godhead.'149 Also this, 'I was envious at the wicked,
when I saw the prosperity of sinners,'150 seems to me to have been paraphrased
by Plato in the passage, 'You must also take the same account of those others,
those, I mean, whom you saw grown from small to great by unholy deeds, or any
such practices, and supposed that they had passed from misery to happiness.'

Also all the other passages expressed like these in the words of the Hebrews
anticipated the interpretation put forth at length by Plato. And so you will
find, by carefully examining each of them point by point, that it agrees with
the Hebrew writings. And by doctrines of the Hebrews I mean not only the oracles
of Moses, but also those of all the other godly men after Moses, whether
prophets or apostles of our Saviour, whose consent in doctrines must fairly
render them worthy of one and the same title.

[Footnotes moved to end and numbered] 1. 573 c 1 Plato, Laws, i. 634 D 2. d 5
Isa. vii. 9 3. d 7 Ps. cxv. i 4. 574 b 1 Plato, Laws, i. 629 E 5. c 2 Theognis,
Elegiac Gnomes, v. 77 f.

6. c 10 Tyrtaeus, i. 16 7. 575 a 2 Matt. xxiv. 45 8. a 3 ibid. xxv. 21 9. b 1
Plato, Laws, xi. 926 E 10. c 8 2 Macc. xv. 12 11. d 3 Plato, Republic, ii. 376 E
12. 676 b 1 Plato, Republic, ii. 377 B 13. 577 b 1 Plato, Gorgias, 523 A 14. c 5
ibid. 524 A 15. 578 d 11 Plato, Gorgias, 471 A 16. 579 a 5 Hom. Od. xi. 575 ff.

17. d 10 Hom. Od. xi. 569 18. 580 d 2 2 Cor. v, 10 19. d 6 Rom. ii. 16, 6 20. d
13 ibid. iii. 22 21. 581 a 1 Plato, Epistles, ii. 313 E 22. b 4 Matt. vii. 6 23.
b 5 1 Cor, ii. 14 24. c 1 Plato, Laws, iii. 689 B 25. 582 b 3 Plato, Statesman,
261 E 26. 582 c 3 Exod. iv. 13 27. d 1 Plato, Republic, i. 346 28. 583 b 4 ibid,
ii. 361 B 29. b 5 Aeschylus, Seven against Thebes, 577 30. d 10 Heb. xi. 37 31.
584 a 5 i Cor. iv. 9 32. a 6 ibid. 11 33. 585 a 1 Plato, Symposium, 203 34. b 2
Gen. ii. 20-22 35. c 8 Plato, Symposium, 189 D 36. d 9 ibid. 190 D 37. 586 b 3
Plato, Statesman, 271 E 38. d 1 Gen. iii. 1 39. d 6 Plato, Statesman, 272B 40.
587 d 1 Plato, Laws, 677 A 41. 588 a 10 Plato, Laws, 677 E 42. 589 a 2 Plato,
Laws, 631 A 43. 589 d 10 Plato, Laws, 632 C 44. 590 a 7 Matt. vi. 33 45. c 1
Plato, Laws, 643 B 46. 591 a 1 Deut. vi. 6.

47. b 1 Plato, Laws, 643 D 48. 591 d 12 Plato, Laws, ii. 653 B 49. 592 b 6 Ps.
xxxiv. 11, 12 50. 592 c 2 Prov. iv. 1 51. c 5 ibid. iv. 5 52. c 6 ibid. vii. 4
53. c 7 ibid. iv. 14 54. d 1 Exod. xv. 40 55. d 3 Heb. viii. 5 56. 693 a 6
Plato, Republic, 500 C 57. 593 d 7 Hom. Il. i. 131, iii. 16 58. 594 a 1 Plato,
Laws, 659 C 59. d 8 Plato, Laws, 660 E 60. 595 a 3 Tyrtaeus, i. 6 61. a 6 ibid.
i. 1 62. a 9 ibid. i. 12 63. a 11 ibid. i. 11 64. a 12 ibid. i. 4 65. 596 a 1
Ps. i. 1 66. a 7 Ps. lxii. 10 67. a 8 Ps. xlix. 16 68. b 3 Plato, Laws, 657 A
69. d 3 ibid. 658 E 70. 597 d 1 Plato, Laws, 671 A 71. 598 c 1 Plato, Laws, 673
E 72. 599 b 4 Lev. x. 8 73. b 9 Num. vi. 2, 3 74. c 4 Prov. xxxi. 4 75. c 8 I
Tim. v. 23 76. d 1 Plato, Republic, 499 C 77. 600 b 1 Plato, Laws, 626 D 78. c 9
ibid. 644 C 79. d 9 ibid. 644 E 80. 601 c 1 Rom. vii. 22 81. c 3 ibid. ii. 15
82. d 1 Plato, Laws, 896 C 83. 602 a 7 Lev. vi. 2, 4 84. b 2 Lam. iii. 27, 28
85. c 1 Heb. xi. 38 86. c 7 Plato, Theaetetus, 173 C 87. 602 d 14 Pindar,
Fragment, 123 (226) 88. 606 d 2 i Cor. iii. 19 89. d 3 ibid. i. 19, 20 90. d 9 2
Cor. iv. 18 91. 607 a 3 Eph. v. 16 92. a 4 Matt. vi. 34 93. a 5 Hos. iv. 2 94. a
8 Deut. x. 20 95. b 2 Lev. xi. 45 96. b 5 Ps. xi. 7 97. b 6 Ps. lxii. 10 98. b 7
Ps. xlix. 16 99. c a Ps. cxlvi. 3 100. d 1 Plato, Laws, 663 D 101. 608 b 1 ibid.
665 B 102. 608 c 6 Plato, Republic, 455 C 103. 609 c 1 Plato, Laws, 639 A 104.
610 a 1 Prov. x. 7 105. a 3 Ecclus. xi. 28 106. b 3 Plato, Laws, 801 E 107. e 2
Prov. xxx. 8 108. c 5 Plato, Rep. 421 E 109. d 7 Lev. xix. 3 110. d 8 Exod. xx.
12 111. 611 a 1 Plato, Laws, 931 E 112. a 5 ibid. 879 C 113. b 2 Exod. xxi. 2;
Deut. xv. 12 114. b 6 Plato, Republic, 469 C 115. c 1 Plato, Laws, 842 E 116. d
1 ibid. 843 C 117. 611 d 5 Plato, Laws, 856 C 118. 612 a 3 Exod. xxii. 1,4 119.
b 2 Plato, Laws, 857 A 120. c 1 Exod. xxii. 2 121. c 4 Plato, Laws, 874 B 122. d
1 Plato, Laws, 873 D 123. d 8 Exod. xxi. 28 124. 613 a 4 Ezek. xxii. 18 125. b 8
Plato, Republic, 415 A 126. 614 a 4 Ezek. xxxiv. 2 127. b 5 John x. 11 128. c 2
Plato, Republic, 345 C 129. 615 a 1 Isa. xxvi. 18 130. 35 Plato, Theaetetus, 151
A 131. b 2 Ezek. i. 3, 5 132. c 5 Plato, Republic, 588 B 133. 616 d 5 Plato,
Laws, 760 B 134. d 10 ibid. 755 D 135. 617 b 6 ibid. 704 B 136. 618 c 1 Plato,
Republic, X. 595 B 137. d 12 ibid. 599 B 138. 621 a 1 Plato, Laws, 888 E 139.
622 c 3 Plato, Laws, 891 C 140. 622 d 11 Plato, Laws, 892 A 141. 624 a 1 Plato,
Laws, 895 A 142. 628 b 4 Plato, Philebus, 28 C 143. 630 c 1 Plato, Laws, 899 D
144. 631 d 8 Hesiod, Works and Days, 303 145. 636 b 4 Ps. cxxxix. 7 146. b 8 Ps.
xix. 1 147. c 2 Is. xl. 26 148. c 4 Wisdom xiii. 5 149. c 5 Rom. i. 20 150. c 8
Ps. lxxiii. 3 This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on
this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 32: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 13
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 13

BOOK XIII

CONTENTS Preface p. 639 a I. How Plato exposed the absurdity of the Greek
theology. From the Timaeus p. 639 d II. Further on the same subject from the
dialogue Epinomis p. 640 d III. Further on the same subject from the second Book
of the Republic; also that God is not the cause of evils p. 641 a

IV. That nothing else than indecent fables were contained in the narratives
concerning the gods of the Greeks, for not believing which Socrates was put to
death by the Athenians. From the Euthyphron p. 649 d V. Numenius on the same
subject, from The Secrets in Plato p. 650 d

VI. That one must not heed the opinions of the multitude, nor depart from one's
own purpose for fear of death. From the Crito p. 651 b VII. That we must not
retaliate on those who have endeavoured to injure us. From the same p. 653 d

VIII. That we must not set aside what has once been rightly determined, not even
if any one threaten death. And this will apply to those who renounce their
religion in times of persecution p. 655 e IX. What will be the disposition of
the man who through fear of death renounces his own purpose p. 658 b X. That one
ought not to shrink from death in defence of the truth. From the Apology of
Socrates p. 659 d XI. How we ought to honour the death of those who have nobly
resigned their life. From Plato p. 663 a

XII. How Aristobulus the Peripatetic, who was a Hebrew before our time,
acknowledges that the Greeks have started from the philosophy of the Hebrews.
From the statements of Aristobulus addressed to King Ptolemy p. 663 d

XIII. How Clement in like proves that the noble sayings of the Greeks are in
agreement with the doctrines of the Hebrews. From the fifth Miscellany p. 668 d

XIV. That Plato has not stated all things correctly: wherefore it is not without
reason that we have declined his philosophy, and accepted the Hebrew oracles p.
691 c

XV. That Plato was not altogether right in his conduct of the argument
concerning the intelligible essences, but the Hebrews were p. 694 c

XVI. That Plato did not on all points hold right opinions concerning the soul,
like the Hebrews p. 696 b XVII. That the nature of the soul does not, as Plato
supposes, consist of an impassive and passive essence. From the Platonist
Severus On the Soul p. 700 c XVIII. That Plato was not altogether right in his
opinions concerning heaven and the luminaries therein p. 702 b XIX. What kind of
laws concerning women were not rightly ordained by Plato p. 706 a XX. Plato's
directions in the Phaedrus concerning unlawful love opposed to the Laws of Moses
p. 709 c

XXI. Concerning the laws of murder in Plato, which were not worthy of his great
intellect: with these the laws of Moses should be contrasted p. 711 b

PREFACE

SINCE it has been seen in the preceding Books that the philosophy of Plato in
very many points contains a translation, as it were, of Moses and the sacred
writings of the Hebrews into the Greek language, I now proceed to add what is
still wanting to the argument, and to go through the opinions expressed upon the
several topics by those who were before me, and at the same time to free myself
from a plausible charge of reproach, in case any one should accuse me. Why then,
he might say, if Moses and Plato have agreed so well in their philosophy, are we
to follow the doctrines not of Plato but of Moses, when we ought to do the
reverse, because, in addition to the equivalence of the doctrines, the Greek
author would be more congenial to us as Greeks than the Barbarian? Being loth to
make a retort to this charge from respect to the philosopher, I defer this
question to a later period, and will first examine those points which I
mentioned first. Take then and read what sort of opinion Plato used to put
forward concerning the Greek poets and writers on religion, and how he used to
reject all the traditional notions concerning the gods, and thoroughly expose
their absurdity.

CHAPTER I

[PLATO] 1 'To tell of the other divinities, and to learn their origin, is beyond
our power; but we must give credence to those who have spoken in former times,
who being, as they said, the offspring of gods, had certain knowledge, I
suppose, of their own ancestors. It is impossible therefore to disbelieve
children of the gods, even though they speak without certain or probable proofs:
but as they declare that they are reporting family histories, we must in
obedience to the law believe them.

'On their authority then let the origin of these gods be admitted and stated
thus. The children of Ge and Uranus (Earth and Heaven) were Oceanus and Tethys,
and their children Phorcys and Kronos and Rhea and the rest of them; and of
Kronos and Rhea sprang Zeus and Hera, and all whom we know as their reputed
brethren, and still others who were their offspring.' In exhorting us hereby to
believe the fables concerning gods, and the authors also of the fables as being
forsooth the children of gods, in the first place by saying that 'the poets are
the offspring of the gods,' it seems to me that he scoffingly implies that the
gods also had been men, and of the same nature as their children. And next he
brings a direct charge against the theologians, whom he had declared to be the
offspring of gods, in the assertion which he adds, 'even though they speak
without probable or certain proofs,' and by the addition of the words 'as they
said.' He seems too to be jesting when he says, they 'had certain knowledge, I
suppose, of their own ancestors'; and again, 'It is impossible to disbelieve
children of the gods.' Also he expressly shows that he speaks thus against his
own judgement on account of the laws, by confessing that it was necessary 'to
believe them in obedience to the law.' And in proof that this was his meaning,
hear how in open and undisguised language he reproaches all the would-be
theologians, smiting them in the Epinomis with the following words: 2

CHAPTER II

[PLATO] 'WITH regard therefore to the origin of gods and of living beings, as it
has been misrepresented by those of former times, it seems necessary for me in
the first place to give a better representation in the subsequent discourse,
taking up again the argument which I have undertaken against the impious.' That
he has good reason for repudiating the theology of the earliest writers, he
shows in the second Book of the Republic, where it is worth while to fix the
attention upon the number and nature of the statements which he makes concerning
the same poets and theologians, from the traditions handed down from old times
concerning the Hellenic gods, speaking in the very words that follow: 3

CHAPTER III

[PLATO] 'IN the greater fables, said I, we shall discern the lesser also: for
the general character and the effect of both the greater and the less must be
the same. Do you not think so? Yes, I do, said he: but I do not even understand
which you call the greater. Those, said I, which Hesiod and Homer and the other
poets used to tell us. For they, I suppose, used to compose and tell, and do
still tell, false stories to mankind.

'What kind of stories do you mean, said he, and what fault do you find with
them?

'The fault, said I, which before and above all we ought to reprove, especially
if the falsehood is unseemly.

'What is this fault?

'When a man in his discourse concerning gods and heroes misrepresents their
nature, as when an artist paints what is not at all like the things which he may
wish to imitate.

'Yes indeed, said he, it is right to condemn such things: but how. and what kind
of faults do we mean?

'In the first place then, said I, it was an unseemly lie that was told by the
author of that greatest fiction about the greatest gods, how Uranus wrought what
Hesiod says he did, and how Kronos took revenge upon him. Again, the doings of
Kronos and his treatment by his son, even if they were true, ought not, I should
have thought, to have been thus lightly mentioned before young and silly
persons, but, best of all, to have been buried in silence; or, if there were any
necessity to tell them, then as few as possible should have heard them in
secret, after sacrificing no mere pig, but some great and scarce victim, so that
very few might have had a chance of hearing them.

'Yes indeed, said he, these stories are mischievous. Aye, said I, and they must
not be told in our city, Adeimantus; nor must a young hearer be told, that he
would be doing nothing extraordinary in committing the worst crimes, nor on the
other hand in inflicting every kind of punishment upon his father if he did
wrong, but would be doing what the first and greatest of the gods did.

'Certainly not, nor in my own opinion are such stories fit to be told.

'Nor yet, said I, about gods going to war with gods, and plotting against each
other and fighting (untrue as such things are), ought anything to be said, if
the future guardians of our city are to think it most disgraceful to be
quarrelling lightly one with another. Far less ought we to tell them in fables
and on tapestry about wars of the giants and many other quarrels of all kinds
between gods and heroes and their own kinsmen and relations: but if we could in
any way persuade them, that no citizen was ever at enmity with a fellow citizen,
and that such a thing was unholy, these are the kind of tales that ought rather
to be told to children from the first by old men and old women and by those who
are growing elderly, and the poets should be compelled to make their tales like
these.

'The chaining too of Hera by her son, and the hurling of Hephaestus out of
heaven by his father, when he was going to defend his mother from a beating, and
all the battles of the gods that Homer has invented, must not be admitted into
the city, whether they are composed with or without allegorical meanings.

'For the youth is not able to judge what is allegory and what is not: but
whatever opinions he accepts at such an age are wont to become indelible and
unalterable: and on this account perhaps we ought to regard it of the highest
importance, that the tales which they first hear "should be adapted in the most
perfect manner to the promotion of virtue." 4

'Yes, that is reasonable, said he: but if any one were to ask us again which
these fictions are, and what fables we mean, which should we mention? Then said
I: My dear Adeimantus, you and I are not speaking at present as poets, but as
founders of a state: and founders of a state ought to know the moulds in which
poets should cast their fictions, and from which they must not be permitted to
deviate, nor must they invent the fables themselves.

'Quite right, said he: but that is the very point, what would be the proper
models in the case of theology?

'Some such as the following, said I; God must of course always be represented as
He really is, whether a poet describes Him in epic verse, or in lyrics, or in
tragedy.

'Yes, that must be so.

'Is not God then really good, and to be so described?

'Of course.

'But surely nothing good is hurtful? Is it?

'I think not.

'Does then that which is not hurtful do hurt?

'Of course not.

'And does that which hurts not, do any evil?

'No, again.

'Neither can that which does no evil be the cause of any evil?

'How could it?

'Well then, is the good beneficial?

'Yes.

'It is the cause then of well-being?

'Yes.

'The good then is not the cause of all things, but only of what is right, and
not the cause of evils.

'Quite so, said he.

'Neither then, said I, can God, since He is good, be the cause of all things, as
the many say, but of few things that happen to men He is the cause, and of many
things He is not the cause: for our good things are far fewer than the evil. And
of the good we must assign no other cause than God, but of the evil we must seek
the causes in other things, but not in God.

'I think, said he, you speak most truly.

'We must not then, said I, allow either Homer or any other poet foolishly to
commit such an offence as this against the gods, and to say that

" Two coffers lie beside the door of Zeus, With gifts for man; one good, the
other ill." 5

'And to whom Zeus give a mixture of the two,

"Him sometimes evil, sometimes good befalls"; 6

'And to whom he gives no mixture, but the ill alone,

"Him ravenous hunger o'er God's earth pursues." 7

'Nor must we admit that Zeus is to us

"The sole dispenser both of weal and woe." 8

'And if any one say that the violation of oaths and treaties wrought by Pandarus
was brought about by Athene and Zeus,9 we shall not approve: nor that the strife
and contest of the gods was caused by Themis and Zeus:10 nor again must we
permit our young men to hear how Aeschylus says that

" God plants in mortal breasts the cause of sin, When He would utterly destroy a
house." 11

'But if any one writes a poem, in which these iambics are found, about the
sorrows of Niobe, or the calamities of "Pelops' line," or the "tale of Troy," or
any other such events, either we must forbid him to call them the work of a god,
or, if of a god, then he must invent some such explanation for them as we are
now seeking, and must say that God did what was just and good, and the others
were the better for being chastised. But we must not permit the poet to say that
those who suffered punishment were miserable, and that this was God's doing.

'If, however, they would say that the wicked were miserable because they needed
punishment, but were benefited by being punished by God, that we must approve.

'But as to saying that God, who is good, becomes the author of evil to any, we
must by all possible means contend that no one shall make such statements in his
own city, if it is to be governed by good laws, nor any one either young or old
listen to his tales whether in verse or prose, as such statements if tittered
would be impious, and neither profitable to us, nor consistent with themselves.

'I vote with you, said he, for this law, and am pleased with it.

'This then, said I, will be one of the laws and moulds in which our speakers
must speak concerning God, and our poets write, That God is not the cause of all
things, but only of the good.

'That is quite satisfactory, said he.

'And what then of this second? Do you suppose God to be a sorcerer, and of a
nature to show Himself craftily now in one form and now in another, at one time
actually becoming what He seems, and changing His own proper form into various
shapes, and at another deceiving us, and making us imagine such transformations
in Him; or do you think that He is a simple essence, and most unlikely to go out
of His own proper form?

'I am not able, said he, to answer now off-hand.

'Well, what do you say to this? If anything were to change from its own proper
form, must it not be changed either by itself or by some other?

'It must.

'Are not then the things which are in the best condition least liable to be
altered or moved by another? As for example when a body is affected by meats and
drinks and labours, and every plant by sunshine and winds and other such
influences, is it not the healthiest and the most perfect that is altered least?

'Of course it is.

'And would not the bravest and wisest soul be least disturbed and altered by any
influence from without?

'Yes.

'Moreover I suppose that, on the same principle, among all manufactured things,
furniture, buildings, and clothes, those that are well made and in good
condition suffer the least alteration from time and other influences?

'It is so.

'Everything then which is well constituted either by nature or art, or both,
admits the least alteration by any other?

'So it seems.

'But surely God, and the things of God, are in every way most excellent?

'Of course.

'In this way then God is most unlikely to take many shapes.

'Most unlikely indeed.

'But would He change and alter Himself?

'Evidently, said he, if He is changed at all.

'Does He then change Himself into what is better and more beautiful, or into
what is worse and less beautiful than Himself?

'It must be into what is worse than Himself, if He is changed at all: for surely
we shall not say that God is imperfect in beauty or goodness.

'You are quite right, said I. And this being so, do you think, Adeimantus, that
any one, whether god or man, would willingly make himself worse in any way?

'Impossible, said he.

'It is also impossible then, said I, that a god should be willing to change
himself, but each one of them, as it seems, being as perfect as possible in
beauty and goodness, remains ever absolutely in his own form.

'It seems to me quite certain, said he.

'Then, my good friend, said I, let none of the poets tell us that

" Gods, in the guise of strangers from afar, Wander in various forms from state
to state." 12

'Nor let any one slander Proteus and Thetis, nor introduce Hera in tragedies nor
in any other poems transformed as a priestess begging alms

"For Inachus the Argive river-god's Life-giving daughters." 13

'These and many other such falsehoods let them cease to invent. Neither let our
mothers be persuaded by these poets to terrify their children by the tales which
they wickedly tell them, that certain gods forsooth wander about by night in the
likeness of many animals of different kinds, lest they be both guilty of
blasphemy against the gods, and at the same time make their children more
cowardly.

'Let them beware, said he.

'But then, said I, do the gods, though they are not capable of actual change,
make us imagine, by their deception and magic, that they appear in various
forms?

'Perhaps, said he.

'Well then, said I, would a god be willing to lie either by word or by deed, in
putting phantoms before us?

'I do not know, said he.

'Do you not know, said I, that the true lie, if one may so speak, is hated by
all both gods and men?

'How do you mean? said he.

'You know, of course, said I, that no one willingly consents to lie to the
highest and chiefest part of himself, and concerning matters of the highest
importance, but every one fears above all to harbour a lie there.

'No, I do not even now understand you, said he.

'Because, said I, you think I have some grand meaning: but I only mean that to
lie to the soul about realities, and to be deceived and ignorant, and to have
and to hold the falsehood there, is what all men would most dislike, and what in
that part of them they utterly detest.

'Yes, utterly, said he.

'But surely, as I was saying just now, this is what might most rightly be called
"a true lie," this ignorance in the soul of the deceived: since the lie in words
is a sort of imitation of the affection in the soul, and an image produced
afterwards, not at all a pure unmixed lie. Is it not so?

'Yes, certainly.

'The real lie then is hated not only by gods, but also by men?

'I think so.

'Well then? When and in what case is the lie in words useful, and so not
deserving to be hated? Is it not in dealing with enemies, and when any of those
who are called our friends from madness or any kind of folly attempt to do some
mischief, it then becomes useful as a remedy to turn them from their purpose?

'Also in those mythical tales of which we were speaking just now, because we
know not how the truth stands about ancient events, do we not make the falsehood
as much like truth as possible, and so make it useful?

'It certainly is so, said he.

'For which of these reasons then is falsehood useful to God? Would He lie from
ignorance of ancient events by trying to make them like the truth?

'Nay, that would be ridiculous.

'There is nothing of the lying poet then in God?

'I think not.

'But would He lie through fear of His enemies?

'Far from it.

'Or because His friends are foolish or mad?

'Nay, said he, no fool or madman is a friend of God.

'There is no motive then for a god to lie?

'There is none.

'The nature then of gods and demi-gods is quite incapable of falsehood?

'Yes, utterly so.

'God then is perfectly simple and true both in deed and word, and neither
changes in Himself, nor deceives others, either in apparitions, or by words, or
by sending signs, either in dream or waking vision.

'I too think it is just as you say.

'You agree then, said I, that this is a second mould in which speech or poetry
about the gods must be cast, that they neither are wizards who transform
themselves nor mislead us by falsehoods either in word or in deed?

'I do agree.

'While therefore we commend many other things in Homer, we shall not commend
this, the sending of the dream by Zeus to Agamemnon;14 nor the passage of
Aeschylus, in which Thetis says that Apollo, singing at her marriage,

"Dwelt on my happy motherhood, The life from sickness free and lengthened years;

Then all-inclusively he blest my lot, Favoured of heaven, in strains that
cheered my soul. And I too fondly deemed those lips divine Sacred to truth,
fraught with prophetic skill; But he himself who sang, the marriage-guest
Himself, who spake all this, 'twas even he That slew my son." 15

'When a poet says such things as these about gods, we shall be angry, and refuse
him a chorus; neither shall we allow our teachers to use them for the education
of the young, if our guardians are to grow up devout and godlike, as far as it
is possible for man to be.

'I entirely assent, said he, to these principles, and would adopt them as laws.'

Thus speaks Plato: and you would find that the Hebrew Scripture does not contain
disgraceful tales about the God of the universe, nor yet about the heavenly
angels around Him, nor even about the men who are beloved of God, in any like
manner to the Greek theologies; but it contains the model put forth by Plato,
that God is good, and all things done by Him are of the same character.

Therefore after each of the works of creation that admirable man Moses adds,16
And God saw that it was good: and at the end of all he sums up his account of
the whole and says,17 And God saw all things that He had made, and, behold, they
were very good. It is also a doctrine of the Hebrews that God is not the author
of evils, inasmuch as God made not death, neither hath He pleasure in the
destruction of the living:18 for He created all things that they might have
being, and the generative powers of the world are healthful; but by the envy of
the devil death entered into the world.19

Wherefore by the prophet also God is introduced as saying to the man who from
his own choice had become evil, Yet I had planted thee a fruitful vine: how wast
thou turned back into the strange vine? 20 And if it should anywhere be said
that evils happen to the wicked from God, it must be understood as an accidental
coincidence of name, this name being given to the chastisements which God in His
goodness is said to send not for the hurt of those who are chastised, but for
their benefit and profit: just as a physician to save the sick might be thought
to apply bad things in his painful and bitter remedies.

Wherefore in the sacred Scripture also, where it is said that evils are brought
upon men by God, we must apply the saying of Plato, 'that God did what was just
and good,' even when He was inflicting stern treatment and what men think evils
upon those who so deserved, and that 'they were the better for being chastised,'
not only according to the philosopher but also according to the Hebrew Scripture
which says,21 For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son
whom He receiveth.

'But we must not permit the poet to say that they who were punished were
miserable, and that this was God's doing; if, however, they would say that the
wicked were miserable because they needed chastisement, but were benefited by
being punished by God, that we must approve. But as to saying that God, who is
good, becomes the author of evil to any, we must by all possible means contend
against it.' 22

Moreover on the point that God is not subject to change, the Hebrew prophecy
teaches as follows, speaking in the person of God: For I am the Lord your God,
and I change not.23 David also, in his description of God, cries aloud saying:
They all shall wax old as doth a garment, and as a vesture shalt Thou roll them
up, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not
fail.24

Wherever the Hebrew writings introduce the Word of God as appearing in form and
fashion of man, we must remark that they do not represent Him as appearing to
men in the same manner as Proteus and Thetis and Hera, according to the Greek
legends, nor as the gods who wander about at night in the likeness of animals of
many various kinds; but He came, as Plato himself says is sometimes necessary,
for the benefit of friends: 'when through madness or some kind of folly they
attempt to do mischief, then as a remedy to turn them from their purpose' 25 the
advent of God among men is useful.

Now no species of living creatures on earth is dearer to God than man, a species
which is of the kindred and family of the Word of God, by whom also man was made
rational in the nature of his soul; with good reason therefore they say that the
heavenly Word, in His care for a living creature whom He loved, came for the
healing of the whole race, which had become subject to disease and a strange
kind of madness, so that they knew neither God their Father, nor the proper
essence of their own spiritual nature, nor yet God's providence which preserves
the universe, but had almost come into the degenerate state of an irrational
animal. And on this account, they say, the Saviour and Physician at His advent
departed not from His own proper nature, nor yet deceived those who saw Him, but
preserved the truth of both natures, the invisible and the visible. For in one
way He was seen as true man, and in another way He was the true Word of God, not
by witchcraft nor by deluding the spectators; for even Plato thought that the
divine nature was rightly free from falsehood.

'Therefore God the Word, being perfectly simple and true both in deed and in
word, neither changed Himself, nor deceived others, either by apparitions or by
words, or by sending signs, either in dream or waking vision.' 26 For all such
actions He performed, as became a Physician of reasonable souls, for the
salvation of the whole human race, in reality and not in mere seeming, by means
of the human nature which He assumed; and thus He bestowed on all of us
reconciliation and friendship with His Father through that knowledge of God and
true religion which was announced by Him.

Such then are our doctrines: and with those who say otherwise 'we shall be
angry, and refuse them a chorus, neither shall we allow our teachers to use
their sayings for the education of the young, if our guardians are to grow up
devout and godlike,' 27 as our philosopher also thought to be best.

CHAPTER IV

[PLATO] 'FOR though these men themselves consider Zeus the best and most
righteous of the gods, yet they acknowledge that even he bound his own father
Kronos, because he used wickedly to devour his sons, and that Kronos too had
mutilated his own father for similar reasons; but they are angry with me because
I proceed against my father for doing wrong, and so they contradict themselves
in regard both to the gods and to me.

'Is this then the reason, Euthyphron, why I am prosecuted, because when any one
says such things about the gods, I am vexed at hearing them? And for this, it
seems, some one will say that I commit a great sin. Now therefore if you, who
know so well about such matters, agree with them, it seems that I too must of
necessity agree. For what else can I say, since I myself admit that I know
nothing about them? But tell me, for friendship's sake, do you really believe
that these things are so?

'Yes, Socrates, and more wonderful things than these, of which the multitude
know nothing.

'Do you then also believe that there has really been war among the gods, and
dire quarrels and battles, and many other such things, as are told by the poets,
and seen in the decorations of our temples by good painters? Especially at the
Great Panathenaea the robe that is carried up to the Acropolis is full of such
embroideries. Are we to say that these tales are true, Euthyphron?

'Not these alone, O Socrates; but, as I said just now, I will, if you like,
relate to you many other tales concerning the gods, which, I am sure, you will
be astonished to hear.' 28

Thus writes Plato in the Euthyphron. And Numenius explains his meaning in his
book concerning The Secrets in Plato, speaking in the way following: 29

CHAPTER V

[NUMENIUS] 'IF Plato, after proposing to write about the theology of the Athenians, had then been displeased with it, and accused it of containing tales of the quarrels of the gods among themselves, and of singing how some had intercourse with their children, and others devoured them, and how for these things children took vengeance upon their fathers, and brothers upon brothers, and other things of this kind,----if, I say, Plato had taken these stories and openly censured them, I think he would have afforded to the Athenians an occasion for showing their wickedness again by killing him, just as they killed Socrates.

'But since he would not have preferred life to truthfulness, and saw that he
should be able to preserve both life and truth, he gave the part of the
Athenians to Euthyphron, a boastful and stupid person, and especially bad in
theology, but represented Socrates in his own person, and in his peculiar style,
in which he was accustomed to converse with and confute every one.'

CHAPTER VI

[PLATO] 30 'MY dear Crito, your zeal would be most valuable, if it were
consistent at all with right; but if not, the greater the zeal, the more
dangerous. We must consider therefore whether we ought to do this or not; for I
not only am now but always have been so disposed as to yield to no other
persuasion from my friends except the reason which on consideration may appear
to me the best.

'The arguments then which I used to urge aforetime, I cannot reject now, because
this mischance has come upon me; but they appear to me of no less force, and I
prefer and honour the same reasons as I did before: and unless we have any
better to urge in my present position, be assured that I shall never agree with
you, not even if the power of the multitude should try to scare us like children
with more bugbears than at present, threatening bonds, and all kinds of death,
and confiscations of goods.

'What then will be the fairest way of examining the question? Should we in the
first place take up again this argument which you urge, I mean that concerning
men's opinions, whether it was in every case a right statement or not, that we
ought to pay attention to some opinions, and not to others? Or whether the
statement was right before I was condemned to die, but now has been manifestly
proved to have been urged just for the sake of arguing, while it was in reality
mere jesting and trifling?

'My own desire then is to consider with your help, Crito, whether the argument
will appear to me to be in anyway altered, now that I am. in this position, or
still the same; and whether we shall renounce it or act according to it. Now I
think that by those who thought they were talking seriously, it was generally
stated in the same manner as I stated it just now, that of the opinions which
men entertain we ought to prize some highly, and not others.

'Pray tell me, Crito, do you not think this a right statement? For you, in all
human probability, are in no danger of dying to-morrow, and your judgement will
not be perverted by the present mischance. Consider then: do you not think it a
satisfactory statement, that we ought not to respect all the opinions that men
hold, but to respect some and not others? Nor yet the opinions of all men, but
those of some, and not of others? What say you? Is not this a right statement?

'Quite right.

'Must we not then respect the good opinions, and not the bad?

'Yes.

'And are not the opinions of the wise good, and those of the foolish bad?

'Of course.

'Come then, what again was said about such matters as these? Does a man who is
learning gymnastics with serious attention give heed to the praise and blame and
opinion of every man, or only of that one who may happen to be a physician or a
trainer?

'Only of that one.

'He ought then to fear the censures and welcome the praises of that one, and not
those of the many?

'That is evident.

'He must act then, and practise, and eat and drink in such way as may seem good
to the one who is his master and understands the matter, rather than to all the
others together.

'It is so.

'Well; and if he disobey that one, and disregard his opinion and praises, and
respect those of the many who understand nothing about it, will he suffer no
harm?

'Of course he will.

'But what is this harm? And whither does it tend, and to what part of the
disobedient person?

'Evidently to the body, for it does harm to this.

'You are right. And, Crito, is not the case the same with the rest, not to go
through them all? Moreover, in regard to what things are just and unjust, and
disgraceful and honourable, and good and evil, which are the subjects of our
present consultation, must we follow the opinion of the many and fear it, or
that of the one, if there is a man of understanding, whom we ought to reverence
and fear more than all the rest together? And if we fail to follow him we shall
corrupt and ruin that part of us which, as we said, is improved by justice and
degraded by injustice. Or is that part of no importance?

'I think it is important, Socrates.

'Well then, if we ruin that part of us, which is improved by what is healthful
and damaged by what is unwholesome, by not yielding to the opinion of those who
have understanding, is our life worth living when that is ruined? Now this part,
I suppose, is the body, is it not?

'Yes.

'Is our life then worth living with a wretched and diseased body?

'By no means.

'But is then life tolerable for us with that part of us diseased which is
damaged by injustice and improved by justice? Or do we believe that part of us,
whatever it is, which is concerned with injustice and justice to be more
worthless than the body?

'By no means.

'More precious then?

'By far.

'Then, my good friend, we must not care thus at all what the many will say of
us, but what the man who understands about justice and injustice will say, the
one man, and the very truth. So in the first place this proposal of yours is not
right, when you advise that we ought to care for the opinion of the many in
reference to what is just and honourable and good, and the contrary.' The word
of salvation also says: 'Ye seek the glory which cometh from men, and the glory
which cometh from the Only One ye seek not.' 31 Wherefore we also in our
conflicts for religion do rightly in not considering what the many will say of
us, but what is the will of One, even the Word of God, whom having in our
judgement chosen once for all, it behoves us still to honour even as we did
before, and not to change, no, 'not even if the power of the multitude should
scare us like children with bugbears.' 32 Now such were the men who bore
illustrious testimony of old among the Hebrews.

CHAPTER VII

[PLATO] 33 'Do we say that we must not intentionally do wrong in any way, or
that we ought to do wrong in one way, and not in another? Or is it neither
honourable nor good to do wrong in any way, as we have often agreed in former
times, and as I was saying just now? Or have all those our former admissions
been scattered to the winds in these last few days, and have we at our age, dear
Crito, while holding earnest discourse with one another, been unaware so long
that we are no better than children? Or is it most surely true, as we used then
to say, that whether the many affirm or deny it, and whether we are to receive
still harder treatment or more gentle than now, nevertheless to do wrong is in
every way both evil and disgraceful to the wrong-doer? Is this what we assert or
not?

'It is.

'We must not then do wrong in any way.

'Surely not.

'Not even return wrong for wrong then, as is the opinion of the many, since we
must never do wrong in any way?

'Evidently not.

'Well, again? Ought we, Crito, to do evil or not?

'Of course we ought not, Socrates.

'Well then? To render evil for evil, as the many say, is that just or not just?

'Not just.

'For, I suppose, there is no difference between doing evil to men, and doing
them wrong.

'You say well.

'Then we must neither do wrong in return, nor do evil to any man, whatever we
may suffer from him. But take care, dear Crito, lest you may be making this
admission against your real opinion. For I know that this is what very few
people think or ever will think. Between those then who have adopted this
opinion and those who have not there is no common purpose, but they must
necessarily despise each other when they look each at the others' intentions.
Therefore do you also consider very carefully whether you share and agree with
my opinion, and let us begin our deliberations from this point, that it is never
right either to do wrong, or to return wrong, or when evil-entreated to
retaliate by rendering evil. Or do you draw back, and not agree with my first
principle? For I have long been of this opinion, and am so still. But if you
have formed any other opinion, speak and explain. If, however, you abide by what
you held before, listen to the next step.

'I do abide by it, and agree with you. But say on.

'I go on then to state the next point, or rather I ask whether a man ought to do
whatever he has admitted to any one to he just, or falsely to abandon it?

'He ought to do it.'

Compare with this the saying: 'Render to no man evil for evil';34 and this:
'Bless them that curse you: pray for them that despitefully use and persecute
you, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven, who maketh
His sun to rise upon the evil and upon the good, and sendeth rain upon the just
and on the unjust.' 35 Also this: 'Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we
endure; being defamed, we intreat': 36 a passage which occurs in our sacred
Scriptures. The Hebrew prophet also says: 'If I rendered evil to them that
rendered evil to me.' 37 And again: 'With them that hate peace I am for peace.'
38

CHAPTER VIII

[PLATO] 39 'BUT you used to boast then that you were not grieved if you must
die, but preferred death, as you said, to banishment; now, however, you are
neither ashamed of those fine sayings, nor pay any respect to us, the laws, but
are attempting to destroy us; and you cire doing just what the vilest slave
would do, in trying to run away contrary to the conditions and agreements on
which you consented to be our citizen.

'In the first place, therefore, answer us this very question, whether we state
the truth in asserting that you have agreed to be governed according to us in
deed, and not only in word; or is it untrue? What are we to say in answer to
this, Crito? Must we not admit it?

'Yes, Socrates, we must.

'Are you not then, they would say, transgressing the covenants and agreements
which you made with us, and to which you agreed under no compulsion, nor
deception? Nor were you forced to decide too hastily, but for a period of
seventy years you were at liberty to go away, if you were not satisfied with us,
and if our agreements appeared to you unjust?

'You did not, however, prefer either Lacedaemon or Crete, which you are always
saying are well governed, nor any other state, Hellenic nor Barbarian, but you
travelled away from Athens less than the lame and the blind and the cripples. So
much more than other Athenians were you in love with the state, and of course
with us the laws; for who would like a state without laws? And will you not now
abide by your agreements? You will, if you take our advice, Socrates.'

CHAPTER IX

40 'FOR whoever is a corrupter of laws, would be surely thought a corrupter of young and foolish persons. Will you then flee from the well-governed states, and the best-behaved of men? And if you do this, will your life be worth living? Or will you associate with them, and feel no shame in discoursing with them,----and what arguments will you use, dear Socrates? The same as here, that virtue and justice and institutions and laws are the most precious things for mankind? And do you not think that this conduct of Socrates would be unseemly? You certainly ought to think so.

'But you will depart from these regions, and go to Crito's friends in Thessaly:
for there forsooth is the greatest disorder and licence. And perhaps it will
please them to hear from you, in what a ridiculous fashion you made your escape
from the prison, having wrapped yourself in some disguise, or taken a goatskin,
or something else such as runaways usually dress themselves up in, and so
transformed your appearance.

'But will there be no one to remark that, being an old man, with probably but a
short time left to live, you dared to show so greedy a love of life in defiance
of the highest laws? Perhaps not, if you do not annoy any one: but otherwise,
you will have to listen to many things unworthy, dear Socrates, of you. So you
will live by cringing to all men, and serving them; and what will you be doing
but feasting in Thessaly, as if you had gone abroad to Thessaly for a dinner?
And those fine discourses about justice and the other virtues, where will they
be?

'But forsooth you wish to live for the sake of your children, that you may bring
them up and educate them?

'What then? Will you take them to Thessaly and bring them up and educate them
there, making aliens of them, that they may receive this further benefit from
you? Or if instead of that they are brought up here, will they be better brought
up and educated because you are alive though not with them? For your friends
will take care of them? They will take care of them then if you are gone away to
Thessaly; but if you are gone to the other world, will they not take care of
them, if indeed there is any good in those who say that they are your friends?
You must surely suppose they will.

'Nay, dear Socrates, listen to us who have reared you, and value neither
children, nor life, nor any thing else as of more account than justice, that
when you come to the unseen world you may have all these pleas to offer in your
defence to the rulers there. For it is evident that to act in this manner is
neither in this life better or more just or more holy for you or any of yours,
nor will it be better for you when you have arrived in the other world.

'But now, if you go hence, you will go as one who has suffered injustice not
from us, the laws, but from men. But if you go abroad in this disgraceful
manner, returning injury for injury and evil for evil, transgressing your own
agreements and covenants which you made with us, and wronging those whom you
ought least to wrong, yourself and your friends and country and us, we shall be
angry with you while you live, and in the other world our brethren, the laws in
Hades, will give you no friendly reception, knowing that you have tried your
best to destroy us.'

CHAPTER X

41 'PERHAPS therefore some one will say, Are you not ashamed then, Socrates, of
having pursued such a course of life, that you are now in danger of being put to
death for it? But I should return a just answer to him, You are wrong in what
you say, Sir, if you suppose that any man who is of the least good ought to take
into account the risk of life or death, instead of looking at this point alone
in his actions, whether he is doing what is just or unjust, the works of a good
or a bad man.

'For according to your argument the demi-gods who died at Troy would be good for
nothing, especially the son of Thetis, who so despised danger in comparison with
incurring disgrace, that though his mother, being a goddess, had spoken to him,
I suppose, in this way, when he was so eager to kill Hector, O my Son, if you
avenge the murder of your friend Patroclus and kill Hector, you will be killed
yourself, for, said she,

"On Hector's fate thine own will follow close." 42

And after hearing this he cared little for death and danger, but fearing much
more to live as a coward and not avenge his friends, he exclaims:

"Would I might die this hour" 43

after inflicting vengeance on the injurious foe, that I remain not here a
laughing-stock,

"Cumbering the ground, beside the sharp-beaked ships." 44

'Think you that he cared for death and danger? Thus, O men of Athens, the case
stands in very truth: wherever a man has chosen his own post because he thought
it best, or has been placed by a commander, there, in my judgement, he is bound
to await the danger, taking no account either of death or of anything else than
disgrace.

'If therefore, O men of Athens, when the leaders whom you chose to be my commanders set me in my post at Potidaea, and Amphipolis, and at Delium, or anywhere else, I remained just like any other where they placed me and ran the risk of being killed,----how strangely should I have acted, when the god, as I thought and supposed, ordered me to live the life of a philosopher, examining myself and others, if in this case, through fear either of death or anything else whatever, I should desert my post.

'Strange it would be indeed, and then in truth any one might justly bring me
before the court, on the ground that I do not believe in the existence of gods,
since I disobey the oracle, and am afraid of death, and think myself wise when I
am not. For to be afraid to die, Sirs, is nothing else than to think oneself to
be wise, when one is not: for it is to think that one knows, what one does not
know. For no one knows about death even whether it may not be the greatest of
all blessings to man; but they fear it as if they certainly knew that it is the
greatest of evils. And what is this but that same disgraceful ignorance, for a
man to think that he knows what he does not know?

'But I, Sirs, perhaps on this subject also differ from most men in this; and
were I to say that I am wiser than another in any respect, it would be in this,
that, as I do not know enough about the state of things in Hades, so I also
think that I do not know. But I do know that to do wrong and to disobey one's
superior, whether god or man, is evil and disgraceful. Those evils therefore
which I know to be evil I shall always fear and shun, rather than things which,
for aught I know, may really be good.

'Therefore not even if you acquit me now, and refuse to believe Anytus, who said that either I ought
not to have come into this court at all, or that, since I had come, it was impossible to avoid putting me to death, and told you that, if I should be acquitted, at once your sons would all be utterly corrupted by practising what Socrates teaches----if in answer to this you should say to me,

Socrates, we are not going to be persuaded by Anytus this time, but we acquit you, on this condition however, that you cease to spend your time in this speculation, and in philosophy; and if you be convicted of doing so any more, you will be put to death;----if then, as I said, you were to acquit me on these conditions, I should say to you, O men of Athens, I honour and I love you, but I shall obey the god rather than you, and as long as I have breath and power, I shall never cease from studying philosophy, and exhorting and instructing any of you whom I may meet from time to time, in my usual style of discourse.' And a little further on he adds: 45

'Let us then consider it also in this way, that there is much reason to hope
that death is a good. For the state of the dead is one of two things: either it
is like non-existence and absence of all sensation in the dead, or, as is
commonly said, it is a sort of transference and migration of the soul from this
region to another. And if there is no sensation, but as it were a sleep in which
the sleeper sees nothing even in a dream, death must be a wonderful gain.

'For I suppose, that if a man were obliged to select the night in which he slept so soundly as to see nothing even in a dream, and to compare all the other nights and days of his life with this night,----if, I say, he were obliged to consider and tell us how many days and nights in the course of his life he had passed more happily and more pleasantly than this night, I think that not merely any ordinary person but even the great King himself would find these better nights very few in comparison with all the rest of his days and nights. If therefore death is something of this kind, I call it a gain: for thus all time appears nothing more than a single night.

'But if on the other hand death is like a departure hence to another place, and
if what is said is true, that all the dead exist there, what greater good could
there be than this, O my judges? For if on arriving in Hades, after having been
delivered from the self-styled judges here, a man shall find the true judges,
who are said to give judgement there, Minos, and Rhadamanthus, and Aeacus, and
Triptolemus, and all the other demi-gods who were just in their own lives, will
the change of abode be worth nothing?

'Or on the contrary, what would any of you pay to associate with Orpheus, and Musaeus, and Hesiod, and Homer? For my part I am willing to die many a death, if indeed these things are true, since I too should find it a delightful occupation there,
whenever I met with Palamedes, and Ajax the son of Telamon, and any other of the ancients who has died through an unjust judgement, to compare my own sufferings with theirs,----no unpleasant thing, methinks it would he. And moreover the chief delight would be to spend my life in examining and scrutinizing the dwellers in that world, as I do those here, to learn which of them is wise, and which, though he thinks so, is not.'

We also have the saying: 'We ought to obey God rather than men.' 46 And: 'Be not
afraid of them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul.' 47 And
we know, 'that if the earthly house of our bodily frame be dissolved, we have a
building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens':48 ...
and that 'whilst we are absent from the body we are at home with the Lord,' 49
who also hath promised to all who have hoped in Him, that they shall rest in the
bosoms of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and, in company with all the other Hebrew
prophets and righteous men beloved of God, shall pass the long eternity in a
blessed life.

CHAPTER XI

50 'OF those then who have been killed in war, shall we not say in the first
place that any one who died an honourable death was of the golden race?

'Most certainly.

'But when any of such a race as this have died, shall we not believe Hesiod,
that:

"These still on earth as holy daemons dwell, Brave guardians of mankind from
every ill"?

'Yes, we shall believe him.

'Shall we then inquire of the god how we ought to class daemons and deities, and
with what difference, and place them thus in whatever way he may direct?

'Of course we shall.

'And for all time to come, believing them to have become daemons, we shall so
serve and worship their tombs; and these same customs we shall observe, when
from old age or any other cause any one dies of those who have been judged
pre-eminently good in life? '

These customs also may fitly be adopted on the death of those beloved of God,
whom you would not do wrong in calling soldiers of the true religion. Hence
comes also our custom of visiting their tombs, and offering our prayers beside
them, and honouring their blessed souls, believing that we do this with good
reason. But in truth though I have made these selections out of the writings of
Plato, any other student might find still more points of agreement with our
doctrines in the same author, and perhaps in others also. Since, however, others
before us have touched upon the same subject, I think it would be right for me
to look at the results of their work also. And I will quote first the words of
the Hebrew philosopher Aristobulus, which are as follows: 51

CHAPTER XII

[ARISTOBULUS] 'IT is evident that Plato closely followed our legislation, and
has carefully studied the several precepts contained in it. For others before
Demetrius Phalereus, and prior to the supremacy of Alexander and the Persians,
have translated both the narrative of the exodus of the Hebrews our fellow
countrymen from Egypt, and the fame of all that had happened to them, and the
conquest of the land, and the exposition of the whole Law; so that it is
manifest that many things have been borrowed by the aforesaid philosopher, for
he is very learned: as also Pythagoras transferred many of our precepts and
inserted them in his own system of doctrines.

'But the entire translation of all the contents of our law was made in the time
of the king surnamed Philadelphus, thy ancestor, who brought greater zeal to the
work, which was managed by Demetrius Phalereus.' Then, after interposing some
remarks, he further says:

'For we must understand the voice of God not as words spoken, but as
construction of works, just as Moses in the Law has spoken of the whole creation
of the world as words of God. For he constantly says of each work, "And God
said, and it was so."

'Now it seems to me that he has been very carefully followed in all by
Pythagoras, and Socrates, and Plato, who said that they heard the voice of God,
when they were contemplating the arrangement of the universe so accurately made
and indissolubly combined by God. Moreover, Orpheus, in verses taken from his
writings in the Sacred Legend, thus sets forth the doctrine that all things are
governed by divine power, and that they have had a beginning, and that God is
over all. And this is what he says: 52

"I speak to those who lawfully may hear:

Depart, and close the doors, all ye profane, Who hate the ordinances of the
just, The law divine announced to all mankind. But thou, Musaeus, child of the
bright Moon, Lend me thine ear; for I have truths to tell.

Let not the former fancies of thy mind Amerce thee of the dear and blessed life.

Look to the word divine, keep close to that, And guide thereby the deep thoughts
of thine heart.

Walk wisely in the way, and look to none, Save to the immortal Framer of the
world: For thus of Him an ancient story speaks:

One, perfect in Himself, all else by Him Made perfect: ever present in His
works, By mortal eyes unseen, by mind alone Discerned. It is not He that out of
good Makes evil to spring up for mortal men.

Both love and hatred wait upon His steps, And war and pestilence, and sorrow and
tears: For there is none but He. All other things 'Twere easy to behold,
could'st thou but first Behold Himself here present upon earth. The footsteps
and the mighty hand of God Whene'er I see, I'll show them thee, my son: But Him
I cannot see, so dense a cloud In tenfold darkness wraps our feeble sight.

Him in His power no mortal could behold, Save one, a scion of Chaldaean race:
For he was skilled to mark the sun's bright path, And how in even circle round
the earth The starry sphere on its own axis turns, And winds their chariot guide
o'er sea and sky; And showed where fire's bright flame its strength displayed.
But God Himself, high above heaven unmoved, Sits on His golden throne, and
plants His feet On the broad earth; His right hand He extends O'er Ocean's
farthest bound; the eternal hills Tremble in their deep heart, nor can endure
His mighty power. And still above the heavens Alone He sits, and governs all on
earth, Himself first cause, and means, and end of all. So men of old, so tells
the Nile-born sage, Taught by the twofold tablet of God's law; Nor otherwise
dare I of Him to speak: In heart and limbs I tremble at the thought, How He from
heaven all things in order rules.

Draw near in thought, my son; but guard thy tongue With care, and store this
doctrine in thine heart."

Aratus also speaks of the same subject thus: 53

"From Zeus begin the song, nor ever leave His name unsung, whose godhead fills
all streets, All thronging marts of men, the boundless sea And all its ports:
whose aid all mortals need; For we his offspring are; and kindly he Reveals to
man good omens of success, Stirs him to labour by the hope of food, Tells when
the land best suits the grazing ox, Or when the plough; when favouring seasons
bid Plant the young tree, and sow the various seed."

'It is clearly shown, I think, that all things are pervaded by the power of God:
and this I have properly represented by taking away the name of Zeus which runs
through the poems; for it is to God that their thought is sent up, and for that
reason I have so expressed it. These quotations, therefore, which I have brought
forward are not inappropriate to the questions before us.

'For all the philosophers agree, that we ought to hold pious opinions concerning
God, and to this especially our system gives excellent exhortation; and the
whole constitution of our law is arranged with reference to piety, and justice,
and temperance, and all things else that are truly good.' To this, after an
interval, he adds what follows: 54

'With this it is closely connected, that God the Creator of the whole world, has
also given us the seventh day as a rest, because for all men life is full of
troubles: which day indeed might naturally be called the first birth of light,
whereby all things are beheld.

'The same thought might also be metaphorically applied in the case of wisdom,
for from it all light proceeds. And it has been said by some who were of the
Peripatetic School that wisdom is in place of a beacon-light, for by following
it constantly men will be rendered free from trouble through their whole life.

'But more clearly and more beautifully one of our forefathers, Solomon, said
that it has existed before heaven and earth;55 which indeed agrees with what has
been said above. But what is clearly stated by the Law, that God rested on the
seventh day, means not, as some suppose, that God henceforth ceases to do
anything, but it refers to the fact that, after He has brought the arrangement
of His works to completion, He has arranged them thus for all time.

'For it points out that in six days He made the heaven and the earth and all
things that are therein, to distinguish the times, and predict the order in
which one thing comes before another: for after arranging their order, He keeps
them so, and makes no change. He has also plainly declared that the seventh day
is ordained for us by the Law, to be a sign of that which is our seventh
faculty, namely reason, whereby we have knowledge of things human and divine.

'Also the whole world of living creatures, and of all plants that grow, revolves
in sevens. And its name "Sabbath" is interpreted as meaning "rest."

'Homer also and Hesiod declare, what they have borrowed from our books, that it
is a holy day; Hesiod in the following words: 56

"The first, the fourth, the seventh a holy day."

'And again he says:

''And on the seventh again the sun shines bright."

'Homer too speaks as follows:

" And soon the seventh returned, a holy day."

'And again:

" It was the seventh day, and all was done."

'Again:

" And on the seventh dawn the baleful stream Of Acheron we left."

'By which he means, that after the soul's forgetfulness and vice have been left,
the things it chose before are abandoned on the true seventh which is reason,
and we receive the knowledge of truth, as we have said before.

'Linus too speaks thus:

"All things are finished on the seventh dawn."

'And again:

"Good is the seventh day, and seventh birth."

'And:

"Among the prime, and perfect is the seventh."

'And:

"Seven orbs created in the starlit sky Shine in their courses through revolving
years."'

Such then are the statements of Aristobulus. And what Clement has said on the
same subject, you may learn from the following: 57

CHAPTER XIII

[CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA] 'BUT we must add the further evidence, and show now more
clearly the plagiarism of the Greeks from the Barbarian philosophy. For the
Stoics say that God, as also the soul of course, is in essence body and spirit.
All this you will find directly stated in their writings. For I do not wish you
now to consider whether their allegorical interpretations, as the Gnostic verity
delivers them, show one thing and mean another, like clever wrestlers. But what
they say is that God extends through all being, while we call Him simply the
Creator, and Creator by a word.

Now they were misled by what is said in Wisdom: "Yea, she pervadeth and
penetrateth all things by virtue of her purity":58 since they did not understand
that this is said of that wisdom which was the first-created of God. Yes, say
they; but the philosophers, Stoics as well as Plato and Pythagoras and even
Aristotle the Peripatetic, suppose matter to be one of the first principles, and
do not assume one only principle.

'Let them know, then, that the so-called matter, which is said by them to be
without quality or shape, has been previously described more boldly by Plato as
"Not-being"; and is it perchance from knowing that the real and true first cause
is one, that he speaks so mysteriously in the Timaeus in these very words?

59 'Now therefore let my position be stated as follows: "Of the first principle
or principles of all things, or in whatever way it is thought right to describe
them, I must not speak at present, for no other reason than this, that it is
difficult to explain my opinions according to our present form of discourse."

'And, besides, that prophetic expression, "The earth was invisible and without
order," 60 has given them suggestions of a material essence. In fact, the
interposition of "chance" occurred to Epicurus from having misunderstood the
language of the following passage: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." 61 To
Aristotle it occurred to bring Providence down only so far as to the moon, from
this Psalm: " Thy mercy, O LORD, is in the heaven, and Thy truth reacheth unto
the clouds." 62 For before the coming of the Lord the meaning of the prophetic
mysteries was not as yet revealed.

'Again the chastisements after death and the punishment by fire were stolen from
our Barbarian philosophy both by every Muse of poetry and even by the Greek
philosophy. Plato, for instance, in the last Book of the Republic says in.
express terms: "Hereupon certain fierce men of fiery aspect, who were standing
by and understood the sound, seized and led away some of them separately; But
Aridaeus and the rest they bound hand and foot and head together, and threw them
down, and flayed them, and dragged them along the road outside, carding them
like wool on thorns." 63 For his "fiery men" are meant to indicate angels, who
seize the unrighteous and punish them. " Who maketh," says the Scripture, " His
angels spirits, and His ministers a flaming fire." 64

'Now it follows upon this that the soul is immortal. For that which is
undergoing punishment or correction being in a state of sensation, must be
living, though it be said to suffer. Again, does not Plato know also rivers of
fire, and the deep of the earth, called by the Barbarians Gehenna, which he
calls poetically Tartarus, and introduces Cocytus, and Acheron, and Phlegethon,
and names of this kind, as places of punishment for correctional training? And
representing, according to the Scripture, the angels of the least of the little
ones which behold the face of God,65 and also His supervision extended to us
through the angels set over us, he does not hesitate to write:

'"After all the souls have chosen their lives, according to their lot, they went
forward in order to Lachesis, and she sent with each the genius of his choice,
to be the guardian of his life, and the fulfiller of his chosen destiny." 66
'Perhaps also something of this kind was intimated to Socrates by his daemon.

'Nay more, the philosophers borrowed, from Moses their doctrine that the world
was created, and Plato has said expressly:

' " Was it that the world had no beginning of creation, or has it been created
at first from some beginning? For it is visible, and tangible, and has a body."
67

'And again, when he says: "To find therefore the Maker and Father of this
universe is a hard task," 68 he not only shows that the world has been
generated, but also indicates that it was generated from Him, as from one alone,
and sprang up out of non-existence. The Stoics also suppose that the world has
been created.

'The devil too, so often mentioned by the Barbarian philosophy, the prince of
the daemons, is described by Plato, in the tenth Book of the Laws, as being a
malignant soul, in the following words: 69 "As then a soul directs and inhabits
all things that move in every direction, must we not say that it also directs
the heaven?

' " Of course.

' "One soul or more? More, I will answer for both of you. Less than two surely
we must not suppose, one that does good, and the other that has power to work
evil."

'In like manner also he writes in the Phaedrus thus: 70 "There are indeed other
evils, but with most of them some daemon has mingled an immediate pleasure." And
further in the tenth Book of the Laws be directly expresses that thought of the
Apostle: "Our wrestling is not against blood and flesh, . . . but against the
spiritual powers of the hosts in heaven," 71 when he writes thus:

' " For since we agreed among ourselves that the heaven is full of many goods,
and full also of evils, and of more evils than goods, such a conflict as this,
we say, is immortal, and requires wonderful caution." 72

'Again, the Barbarian philosophy knows one intelligible world, and another
sensible, the one an archetype, and the other an image of that fair model; and
the former it ascribes to unity, as being perceptible to thought only, but the
sensible to the number six: for among the Pythagoreans six is called marriage,
as being a generative number. And in the unity it sets an invisible heaven, and
a holy earth, and intelligible light. For "In the beginning," says the
Scripture, "God created the heaven and the earth: and the earth was invisible."
73 Then it adds, "And God said, Let there be light, and there was light." 74 But
in the creation of the sensible world He framed a solid heaven (and what is
solid is sensible), and a visible earth, and a light that is seen. Do you not
think that from this passage Plato was led to leave the "ideas" of living things
in the intelligible world, and to create the sensible forms according to the
various kinds of that intelligible world?

'With good reason, therefore, Moses says that the body was formed of earth, what
Plato calls "an earthly tabernacle," but that the reasonable soul was breathed
by God from, on high into man's face: for they say that the ruling faculty is
seated in this part, and interpret thus the accessory entrance of the soul
through the organs of sense in the first-formed man; for which reason also man,
they say, is made "after the image and likeness of God." 75

'For the image of God is the divine and royal Word, the impassible man; and an
image of that image is the human mind. But if you will admit another name for
the growing likeness, you will find it called in Moses a following of God: for
he says, "Walk after the LORD your God, . . . and keep His commandments." 76 And
all the virtuous are, I suppose, followers and servants of God.

'Hence the Stoics have said that the end of philosophy is to live according to
the guidance of nature, while Plato says it is to become like God, as we showed
in the second Miscellany; and Zeno the Stoic having received it from Plato, and
he from the Barbarian philosophy, says that all good men are friends one of
another. For in the Phaedrus Socrates says that "Fate has not ordained that the
wicked should be a friend to the wicked; nor the good fail to be a friend to the
good." 77

'This he also fully showed in the Lysis, 78 that friendship can never be
preserved amid injustice and wickedness. The Athenian Stranger too says in like
manner, "That it is conduct pleasing to God and like Him, and has one ancient
saying in its favour, when 'like loves like' if it be in measure, but things
beyond measure agree neither with things beyond nor with things within measure.
And God must be to us the measure of all things." 79 'Then lower down Plato adds
again:

' " For indeed every good man is like every other good man, and consequently
being also like God, he is beloved both by every good man and by God." Arrived
at this point, I am reminded of the following passage, for at the end of the
Timaeus he says that "one should assimilate that which perceives to that which
is perceived, according to its original nature, and by thus assimilating them
attain the end of that life which is proposed by the gods to men as the best
both for the present time and for that which is to follow." 80 And after a few
sentences he adds: 81 'That we are brethren as belonging to one God and one
teacher, Plato evidently declares in the following terms:

" For ye in the city are all brothers, as we shall say to them in telling the
fable; but God, in forming as many of you as are fit to rule, mixed gold in
their composition, wherefore they are the most to be honoured: and for all the
auxiliaries silver, but iron and copper for the husbandmen and other
operatives." 82

'Whence, he says, it has necessarily come to pass that some embrace and love
those things which are objects of knowledge, and others those which are matters
of opinion. For perhaps he is prophesying of that elect nature which desires
knowledge; unless in assuming three natures he, as some supposed, is describing
three forms of polity, that of the Jews silver, that of the Greeks the third,
and that of the Christians in whom there has been infused the royal gold, the
Holy Spirit.

'Also he exhibits the Christian life when writing word for word in the
Theaetetus: 83

''Let us speak then of the leaders; for why should one talk about those who
spend their time to no good purpose in philosophy? But these leaders, I suppose,
neither know the way to the Agora, nor where the court of justice is, or the
council-chamber, or any other public assembly of the State; and laws, and
decrees whether read or written, they neither see nor hear. The strivings of
political clubs, and meetings, to obtain offices, and revellings with
flute-girls are practices which do not occur to them even in dreams. And what
has happened well or ill in the city, or what evil has come to any one from his
ancestors, is less known to them than, as the proverb says, the number of
gallons in the sea. As to all these things he knows not even that he does not
know them: for in fact it is his body only that has its place and home in the
city, but the man himself 'is flying,' as Pindar says,'underneath the earth' 84
and above the heaven, studying the stars, and scrutinizing every nature on all
sides."

'Again, with the Lord's saying, "Let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay," 85 we
must compare this: "But it is by no means right for me to admit a falsehood, and
to suppress a truth." 86 Also with the prohibition of swearing agrees this
saying in the tenth Book of the Laws: "Let there be no praising nor swearing
about anything." 87 And to speak generally, Pythagoras and Socrates and Plato,
when they say that they hear God's voice, while carefully contemplating the
constitution of the universe as made by God and held together without
interruption, must have heard Moses say, in describing the word of God as a
deed, "He spake, and it was done." 88

'Also taking their stand upon the formation of the man out of dust, the
philosophers on every occasion proclaim that the body is of earth, and Homer
does not shrink from putting it in the light of a curse:

" But may all ye to earth and water turn." 89

Just as Esaias says: " And tread them down as clay." 90 'Callimachus too writes
expressly:

" It was that year in which the winged tribe And they that swim the sea or tread
the earth Spake like the clay Prometheus called to life." 91

'And again the same poet said:

" If thou wast fashioned by Prometheus' hand, And not of other clay." 92

'Hesiod also says of Pandora:

" Renowned Hephaestus bade he with all speed Mix earth with water, and therein
infuse The voice and mind of man." 93

'Now as the Stoics define nature as an artistic fire which proceeds
systematically to generation; 94 so by the Scripture God and His Word are
represented figuratively by fire and light. Again, is not Homer also alluding to
the separation of the water from the land, and the clear discovery of the dry
land, when he says of Tethys and Oceanus:

" For now have they long time From love and from the marriage-bed abstained "?
95

'Again, the most learned among the Greeks ascribe to God power in all things:
thus Epicharmus, who was a Pythagorean, says:

" Nothing e'er from God escapeth; this behoves thee well to know;

He o'erlooks us closely; nothing is to God impossible." 96

'The lyric poet too:

" From thickest darkness of the night God can call forth the purest light, Or
with dark clouds at will o'erlay The brightness of the orient day." 97

'He who alone can turn the present day into night, the poet says, is God.

'Aratus also, in the book entitled Phaenomena, after saying:

" From Zeus begin the song, nor ever leave His name unsung, whose godhead fills
all streets, All thronging marts of men, the boundless sea, And all its ports;
whose aid all mortals need," 98

'adds:

"For we his offspring are,"

as it were by creation,

. . . "and kindly he Reveals to man good omens of success. In heaven he set
those guiding lights, and marked Their several course; and for the year he wove
The circlet of the stars, to show to man What best the seasons suit, that all
things set In order due may grow. Him ever first, Him last our prayers invoke.
Hail, Father, hail!

Wonder and joy and blessing of mankind."

'Also before him Homer, in the account of the shield made by Hephaestus,
describes the creation of the world in accordance with Moses, saying:

"Thereon were figured earth, and sky, and sea, And all the signs that crown the
vault of heaven." 99

'For the Zeus who is celebrated in all poems and prose compositions, carries up
our thought to God.

'Then, further, Democritus writes that some few of mankind are in the light, so
to say, 100 "who lift up their hands to that place which we Greeks now call the
air, and mythically speak of all as Zeus; and he knows all things, and gives and
takes away, and he is king of all." With deeper mystery the Boeotian Pindar, as
being a Pythagorean, teaches:

" One race of men and one of gods, Both from one mother draw our breath," 101

that is, from matter: he teaches also that the Creator of this world is one,
whom he calls,

" Father, of all artificers the best," 102

who has also provided the means of advancement to divinity according to merit.

'For I say nothing as to Plato, how he plainly appears in the Epistle to Erastus
and Coriscus to set forth Father and Son somehow from the Hebrew Scriptures,
when he exhorts them in these words 103 "to invoke both with a graceful
earnestness, and with the culture which is akin to such earnestness, the God who
is the cause of all, and also to invoke the Father and Lord of Him who is ruler
and cause, whom (says he) ye shall know, if ye study philosophy aright."

'Also Zeus in his harangue in the Timaeus calls the Creator Father, in these
words: 104

"Ye gods and sons of gods, whose Father I am, and Creator of the works." So that
also when he says, 105 "Around the King of all are all things, and for His sake
they all are, and that is the cause of all things beautiful; and around a Second
are the secondary things, and around a Third the tertiary," I understand it in
no other way than that the Holy Trinity is signified. For I think that the Holy
Spirit is the third, and the Son the second, "by whom all things were made"
according to the will of the Father.

'The same author, in the tenth Book of the Republic,106 mentions Er, the son of
Armenius, a Pamphylian by birth, who is Zoroaster. At least Zoroaster himself
writes, "Zoroaster the son of Armenius, a Pamphylian by birth, having been slain
in war, writes down here all things which when in Hades I learned from the
gods." Now Plato says that this Zoroaster when laid upon the funeral pile on the
twelfth day after death came to life again. Perhaps he alludes not to the
resurrection, but to the circumstance that the way for souls to their reception
above is through the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and Plato himself says that
their way of return to birth is the same. In this way we must understand also
that the labours of Hercules were said to be twelve, after which the soul
obtains its release from this world entirely. Empedocles also I do not pass
over, who mentions the restitution of all things in merely physical language,
saying that there will at some time be a change into the essence of fire.

'And most plainly is Heracleitus of Ephesus of this opinion, who maintained that
there is one world eternal, and another that perishes, namely, the world in its
orderly arrangement, which he knew to be no other than a certain condition of
the former. But that he knew the world, which consisting of all being is
eternally of a certain quality, to be eternal, he makes evident in speaking
thus: 107

" The world which is the same for all was made neither by any god nor man, but
always was, and is, and shall be, an everliving fire, kindled in measure, and in
measure extinguished."

'His doctrine was that the world was created and perishable, as is shown by what
he adds: "The transmutations of fire are first sea, and of sea one half becomes
earth and the other half lightning." 108 For virtually he says, that by God the
Word, who administers the universe, fire is changed through air into moisture,
the seed as it were of the cosmical arrangement; and this moisture he calls
sea.109 And out of this again heaven and earth arise, and all things therein
contained.

'How the world is again taken back into the primitive essence, and destroyed by
fire, he clearly shows in these words: " The sea is spread abroad, and is
measured to the same proportion as it was before it became earth." In like
manner concerning the other elements the same is to be understood.

'Doctrines similar to this are taught also by the most celebrated of the Stoics
in their discussions concerning a conflagration and re-arrangement of the
world's order, and concerning both the world and man in their proper quality,
and the continuance of our souls. Again, Plato in the seventh Book of the
Republic has called our day here a " darkness visible," 110 because, I suppose,
of the world-rulers of this darkness; and the soul's entrance into the body he
has called "sleep" and "death," in the same manner as Heracleitus.111 And is
this, perhaps, what the Holy Spirit, speaking by David, foretold concerning our
Saviour: " I laid me down and slept: I awaked, for the LORD will sustain me."
112 For he figuratively calls not only the Resurrection of Christ an awaking
from sleep, but also the Lord's coming down into flesh a sleep.

'For instance, the same Saviour gives the exhortation "Watch," as much as to
say, study to live, and try to keep the soul independent of the body. Also in
the tenth Book of the Republic, Plato speaks prophetically of the Lord's day in
these words:

"But when those in the meadow had each been there seven days, they were obliged
on the eighth to arise thence and proceed on their journey, and arrive on the
fourth day." 113

'By the meadow, therefore, we must understand the fixed sphere, as a quiet and
pleasant place, and an abode of the saints; and by the seven days, each motion
of the seven planets, and the whole effective device which speeds them to their
final rest. The journey after passing the planets leads to heaven, that is to
the eighth motion and eighth day; and when he says that the souls are four days
on the journey, he indicates their passage through the four elements.

'Moreover, the Greeks as well as the Hebrews recognize the holiness of the
seventh day, by which the cycle of the whole world of animals and plants is
regulated. Hesiod, for instance, speaks of it thus:

"The first, the fourth, the seventh a holy day."

'And again:

"And on the seventh again the sun shines bright."

'Homer too:

" And soon the seventh returned, a holy day."

'And again:

"The seventh day was holy." 114

'And again:

" It was the seventh day, and all was done."

'And again:

"And on the seventh day the baleful stream Of Acheron we left."

'Moreover, the poet Callimachus writes:

"All things were finished on the seventh dawn."

'And again:

" Good is the seventh day, and seventh birth."

'And:

" Among the prime, and perfect is the seventh."

'Also:

" Seven orbs created in the starlit sky Shine in their courses through revolving
years."

'The Elegies of Solon also make the seventh day very divine. 115

'And again: Is it not like the Scripture, which says, 116 "Let us take away from
us the righteous man, because he is of disservice to us," when Plato, all but
foretelling the dispensation of salvation, speaks thus in the second Book of the
Republic: "In these circumstances the just man will be scourged, fettered, both
eyes torn out; and at last, after suffering every kind of torture, he will be
crucified "? 117 Antisthenes too, the Socratic, paraphrases that prophetic
Scripture, "To whom did ye liken Me? saith the LORD," when he says that "God is
like to none, wherefore no man can come to know Him from an image." 118 The like
thoughts Xenophon the Athenian expresses in these words: " That He who moves all
things, and is Himself at rest, is a great and mighty Being, is manifest: but
what He is in form, is unknown. Neither, indeed, does the sun, which appears to
shine on all, seem to allow himself to be seen: but if any one gazes impudently
upon him, he is deprived of sight." 119 The Sibyl had said before:

"What flesh can e'er behold with mortal eyes The immortal God, who dwells above
the skies? Or who of mortal birth can stand and gaze With eyes unshrinking on
the sun's fierce rays?" 120

'Rightly, therefore, does also Xenophanes of Colophon, when teaching that God is
one and incorporeal, add this:

" One God there is, supreme o'er gods and men, Not like in form to mortals, nor
in mind." 121

'And again:

" But mortals fondly deem that gods are born, Have voice, and form, and raiment
like their own." 122

'And again:

"If then the ox and lion had but hands To paint and model works of art, like
man, The ox would give his god an oxlike shape, The horse a figure like his own
would frame, And each would deify his kindred form." 123

'Again, then, let us listen to Bacchylides, the lyric poet, when he says
concerning the divine nature:

" No taint of foul disease can them assail, No bane annoy, unlike in all to
man." 124

'Hear also Cleanthes, the Stoic, who has written as follows in a certain poem
concerning the Deity:

"Askest thou what good is? List then to me.

Good is well ordered, holy, just, devout, Self-mastering, useful, honourable,
right, Grave, self-dependent, ever full of help, Unmoved by fear, by sorrow, and
by pain, Beneficent, well pleasing, friendly, safe, Of good report,
acknowledged, and esteemed, Free from vainglory, careful, gentle, strong,
Deliberate, blameless, during to the end." 125

'The same author, tacitly accusing the idolatry of the multitude, adds this:

"Poor slave is he who to opinion looks, In hope, forsooth, some honour thence to
gain." 126

'We must not, therefore, any longer think of the divine nature according to the
opinion of the multitude: for, as Amphion says in the Antiope:

" Never can I believe that secretly, Disguised in fashion of some wicked knave,
Zeus visited thy bed in human form." 127

'But Sophocles writes in straightforward language:

" For this man's mother was by Zeus espoused, Not in a shower of gold, nor in
disguise Of feathered swan, as when he pregnant made Fair Leda, but complete in
manly form." 128

'Then farther down he added:

"Swiftly then the adulterer Upon the bridal chamber's threshold stood." 129

'After which he still more openly describes the incontinence of Zeus as
represented in the fable, in the following manner:

"Then he nor feast, nor lustral water touched, But hastened to the couch, with
heart deep stung By lust, and wantoned there that whole night through." 130

'Let these things, however, he left to the follies of the theatres. Heracleitus
expressly says: "Men are found incapable of understanding the reason of what is
right on each occasion, both before they have heard it, and on hearing it for
the first time."

'And Melanippides, the lyric poet, sings thus:

" Hear me, O Father, man's delight, Thou ruler of the undying soul." 131

'Parmenides too, "the Great," as Plato calls him in the Sophist,132 writes in
the following manner concerning the Deity:

" Many the proofs that show The Deity knows neither birth nor death, Sole of His
kind, complete, immovable." 133

'Moreover, Hesiod says that He is

"Sole king and lord of all the immortal gods, With whom no other may in power
contend." 134

'Nay, further, Tragedy also draws us away from the idols, and teaches us to look
up to heaven. For as Hecataeus, who composed the Histories, says in the passage
concerning Abraham and the Egyptians, Sophocles openly cries out upon the stage:

"There is in truth One God, and One alone, Who made the lofty heavens, and
wide-spread earth, The sea's blue wave, and might of warring winds. But we poor
mortals with deceived heart, Seeking some solace for our many woes, Raised
images of gods in stone or bronze, Or figures Wrought of gold or ivory; And when
we crowned their sacrifice, and held High festival, we thought this piety." 135

'Euripides, too, says in his tragedy upon the same stage:

"Seest thou this boundless ether spread on high, With watery arms embracing all
the earth?

Call this thy Zeus, deem this thine only god." 136

'In the drama of Pirithous also the same tragic poet speaks as follows:

" Thee we sing, the Self-begotten, Who all nature dost embrace, And mid yon
bright ether guidest In her everlasting race.

Day and dusky night returning Deck for Thee heaven's wide expanse:

Myriad stars for ever burning Weave round Thee their mystic dance." 137

'For here he speaks of the Creative mind as " the Self-begotten," and all things
that follow are ranked with the cosmos, in which also are the alternations of
light and darkness.

Aeschylus also, the son of Euphorion, speaks very solemnly of God:

" Zeus is the bright pure ether, Zeus the earth, The heaven, the universe, and
all above." 138

'I know that Plato adds his testimony to Heracleitus when he writes: " One, the
only wise, wills not to be described, and wills to be named Zeus." 139 And
again, "law is obedience to the will of one." 140 Also if you should wish to
trace back the meaning of the saying, " He that hath ears to hear, let him
hear," 141 you would find it explained by the Ephesian thus: " Those who hear
without understanding are like deaf persons: the proverb witnesses of them that
though present they are absent." 142

'But you wish perhaps to hear from the Greeks an express statement of one first
cause? Timaeus the Locrian, in his treatise on Nature, will testify for me word
for word: "There is one beginning of all things, which is unoriginate: for if it
had an origin, it would be no longer a beginning, but that from which it
originated would be the beginning." 143 For this opinion, which is true, flowed
from the passage, " Hear, O Israel, the LORD thy God is One, and Him only shalt
thou serve." 144

"Lo! He is clear to all, from error free," 145

as says the Sibyl.

'Also Xenocrates, the Chalcedonian, by naming " the High and Nether" Zeus,146
admits an indication of Father and Son. And the strangest thing of all is, that
the Deity seems to be known to Homer, who represents the gods as subject to
human passions, yet even so does not gain the respect of Epicurus. Homer says at
least:

"Achilles, why with active feet pursue, Thou mortal, me Immortal?

Knowest thou not My Godhead? " 147

'For he has made it clear that the deity cannot be apprehended by a mortal, nor
perceived by feet, or hands, or eyes, or by the body at all. "To whom have ye
likened the Lord? Or to what likeness have ye compared Him?" 148 says the
Scripture. " Is He an image that a workman made, or did a goldsmith melt gold
and spread it over Him? " and the rest.

'The Comic poet Epicharmus also, in his Republic, speaks evidently of the Word
(Reason) in this manner:

" Greatest need hath man of Reason and of number in life's ways; For in them is
our salvation, and by them we mortals live." 149

Then he adds expressly: 150

"Reason is man's guide, to govern and preserve him in the way."

Then:

" Mortal men have use of Reason; Reason also is divine:

Reason is the gift of nature for man's life and sustenance.

Reason man's divine attendant guideth him in all his arts:

Reason is his sole instructor, teaching what is best to do.

Art is not of man's invention, but a gift that comes from God, Man's own reason
is the offspring of that Reason all-divine."

'Moreover, the Spirit had cried by the mouth of Esaias, " What is the multitude
of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt-offerings [of
rams], and in the fat of lambs and blood of bulls [and of he-goats] I have no
delight"; 151 and added soon after, " Wash you, make you clean, put away your
iniquities from your souls." 152 So Menander, the Comic poet, writes what
answers to this in these very words:

"For whosoever brings a sacrifice Of countless bulls or kids, O Pamphilus, Or
aught like these, who works of art designs, Vestments of gold or purple,
life-like forms Graven in emerald or ivory, And hopes thereby God's favour may
be Won He strangely errs, and hath a dullard's mind.

Man's duty is to help his brother man, Nor simple maid nor wedded wife betray.
Nor steal nor murder for foul lucre's sake.

Then covet not, dear friend, a needle's thread, For God is ever near to watch
thy deeds." 153

'" I am a God at hand, and not a God far off. Shall man do aught in secret
places, and I not see him?" 154 So God speaks by Jeremiah. And again Menander,
paraphrasing that Scripture, "Offer the sacrifice of righteousness, and put your
trust in the LORD," 155 writes in this way:

"Then, dearest friend, Ne'er covet even a pin that is not thine; For God in
works of righteousness delights, And thine own life permits thee to enrich,
Ploughing the land and toiling night and day.

Then be thou ever just, and worship God With heart as pure as is thy festal
robe. And if the thunder roll, flee not, my lord, For conscious of no guilt thou
need'st not fear:

Since God is watching o'er thee nigh at hand." 156

"Whilst thou art yet speaking, I will say, Behold, here I am," 157 saith the
Scripture.

'Diphilus again, the Comic poet, discourses of the Judgement somewhat as
follows: 158

"Thinkest thou then, Niceratus, the dead, Who in this life all luxury enjoyed,
Escaped from God lie hidden from His sight?

There is an eye of Justice that sees all, And even in Hades we believe there are
Two paths of destiny, one for the just, The other for the ungodly. If men say
The earth shall hide them both alike for ever, Go rob, and steal, all right and
wrong confound: Be not deceived; in Hades judgement waits, Which God will
execute, the Lord of all, Whose Name so terrible I dare not speak.

He to the sinners length of days accords;

159 But if a mortal thinks, that day by day He can do evil, and escape the gods,
In this his wicked thought, though Justice lag With tardy foot, he shall be
caught at last.

160 All ye who think there is no God, beware!

There is, there is: let then the wicked man Cease to do ill, and so redeem the
time:

Else his just doom he shall at last receive."

'With this the tragedy also agrees in these words:

161 "There comes in after days, there comes a time, When you bright golden ether
shall pour forth Her store of fire, until the well-fed flame All things in
heaven and earth shall fiercely burn."

And again soon after it adds:

"And then when all creation is dissolved, The sea's last wave shall die upon the
shore, The bald earth stript of trees, the burning air No winged thing shall
bear upon its breast; When all is lost then all shall be restored."

The like thoughts we shall find also expressed in the Orphic poems, as follows:

"He hides them all, then from his heart again With anxious care brings all to
gladsome light." 162

And if we live a just and holy life throughout, happy are we here, and happier
after our departure hence, enjoying blessedness not merely for a time, but
enabled to find rest in eternity.

"Sharing with all the gods one hearth, one feast, And free from human sorrows,
toil, and death."

So says the philosophic poetry of Empedocles. There is none so great, even in
the opinion of the Greeks, as to be above the judgement, nor so small as to be
hidden from it. 'The same Orpheus says also this:

" Look to the word divine, keep close to that, And guide thereby the deep
thoughts of thine heart.

Walk wisely in the way; and look to none Save to the immortal Framer of the
world." 163

And again concerning God, calling Him invisible, he says that He was made known
only to one certain person, a Chaldaean by birth, whether he so speaks of
Abraham, or of his son, in the following words:

"Save one, a scion of Chaldaean race: For he was skilled to mark the sun's
bright path, And how in even circle round the earth The starry sphere on its own
axis turns, And winds their chariot guide o'er sea and sky." 164

'Then, as it were paraphrasing the Scripture, " Heaven is my throne, and earth
the footstool of my feet," 165 he adds:

"But God Himself high above heav'n, unmoved, Sits on His golden throne; and
plants His feet On the broad earth; His right hand He extends O'er Ocean's
farthest bound; the eternal hills Tremble in their deep heart, nor can endure
His mighty power. And still above the heavens Alone He sits, and governs all on
earth.

Himself first cause, and means, and end of all. Not otherwise dare I to speak of
Him: In heart and limbs I tremble at the thought, How He from heav'n all things
in order rules," 166

and the lines that follow these. For herein he has plainly set forth all those
prophetic sayings: "Whosoever shall rend the heaven, trembling shall seize him:
and from Thee the. mountains shall melt away, as wax melteth from the presence
of fire." 167 Also what is said by the mouth of Esaias: "Who measured the heaven
with a span, and all the earth with his fist?" 168 'Again, when he says:

"Lord of the heavens, of Hades, land, and sea, Whose thunders shake Olympus'
strong-built dome, Whom daemons shuddering flee, and all the gods Do fear, and
Fates implacable obey.

Eternal Mother and eternal Sire, Whose anger shakes the universal frame, Awakes
the stormy wind, veils all with clouds, And rends with sudden flash the expanse
of heav'n. At Thy command the stars their changeless course In order run. Before
Thy fiery throne Angels unwearied stand; whose only care Is to perform Thy
gracious will for man.

Thine is the Spring new-decked with purple buds, The winter Thine, with chilling
clouds o'ercast, And autumn with its merry vintage Thine." 169

'Then, expressly calling God the Almighty, he adds:

" Come, then, thou deathless and Immortal Power, Whose name none but Immortals
can express.

Mightiest of Gods, whose will is strong as Fate, Dreadful art Thou, resistless
in Thy might, Deathless, and with etherial glory crowned." 170

So then by the word μητροπάτωρ he not only indicated the creation out of
nothing, but gave occasion perhaps to those who introduce the doctrine of
emissions to imagine also a consort of God. And he paraphrases the prophetic
Scriptures, both that which was spoken by Hosea (Amos): " Lo! I am he that
formeth the thunder and createth the wind, whose hands founded the host of
heaven":171 and that which was spoken by Moses: " See, see, that it is I, and
there is no other god but me. I will kill, and I will make to live: I will
wound, and I will heal: and there is none that shall deliver out of my hand."
172

" 'Tis He that out of good for mortals brings Evil and cruel war," 173

according to Orpheus.

'Such also is the saying of Archilochus of Pares:

"Zeus, Father Zeus, the realm of heav'n is thine, But knavish and unholy deeds
of men Scape not thine eye." 174

'Let Thracian Orpheus again sing for us thus:

"His right hand He extends O'er Ocean's farthest bound; and plants His feet On
the broad earth." 175

These thoughts are manifestly taken from that passage, "The Lord shall shake
inhabited cities, and take the whole world in His hand, as a nest";176 "The LORD
who made the earth by His power," as Jeremiah says, " and established the world
by His wisdom." 177

'Moreover in addition to this Phocylides, calling the angels daemons, shows in
the following words that some of them are good and some bad, as we also have
been taught that some are apostate:

" But daemons different in kind o'er men At various times preside; some to
protect Mankind from coming evils." 178

'Well therefore does Philemon also, the Comic poet, exterminate idolatry by
these words:

" Fortune is no divinity for us, No goddess; only that which of itself Happens
by chance to each is fortune called." 179

'Sophocles too, the Tragedian, says:

"Not even the gods have all things at their will, Save Zeus, the final and first
cause of all." 180

'Orpheus also says:

" One power, one god, one vast and flaming heav'n, One universal frame, wherein
revolve All things which here we see, fire, water, earth," 181

and the lines that follow.

'Pindar too, the Lyric poet, breaks out as it were in transport, saying
expressly:

" What then is God? The All." 182

'And again:

" God, who for mortals all things makes, (Gives also grace to song)." 183

'Also when he says:

"Why hope in wisdom to excel Thy brother man? It is not well For mortals here on
earth With minds of human birth The counsels of the gods to scan." 184

He has drawn his thought from the passage: " Who hath known the mind of the
LORD? Or who hath been His counsellor?" 185 'Moreover Hesiod agrees with what
has been said above in writing thus:

"Of men on earth no prophet so inspired Can know the mind of aegis-bearing
Zeus." 186

With good reason, therefore, does the Athenian Solon himself follow Hesiod, when
he writes:

"The Immortals' mind is all unknown to men." 187

'Again, as Moses had foretold that the woman because of the transgression should
bring forth children to pain and sorrow, a certain poet of no little distinction
writes:

" Never by day from labour and distress By night from groaning shall they cease;
so hard The cares and troubles which the gods shall give." 188

'Moreover Homer shows that God is just, when he says:

"The Eternal Father hung His golden scales aloft." 189

And Menander, the Comic poet, interprets God's, goodness, when he says:

" By every man from moment of his birth A friendly genius stands, life's mystic
guide. No evil daemon he (forbid the thought!), With power malign to mar thy
happy lot." 190

And then he adds:

" Ἅπαντα δ' ἀγαθὸν εἶναι τὸν Θεόν,"

meaning either "that every god is good," or, what is the truer meaning, " that
in all things God is good."

'Again, Aeschylus, the Tragic poet, in setting forth the power of God does not
hesitate to call Him the Most High in the following passage:

"Set God apart from mortals in thy thought, Nor deem that, like thyself, He too
is flesh.

Thou know'st. Him not: as fire He now appears. A mighty force, now water, now
dark storm.

Again in likeness of the beasts He comes, Of wind, or lightning, thunder, cloud,
or rain. The seas, and sea-girt rocks, the springing wells, The gathering
floods, obey His sovereign will. The pillars of the earth, the vast abyss Of
Ocean, and the mountain-tops do shake, If the dread Master's eye but look on
them: So glorious is the power of God Most High." 191

Does it not seem to you that he is paraphrasing that passage: " At the presence
of the LORD the earth trembles." 192

'Besides this, the chief prophet Apollo is compelled, in testimony to the glory
of God, to say of Athena, when the Medes were marching against Greece, that she
entreated and supplicated Zeus for Attica. And the oracle is as follows:

"Pallas with many words and counsel wise May pray, but ne'er appease Olympian
Zeus. For he to the consuming fire will give The shrines of many gods, who now
perchance Stand bathed in chilling sweat, and shake with fear," 193

and so forth.

[CLEMENT] 'Thearidas, in his book On Nature, writes, "The first cause of things
that exist, the real and true cause, is one. For that is in the beginning one
and alone." 194

"There is none other save the mighty King," 195

as Orpheus says. And with him the Comic poet Diphilus agrees in a very
sententious manner, when he says:

"Him never cease to honour and adore, Father of all, sole source of every good."
196

'With good reason, therefore, Plato trains "the noblest natures to attain that
learning which in the former part of our discussion we declared to be the
highest, both to discern the good and to make the great ascent." 197 "This then,
as it seems, would be no mere turning of an oyster-shell, but the conversion of
a soul passing from a kind 'of darkness visible' to the true upward path of
being, which we shall call true philosophy";198 and those who have partaken
thereof he judges to belong to the golden race, when he says, "Ye are doubtless
all brethren";199 but those who are of the golden race can judge most
accurately, and in every way. . . . 200

'Instinctively, therefore, and without teaching, all things derive from all a
conception of the Father and Maker of all, things inanimate by suffering with
the animal creation, and of living beings those which are already immortal by
working in the light of day, and of those still mortal some (perceive Him) in
fear while carried by their mother in the womb, but others by independent
reasoning. And of mankind both Greeks and Barbarians all have this conception;
and nowhere is there any race either of husbandmen or of shepherds, nay not even
of the dwellers in cities, who can live without being prepossessed by the belief
in that higher power. Wherefore every nation of the east, and every one that
touches the western shores, the northern also, and all upon the south, have one
and the same presentiment of Him who established the government of the world,
inasmuch as the most universal of His operations have pervaded all things alike.

'Much more did the inquisitive philosophers among the Greeks, by an impulse from
the Barbarian philosophy, ascribe the pre-eminence to the One invisible most
mighty and most skilful chief cause of all things most beautiful, without
understanding the consequences of this, unless they were instructed by us, nay,
not even understanding how God Himself is naturally to be conceived, but only,
as we have said many times already, in a true but indirect way.' So far Clement.
But since the Philosophy of Plato was shown by us at some length to be in very
many things in agreement with the doctrines of the Hebrews (for which we admire
the man's wisdom and his candour also in regard to the truth), it is time to
consider what the points are in which, as we say, we are no longer so favourably
disposed towards him, but prefer that which is accounted the Barbarian
philosophy to his.

CHAPTER XIV THE oracles of the Hebrews containing prophecies and responses of a
divine power beyond that of man, and claiming God as their author, and
confirming their promise by the prediction of things to come, and by the results
corresponding to the prophecies, are said to be free from all erroneous thought.
For instance, 'the words of God are declared to be pure words, and silver tried
in the fire, tested by earth, purified seven times.' 201 But not such are the
words of Plato, nor yet of any other of the wise among men, who with the eyes of
mortal thought and with feeble guesses and comparisons, as in a dream, and not
awake, attained to a notion of the nature of all things, but superadded to the
truth of nature a large admixture of falsehood, so that one can find in them no
learning free from error.

Now, for example, if you would suppress a little of this self-admiration, and
contemplate the true light itself by the faculty of reason, you would perceive
that even that wonderful philosopher, who alone of all the Greeks touched the
threshold of truth, dishonours the name of the gods by applying it to perishable
matter and carved images fashioned by mechanic hands into a human shape; and
after the lofty height of his magniloquence, wherein he contended that he knew
the Father and Maker of this universe, is thrust down from his place on high
among the supramundane circles, and sinks with the common people of Athens into
the lowest depth of their God-detested idolatry; so that he does not shrink from
saying that Socrates had gone down to the Peiraeus to pray to the goddess, and
to see his fellow citizens then for the first time celebrating their barbarous
festival; acknowledging also that he had enjoined the offering of a cock to
Aesculapius, and regarded as a god the ancestral prophet of the Greeks, the
daemon who sits enshrined at Delphi.

Wherefore also the blame of the superstitious delusion of the unphilosophical
multitude might with good reason be ascribed to him. Take up again for instance
his discourse a little farther back, and after his incorporeal and imperishable
'ideas,' and after a first god and a second cause, and after intelligent and
immortal essences, observe what kind of laws the all-wise philosopher would
enact concerning the belief of the common people, speaking thus: 202

[PLATO] 'To tell of the other divinities and to learn their origin is beyond us;
but we must give credence to those who have spoken in former times, who being,
as they said, the offspring of gods, had, I suppose, a clear knowledge of their
own ancestors. It is impossible therefore to disbelieve children of the gods,
even though they speak without certain or probable proofs: but as they assert
that they are reporting family histories, we must in obedience to the law
believe them.

'On their authority then let the origin of these gods be as follows and so
stated. The children of Earth and Heaven were Oceanus and Tethys; and their
children Phorcys and Kronos and Rhea, and all the others with them: and of
Kronos and Rhea came Zeus and Hera, and all whom we know as their reputed
brethren, and still others who were their offspring.' For these reasons then we
must give up the great philosopher, as having misrepresented the fabulous
theogonies of the poets, not like a philosopher, nor in a self-consistent
manner. For you had the opportunity of hearing himself speak in the Republic as
follows: 203

'In the greater fables, said I, we shall also discern the less: for there must
be the same type, and the same tendency in both the greater and the less: do you
not think so?

'Yes, I do, said he: but I do not even understand which you call the greater.

'Those, said I, which Hesiod and Homer and the other poets told us: for they, I
suppose, were the composers of fictitious tales, which they told and still tell
to mankind'; meaning the stories which we have quoted a little above.

Again there was that passage of his in which he said, 204 'We shall begin then,
said I, with the following verse, and strike out it and all that are like it:

" Fain would I serve some master in the field," 205

and the rest; also the passage wherein he adds: 206 'Once more then we shall
entreat Homer and the other poets not to represent Achilles, the son of a
goddess,

" Now turning on his side, and now again Upon his back," 207

and the rest that follows. To this he adds: 208

'Or to say that Zeus, while all the other gods and men were asleep, and he alone
awake, lightly forgot all the plans he had devised, through the eagerness of
desire, and was so smitten at sight of Hera that he would not even wait to go
into his chamber, but wished to lie with her there on the ground like a lark,
and said that he was possessed by a stronger passion than even when they first
used to meet "without the knowledge of their dear parents." 209 Nor shall we
admit the tale of Ares and Aphrodite being bound by Hephaestus for acts of the
same kind!' And then after having told these tales in such a manner, what does
he mean in the saying which comes after, by calling the poets 'children of the
gods,' 210 and asserting that 'to disbelieve them is impossible,' although he
protested that they had invented the fictitious stories about the gods 'without
necessary or probable proofs'? And what is the meaning of this unreasonable
belief, put forward in fear of punishment from the laws? And how can Uranus and
Ge be first of the gods, then their offspring Oceanus and Tethys, and after all
these Kronos, and Rhea, and Zeus, and Hera, and all their sons and brothers and
descendants mentioned in fables by Homer and Hesiod, when he was refuting these
very stories by speaking thus: 211 'The fault, said I, which we ought to reprove
before all and above all, especially if a man lies in unseemly fashion.

'What fault is that?

'When a man in his discourse concerning gods and heroes misrepresents their
nature, just as when an artist paints what is not at all like the things which
he may wish to imitate.' And again: 212

'In the first place, said I, it was no seemly lie that was told by the author of
that greatest lie about the greatest gods, how Uranus wrought what Hesiod says
he did, 213 and how Kronos took revenge upon him,' and what follows this. But
how could the same poets who are here called false and untruthful be spoken of
on the other hand as offspring of the gods? However, for these reasons we must
abandon this philosopher, as having through fear of death played false with the
Athenian democracy: but must honour Moses, and the Hebrew oracles, as everywhere
shining out from the one true religion that is free from error. Look then at
another point.

CHAPTER XV THE Hebrews say that the intermediate nature of rational beings is
generated and not without beginning. And in their account they distinguish this
nature into intelligent beings whom they call spirits, and powers, and God's
ministering angels and archangels: and from their fall and transgression they
derive the race of daemons, and the whole species of the adverse and wicked
agency. For which reason they forbid us to regard as gods those who are not
possessed of virtue and goodness as inseparable from their nature, but have
received their very existence not from themselves but from the Cause of all, and
also acquire their well-being, and their virtue, and their immortality itself
not in the same manner as either He who is God over all, or He by whom all
things were made. But Plato although, like the Hebrews, he supposes the rational
natures to be incorporeal and intelligible essences, yet falls away from
consistency, by first asserting that they, as well as every soul, are
unoriginated, and then saying that they were formed out of an effluence of the
First Cause. For he does not mean to admit that they have arisen out of nothing.

Wherefore also he supposes that there is a numerous race of gods, assuming in
his argument certain effluences and emissions of the First and Second Causes:
and that they are in nature good and in no way capable of departing from their
proper virtue, whence also he supposes them to be gods. But the tribe of daemons
he believes to be different from these, as being capable of baseness and
wickedness, and change for the worse: and some of these are called, and are,
good and some evil. But while he thus makes these suppositions contrary to the
Hebrew doctrines, he does not explain from what source it may reasonably be said
that the daemons arose. For that they arose from the matter of the corporeal
elements no one in his senses would assert: for this matter is irrational, but
rational things can never be born of an irrational, and the daemons are
rational. If, however, these come from an effluence of the greater gods, how
then are they not themselves gods as much as those who have begotten them? And
how if the source is good are the things which flow from it not like it? And
whence in these latter did a shoot of wickedness grow up, if the root comes
originally from good and passes through good? Of how can bitter come from the
sweet?

If then the race of the wicked daemons is worse than any darkness and any
bitterness, how can it be said to come from an effluence of the nature of the
better powers? If it was from this, it would not have turned aside from its
proper lot: and if it has been changed, then it was not at first impassible in
its nature: and if it was not such, how then could they be gods who are capable
of participating in an evil destiny?

If, however, they were neither from the effluence of the better powers, nor yet
from the matter of the corporeal elements, we must now either say that they were
unoriginated, and must set over against God in addition to the unoriginated
matter of the corporeal elements a third group of unoriginated rational beings,
thus no longer representing God as being the Maker of all, and Framer of the
Universe, or, if we admit this, we must also admit that He made the
non-existent, according to the statements of the Hebrews, For what do these
teach on this subject? They say that the intermediate nature of rational beings
arose neither from the matter of the corporeal elements, nor from an effluence
of the essence which is unbegotten and ever remains in the same mode and
relations; but that having no previous existence it has come into being by the
effective power of the Cause of all. And thus they are no gods, nor have been
properly dignified with the title, because they are not equalized in nature with
their Maker, nor have goodness inseparably attached to them, like God, but
sometimes would even admit the contrary to that which is good through disregard
of that study of the higher power, which everyone has wrought out for himself,
who is by nature master of his own movement and purpose. So much then for this
subject; and now let us pass to another.

CHAPTER, XVI

PLATO, although he agreed with the Hebrews in supposing the soul immortal, and
saying that it was like unto God, no longer follows them when he sometimes says
that its essence is composite, as if involving a certain part of the indivisible
and immutable Cause, and a part of the divisible nature belonging to bodies.

He speaks, for instance, in the Timaeus in these very words: 214

[PLATO] 'But to the soul, as a mistress to rule over a subject, He gave priority
and precedence over the body both in origin and excellence, and made her out of
the following constituents and in the following manner. Of the indivisible and
ever immutable essence, and of the other divisible essence belonging to bodies,
He compounded a third intermediate species of essence out of both the nature of
'the same' and the nature of 'the other,' and in this way set it midway between
the indivisible part and the divisible part which belongs to bodies. And he took
the three, as they now were, and mingled them all together into one "idea," and
as the nature of "the other" was hard to combine, he fitted it by force into
"the same."'

Hence also he has naturally connected the passible part with the rational part
of the essence. But though at one time he has given this decision concerning the
essence of soul, at another he involves it in a different and worse absurdity,
by declaring that the divine and heavenly essence, which is incorporeal and
rational and like unto God, and which by virtue of its great excellence soars
above the celestial circles, comes down from above out of the supramundane
regions upon asses, and wolves, and ants, and bees, and calls upon us to believe
this account without any proof.

He speaks accordingly in the discourse Concerning the Soul as follows: 215

'So they continue to wander until, by the craving of that corporeal nature which
still accompanies them, they are again imprisoned in a body: and probably they
are imprisoned in animals of such moral nature as the habits which they may
themselves happen to have followed in life.

'What kind of natures do you mean, Socrates?

'For example, those who have practised gluttony, and wantonness, and
drunkenness, and have taken no good heed, probably sink into the class of asses
and other beasts of that kind: do you not think so?

'Yes, what you say is quite probable.

'And those who have preferred a course of injustice and tyranny and plunder go
into the classes of wolves, and hawks, and kites: or whither else should we say
that such souls go?

'Certainly into such as these, said Cebes.

'Well then, said he, as to the other cases it is evident what way each soul will
go, according to the affinities of their habits.

'Quite evident, said he, for how could it be otherwise?

'Well then, said he, are not the happiest among them and those who pass into the
best place the men who have practised the civil and political virtue which is
called temperance and justice, produced by habit and attention, without the aid
of philosophy and intellect?

'How now are these the happiest?

'Because it is probable that these pass again into some social and gentle race,
of bees perhaps or wasps or ants, or even back again into the human race
itself.' In the Phaedrus also hear how he discourses: 216

'For to the same state from which each soul has come she does not attain within
ten thousand years; for before this time none grows wings except the soul of the
guileless philosopher, or of the philosophic lover. These in the third period of
a thousand years, if they have chosen this life thrice successively, so get
their wings and fly away in the three-thousandth year. But the others receive
judgement when they have finished their first life: and after judgement some go
to the houses of correction beneath the earth and suffer punishment, and others,
lifted by the judgement to some place in heaven, live in a manner worthy of the
life which they lived in human form. But in the thousandth year both good and
evil souls come to an allotment and choice of their second life, and choose
whichever each may wish. And there both a human soul may pass into the life of a
beast, and from a beast he who was once a man may pass back into a man again.'
This is what he says in the Phaedrus; but now listen to him writing in the
Republic in the following style: 217

'For he said that he saw the soul which was once that of Orpheus choosing the
life of a swan, out of hatred of the female sex, because he had been killed by
them, and would not be conceived and born of woman. Then he saw the soul of
Thamyras choose the life of a nightingale: he saw also a swan changing and
making choice of a man's life, and other musical animals in like manner, as was
natural. And the soul that gained the twentieth lot chose a lion's life; and it
was the soul of Ajax, son of Telamon, which shrank from becoming a man because
he remembered the judgement concerning the arms.

'And the soul of Agamemnon which came next, and also hated the human race
because of his sufferings, changed for the life of an eagle. The soul of
Atalanta, whose lot was about the middle, having observed the great honours of
an athlete, could not pass by without choosing that life. Next after her he saw
the soul of Epeius, the son of Panopeus, passing into the nature of a female
artist. Far off among the hindmost he saw the soul of Thersites, the buffoon,
entering into an ape.

'The soul of Odysseus, having by chance obtained the last lot of all, came
forward to choose; and having been cured of ambition by remembrance of his
former troubles, went about for a long time seeking for the life of a private
person free from business, and with difficulty found one lying somewhere
neglected by all the rest, and when he saw it he said that he would have done
the same even if he had gained the first lot, and so chose it gladly. Of the
other animals also some in like manner passed into men and into one another, the
unjust changing into the savage, and the just into the gentle, and formed all
kinds of mixtures.' In these discourses concerning the soul it is evident that
Plato is following the Egyptian doctrines: for his statement is not that of the
Hebrews, since it is not in accordance with truth. There is, however, no
occasion to refute this, because he did not himself attempt the problem in the
way of demonstration. But thus much one may reasonably remark, that it was not
consistent for the same person to say that at the moment of decease the souls of
the ungodly departing hence suffer in Hades the just penalties of their deeds,
and there undergo eternal punishment, and then to assert that they choose again
their modes of life here according to their own will. For he says that they
become imprisoned in a body through desire of what is bodily; and that some of
them who have been reared in wantonness and gluttony become asses, and enter
into the bodies of other beasts, choosing them at will and not according to just
desert; and the unjust and rapacious become wolves, and kites, having entered
into this nature of their own accord. Then he says that the soul of Orpheus
wished to be a swan; and the soul of Thamyras chose the life of a nightingale,
and Thersites that of an ape. But where then would be that judgement after their
departure hence, which he describes in the dialogue On the Soul, saying: 218

'When the deceased have arrived at the place to which each is brought by his
daemon, . . . then those who may be thought to have lived an ordinary life
proceed to Acheron, and having embarked in such vessels as there are for them,
they arrive in these at the lake; and there they dwell, and are purged and
punished for their crimes, and so absolved from any offence which each has
committed: and for their good deeds they receive rewards each according to his
desert. But any who may be thought to be incurable because of the greatness of
their sins, having perpetrated either many great acts of sacrilege or many
wicked and lawless murders, or any other crimes of this kind, these, I say, are
cast by their suitable destiny into Tartarus, whence they never come out.

Thus he described the fate of the ungodly; and now hear how he speaks of the
pious: 219

'And of this class those who have thoroughly purified themselves by philosophy
live for the time to come altogether free from troubles, and attain to abodes
still more beautiful than the former, to describe which is neither easy, nor is
the time at present sufficient.' In the Gorgias also observe what he says: 220

'The man who has lived a just and holy life departs after death to the Islands
of the Blessed, and there dwells in perfect happiness beyond the reach of ills.
But he who has lived an unjust and godless life goes to the prison-house of
vengeance and punishment, which they call Tartarus, . . . and whoever may have
committed the worst misdeeds, and because of such crimes have become incurable,
of these the examples are made. And, being incurable, they receive no more
benefit themselves; but others receive benefit, who see them for their great
sins enduring the most painful and terrible sufferings for all time, hung up
simply as examples there in the prison-house in Hades, a spectacle and warning
to the wicked who are continually arriving.' 221

How can this agree with the statements concerning an exchange of bodies, which
the soul, they say, seeks after and chooses? For how can the same soul after its
departure hence endure tortures, and prisons, and all this punishment for ever,
and on the other hand as one released and free from bonds choose whatever modes
of life it will? And if it were likely to choose again the life of pleasure,
where then is the prison-house of vengeance and punishment? At leisure one might
attack the argument at a thousand other points, on the thought of which there is
no time to enlarge. So the first error in Plato's opinion on this subject has
been thus detected; but the second slip in the exposition of his doctrine,
wherein he laid down that one part of the soul is divine and rational and
another part of it irrational and passible, has been condemned even by his own
friends, as one may learn from statements of the following kind: 222

CHAPTER XVII

[SEVERUS] 'WITH regard to the soul as described by Plato, which he says was
composed by God of an impassible and a passible essence, as some intermediate
colour from white and black, this is what we have to say, that when in time a
separation of them takes place the soul must necessarily disappear, like the
composition of the intermediate colour, when each of its constituents is
naturally separated in time into its proper colour. But if this is so we shall
show the soul to be perishable and not immortal.

'For if this is admitted, that nothing in nature is without its opposite, and
that all things in the world have been arranged by God out of the nature of
these opposites, He having impressed upon them a friendship and communion, as of
dry with moist, and hot with cold, heavy with light, white with black, sweet
with bitter, hard with soft, and on all qualities of this kind one other
combination including them all, and then upon the impassible essence a
combination with the passible, and if the combined and mingled elements
naturally in time undergo a separation from each other, and if it is to be
assumed that the soul has been produced out of an impassible and a passible
essence, then, in the same way as the intermediate colour, so also this must
naturally disappear in time, when the opposite elements in its composition press
towards their proper nature.

'For do we not see that what is naturally heavy, even though it be lifted up by
us, or by any natural lightness being added to it from without, presses down as
before in its own natural direction? How in like manner also that which is by
nature light, if borne downward by similar external causes, presses upward
itself as before? For things which have been combined into one out of two mutual
opposites cannot possibly remain always in the same state, unless there is
always in them some third kind of natural substance.

'But soul in fact is not any third thing compounded of two mutual opposites, but
simple and in its sameness of nature impassible and incorporeal: whence Plato
and his School said that it was immortal.

'Since, however, it is a doctrine common to all that man is made of soul and
body, and the motions which take place within us apart from the body, whether
voluntary or involuntary, are said to be affections of the soul, most of the
philosophers, guessing hereby that its substance is passible, say that it is
mortal and of a corporeal nature, not incorporeal. But Plato was driven to
interweave the passible element with its naturally impassible essence. That
neither, however, is the case we shall endeavour to demonstrate by arguing from
what Plato and the others have severally said, and explaining the powers which
operate within us.' Let this suffice for my quotation from Severus the Platonist
On the Soul. But in addition to what has been already said consider also the
following point in regard to the origin of heaven and the luminaries therein.

CHAPTER XVIII

PLATO agrees with the Hebrews in the account which he gives of the heaven and
its phenomena, according to which it was settled that they have had a beginning,
as having been made by the Author of the universe, and that they partake of the
corporeal and perishable substance; but he no longer agrees with the Hebrews
when he enacts a law that men should worship them and believe them to be gods,
speaking thus in the Epinomis:223

[PS.-PLATO] 'Whom then, O Megillus and Cleinias, do I ever with reverence speak
of as god? Heaven, I suppose, which it is most right for us, like all others,
daemons as well as gods, to honour, and to pray especially to it: and that it
has also been the author of all other blessings to us all men would agree.' Then
lower down in the same work he adds this: 224

'But of the visible gods, who are the greatest and most honourable, and have the
keenest sight in all directions, the first we must declare to be the nature of
the stars, and all things that we perceive to have been created with them; and
next to these and under them the daemons in order, and, as occupying a third and
intermediate abode, an aerial race acting as our interpreters, whom we ought to
honour much with prayers for the sake of their favourable intervention.'

Having hereby declared that the aforesaid beings are gods, he gives in the
Timaeus a physical explanation of their original constitution, in the following
description: 225

[PLATO] '(Having arranged that) as fire is to air, so is air to water, and as
air to water, so is water to earth, of these He combined and constituted a
visible and tangible heaven. And for these reasons and out of these elements,
such as I have described, being four in number, the body of the world was formed
in harmony by due proportion, and from them gained a friendliness such that
after having coalesced in itself it became indissoluble by any other except the
author of its combination.' Then he adds: 226

'And in the centre of it He set a soul, which He not only spread throughout, but
also wrapped it round the body on the outside, and so formed one single and
solitary heaven as a circle revolving in a circle.' And again lower down he says
in addition: 227

'In accordance then with reason and this purpose of God for the birth of time,
that time might begin, sun, and moon, and five other luminaries, which are
surnamed planets, have been created in order to define and preserve the
reckonings of time: and, after having made their several bodies, God set them in
the orbits traversed by the revolution of "the other." ' Also he adds: 228 'And
the bodies bound together by animated bonds became living beings, and learned
the law appointed for them.' In the tenth Book also of the Laws he gives a
general explanation concerning every kind of soul, speaking as follows: 229

'All things, however, that partake of soul are subject to change, as possessing
in themselves the cause of change. And when they have changed they move on in
the order and law of their destiny: if they have made only small change in their
moral characters, they make small changes of place on the surface of the ground;
but if they have fallen away more frequently and culpably, they pass into the
abyss.' So then if 'all things which partake of soul are liable to change, as
possessing the cause of change in themselves,' and if heaven, and sun, and moon
are, according to Plato himself, partakers of soul, then these also must change,
'as possessing the cause of change in themselves,' according to his statement.
How then does he say on the other hand that they are eternal and therefore gods,
although existing in a mortal body, and liable to be dissolved? At least he says
again in the Timaeus: 230

'When therefore all gods, both those which are visible in their revolutions and
those which appear only as far as they choose, had been created, the author of
this universe spake to them as follows:

'Ye gods and sons of gods, the works whereof I am the creator and father, are
indissoluble save by My will. Therefore though all that is bound may be
dissolved, yet only an evil being would wish to dissolve that which is well
composed and in right condition. Wherefore also since ye have come into
existence, though ye are not altogether immortal nor indissoluble, nevertheless
ye shall not be dissolved nor incur the fate of death, since in My will ye have
found a still stronger and more valid bond than those by which ye were bound
together at the time of your creation.' So speaks Plato. With good reason
therefore do Moses and the Hebrew oracles forbid to worship these and to regard
them as gods; but leading us upward to the God who is King of all, the very
creator of sun and moon and stars and the whole heaven and world, who by a
divine word combined and fitted all things together, he bids us by his law to
believe in Him alone as God, and to ascribe the honour of worship to Him only,
saying, 'Lest, when thou see the sun and moon and all the stars and all the host
of heaven, thou be deceived and worship them.' 231 This command is interpreted
and explained at large by Philo, the man so learned in the affairs of the
Hebrews, speaking thus word for word: 232

[PHILO] 'Some supposed that sun and moon and the other luminaries are gods of
absolute power, to whom they attributed the causes of all things that are made.
But Moses thought that the world was both created, and was the greatest of all
States, having rulers and subjects, the rulers being all in heaven, such as are
planets and fixed stars, and the subjects being the natures beneath the moon, in
the air, and near the earth.

'But the so-called rulers, he thought, were not independent, but deputies of one
universal Father, by imitating whose superintendence they succeed in ruling
every thing in creation in accordance with justice and law. But they who did not
discern Him who sits as charioteer ascribed the causes of all things which are
done in the world to those who are yoked under Him, as if they worked
independently. But the most sacred Lawgiver changes their ignorance into
knowledge, when He speaks thus: ''Lest, when thou beholdest the sun and the moon
and the stars and all the host of heaven, thou be deceived and worship them."
233

'With well-directed aim and nobly did he call the acceptance of the
above-mentioned as gods a deception. For they saw that the seasons of the year,
in which the generations of animals and plants and fruits are brought to
completion in definite periods, of time are settled by the advance and retreat
of the Sun; they saw also that the Moon as handmaid and successor of the Sun had
taken up by night the care and superintendence of the same as the Sun by day,
and that the other luminaries in accordance with their sympathy towards things
terrestrial were working and doing countless services for the permanence of the
whole; and so they fell into an endless delusion in supposing that these were
the only gods.

'Whereas if they had been attentive to walk by the unerring path they would have
learned at once that in the same way as sense is the servant of mind, so also
were all who can be perceived by sense made ministers of Him whom mind alone can
perceive.' Also he further says: 234

'So having transcended by reason all visible being, let us go on to the dignity
of Him who is without bodily form and invisible, and can be apprehended by
thought alone, who is not only the God of the worlds both of thought and sense,
but also the Creator of all things. But if any one assign the worship of the
Eternal Maker to another younger and begotten being, let him be written down as
a madman and guilty of the greatest impiety.'

These are the truly genuine and divine teachings of the Hebrew religion which we
have preferred to their vain philosophy. Why need I enlarge further, and bring
to light the other errors of Plato, when it is easy from what has been already
said to guess also what points I have now passed over in silence? It was not,
however, for the sake of accusing him that I was led to speak of these things,
since for my part I very greatly admire the man, and esteem him as a friend
above all the Greeks, and honour him as one whose sentiments are dear and
congenial to myself, although not the same throughout; but I wished to show in
what his intelligence falls short in comparison with Moses and the Hebrew
prophets. And yet to one prepared to find fault it were easy to pass censure on
countless points, such as his solemn and sapient regulations with regard to
women in the Republic, or such as his fine phrases about unnatural love in the
Phaedrus. If, however, you desire to listen to these subjects also, take and
read his utterances which follow: 235

CHAPTER XIX

[PLATO] 'PERHAPS now, said I, many points connected with our present subject
will appear more than usually ridiculous, if they are to be carried out as
described.

'Certainly, said he.

'What then, said I, is the most ridiculous thing that you see in them? Is it
not, of course, that the women are to practise gymnastics naked in the palaestra
with the men, and not only the young women but even the elder also; just as the
old men in the gymnasia, when though wrinkled and not pleasing in appearance,
they nevertheless love to practise gymnastics.' And next he adds: 236

'But the man who laughs at the women taking exercise naked for the best of
purposes, as though forsooth he were "reaping fruit of wisdom" 237 in his
laughter, seems not even to know at what he is laughing.' He says also in the
seventh Book of the Laws: 238

'It will therefore evidently be necessary for the boys and girls to learn
dancing and gymnastics; and there will be dancing-masters for the boys and
mistresses for the girls, that they may go through the exercise with the greater
advantage.' He also writes therein as follows: 239

'Again, I suppose, our virgin Queen, who delighted in the practice of the dance,
did not think fit to play with empty hands, but to be arrayed in full armour and
so perform the dance: an example which most surely it would become both youths
and maidens alike to imitate.' He also enacts a law that women should even go to
war, in the following words: 240

'And in all these schools teachers of the several subjects, being resident
foreigners, should be induced by payments to give fill instructions relating to
war to those who come as pupils, and all relating to music, not merely to one
who may come at his father's wish, while another, without such wish, neglects
his education; but, as the saying is, every man and boy, as far as possible,
must receive compulsory education, as belonging more to the State than to their
parents. All the same rules my law would enjoin for women as much as for men,
that the females also should practise the same exercises. And neither as to
horsemanship nor gymnastics should I have any fear in making this statement,
that, though becoming to men, it would not be becoming to women.' And again a
little lower down he says: 241

'Let us consider as gymnastics all bodily exercises relating to war, in archery,
and in throwing all kinds of missiles, and the use of the target, and all
fighting in heavy armour, and tactical evolutions, and all kinds of marching,
camps and encamping, and all instructions pertaining to horsemanship. For there
must be public teachers of all these arts, earning pay from the State, and their
pupils, all the boys and men in the city and girls and women, must be skilled in
all these matters; having while still girls practised every kind of dancing and
fighting in heavy armour, and as women having applied themselves to evolutions,
and tactics, and grounding and taking up arms.' But neither to these rules would
the Hebrew doctrine assent, but would assert the very opposite, ascribing
success in war not even to the strength of men, much less to that of women, but
attributing all to God and to His aid in battle. And so it says: 'Except the
Lord build the house, their labour is but lost that build it. Except the Lord
keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.' 242 But observe how the
wonderful philosopher also brings the women into the gymnastic contests,
speaking thus: 243

'But as to women, let girls who are still young contend naked in the foot-race,
and double course, and horse-race, and long race on the race-course itself: but
those of thirteen years are to go on until their union in marriage, but not
beyond twenty years nor less than eighteen; and they must come down to contend
in these races clothed in befitting dress.

'So let these be our rules of racing for both men and women. But as to trials of
strength, instead of wrestling and all such contests which now are severe, let
there be fighting in armour, both single combats, and two against two.' And
next, after saying, 244 'So also we must call to our aid those who excel in
fighting in armour, and bid them help us to frame the like laws,' he adds these
words: 245 'Let also the same laws be in force in regard to the females until
the time of marriage.'

Then after having appended immediately to these laws those concerning the
training of peltasts and the pancratium, and archery, and throwing stones from
the hand and with a sling, and concerning the horserace, here again he adds
these words concerning the females:

'But it is not right to force females by laws and ordinances to participate in
these contests; if, however, just from their former training passing into a
habit their natural, constitution without inconvenience allows children or
maidens to take part, we must permit it and not blame them.' 246 So far the laws
of Plato concerning women. But the following extraordinary law is also his: 247

'If any have left female children, let the judge go back through brothers and
brothers' sons, first on the male side, and afterwards on the female, in one and
the same family: and let him judge by examination the fitness or unfitness of
the time for marriage, inspecting the males naked, and the females naked as far
as the navel.' Moreover at the festivals he says that they must dance naked,
speaking in the sixth Book of the Laws as follows: 248

'For this so serious purpose therefore they ought to perform their sports and
dance together youths and maidens, both seeing and being seen within bounds of
reason and of a certain age implying suitable causes, both sexes being naked so
far as sober modesty in each permits.' In addition to all this hear also the
following passages in the Republic on the law that the women should be in
common: 249 'This law, said I, and the others which went before have, I suppose,
the following law as their consequence.

'What is that?

'These women must all be common to all these men, and none live with any man as
his own: and the children too must be common, and neither any parent know his
own offspring, nor any child his father.' Next he adds: 250

'It is probable, said he. You therefore, said I, as their lawgiver will select
the women as well as the men, and, as far as possible assign those who are of
like nature: and they, as having houses and meals in common, and none possessing
anything of this kind privately, will of course be together, and being mixed up
together both in the gymnasia and in their general mode of life will be led, I
suppose, by the necessity of nature to intercourse with each other. Or do you
think that what I say will not necessarily occur?

'Not by any mathematical necessity, said he, but by constraints of love, which
are likely to be keener than the other kind in persuading and drawing the mass
of mankind.' But some one perhaps will explain the meaning of these passages in
a different way, and will say that they do not suggest what is commonly
supposed; since he does not say that all the women without distinction are to be
in common, so that wantonness may be allowed to every chance-comer, but that the
assignment of them among the men is to lie in the power of the magistrates. For
they are to be common in the same way as one may say that the public money is
common, being distributed to the proper persons by those who are entrusted with
it. Suppose then that this is so. But what would you say on learning that he
also bids them not to bring forth into light what they conceive, speaking as
follows? 251

'For a woman, said I, let the law be that beginning from the twentieth year she
should bear children for the State until the fortieth year: and for a man, after
he has passed the most vigorous prime of his course, henceforward to beget
children for the State until his fifty-fifth year.' After which he says: 252

'But when both the women and the men, I suppose, have passed the age for
begetting children, we shall let them go free perhaps to have intercourse with
whomsoever they please.' And he adds: 253

'Having strictly charged them, if possible, to bring forth no embryo to light,
if such there should be; but should any force its way, to deal with it on the
understanding that there is no maintenance for such a child.'

Such are his directions concerning the conduct of women: and concerning unnatural love [for which he makes a long apology----ED.], how unlike are his sentiments to those of Moses, who in laws expressly contrary pronounces with loud voice the fit sentence against sodomites.

Why need we still urge the charge that this most wise philosopher after
acquitting such sinners, against whom he did not think it fit to prescribe
sentence of death, directs in his Laws that the slave who failed to give
information of a treasure discovered by another should be punished with death.
But that you may not suspect me of bearing false witness, listen also to what
follows: 254

CHAPTER XXI

'WHATEVER answer the god may give in regard to the property and the man who
removed it, that let the city execute in obedience to the oracles of the god.
And if the informer be a free man, let him have the reputation of goodness; but
if he fail to inform, of baseness. But if he be a slave, the informer may
rightly be made free by the city, on payment of his value to his master; but if
he fail to give information, let him be punished by death.'

Here again the punishment of death is enacted not against the man who has
purloined some forbidden property, but against him who failed to inform against
another who had done wrong: and in another case too he declares a master free
from guilt if he kill his own slave in anger. He says in fact: 255

'If he have killed a slave of his own, let him undergo purification; but if he
have killed another man's slave in anger, let him pay the owner twofold for the
loss.' Listen also to this passage of the laws which he enacted in regard to
murderers: 256

'If therefore any one with his own hand slay a free man, and the deed have been
done in a passion without premeditation, let him suffer all other penalties that
were deemed right for one who slew another without anger to suffer, but let him
undergo compulsory exile for two years to correct his passion.' And then he
appends to this another law of the following kind: 257

'But let the man who has slain another in anger, yet with premeditation, suffer
all other the same penalties as the former offender; but just as the other was
banished for two years, let him be banished for three, being punished for a
longer term because of the violence of his passion.' Then next he enacts such
laws as the following in regard to one who has committed homicide a second time:
258

'But if ever after returning from exile either of them be overcome by anger and
commit this same offence again, let him be banished and never return.' And again
afterwards he says: 259

'But if, as occurs sometimes, though not often, a father or mother from anger
kill a son or a daughter by blows or any manner of violence, let them undergo
the same purifications as the others, and spend three years in exile. But when
the homicides have returned from exile, let the wife be separated from her
husband and the husband from the wife, and not beget children together any
more.' To this also he adds: 260

'But if any man in anger slay his wedded wife, or a wife do the same in like
manner to her own husband, let them undergo the same purifications, but continue
three years in banishment. And when the author of such a deed has returned, let
him have no communion in sacred rites with his children, nor ever sit at the
same table with them.

261 'And if a brother or sister slay brother or sister in anger, be it enacted
that the same purifications and banishments as have been appointed for parents
and children be undergone by them; and let them never have the same home with
those whom they have deprived of brothers, or of children, nor share in their
sacred rites.

'But if brother slay brother in a faction fight, or in other like manner, while
defending himself against an assault, let him be guiltless, as if he had slain
an enemy in war. And in like manner if a citizen slay a fellow citizen, or a
foreigner a foreigner. But if a foreigner slay a citizen, or a citizen a
foreigner in self-defence, let him be in the same position as to being
guiltless: and in like manner if a slave kill a slave. But if on the other hand
a slave kill a free man in self-defence, let him be subject to the same laws as
the slayer of a father.

262 'Whosoever designedly and wrongfully slays with his own hand any one of his
kinsmen, in the first place let him be excluded from legal rights, polluting
neither agora, nor temples, nor harbours, nor any other public assembly, whether
any one interdict the doer of these deeds or not: for the law interdicts him. .
. . And let the man who fails to prosecute him, when he ought, or fails to
proclaim him be excluded from kinship: . . . and in the second place let him be
liable to prosecution by any one who wishes to exact retribution for the
deceased. 263 And if a woman has wounded her husband, or a man his wife, with
design to kill, let either suffer perpetual banishment.'

Such are the laws of the philosopher: and if we are to bring those of Moses into
comparison with them, hear what sort of ordinances he makes concerning cases of
homicide.264 'If one smite a man and he die, let him surely be put to death. And
if he did it not purposely, but God delivered him 'into his hands, I will give
thee a place whither the slayer shall flee. But if a man set upon his neighbour
to slay him with guile, and flee for refuge, thou shalt take him from Mine altar
to put him to death. He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall surely be
put to death. . . . And if two men revile one another, and one smite his
neighbour with a stone or with his fist, and he die not, but be laid upon his
bed, if the man rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that
smote him be quit: only he shall pay for his loss of time, and the fees of his
physician. And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a staff, and he die
under his hands, he shall surely be punished. But if he live a day or two he
shall not be punished; for he is his money. . . . 265 And if a man smite the eye
of his servant, or the eye of his handmaiden, and blind him utterly, he shall
send them forth free for their eyes' sake.'

Such then are the laws of Moses. Now hear again in what way, and for what kind
of offences, Plato orders that the slave shall be punished with scourging
without hope of pardon: 266

'"When a man wishes to gather the vintage of what are now called fine grapes, or
the so-called fine figs, if he be taking them from his own property, let him
gather the fruit however and whenever he will: but if from the property of
others without having gained permission, let that man always be punished, in
accordance with the principle of not taking up what one laid not down. But if a
slave touch any of such things without having gained permission of the owner of
the farms, for every berry of the grapes and every fig of the fig-tree let him
be scourged with an equal number of stripes.'

Such are the enactments against these offences, unworthy of the magnanimity of
Plato. But how noble and humane those of Moses are you may learn by listening to
him while he speaks as follows: 267 'When thou art come into thy neighbour's
vineyard, thou shalt eat grapes until thy soul be satisfied, but shalt not put
any into thy vessel.' And again: 'If thou come into thy neighbour's standing
corn, and pluck the ears with thy hands, then thou shalt not put a sickle to thy
neighbour's standing corn.' And again: 268 'If thou reapest thy harvest in thy
field, and hast forgotten a sheaf in thy field, thou shalt not turn back again
to take it: it shall be for the poor, for the stranger, for the fatherless, and
for the widow, that the LORD thy God may bless thee in every work of thine
hands. And if thou gather thine olives, thou shalt not turn back to glean what
is left behind thee: it shall be for the stranger, and the fatherless, and the
widow. And if thou gather the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean over
again what is left behind thee: this shall be for the stranger, for the
fatherless and for the widow.'

These then are the enactments found in Moses. And Plato's are well known, in
which you may find thousands irreproachable, whereof we most gladly welcome all
that is noble and excellent in him, and bid a long leave to what is not of such
a character. But since we have travelled so far through these matters, and have
shown cause why we have not chosen to follow Plato in philosophy, it is time to
bring the rest of our promise to completion, and to review the other sects of
Greek philosophy.

[Footnotes moved to the end and numbered] 1. 639 d 1 Plato, Timaeus, p. 40 D,
quoted also p. 75 d 5, and p. 692 c 1 2. 640 c 5 Ps.-Plato, Epinomis, 980 C 3.
641 a 1 Plato, Republic, 377 C, quoted again p. 692 d 9 4. 642 c 1 From the
translation of Davies and Vaughan.

5. 643 b 3 Hom. Il. xxiv. 527 (Lord Derby)

6. b 6 ibid.

7. 530 c 1 ibid.532 8. c 3 Cf. Hom. Il. iv. 84; xix. 224 9. c 4 ibid. iii. 275
10. c 6 ibid. xx. 4 11. c 9 Aeschylus, Niobe, Fr. 160 12. 645 b 6 Homer,
Odyssey, xvii. 485 13. c 2 Aeschylus, Xantriae, a Fragment known only from
Plato's quotation 14. 646 d 14 Homer, Il. ii. 5 ff.

15. 647 a 2 Aeschylus, Fragment, 266 (281) 16. c 4 Gen. i. 10 17. c 6 ibid i. 31
18. c 9 Wisd. i. 13 19. d 1 Wisdom ii. 24 20. d 4 Jer. ii. 21 21. 648 a 10 Heb.
xii. 6; Prov. iii. 12 22. b 2 Cf. 643 d 6 23. b 12 Mal. iii. 6 24. c 2 Ps. cii.
26, 27 25. d 2 Cf. 646 b 5 26. 649 b 1 Cf. 646 d a 27. 649 c 3 Cf. 647 a 12 28.
d 1 Plato, Euthyphron, 5 E 29. 650 d 1 Numenius, a Fragment preserved by
Eusebius 30. 651 b 1 Plato, Crito, 46 B 31. 653 b 12 Joh. v. 44 32. c 6 Cf. 651
c 11 33. d 1 Plato, Crito, 49 A 34. 654 d 11 Rom. xii. 17 35. d 12 Matt. v. 44,
45 36. 655 a 3 1 Cor. iv. 12 37. b 3 Ps. vii. 4 38. b 4 Ps. cxx. 7 39. c 1
Plato, Crito, p. 52 C 40. 658 b 1 Crito, 53 C. The Laws still speak.

41. 659 d 1 Plato, Apology of Socrates, 28 B 42. 660 a 7 Hom. Il. xviii. 96 43.
b 1 ibid. 98 44. b 4 ibid. 104 45. 661 c 5 Plato, Apology of Socrates, 40 C 46.
662 c 7 Acts v. 29 47. c 8 Matt. x. 28 48. c 9 2 Cor. v. 1

49. d 1 ibid. 8 50. 663 a 1 Plato, Republic, 468 E 51. 663 d 2 Aristobulus, cf.
p. 411 A 52. 664 d 1 Orphic Fragment, ii (Hermann) 53. 666 b 3 Aratus,
Phaenomena, 1 54. 667 a 4 Aristobulus 55. b5 Prov. viii. 23, 27 56. d 7 Hesiod,
Works and Days, 770. The verses that follow are all spurious 57. 668 d 1 Clement
of Alexandria, Miscellany, v. 14, p. 699 Potter 58. 669 a 1 Wisdom vii. 24 59. b
4 Plato, Timaeus, 48 C 60. b 9 Gen. i. 2 61. c 4 Eccles. i. 2 62. c 6 Ps. (xxxv)
xxxvi. 5 63. d 3 Plato, Republic, 615E 64. d 9 Ps. (ciii) civ. 4 65. 670 a 9
Matt, xviii. 10 66. b 3 Plato, Republic, 620 D 67. b 1 Plato, Timaeus, 28 B 68.
c 2 ibid. 28 C 69. d 1 Plato, Laws, 896 D 70. d 7 Plato, Phaedrus, 240 A 71. d
10 Eph. vi. 12 72. 671 a 1 Plato, Laws, 906 A 73. b 3 Gen. i. 1

74. b 4 ibid. 3 75. c 7 Cf. Gen. i. 26 76. d 3 Deut. xiii. 4 77. 672 a 1 Plato,
Phaedrus, 255 B 78. a 4 Plato, Lysis, 214 C 79. a 6 Laws, 716 C 80. b 4 Plato,
Timaeus, 90 D 81. b 10 Clement of Alexandria, Miscellany, v. 14, p. 706 Potter
82. b 12 Plato, Republic, 415 A 83. d 7 Theaetetus, 173 C 84. 673 a 8 Pindar,
Fr. (226), 123 85. b 2 Matt. v. 37 86. b 3 Theaetetus, 151 D 87. b 6 Laws, 917 C
88. c 2 Ps. (xxxii) xxxiii. 9 89. c 8 Hom. Il. vii. 99 90. c 9 Isa. x. 6 91. 673
d 2 Callimachus, Fr. 87 92. d 6 ibid. 133 93. d 9 Hesiod, Works and Days, 60 94.
674 a 1 Diog. Laertius, vii. 156 95. a 7 Hom.Il. xiv. 206 96. b 1 Epicharmus,
Fr. 297 (Mullach, i. p. 146) 97. b 4 Pindar, Fr. 106 (3) 98. c 1 Aratus,
Phaenomena, 1 99. 675 a 1 Hom. Il. xviii. 483 (Lord Derby's translation) 100. a
6 Cf. Clem. Al. Protrept. c. vi. p. 59 Potter 101. b 2 Pindar, Nem. vi. 1 102. b
6 Paean. Fr. vi 103. b 12 Pseudo-Plato, Epistle, vi. 323 C 104. 675 c 5 Timaeus,
41 A 105. c 6 Pseudo-Plato, Epistle, ii. 312 E 106. d 4 Plato, Republic, 614 B
107. 676 b 8 Heracleitus, Fr. 27 (Mullach) 108. c 2 Heracleitus, Fr. 28
(Mullach) 109. c 7 ibid. Fr. 29 110. d 8 Plato, Republic, 521 C; Eph. vi. 12
111. d 10 Plato, Phaedo, 95 D 112. d 12 Ps. iii. 5 113. 677 a 8 Plato, Republic,
616 B 114. 677 d See p. 667 d 115. 678 a 6 Solon Fr. xiv. (Hermann, Poet. Min.
Gr. iii. 139) 116. b 1 Wisdom ii. 12 117. b 4 Plato, Republic, 361 E; see notes
on p. 583 d 118. b 8 Isa. xl. 25 119. c 2 Xenophon, Memorabilia, iv. iii. 13, 14
120. c 8 Sibylline Oracles, Fr. i. 10-13 121. d 5 Xenophanes, Fr. i. i (Mullach)
122. d 8 ibid. Fr. v 123. 679 a 3 ibid. Fr. vi 124. b 4 Bacchylides, Fr.
60.(Kenyon) 125. 679 b 8 Cleanthes, Fr. 1. 45 (Mullach, i. p. 152) 126. d 3
ibid. 1. 54 127. d 8 Euripides, Antiope, Fr. 6 128. 680 a 2 Sophocles, Fr. 708

129. b 1 ibid.

130. b 5 Heracleitus, Fr. ii; Aristotle, Rhetoric, iii. 5, 6 131. b 9
Melanippides, Fr. 8 (Bergk), Parnell's Greek Lyric Poetry, p. 275 132. c 1
Plato, Sophist, 237 A 133. c 3 Parmenides, Fr. i. 59 (Mullach) 134. c 7 Hesiod,
Fr. 53 (Gaisf.), 152 (Göttling) 135. d 5 Pseudo-Sophocles, Fr. 18, in Müller,
Fr. Hist. Gr., tom. ii 136. 681 a 3 Euripides, Fragment quoted by Lucian,
Jupiter Trag., c. 41 137. a 8 Euripides, Pirithous, Fr. ii.

138. 681 b 9 Aeschylus, Fr. Incert. 295 139. c 3 Heracleitus, Fr. 12 (Mullach)
140. c 4 ibid. Fr. 56 (Mullach) 141. c 6 Luke viii. 8 142. c 7 Heracleitus, Fr.
4 (Mullach) 143. d 2 Cf. Plato, Phaedrus, 245 D 144. d 6 Deut. vi. 4, 13 145. d
8 Sibylline Oracle's, Fr. i (Rzach, p. 234) 146. d 10 Xenocrates, Fr. 2
(Mullach, iii. p. 114) Cf. Comus, l. 20.

147. 682 a 5 Hom. Il. xxii. 8 (Lord Derby's translation) 148. b 1 Is. xl. 18
149. b 7 Epicharmus, Republic 150. c 3 Cf. Plato, Republic, vii. 522: the
following fragments of Epicharmus seem to be otherwise unknown 151. d 4 Is. 1.
11 152. d 7 ibid. 16 153. d 10 Pseudo-Menander (Meineke, p. 306) 154. 683 b 3
Jer. xxiii. 23, 24 155. 683 b 5 Ps. iv. 5 156. b 8 Pseudo-Menander (Meineke, p.
308) 157. d 1 Is. Iviii. 9 158. d 5 Pseudo-Philemon (Meineke, p. 865) 159. 684 a
7 Euripides, Phrixus, Fr. viii; cf. Valckenär, Aristobulus, c. i.

160. b 3 Cf. Valckenär, ibid.

161. b 8 Pseudo-Justin, De Monarchia, c. iii.

162. d 3 Orph. Fr. 123 (Abel), vi (Hermann); Stob. Ecl. I. ii. 23 163. 685 a 5
Orph. Fr. ii. 6; cf. 664 d 6 164. b 6 ibid. 23 165. c 4 Is. lxvi. i 166. c 6
Orph. Fr. ii. 29 167. 686 a 5 Is. lxiv. 1 168. b 1 ibid. xl. 12 169. b 4 Orphic
Fr. iii. 1 170. d 5 ibid. iii. 14 171. 687 a 5 Amos iv. 13 172. a 7 Deut. xxxii.
39 Cf. Hos. xiii. 4 173. b 1 Orphic Fr. i. 11 174. b 5 Archilochus, Fr. xvii
175. b 9 Orphic Fr. i 19 176. c 2 Is. x, 14 177. c 4 Jer. x. 12 178. d 3
Phocylides, Fr. i. 19 (cf. ii. 31) 179. d 8 Philemon, Fr. xlviii 180. 688 a 1
Fragment otherwise unknown 181. 688 a 4 Orph. Fr. vi. 16 (Hermann) 182. b 3
Pindar, Fr. 104 (Boeckh) 183. b 5 ibid Fr. 105 184. b 8 ibid. Fr. 33 185. b 14
Is. xl. 13 186. c 3 Hesiod, Fr. iii (Gaisford) 187. c 7 Solon, Fr. x 188. d 4
Hesiod, Works and Days, 174-176 189. d 8 Homer, Il. viii. 689 190. 680 a 1
Menander, Fr. 18 191. b 1 Ps.-Aeschylus, Fr. in Ps.-Justin, De Monarchia, c. ii
192. c 6 Ps. cxiv. 7 193. c 11 Herodotus, vii. 141; cf. 218 d 5 194. 690 a 2
Thearidas, On Nature, a work otherwise unknown 195. a 5 Orph. Fr. i. 13 196. a 8
Diphilus, Fr. 52 197. b 1 Plato, Republic, 519 C 198. b 4 ibid. 521C 199. b 8
ibid. 415 A 200. b 10 The Greek text is defective here 201. 691 c 6 Ps. xli. 6
202. 692 c 1 Plato, Timaeus, 40 D; cf. 75 d, 639 d 203. d 10 Plato, Republic,
377 C 204. 693 a 8 ibid. 386 C 205. a 10 Hom. Od. xi. 488 206. b 2 Plato,
Republic, 388 A 207. b 4 Hom. Il. xxiv. 10 208. b 7 Plato, ibid. 390 B 209. 693
c 5 Hom. Il. xiv. 291 210. c 10 Plato, Timaeus, 40 D 211. d 11 ibid. Republic,
377 D 212. 694 a 3 ibid. 377 E 213. a 5 Hesiod, Theogony, 154, 178 214. 696 b 9
Plato, Timaeus, 34 C 215. 697 a 1 Plato, Phaedo, 81 D 216. c 6 Plato, Phaedrus,
248 E 217. 698 a 1 ibid. Republic, 620 A 218. 699 a 10 Plato, Phaedo, 113 D 219.
c 4 ibid. 114 C 220. c 10 ibid. Gorgias, 523 A 221. d 3 ibid. 535 C 222. 700 c 1
Severus, On the Soul, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 223. 702 b 9 Ps.-Plato,
Epinomis, 977 A 224. c 5 ibid. 984 D 225. d 5 Plato, Timaeus, 32 B 226. 703 a 2
Plato, Timaeus, 34 B 227. a 7 ibid. 38C 228. b 3 ibid. 38 E 229. b 8 ibid. Laws,
904 C 230. 703 d 5 Plato, Timaeus, 41 A 231. 704 b 3 Deut. iv. 19 232. b 8 Philo
Iud. De Monarchia, i. c. i. p. 213 233. d 5 Deut. iv. 19 234. 705 b 1 Philo Iud.
De Monarchia, i. c. i. p. 214 235. 706 a 1 Plato, Republic, 452 A 236. b 1 ibid.
457 B 237. b 2 Pindar, Fr. 227 238. b 6 Plato, Laws, 813 B 239. b 11 ibid. 796 B
240. c 6 ibid. 804 C 241. d 7 ibid. 813 D 242. 707 b 5 Ps. cxxvii. 1 243. b 10
Plato, Laws, 833 C 244. c 9 ibid. 833 E 245. d 1 ibid. 834 A 246. d 9 Plato,
Laws, 834 D 247. 708 a 3 ibid. 924 E 248. a 12 ibid. 771 E 249. b 8 Plato,
Republic, 457 G 250. c 4 ibid. 458 C 251. 709 a 2 Plato, Republic, 460 E 252. a
8 ibid. 461 B 253. b 1 ibid. 461 C 254. 711 b 1 Plato, Laws, 914 A 255. c 11
ibid. 868 A 256. 711 d 4 Plato, Laws, 867 C 257. d 11 ibid. 867 D 258. 712 a 1
ibid. 868 A 259. a 5 ibid. 868 C 260. a 13 ibid. 868 D 261. b 6 Plato, Laws, 869
B 262. d 1 ibid. 871 A 263. d 10 ibid. 877 C 264. 713 a 4 Ex. xxi. 12 265. 713 b
9 Ex. xxi. 26 266. c 6 Plato, Laws, 844 E 267. d 6 Deut. xxiii. 24, 25 268. d 11
Deut. xxiv. 19 This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on
this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 33: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 14
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 14

BOOK XIV

CONTENTS I. Preface concerning the subject of the Book p. 717 a II. On the
mutual contradiction and conflict of the philosophers p. 717 d III. On the
harmony of the Hebrew writers p. 719 b IV. How Plato has accused his
predecessors. From the Theaetetus p. 720 d V. On the first successors of Plato.
From Numenius the Pythagorean p. 737 b VI. On Arcesilaus, the founder of the
second Academy. From the same p. 730 b VII. Of Lacydes, the successor of
Arcesilaus. From the same p. 734 a VIII. Of Carneades, the founder of the third
Academy. From the same p. 737 b IX. Of Philo, who succeeded Cleitomachus, the
successor of Carneades. From the same p. 739 b

X. That among the Greek philosophers there are conjectures, and logomachies, and
much error. From Porphyry's Epistle to Nectenabo and other sources p. 741 b XI.
Concerning geometry, and astronomy, and syllogisms. From Xenophon's Memorabilia
p. 743 b XII. Concerning the professors of Natural Science. From the same, in
the Epistle to Aeschines p. 745 a XIII. On gymnastic and music. From Plato's
Republic p. 746 a XIV. Opinions of philosophers on First Principles. From
Plutarch p. 747 d XV. On the doctrine of Anaxagoras. From Plato p. 750 d XVI.
Opinions of philosophers concerning gods. From Plutarch p. 753 b

XVII. Against the School of Xenophanes and Parmenides, who rejected the senses.
From the eighth Book of Aristocles On philosophy p. 756 b

XVIII. Against the followers of Pyrrhon, called Sceptics or Ephectics, who
declared that nothing can be clearly apprehended. From Aristocles p. 758 c

XIX. Against the philosophers of the School of Aristippus, who say that only
feelings can be apprehended, and that of other things there is no apprehension.
From the same p. 764 c

XX. Against the School of Metrodorus and Protagoras, who say that the senses
alone are to be trusted. From the same p. 766 b XXI. Against the Epicureans, who
define the good as pleasure. From the same p. 768 d XXII. Further against those
who define the good as pleasure. From the Philebus of Plato p. 770 b

XXIII. Against the Epicureans, who deny a Providence, and refer the universe to
corporeal atoms. From Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, On Nature p. 772 d XXIV.
From human examples. From the same p. 773 d XXV. From the constitution of the
universe. From the same p. 774 d XXVI. From the nature of man. From the same p.
778 c XXVII. That to God there is no toil in working. From the same p. 781 a

CHAPTER I PREFACE CONCERNING THE SUBJECT OF THE BOOK.

HAVING described in the preceding Book all that there was to say and to hear
about the philosophy of Plato and his agreement with the Hebrew oracles, for
which we are struck with admiration of him, and on the other hand concerning his
dissent from them, for which no man of good sense could approve him, I will now
pass on to the remaining sects of those who have been famed for philosophy among
the Greeks. And in their case again I shall set their lapse from the truth
before the eyes of my readers, not in. my own person nor of my own authority,
but as before by the testimony of the very words of Greek authors: not indeed
from dislike to any of them personally, since I confess that I have a great
admiration for them, when I compare the persons with the rest of mankind as men.
But when I compare them with the sacred writers and prophets of the Hebrews, and
with God who through them has both uttered predictions of things to come and
exhibited marvellous works, nay more, has laid the foundations of instruction in
religious learning and true doctrines, I no longer think that any one ought with
reason to blame us, if we prefer God before men, and truth itself before human
reasonings and conjectures.

All this I have striven to prove in the argument of this present Preparation, as
at once an answer and a defence against those who shall inquire, what beauty or
majesty we have seen in the writings of the Barbarians, that we have decided to
prefer them to our ancestral and noble philosophy, that, I mean, of the Greeks.
However, it is time now to let our proof proceed by way of facts.

CHAPTER II

Now, I think, we ought before all things to begin from the first foundation of
philosophy among the Greeks, and to learn concerning the so-called physical
philosophers before the time of Plato, who they were, and what sort of men their
philosophy found as champions of its system; then we must pass on to the
successors of Plato, and learn who they also were, and survey their mutual
disputations, and review also the dissensions of the other sects, and the
oppositions of their opinions, wherein I shall exhibit the noble combatants like
boxers eagerly exchanging blows as on a stage before the spectators.

Let us, for instance, at once observe how, on the one hand, Plato used to scoff
at the earliest philosophers who preceded him, and how others scoffed at Plato's
friends and successors: and again in turn how Plato's disciples used to
criticize the wise doctrines of Aristotle's fertile thought: and how those who
boasted of Aristotle and the Peripatetic School used to prove that the views of
those who preferred the opposite sect were nonsense.

You will also see the clever and precise doctrines of the subtlety of the Stoics
ridiculed in turn by others, and all the philosophers on all sides struggling
against their: neighbours, and most bravely joining in battle and wrestling, so
that even with hands and tongue, or rather with pen and ink, they raise
strongholds of war against each other, striking, as it were, and being struck by
the spears and various weapons of their wordy war. And in this strife of
athletes our arena will include, in addition to those already mentioned, men
stripped of all truth, who have taken up arms in opposition to all the dogmatic
philosophers alike; I mean the Pyrrhonists, who declared that in man's world
there is nothing comprehensible; and those who said with Aristippus that the
feelings were the sole objects of perception, and then again those who with
Metrodorus and Protagoras said that we ought to believe only the sensations of
the body.

Over against these we shall at the same time strip for the combat the schools of
Xenophanes and Parmenides, who arrayed themselves on the opposite side and
annihilated the senses.

Neither shall we omit the champions of pleasure, but shall enroll their leader
Epicurus also with those already mentioned. But against all alike we shall use
their own weapons to set forth their confutation.

Also of all the so-called physicists alike I shall drag out to light both the
discrepancies of their doctrines and the futility of their eager studies; not at
all as a hater of the Greeks or of reason, far from it, but to remove all cause
of slanderous accusation, that we have preferred the Hebrew oracles from having
forsooth been very little acquainted with Hellenic culture.

CHAPTER III THE Hebrews on their part from long time of old and, so to say, from
the very first origin of man, having found the true and religious philosophy
have carefully preserved this undefiled to succeeding generations, son from sire
having received and guarded a treasure of true doctrines, so that no one dared
to take away from or add to what had been once for all determined. So neither
has Moses the all-wise, who has been shown by our former discourse to have been
older than all the Greeks, but last in time of all the ancient Hebrews, ever
thought of disturbing and changing any of the doctrines held by his forefathers
concerning dogmatic theology, except so far as to found for the people under his
charge a certain conduct of life towards each other, and a code of laws for a
kind of moderate republic. Nor have the prophets after him, who flourished for
countless periods of years, ever ventured to utter a word of discord either
against each other, or against the opinions held by Moses and the elders beloved
of God.

Nay not even has our Christian School, which derives its origin from them, and
by a divinely inspired power has filled alike all Greece and Barbarian lands,
introduced anything at variance with the earlier doctrines; or perhaps one
should rather say that not only in the doctrines of theology but also in the
mode of life Christianity prescribes the same course as the godly Hebrews before
Moses. Our doctrines then thus described, and testified to by all authors, first
middle and last, with one mind and one voice, confirm with unanimous vote the
certainty of that which is both the true religion and philosophy, and are
filling the whole world, and growing afresh and flourishing every day, as if
they had but just established their first prime: and neither legal ordinances,
nor hostile plots, nor the oft-sharpened weapons of enemies have exhibited a
power superior to the excellence of the reasons which we followed. But now let
us observe what strength has ever been exhibited by the doctrines of the
philosophy of the Greeks, tossed as they were in shallow waters; and first of
them all let us send down into the battle those who are called physicists. As
then these are said to have flourished before Plato, we may learn, from Plato
himself how they were at variance one with another; for he exposes the feud of
Protagoras, Heracleitus, and Empedocles against Parmenides and his school. For
Protagoras, who had been a disciple of Democritus, incurred the reputation of
atheism: he is said, at least, to have used an introduction of the following
kind in his book Concerning the gods:1 'As to gods I neither know that they
exist, nor that they do not exist, nor of what nature they are.' And Democritus
said 2 that 'the first elements of the universe were vacuum and plenum,' and the
plenum he called 'being' and 'solid,' but the vacuum 'not-being.' Wherefore he
also says that 'being' no more exists than 'not-being'; and that 'the things
which partake of "being" have from eternity a continuous and swift motion in the
vacuum.' But Heracleitus said 3 that fire was the first principle of all things,
out of which they all come, and into which they are resolved. For all things are
change, and there is a time determined for the resolution of them all into fire,
and for their production out of it.

These philosophers then said that all things are in motion; but Parmenides, who
was by birth an Eleatic, held the doctrine that 'the all is one,' and that it
subsists without beginning and without motion, and is spherical in shape. And
Melissus, who was a disciple of Parmenides, held the same opinions with
Parmenides. So now listen to what Plato relates with regard to these men in the
Theaetetus:4

CHAPTER IV

[PLATO] 'AND so from drift and motion and mixture of one with another, all
things are "becoming," though we forsooth speak of them as "being," not using a
right term. 5 For nothing ever "is," but is always "becoming." And on this point
grant that, except Parmenides, all the wise men in succession were agreed,
Protagoras, and Heracleitus, and Empedocles, and the chief poets in either kind
of poetry, Epicharmus in Comedy, and Homer in Tragedy, who, when he calls

"Oceanus sire and Tethys mother of gods," 6

says that all things are the offspring of flux and motion. Do you not think that
this is what he means?

'I think so.

'Who then could any longer escape derision, if he disputed against so great an
army with Homer for their leader? ' Then afterwards proceeding in his argument
he further says: 7

'One must come then to closer quarters, as the argument in defence of Protagoras
enjoined, and by sounding this floating essence observe whether it gives a true
or a false note. At all events there has been no small conflict about it with no
few disputants.

Far indeed from being small, it is making great advance in Ionia. For the
disciples of Heracleitus take a very vigorous lead in this argument.

'So much the more then, my dear Theodorus, are we bound to examine it, and that
from its first principle, as they themselves suggest.

'Yes, by all means: for in fact, Socrates, about these Heracleitean doctrines,
or, as you call them, Homeric and still older, it is no more possible to argue
with the men themselves at Ephesus who pretend to be experts than with men in a
frenzy. For in absolute accordance with his writings they are always adrift, and
as to dwelling upon an argument and a question, and quietly answering and asking
in turn, they have less than no power at all; or rather the expression "not even
nothing" is preferable in view of the absence of even the least quietness in the
men. But if you ask any of them a question, they pull out as from a quiver dark
little phrases which they shoot off at you, and if you try to get an explanation
of what this means, you will presently be struck with another new-fangled
phrase, and will never come to any conclusion at all with any of them, no, nor
yet they themselves with one another; but they watch most carefully not to allow
anything to be settled either in argument, or in their own souls, thinking, I
suppose, that it would be something stationary; and with that they are
altogether at war, and drive it out everywhere to the utmost of their power.

'Perhaps, Theodorus, you have seen the men fighting, but have never been in
their company when at peace; for they are no friends of yours. But, I suppose,
they explain doctrines of this peaceful kind at leisure to their disciples,
whomsoever they wish to make like themselves.

'Disciples, my good Sir! Such people do not become disciples one of another, but
they grow up of themselves, inspired each of them from any chance source, and
the one thinking that the other knows nothing. From these men therefore, as I
was going to say, you can never get a reason, either willingly or unwillingly;
but we must take the matter over ourselves and examine it like a mathematical
proposition.

'Yes, you speak with discretion. As to the proposition then, have we not
received it from the ancients, who concealed it from the multitude in poetry,
that Oceanus and Tethys, the origin of all things, are flowing streams, and that
nothing is at rest; and now from their successors, who in their superior wisdom
openly declare it, in order that even their cobblers may hear and learn their
wisdom, and may cease from foolishly supposing that some things are at rest and
others in motion, and when they have learned that all are in motion, may honour
them?

'But I nearly forgot, Theodorus, that others set forth the opposite doctrine to
this, namely,

"That only is unmoved, whose name is All," 8

and all other assertions which men like Melissus and Parmenides, in opposition
to all these doctrines, stoutly maintain, that all is one and stands
self-contained, having no place in which to move.

'How then, my friend, are we to deal with all these? For going on little by
little we have unconsciously fallen between both armies, and unless we can in
some way defend ourselves and retreat, we shall pay the penalty, just like those
who play across a line in the palaestra, when they are caught hold of by both
sides and dragged in opposite directions.' This is what Plato says in the
Theaetetus. Passing next to the Sophist, he speaks again concerning the physical
philosophers his predecessors as follows: 9

'It seems to me that Parmenides, and every one who has ever yet adventured upon
a trial of determining the number and nature of things existent, have discoursed
to us in an easy strain. How? Each seems to me to be relating a sort of fable to
us, as if we were children. One says that existences are three, and some of them
are sometimes warring in a manner with one another, and then becoming friends
again they exhibit marriages, and births, and rearing of offspring: another says
that they are two, moist and dry, or hot and cold, and he makes them dwell
together and marries them. But all the Eleatic tribe in our part, beginning with
Xenophanes and still earlier, assume that all things so-called are one, and so
proceed with their fables. But certain Ionian and Sicilian Muses afterwards
conceived that it is safer to combine both principles, and say that "being" is
both many and one, and is held together by enmity and friendship. For it is ever
separating and being united, as the more strong-minded Muses assert; but the
weaker relax the perpetual continuance of these conditions, and say that in turn
the universe is now one and friendly under the influence of Aphrodite, and then
many and at war with itself through some discordance. But whether in all this
any of them has spoken truly or not, it would be hard and offensive to find
fault in such important matters with famous men of antiquity.' Then after a few
sentences he adds: 10

'Well then, though we have not discussed all those who give precise definitions
about "being" and "not-being," nevertheless let it suffice: and on the other
hand let us look at those who speak otherwise, in order that we may see from
them all that it is by no means easier to say what "being" is than what
"not-being" is.

'We must proceed then to consider these also.

'Moreover it seems that among them there is, as it were, a kind of war of the
Giants, through their disputing with one another about the nature of "being."

'How?

'One side are for dragging all things down from heaven and from the invisible to
earth, actually grasping rocks and oaks in their hands. For they lay hold of
everything of this kind, and stoutly maintain, that "being" belongs only to that
which admits some kind of contact and handling, defining body and "being" as the
same, and should any one else say that a thing without body has "being," they
utterly despise him, and will not listen to anything else.

'Truly they are terrible men that you speak of: for I too ere now have met with
many of them.

'For this reason those who dispute against them defend themselves very
cautiously from some high place in an unseen world, contending that certain
intelligible and incorporeal "forms" are the true "being." But the corporeal
atoms of the other side, and that which they call the truth, these shatter in
pieces by their arguments, and call them a floating kind of "becoming," instead
of "being." And between the two armies, O Theaetetus, there is always a mighty
battle joined on these subjects.

'True.' So far, then, has Plato censured the physical philosophers who preceded
him. And the kind of opinion which he himself was for introducing on the matters
in question we have declared in the preceding Books, when we were showing his
agreement with the Hebrew doctrines and with the teaching of Moses in regard to
'Being.' But come, let us examine in our argument Plato's own successors also.
It is said that Plato, haying established his School in the Academy, was the
first called an Academic, and was the founder of the so-called Academic
philosophy. And after Plato Speusippus, the son of Plato's sister Potone,
succeeded to the School, then Xenocrates, and afterwards Polemon. And these, it
is said, began from his own hearth at once to undo the teaching of Plato,
distorting what had been clear to the master by introducing foreign doctrines,
so that you might expect the power of those marvellous dialogues to be
extinguished at no distant time, and the transmission of the doctrines to come
to an end at once on the founder's death: for a conflict and schism having
hereupon begun from them, and never ceasing up to the present time, there are
none who delight to emulate the doctrines which the Master loved, except
perchance one or two in all our lifetime, or some others very few in number, and
themselves not altogether free from false sophistry; since even the earlier
successors of Plato have been blamed for such tendencies.

Polemon's successor, it is said, was Arcesilaus, and report says that he forsook
the doctrines of Plato, and established a sort of alien and, as it is called,
second Academy. For he declared that we ought to suspend judgement about all
things, for all are incomprehensible, and the arguments on either side equal
each other in force, also that the senses and reason in general are
untrustworthy. He used, for instance, to praise this saying of Hesiod,

'The gods have spread a veil o'er human thought.' 11

He used also to try to make some paradoxical novelties. After Arcesilaus,
Carneades and Cleitomachus are said to have abandoned the opinion of their
predecessors, and become the authors of a third Academy.12 'And some add also a
fourth, that of the followers of Philo and Charmides: while some reckon even a
fifth, that of the disciples of Antiochus.'

Such were the successors of Plato himself: and as to their character take and
read the statements of Numenius the Pythagorean, which he has set down in the
first Book of his work entitled Of the revolt of the Academics against Plato, to
the following effect. 13

CHAPTER V

[NUMENIUS] 'FOR the time then of Speusippus, sister's son to Plato, and
Xenocrates the successor of Speusippus, and Polemon who succeeded Xenocrates in
the School, the character of the doctrine always continued nearly the same, so
far as concerned this much belauded suspension of judgement which was not yet
introduced, and some other things perchance of this kind. For in other respects
they did not abide by the original tradition, but partly weakened it in many
ways, and partly distorted it: and beginning from his time, sooner or later they
diverged purposely or unconsciously, and partly from some other cause perhaps
other than rivalry.

'And though for the sake of Xenocrates I do not wish to say anything
disparaging, nevertheless I am more anxious to defend Plato. For in fact it
grieves me that they did not do and suffer everything to maintain in "every way
an entire agreement with Plato on all points. Yet Plato deserved this at their
hands, for though not superior to Pythagoras the Great, yet neither perhaps was
he inferior to him; and it was by closely following and reverencing him that the
friends of Pythagoras became the chief causes of his great reputation.

'And the Epicureans, having observed this, though they were wrong, were never
seen on any point to have opposed the doctrines of Epicurus in any way; but by
acknowledging that they held the same opinions with a learned sage they
naturally for this reason gained the title themselves: and with the later
Epicureans it was for the most part a fixed rule never to express any opposition
either to one another or to Epicurus on any point worth mentioning: but
innovation is with them a transgression or rather an impiety, and is condemned.
And for this reason no one even dares to differ, but from their constant
agreement among themselves their doctrines are quietly held in perfect peace.
Thus the School of Epicurus is like some true republic, perfectly free from
sedition, with one mind in common and one consent; from which cause they were,
and are, and seemingly will be zealous disciples.

'But the Stoic sect is torn by factions, which began with their founders, and
have not ceased even yet. They delight in refuting one another with angry
arguments, one party among them having still remained steadfast, and others
having changed. So their founders are like extreme oligarchs, who by quarrelling
among themselves have caused those who came after to censure freely both their
predecessors and each other, as still being more Stoical one party than the
other, and especially those who showed themselves more captious in
technicalities; for these were the very men who, surpassing the others in
meddlesomeness and petty quibbles, were the more quick to find fault.

'Long before these, however, there was the same feeling in those who drew their
doctrines from Socrates in different directions, Aristippus in his own way, and
Antisthenes in his, and elsewhere the Megarians and Eretrians in ways of their
own, and others with them.

'And the cause was, that as Socrates assumed three gods, and philosophized
before them in the strains appropriate to each, his hearers did not understand
this, but thought that he spoke all at random, and according to the breath of
fortune which at any moment prevailed, sometimes one, sometimes another, as it
chanced to blow.

'But Plato had been a Pythagorean, and knew that Socrates for the same reason took such sayings from no other source than that, and had known what he was saying; and so he too wrapped up his subjects in a manner that was neither usual nor plain to understand; and after conducting them each in the way that he thought fit, and disguising them so as to be half seen and half unseen, he wrote in safety, but himself gave occasion to the subsequent dissension, and distraction of his doctrines, not indeed from jealousy nor yet from ill will----but I am unwilling to speak unfavourable words of men of earlier times.

'But now that we have learned this, we ought rather to apply our judgement to a
different point, and as we proposed at the commencement to distinguish Plato
from Aristotle and Zeno, so now again separating him from the Academy, if God
help us, we will allow him to be in and of himself a Pythagorean. Since now
being torn in pieces more furiously than any Pentheus deserved, he suffers limb
by limb, but is by no means transformed from his whole self and retransformed.

'As a man therefore who stood midway between Pythagoras and Socrates he reduced
the sternness of the former to benevolence, and the wit and playfulness of the
latter he raised from irony to dignity and gravity, and by making just this
mixture of Socrates and Pythagoras he showed himself more affable than the one
and more grave than the other.

'This, however, is not at all what I was going to discuss, my present inquiry
having no concern herewith: but I will pass on to what I had intended, lest I
should be thrown out of the way that leads thither, or else I seem likely to run
away altogether.

'Arcesilaus and Zeno became disciples of Polemon, for I am going to mention them
again at last. Of Zeno I remember to have said that he attended Xenocrates and
then Polemon, and afterwards became a Cynic in the School of Crates: but now let
him be accounted to have also derived something from Stilpo and those
Heracleitean discourses.

'For since as fellow disciples of Polemon Arcesilaus and Zeno were emulous of
each other, the one of them took as his allies in their mutual contest
Heracleitus, and Stilpo, and also Crates, among whom he was made by Stilpo a
disputant, by Heracleitus austere, and by Crates cynical: but the other,
Arcesilaus, has Theophrastus, and Crantor the Piatonist, and Diodorus, and then
Pyrrho, and of these Crantor made him persuasive, Diodorus sophistical, and
Pyrrho versatile, and reckless, and nothing at all.

'And this was the meaning of a certain hexameter verse often applied to him in
an insulting parody:

"Plato before, and Pyrrho behind, in the midst Diodorus." 14

But Timon says that he was also taught and equipped by Menedemus in the art of
disputation, if at least it is of him that he says:

"With Menedemus' lead beneath his breast He runs apace to Pyrrho's mass of
flesh, Or Diodorus' dialectic craft." 15

'So by interweaving the reasonings and scepticism of Pyrrho with the subtleties
of Diodorus, who was skilled in dialectics, he arrayed a kind of mouthy chatter
in Plato's forcible language, and would say and unsay, and roll over from this
side and from that, and from either side, whichever it might chance, retracting
his own words, obscure, and contradictory withal, and venturesome, and knowing
nothing, as he said himself, so candid as he was: and then somehow he would turn
out like those who did know, after having exhibited himself in all kinds of
characters by the sketchiness of his discourses.'

CHAPTER VI

'THERE was no less uncertainty about Arcesilaus than about Tydides in Homer,16
when you could not know on which side he was, whether associated with Trojans or
with Achaeans. For to keep to one argument and ever say the same thing, was not
possible for him, nor indeed did he ever think such a course by any means worthy
of a clever man. So he went by the name of a

"Keen sophist, slayer of men unskilled in fence."

'For by preparation and study in the delusive show of his arguments he used to
stupefy and juggle like the Empusae, and could neither know anything himself nor
let others know: he spread terror and confusion, and in carrying off the prize
for sophistries and deceitful arguments, he rejoiced over his disgrace, and
prided himself wonderfully on not knowing either what is base or noble, or what
is good or bad, but after saying whichever came into his thoughts, he would
change again and upset his argument in many more ways than he had constructed
it.

'So he would cut himself and be cut in pieces like a hydra, neither side being
distinguished from the other, and without regard to decency; nevertheless he
pleased his hearers, who while they listened saw also that he was good-looking:
he was most pleasing therefore both to hear and to see, after they grew
accustomed to accept from him arguments proceeding from a beautiful face and
mouth, besides the kindliness which shone in his eyes.

'Now this description must not be taken loosely, but from the beginning such was his character. For having associated in boyhood with Theophrastus, a man of gentle and amorous disposition, Arcesilaus being beautiful and still in the bloom of youth gained the love of Crantor the Academic, and attached himself to him; and being not without natural ability, he let it run its swift and easy course, and fired by love of disputation he gained help from Diodorus in those elegant and artfully studied plausibilities, and also attended the School of Pyrrho (now Pyrrho had begun somewhere or other from the School of Democritus),----so Arcesilaus, equipped from this source, adhered, except in name, to Pyrrho, as one who overthrew all things.

'Mnaseas at least, and Philomelus, and Timon, the Sceptics, call him a Sceptic,
as they were themselves, because he also overthrew truth and falsehood and
probability.

'Therefore, although on account of his Pyrrhonistic doctrines he might have been
called a Pyrrhonist, yet from respect for his lover he submitted to be still
called an Academic. He was therefore a Pyrrhonist, except in name: but an
Academic he was not, except in being so called. For I do not believe what
Diocles of Cnidos asserts in his Diatribae so-entitled, that through fear of the
followers of Theodorus, and of the Sophist Bion, who used to assail the
philosophers, and shrank from no means of refuting them, Arcesilaus took
precautions, in order to avoid trouble, by never appearing to suggest any dogma,
but used to put forward the "suspense of judgement" as a protection, like the
black juice which the cuttle-fishes throw out. This then I do not believe.

'Those, however, who started from this School, Arcesilaus and Zeno, with such
auxiliary forces of arguments helping both sides in the war, forgot the origin
from, which they had started in the School of Polemon:

"And parting, formed in order of attack." 17 "Together rushed Bucklers and
lances, and the furious might Of mail-clad warriors; bossy shield on shield
Clattered in conflict; loud the clamour rose." 18 "Buckler to buckler pressed,
and helm to helm, And man to man." 19 "Man struggling hand to hand with man." 20
"Then rose too mingled shouts and groans of man, Slaying and slain "; 21

the Stoics being the slain; for they could not strike the Academics, because
they could not discover in what part they were most liable to be beaten. But
beaten they would be, and their foundation shaken, if they were to have neither
principle nor starting-point for the battle. Now the principle was to prove that
they did not express the thoughts of Plato; and their starting-point was lost,
if they altered the definition concerning the conceptual presentation by the
removal of a single word.

'It is not now the proper time for me to show this, but I will mention it again,
when I arrive exactly at this point. When, however, they had come to open
variance, it was not that the two struck at each other, but only Arcesilaus at
Zeno. For Zeno in his fighting had a certain solemnity and heaviness, not more
effective than the oratory of Cephisodorus: for he, Cephisodorus, when he saw
his own teacher Isocrates attacked by Aristotle, though he was ignorant and
unacquainted with Aristotle, yet from perceiving that the works of Plato were
highly esteemed, supposed that Aristotle's philosophy agreed with Plato's, and
in trying to make war upon Aristotle struck at Plato, and having drawn his first
accusation from the "Ideas," ended by attacking his other doctrines, of which he
knew nothing himself, but guessed the received opinions concerning them by the
way in which they are usually described.

'However, this Cephisodorus instead of fighting the man with whom he was at war,
fought with the one against whom he wished not to make war. But if Zeno himself
after getting rid of Arcesilaus, had abstained also from making war upon Plato,
he would have shown himself, in my judgement, an excellent philosopher, in so
keeping the peace. But if he acted with a knowledge perhaps of the doctrines of
Arcesilaus, though in ignorance of Plato, to judge from what he wrote against
him, he is convicted of taking an inconsistent course, in not striking the one
whom he knew, and insulting most foully and disgracefully the man whom he had no
right to assail, and treating him far worse than he should have treated a dog.

'However, he certainly showed a high spirit in his disregard of Arcesilaus: for
either through ignorance of his doctrines, or through fear of the Stoics, he
turned aside "the mighty jaws of bitter war" 22 against Plato. But of Zeno's
vile and utterly shameless revolts against Plato I shall speak again, if I can
spare time from philosophy. I hope, however, never to have so much time to
spare, at least for this purpose, unless it be in sport.

'So, when Arcesilaus saw that Zeno was a professional rival, and worth
conquering, he shrank from nothing in trying to overthrow the arguments set
forth by him.

'Now of the other points on which he was at war with him, I perhaps am not able
to speak, or even if I were able, there would be no need to mention them now:
but as Zeno was the first inventor of the following doctrine, and as he,
Arcesilaus, saw that both itself and its name were famous at Athens, I mean, the
conceptual presentation, he employed every device against it. But the other
being in the weaker position could suffer no injury by keeping quiet, and so
disregarded Arcesilaus, against whom he would have had much to say, but was
unwilling, or rather perhaps there was some other cause; but Plato being no
longer among the living he proceeded to fight with his shadow, and tried to cry
him down by uttering all kinds of vulgar buffoonery, thinking that neither could
Plato defend himself, nor would any one else care to avenge him: or if
Arcesilaus should care to do so, he thought that at all events he should be a
gainer by diverting the attack of Arcesilaus from himself. He knew also that
Agathocles of Syracuse had practised this artifice upon the Carthaginians.

'The Stoics listened in amazement. For their Muse was not even then learned nor
productive of such graces as those by which Arcesilaus talked them down,
knocking off this argument, cutting away that, and tripping up others, and so
succeeded in persuading them. When therefore those against whom he argued were
worsted, and those in whose midst he was speaking were astounded, the men of
that day were somehow convinced that neither speech was anything, nor feeling,
nor any single work however small, nor on the contrary would anything ever have
seemed useless, except what so seemed in the opinion of Arcesilaus of Pitane.
But he, as we said, held no opinion, nor made any more definite statement than
that all these were little phrases and bugbears.'

CHAPTER VII

'Now there is a pleasant story about Lacydes which I wish to tell you. Lacydes
was rather stingy, and in a manner the proverbial Economist; for this man, who
was in such general good repute, used to open his storeroom himself and shut it
himself. And he would take out what things he wanted, and do all other such,
work with his own hands, not at all as approving self-dependence, nor as being
in any poverty, nor in want of servants, for he certainly had servants such as
they were: but the reason you are at liberty to guess.

'However, I will go on to tell the pretty story which I promised. For while
acting as his own steward he thought that he ought not to carry the key about on
his own person, but he used after locking up to hide the key in a certain hollow
writing-case: and after sealing this with a ring, he used to roll the ring down
through the keyhole and leave it inside the house, so that afterwards when he
came back, and opened with the key, he would be able to pick up the ring, and
lock up again, and then to seal, and then to throw the ring back again inside
through the keyhole. So the servants having discovered this clever trick,
whenever Lacydes went out for a walk or anywhere else, they too would open the
storeroom, and then, after eating this and drinking up that according to their
desire, and carrying other things away, they went through this same round, they
shut up, and sealed, and the ring they let down through the keyhole into the
house, laughing heartily at their master.

'So Lacydes, when he had left his vessels full and found them empty, was puzzled
by what occurred; and when he heard that the doctrine of incomprehensibility was
taught in the philosophy of Arcesilaus, he thought that this was the very thing
that was occurring in regard to his storeroom. And from this beginning he took
to studying with Arcesilaus the philosophy that we can neither see nor hear
anything clear or sound; and having once drawn one of his companions into the
house, he began to argue with him on "the suspense of judgement" with
extraordinary Tehemence, as it seemed, and said, This indeed I can state to you
as an indisputable fact, haying learned it from my own case, not from
questioning any other.

'And then he began and described the whole misfortune which had happened to him
about the storeroom. What then, said he, could Zeno now say against
"incomprehensibility" thus in all points proved manifest to me in such
circumstances as these? For as I locked it up with my own hands, sealed it
myself, and myself threw the ring inside, and when I came again and opened it,
saw the ring inside but not my other property, how can I fail to be justly
incredulous of all things? For I shall not dare for my part to say that any one
came and stole the things, as there was the ring inside.

'Then his hearer, who was an insolent fellow, having heard out the whole story
as well as he could listen, being scarce able hitherto to contain himself, burst
out into a very broad laugh, and still laughing and chuckling tried between
whiles to refute his silly notion. So beginning from that time Lacydes no longer
used to throw the ring inside, and ceased to use in argument the
"incomprehensibility" of his storeroom, but began to comprehend his losses, and
found that he had been philosophizing over them in vain.

'Nevertheless his servants were impudent knaves, and not to be caught with one
band, but just such as the slaves you see in comedy, a Geta or a Dacus,
loud-tongued in Dacian chatter; and after they had listened to the Stoics'
sophisms, or had learned them in some other way, went straight at the venture,
and used to take off his seal, and sometimes they would substitute another
instead of it, but sometimes they did not even this, because they thought it
would be all incomprehensible to him, whether this way or any other.

'So when he came in, he used to examine, and when he saw the writing-case
unsealed, or, though sealed, yet with a different seal, he was very angry: but
when they said that it was sealed, for they could themselves see his own seal,
he would begin a subtle argument and demonstration. And when they were beaten by
his demonstration, and said that, if the seal was not there, perhaps he had
himself forgotten and not sealed it up, Yes, certainly, he said, he remembered
that he had himself sealed it up, and began to prove it, and argue all round,
and thinking that they were making sport of him, he would make violent
complaints against them with many oaths.

'But they suspected his attacks, and began to think that he was making sport of
them; since Lacydes, who was a philosopher, had decided that he could have no
opinion, and therefore no memory, for memory is a kind of opinion; a short time
ago at least they had heard him, they said, speak thus to his friends.

'But when he overthrew their attempts and used language not at all Academic,
they would go themselves to the school of some Stoic, and learn anew what they
ought to say, and with that preparation would meet sophistry with sophistry, and
show themselves rivals of the Academic school in the art of thievery; Then he
would find fault with the Stoics; but his servants would put aside his
accusations by alleging "incomprehensibility" with no little jeering.

'So discussions went on there on all points, and arguments and
counter-arguments; and in the meanwhile there was not a single thing left, no
vessel, nor anything that was put in the vess.el, nor any other things that make
up the furnishing of a house.

'And Lacydes for a while was at a loss, seeing that the support of his own doctrines was of no help to him; and thinking that, if he could not convict them, everything he had would be upset, he fell into perplexity, and began to cry out upon his neighbours and upon the gods, Oh! Oh! and Alas! Alas! and By all the gods, and By the goddesses, and all the other artless affirmations of men who in cases of distrust take to strong language----all these were uttered with loud shouting and asseveration.

'But at last, since he had a battle of contradiction in the house, the master,
doubtless, took to playing the Stoic with his servants, and when the servants
insisted, on the Academic doctrines, in order that they might have no more
trouble, he became a constant stay-at-home, sitting before his storeroom. And
when he could do no good, he began to suspect what his philosophy was coming to,
and opened his mind. Of these things, my boys, said he, we talk in our
discussions one way, but we live in another.' This is what he tells about
Lacydes. But the man found many hearers, one of whom, Aristippus of Cyrene, was
distinguished. But of all his disciples his successor in the School was Evander,
and those who came after him.

After these Carneades took up the teaching and established a third Academy. In
argument he employed the same method as Arcesilaus, for, like him, he too
practised the mode of attacking both sides, and used to upset all the arguments
used by the others: but in the principle of 'suspension of judgement' alone he
differed from him, saying that it was impossible for a mortal man to suspend
judgement upon all matters, and there was a difference between 'uncertain' and
'incomprehensible,' and though all things were incomprehensible, not all were
uncertain. But this Carneades was also acquainted with the Stoic doctrines, and
by his contentious opposition to them grew more famous, by aiming not at the
truth but at what seemed plausible to the multitude: whence he also gave the
Stoics much displeasure. So Numenius writes about him as follows:

CHAPTER VIII

'CARNEADES having succeeded to the leadership disregarded the teacher whose
doctrines he ought to have defended, both those which were unassailable and
those which had been assailed, and referring everything back to Arcesilaus,
whether good or bad, renewed the battle after a long interval.' And afterwards
he adds:

'So this man also would bring forward and take back, and gather to the battle
contradictions and subtle twists in various ways, and be full both of denials
and affirmations, and contradictions on both sides: and if ever there was need
of marvellous statements, he would rise up as violent as a river in, flood,
overflowing with rapid stream everything on this side and on that, and would
fall upon his hearers and drag them along with him in a tumult.

'While therefore he swept off all others he himself remained infallible, an
advantage not enjoyed by Arcesilaus: for while he used with his quackery to come
round his frenzied companions, he was unconscious of having first deluded
himself in this, that he had not been guided by sensation, but convinced of the
truth of his reasoning in the overthrow of all things at once.

'But Carneades after Arcesilaus must have been evil upon evil, as he made not
even the smallest concession, unless his opponents were likely to be
disconcerted by it, in accordance with what he called his positive and negative
presentations from probability, that this individual thing was an animal or was
not an animal.

'So after such a concession, just as wild beasts who recoil throw themselves all
the more violently upon the spear-points, he too after giving in would make a
more powerful assault. And when he had stood his ground and was successful, then
at once he would voluntarily disregard his previous opinion, and make no mention
of it.

'For while granting that there are both truth and falsehood in all things, as if
he were co-operating in the method of inquiry, he would give a hold like a
clever wrestler and thereby get the advantage. For after granting each side
according to the turn of the scale in probability, he said that neither was
comprehended with certainty.

'He was in fact a more clever freebooter and conjurer than Arcesilaus. For
together with something true he would take a falsehood like it, and with a
conceptual presentation a concept similar to it, and after weighing them till
the scales were even, he would admit the existence neither of the truth nor of
the falsehood, or no more of the one than of the other, or more only from
probability.

'So dreams followed dreams, because the false presentations were like the true,
as in passing from an egg of wax to the real egg.

'The evil results therefore were the more numerous. And nevertheless Carneades
fascinated and enslaved men's souls; as an undetected cozener, and an open
freebooter, he could conquer whether by craft or by force even those who were
very thoroughly equipped.

'In fact every opinion of Carneades was victorious, and never any other, since
those with whom he was at war were less powerful as speakers.

'Antipater, for instance, who was his contemporary, was intending to write
something in rivalry; in face, however, of the arguments which Carneades kept
pouring forth day by day, he never made it public, neither in the Schools, nor
in the public walks, nor even spoke nor uttered a sound, nor, it is said, did
any one ever hear from him a single syllable: but he kept threatening written
replies, and hiding in a corner wrote books which he bequeathed to posterity,
that are powerless now, and were more powerless then against a man like
Carneades, who showed himself eminently great, and was so considered by the men
of that time.

'But nevertheless, although from his jealousy of the Stoics he stirred up
confusion in public, he would himself in secret with his own friends agree, and
speak candidly, and affirm, as much as any other ordinary person.' Then next he
adds:

'Mentor was a disciple of Carneades at first, yet not his successor: for while
still living Carneades found him familiar with his mistress, and not merely from
a probable presentation, nor as failing to comprehend, but most fully believing
his own eyes, and with a clear comprehension, rejected him from his School. So
he departed and became his opponent in sophistry, and his rival in art, refuting
the "incomprehensibility" which he taught in his discourses.'

Again he adds:

'But Carneades, as teaching a self-contradictory philosophy, used to pride
himself upon his falsehoods, and hide the truths beneath them. So he used his
falsehoods as curtains, and hiding within spoke the truth in a somewhat knavish
way. Thus he suffered from the same fault as beans, of which the empty ones
float on the water and rise highest, while the good ones lie below and are
unseen,' This is what is said about Carneades. In the School Cleitomachus is
appointed his successor, and after him Philon, of whom Numenius makes mention as
follows:

CHAPTER IX

'So then this Philon on first succeeding to the School was beside himself with
joy, and by way of making a grateful return used to worship and extol the
doctrines of Cleitomachus, and

"arm himself in gleaming brass" 23

against the Stoics.

'But as time went on, and their doctrine of "suspense" was going out of fashion
from familiarity, he was not at all consistent in thought with himself, but
began to be converted by the clear evidence and acknowledgement of his
misfortunes. Having therefore already much clearness of perception, he was very
desirous, you may be sure, to find some who would refute him, that he might not
appear to be turning his back and running away of his own accord.

'A disciple of Philon was Antiochus, who founded a different Academy: at least
he attended the School of Mnesarchus the Stoic, and adopted the contrary
opinions to his teacher Philon, and fastened countless strange doctrines upon
the Academy.'

These anecdotes and thousands like these are recorded of the successors of
Plato. It is time, however, to take up our subject anew, and examine the
opinions, alike false and contradictory, of the physical philosophers, men who
wandered over the wide earth, and had set the highest value on the discovery of
truth, and been familiar with the opinions of all the ancients, and carefully
studied the exact nature of the theology which existed among all, Phoenicians
and Egyptians and the Greeks themselves, in much earlier times. It is worth
while then to hear from themselves what was the fruit they found from their
labours, that so we may learn whether any worthy notion of God had come down to
them from the men of an older time. For the superstition of polytheism was
formerly prevalent from ancient times among the nations, and shrines, and
temples, and mysteries of the gods were everywhere customarily maintained, both
in city and country districts. So then there was no need even of human
philosophy, if indeed the knowledge of things divine had preoccupied the ground:
nor was there any necessity for the wise to invent novelties, if forsooth the
doctrines of their forefathers were right, nor any cause for factions and
dissensions among the noble philosophers, if the ancestral opinion about their
gods had been tested and proved to be harmonious and true. Or what need was
there to war and fight with one another, or run about and wander up and down the
long course, and filch the learning of the Barbarians, when they ought to have
been staying at home, and learning all from the gods, if forsooth there were any
gods, or to learn from the writers on religion the true and infallible
statements of the matters investigated in philosophy, about which they spent
infinite toil and contention, yet fell far short of discovering the truth?

Why too need they have ventured to make novel inquiries about gods or to quarrel
and pummel one another, if forsooth a safe and sure discovery of gods and a true
knowledge of religion was contained in sacred rites and mysteries and the rest
of the theology of the most ancient races, when they might have cultivated that
very religion undisturbed and in harmonious agreement? But then if it should be
found that these men had learned no truth about God from their predecessors, but
had set themselves to the examination of nature by their own devices, and used
conjectures rather than clear conception, why should they any longer refuse to
acknowledge that the ancient theology of the nations offered nothing beyond the
account which has been rendered in the books preceding this?

Now that the philosophy of the Greeks was a product of human conjectures and
much disputation and error, but not of any exact conception, you may learn from
Porphyry's Epistle to Anebo the Egyptian, when you hear him acknowledge this
very fact in these words: 24

CHAPTER X

[PORPHYRY] 'I WILL begin my friendship with you by an inquiry concerning the
gods and good demons and the philosophical doctrines relating to them, subjects
upon which very much has been said by Greek philosophers also, the greater part,
however, of their statements having only conjecture for the foundation of their
credibility.' And lower down he adds again: 25

'For among us there is much verbal controversy, as we derive the notion of "the
good" by conjecture from human reasonings: and those who have formed plans of
communication with the higher nature, have exercised their wisdom in vain, if
this branch of the subject has been disregarded in the investigation.'

Moreover in what he wrote Against Boethus, On the Soul, the same author makes the following confession in writing, word for word:----
26

'The evidence of our thoughts and that of history unquestionably establish the
immortality of the soul: but the arguments brought forward by philosophers in
demonstration of it seem easy to be overthrown through the ingenious arguments
of the Eristics on every subject. For what argument in philosophy could not be
disputed by men of a different opinion, when some of them thought fit to suspend
judgement even about matters that seemed to be manifest?'

Also in the work which he entitled Of the Philosophy derived from Oracles he
expressly acknowledges that the Greeks have been in error, and calls his own god
as a witness, saying that even Apollo had proclaimed this by oracles, and had
testified to the discovery of the truth by the Barbarians rather than by the
Greeks, and moreover had even mentioned the Hebrews in the testimony which he
bore. In fact, after quoting the oracle he has immediately made use of these
concluding words: 27

'Have you heard how much pains have been taken that a man may offer the
sacrifices of purification for the body, to say nothing of finding the salvation
of the soul? For the road to the gods is bound with brass, and steep, and rough,
and in it Barbarians found many paths, but Greeks went astray, while those who
already held it even ruined it; but the discovery was ascribed by the testimony
of the god to Egyptians, Phoenicians, and Chaldeans (for these are Assyrians),
to Lydians, and to Hebrews.' This is the statement of the philosopher, or rather
of his god. Is it right then after this to blame us, because forsooth we forsook
the Greeks who had gone astray and chose the doctrines of the Hebrews, who had
received such testimony for comprehension of the truth? And what are we to
expect to learn from philosophers? Or what hope is there of assistance from
them, if indeed their statements for the most part derive the first principles
of their proof from conjectures and probabilities? And what is the benefit of
disputation, if forsooth all the arguments of the philosophers are easily
overthrown, because of the sophistical use of language on all subjects? For
these are the statements heard just now not from us, but from themselves.

Wherefore it seems to me that not unreasonably but rightly and with well-proved judgement, we have despised teaching of such a character, and have welcomed the doctrines of the Hebrews, not because they have received testimony from the demon, but because they are shown to partake of the excellence and power of divine inspiration. In order, however, that you may learn by actual facts the disputations of the wonderful philosophers, and their dissensions about first principles, and about gods, and the constitution of the universe, I will set out their own words before you a little later. But first we must notice another point; for they go about boasting everywhere of their mathematical sciences and saying that it is altogether necessary for those who are going to attempt the comprehension of truth to pursue the study of astronomy, arithmetic, geometry, music,----the very things which were proved to have come to them from Barbarians,----for that without these a man cannot be accomplished in learning and philosophy, nay, cannot even touch the truth of things, unless the knowledge of these sciences has been previously impressed upon his soul. And then, priding themselves upon their learning in the subjects which I have mentioned, they think that they are lifted up on high and almost walking upon the very ether, as though forsooth they carried God Himself about with them in their arithmetic; and because we do not pursue the like studies, they think us no better than cattle, and say that we cannot in this way know God, nor anything grand. Come then, let us first set straight what is wrong in this, by holding out true reason as a light before them. And that will show thousands of Greeks and thousands of Barbarian races also, of whom the former with the help of the aforesaid sciences recognized neither God, nor virtuous life, nor anything at all that is excellent and profitable, while the latter without all these sciences have been eminent in religion and philosophy. For instance, you may learn what sort of opinions were held on these subjects by one so celebrated among them all as Socrates, if you give credit to what Xenophon narrates in the Memorabilia as follows: 28

CHAPTER XI

[XENOPHON] 'HE also used to teach how far it was necessary for a well-educated
man to be acquainted with each subject. For example, he said that he ought to
learn geometry so far as to be able, if ever it should be necessary, rightly to
measure land either in taking or giving possession, or in allotting it, or
marking out work. And this, he said, was so easy to learn that one who gave his
mind to the measuring could know at once how much land there was, and go away
acquainted with the mode of measuring it.

'But of learning geometry so far as to reach those unintelligible diagrams he
disapproved, for he said he did not see of what use these were, although he was
not unacquainted with them. But they were enough, he said, to exhaust a man's
lifetime, and hindered him from many other useful branches of learning.

'He bade them also become acquainted with astronomy, but this also only so far
as to be able to know the time of night, or of the month, or of the year, for
the sake of travelling, or voyaging, or keeping watch, and to be able to make
use of the indications relating to all other things that are to be done either
in the night, or in the month, or year, by knowing the different seasons for the
works before mentioned. These also, he said, were easy to learn from nocturnal
hunters, and pilots, and many others, whose business it is to know these things.

'But he strongly dissuaded from learning astronomy to such an extent as to know
the bodies which are not in the same orbit, and the planets and comets, and to
waste time in investigating their distances from the earth, and their periods,
and the causes of them. For he said that in these matters he did not see any
benefit, and yet even in these he was not uninstructed. But he said of these
also that they were enough to wear out a man's lifetime, and to hinder him from
many useful pursuits.

'And he wholly dissuaded one from anxiously inquiring in what way the heavenly
bodies are each contrived by God; for he neither thought that these things could
be discovered by mankind, nor did he believe that the gods would be pleased with
the man who sought to know what they had not been willing to make clear. But he
said that the man who troubled himself about these things would be in danger
even of going as mad as Anaxagoras was, who prided himself very highly upon
explaining the contrivances of the gods.

'For when he used to say that fire and the sun were the same, he ignored the
fact that though men easily discern, the fire, yet they cannot look upon the
sun; and by being exposed to the sunshine they have their complexions darkened,
but not so by fire. Also he was ignorant that of plants which spring out of the
earth none can make good growth without the light of the sun, while all perish
when heated by fire. And in saying that the sun was a fiery stone he was
ignorant also of this fact, that while a stone set in the fire neither shines
nor lasts long, the sun continues all the time to be the brightest of all
things.

'He also used to bid us learn to count; but here also as in everything else he
bade us guard against useless trouble: yet as far as it was useful he would
himself help his companions in examining and discussing all things.' So writes
Xenophon in the Memorabilia. And in the Epistle to Aeschines the same author
writes as follows concerning Plato, and those who boast of their physiology of
the universe: 29

CHAPTER XII

'THAT the things of the gods are beyond us is manifest to every one; but it is sufficient to worship them to the best of our power. What their nature is it is neither easy to discover nor lawful to inquire. For it pertains not to slaves to know the nature or conduct of their masters, beyond what their service requires. And what is of most importance, in proportion as we ought to admire one who spends labour upon the interests of mankind, so to those who strive to get fame from many inopportune and vain attempts it brings the more trouble. For when, 0 Aeschines, has any one ever heard Socrates talking about the heaven, or encouraging any one to learn about geometrical lines for correction of morals? As to music we know that he understood it only by ear; but he was constantly telling them on every occasion what was noble, and what manliness was, and justice, and other virtues: he used in fact to call the interests of mankind absolute good; and all things else, he used to say, were either impossible to be achieved by men, or were akin to fables, playthings of Sophists in their supercilious discussions. And he did not merely say these things without practising them. But to write of his doings to you who know them, although not likely to be unpleasing, takes time, and I have recorded them elsewhere. When refuted therefore let them cease, or betake themselves to what is reasonable, these men who were not pleased with Socrates, to whose wisdom the god bare witness while he was yet alive, and they who put him to death found no expiation in repentance. And so-----what a noble thing----they fell in love with Egypt, and the prodigious wisdom of Pythagoras, men whose excess and inconstancy towards Socrates was proved by their love of tyranny, and exchange of frugal living for a table of Sicilian luxury to serve their boundless appetite.' So speaks Xenophon, with a hint at Plato.30 But Plato in the Republic relates that concerning gymnastics and music Socrates spake as follows:31

CHAPTER XIII

[PLATO] 'WHAT then, O Glaucon, would be a learning likely to draw the soul from
the transient to the real? But while I am speaking there comes into my mind this
point: did we not say surely that these guardians while yet young must be
athletes in war? Yes, we said so. The learning then which we are seeking must
have this quality in addition to the former. What quality? It must be of some
use to men of war. It certainly must, if possible. They were to be educated, we
said before, in gymnastic and music. It was so, said he. And gymnastic, I
suppose, since it presides over growth and decay of the body, is concerned with
generation and corruption. That is evident. This then cannot be the study for
which we are seeking. It cannot. Can then music, so far as we previously
discussed it? Nay, said he, that, if you remember, was the counterpart of
gymnastic, as training our guardians by the influences of habit, by harmony
imparting not science but a kind of harmoniousness, and by rhythm a rhythmical
movement, and as having in its words certain other moral tendencies akin to
these, whether the subjects of its discourse were fabulous or partly true; but
it contained no instruction tending to such an end as you are now seeking.

'You remind me very correctly, said I; for music certainly contained nothing of
the kind. But what can there be of this character, my excellent Glaucon? For, I
think, we regarded all the arts as mechanical. Of course.' Then further on he
adds: 32

'We must never let those whom we are to educate attempt any imperfect form of
science that has not reached the point that all ought to attain, as we were
saying just now about astronomy. Or do you not know that they treat harmony also
in this way? For while they measure and compare with each other the notes and
concords that are merely heard, they labour, like the astronomers, on a useless
task.

'Yes, by heaven! said he, and it is ludicrous to see how they name certain
condensed intervals, and lay their ears on one side, as if trying to catch a
note from their neighbours; and some of them say that they can still hear an
intermediate sound, and that this is the very smallest interval which should be
used in measuring, while others doubt this and say that they now sound alike,
and both set their ears before their mind.

'You mean, said I, those good men who are always teasing and torturing the
strings, and screwing them up on the pegs. But that the metaphor may not be
extended too far about the beats given by the plectrum, and the assent, and
dissent, and petulance of the strings, I drop the metaphor, and say that I do
not mean these men, but those others whom we said just now that we would consult
about harmony. For they do the same as the astronomers; they investigate the
numerical relations in the harmonies which fall upon the ears, but they do not
rise to problems, to examine what numbers are harmonious, and what not, and the
reason in either case.' But now let this suffice in the way of preface to our
defence that we have not without right judgement neglected the useless learning
of such subjects as these. Let us then make at once a new beginning and examine
the mutual contradictions in doctrine of the aforesaid physical philosophers.
Now Plutarch has collected together the opinions of all the Platonists and
Pythagoreans alike, and of the still earlier physical philosophers as they were
called, and again of the more recent Peripatetics, and Stoics, and Epicureans,
and written them in a work which he entitled Of the Physical Doctrines approved
by Philosophers, from which I shall make the following quotations: 33

CHAPTER XIV

[PLUTARCH] 'THALES of Miletus, one of the seven sages, declared water to be the
first principle of all things. This man is thought to have been the founder of
philosophy, and from him the Ionic sect derived its name; for it had many
successions. After studying philosophy in Egypt he came as an elderly man to
Miletus. He says that all things come from water, and are all resolved into
water. And he forms his conjecture first from the fact that seed, which is
watery, is the first principle of all animal life; thus it is probable that all
things have their origin from moisture. His second argument is that all plants
derive nourishment and fruitfulness from moisture, and when deprived of it
wither away. And the third, that the very fire of the sun, and of the stars, and
the world itself are nourished by the evaporations of the waters. For this
reason Homer also suggests this notion concerning water,

"Ocean, which is the origin of all." 34

This is what Thales says.

'But Anaximander of Miletus says that the first principle of all things is the
infinite, for from this all are produced, and into this all pass away; for which
reason also infinite worlds are generated, and pass away again into that from
which they spring. So he says the reason why the infinite exists is that the
subsisting creation may not be deficient in any point. But he also is at fault
in not saying what the infinite is, whether it is air, or water, or earth, or
any other corporeal elements; he is wrong therefore in declaring the matter
while excluding the efficient cause. For the infinite is nothing else than
matter, and matter cannot have an actual existence, unless the efficient cause
underlie it.

'Anaximenes of Miletus declared that the air is the first principle of all
things, for from this all are produced, and into it they are resolved again. For
example, our soul, he says, is air, for it holds us together; and the whole
world too is encompassed by air and breath, and air and breath are used as
synonyms. But he too is wrong in thinking that living beings consist of simple
homogeneous air and breath; for it is impossible that the matter can exist as
sole principle of things, but we must assume the efficient cause also. As for
instance silver suffices not for the production of the drinking-cup, unless
there be the efficient cause, that is the silversmith; the case is similar with
copper and various kinds of wood, and all other matter.

'Heracleitus and Hippasus of Metapontum say that fire is the principle of all
things: for from fire, they say, all things are produced and all end in fire:
and all things in the world are created as it gradually cools down. For first
the coarsest part of it is pressed together and becomes earth; then the earth
being resolved by the natural force of the fire is turned into water, and being
vaporised becomes air. And again the world and all the bodies in it are consumed
in a conflagration by fire. Fire therefore is the first principle, because all
things come from it, and the end, inasmuch as they are all resolved into it.

'Democritus, who was followed long after by Epicurus, said that the first
principles of all things are bodies indivisible, but conceivable by reason, with
no admixture of vacuum, uncreated, imperishable, not capable of being broken,
nor of receiving shape from their parts, nor of being altered in quality, but
perceptible by reason only; that they move, however, in the vacuum, and through
the vacuum, and that both the vacuum itself is infinite and the bodies infinite.
And the bodies possess these three properties, shape, magnitude, and weight.
Democritus, however, said two, magnitude and shape; but Epicurus added to them a
third, namely weight. For he said the bodies must be moved by the impulse of the
weight, since otherwise they will not be moved at all. The shapes of the atoms
are limitable, not infinite: for there are none either hook-shaped, nor
trident-shaped, nor ring-shaped. For these shapes are easily broken, whereas the
atoms are impassive and cannot be broken; but they have their proper shapes,
which are conceivable by reason. And the "atom" is so called, not because it is
extremely small, but because it cannot be divided, being impassive, and free
from admixture of vacuum: so that if a man says "atom" he means unbreakable,
impassive, unmixed with vacuum. And that the atom exists is manifest: for there
are also elements (στοιχεῖα), and living beings that are empty, and there is the
Monad.

'Empedocles, son of Meton, of Agrigentum, says that there are four elements,
fire, air, water, earth, and, two original forces, love and hate, of which the
one tends to unite, and the other to separate. And this is how he speaks:

"Learn first four roots of all things that exist:

Bright Zeus, life-giving Hera, and the god Of realms unseen, and Nestis, who
with tears Bedews the fountain-head of mortal life." 35

For by "Zeus" he means the seething heat and the ether; and by "life-giving
Hera," the air; the earth by Aidoneus, and by Nestis and "the fountain-head of
mortal life," the seed, as it were, and the water.' So great is the dissonance
of the first physical philosophers: such too is their opinion concerning first
principles, assuming, as they did, no god, no maker, no artificer, nor any cause
of the universe, nor yet gods, nor incorporeal powers, no intelligent natures,
no rational essences, nor anything at all beyond the reach of the senses, in
their first principles. In fact Anaxagoras alone is mentioned as the first of
the Greeks who declared in his discourses about first principles that mind is
the cause of all things. They say at least that this philosopher had a great
admiration for natural science beyond all who were before him: for the sake of
it certainly he left his own district a mere sheepwalk, and was the first of the
Greeks who stated clearly the doctrine of first principles. For he not only
pronounced, like those before him, on the essence of all things, but also on the
cause which set it in motion.

'"For in the beginning," he said, "all things were mingled together in
confusion: but mind came in, and brought them out of confusion into order.'"

One cannot but wonder how this man, having been the first among Greeks who
taught concerning God in this fashion, was thought by the Athenians to be an
atheist, because he regarded not the sun but the Maker of the sun as God, and
barely escaped being stoned to death. But it is said that even he did not keep
the doctrine safe and sound: for though he made mind preside over all things, he
did not go on to render his physical system concerning the existing world
accordant with mind and reason. Hear in fact how in Plato's dialogue Of the Soul
Socrates blames him in the following passage: 36

CHAPTER XV

[PLATO] 'BUT once when I heard a man reading out of a book, as he said, of
Anaxagoras, and saying that it is mind that sets all in order, and is the cause
of all, I was delighted with this cause, and it seemed to me in a certain manner
right that mind should be the cause of all things, and I thought, if this is so,
mind in its ordering all things must arrange each in such a way that all may be
best.

'If therefore any one should wish to find the cause of each thing, how it comes
into being or perishes or exists, what he must find out about it is this, how it
is best for it either to be, or to do or suffer anything else. According to this
theory then a man ought to consider nothing else, whether in regard to himself
or others, except what is best and most perfect: then the same man must
necessarily know also the worse; for the knowledge concerning them is the same.

'Reasoning thus then I rejoiced to think that I had found in Anaxagoras a
teacher of the cause of existing things after my own mind, and that he would
tell me in the first place whether the earth is flat or round, and, after he had
told me, would further explain the cause and the necessity, stating which is the
better, and that it is better for it to be of such shape: and if he should say
that it is in the centre, I thought that he would go on to explain that it is
better for it to be in the centre: and if he should prove all this to me, I was
prepared to desire no other kind of cause beyond that.

'Moreover I was prepared to make the like inquiries concerning sun and moon and
the other heavenly bodies as to their relative swiftness, and turning-points and
other conditions, how it is better for each of them thus to act and be acted
upon as they are. For I could never have thought that when he asserted that they
were ordered by mind he would ascribe any other cause to them, except that it
was best for them to be just as they are.

'I thought therefore that in assigning its cause to each of them severally, and
to all in common, he would further explain what was best for each and what was
the common good of all. And I would not have sold my expectations for a great
deal, but I seized the books very eagerly, and began to read as fast as I could,
in order that I might know as soon as possible what was best and what worse. How
glorious then the hope, my friend, from which I was driven away, when, as I went
on reading, I saw a man making no use of mind, nor alleging any (real) causes
for the ordering of things, but treating as causes a parcel of airs and ethers
and waters, and many other absurdities.

'And he seemed to me to be very much in the same case as if one were to say that
whatever Socrates does he does by mind, and then, on attempting to state the
causes of each of my actions, should say first of all that the reasons of my
sitting here now are these, that my body is composed of bones and muscles, and
the bones are hard and have joints separate one from another, while the muscles
are capable of contraction and relaxation, surrounding the bones as do also the
flesh and skin which hold them together. When therefore the bones are lifted in
their sockets, the muscles by their relaxation and contraction make me able, I
suppose, now to bend my limbs, and this is the cause why I am sitting here with
my knees bent.

Again, with regard to my conversing with you, it is as if he were to state other
causes, such as these, a set of sounds, and airs, and hearings, and ten thousand
other things of this kind, but should neglect to mention the true causes,
namely, that since the Athenians thought it better to condemn me, for that
reason I too in my turn have thought it better to sit here, and more just to
remain and undergo my sentence, whatever they may have ordered.

'For, by the Dog! I think these muscles and these bones would long ago have been
near Megara or Boeotia, carried thither by their opinion of what is best, did I
not think it more just and more noble to undergo any sentence which the state
may appoint, instead of taking to flight like a runaway.

'But to call such things as these causes is extremely absurd: if however any one
were to say that without having such things, bones and muscles and all else that
I have, I should not be able to do what I thought right, he would speak truly;
but to say that these are the causes of my doing what I do, and that I do so by
mind, but not by choice of what is best, would be a great and extreme
carelessness of speech.' Then he adds: 37

'And for this reason one man by surrounding the earth with a vortex makes it to
be kept steady forsooth by the heaven, while another sets the air as a support
to the earth as if it were a broad kneading-trough. But the power by which
things are now set in the best possible way for them to have been placed, this
they neither investigate, nor think that there is any superhuman force in it,
but imagine that they might at some time discover an Atlas stronger and more
immortal than this, and more capable of holding all things together, and suppose
that "the good and binding" does in reality bind and hold together nothing at
all.' So much says Socrates of the opinion of Anaxagoras. Now Anaxagoras was
succeeded by Archelaus both in the school and in opinion, and Socrates is said
to have been a disciple of Archelaus. Other physical philosophers, however, as
Xenophanes and Pythagoras, who nourished at the same time with Anaxagoras,
discussed the imperishable nature of God and the immortality of the soul. And
from these afterwards arose the sects of Greek philosophy, some of whom followed
these, and some followed others, and certain of them also invented opinions of
their own. Again then Plutarch writes of their suppositions concerning gods in
this same manner: 38

CHAPTER XVI

[PLUTARCH] 'SOME of the philosophers, as Diagoras of Melos, and Theodoras of
Cyrene, and Euemerus of Tegea, altogether deny that there are any gods'. There
is an allusion also to Euemerus in the Iambic poems of Callimachus of Cyrene.
Euripides also, the tragic poet, though he was loth to withdraw the veil through
fear of the Areopagus, yet gave a glimpse of this. For he brought Sisyphus
forward as the patron of this opinion, and advocated his judgement.'

After these he brings in Anaxagoras again, stating that he was the first who
formed right thoughts about God. And this is how he speaks: 39

'But Anaxagoras says that in the beginning the bodies were motionless, but the
mind of God distributed them in order, and produced the generations of the
universe. Plato, however, supposed that the primordial bodies were not
motionless, but were moving in a disorderly way: wherefore, says he, God having
ordained that order is better than disorder, made an orderly distribution of
them.' To which he adds:

'They therefore are both in error, because they represented God as having regard
to human affairs, and arranging the world for this purpose: for the living Being
which is blessed and immortal, supplied with all good things, and incapable of
any misfortune, being wholly occupied with the maintenance of its own happiness
and immortality, has no regard for human affairs. But he would be a miserable
being if he carried burdens like a labourer or artisan, and was full of cares
about the constitution of the world.

'And again the god of whom they speak either was not existing throughout that
former age when the primary bodies were motionless, or when they were moving in
disorderly fashion, or else he was either asleep, or awake, or neither of these.
We can neither admit the first, for every god is eternal; nor the second, for if
God was sleeping from eternity He was dead; for an eternal sleep is death. But
surely God is incapable of sleep; for the immortality of God and that which is
akin to death are far apart.

'If then God was awake, either He was in want of something to complete His
happiness, or He was complete in blessedness. And neither according to the first
case is God blessed, for that which is wanting in happiness is not blessed: nor
according to the second case; for being deficient in nothing, any actions He
might attempt must be void of purpose. And if God exists, and if human affairs
are administered by His care, how conies it that the counterfeit is prosperous,
and the worthy suffers adversity?

'For Agamemnon, who was both

"A valiant warrior and a virtuous king," 40

was overpowered and treacherously murdered by an adulterer and adulteress. Also
his kinsman Hercules, after purging away many of the plagues by which human life
is infested, was treacherously murdered with a poisoned robe by Deianira.

'Thales held that god is the mind of the world; Anaximander that the stars are
celestial gods; Democritus that god is like a sphere amid fire, which is the
soul of the world.

'Pythagoras held that of first principles the monad is god: and the good, which
is the nature of the One, is the mind itself. But the unlimited duad is a daemon
and the evil, and it is surrounded by the multitude of matter and the visible
world.' Now after these, hear what were the opinions held by those of more
recent time: 41

'Socrates and Plato held that (God is) the One, the single self-existent nature,
the monadic, the real Being, the good: and all this variety of names points
immediately to mind. God therefore is mind, a separate species, that is to say
what is purely immaterial and unconnected with anything passible.

'Aristotle held that the Most High God is a separate species, and rides upon the
sphere of the universe, which is an etherial body, the fifth essence so-called
by him. And when this had been divided into spheres, which though connected in
their nature are separated by reason, he thinks that each of the spheres is a
living being compounded of body and soul, of which the body is etherial, and
moves in a circular orbit, while the soul, being itself motionless reason, is
actually the cause of the motion.

'The Stoics set forth an intelligent god, an artistic fire, proceeding
methodically to generate a world, which comprises all the seminal laws, in
accordance with which things are severally produced according to fate: also a
spirit, which pervades the whole world, but receives different names according
to the changes of the matter through which it has passed.

'They regard as a god the world, and the stars, and the earth, but mind which is
highest of all they place in the ether.

'Epicurus held that the gods are of human shape, but all to be discerned by
reason because of the fineness of the particles in the nature of their forms.
The same philosopher added four other natures generically imperishable, namely
the atoms, the vacuum, the infinite, the similarities, which are called
homoeomeriae and elements.'

Such are the dissensions and blasphemies concerning God of the physical
philosophers, among whom, as is proved by this narrative, Pythagoras, and
Anaxa-goras, and Plato, and Socrates were the first who made mind and God
preside over the world. These then are shown to have been in their times very
children, as compared with the times at which the remotest events in Hebrew
antiquity are fixed by history.

Accordingly among all the Greeks, and those who long ago introduced the
polytheistic superstition among both the Phoenicians and Egyptians, the
knowledge of the God of the universe was not very ancient, but the first of the
Greeks to publish it were Anaxagoras and his school. Moreover the doctrines of
the polytheistic superstition prevailed over all nations; but they contained, as
it seems, not the true theology, but that which the Egyptians and Phoenicians,
as was testified, were the very first to establish. And this was a theology
which by no means treated of gods, nor of any divine powers, but of men who had
already been long lying among the dead, as was shown long since by our word of
truth. Come then, let us take up our argument again. Since among the physical
philosophers some were for bringing all things down to the senses, while others
drew all in the contrary direction, as Xenophanes of Colophon, and Parmenides
the Eleatic, who made nought of the senses, asserting that there could be no
comprehension of things sensible, and that we must therefore trust to reason
alone, let us examine the objections which have been urged against them.

CHAPTER XVII

[ARISTOCLES] 42 'BUT there came others uttering language opposed to these. For
they think we ought to put down the senses and their presentations, and trust
only to reason. For such were formerly the statements of Xenophanes and
Parmenides and Zenon and Melissus, and afterwards of Stilpo and the Megarics.
Whence these maintain that "being" is one, and that the "other" does not exist,
and that nothing is generated, and nothing perishes, nor is moved at all.

'The fuller argument then against these we shall learn in our course of
philosophy; at present, however, we must say as much as this. We should argue,
that though reason is the most divine of our faculties, yet nevertheless we have
need also of sense, just as we have of the body. And it is evidently the nature
of sense also to be true: for it is not possible that the sentient subject
should not be in some way affected, and being affected he must know the
affection: therefore sensation also is a kind of knowledge.

'Moreover if sensation is a kind of affection, and everything that is affected
is affected by something, that which acts must certainly be other than that
which is acted on. So that first there would be the so-called "other," as for
instance, the colour and the sound; and then the existing thing will not be one:
nor moreover will it be motionless, for sensation is a motion.

'And in this way every one wishes to have his senses in a natural state,
inasmuch as he trusts, I suppose, to sound senses rather than to diseased. With
good reason therefore a strong love of our senses is infused in us. No one
certainly, unless mad, would choose ever to lose a single sense, that so he
might gain all other good things.

'Those then who found fault with the senses, if at least they were persualded
that it was useless to have them, ought to have said just what Pandarus says in
Homer about his own bow,

"Then may a stranger's sword cut off my head, If with these hands I shatter not
and burn The bow that thus hath failed me at my need," 43

and immediately after to have destroyed all their senses: for thus one would
have believed them as teaching by deed that they had no need of them.

'But now this is the very greatest absurdity; for though in their words they
declare their senses to be useless, in their deeds they continue to make the
fullest use of them.

'Melissus in fact wishing to show why none of these things which are apparent
and visible really exists, demonstrates it by the phenomena themselves. He says
in fact: "For if earth exists, and water, and air, and fire, and iron, and gold,
and the living and the dead, and black and white, and all the other things which
men say are real, and if we see and hear rightly, then 'being' also ought to be
such as it at first seemed to us to be, and not to change, nor become other, but
each, thing ought always to be just such as it is. But now we say that we see,
and hear, and understand aright: yet it seems to us that the hot becomes cold,
and the cold hot, and the hard soft, and the soft hard."

'But when he used to say these and many other such things one might very
reasonably have asked him, Well then, was it not by sensation you learned that
what is hot now becomes cold afterwards? And in like manner concerning the other
instances. For just as I said, it would be found that he abolishes and convicts
the senses because he most fully believes them.

'But in fact the arguments of this kind have already been subjected to nearly
sufficient correction: they have certainly become obsolete, as if they had never
been uttered at all. Now indeed we may say boldly that those philosophers take
the right course who adopt both the senses and the reason for acquiring the
knowledge of things.'

Such then were the followers of Xenophanes, who is said to have flourished at
the same time with Pythagoras and Anaxagoras. Now a hearer of Xenophanes was
Parmenides, and of Parmenides Melissus, of him Zeno, of him Leucippus, of him
Democritus, of him Protagoras and Nessas, and of Nessas Metrodorus, of him
Diogenes, of him Anaxarchus, and a disciple of Anaxarchus was Pyrrho, from whom
arose the school of those who were surnamed Sceptics. And as these also laid it
down that no conception of anything was possible either by sense or by reason,
but suspended their judgement in all cases, we may learn how they were refuted
by those who held an opposite opinion, from the book before mentioned, speaking
word for word as follows: 44

CHAPTER XVIII

"BEFORE all things it is necessary to make a thorough examination of our own
knowledge; for if it is our nature to know nothing there is no further need to
inquire about other things.

'Some then there were even of the ancients who spoke this language, and who have
been opposed by Aristotle. Pyrrho indeed, of Elis, spoke strongly in this sense,
but has not himself left anything in writing. But his disciple Timon says that
the man who means to be happy must look to these three things: first, what are
the natural qualities of things; secondly, in what way we should be disposed
towards them; and lastly, what advantage there will be to those who are so
disposed.

'The things themselves then, he professes to show, are equally indifferent, and
unstable, and indeterminate, and therefore neither our senses nor our opinions
are either true or false. For this reason then we must not trust them, but be
without opinions, and without bias, and without wavering, saying of every single
thing that it no more is than is not, or both is and is not, or neither is nor
is not.

'To those indeed who are thus disposed the result, Timon says, will be first
speechlessness, and then imperturbability, but Aene-sidemus says pleasure.

'These then are the chief points of their arguments: and now let us consider
whether they are right in what they say. Since therefore they say that all
things are equally indifferent, and bid us for this reason attach ourselves to
none, nor hold any opinion, I think one may reasonably ask them, whether those
who think things differ are in error or not. For if they are in error, surely
they cannot be right in their supposition. So they will be compelled to say that
there are some who have false opinions about things, and they themselves
therefore must be those who speak the truth: and so there must be truth and
falsehood. But if we the many are not in error in thinking that things differ,
what do they mean by rebuking us? For they must be in error themselves in
maintaining that they do not differ.

'Moreover if we should even grant to them that all things are equally
indifferent, it is evident that even they themselves would not differ from the
multitude. What then would their wisdom, be? And why does Timon abuse all other
persons, and sing the praises of Pyrrho only?

'Yet, further, if all things are equally indifferent and we ought therefore to
have no opinion, there would be no difference even in these cases, I mean in the
differing or not differing, and the having or not having an opinion. For why
should things of this kind be rather than not be? Or, as Timon says, why "yes,"
and why "no," and why the very "Why?" itself? It is manifest therefore that
inquiry is done away: so let them cease from troubling. For at present there is
no method in their madness, while, in the very act of admonishing us to have no
opinion, they at the same time bid us to form an opinion, and in saying that men
ought to make no statement they make a statement themselves: and though they
require you to agree with no one, they command you to believe themselves: and
then though they say they know nothing, they reprove us all, as if they knew
very well.

'And those who assert that all things are uncertain must do one of two things,
either be silent, or speak and state something. If then they should hold their
peace, it is evident that against such there would be no argument. But if they
should make a statement, anyhow and by all means they must say that something
either is or is not, just as they certainly now say that all things are to all
men matters not of knowledge but of customary opinion, and that nothing can be
known.

'The man therefore who maintains this either makes the matter clear, and it is
possible to understand it as spoken, or it is impossible. But if he does not
make it clear, there can be absolutely no arguing in this case either with such
a man. But if he should make his meaning clear, he must certainly either state
what is indefinite or what is definite: and if indefinite, neither in this case
would there be any arguing with him, for of the indefinite there can be no
knowledge. But if the statements, or any one of them whatever, be definite, the
man who states this defines something and decides. How then can all things be
unknowable and indeterminate? But should he say that the same thing both is and
is not, in the first place the same thing will be both true and false, and next
he will both say a thing and not say it, and by use of speech will destroy
speech, and moreover, while acknowledging that he speaks falsely, says that we
ought to believe him.

'Now it is worth inquiring whence they learned what they say, that all things
are uncertain. For they ought to know beforehand what certainty is: thus at all
events they would be able to say that things have not this quality of certainty.
First they ought to know affirmation, and then negation. But if they are
ignorant of the nature of certainty, neither can they know what uncertainty is.

'When indeed Aenesidemus in his Outline goes through the nine moods (in all of
which he has attempted to prove the uncertainty of things), which are we to say,
that he speaks with knowledge of them or without knowledge? For he says that
there is a difference in animals, and in ourselves, and in states, and in the
modes of life, and customs, and laws: he says also that our senses are feeble,
and that the external hindrances to knwoledge are many, such as distances,
magnitudes, and motions: and further, the difference of condition in men young
and old, and waking and sleeping, and healthy and sick: and nothing that we
perceive is simple and unmixed; for all things are confused, and spoken in a
relative sense.

'But when he was making these and other such fine speeches, one would have
liked, I say, to ask hirn whether he was stating with full knowledge that this
is the condition of things, or without knowledge. For if he did not know, how
could we believe him? But if he knew, he was vastly silly for declaring at the
same time that all things are uncertain, and yet saying that he knew so much.

'Moreover whenever they go through such details, they are only making a sort of
induction, showing what is the nature of the phenomena and of the particulars:
and a process of this kind both is, and is called, a proof. If therefore they
assent to it, it is evident that they form an opinion: and if they disbelieve
it, neither should we choose to give heed to them.

'Timon moreover in the Python relates a story at great length, how he met Pyrrho
walking towards Delphi past the temple of Amphiaraus, and what they talked about
to each other. Might not then any one who stood beside him while writing this
reasonably say, Why trouble yourself, poor fellow, in writing this, and relating
what you do not know? For why rather did you meet him than not meet him, and
talk with him rather than not talk?

'And this same wonderful Pyrrho, did he know the reason why he was walking to
see the Pythian games? Or was he wandering, like a madman, along the road? And
when he began to find fault with mankind and their ignorance, are we to say that
he spoke truth or not, and that Timon was affected in a certain way and agreed
with his sayings, or did not heed them? For if he was not persuaded, how did he
pass from a choral dancer to a philosopher, and continue to be an admirer of
Pyrrho? But if he agreed with what was said, he must be an absurd person for
taking to philosophy himself but forbidding us to do so.

'And one must simply wonder what is the meaning to them of Timon's lampoons and
railings against all men, and the tedious Rudiments of Aenesidemus and all the
like multitude of words. For if they have written these with an idea that they
would render us better, and therefore think it right to confute us all, that so
we may cease to talk nonsense, it is evidently their wish that we should know
the truth, and assume that things are such as Pyrrho maintains. So if we were to
be persuaded by them we should change from worse to better, by forming the more
advantageous judgements, and approving those who gave the better advice.

'How then could things possibly be equally indifferent and indeterminate? And
how could we avoid giving assent and forming opinions? And if there is no use in
arguments, why do they trouble us? Or why does Timon say,

"No other mortal could with Pyrrho vie"? 45

For one would not admire Pyrrho any more than the notorious Coroebus or
Meletides, who are thought to excel in stupidity.

'We ought, however, to take also the following matters into consideration. For
what sort of citizen, or judge, or counsellor, or friend, or, in a word, what
sort of man would such an one be? Or what evil deeds would not he dare, who held
that nothing is really evil, or disgraceful, or just or unjust? For one could
not say even this, that such men are afraid of the laws and their penalties; for
how should they, seeing that, as they themselves say, they are incapable of
feeling or of trouble?

'Timon indeed even says this of Pyrrho:

''O what a man I knew, void of conceit, Daunted by none, who whether known to
fame Or nameless o'er the fickle nations rule, This way and that weighed down by
passion's force, Opinion false, and legislation vain." 46

'When, however, they utter this wise saw, that one ought to live in accordance
with nature and with customs, and yet not to assent to anything, they are too
silly. For they require one to assent to this at least, if to nothing else, and
to assume that it is so. But why ought one, rather than ought not, to follow
nature and customs, if forsooth we know nothing, and have no means whereby to
judge?

'It is altogether a silly thing, when they say, that just as cathartic drugs
purge out themselves together with the excrements, in like manner the argument
which maintains that all things are uncertain together with everything else
destroys itself also. For supposing it to refute itself, they who use it must
talk nonsense. It were better therefore for them to hold their peace, and not
open their mouth at all,

'But in truth there is no similarity between the cathartic drug and their
argument. For the drug is secreted and does not remain in the body: the
argument, however, must be there in men's souls, as being always the same and
gaining their belief, for it can be only this that makes them incapable of
assent.

'But that it is not possible for a man to have no opinions, one may learn in the
following manner. For it is impossible that he who perceives by sense does not
perceive: now perception by sense is a kind of knowledge. And that he also
believes his sensation is evident to all: for when he wishes to see more
exactly, he wipes his eyes, and comes nearer, and shades them.

'Moreover we know that we feel pleasure and pain: for it is not possible for one
who is being burned or cut to be ignorant of it. And who would not say that acts
of memory surely and of recollection are accompanied by an assumption? But what
need one say about common concepts, that such a thing is a man, and again
concerning sciences and arts? For there would be none of these, were it not our
nature to make assumptions. But for my part I pass over all other arguments.
Whether, however, we believe, or whether we disbelieve the arguments used by
them, in every way it is an absolute necessity to form an opinion.

'It is manifest then that it is impossible to study philosophy in this fashion;
and that it is also unnatural and contrary to the laws, we may perceive as
follows. For if on the other hand things were in reality of this kind, what
would remain but that we must live as if asleep, in a random and senseless
fashion? So that our lawgivers, and generals, and educators must all be talking
nonsense. To me, however, it seems that all the rest of mankind are living in a
natural way, but only those who talk this nonsense are puffed up with conceit,
or rather are gone stark mad.

'Not least, however, one may learn this from the following case. Antigonus, for
instance, of Carystus, who lived about the same times and wrote their biography,
says that Pyrrho being pursued by a dog escaped up a tree, and, when laughed at
by those who stood by, said that it was difficult to put off the man. And when
his sister Philiste was to offer a sacrifice, and then one of her friends
promised what was necessary for the sacrifice and did not provide it, but Pyrrho
bought it, and was angry, upon his friend saying that his acts were not in
accord with his words nor worthy of his impassivity, he replied, In the case of
a woman certainly we ought not to make proof of it. Nevertheless his friend
might fairly have answered, If there is any good in these arguments of yours,
your impassivity is useless in the case even of a woman, or a dog, and in all
cases.

'But it is right to ascertain both who they were that admired him, and whom he
himself admired. Pyrrho then was a disciple of one Anaxarchus, and was at first
a painter, and not very successful at that; next, after reading the books of
Democritus, he neither found anything useful there nor wrote anything good
himself, but spake evil of all, both gods and men. But afterwards wrapping
himself up in this conceit, and calling himself free from conceit, he left
nothing in writing.

'A disciple of his was Timon of Phlius, who at first was a dancer in the chorus
at the theatres, but having afterwards fallen in with Pyrrho he composed
offensive and vulgar parodies, in which he has reviled all who ever studied
philosophy. For this was the man who wrote the Silli, and said:

"Mankind how poor and base, born but to eat, Your life made up of shame, and
strife, and woe." 47

And again:

''Men are but bags with vain opinions filled." 48

'When nobody took notice of them any more than if they had never been born, a
certain Aenesidemus began just yesterday to stir up this nonsense again at
Alexandria in Egypt. And these are just the men who were thought to be the
mightiest of those who had trodden this path.

'It is evident then that no one in his right mind would approve such a sect, or
course of argument, or whatever and however any one likes to call it. For I
think for my part that we ought not to call it philosophy at all, since it
destroys the very first principles of philosophy.'

These then are the arguments against those who are supposed to follow Pyrrho in
philosophy. And near akin to them would be the answers to be urged against those
who follow Aristippus of Cyrene, in saying that only the feelings are
conceptional. Now Aristippus was a companion of Socrates, and was the founder of
the so-called Cyrenaic sect, from which Epicurus has taken occasion for his
exposition of man's proper end. Aristippus was extremely luxurious in his mode
of life, and fond of pleasure; he did not, however, openly discourse on the end,
but virtually used to say that the substance of happiness lay in pleasures. For
by always making pleasure the subject of his discourses he led those who
attended him to suspect him of meaning that to live pleasantly was the end of
man.

Among his other hearers was his own daughter Arete, who having borne a son named
him Aristippus, and he from having been introduced by her to philosophical
studies was called his mother's pupil (mhtrodi/daktoj). He quite plainly defined
the end to be the life of pleasure, ranking as pleasure that which lies in
motion. For he said that there are three states affecting our temperament: one,
in which we feel pain, like a storm at sea; another, in which we feel pleasure,
that may be likened to a gentle undulation, for pleasure is a gentle movement,
comparable to a favourable breeze; and the third is an intermediate state, in
which we feel neither pain nor pleasure, which is similar to a calm. So of these
feelings only, he said, we have the sensation. Now against this sect the
following objections have been urged (by Aristocles). 49

CHAPTER XIX

'NEXT in order will be those who say that the feelings alone are conceptional,
and this was asserted by some of the Cyrenaics. For they, as if oppressed by a
kind of torpor, maintained that they knew nothing at all unless some one
standing by struck and pricked them; for when burned or cut, they said, they
knew that they felt something, but whether what burned them was fire, or what
cut them iron, they could not tell.

'Men then who talk thus one might immediately ask, whether they at all events
know this that they suffer and feel something. For if they do not know, neither
could they say that they know only the feeling: if on the other hand they know,
the feelings cannot be the only things conceptional. For "I am being burned" was
a statement, and not a feeling.

'Moreover these three things must necessarily subsist together, the suffering
itself, and that which causes it, and that which suffers. The man therefore who
perceives the suffering must certainly by sensation feel the sufferer. For
surely he will not know that some one is being warmed, it may be, without
knowing whether it is himself or his neighbour; and whether now or last year,
and whether at Athens or in Egypt, whether alive or dead, and moreover whether a
man or a stone.

'Therefore he will also know by what he suffers: for men know one another, and
roads, and cities, and their food. Artisans again know their own tools, and
physicians and sailors prognosticate what is going to happen, and dogs discover
the tracks of wild beasts.

'Moreover the man who suffers anything certainly perceives it either as
something affecting himself or as another's suffering. Whence therefore will he
be able to say that this is pleasure, and that pain? Or that he felt something
by taste, or sight, or hearing? And by tasting with his tongue, and seeing with
his eyes, and hearing with his ears? Or how do they know that it is right to
choose this, and avoid that? But supposing them to know none of these things,
they will have no impulse nor desire; and so would not be living beings. For
they are ridiculous, whenever they say that these things have happened to them,
but that they do not know how or in what manner. For such as these could not
even say whether they are human beings, nor whether they are alive, nor,
therefore, whether they say and declare anything.

'What discussion then can there be with such men as these? One may wonder,
however, if they know not whether they are upon earth or in heaven; and wonder
still more, if they do not know, though they profess to study this kind of
philosophy, whether four are more than three, and how many one and two make. For
being what they are they cannot even say how many fingers they have on their
hands, nor whether each of them is one or more.

'So they would not even know their own name, nor their country, nor Aristippus:
neither therefore whom they love or hate, nor what things they desire. Nor, if
they were to laugh or cry, would they be able to say, that is laughable, and
that painful. It is evident therefore that we do not even know what we are now
saying. Such men therefore as these would be no better than gnats or flies,
though even those animals know what is natural and unnatural.'

Although there are endless arguments that one might use against men in this
state of mind, yet these are sufficient. The next thing is to join them in
examining those who have taken the opposite road, and decided that we ought to
believe the bodily senses in everything, among whom are Metrodorus of Chios, and
Protagoras of Abdera.

Metrodorus then was said to have been a hearer of Democritus, and to have
declared 'plenum' and 'vacuum' to be first principles, of which the former was
'being,' and the latter 'not-being.' So in writing about nature he employed an
introduction of this kind,50 'None of us knows anything, not even this, whether
we know or do not know': an introduction which gave a mischievous impulse to
Pyrrho who came afterwards. Then he went on to say that 'all things are just
what any one may think them.' And as to Protagoras it is reported that he was
called an atheist. In fact he, too, in writing about the gods used this sort of
introduction: 51

'So as to gods I know not either that they exist, nor what their nature is: for
there are many things that hinder me from knowing each of these points.' This
man the Athenians punished by banishment, and burned his books publicly in the
middle of the marketplace. Since then these men asserted that we must believe
our senses only, let us look at the arguments urged against them (by
Aristocles). 52

CHAPTER XX

'Now there have been men who maintained that we must believe only sense and its
presentations. Some indeed say that even Homer intimates this kind of doctrine
by declaring that Ocean is the first principle, as though all things were in
flux. But of those known to us, Metrodorus of Chios seems to make the same
statement; Protagoras of Abdera not only seems, but expressly states this.

'For he said that "the Man is the measure of all things, of existing things,
that they exist, of non-existent things, that they do not exist: for as things
appear to each person, such they also are; and of the rest we can affirm nothing
positively."

'Now in answer to them one may say what Plato says in the Theaetetus:53 in the
first place, why in the world, if such forsooth is the nature of things, did he
assert that "the Man" is the measure of truth and not a pig or a dog-headed ape?
But next, how did they mean that themselves were wise, if forsooth every one is
the measure of truth to himself? Or how do they refute other men, if that which
appears to each is true? And how is it that we are ignorant of some things,
though we often perceive them by sensation, just as when we hear barbarians
speaking?

'Moreover the man who has seen anything, and then remembers it, knows it, though
he is no longer sensible of it. And if he should shut one eye and see with the
other, he will evidently be both knowing and not knowing the same thing.

'And in addition to this, if that which appears to each is also true, but what
they say does not appear true to us, it must also be true that the Man is not
the measure of all things.

'Moreover artists are superior to the unskilled, and experts to the
inexperienced, and for this reason a pilot, or a physician, or a general
foresees better what is about to happen.

'These men too absolutely destroy the degrees of the more or less, and the
necessary and contingent, and the natural and unnatural. And thus the same thing
would both be and not be; for nothing hinders the same thing from appearing to
some to be, and to others not to be. And the same thing would be both a man and
a block: for sometimes the same thing appears to one a man and to another a
block.

'Every speech too would be true, but also for this reason false: and counsellors
and judges would not have anything to do. And what is most terrible, the same
persons will be both good and bad, and vice and virtue the same thing. Many
other instances also of this kind one might mention; but in fact there is no
need of more arguments against those who think that they have no mind nor
reason.' Then next he adds:

'But since there are even now some who say that every sensation and every
presentation is true, let us say a few words about them also. For these seem to
be afraid lest, if they should say that some sensations are false, they should
not have their criterion and their canon sure and trustworthy: but they fail to
see that, if this be so, they should lose no time in declaring that all opinions
also are true; for it is natural to us to judge by them also of many things: and
nevertheless they maintain that some opinions are true and some false.

'And then if one were to examine he would see that none even of the other
criteria are always and thoroughly free from error; as for instance I mean a
balance, or a turning-lathe, or anything of this kind: but each of them in one
condition is sound and in another bad; and when men use it in this way, it tells
true, but in that way tells false. Moreover if every sensation were true, they
ought not to differ so much. For they are different when near and far off, and
in the sick and the strong, and in the skilled and unskilled, and prudent and
senseless. And of course it would be altogether absurd to say that the
sensations of the mad are true, and of those who see amiss, and hear amiss. For
the statement that he who sees amiss either sees or does not see would be silly:
for one would answer, that he sees indeed, but not aright.

'When, however, they say that sensation being devoid of reason neither adds
anything nor takes away, it is evident that they fail to see the obstacles: for
in the case of the oar in the water, and in pictures, and numberless other
things, it is the sense that deceives. Wherefore in such cases we all lay the
blame not on our mind, but on the presentation: for the argument refutes itself
when it maintains that every presentation is true. For at all events it declares
the falsity of ours, which causes us to think that not every presentation is
true. The result then for them is to say that every presentation is both true
and false.

'And they are altogether wrong in maintaining that things really are just such
as they may seem to us: for on the contrary they appear such as they are by
nature, and we do not make them to be so, but are ourselves affected in a
certain way by them. Since if we were to imagine puppies or young kids, as
painters and sculptors do, it would be ridiculous to assert straightway that
they existed, and therefore to represent them to ourselves as standing ready at
hand.' From what has been said then it is evident that they do not speak rightly
who assert that every sensation and every presentation is true. But in fact,
though this is so, Epicurus again, starting from the School of Aristippus, made
all things depend on pleasure and sense, defining the feelings alone to be
conceptional, and pleasure the end of all good.

Now some say that Epicurus had no teacher, but read the writings of the
ancients; others say that he was a hearer of Xenocrates, and afterwards of
Nausiphanes also, who had been a disciple of Pyrrho. Let us see then what are
the arguments which have been urged against him also. 54

CHAPTER XXI

[ARISTOCLES] 'SINCE knowledge is of two kinds, the one of things external, and
the other of what we can choose or avoid, some say that as the principle and
criterion of choosing and avoiding we have pleasure and pain: at least the
Epicureans now still say something of this kind: it is necessary therefore to
consider these points also.

'For my part then I am so far from saying that feeling is the principle and
canon of things good and evil, that I think a criterion is needed for feeling
itself. For though it proves its own existence, something else is wanted to
judge of its nature. For though the sensation tells whether the feeling is our
own or another's, it is reason that tells whether it is to be chosen or avoided.

'They say indeed that they do not themselves welcome every pleasure, and shun
every pain. And this is a very natural result. For the criteria prove both
themselves and the things which they judge: feeling, however, proves itself
only. And that this is so, they bear witness themselves. For although they
maintain that every pleasure is a good and every pain an evil, nevertheless they
do not say that we ought always to choose the former and avoid the latter, for
they are measured by quantity and not by quality.

'It is evident therefore that nothing else than reason, judges the quantity: for
it is reason that gives the judgement, "It is better to endure this or that pain
that so we may enjoy greater pleasures," and this, "It is expedient to abstain
from this or that pleasure, in order that we may not suffer more grievous
pains," and all cases of this kind.

'On the whole, sensations and presentations seem to be, as it were, mirrors and
images of things: but feelings and pleasures and pains to be changes and
alterations in ourselves. And thus in sensation and in forming presentations we
look to the external objects, but in experiencing pleasure and pain we turn our
attention to ourselves only. For our sensations are caused by the external
objects, and as their character may be, such also are the presentations which
they produce: but our feelings take this or that character because of ourselves,
and according to our state.

'Wherefore these appear sometimes pleasant and sometimes unpleasant, and
sometimes more and sometimes less. And this being so, we shall find, if we
should choose to examine, that the best assumptions of the principles of
knowledge are made by those who take into consideration both the senses and the
mind.

'While the senses are like the toils and nets and other hunting implements of
this kind, the mind and the reason are like the hounds that track and pursue the
prey. Better philosophers, however, than even these we must consider those to be
who neither make use of their senses at random, nor associate their feelings in
the discernment of truth. Else it would be a monstrous thing for beings endowed
with man's nature to forsake the most divine judgement of the mind and entrust
themselves to irrational pleasures and pains.'

CHAPTER XXII So much, from the writings of Aristocles.

[PLATO] 55 'Let us then judge each of the three separately in relation to
Pleasure and to Mind: for we must see to which of these two we are to assign
each of them as more akin.

'You are speaking of Beauty, and Truth, and Moderation?

'Yes: but take Truth first, Protarchus, and then look at three things, Mind, and
Truth, and Pleasure, and after taking long time for deliberation make answer to
yourself whether Pleasure or Mind is more akin to Truth.

'But what need of time? For I think they differ widely. Pleasure is of all
things most full of false pretensions; and in the pleasures of love, the
greatest as they are thought, even perjury, as they say, is forgiven by the
gods, its votaries being regarded, like children, as possessing not even the
smallest share of Reason; while Reason is either the same thing as Truth, or of
all things most like it and most true.

'Will you not then next consider Moderation in the same way, whether Pleasure
possesses more of it than Wisdom, or Wisdom more than Pleasure?

'An easy question this again that you propose. For I think one would find
nothing in the world of a more immoderate nature than Pleasure and delight, nor
any single thing more full of moderation than Reason and Science.

'You say well; yet go on to speak of the third point. Has Reason a larger share
of Beauty than Pleasure has, so that Reason is more beautiful than Pleasure, or
the contrary?

'Is it not the fact, Socrates, that no one ever yet whether waking or dreaming
either saw or imagined Wisdom and Reason to be unseemly in any way or in any
case, either past, present, or to come?

'Right.

'But surely when we see any one indulging in Pleasures, and those too the
greatest, the sight either of the ridicule or of the extreme disgrace that
follows upon them makes us ashamed ourselves, and we put them out of sight and
conceal them as much as possible, consigning all such things to night, as unfit
for the light to look upon.

'In every way then, Protarchus, you will assert, both by messengers to the
absent and by word of mouth to those present, that Pleasure is not the first of
possessions nor yet the second, but the first is concerned with Measure, and
Moderation, and opportuneness, and whatever qualities of this kind must be
regarded as having acquired the eternal nature.

'So it appears from what you now say.

'The second is concerned with Symmetry and Beauty and Perfection and
Sufficiency, and all qualities which are of this family.

'It seems so, certainly.

'If then, as I foretell, you assume as the third class mind and wisdom, you will
not go far astray from the truth.

'Perhaps so.

'Shall we not say then that the fourth class, in addition to these three, are
what we assumed to belong to the soul itself, sciences, and arts, and right
opinions as they were called, inasmuch as they are more akin to the good than to
Pleasure?

'Very likely.

'In the fifth place then pleasures which we assumed in our definition to be
unmixed with pain, and called them pure cognitions of the soul itself, but
consequent on the sensations.

'Perhaps.

'And, as Orpheus says,

"In the sixth age still the sweet voice of song." 56

But our discourse also seems to have been brought to an end at the sixth trial.
And nothing is left for us after this except to put the crown as it were upon
what we have said.

'Yes, that is proper.

'Come then, as the third libation to Zeus Soter, let us with solemn asseveration
go over the same argument.

'What argument?

'Philebus proposed to us that the good is pleasure universally and absolutely.

'By the third libation, Socrates, it seems that you meant just now that we must
take up again the argument from the beginning.

'Yes. But let us listen to what follows. On my part when I perceived what I have
now been stating, and was indignant at the argument employed by Philebus, and
not by him only but often by thousands of others, I said that Mind was far
nobler than Pleasure, and better for human life.

'It was so.

'Yes, but, suspecting that there were many other good things, I said that if any
of these should be found better than both the former, I would fight it out for
the second prize on the side of Mind against Pleasure, and Pleasure would be
deprived even of the second prize.

'You did indeed say so.

'And presently it was most satisfactorily shown that neither of these was
sufficient.

'Most true.

'So in this argument both Reason and Pleasure had been entirely set aside, as
being neither of them the absolute good, since they lacked sufficiency, and the
power of adequacy and perfection.

'Quite right.

'But something else having been found better than either of them, Mind has now
again been shown to be ten thousand times closer and more akin than Pleasure to
the nature of the conqueror.

'Of course.

'So then the power of Pleasure will be fifth in the award, as our argument has
now declared.

'It seems so.

'But not first, no, not even if all oxen and horses and other beasts together
should assert it by their pursuit of enjoyment, though the multitude believing
them, as soothsayers believe birds, judge pleasures to be most powerful to give
us a happy life, and think that the lusts of animals are more valid witnesses
than the words of those who from time to time have prophesied by inspiration of
the philosophic Muse.

'Now at last, Socrates, we all say that you have spoken most truly.' So writes
Plato. But I am also going to set before you a few passages of Dionysius, a
bishop who professed the Christian philosophy, from his work On Nature, in
answer to Epicurus. And do thou take and read his own words, which are as
follows: 57

CHAPTER XXIII

[DIONYSIUS OF ALEXANDRIA] 'Is the universe one connected whole, as it seems to
us and to the wisest of the Greeks, such as Plato and Pythagoras and the Stoics
and Heracleitus? Or two, as some one may have supposed, or even many and
infinite in number, as it seemed to some others, who by many aberrations of
thought and various applications of terms have attempted minutely to divide the
substance of the universe, and suppose it to be infinite, and uncreated, and
undesigned.

'For some who gave the name "atoms" to certain imperishable and most minute
bodies infinite in number, and assumed a void space of boundless extent, say
that these atoms being borne on at random in the void, and accidentally
colliding with each other through an irregular drift, become entangled, because
they are of many shapes and catch hold of each other, and thus produce the world
and all things in it, or rather worlds infinite in number.

'Epicurus and Democritus were of this opinion: but they disagreed in so far as
the former supposed all atoms to be extremely small and therefore imperceptible,
while Democritus supposed that there were also some very large atoms. Both,
however, affirm that there are atoms, and that they are so called because of
their impenetrable hardness.

'But others change the name of the atoms, and say that they are bodies which
have no parts, but are themselves parts of the universe, out of which in their
indivisible state all things are composed, and into which they are resolved. And
they say that it was Diodorus who invented the name (τὰ ἀμερῆ) of these bodies
without parts. But Heracleides, it is said, gave them a different Dame, and
called them "weights," and from him Asclepiades the physician inherited the
name.'

After these statements he proceeds to overthrow the doctrine by many arguments,
but especially by those which follow: 58

CHAPTER XXIV

'How are we to bear with them when they assert that the wise and therefore
beautiful works of creation are accidental coincidences? Works, of which each as
it came into being by itself, and likewise all of them taken together, were seen
to be good by Him who commanded them to be made. For the Scripture says, "And
God saw all things that He had made, and behold, they were very good." 59

'Nay, they will not even be taught by the small and familiar examples lying at
their feet, from which they might learn that no useful and beneficial work is
made without a special purpose, or by mere accident, but is perfected by
handiwork for its proper service: but when it begins to fall off and become
useless and unserviceable, then it is dissolved and dispersed in an indefinite
and casual way, inasmuch as the wisdom by whose care it was constructed no
longer manages nor directs it.

'For a cloak is not woven by the warp being arranged without a weaver, or the
woof intertwined of its own accord; but if it be worn out, the tattered rags are
cast away. A house too or a city is built up not by receiving some stones
self-deposited at the foundations, and others jumping up to the higher courses,
but the builder brings the well-fitted stones and lays them in their place: but
when the building is overthrown, however it may occur, each stone falls down and
is lost.

'Also while a ship is being built, the keel does not lay itself, and the mast
set itself up amidships, and each of the other timbers of itself take any chance
position;60 nor do the so-called hundred pieces of the wagon fit themselves
together each in any vacant place it finds: but the carpenter in either case
brings them together fitly.

'But should the ship go to pieces at sea, or the wagon in its course on land,
the timbers are scattered wherever it may chance, in the one case by the waves,
and in the other by the violent driving. Thus it would befit them to say that
their atoms, as remaining idle, and not made by hands, and of no use, are driven
at random. Be it for them to see the invisible atoms, and understand the
unintelligible, unlike him who confesses that this had been manifested to him by
God saying to God Himself, "Mine eyes did see Thy unperfected work." 61

'But when they say that even what they assert to be finely-woven textures made
out of atoms are wrought by them spontaneously without wisdom and without
perception, who can endure to hear of the atoms as workmen, though they are
inferior in wisdom even to the spider which spins its web out of itself?'

CHAPTER XXV

'OR who can endure to hear that this great house, which consists of heaven and
earth, and, because of the great and manifold wisdom displayed upon it, is
called the Cosmos, has been set in order by atoms drifting with no order at all,
and that disorder has thus become order?

'Or how believe that movements and courses well regulated are produced from an
irregular drift? Or that the all-harmonious quiring of the heavenly bodies
derives its concord from tuneless and inharmonious instruments?

'Also if there be but one and the same substance of all atoms, and the same
imperishable nature, excepting, as they say, their magnitudes and shapes, how is
it that some bodies are divine, and incorruptible, and eternal, or at least, as
they would say, secular according to him who so named them, both visible and
invisible, visible as the sun, and moon, and stars, and earth and water, and
invisible as gods, and daemons, and souls? For that these exist, they cannot,
even if they would, deny.

'And the most long-lived are animals and plants; animals, in the class of birds,
as they say, eagles, and ravens, and the phoenix; and among land animals, stags,
and elephants, and serpents; but among aquatic animals, whales: and among trees,
palms, and oaks, and perseae; and of trees some are evergreen, of which some one
who had counted them said there were fourteen, and some flower for a season, and
shed their leaves: but the greatest part both of plants and animals die early
and are short-lived, and man among them, as a certain holy Scripture said of
him, "Man that is born of a woman hath but a short time to live." 62

'But they will say that variations in the bonds which connect the atoms are the
causes of the difference in duration. For some things are said to be packed
close and fastened tightly together by them, so that they have become close
textures extremely difficult to unloose, while in others the combination of the
atoms has been weak and loose in a greater or less degree, so that either
quickly or after a long time they separate from their orderly arrangement: and
some things are made up of atoms of a certain nature shaped in a certain way,
and others of different kinds of atoms differently arranged.

'Who is it then that distinguishes the classes, and collects them, and spreads
them abroad, and arranges some in this way for a sun, and others in that way to
produce the moon, and brings together the several kinds according to their
fitness for the light of each separate star? For neither would the solar atoms,
of such a number and kind as they are, and in such wise united, ever have
condescended to the formation of a moon, nor would the combinations of the lunar
atoms ever have become a sun. Nay, nor would Arcturus, bright though he is, ever
boast of possessing the atoms of the morning star, nor the Pleiades those of
Orion. For it was a fine distinction drawn by Paul when he said, "There is one
glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars:
for one star differeth from another star in glory." 63

'And if their combination, as of things without life, took place unconsciously,
they required a skilful artificer: and if their conjunction was involuntary and
of necessity, as in things without reason, then some wise leader of the flock
presided over their gathering. But if they have been willingly confined to the
performance of a voluntary work, some marvellous architect took the lead in
apportioning their work; or acted as a general who, loving order, does not leave
his army in confusion and all mixed up together, but arranges the cavalry in one
place, and the heavy-armed infantry separately, and the javelin-men by
themselves, and the archers apart, and the slingers in the proper place, that
those of like arms might fight side by side.

'But if they think this example a jest because I make a comparison between large
bodies and very small, we will turn to the very smallest.' Then he adds next to
this:

'But if there were neither word, nor choice, nor order of a ruler laid upon
them, but they by themselves directing themselves through the great throng of
the stream, and passing out through the great tumult of their collisions, were
brought together like to like not by the guidance of God, as the poet says,64
but ran together and gathered in groups recognizing their own kin, then
wonderful surely would be this democracy of the atoms, friends welcoming and
embracing one another, and hastening to settle in one common home; while some of
them rounded themselves off of their own accord into that mighty luminary the
sun, in order to make day, and others flamed up into many pyramids perhaps of
stars, in order to crown the whole heaven; while others are ranged around,
perchance to make it firm, and throw an arch over the ether for the luminaries
to ascend, and that the confederacies of the common atoms may choose their own
abodes, and portion out the heaven into habitations and stations for
themselves.' Then after some other passages he says:

'But these improvident men, so far from discerning what is invisible, do not see
even what is plainly visible. For they seem not even to observe the regular
risings and settings either of the other bodies, or the most conspicuous, those
of the sun, nor to make use of the aids bestowed through them upon mankind, the
day lighted up for work, and the night overshadowing for rest. For "man," says
the Scripture, "will go forth to his work and to his labour until the evening."
65

'Nay, they do not even observe that other revolution of the sun, in which he
completes determinate times and convenient seasons and solstices recurring in
undeviating order, being guided by the atoms of which he consists. But though
these miserable men, the righteous, however, as they believe, be unwilling to
admit it, yet "Great is the Lord that made him, and at His word he hasteneth his
course." 66

'For do atoms, O ye blind, bring you winter and rains, that the earth may send
up food for you and all the living creatures thereon? And do they lead on the
summer, that ye may also receive the fruits of the trees for enjoyment? And why
then do ye not worship the atoms, and offer sacrifice to the guardians of your
fruits? Ungrateful surely, for not consecrating to them even small first-fruits
of the abundant gifts which ye receive from them.' And after a short interval he
says:

'But the stars, that mixed democracy of many tribes, constituted by the
wandering atoms ever scattering themselves abroad, marked off regions for
themselves by agreement, just as if they had instituted a colony or a community,
without any founder or master presiding over them; and the border-laws towards
neighbouring nations they faithfully and peacefully observe, not encroaching
beyond the boundaries which they have occupied from the beginning, just as if
they had laws established by these royal atoms.

'Yet these do not rule over them: for how could they, that are non-existent? But
listen to the oracles of God:67 "In the judgement of the Lord are His works from
the beginning; and from the making of them He disposed the parts thereof. He
garnished His works for ever, and the beginnings of them unto their
generations."' And after a few sentences he says:

'Or what phalanx ever marched across the level ground in such good order, none
running on ahead, none falling out of rank, none blocking the way, nor lagging
behind his company, as in even ranks and shield to shield the stars move ever
onward, that continuous, undivided, unconfused, unhindered host?

'Nevertheless, by inclinations and sidelong deviations, certain obscure changes
of their course occur. And yet those who have given attention to these matters
always watch for the right times and foresee the places from which they each
rise. Let then the anatomists of the atoms, and dividers of the indivisible, and
compounders of the uncompounded, and definers of the infinite, tell us whence
comes the simultaneous circular revolution and periodical return of the heavenly
bodies, wherein it is not merely one single conglomeration of atoms that has
been thus casually hurled out as from a sling, but all this great circular choir
moving evenly in rhythm, and whirling round together. And whence comes it, that
this vast multitude of fellow travellers without arrangement, without purpose,
and without knowledge of each other, have returned together? Rightly did the
prophet class it among things impossible and unexampled that even two strangers
should run together: "Shall two," he says, "walk together at all, except they
have known each other?'" 68

After speaking thus, and adding numberless other remarks to these, he next
discusses the question at length by arguments drawn from the particular elements
of the universe, and from the living beings of all kinds included in them, and
moreover from the nature of man. And by adding yet a few of these arguments to
those which have been mentioned, I shall bring the present subject to an end.

CHAPTER XXVI

'ALSO, they neither understand themselves nor their own circumstances. For if
any of the founders of this impious doctrine reconsidered who and whence he is,
he would come to his senses as feeling conscious of himself, and would say, not
to the atoms, but to his Father and Maker, "Thy hands fashioned me, and made
me," 69 and like that writer he would have described still further the wonderful
manner of his formation: "Hast Thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me
like cheese? Clothed me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and
sinews? Thou hast granted me life and favour, and Thy guardianship hath
preserved my spirit." 70

'For how many and of what sort were the atoms which the father of Epicurus
poured forth from himself, when he was begetting Epicurus? And when deposited in
his mother's womb, how did they coalesce, and take shape, and form, and motion,
and growth? And how did that small drop, after calling together the atoms of
Epicurus in abundance, make some of them into skin and flesh for a covering, and
how was it raised erect by others turned into bone, and by others bound together
with a contexture of sinews?

'And how did it adapt the many other limbs, and organs, and entrails, and
instruments of sense, some within and some without, by which the body was
quickened into life? For among these no idle nor useless part was added, no, not
even the meanest, neither hair, nor nails, but all contribute, some to the
benefit of the constitution, and others to the beauty of the appearance.

'For Providence is careful not only of usefulness, but also of beauty. For while
the hair of the head is a protection and a covering for all, the beard is a
comely ornament for the philosopher. The nature also of the whole human body
Providence composed of parts, all of which were necessary, and invested all the
members with their mutual connexion, and measured out from the whole their due
supply.

'As to the most important of these members, it is evident even to the simple
from their experience what force they have: there is the supreme power of the
head, and around the brain, as enthroned in the citadel, is the attendant guard
of the senses: the eyes going on in advance, the ears bringing back reports, the
taste, as it were, collecting provisions, the smell tracing out and examining,
and the touch arranging everything that is subject to it. (For at present we
shall only run over in a summary manner a few of the works of the all-wise
Providence, intending soon, if God permit, to complete the task more carefully,
when we are directing our efforts against him who is thought more learned.)

'Then there is the ministry of the hands, by which all kinds of workmanship and
inventive arts are perfected, separately endowed with their particular
facilities for co-operation in one and the same work, the strength of the
shoulders in . bearing burdens, the grasp of the fingers, the joints of the
elbows both turning inward towards the body and bending outwards, that they may
be able both to draw things in and thrust them off. The service of the feet, by
which the whole terrestrial creation comes under our power, the land to tread
on, the sea to sail, the rivers to cross, and communication of all things with
all. The belly, a store-room of food, meting out from itself in due measure the
provisions for all the members associated with it, and ejecting what is
superfluous: and all the other parts whereby the administration of the human
constitution has been manifestly contrived, and of which the wise and foolish
alike possess the use but not the knowledge.

'For the wise refer the administration to whatever deity they suppose to be most
perfect in all knowledge and most beneficent towards themselves, being convinced
that it is the work of superior wisdom and power truly divine; while the others
inconsiderately refer the most marvellous work of beauty to a chance meeting and
coincidence of the atoms.

'Now though the still more effectual consideration of these subjects, and the
arrangement of the internal parts of the body, have been accurately investigated
by physicians, who in their astonishment made a god of nature, yet let us
hereafter make a re-examination as well as we may be able, even though it be
superficial.

'Now in a general and summary way I ask who made this whole tabernacle such as
it is, lofty, erect, of fine proportion, keenly sensitive, graceful in motion,
strong in action, fit for every kind of work? The irrational multitude of atoms,
say they. Why, they could not come together and mould an image of clay, nor
polish a statue of marble, nor produce by casting an idol of silver or gold; but
men have been the inventors of arts and manufactures of these materials for
representing the body.

'And if representations and pictures could not be made without intelligence, how
can the real originals of the same have been spontaneous accidents?

'Whence too have soul, and mind, and reason been implanted in the philosopher?
Did he beg them from the atoms which have no soul, nor mind, nor reason, and did
each of them inspire him with some thought and doctrine?

'And was the wisdom of man brought to perfection by the atoms, in the same way
as Hesiod's fable says that Pandora was by the gods? 71 Will the Greeks also
cease to say that all poetry, and all music, and astronomy, and geometry, and
the other sciences are inventions and instructions of the gods, and have the
Atomic Muses alone been skilful and wise in all things? For the race of gods
constructed by Epicurus out of atoms is banished from their infinite worlds of
order, and driven out into the infinite chaos.'

CHAPTER XXVII

'BUT to work, and to administer, to do good and to show forethought, and all
such actions are burdensome perhaps to the idle and foolish, and to the feeble
and wicked, among whom Epicurus enrolled himself by entertaining such thoughts
of the gods; but to the earnest, and able, and wise, and prudent, such as
philosophers ought to be (how much more the gods?), not only are these things
not unpleasant and arduous, but even most delightful, and above all else most
welcome; for to them carelessness and delay in performing any good action is
judged to be a disgrace, as a poet admonishes them with his advice:

"Nor aught until the morrow to delay," 72

and with the threat in addition:

"He who puts off his work Must ever wrestle with malignant fates." 73

'We too are more solemnly instructed by a prophet, who says that virtuous
actions are truly worthy of God, and that he who cares little for them is
accursed: for he says, "Cursed be he that doeth the works of the Lord
carelessly." 74

'Then too those who have not learned an art, and can only pursue it imperfectly
because the effort is unusual and the work unpractised, find a weariness in
their attempts: but those who are making progress, and still more those who are
perfect, delight in the easy accomplishment of their pursuits, and would rather
choose to complete what they usually practise, and to finish their work, than to
possess all the things which men reckon good.

'For instance, Democritus himself, as the story goes, used to say that he would
rather discover one single law of causation than receive the kingdom of Persia,
and this, although he was vainly seeking causes where no cause was, as one who
started from a false principle and an erroneous hypothesis, and did not discern
the root and the necessity common to the nature of all things, but regarded the
contemplation of senseless and random contingencies as the highest wisdom, and
set up chance as the mistress and queen of things universal and things divine,
and declared that all things took place in accordance therewith, but banished it
from the life of man, and convicted those who worshipped it as senseless. For
example, in the beginning of his Suggestions he says: "Men formed an image of
chance as an excuse for their own folly: for chance is by nature antagonistic to
judgement: and this worst enemy of wisdom they said ruled over it; or rather
they utterly overthrow and annihilate this latter, and set up the other in its
place: for they praise not wisdom as fortunate, but fortune as most wise." 75

'Whereas therefore the masters of those works which are beneficial to life take
pride in the help which they render to their fellow men, and desire praise and
fame for the works in which they labour for their good, some in providing food,
others as pilots, some as physicians, and some as statesmen, philosophers
proudly boast of their efforts to instruct mankind.

'Or will Epicurus or Democritus dare to say that they distress themselves by
their pursuit of philosophy? Nay, there is no other gladness of heart that they
would prefer to this. For even though they think that good consists in pleasure,
yet they will be ashamed to say that philosophy is not more pleasant to them.

'But as to the gods of whom their poets sing as "Givers of good things," 76
these philosophers with mocking reverence say, The gods are neither givers nor
partakers of any good things. In what way then do they show evidence of the
existence of gods, if they neither see them present and doing something, as
those who in admiration of the sun and moon and stars said that they were called
gods (θεούς) because of their running (θεειν), nor assign to them any work of
creation or arrangement, that they might call them gods from setting (θεῖναι),
that is making (for in this respect in truth the Creator and Artificer of the
universe alone is God), nor exhibit any administration, or judgement, or favour
of theirs towards mankind, that we should owe them fear or honour, and therefore
worship them?

'Or did Epicurus peep out from the world, and pass beyond the compass of the
heavens, or go out through some secret gates known only to himself, and behold
the gods dwelling in the void, and deem them and their abundant luxury blessed?
And did he thence become a devotee of pleasure, and an admirer of their life in
the void, and so exhort all who are to be made like unto those gods to
participate in this blessing, commending as a happy banqueting hall for them,
not heaven or Olympus, as the poets did, but the void, and setting before them
their ambrosia made out of the atoms, and pledging them in nectar from the same?

'And moreover he inserts in his own books countless oaths and adjurations
addressed to those who are nothing to us, swearing continually "No, by Zeus,"
and "Yes, by Zeus," and adjuring his readers and opponents in argument "in the
name of the gods," having, I suppose, no fear himself of perjury nor trying to
frighten them, but uttering this as an empty, and false, and idle, and unmeaning
appendage to his speeches, just as he might hawk and spit, and turn his face,
and wave his hand. Such an unintelligible and empty piece of acting on his part
was his mentioning the name of the gods.

'This however was evident, that after the death of Socrates he was afraid of the
Athenians, and that he might not seem to be what he really was, an atheist, he
played the charlatan and painted for them some empty shadows of unsubstantial
gods. For he neither looked up to heaven with eyes of intelligence, that he
might hear the clear voice from above, which the attentive observer did hear,
and testified that "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament
showeth the work of His hands," 77 nor did he with his understanding look upon
the ground, for he would have learned that "The earth is full of the mercy of
the Lord," 78 and that "The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof." 79
For the Scripture says, "After this also the Lord looked upon the earth, and
filled it with His blessings. With the soul of every living thing He covered the
face thereof."' 80

'And if they are not utterly blind, let them survey the vast and varied
multitude of living beings, land and water animals, and birds, and let them take
note how true has been the testimony of the Lord in the judgement which He
passed on all His works, "And all appeared good according to His command." ' 81

These arguments I have culled from a large number framed against Epicurus by
Dionysius, the bishop, our contemporary. But now it is time to pass on to
Aristotle, and to the sect of the Stoic philosophers, and to review the
remaining opinions of the wonderful sect of physicists, that so we may present
to the censorious our defence for having withdrawn from them also.

[Footnotes placed at the end and numbered] 1. 720 b 10 Diogenes Laertius, ix. c.
8, § 51 2. 720 c 1 Aristotle, Metaphysics, A 4 3. 720 c 7 Bywater, Heracl. Rell.
Fr. xxii 4. 720 d 9 Plato, Theaetetus, p. 152 D 5. 723 a Viger's edition, from
which this notation is taken, passes at once from 720 to 733 6. 723 a 7 Hom. Il.
xiv. 201 7. 723 b 8 Plato, Theaetetus, 179 C 8. 724 c 5 Parmenides, Fr. i. 1. 98
(Mullach, i. p. 124) 9. 724 d 9 Plato, Sophist, 242 C 10. 724 b 11 ibid. 245 E
11. 720 d 9 Hesiod, Works and Days, I. 42 12. 720 d 11 Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrh.
Hyp. i. 2 20 13. 727 b 1 Numenius, The revolt of the Academics against Plato, a
Fragment preserved by Eusebius 14. 729 d 4 Cf. Hom. Il. vi. 181 15. 729 d 8
Timon, Fr. 1. 72 (Mullach, i. p. 90) Diogenes Laertius, iv. c. 6 16. 730 b 3 Cf.
Hom. Il. v. 85 17. 731 d 1 Hom. Il. xii. 86 (Lord Derby) 18. 731 d 2 ibid. iv.
447-449 19. 731 d 6 Hom. Il. xiii. 131 20. 731 d 8 ibid. iv. 471 21. 732 a 1
ibid. iv. 450 22. d 7 Hom. Il. x, 8 23. 739 c 1 Hom. Il. vii. 206 24. 741 a 1
Porphyry, Epistle to Anebo, § I 25. 741 b 7 ibid. § 47 26. 741 c 8 Porphyry,
Against Boethus, On the Soul 27. d 14 Porphyry, Of the Philosophy derived from
Oracles 28. 743 b 3 Xenophon, Memorabilia of Socrates, iv. c. 7 29. 745 a 1
Ps.-Xenophon, Epistle to Aeschines 30. d 4 See Plato, Republic, 404 C 31. 746 a
1 ibid. 521 D 32. 746 d 5 ibid. 530 E 33. 747 d 2 Plutarch, De Placitis
Philosophorum, p. 875 34. 748 b 3 Hom. Il. xiv. 246 35. 749 d 12 Empedocles, On
Nature, 1. 59 (Mullach, i. p. 2) 36. 750 d 1 Plato, Phaedo, p. 97 B 37. 752 d 4
Plato, Phaedo, 99 B 38. 753 b 2 Plutarch, De Placitis Philosophorum, p. 880 39.
753 e 9 ibid. p. 881 40. 754 c 1 Hom Il. iii. 179 41. d 7 Plutarch, De Placitis
Philosophorum, i. 7 (Diels, Doxogr. p. 304) 42. 758 b 1 Aristocles, a Fragment
preserved by Eusebius 43. 757 a 4 Hom. Il. v. 314-216 (Lord Derby) 44. 758 c 1
Aristocles, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 45. 761 d 1 Timon, Fragments, 1.
126 (Mullach, i. p. 95) 46. 761 d 13 ibid. 1. 123 47. 763 c 6 Timon, Fragments,
l. 12 48. c 9 ibid. 1. 14 49. 764 c 1 Aristocles, Fragment 4 50. 765 d 12
Diogenes Laertius, ix. 10 51. 766 a 6 ibid. ix. 51 52. 766 b 1 Aristocles,
Fragment 5 53. 766 d 1 Plato, Theaetetus, 161 C, 166 C 54. 768 d 4 Aristocles,
Fr. 6 55. 770 b 1 Plato, Philebus, 65 B 56. 771 c 7 Hermann, Orphica, Fr. xiii
57. 772 d 1 Dionysius of Alexandria, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 58. 773 d
1 Dionysius of Alexandria, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius, § 2 59. 773 d 6
Gen. i. 31 60. 774 b 3 Cf. Hesiod, Works and Days, 454 61. 774 c 6 Ps. cxxxix.
16 62. 775 c 5 Job xiv. 1 63. 776 a 4 1 Cor. xv. 41 64. 776 c 7 Homer, Od. xvii.
218 65. 777 a 7 Ps. ciii. 23 66. 777 b 5 Ecclesiasticus xliii. 5 67. 777 d 5
ibid. xvi. 26, 27 68. 778 b 6 Amos iii. 3 69. 778 d 3 Job x. 8, Ps. cxix. 73 70.
778 d 5 Job x. 10 71. 780 d 7 Hesiod, Works and Days, 60 ff.

72. 781 c 3 Hesiod, ibid. 408 73. 781 c 5 Hesiod, ibid. 411 74. 781 c 9 Jer.
xlviii. 10 75. 782 a 6 Democritus, Ethical Fragments, l.14 (Mullach, i. p. 340)
76. 782 c 6 Homer, Od. viii. 325 77. 783 d 1 Ps. xix. 1 78. d 4 Ps. xxxii. 5 79.
d 5 Ps. xxiv. 1 80. d 6 Ecclesiasticus xvi. 29, 30 81. d 13 Cf. Gen. i. 31 This
text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the
public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 34: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 15
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 15

BOOK XV

CONTENTS I. Preface concerning the whole argument p 788 a II. On the philosophy
of Aristotle, and his personal history. From Aristocles the Peripatetic p 791 b
III. On the doctrines of Aristotle, who was at variance with the Hebrews and
Plato concerning the final good p 793 d

IV. Atticus the Platonist against Aristotle, as at variance with Moses and
Plato; in the discourse On the end p 794 c V. The same against the same, as at
variance with Moses and Plato; in the discourse On Providence p 798 c

VI. The same against the same, as at variance with Moses and Plato; in the
discourse denying that the world was created p 801 b VII. The same against the
same, as assuming a fifth corporeal essence, which neither Moses nor Plato
recognized p 804 b

VIII. The same against the same, as at variance with Plato also in his theories
as to the heaven: matters about which Moses does not concern himself p 806 c

IX. The same against the same, as at variance with Plato and the Hebrew
Scriptures also on the subject of the immortality of the soul p 808 d

X. Plotinus, from the second Book On the immortality of the soul, against
Aristotle's assertion that the soul is an ' actuality' (εντελέχεια) p 811 b XI.
Porphyry on the same, from the answer to Boëthus On the soul p 812 d XII.
Against the same, as at variance with Plato in the argument Concerning the
universal soul. From the same p 814 a

XIII. Against, the same; for ridiculing the Platonic Ideas, of which the Hebrew
Scriptures also have already been shown not to be ignorant p 815 a

XIV. On the Stoic philosophy, and the account of First Principles as rendered by
Zeno. From the seventh Book of Aristocles On philosophy p 816 d

XV. What kind of opinion the Stoics profess concerning God, and concerning the
constitution of the universe. From Arius Didymus. p 817 b XVI. Porphyry, against
the opinion of the Stoics concerning God, from the answer to Boëthus On the
soul. p 818 c XVII. That true Being cannot be body, as the Stoics teach. From
the first Book of Numenius On the good p 819 a XVIII. What the Stoics think
concerning the conflagration of the universe p 820 b XIX. What the Stoics think
concerning the regeneration of the universe p 820 d XX. What the same sect think
concerning the soul p 821 c XXI. The disputation of Longinus against the opinion
of the Stoics concerning the soul p 822 d XXII. In answer to the Stoics, that
the soul cannot possibly be corporeal From Plotinus On the soul, Book I p 824 a
XXIII. Opinions of the physical philosophers concerning the sun; from Plutarch p
836 a XXIV. On the magnitude of the sun p 837 a XXV. On the figure of the sun p
837 b XXVI. On the moon p 837 c XXVII. On the magnitude of the moon p 837 d
XXVIII. On the figure of the moon p 838 a XXIX. On the illumination of the moon
p 838 b XXX. What is the substance of the planets and fixed stars p 838 d XXXI.
On the shapes of the stars p 839 c XXXII. How the world was constituted p 839 d
XXXIII. Whether the All is one p 841 d XXXIV. Whether the world has a soul, and
is administered by Providence p 842 b XXXV. Whether the world is imperishable p
842 d XXXVI. From what source the world is sustained p 843 a XXXVII. From what
God first began to create the world p 843 b XXXVIII. On the order of the world p
843 d XXXIX. What is the cause of the cosmical obliquity p 844 b XL. Concerning
the outside of the world, whether it is a vacuum p 844 d XLI. Which is the right
and which the left side of the world p 845 a XLII. Of the heaven, what is its
substance p 845 b XLIII. Of daemons and heroes p 845 c XLIV. Of matter p 845 d
XLV. Of form p 846 a XLVI. Of the order of the stars p 846 b XLVII. Of the
course and motion of the heavenly bodies p 846 d XLVIII. Whence the stars derive
their light p 847 b XLIX. Of the so-called Dioscuri p 847 c L. Of an eclipse of
the sun p 847 d LI. Of an eclipse of the moon p 848 b LII. Of the appearance of
the moon, and why it appears earthy p 848 d LIII. Of its distances p 849 b LIV.
Of years p 849 c LV. Of the earth p 849 d LVI. Of the figure of the earth p 850
a LVII. Of the position of the earth p 850 b LVIII. Of the earth's motion p 850
c LIX. Of the sea, how it was formed, and why it is salt p 851 a LX. Of the
parts of the soul p 851 d LXI. Of the ruling part p 852 b

LXII. That even Socrates, the wisest of the Greeks, used to declare that those
who boasted greatly of the Natural Science of the aforesaid matters were silly,
as wasting time about things useless to life and incomprehensible p 853 c
PREFACE CONCERNING THE WHOLE SUBJECT

I THOUGHT it important in the beginning of the Preparation for the Gospel to
refute the polytheistic error of all the nations, in order to commend and excuse
our separation from them, which we have made with good reason and judgement.

Therefore before all else in the first three Books, I thoroughly examined not
only the fables concerning their gods which have been turned into ridicule by
their own theologians and poets, but also the solemn and secret physical
theories of these latter, which have been transported by their grand philosophy
high up to heaven and to the various parts of the world; although their
theologians themselves declared that there was no need at all to talk gravely on
these matters.

We must therefore carefully observe that the oldest of their theologians were
proved on the highest testimony to have no special knowledge of the history, but
to rely solely on the fables. Hence naturally in all cities and villages,
according to the narratives of these ancient authors, initiatory rites and
mysteries of the gods corresponding to the earlier mythical tales have been
handed down by tradition; so that even to the present time the marriages of
their gods and their procreation of children, their lamentations and their
drunkenness, the wanderings of some, the amours of others, their anger, and
their different disasters and adventures of all kinds, are traditionally
received in accordance with the notices recorded by the most ancient authors, in
their initiatory rites, and in their hymns, and in the songs composed in honour
of their gods. But nevertheless, as a work of supererogation, I also brought out
to light the refinements of these later authors themselves which they had
pompously exhibited in physical explanations, and the subtleties of the sophists
and philosophers. Moreover, as to the account of the renowned oracles, and the
false opinion concerning fate so celebrated among the multitude, these I laid
bare by evidence as clear as day in other three books following next after the
first three; and for the proof against them I made use not only of my own
dialectic efforts, but also especially of the sayings of the Greek philosophers
themselves.

Passing on thence to the oracles of the Hebrews, I showed, in the same number of
books again, by what reasonings we accepted the dogmatic theology contained in
them, and the universal history taught by them and confirmed by the testimony of
the Greeks themselves.

Next in order I refuted the method of the Greeks, and clearly showed how they
had been helped in all things by Barbarians, and that they bring forward no
serious learning of their own, making also a comparative table of the times in
which the celebrated Greeks and the Hebrew prophets lived. Again in the next
three books I showed the agreement of the best-esteemed philosophers of the
Greeks with the opinions of the Hebrews, and again made their own utterances my
witnesses.

Moreover in the book preceding this I clearly detected those Greek philosophers
who differ from our opinions as being at variance not with us only but also with
their own countrymen, and as having been overthrown by their own disciples.
Throughout all these discussions I show to my readers that the judgement of my
own mind is impartial, and by the very facts and deeds, so to say, I have
brought forward my proofs, that with no want of consideration, but with
well-judged and sound reasoning, we have chosen the philosophy and religion of
the Hebrews, which is both ancient and true, in preference to that of the
Greeks, which result was also confirmed by the comparison of the statements of
the Greeks. As we have been deferring up to the present time our final discourse
hereon, which is the fifteenth Book of the treatise in hand, we will now make up
what is lacking to the discussions which we have travelled through, by still
further dragging into light the solemn doctrines of the fine philosophy of the
Greeks, and laying bare before the eyes of all the useless learning therein. And
before all things we shall show that not from ignorance of the things which they
admire, but from contempt of the unprofitable study therein we have cared very
little for them, and devoted our own souls to the practice of things far better.
When therefore by God's help this book shall have received the seal of truth, my
work on the Preparation shall here be brought to a close; and passing on to the
more complete argument of the Demonstration of the Gospel, I shall connect the
commencement of my second treatise with the consideration of the remaining
charge brought against us.

Now the fault alleged against us was this, that though we honoured the oracles
of the Hebrews above those of our own country, we did not emulate and choose a
life like that of the Jews. Against that charge I shall, with the help of God,
endeavour to make answer after the completion of my present discourse. For in
this way I think that the second part being connected in one bond, as it were,
with the first, will unite and complete the general purpose of the whole
discussion. As to our present task, however, in the preceding Books we have seen
the philosophy of Plato sometimes agreeing with the doctrines of the Hebrews,
and sometimes at variance with them, wherein it has been proved to disagree even
with its own favourite dogmas: while as to the doctrines of the other
philosophers, the physicists, as they are called, and those of the Platonic
succession, and of Xenophanes and Parmenides, moreover of Pyrrho, and those who
introduce the 'suspension of judgement,' and all the rest, whose opinions have
been refuted in the preceding discourse, we have seen that they stand in
opposition alike to the doctrines of the Hebrews and of Plato and to the truth
itself, and moreover have received their refutation by means of their own
weapons.

It is time then to look down, as it were, from a raised stage upon the other
vain conceit of the Aristotelian and Stoic philosophers, and also to survey all
the remaining physical systems of the supercilious tribe, that we may learn the
grand doctrines taught among them, and on the other hand the objections urged
against them by those of their own side. For in this way our decision to
withdraw from these also will be freed from all reasonable blame, for that we
have preferred the truth and piety found among those who have been regarded as
Barbarians to all the wisdom of the Greeks, not in ignorance of their fine
doctrines, but by a well examined and thoroughly tested judgement. . To begin
with Aristotle. Other authors, and among them philosophers not otherwise
undistinguished, have defamed his personal life. But for my part I cannot
willingly endure even to hear the man evil spoken of by his own friends.
Wherefore I shall the rather set forth the defence urged on his behalf in the
works of Aristocles the Peripatetic, who in his seventh book On Philosophy
writes of him as follows:

CHAPTER II

[ARISTOCLES] 1 'FOR how is it possible that, as Epicurus says in his Epistle
concerning moral habits, when a young man he squandered his patrimony, and
afterwards, was forced into military service, and being unsuccessful in this had
recourse to selling drugs, then, after Plato's walk had been thrown open to all,
joined himself to him?

'Or how could any one accept what Timaeus of Tauromenium says in his Histories,
that when advanced in years he kept the doors of an obscure surgery, or any
others?

'Or who would believe what Aristoxenus the musician says in his Life of Plato?
For he states that during his wandering and long absence from home certain
strangers rose up against him and built a Peripatos in opposition to him. Some
therefore think that he says this in reference to Aristotle, whereas Aristoxenus
always speaks of Aristotle with reverence.

'One may also say with reason that the memoirs by Alexinus the Eristic are
ridiculous. For he makes Alexander when a boy converse with his father Philip,
and pour contempt upon Aristotle's doctrines, while approving Nicagoras, who was
surnamed Hermes.

'Eubulides, also, in his book against Aristotle manifestly lies, first in
bringing forward some frigid poems as written by others concerning his marriage
and his intimacy with Hermias, and secondly in asserting that he offended
Philip, and did not come to visit Plato when dying, and that he had corrupted
his writings.

'As to the accusation of Demochares against the philosophers, why need we
mention it? For he has reviled not Aristotle only, but all the rest as well.
Moreover, any one glancing at the calumnies themselves would say that the man
talks nonsense. For he says that there have been discovered letters of Aristotle
against the Athenian state, and that he betrayed Stageira, his native city, to
the Macedonians; and further, that, when Olynthus was destroyed, at the place
where the booty was sold he pointed out to Philip the most wealthy of the
Olynthians.

'Foolish also are the calumnies which have been brought against him by
Cephisodorus, the disciple of Isocrates, saying that he was luxurious and a
gourmand, and other things of this kind.

'But all are surpassed in folly .by the statements of Lycon, who says that he is
himself a Pythagorean. For he affirms that Aristotle offered to his wife after
death a sacrifice such as the Athenians offer to Demeter, and that he used to
bathe in warm oil, and then sell it: and that when he was starting for Chalcis,
the custom-house officers found in the vessel seventy-five brass plates.

'These are nearly all the chief detractors of Aristotle: of whom some lived at
the same time with him, and others a little later, but all were Sophists, and
Eristics, and Rhetoricians, whose very names and books are more dead than their
bodies. As to those who came after them, and then repeated their statements, we
may put them aside altogether, and especially those who have not even read their
books, but invent for themselves, of which kind are those who say that he had
three hundred dishes: for nobody could be found among his contemporaries, except
Lycon, who has said any such thing about him. He, however, has said, as I
mentioned before, that there were seventy-five plates found.

'But not only from the dates and from the persons who have reviled him might one
infer that all the things that have been stated are false, but also from the
fact that they do not all bring the same charges, but each says some things of
his own: in which if there was any one word of truth, he deserved surely to have
been put to death by his contemporaries not once only but ten thousand times.

'It is manifest therefore that it has happened to Aristotle, as to many others,
to be envied by the Sophists of his time, both for his friendships with kings,
and for his superiority in argument. But those who are right-minded must look
not only to the detractors, but also to those who praise and emulate him: for
these will be found much more in number and in worth.

'Now all the other stories are manifestly invented: but credit seems to be given
to these two things for which some blame him; one, that he married Pythias, who
was by birth the sister, and by adoption the daughter, of Hermias, to flatter
him. For instance Theocritus of Chios wrote an epigram of this kind:2

"To Hermias, eunuch and Eubulus' slave, This empty tomb by empty sage was
rais'd, Who left the groves of Academe, and dwelt By Borborus' streams, his
ravenous maw to fill."

'The other charge was that Aristotle was ungrateful to Plato.

'Now among many authors who have written of Hermias and Aristotle's friendship
with him, the chief is Apellicon, and any one after reading his books will soon
cease to speak evil of them.

'But with regard to his marriage to Pythias he has himself made sufficient
defence in his Epistles to Antipater. For after the death of Hermias he married
her because of his affection for him, she being also a modest and good woman,
but in misfortune by reason of the calamities which had overtaken her brother.'
Then afterwards he says:

'But after the death of Pythias, the daughter of Hermias, Aristotle married
Herpyllis of Stageira, by whom a son Nicomachus was born to him. And he, it is
said, was brought up as an orphan by Theophrastus, and when a very young man was
killed in war.' But enough of these extracts from the aforesaid book of
Aristocles: for it is time now to consider the dogmatic philosophy of Aristotle.

CHAPTER III

WHEREAS Moses and the Hebrew prophets laid it down that the perfection of a
happy life is the knowledge of the God of all the world and friendship with Him
accomplished by piety, and taught that true piety is the pleasing God by every
virtue (because this is the source of blessings, for all things depend on God
only, and all are procured from Him for the friends of God), and whereas Plato
gives definitions agreeing with these, and declares virtue to be the perfection
of happiness, Aristotle took the other path, and says that no one can be happy
otherwise than through bodily pleasure and abundance of outward means, without
which even virtue cannot profit. How the friends of Plato opposed him and
refuted the falseness of his opinion, we may learn from what follows: 3

CHAPTER IV

[ATTICUS] 'FOR whereas by the common judgement of philosophers Philosophy as a
whole makes promise of human happiness, and is divided into three parts
according to the distribution which makes up the universe, the Peripatetic will
be seen to be so far from teaching herein any of the doctrines of Plato, that,
though there are many who differ from Plato, he will himself be shown to be his
strongest opponent.

'And in the first place he departed from Plato on the point of universal and
chief importance by failing to keep the measure of happiness, and not admitting
that for this virtue is sufficient; but having missed the power that is in
virtue, he thought that it needed the goods of fortune, in order to gain
happiness with their help; but if it were to be left by itself, he complained
that it was a powerless thing incapable of attaining to happiness.

'Now this is not the time for showing how ignoble and mistaken was his opinion
both on this and on the other points: but I think it is manifest, that whereas
the object aimed at and the happiness are not equal nor identical according to
Plato and according to Aristotle, but the one is ever crying aloud and
proclaiming that the most righteous is the most happy man, while the other does
not admit that happiness is a consequence of virtue, unless it be fortunate also
in birth and beauty and other things, and so

"To war he came, decked, like a girl, with gold," 4

according to the difference of the end the philosophy leading thereto must also
be different.

'For a man who walks only on one way which naturally leads to something that is
petty and low, cannot reach to greater things that are set on high.

"See'st thou where yonder hill stands up aloft Rugged with overhanging cliffs?
There sits The bird that lightly mocks thy feeble threat." 5

'Up to this lofty hill that shrewd and crafty beast is not able to ascend: but
in order that the fox may come close to the eagle's brood, either they must meet
with some ill luck and fall to the ground through the destruction of their own
nest, or the fox herself must grow what it is not her nature to grow,

"and circle on light wings,"

and so soaring from the earth fly up to the lofty hill. But as long as each
remains on his own level, there can be no communion between things of earth and
the offspring of heaven.' After other statements he adds:

'Since then this is the case, and since Plato's endeavour is to draw the souls
of the youths upward to the divine, and in this manner he makes them the friends
of virtue and of honour, and persuades them to despise all else, tell us, O
Peripatetic, how wilt thou teach these things? How wilt thou guide the lovers of
Plato to them? Where in thy sect is so lofty a height of argument as to acquire
the spirit of the Aloadae and seek the path to heaven, which they thought might
be made by piling up mountains, a thing which, as Plato says, is to be done by
removing "the objects of human ambition." 6

'What help then canst thou give the young men towards this end? And whence find
any argument as an active ally of virtue? From what letters of Aristotle? From
whom of his followers? Out of what writings? I give thee leave even to forge, if
thou wilt, only let it be something spirited. But in fact thou hast neither
anything to say, nor would any of the leaders of thy sect permit thee.

'At all events the treatises of Aristotle on these subjects, entitled Eudemian
and Nicomachian and the Great Ethics, have a petty, and low, and vulgar idea of
virtue, and no better than an ordinary and uneducated man might have, or a lad,
or a woman. For the diadem, so to speak, and the kingly sceptre, which virtue
received from Zeus, and holds inalienable,

"For ne'er his promise shall deceive, or fail, Or be recalled, if with a nod
confirmed," 7

this they dare to take away from her.

'For they do not allow her to make men happy, but set her on a level with
wealth, and glory, and birth, and health, and beauty, and all the other
possessions which are common to vice. For as the presence of any whatsoever of
these without virtue suffices not to render the possessor happy, so without
these virtue, according to the same system, is not able to give happiness to its
possessor.

'Is not then the dignity of virtue dethroned and cast down? Certainly: yet they
say virtue is far superior to all the other good things. Of what avail is this?
For they say also that health is better than wealth: but it is a fault common to
all, that apart each from other they suffice not for happiness.

'If ever therefore any one, starting from these doctrines and this sect, should
teach that he who seeks all that is good for man in the soul alone is happy,
they say that he never mounts the wheel, nor could he who is oppressed by
"misfortunes such as Priam's" 8 possibly be happy and blessed.

'But it is not unlikely that the possessor of virtue may fall into some such
misfortunes. Hereupon it follows, that happiness neither results from every
condition to the possessors of virtue, nor remains always with them if it does
come.

"Of leaves one generation by the wind Is scattered on the earth; but others soon
The teeming forest clothe. ... So with our race, these nourish, those decay." 9

Thy similitude, O poet, is still narrow and timid:

"The Spring-tide comes again."

It is a long time that intervenes, and in which nothing grows. If thou would'st
give an exact similitude of the mortality and decay of the human race, compare
it with Aristotle's happiness. This springs up and passes away more lightly than
the leaves, not continuing through the circling year, nor within the year, nor
within a month, but in the very day, the very hour, it both springs up and
perishes.

'And many are the causes which destroy it, and all of them results of chance:
for there are the body's "various dooms," 10 and these are myriads, and there is
poverty, and disgrace, and all things of this kind; and against none of these
are dear virtue's resources sufficient of themselves to give help; for she is
without strength to ward off misery or to preserve happiness.

'In what way then can any one who has been reared in these doctrines and
delighted with them either himself assent to the teaching of Plato, or ever
confirm others in it? For it is not possible that any one starting from these
principles should accept those other Herculean and divine dogmas, that virtue is
a strong and noble thing, and never fails to give happiness, nor is ever
deprived of it: but though poverty and disease and infamy and tortures and pitch
and the cross, yea, though all the disasters of tragedy come in together like a
flood, still the righteous man is happy and blessed.11

'In fact, as with the tongue of the most loud-voiced herald, he proclaims the
most righteous man, just as some victorious athlete, saying that he is the
happiest of all men, who reaps the fruit of happiness from righteousness itself.
Distinguish then, if you will, and variously distribute good things in
threefold, fourfold, or manifold order; for this is nothing to the point before
us; you will never by them bring us near to Plato.

'For what, if among good things, some, as you say, are worthy of honour, as the
gods; and some worthy to be praised, as the virtues; and some are powers, as
riches and strength; and others are beneficial, as the healing arts? Or what, if
you distribute them with less division, and say that of good things some are
ends, and some are not ends, and call those ends, for the sake of which the
others are taken, and not ends those which are taken for the sake of others?

'Or what, if one were taught, that some are absolutely good, and others not good
for all? Or that some are goods of the soul, and others of the body, and others
external? Or again, that of goods, some are powers, and others dispositions and
habits, and others actions; and some ends, and some matter, and some
instruments? And if one learn from thee to divide the good according to the ten
categories, what are these lessons to the judgement of Plato?

'For as long as you on the one hand, either equivocally or as you please, speak
of the good things of virtue, and combine with it certain other things as
essential to happiness, thus robbing virtue of its sufficiency, while Plato on
the other hand gets from virtue itself what is complete for happiness and seeks
for the other things only as a superfluity, there can be on this point nothing
common between you. You want one set of arguments, Plato's friends want others.
'For as

"Lions and men no safe alliance form, Nor wolves and lambs in friendly mind
agree," 12

so between Plato and Aristotle there is no friendship in regard to the very
chief and paramount doctrine of happiness. For if they have no evil thoughts one
towards the other, yet it is evident that their statements concerning what is
important on this point are diametrically opposite.'

CHAPTER V

AGAIN, whereas Moses and the Hebrew prophets, and Plato moreover in agreement
with them on this point, have very clearly treated the doctrine of the universal
providence, Aristotle stays the divine power at the moon, and marks off the
remaining portions of the world from God's government: and on this ground also
he is refuted by the aforesaid author, who discusses the matter as follows: 13

'Whereas, further, the most important and essential of the things that
contribute to happiness is the belief in providence, which more than aught else
guides human life aright, unless at least we are to remain ignorant

"Whether by justice or by crooked wiles Mankind from earth may scale the lofty
height," 14

Plato makes all things connected with God, and dependent on God, for he says
that "He, holding the beginning and the middle and the end of all things, passes
onward in a straight course to the accomplishment of His purpose." 15 And again
he says, that "He is good, and goodness can never have any jealousy of anything.
And being free from jealousy, He makes all things as good as possible, bringing
them out of disorder into order." 16 And while He cares for all things, and
orders all as well as possible, He has taken thought for mankind also.' And
after a few words:

'Thus speaks Plato. But he who puts aside this divine nature, and cuts off the
soul's hope of hereafter, and destroys reverence before superior Beings in the
present life, what communion has he with Plato? Or how could he exhort men to
what Plato desires, and confirm his sayings? For on the contrary he surely would
appear as the helper and ally of those who wish to do injustice. For every one
who is human and constrained by human desires, if he despise the gods and think
they are nothing to him, inasmuch as in life he dwells far away from them, and
after death exists no more, will come prepared to gratify his lusts.

'For it is not impossible to feel assurance of being undetected in wrong-doing,
if indeed it be necessary to avoid detection by men: it is not necessary,
however, on every occasion even to seek to avoid detection, where a man has
power to overmaster those who have discovered him. So the disbelief in
providence is a ready way to wrong-doing.

'For a very worthy person indeed is he, who after holding out pleasure to us as
a good, and granting us security from the gods, still thinks to provide a plan
to prevent wrong-doing. He acts like a physician who, having neglected to give
help while the sick man was yet alive, attempts after death to devise certain
contrivances for curing the dead man.

'In a similar manner to him the Peripatetic acts. For it is not so much the
eagerness for the pleasure, as the disbelief that the deity cares, that
encourages wrong-doing. What then, some one may say, do you put Aristotle in the
same class with Epicurus?

'Why certainly, at least in relation to the point before us. For what difference
does it make to us, whether you banish deity from the world and leave us no
communion therewith, or shut up the gods in the world and remove them from all
share in the affairs of earth? For in both cases the indifference of the gods
towards men is equal, and equal also the security of wrong-doers from fear of
the gods. And as to our deriving any benefit from them while they remain in
heaven, in the first place this is common also to things without reason or life,
and further, in this way, even according to Epicurus, men get help from the
gods, 'They say, for instance, that the better emanations from them become the
causes of great blessings to those who partake of them. But neither Epicurus nor
Aristotle can rightly be reckoned on the side of providence. For if according to
Epicurus providence disappears, although the gods according to him employ the
utmost solicitude for the preservation of their own goods, so must providence
disappear according to Aristotle also, even if the heavenly motions are arranged
in a certain order and array.

'For we seek a providence that has an interest for us, and in such that man has
no share who has admitted that neither daemons, nor heroes, nor any souls at all
can live on hereafter.

'But therein Epicurus, in my judgement, seems to have acted more modestly: for
as if he despaired of the gods being able to abstain from the care of mankind if
they came in contact with them, he transferred them, as it were, to a foreign
country, and settled them somewhere outside the world, excusing them from the
charge of inhumanity by the removal, and by their separation from all things.

'But this our super-excellent discoverer of nature, and accurate judge of things
divine, after putting human affairs under the very eyes of the gods yet left
them uncared for and unregarded, being administered by some force of nature, and
not by divine reason. Wherefore he himself cannot fairly escape that other
charge which some imagine against Epicurus, that it was not according to his
judgement, but through fear of men, that he allotted room in the universe to the
gods, just like a spectator's place in a theatre.

'And they regard it as a proof of. the man's opinion, that he deprived the gods
of their activity towards us, from which alone a just confidence in their
existence was likely to be derived. For this same thing is done by Aristotle
also; for by his both putting them far off and giving over the proof to sight
only, an operation too feeble to judge of things at so great a distance, it may
readily be thought that from shame he admits the existence of gods there.

'For as he neither left anything outside the world, nor gave his gods access to
things on earth, he was compelled either to confess himself altogether an
atheist, or to preserve the appearance of allowing gods to remain, by banishing
his gods to some such place as that. But Epicurus, by excusing the higher powers
from diligent care because of the want of communication, seems to throw a decent
veil over his disbelief in the gods.'

Such are the remarks of Atticus against Aristotle's repudiation of the doctrine
of providence. The same author further adds to what has been quoted the
following remarks, aiming at the same philosopher's unwillingness to admit that
the world was created.

CHAPTER VI

WHEREAS again Moses decided that the world was created, and set up God as Maker
and Creator over the universe, and whereas Plato's philosophy taught the same
doctrines as Moses, Aristotle, having travelled the contrary course on this
point also, is refuted by the aforesaid author writing as follows word for word:

'In the first place then Plato speculating upon the origin of the world, and
considering that every one must necessarily seek after this great and very
beneficial doctrine of Providence, and having reasoned out the conclusion that
the uncreated has no need either of a maker or of a guardian for its well-being,
in order that he might not deprive the world of providence, denied that it was
uncreated.

'And we pray that we may not at this point he opposed by those of our own
household, who choose to think that according to Plato also the world is
uncreated. For they are bound in justice to pardon us, if in reference to
Plato's opinions we believe what he himself, being a Greek, has discoursed to us
Greeks in clear and distinct language.

''For God," says he, "having found the whole visible world not at rest, but
moving in an irregular and disorderly manner, brought it out of disorder into
order, because He thought that this was altogether better than the other." 17
And still more plainly he shows that he did not adopt creation in an enigmatic
way, nor yet for need of clearness, in the discourse which he has made the
Father of all hold upon this point after the creation of the universe.

"For," says he, "since ye have come into being, (and he is speaking to the gods)
though ye are not altogether immortal nor indissoluble, nevertheless ye shall
certainly not be dissolved, since ye have gained my will." 18

'But, as I was saying, with those who talk to us at home, as being our friends,
we will discuss the matter in a friendly way and quietly with gentle arguments.
For Aristotle seems to have brought them also over, as haying been unable to
resist his attack upon the doctrine, and unwilling to impute to Plato what
seemed to have been detected as a fallacy.

'But according to our hearing, whereas Plato claims for the world that it is the
noblest work made by the noblest of Creators, and invests the Maker of all with
a power by which He made the world which did not previously exist, and haying
made it, will if He please preserve it ever in safety, and whereas according to
him the world is in this way supposed to be created and imperishable, who among
the Peripatetics gives us any confirmation of these doctrines?

'We must gently admonish their ally, that it is not absolutely necessary that
whatever has been created must also perish, nor conversely that what will never
perish must necessarily be uncreated. For we must neither admit that the sole
cause of the imperishable is derived from its being uncreated, nor must we leave
the passing of the created to destruction as admitting no remedy.

'Whence then are we to get any help on these points from the doctrines of
Aristotle, a man who pursues the argument on these subjects, not indirectly, nor
merely as stating his own opinion, but sets himself in direct opposition to
Plato, and both brings the created under a necessity of perishing, and says that
what is imperishable maintains its imperishable condition only from the fact of
not having been created, nor even leaves any power in God, which He can use to
do any good. For what has never existed before now, this, he says, never can
come into existence.

'And so far is he from supporting Plato's doctrine by these statements, that he
has ere now frightened some even of Plato's zealous disciples by what he said,
and led them to reject his doctrine, because they were not able to perceive,
that although, according to the nature of things alone without the will and
power of God, neither the created is imperishable nor the imperishable created.

'Yet when one has established as the chief cause that which proceeds from God,
one must take this as guide in all things, and show it to be a cause on no point
inferior to any others. For it is ridiculous that, because a thing has come into
existence, it must therefore perish, and yet not perish, if God so wills;
ridiculous also that, because a thing is uncreated, it has strength to escape
from perishing, and yet that the will of God is insufficient to keep any created
thing from perishing.

'The builder is able to set up a house not yet existent, and a man can make a
statue not previously existent, and another frames a ship out of unwrought
timber and gives it over to those who want it, and all the other artificers, who
pursue the constructive arts, have this power to bring some non-existent thing
into existence; and shall the universal King and Chief Artificer not so much as
share the power of a human artificer, but be left by us without any share in
creation? Not so, if at least we be able in any small degree to form an estimate
of a divine cause.

'But though competent to create and to will what is excellent, (for He is good,
and the good feels no envy about anything), is He yet unable to preserve and
guard what He has made? 19 Yet surely even the other artificers are competent to
do both. The builder, for instance, and the shipwright not only build new ships
and houses, but are able also to repair those which are wearing away from time,
substituting in them other parts in place of those which have been damaged.

'So that surely so much as this must be conceded to God also. For how can He who
is able to make a whole thing be unable to make it in part? So then why need it
be made new, if one who is a maker in general is also to preserve his beautiful
work against every accident? For to be willing to undo what was well made is the
part of an evil one.

'But there is no stronger bond for the preservation of things created than the will of God. Or, while many things which shared in the zeal and will of man, as nations and cities and works, after existing an enormous time still remain when he who willed them is no more, shall the things which have had a share in God's purpose, and have been made for Him and by Him,----shall these then pass away and no longer remain while their Maker is still present?

'What cause can have done violence to the purpose of God? Can it be the
necessity proceeding from the things created themselves? But this by accepting
the orderly arrangement confessed itself overcome by God. But can it be some
cause from without acting in antagonism to God? Yet neither does any such cause
exist, nor is it right to make God inferior to any in matters in which He has
before prevailed and made order, unless indeed we altogether forget that we are
discoursing about the greatest and most divine power.

'But enough, for perhaps we are carried away by zeal into this argument
concerning the truth. One thing is plain which we set forth, that they can be no
teachers concerning the creation of the world who do not allow it any creation
at all.' Further, concerning the fifth essence in bodies introduced by Aristotle
we must quote the following statements:

CHAPTER VII

'For instance, with regard to the so-called elements, which are the primary
constituents of bodies, Plato, like those before him, following the clear
evidence concerning them, said that they were these four which are generally
acknowledged, namely, fire, earth, air, and water, and that all other things are
produced from their combinations and changes. But Aristotle, as it seems, hoped
to appear extraordinarily wise, if he could add another body, and counted in
with the four visible bodies the fifth essence: and he thus made a very
brilliant and bountiful use of nature, but failed to observe that in physical
inquiry one must not lay down laws, but search out nature's own facts.

'To the proof then that the primary natures of bodies are four, which is what the Platonists want, the Peripatetic would not only give no help, but would even be almost its only opponent. For instance, when we say that every body is either hot or cold, or moist or dry, or soft or hard, or light or heavy, or rare or dense, and when we find that there can be nothing else to partake of any of these conditions besides the four elements,----for if anything is hot, it is either fire or air; and if cold, either water or earth; and if dry, fire or earth; and if moist, water or air; and if soft, air or fire; and if hard, water or earth; and light and rare, as for instance, fire and air; and heavy and dense, as water and earth; ----and when from all the other simple forces we perceive that
there cannot be any other body besides these, this man alone opposes us, asserting that there can be a body which partakes not of these, a body, that is, neither heavy nor light, neither soft nor hard, neither moist nor dry, almost calling it a body that is not a body. For though he has left it the name, he has taken away all the forces by means of which it naturally becomes a body.

'Either, therefore, he will withdraw us from Plato's opinion by persuading us of
his own statements, or by confirming those of Plato he will himself withdraw
from his own opinions. So that in no way is he of any use in regard to Plato's
doctrines.

'Further, Plato will have it that all bodies, inasmuch as they are regarded as
formed upon one similar kind of matter, turn and change one into another. But
Aristotle claims absolutely an essence in all other things which is impassible,
and imperishable, and unchangeable, lest forsooth he should seem to be the
inventor of something contemptible: yet he says nothing at all extraordinary and
original, but transfers Plato's fine intuitions in other matters to such as are
unsuitable, just like some of the more modern sculptors.

'For they too, when they have copied the head of one statue, and the breast of
another, and the waist of another, sometimes put together things which do not
suit each other, and persuade themselves that they have made something original:
and indeed the whole, which any one would blame as being unsymmetrical, is their
own; but the contributions which are brought together in it, and have some
beauty, are not theirs.

'In like manner also Aristotle hearing from Plato that there is a certain
essence intelligible in itself abstractedly, and incorporeal colourless and
intangible, neither coming into being, nor perishing, nor turning, nor changing,
but always existing in the same conditions and manner, and hearing again at
another time of the things in heaven that being divine and imperishable and
impassible they are yet bodies, he combined out of both and stuck together
things not at all congruous: for from the one he took the property of body, and
from the others the property of impassibility, and so framed an impassible body.

'In the case then of the statues, even if the combination of the different parts
was not beautiful, it was at least not impossible to be made. For instance, even
Homer shows us such combinations, for he says,

"In eyes and head Like Zeus the Lord of thunder, with the girth Of Ares, and
Poseidon's brawny chest." 20

But the body could never be impassible: for being combined with a passible and
changeable nature, it must necessarily suffer with its yokefellow. And if there
were anything impassible, it must be separated and free from that which suffers;
so that it would be without the matter, and when separated from that it must
necessarily be acknowledged to be incorporeal.'

Further, let us give our attention to these other points in which he proves that
Aristotle is at variance with Plato. 21

CHAPTER VIII

'THEN these are followed by many points in which they are at variance. For the
one says that the things in heaven have most of their character from fire, while
the other says that the heavenly bodies have nothing to do with fire.22 And
Plato says that God kindled light in the second circle from the earth in order
that it might as much as possible illumine the whole heaven, such being his
declaration concerning the sun.23 But the other, not willing that the sun should
be fire, and knowing that light is pure fire, or something of fire, does not
allow that light is kindled round the sun.

'Further, the one, attributing formal immortality to all the heavenly bodies,
says that there take place certain secretions from them and equivalent
accessions; and he is compelled to say this, in regard to the secretions, by the
rays of the sun and the heat produced in the efflux from him; and, in regard to
the accessions, by the equality in his apparent magnitude: for the bodies would
not appear equal if they received nothing in place of what they emit: 'but
Aristotle maintains that they continue altogether the same in substance, without
either any secretion from them or any accretion.

'Further, the one, in addition to the common motion of the heavenly bodies, in
which all move in the spheres to which they are confined, both the fixed stars
and the planets, gives them another motion also, which indeed happens to be
otherwise most admirable, and congenial to the nature of their body; for as they
are spherical, naturally each would have a spherical motion of rotation: but the
other deprives them of this motion also, which they perform as liviag beings,
and leaves them only the motion which results from other bodies surrounding
them, as if they were without life.

'Moreover he says that the appearance presented to us by the stars as if they
were in motion is an affection of the feebleness and quivering, as it were, of
our sight, and is not a reality: as if Plato derived his belief in their motion
from this appearance, and not from the reason which teaches that as each of
these is a living being, and has both soul and body, it must necessarily have
its own proper motion (for every body whose motion is from without is lifeless,
but that which is moved from within and of itself is animated); and when moved,
as being divine, it must move with the most beautiful motion, and since motion
in a circle is the most beautiful, it must move in this way.

'And the truth of the sensation would be in part confirmed by the testimony of
reason; it was not, however, this sensation that caused the belief in the
motion. With regard to the motion of the whole, he could not contradict Plato's
assertion that it takes place in a circle, for he was overpowered by the clear
evidence: yet here also this fine invention of the new body gave him room for
dissent.

'For whereas Plato attributed the circular motion to the soul, inasmuch as there
were four bodies and all naturally moved in a simple and straight course, fire
towards the outside, and earth towards the centre, and the others towards the
intervening space, Aristotle, as assigning a different motion to each different
body, so also assigned the circular as a sort of bodily motion to his fifth
body, easily deceiving himself in all.

'For to bodies which move in a straight line their heaviness or lightness
supplied a source of motion; but the fifth body, partaking neither of heaviness
nor lightness, was rather a cause of immobility, and not of motion in a circle.

'For if to bodies that move in a straight line the cause of their motion is not
their shape, but the inclination of their weight, a body, not only when placed
in the centre of any like body, will have no inclination in any direction, but,
also, when set in a circle round any kind of body whatever, will have no cause
of inclination towards anything,

"Move they to right towards the rising sun, Or move to left," 24

whether forward or backward.

'Further, when other bodies have been thrust out of their proper places, the
rebound towards these gives them a motion again of themselves; but as that fifth
body never departs from its own localities, it ought to remain at rest.

'And with regard to the other bodies, when this fifth is put out of the
question, it is evident that Aristotle out of contentiousness does not agree
with Plato. For Plato had inquired whether body, is heavy by nature or light by
nature, and, since it was evident that these terms are used according to the
relation towards up and down, he had considered whether there is by nature any
up and down or not, and had exactly shown that according to the affinities of
the bodies to their places, the direction towards which they severally tended
would be called "down," and the other direction from which each would draw back
be called "up." And "heavy" and "light" he disposed according to the same
relation, and further proved that neither their centre nor their circumference
is rightly called "up" or "down." But Aristotle makes objection, thinking that
he must overthrow the other's doctrines on every side, and urges us to call that
which tends to the centre "heavy," and that which tends to the circumference
"light," and the place in the centre he calls "down," and the circumference
"up." '

Thus widely do they differ from each other in regard to the world, and its
constituents, and the heavenly bodies. Such are the opinions of these two. But
Moses and the oracles of the Hebrews trouble themselves about none of these
things; and with good reason, because it was thought that those who busied
themselves about these matters gained no benefit in regard to the right conduct
of life.

CHAPTER IX

'Now concerning the soul what need we say? For this is evident not only to
philosophers but also to nearly all ordinary persons, that Plato allows the soul
to be immortal, and has written many discourses concerning this, showing in many
various ways that the soul is immortal.

'Great also has been the emulation of the zealous followers of Plato's teaching
in defence both of Plato and of his doctrine; for this is almost the one thing
that holds his whole school together.

'For the hypothesis of his ethical doctrines was a consequence of the
immortality of the soul, since it was through the divine nature of the soul that
virtue was enabled to maintain its grandeur and lustre and high spirit; in
nature also it was in consequence of the soul's direction that all things gained
the possibility of being well ordered.

'"For soul," he says, "as a whole has the care of all soulless being, and
traverses all heaven, appearing at different times in different forms." 25

Moreover, science also and wisdom have been made by Plato dependent on the
immortality of the soul. 26 For all kinds of learning are recollections, and he
thinks that in no other way can inquiry and learning, out of which science
springs, be maintained.

'Now if the soul is not immortal, neither is recollection, and if not this, then
neither learning. Whereas therefore all the doctrines of Plato are absolutely
attached to and dependent on the divine nature of the soul and its immortality,
he who does not admit this overthrows Plato's whole philosophy.

'Who then first attempted to oppose the proofs, and rob the soul of immortality
and all its other power? Who else, I say, before Aristotle? For of the rest some
allowed that it has a continued existence, and others, if not granting so much
as this, yet assigned to the soul a certain power and movement and works and
actions in the body.

'But the more Plato tried to magnify the importance of the soul, declaring it to
be the beginning of creation, and the pupil of God, and the power presiding over
all things, so much the more contentiously did Aristotle seek to destroy and to
dishonour it, and prove the soul to be almost nothing.

'For he said that it was neither spirit, nor fire, nor body at all, nay, nor yet
an incorporeal thing such as to be self-governed and to have motion, nor even so
much as to be in the body without motion, and, so to say, soulless. For see how
he ventured, or even was forced, so far as to rob the soul of its primary
motions, deliberation, thought, expectation, remembrance, reasoning!

'For this secretary, as they say, of nature says that these are not movements of
the soul. Surely this man may be quite trusted to have understood anything about
the things outside him, who has made so great a mistake about his own soul, as
not even to understand that it thinks! For it is not the soul, he says, but the
man that performs each of these acts, while the soul is motionless.

'Dicaearchus therefore following him, and being able to discern the consequence,
took away the whole substance of the soul. It is manifest indeed that the soul
is a thing invisible and concealed, so that, through the clear evidence at least
of our senses, we could not grant its existence: but though concealed, its
motions seem to compel us to acknowledge that the soul is an existent thing.

'For almost every one seems to understand that the following are acts of the
soul: to deliberate, to consider, and to think in any way whatever. For when we
behold the body and its powers, and reflect that actions of this kind are not
proper to the body, we grant the existence within us of something else which
deliberates, and that this is the soul. Since from what other source came our
belief concerning soul?

'If therefore any one take away these acts which are the chief evidences of the
soul, and assign them to something else, he has neither left us any evidence of
its existence, nor any purpose for which it would seem to be of use. What help
therefore can he who would have the soul to be immortal derive from him that
deals death to the soul? And what is the explanation of the manner of its
motion, according to which we call it self-moved, to be obtained from those who
attribute to it no motion at all?

'True; but in regard to the immortality of the mind some one may say that
Aristotle agrees with Plato. For though he will not admit the whole soul to be
immortal, yet he acknowledges the mind at least to be divine and imperishable.
What therefore the mind is in its essence and its nature, whence it comes, and
from what source it separates itself and enters into man's nature, and whither
it departs again, himself alone may know; if at least he understands anything
that he says about the mind, and is not avoiding the proof by wrapping up the
difficulty of the matter in the obscurity of his language, and, just like the
cuttle-fish, making it difficult to catch him by means of the darkness he
creates. 'But even in these matters he is altogether at variance with Plato. For
the one says that mind cannot subsist without a soul, while the other separates
the mind from the soul. And immortality the one gives to it in partnership with
the soul, as being otherwise impossible; but the other says that this survives
in the mind alone when separated from the soul. And that the soul goes forth
from the body he would not allow, because this thought pleased Plato: but he
insisted that the mind is severed from the soul, because Plato judged such a
thing as this impossible.'

These are the statements of Atticus: and I will add to them the views of
Plotinus also, expressed in the following manner: 27

CHAPTER X

[PLOTINUS] 'THE manner in which "entelecheia" is used in speaking of the soul
may be considered in the following way. The soul, they say, holds in the
combination the place of form, in relation to the body when alive as matter: but
it is the form not of every body, nor of body as such, but as physical, organic,
and potentially alive.

'If therefore it is like that with which it has been compared, it is as the form
of a statue to the bronze: and if the body is divided, the soul must be divided
into parts with it, and if any part is cut off from the body, a portion of the
soul is with the part cut off; and the supposed withdrawal of the soul in sleep
does not take place, since the entelechy must be inseparable from that to which
it belongs; but in reality there is no such thing as sleep.

'Moreover if there is an entelechy, there can be no opposition between reason
and desires, but the whole must be affected throughout in one and the same way,
without any self-discord. But sensations may possibly exist only contingently,
while perceptions cannot: wherefore they themselves also introduce the mind as
another soul, and suppose it immortal.

'The reasoning soul therefore must be an entelechy, if we must use this term, in
some other way than this. Nor will the sensitive soul, since this also retains
the impressions of the sensible objects when absent, retain them without the
body's aid: otherwise, they will be in it just like forms and images: but if
they were therein in this manner, it would be impossible to receive them
otherwise (than with the body's aid). Therefore, it is not an entelechy as being
inseparable.

'Moreover that which desires not meats or drinks, but other than bodily things,
is not itself an inseparable entelechy.

'Then there would remain the vegetative principle, which would seem to admit a
doubt, whether it be in this way an inseparable entelechy. Yet even this seems
not to be so. For if the beginning of every plant is at the root, and the rest
of the body grows round the root and the lower parts in many plants, it is
evident that the soul forsakes the other parts and is collected in some one: it
is not then in the whole as an inseparable entelechy. For again, before the
plant grows the soul is in a little germ: if therefore it both comes from a
larger plant into a small germ, and from a small germ into a whole plant, what
is to hinder its being also wholly separated? And how, being also indivisible
can it become a divisible entelechy of a divisible body?

'Also the same soul from one animal becomes another: how then could the soul of
the former become the soul of the next, if it were the entelechy of one? And
this is evident from the animals which change into other animals. The soul then
has not its existence from being the "form" of anything, but is an essence, not
receiving its existence in consequence of its abode in a body, but existing
before it belonged to this, so that in an animal the body will not generate the
soul.

'What then is its essence? And if it is neither body, nor an affection of body,
but action and production and many such things are both in it and from it, being
an essence in addition to its bodies, what is its nature? Must it not manifestly
be what we call real essence? For all that is bodily may be said to be
generation but not substance, becoming and perishing, and never really being,
but preserved by participation with being, so far as it may partake thereof.'

Now since we have related the opinions of Plotinus, it will not be out of place
to observe what Porphyry also has said in his books against Boëthus On the Soul.
28

CHAPTER XI

[PORPHYRY] 'IN answer to him who called the soul an entelechy, and supposed it,
though utterly motionless, to be a cause of motion, we must ask what is the
source of the strong excitements of the animal who understands nothing of what
he sees and utters, though his soul discerns what is future and not yet present,
and moves according to the same? Whence also in the constitution of the animal
come the acts of the soul as of a living thing, acts of deliberation, inquiry,
and will, which are movements of the soul and not of the body?' Then presently
he adds:

'To liken the soul to weight or bodily properties uniform and immovable, by
which either the motion or the quality of the subject-matter is determined, was
the part of a man who either willingly or unwillingly had utterly lost sight of
the dignity of the soul, and had in no way discerned that by the presence of the
soul the animal's body is made alive, as by the presence of fire the water
placed close to it, though cold in itself, is made hot; and by the rising of the
sun the air, which is dark without his shining, is made full of light.

'Yet neither was the heat of the water previously the fire nor the fire's heat;
nor was the light of the atmosphere that light which is inherent in the sun: and
in the same way the animation of the body, which seems like the weight or the
quality in the body, is not that soul which was located in the body and through
which also the body partook of a certain breath of life.' Then afterwards he
adds:

'So then all the other statements which others have made concerning the soul
bring disgrace upon us. For must it not be a disgraceful doctrine which makes
the soul the entelechy of the physical organic body? And is not that a shameful
doctrine, which represents it as having somehow a breath or intelligent fire,
kindled or quenched by the cooling, and, as it were, dipping in the air around
it, and which makes it a collection of atoms, or represents it as wholly
engendered of the body? ' This is what in The Laws the author represented as the
impious doctrine of impious men.29 All such statements then are full of shame:
but, says he, no one would be ashamed for him who calls it a self-moved
substance.

CHAPTER XII

[ATTICUS] 'FURTHER, when Plato says that the soul pervading all parts arranges
all in order, and is that whereby the other philosophers would admit that all
things are so arranged, and that nature is nothing else than soul, and evidently
not an irrational soul, and when from this Plato gathers that all things take
place according to providence, since they take place according to nature, in
none of these opinions does Aristotle agree with us.

'For he does not admit that nature is soul, and earthly things ordered by one
nature: for he says that for each several thing there are also different causes.
For of the things in heaven which 'always remain in the same relations and
conditions he supposes fate to be the cause: and of sublunary things, nature;
and of human affairs, prudence, and forethought, and soul, showing indeed nicety
in such distinctions, but not discerning the necessary truth.

'For if there were not some one animate power pervading the whole, and binding
and holding all things together, the whole could not be either reasonably or
beautifully arranged. It was a proof then of the same blindness, to hope that a
city could ever continue in well-being without unity, and to believe that one
could in argument preserve this universe in perfect beauty, such it appears,
without having bound and compacted it together by participation in some one
common principle.

'And something of this kind, he says, it is that arranges the several parts,
such as to be a principle of motion, but he will not admit that this is soul;
though Plato nevertheless shows that in all things that are moved the source and
fountain of their motion is the soul. And that which would be the work of a
rational and wise soul, to make nothing without a purpose, this he attributes to
nature, but gives nature no share in the name of soul; as if things were derived
not from powers but from names.'

CHAPTER XIII

'BUT the chief point and power of Plato's system, his theory of ideas, has been
discredited, and abused, and insulted in every way, as far as it was in
Aristotle's power. For as he was unable to conceive that things of a grand,
divine, and transcendent nature require a certain kindred power for their
recognition, and trusted to his own meagre and petty shrewdness, which was able
to make its way through things terrestrial, and discern the truth in them, but
was not capable of beholding the plain of absolute truth, he made himself the
rule and judge of things above him,30 and denied the existence of any peculiar
natures such as Plato affirmed, but dared to call the highest of all realities
triflings and chatterings and nonsense.

'Rather is the supreme and final speculation of Plato's philosophy that which
treats of this intelligible and eternal being of the ideas, wherein verily the
utmost toil and stress is set before the soul. For a most happy man is he, who
has shared in the effort and attained the end, while he who has failed from want
of power to obtain an insight is left without any share at all of happiness.

'And for this reason Plato too strives earnestly in every way to show the
strength of these ideal natures. For he says that it is not possible either
rightly to assign a cause of anything whatsoever, except by participation in the
ideas, or to have knowledge of any truth except by reference to these: nay not
even a particle of reason would any have, unless they should acknowledge the
existence of these ideas.

'They again who have decided to maintain the doctrines of Plato lay the chief
stress of their arguments on this point, and quite necessarily. For nothing is
left of the Platonic system, if one will not grant them on Plato's behalf these
primary and i principal natures. For it is in these that he is especially
superior to all other men.

'For as he conceived God in relation to these ideas as Father of all, and
Creator, and Lord, and Guardian; and as from men's works he recognized that the
artist formed a previous conception of that which he was about to make, and then
afterwards adapted the likeness to the conception thus formed in the case of the
things made; in the same way therefore Plato comprehended at a glance that God's
conceptions, the patterns of the things made, are earlier than the things
themselves, being incorporeal and intelligible, ever existing in the same
conditions and modes, themselves the highest and first beings, and in part the
causes to all the rest of their being just such as they severally are, according
to their likeness to them; and seeing that they are not easy to be discerned,
nor yet able to be clearly expressed in speech, Plato himself treated of these
subjects as far as it was possible to represent them in speech or thought, and
to prepare those who were to follow after him; and having arranged his whole
philosophy to this end, he asserts that with these ideas and the perception of
them are concerned the wisdom and the science, whereby the proper end of man and
the life of blessedness are attained.' So far speaks Atticus. I might have
quoted yet more than this from his book which I have mentioned: let us be
satisfied, however, with what has been set forth, and pass on next to the sect
of the Stoics. Among the hearers then of Socrates was one Antisthenes, a man
like Heracleitus in spirit, who said that madness was better than pleasure, and
therefore used to advise his friends never to stretch out a finger for the sake
of pleasure. And a disciple of his was Diogenes the 'dog,' who seemed to
entertain most brutelike ideas, and attracted many followers. He was succeeded
by Crates, and a disciple of Crates was Zeno of Cittium, who was established as
founder of the sect of the Stoic philosophers.

Zeno was succeeded by Cleanthes, and Cleanthes by Chrysippus, and he by the
second Zeno, and the rest in order. All these are said to have been especially
devoted both to hard living and to dialectic. The doctrines then of their
philosophy are somewhat as follows.

CHAPTER XIV

[ARISTOCLES] 31 'THEY say, like Heracleitus, that the element of the existing
world is fire, and that the original principles of fire are matter and god, as
Plato says. But the former says that both principles, the active and the
passive, are corporeal, while the latter says that the first active cause is
incorporeal.

'Then, moreover, they say that at certain predestined and definite times the
whole world is consumed by fire, and afterwards reorganized again. The
primordial fire, however, is as it were just a seed, containing the reasons and
the causes of all things past, present, and future: and that the combination and
sequence of these constitute fate, and knowledge, and truth, and law of all
being, from which there is no escape or avoidance. And in this way all things in
the world are admirably arranged, just as in any well-ordered state.'

CHAPTER XV

[ARIUS DIDYMUS] 'THE whole ordered world (κόσμος) with all its parts they call
god, and say that he is one alone, and finite, and living, and eternal, and god:
for all bodies are contained in him, and in him there is no vacuum. For the name
order (κόσμος) is applied to the quality of all substance as well as to that
which has an arrangement of like kind consequent on the ordering (διακόσμηνσιν).

'Wherefore according to the former rendering they say that the world is eternal,
but as to its orderly arrangement created and subject to change at infinite
periods past and future.

'And the quality of all being is an eternal world and god; the name world
(κόσμος) also means the system compounded of heaven, and the air, and earth, and
sea, and the natures contained in them; and again the name world means the
dwelling-place of gods and men, and of all things made for their sake.

'For in the same way as the name city has two meanings, the dwelling-place, and
the system resulting from the combination of residents and citizens, so also the
world is, as it were, a city composed of gods and men, in which the gods hold
the rule, and the men are subject.

'There is, however, a community between them, because they partake of reason,
which is nature's law: and for their sakes all other things have been made. From
which things it follows that we must suppose that the god who administers the
whole takes thought for mankind, being beneficent, and kind, and friendly to;
man, and just, and possessed of all virtues.

'For this reason indeed the world is also called Zeus, since he is the cause of
our life (ζῆν): and inasmuch as from eternity he administers all things
unchangeably by connected (εἰρομένῳ) reason, he is also called Fate
(εἱμαρμένην): and Adrasteia, because nothing can escape him (ἀποδιδράσκειν) and
Providence, because, he arranges things severally for good.

'Cleanthes would have the sun to be the ruling power of the world, because it is
the greatest of the heavenly bodies, and contributes most to the administration
of the whole by making the day and the year and the other seasons.

'Some, however, of the sect thought that the earth was the ruling power of the
world. But Chrysippus thought it was the ether, the clearest and purest as being
most mobile of all things, and carrying round the whole course of the world.'

Let this extract then suffice from the Epitome of Arius Didymus. But with
reference to the opinion of the Stoics concerning God it is sufficient to quote
the words of Porphyry in the answer which he wrote to Boëthus On the Soul, in
the form following: 32

CHAPTER XVI

[PORPHYRY] 'THEY do not hesitate to call God an intelligent fire and allow Him
to be eternal, and to say that He destroys and devours all things, being such a
fire as that which is known to us, and to contradict Aristotle who deprecates
saying that the ether consists of fire of this kind.

'But if they are asked how such a fire lasts so long, though they do not say
that it is fire of another kind, yet after describing it as of such a nature,
and claiming credence for their own assertion, they add on to this unreasonable
belief that it is also an eternal fire, though they assume that even this
etherial fire is partially quenched and rekindled. But why should one spend time
in pursuing any further their blindness in regard to their own doctrines, and
their indolence and contempt for the doctrines of the ancients?'

CHAPTER XVII

[NUMENIUS] 33 'BUT what then is "being "? Is it these four elements, earth and
fire and the other two intermediate natures? Are then these the real beings,
either collectively, or any one of them singly? But how can they be, since they
are both created and destroyed again, for we may see them proceeding one out of
another, and interchanging, and subsisting neither as elements nor as compounds?
These cannot thus be a body with true being.

'But though not these, yet it is possible that matter may have true being? But
for matter also this is utterly impossible, through want of power to continue.
For matter is a running and swiftly changing stream, in depth, and breadth, and
length undefined and endless.' And presently he adds:

'So it is well stated in the argument that, if matter is infinite, it is
undefined; and, if undefined, irrational; and, if irrational, it cannot be
known. But as it cannot be known it must necessarily be without order, as things
arranged in order must certainly be easy to be known: and what is without order,
is not stable: and whatever is not stable cannot have true being.

'Now this was the very point on which we agreed among ourselves before, that it
is not permissible for all these things to be associated with true being. I
should wish this to be the opinion of all men, be it at all events mine. I deny,
therefore, that either matter in itself, or material bodies are true being.

'What then? Have we any thing else besides these elements in the nature of the
universe? Yes, certainly. And this is not at all a subtle thing to express, if
we would together try to discuss the following point first in the case of
ourselves.

'For since bodies are in their own nature inanimate and dead, carried hither and
thither, and not abiding in one stay, have they not need of something to hold
them together? Most certainly. And if they should fail to find this, would they
continue? Certainly not. What is there then to hold them? If on the one hand
this also were a body, I think that being liable to be dissolved and dispersed
it would need a Zeus Soter to sustain it. If, however, it must be freed from
what bodies suffer, in order that after they have been generated it may be able
to avert their destruction, and hold them together, to me it seems that there is
nothing else left, except only the incorporeal. For of all natures this alone is
stable, and compact, and not at all corporeal. At all events it is neither
created, nor increased, nor subject to any other kind of motion, and for these
reasons the incorporeal was rightly judged worthy to take precedence.'

CHAPTER XVIII

[ARIUS DIDYMUS] 'But the oldest of this sect are of opinion that all things are
changed into ether, when at certain very long periods all are resolved into an
ethereal fire.' And afterwards he adds:

'But from this it is manifest that Chrysippus has not accepted this confusion in
reference to substance (for that was impossible), but only that which was meant
as equivalent to change. For the term destruction is not properly understood of
the great destruction of the world which takes place in long periods by those
who hold the doctrine of the dissolution of the universe into fire, which they
call conflagration, but they use the term destruction (fqora&n) as equivalent to
change in the course of nature.

'For it is held by the Stoic philosophers that the universal substance changes
into fire, as into a seed, and coming back again, from this completes its
organization, such as it was before. And this is the doctrine which was accepted
by the first and oldest leaders of the sect, Zeno, and Cleanthes, and
Chrysippus. For the Zeno who was the disciple and successor of Chrysippus in the
School is said to have doubted about the conflagration of the universe.'

CHAPTER XIX

'THE common reason having advanced so far, and a common nature having become
greater and fuller, and having at last dried up all things and absorbed them
into itself, finds itself in the universal substance, having gone back to the
condition first mentioned, and to that resurrection which makes the Great Year,
in which takes place the restitution from itself alone to itself again.

'And when it has returned, because of an arrangement such as that from which it
began to make a similar organization, it according to reason follows the same
course again, so that such periods go on from eternity and never cease. For it
is not possible for all things to have a cause of their beginning, nor of that
which administers them. For under things created there must lie a substance of a
nature to receive all the changes, and the power that out of it created them.
For as there is in our case a certain kind of creative nature, there must of
necessity be something of the same kind in the world also, something uncreated,
for there cannot be a beginning of creation in the case of this nature: and in
the same way as it is uncreated, it is also impossible for it to be destroyed,
either by itself, or by anything external that would destroy it.

CHAPTER XX

'THE seed, says Zeno, which man emits is breath combined with moisture, a
portion and fragment of soul, and a blending of the parents' seed, and a
concrete mixture of the various parts of the soul. For this, having the same
laws as the universe, when emitted into the womb is caught up by another breath,
and made a portion of the female's soul and grows into one with it, and being
there stirred and kindled by it grows in secret, continually receiving additions
to the moisture and increasing of itself.' And a little further on he adds:

'With regard to the soul, Cleanthes, in setting forth the doctrines of Zeno for
comparison with the other physicists, says that Zeno calls the soul an
exhalation endowed with sensation, just as Heracleitus does. For wishing to make
it clear that there is a perpetual production of intelligent souls by
exhalation, he compared them to rivers, speaking as follows: "Though men step
into the same rivers, the waters that from time to time flow over them are
different": and souls likewise are exhaled from moisture.

'So then Zeno, like Heracleitus, represents the soul as an exhalation. And he
says that it is sensitive for the reason that the ruling part is capable of
being impressed through the senses from real and substantial objects, and
receiving their impressions. For these are special properties of soul.' After
other remarks he adds:

'And they say that there is a soul in the universe, which they call ether, and
air surrounding the laud and sea, and exhalations from them; and that to this
soul are attached all the other souls, both those in animals, and those in the
surrounding air; for the souls of the dead still continue.

'Some say that the soul of the universe is eternal, but that the others at death
are absorbed into union with it: and that every soul has in it a certain ruling
faculty, which is life, and sensation, and appetite.' And a little further on he
proceeds:

'They say that the soul is created and perishable, but does not perish
immediately when freed from the body, but abides for some time by itself; the
soul of the good until the resolution of all things into fire, but the soul of
the foolish for certain periods of time.

'But the continued existence of souls they thus describe, that we ourselves on
becoming souls continue to exist, having been separated from the body and
changed into the smaller substance of the soul. But the souls of the foolish and
of irrational animals perish together with their bodies.'

Such are the doctrines of the Stoic philosophy collected out of the Epitomae of
Arius Didymus. But in answer to their absurd opinion about the soul, it is
sufficient to quote the refutations briefly stated in the following words in
Longinus, one of our own age: 34

CHAPTER XXI

[LONGINUS] 'To speak briefly, it seems to me that all who represented the soul
as a body have strayed, one after another, far away from right reasoning. For
how is it at all admissible to assume that what is proper to the soul is similar
to any of the elements? Or how refer it to the compounds and mixtures, which
occurring in many ways are of a nature to generate forms of countless other
bodies, in which, if not continuously, at all events at intervals one may see
the cause of the elements, and the advance of the primary elements towards the
secondary and tertiary compounds? But of properties pertaining to the soul not a
trace nor a sign is found in bodies, not even if one should strive, like
Epicurus and Chrysippus, to turn every stone, and examine every power of body
for an origin of the functions of the soul.

'For what help would the subtilty of the breath give us for sensible
presentations and reasonings? Or why has the shape of the atoms so great power
above all else and such facility of change, as to beget wisdom, whenever it is
mixed up in the moulding of another body? I think indeed that not even if one
chanced to be one of Hephaestus' tripods and handmaidens, of whom the former,
Homer says, went self-moved to the assembly,35 and the latter helped their
master in his work, and lacked none of the advantages which living beings
possess, much less those of the fortuitous motes, . . . and on the other hand it
is like the stones upon the sea-shore, in regard to being able to do anything
remarkable towards producing sensation. For one might justly be indignant with
Zeno and Cleanthes for arguing so very contemptuously about the soul, and saying
both alike that the soul is an exhalation of the solid body. For what, in
heaven's name, is there at all in common between an exhalation and a soul? And
how is it possible for them, if they think that both our nature and that of
other animals is like this, to be able to preserve either sensible presentations
and remembrances permanently, or, on the other hand, instincts and desires of
things conducive to understanding? Shall we then indeed degrade the gods also,
and Him who pervades all things alike in earth and heaven, into an exhalation,
and smoke, and such nonsense as this? And shall we not feel ashamed even towards
the poets, who although they have not an exact understanding of the gods,
nevertheless partly from the common conception of mankind, and partly from
inspiration of the Muses, which is of a nature to stir them hereto, have spoken
more honourably concerning them, and not called them exhalations, or airs, or
breaths, and such nonsense?' This is what Longinus tells you. But listen to
Plotinus also, aiming against the same sect such remarks as follow: 36

CHAPTER XXII

[PLOTINUS] 'Now whether each of us is immortal, or wholly perishes, or whether
parts of him will pass into dissolution and destruction, while parts remain for
ever, which are the man himself, this one may learn as follows, by examining it
in the natural way.

'In the first place, man cannot be a simple thing, but he has in him a soul, and
has also a body whether as our instrument, or as attached to us in any other
way; at all events let them be thus distinguished, and let us examine closely
the nature and essence of each.

'The body then, being itself compound, cannot, from the reason of the thing, be
permanent; and our senses perceive it dissolving, and wasting, and suffering all
kinds of decay, while each of the parts in it follows its own course, and one
wastes another away, and changes into another, and destroys it; and this
especially when the soul, which harmonizes them, is not present with the atoms.

'And even if each be isolated in coming into existence, it is not one, since it
admits of separation into form and matter, of which even simple bodies must be
constituted; moreover having also magnitude, inasmuch as they are bodies, and
can be divided and broken into small fragments, in this way also they would be
liable to destruction.

'So if this is part of ourselves, we are not altogether immortal: but if it is
an instrument, it must be of the nature described, as having been given only for
a certain time. But the dominant part, even the man himself, would be either
like the form in relation to the body as matter, or like the agent in relation
to an instrument. And in either way the soul is the self.

'Of what nature then is this? Either it is body, and must certainly be soluble,
for every body is compound. Or if it were not body, but of some other nature,
this also we must examine either in the same way or some other. And first we
must consider into what this body, which they say is soul, must be resolved.

'For since life is an inseparable property of soul, this body which is the soul,
if it consisted of two or more bodies, must either in each of the two or in
every one have life innate, or one must have it and the other not, or neither
have it. If then the life were attached to one of them only, this itself would
be soul.

'What then would a body be, which derived life from itself? For fire, and air,
and water, and earth, are without life from. themselves: and to whichever of
these soul is attached, the life which this one enjoys is adventitious. But
besides these there are no other bodies. And by those who think that there are
elements different from these, they were not said to be souls but bodies, and
not to have life. But if, though none of them has life, the assemblage of them
is said to have produced life, this is absurd.

'If, however, each has life, even one is sufficient: but rather it is impossible
that a collection of bodies should produce life, and things unintelligent beget
intelligence. Moreover they will not assert that these are produced by any and
every mode of combination. There must then be the power that is to arrange, and
the cause of the combination: so that this would hold the place of a soul.

'For there would not be even a simple body, to say nothing of a composite body,
in the world of being, if there were not a soul in the universe; since it is the
accession of reason to matter that makes body, and reason can come from no other
source than soul.; 'If any one should deny this, and say that a soul is made by
a concurrence of atoms or indivisibles, he would be refuted by its oneness and
community of feeling, and by analogy, since there can be no unity that does not
extend throughout the whole, nor can a common feeling come from bodies which are
without feeling and incapable of union; but the soul is conscious of feeling;
also from things which have no parts there can come neither body nor magnitude.

'Moreover supposing the body to be simple, if they say that all that is material has no life of itself (for matter has no qualities), but that what is classed as the form
(εἶδος) adds the life----then, if they say that this form is the essence, only the one of these and not the union of both will be the soul; and on the other hand, there is no body, for even this is not produced from mere matter, or else we must resolve it again in the same manner.

'But if they say that the form is an affection of the matter, but not the
essence, they will have to state the source from which this affection and the
life have come into the matter. For certainly the matter does not give itself
form, nor infuse into itself a soul. There must, then, be something which
provides life, whether it be provided for the matter or for any of the bodies,
and this must be outside and beyond any bodily nature. Since otherwise there
would not even be any body, as there would be no animal force.

'For its own nature is in flux and motion, and if all were bodies they would
perish very speedily, even though the name soul should be given to one of them:
for it would be affected in the same way as the other bodies, they all having
the same matter. Or rather nothing would ever come into being, but all things
would remain as matter, if there were nothing to give it form.

'But perhaps even matter would not exist at all, but this universe would be
dissolved, if any one should entrust it to a combination of body, giving it in
mere name the rank of soul, though it is only air and breath that is most easily
dispersed, and has no unity of itself. For since all bodies are capable of
division, how can any one who makes this universe depend on any of them, fail to
make it unintelligent and moved at random?

'For what order, or reason, or mind can there be in breath which needs a soul to
give it order? But granted the existence of a soul, all these are subservient to
it for the constitution of a world and of every living thing, a different power
from each contributing to the whole: whereas if there be no soul present in the
universals, they will not merely be without order, but will be nothing at all.

'These men are also themselves led by the truth to testify that there must be
something prior to bodies and superior to them, a species of soul, since they
suppose that breath is endowed with mind and that fire is intelligent, as
without fire and breath the better part cannot exist in the actual world, but
seeks a place where it may be settled; whereas they ought to be seeking where to
settle the bodies, as it seems these must be settled in powers of the soul.

'But if they assume that life and soul are nothing besides breath, what becomes
of their much boasted phrase "in a certain state," in which they take refuge
when compelled to assume some active nature besides bodies? If then they say
that not every breath is soul, because countless breaths are inanimate, but the
breath that is "in a certain state," they must say that this "certain state,"
and this condition, is either something real or nothing.

'But if they say it is nothing, there will be breath only, and the "certain
state" a mere name: and so it will result in their saying that nothing else
exists but matter, and that soul, and god, and all things are a mere name, and
that matter alone exists. But if the "state" is something real and additional to
the substratum and the matter, existing in matter but itself immaterial because
it is not compounded again out of matter, it must be not body, but a kind of
reason, and a different nature.

'Moreover from the following considerations it is not less evidently impossible
that the soul should be a body of any kind whatever. For then it must be either
hot or cold, either hard or soft, and liquid or solid, and black or white, with
all other bodily qualities differing in different bodies. And if it is hot, it
will only give heat, if cold it will only chill, and the additional presence of
lightness will make things light, and of heaviness heavy, and blackness will
make black, and whiteness white.

'For it is no property of fire to chill, nor of cold to make hot. But the soul
both produces different effects in different animals, and also contrary effects
in the same animal; making some parts solid and others liquid, and some thick
and others thin, black and white, light and heavy. Yet it ought to have produced
only one effect according to the quality of the body in colour and other
respects: but in fact it produces many.

'And how then will they explain the fact that the motions are diverse instead of
one, since every body has one motion only? If they allege choice as cause of
some motions, natural laws of others, so far they are right: but choice is not a
property of body, nor laws, at least if they are different, while the body is
one and simple, and has no participation in any such law, except what has been
given to it by that which caused it to be hot or cold.

'Also the power of causing growth in periods of time and up to this or that measurer----whence can the body itself get this? For it is natural to it to be increased, but to have no power in itself of causing increase, except in as far as it may be taken into service as a mass of matter by the power which by means of it effects the increase. Even if the soul were a body and caused increase, it must also be itself increased by an addition evidently of similar body, if it is to advance equally with that which receives increase from it. And the addition will either be soul, or soulless body.

'And if soul, how and whence does it come in, and how is it added? But if the
addition is soulless, how is it to become animated, and to agree with what was
there before, and be one with it, and share the same opinions with the first
soul? Will not rather this soul, as a stranger, be in ignorance of what the
other knows; and just as with the other mass of our body, one part will pass
away from it, and another be added, and nothing will be the same?

'How then are our remembrances formed? And how our knowledge of our own selves,
if we have never the same soul? Moreover if it is body, and the nature of body
is that, when divided into several parts, each of the parts is not the same as
the whole, and if a soul is of a certain size, then whatever is less than that
will not be soul, just as everything of a certain size by any subtraction
changes from being what it was.

'But if anything possessing magnitude should remain the same in quality when
diminished in bulk, it is altered as body and as quantity, but may retain its
sameness in quality as being different from quantity.

'What then will they say, who assert that the soul is body?

'First as to each part of the soul that is in the same body, is each a soul such
as the whole is?

'And so again the part of each part? Magnitude then contributed nothing to its
essence; yet it ought to have done so, as there was, a certain fixed quantity;
and it was whole in many different places, which cannot be the case with body,
that the same should be whole in many places, and the part be the same as the
whole.

'But if they say that each of the parts is not a soul, they will have a soul
consisting of soulless parts. And further still, if the magnitude of each soul
be limited in each direction, then if it become either less or greater it will
not be a soul.

'Whenever therefore from one connexion and the same seed twin children are
begotten, or even many, as in the case of the other animals, the seed being
parted into several places, where each is a whole, does not this teach those who
are willing to learn, that where the part is the same as the whole, this whole
in its own essence transcends the quantitative existence, and must itself be
without quantity? For thus it will remain the same when quantity is withdrawn,
inasmuch as it is independent of quantity and bulk, as its essence is something
different therefrom. The soul therefore and its laws are independent of
quantity.

'But that, if the soul were body, there would be neither sensation nor thought,
nor knowledge, nor virtues, nor anything noble, is evident from the following
reasons. Whatever is to perceive anything by sensation must itself be one, and
must apprehend everything by the same sentient power; even if there should be
many impressions that enter through many organs of sensation, or many qualities
of one thing, and even if through one sense there should enter a complex object,
such as a face.

'For there are not different powers that perceive the nostril and the eye, but
the same perceives all at once. And if one impression comes through the eyes,
and another through hearing, there must be some one power which both reach: or
how could one say that these are different, if the sensations did not reach the
same sentient power at the same time? This, therefore, must be as it were a
centre, and lines converging from the circumference of the circle must convey
the sensations from all sides to it, and the percipient power of this kind must
be really and truly one.

'For if this were to be extended, and the sensations were to strike upon both
extremities, as it were, of a line, either they must run together again to one
and the same point, as the centre, or to some other: and each different point
will have a sensation of one of the two objects, just as if I were to perceive
one object and you another.

'And if the sensible object be one, as a face, it will be contracted into one,
as is evidently the case; for contraction takes place in the very pupils of the
eyes (otherwise how could very large objects be seen through them?): so that
there is a still further contraction in passing on to the ruling faculty, in
such a way that indivisible notions are produced. And this faculty will be
indivisible, or, if it were a magnitude, the perceptions would share its
divisibility, so that one part (of the soul) would perceive one part (of the
object), and another another, and nothing in us would perceive the sensible
object as a whole.

'But in fact the whole sentient is one: for how could it be divided? For there
can be no correspondence of equal to equal, because the ruling faculty cannot be
equal to each and every sensible object. Into how many parts then shall the
division be made? Or shall it be divided into as many parts as the number of
varieties in the object of sense that enters? And so then each of those parts of
the soul will also perceive by its subdivisions, or the parts of the
subdivisions will have no perception; but that is impossible. And if any part
perceive all the object, since magnitude by its nature is infinitely divisible,
the result will be that each man will also have infinite sensations for each
sensible object, infinite images, as it were, of the same thing in our ruling
faculty.

'Moreover if the sentient be body, the sensation cannot take place otherwise
than as seals impressed on wax from signet-rings, whether the sensations be
impressed upon the blood or upon the breath. If then the impressions are made as
in liquid bodies, which is probable, they will become confused, just as if made
on water, and there will be no remembrance of them.

'But if the impressions remain, either it is impossible for others to be
imprinted while the former occupy the place, so that there will be no other
sensations: or if others are made, the former will be obliterated, so that the
remembrance will come to nothing. But if it is possible to remember, and to
receive sensations one upon another, without hindrance from the earlier, it is
impossible for the soul to be body.

'And the same may also be seen from the sensation of pain. When a man is said to
have a pain in his finger, the pain of course is about the finger, but the
sensation of the pain, they must evidently admit, arises in the ruling faculty.
While the suffering part therefore is different, the ruling faculty perceives
the (animal) spirit, and the whole soul shares the same feeling.

'How then does this result? By transmission, they will say, the animal spirit
about the finger having first suffered, and imparted the suffering to the next,
and this to another, until it arrived at the ruling faculty.

'Necessarily, therefore, if the first had a sensation of pain, there must be
another sensation for the second, if the sensation came by way of transmission,
and another also for the third, and the sensation of one single pain must become
many and infinite, and afterwards the ruling faculty must perceive all these
sensations and its own in addition to them.

'But the truth is, that each of them is not a sensation of the pain in the
finger, but that which is next to the finger is a feeling that the wrist is in
pain, and the third is a feeling that another part farther up is in pain, and so
there are many pains: and the ruling faculty does not perceive the pain in the
finger, but the pain close to itself, and knows only this, and dismisses the
others, not understanding that it is the finger which is in pain.

'If, therefore, it is not possible for the sensation of such a pain to be
produced by transmission, nor possible that in the body as being a mass, when
one part suffers, another part should be noticed (for in every magnitude one
part and another part are different), we must suppose the sentient power to be
of such a nature as to be everywhere identical with itself. But to effect this
is the property of a different kind of being from body.

'That it would not be possible even to think, if the soul were any kind of body,
is to be shown from the following reasons. For if the meaning of sensation is,
that the soul apprehends the objects of sense by making use of body, it cannot
be that thought also means perception by means of body, or else it will be the
same as sensation.

'If, therefore, thought is apprehension without the aid of body, much rather
must the thinking faculty not be body, since sensation is of sensibles, but
thought of intelligibles. But if they will not admit this, at all events there
must be both thoughts of some intelligibles, and apprehensions of things without
magnitude.

'How, then, if it be magnitude will it conceive in thought that which is not
magnitude, or by that which is divisible conceive that which is not divisible?
Will it be by some indivisible part of itself? But if so, the thinking faculty
will not be body. For there is certainly no need of the whole in order to touch;
for any one part is sufficient.

'If, therefore, they should admit, as is true, that the first notions are those
of the things which are most entirely free from body, that is of absolutes, the
intelligent faculty can form notions only as being or becoming free from body.
But if they should say that the notions are of forms embodied in matter, yet
they are only formed by abstraction from the bodies, the mind making the
abstraction.

'For certainly the abstraction of circle, and triangle, and line, and point has
nothing to do with flesh, or matter at all. In such an operation, therefore, we
must separate the soul itself also from body: it must not therefore itself be
body. I suppose too that beauty and justice are things without magnitude, and
therefore the conception of them also. So that as they occur the soul will
receive them with its indivisible faculty, and they will abide in it as
indivisibles.

'Also if the soul be corporeal how can prudence, justice, fortitude, and other
virtues belong to it? For then temperance, or justice, or fortitude must be some
kind of breath, or of blood; unless perhaps fortitude were the uneasiness of the
breath, and temperance its right temperature, and beauty a certain elegance in
forms, because of which, when we see them, we call men goodly and beautiful in
body.

'To be strong and beautiful in form might indeed be suitable to breath; but what
does breath want of prudence? Nay; but, on the contrary, it wants to find
enjoyment in embraces and caresses, wherein it will either be warmed, or will
desire a moderate coolness, or attach itself to things soft, and tender, and
smooth. But for assigning to each thing its due worth, what would it care?

'And is it because they are eternal that the soul fastens upon the conceptions
of virtue, and the other objects of the intellect, or does virtue begin to exist
in one, and must it perish again? But then who creates it, and whence? For thus
there would again remain that former question. It must be, then, because they
are eternal and abiding, such as are the conceptions of geometry: and, if
eternal and abiding, not corporeal. Therefore also the soul in which they are to
exist must be of this same nature; it must not then be corporeal; for everything
of the nature of body is non-abiding and transient.

'If, from seeing the operations of bodies, in imparting heat and cold, and thrusting, and weighing down, they put the soul in this class, as if seating it in a place of activity,----then in the first place they are ignorant that even these bodies work these effects by means of the incorporeal powers contained in them, and then that these are not the powers which we claim as belonging to the soul; but the powers of thought, sensation, reasoning, desiring, managing wisely and well, all require another kind of essence.

'So by transferring the powers of the incorporeal to the corporeal, they leave
none for the former. And that bodies can only produce their effects by means of
incorporeal powers is evident from the following reasons. For it will be
admitted that quality is one thing and quantity another, and that every body has
quantity, and yet not every body has quality, as for example mere matter. But if
they admit this, they must admit that quality, being different from quantity, is
different from body.

'For if it have not quantity, how can it be body, since every body has quantity? Moreover, as was said somewhere above, if every body on being divided, and every mass, ceases to be what it was, but when the body is cut small the same quality remains entire in every part,----if for example, the sweetness of honey is none the less sweetness in every drop,----sweetness cannot be a body. The same is true of all the other qualities.

'Then further, if the powers were bodies, the strong powers must necessarily be great masses, and those which can effect but little, small masses. But if when the masses are great the powers are small, and a few very small masses have the greatest powers, their efficacy must be attributed to something else than magnitude, therefore to something without magnitude. 'The fact too that matter, being as they say body, is itself the same, but produces different effects when it has qualities added
to it,----does not this make it evident that the things added are actually rational powers and incorporeal? And let them not reply that, when breath or blood has departed, the animals die. For it is impossible to exist without many other things besides these, and yet the soul can be none of them. Moreover neither breath nor blood extends through all parts, but soul does.

'Further, if the soul being body had pervaded every part, it would also have
been mixed, in the same way as the mixture takes place in all other bodies. But
if the mixture of the bodies leaves none of the components in actual existence,
neither will the soul retain an actual existence in the bodies, but only
potential, having lost its existence as soul. Just as if sweet and bitter be
mingled, the sweet no longer exists. And so we have no soul.

'And the fact that, being body, it is mingled with body, the whole throughout the whole, so that wherever either may be there the other is also, both having a mass equal to the whole, and that no increase has taken place by the addition of the other,----this will leave nothing that it does not divide. For the mixture is not made in large portions alternately (for so they say it would be a juxta-position), but having passed through the whole, the addition being superimposed upon the less (a thing impossible, that the less should be found equal to the greater)----but nevertheless having so passed through, it divides the whole in every part.

'Therefore if this occurs at any point whatever, and there be no body between,
which has not been cut, the body must have been divided into points, which is
impossible; and if the division be carried on to infinity (for whatever particle
of body you take, it may be divided), the infinities will have not only a
potential but an actual existence. Therefore it is not possible that body should
wholly pervade the whole: but the soul does pervade the whole: therefore it is
incorporeal.

'As to their saying that the same breath is an earlier nature, and when it has come into a cool place
(ψυχρῷ) and been sharpened, it becomes soul
(ψυχή), being made finer in the cool, ----this certainly is absurd; for many animals are born in warm places, and have a soul that has not been cooled. But at all events they say that there is an earlier nature of the soul produced
by external contingencies. The result, therefore, is that they make the inferior first, and before this another still less, which they call habit
(ἕξις). And the mind comes last, as produced of course from the soul; or if mind is before all things, they ought to make soul next, then vegetative nature; and the later always the worse, if it is a merely natural product.

'If, therefore, even God in respect of His mind is regarded by them as later,
and as generated, His intelligence also being adscititious, it would be possible
that neither soul, nor mind, nor God should exist. For if the potential could
exist without the previous existence of the actual, and of mind, it would never
attain to actuality. For what would there be to bring it on, if there exist not
besides itself something prior? But if it is to bring itself into actuality
(which is absurd), yet at least in so bringing itself forward it must have
something to look to, which must exist not potentially but actually.

'And yet if the potential is to have the power of always remaining the same, it
will of itself have attained to actuality, and this latter will be better than
that which has only potentiality, as being a state desired by it. The better
therefore will be the prior, both as having a different nature from body, and as
always actually existent: mind, therefore, and soul are prior to mere nature;
soul, therefore, does not exist as breath, nor yet as body. However, though
other arguments might be stated, and have been stated by others, showing that it
is not body, yet even what I have now said is sufficient.

'But since it is of a different nature, we must inquire what this nature is. Is
it then, though different from body, yet something belonging to body, as it were
a harmony? For although the Pythagoreans used this word "harmony" in a different
way, they supposed that it was something of the same kind as the harmony on the
strings of the lyre.

'For as when the strings of the lyre have been stretched tight there conies a
certain kind of effect upon them, which is called harmony, in the same way also
in our body, when a mixture is made of unlike elements, they thought that a
mixture of a certain quality produces both life and soul, which is the effect
upon the mixture. But many arguments have ere now been urged against this
opinion to show that it is impossible.

'For it has been argued that the soul is the prior element, but the harmony
subsequent: and that the former rules and presides over the body, and in many
ways contends with it, but could not do so if it were a harmony: and that the
one is an essence, but the harmony is not an essence: and that the mixture of
the bodily elements, of which we consist, if it be in due proportion, would mean
health: also that in each part differently compounded there would be a different
soul, so that there would be many souls: and, as the chief argument, that prior
to this present soul there must be another soul to produce this harmony, as in
the case of musical instruments there is the musician, who puts the harmony into
the strings, having in himself the reasoning faculty in accordance with which he
will modulate it.

'For neither in that case will the strings of themselves, nor in this case the
bodily particles be able to bring themselves into harmony. And speaking
generally, these philosophers also make animated things out of inanimate, and
things casually brought out of disorder into order, and instead of order from
the soul they make the soul itself to have received its subsistence from the
self-made order. But this cannot possibly take place either in the single parts
or in the wholes. The soul, therefore, is not a harmony.'

These extracts are taken from the work of Plotinus against the opinion of the
Stoics concerning the soul, who say that it is corporeal. But since I have set
forth sufficiently for a summary statement the arguments against Aristotle and
the Peripatetics, and those against the sect of the Stoics, it is time to go
back again and survey the wonderful physical theories of all their noble
philosophers together, seeing especially that all the Greeks in common believed
in and worshipped as visible gods the Sun, and Moon, and the rest of the
luminaries, and the other elements of the world, and have transferred the
fabulous and nonsensical tales about their polytheistic error by more seemly
physical explanations to the primary elements and the divisions of the whole
world.

Wherefore I think it necessary for me also to collect their opinions on these
subjects, and to review their disputes and their vain conceit.

These matters also I will quote from the work of Plutarch, in which he collected the opinions thereon of all the philosophers both ancient and modern, writing in the following manner: 37 CHAPTER XXIII ---- OF THE SUN.

[PLUTARCH] 'ANAXIMANDER: that there is a circle twenty-eight times as large as
the Earth, having its circumference like a chariot-wheel, hollow, and full of
fire, and partly showing the fire through an opening, as through a bellows-pipe:
and this is the Sun.

'Xenophanes: it is formed from the sparks which are seen to be collected from
watery vapour, and which compose the Sun out of burning clouds.

'The Stoics: a flame out of the sea, endowed with intelligence.

'Plato: out of an immense fire.

'Anaxagoras, Democritus, Metrodorus: a fiery mass of metal or stone.

'Aristotle: a globe of the fifth corporeal element.

'Philolaus the Pythagorean: a disk as of glass, which receives the reflected
radiance of the fire in the cosmos, and transmits the light to us; so that the
Sun's fiery appearance in the heaven is like the light which comes to us
dispersed by reflexion from the mirror: for this light also we call the Sun,
being as it were an image of an image.

'Empedocles: there are two Suns; the one archetypal, a fire in the other
hemisphere of the cosmos, which, has filled that hemisphere, being always
opposite to its own reflected light; and the other which we see is the reflected
light in this other hemisphere which is filled with air mixed with heat, formed
by reflexion from the spherical surface of the Earth and failing upon the
crystalline Sun, and carried round with the motion of the fiery Sun: but to
express it more shortly, the Sun is the reflexion of the fire that surrounds the
Earth.

'Epicurus: a compact mass of earth, resembling pumice or sponge in its pores, and kindled by the fire.' CHAPTER XXIV ---- OF THE SUN'S MAGNITUDE.

'ANAXIMANDER: the Sun itself is equal to the Earth, but the orbit from which it
breathes out its fire, and by which it is carried round, is twenty-seven times
as large as the Earth.

'Anaxagoras: many times as large as Peloponnesus.

'Heracleitus: the breadth of a man's foot.

'Epicurus again says that the aforesaid descriptions are all possible: or else that it is of the same size as it appears, or a little greater or less.' CHAPTER XXV ---- OF THE SHAPE OF THE SUN.

'ANAXIMENES: the Sun is flat like a plate.

'Heracleitus: like a boat, concave.

'The Stoics: spherical, like the universe and the stars.

'Epicurus: the aforesaid descriptions are all possible.'

Such is their Sun, the mighty god of all things visible in heaven. But Moses and
the Hebrew oracles waste no labour on any of these matters.

CHAPTER XXVI ---- OF THE MOON.

'ANAXIMANDER: it is a circle nineteen times as large as the Earth, full of fire,
as in the case of the Sun, and is eclipsed in consequence of the rotation of its
disk. And it is like a chariot wheel, having its circumference hollow, and full
of fire, with only one vent.

'Xenophanes: a cloud condensed.

'The Stoics: a mixture of fire and air. 'Plato: of earth for the more part.

'Anaxagoras, Democritus: a fiery solid, having in itself plains, and mountains,
and ravines.

'Heracleitus: earth surrounded with mist. 'Pythagoras: a mirror-like body.' CHAPTER XXVII ---- OF THE MOON'S MAGNITUDE.

'THE Stoics represent it as larger than the Earth, as they also say of the Sun.

'Parmenides: equal to the Sun, for it is illumined from it.' CHAPTER XXVIII ---- OF THE MOON'S SHAPE.

'THE Stoics: it is spherical, as the Sun.

'Heracleitus: like a boat.

'Empedocles: like a disk (or quoit).

'Others like a cylinder.' CHAPTER XXIX ---- OF THE MOON'S ILLUMINATION.

'ANAXIMANDER: it has light of its own, but somewhat scanty.

'Antiphon: the Moon shines by its own light; but the portion of it which is
partially hidden is obscured by the Sun's light falling upon it, as it is the
nature of the stronger fire to obscure the weaker: which happens also with the
other heavenly bodies.

'Thales and his followers: the Moon is illumined from the Sun.

'Heracleitus: the Sun and Moon are affected in the same way: for the heavenly bodies being boat-like in shape, and receiving the products of the watery evaporation, become luminous in appearance; the Sun more brilliantly, because it moves in a purer atmosphere, but the Moon moving in a turbid atmosphere therefore also appears more dim.' CHAPTER XXX ---- WHAT IS THE SUBSTANCE OF THE PLANETS AND FIXED STARS?

38 'THALES: the heavenly bodies are of earth, but on fire.

'Empedocles: of fire, from the fiery element, which the air contained in itself
and thrust out at the first separation of the elements.

'Anaxagoras: the surrounding atmosphere is in its substance fire, but by the
energy of its revolution catches up stones from the earth, and having set them
on fire has made stars of them.;

'Diogenes: the heavenly bodies are porous like pumice, and are the
breathing-holes of the universe. But again the same author thinks that they are
stones, which, though at first invisible, often fall upon the Earth and are
extinguished, just as the stony meteor which fell in a fiery form at
Aegospotamoi.

'Empedocles: the fixed stars are fastened to the crystalline sphere, but the
planets are free.

'Plato: for the most part they are of fire, but partake also of the other
elements as a cement.

'Xenophanes: they consist of clouds on fire, but are extinguished every day, and
re-kindled in the night, just like live coals: for their risings and settings
are their kindlings and quenchings.

'Heracleides and the Pythagoreans think that each of the stars is a world,
including an Earth, and an atmosphere and an ether in the infinite space. These
doctrines are introduced in the Orphic Hymns, for they make each star a world.

'Epicurus rejects none of these opinions, but adheres to his "possible."' CHAPTER XXXI ---- OF THE SHAPE OF THE STARS.

'THE Stoics: the stars are spherical, like the universe, Sun; and Moon.

'Cleanthes: conical.

'Anaximenes: like studs fastened in the crystalline sphere.

'But some say that they are plates of fire, as it were pictures.'

Such are the discoveries of the wonderful philosophers concerning what they call visible gods. But learn also from the same Plutarch's voice, what decisions they have pronounced concerning the universe: 39 CHAPTER XXXII ---- HOW THE WORLD WAS CONSTRUCTED.

'THE world, therefore, has been fashioned in a rounded form, in the following
manner. As the corporeal atoms have an undesigned and fortuitous motion, and
move continuously and very swiftly, many of them were collected together, and
from this cause had great variety of shapes and sizes.

'And when these were all gathered in the same place, all the larger and heaviest
settled down: but as many as were small, and round, and smooth, and easily
moved, were thrust out in the collision of the bodies, and carried up on high.

'When, therefore, the propelling force ceased to carry them upward, and the
propulsion no longer tended towards the height, while on the other hand they
were prevented from sinking downward, they were compressed into the places which
were able to admit them; and these were the places around them.

'So the multitude of the bodies were turned round towards these places, and
becoming intermingled one with another in the turning they generated the heaven.
But the atoms retaining the same natural tendency, and being of various kinds,
as I have said, were thrust out towards the upper region, and produced the
nature of the stars.

'But the multitude of the bodies which were exhaled kept striking upon the air
and thrusting it away; and the air in its motion being turned into wind and
encompassing the stars carried them round with it, and maintained the revolution
which they now have on high. Afterwards out of the particles which settled down
the Earth was produced, and out of those which were carried upward the heaven,
and fire, and air.

'And as there was still much matter included in the Earth, which became
condensed in consequence of the blows from the winds and the currents from the
stars, all of its shape that was formed by minute particles was further
compressed, and generated the watery element.

'And this having a fluid tendency was carried down into the hollow places which
were able to receive and hold it; or the water settled down of itself and
gradually hollowed out the places below it.'

Such is their wonderful cosmogony! And with, this is connected much other
disputation, as they started questions about problems of all kinds; whether we
ought to regard the universe as one or many; and the cosmos as one or more; and
whether it has a soul, and is administered by a divine providence, or the
contrary: also whether it is imperishable or perishable; and from what source it
is sustained; and from what kind of material God began to make the world: also
concerning the order of the world; and what is the cause of its inclination;
also concerning what is outside the circumference of the world; and which is the
right and which the left side of the world; also concerning the heaven, and,
besides all this, concerning daemons and heroes; and about matter, and about
ideas: about the arrangement of the universe: yet more, about the course and
motion of the stars: and besides this, from what source the stars derive their
light: also about the so-called Dioscuri, and the eclipses of the Sun and Moon,
and her aspect, and why she has an earthlike appearance; also concerning her
distances; and moreover concerning the years.

Now all these questions have been treated in numberless ways by the philosophers
of whom we speak, but since Plutarch collected them in a few concise words, by
bringing together the opinions of them all and their contradictions, I think it
will not be unprofitable to us if they are presented with a view to their
rejection on reasonable grounds. For since they stood in diametrical opposition
one to another, and stirred up battles and wars against each other, and nothing
better, each with jealous strife of words confuting their neighbours' opinions,
must not every one admit that our hesitation on these subjects has been
reasonable and safe?

Next in order to the aforesaid subjects I will add all their disquisitions upon
matters nearer to the Earth; concerning the figure of the Earth, and its
position and inclination: also concerning the sea; that so you may know that the
noble sages differed not only about things high and lofty, but that they have
disagreed also in matters terrestrial. And to increase yet more your admiration
of this wisdom of the wise, I will add also all the controversies they waged
about the soul and the ruling faculty therein, unable as they were to discover
what their own nature was. But now let us go back to the first of the aforesaid
subjects.

CHAPTER XXXIII ----
WHETHER THE ALL IS ONE.

40 'THE Stoics then represented the world as one, which they also affirmed to be
the All, including the corporeal elements.

'But Empedocles said that, though the world was one, yet it was not the All, but
only a small part of the All, and the rest useless matter.

'Plato derives his opinion that the world is one, and the All one, by inference
from three arguments: from the notion that it will not be perfect, unless it
comprehends all things; that it will not be like its pattern, unless it be
unique; that it will not be indestructible, if there be anything outside it. But
in answer to Plato it must be said, that the world is not perfect, for it does
not include all things; for man also is perfect, but does not include all
things: and there are many examples, as in the case of statues, and houses, and
pictures: and how can it be perfect, if it is possible for anything to revolve
outside it? And indestructible it is not, and cannot be, since it is created.

'But Metrodorus says it is as absurd that there should be but one world generated in infinite space, as that there should be but one head of corn in a great plain: and that the world is one of an infinite multitude is manifest from the infinity of causes. For if the world is finite, while the causes from which the world has come are all infinite, the number of worlds must be infinite. For where they all have been causes, there must also be effects: and causes they are, whether the atoms or the elements.' CHAPTER XXXIV ---- WHETHER THE WORLD HAS A SOUL, AND IS ADMINISTERED BY PROVIDENCE.

41 'THE others all say that it has a soul, and is administered by providence.

'But Democritus and Epicurus, and all who are for bringing in the atoms and
vacuum, say that it neither has a soul, nor is administered by providence, but
by some irrational kind of nature.

'Aristotle says that, as a whole and throughout, it has neither a soul, nor reason, nor intelligence, nor is it administered by providence. For while the heavenly regions partake of all these properties, because they include spheres which are endowed with a soul and life, the terrestrial regions have none of them, but share in the orderly arrangement by accident and not directly.' CHAPTER XXXV ---- WHETHER THE WORLD IS IMPERISHABLE.

'PYTHAGORAS, and Plato, and the Stoics say that the world was created by God;
and that, so far as it depends on its nature, it is perishable, because it is
perceptible by sense through being corporeal; nevertheless it will not be
destroyed, through the providence and support of God.

'Epicurus says that it is perishable, because created, like an animal or a
plant.

'Xenophanes: the world is uncreated, and eternal, and imperishable.

'Aristotle: the part of the world beneath the Moon may be affected by change, and the things terrestrial therein are doomed to perish.' CHAPTER XXXVI ---- FROM WHAT SOURCE THE WORLD IS SUSTAINED.

'ARISTOTLE: if the world receives sustenance, it will also perish; but in fact
it needs no sustenance, and therefore is also eternal.

'Plato: the world supplies its own sustenance out of its waste, by a change.

'Philolaus: the decay is twofold, sometimes by fire fallen from heaven, and sometimes from the water of the Moon being thrown off by the revolution of its atmosphere: and the exhalations from these are the sustenance of the world.' CHAPTER XXXVII ---- FROM WHAT MATERIAL FIRST GOD BEGAN TO FORM THE WORLD.

'THE physicists say that the creation of the world began from Earth, as from a
centre; and the centre is the beginning of a sphere.

'Pythagoras: from fire, and the fifth element.

'Empedocles: the ether was first separated, and next the fire, and after it the
Earth, out of which, when very closely compressed by the rush of the sphere, the
water gushed up, and the air was formed from it by evaporation. Then the heaven
was produced from the ether, and the Sun from the fire: and the terrestrial
parts were formed by condensation out of the other elements.

'Plato: the world was made visible according to the pattern of the intelligible
world: and of the visible world first the soul, and after this the corporeal
element, first the part produced from fire and earth, and secondly that from
water and air.

'Pythagoras says that, whereas there are five solid figures which are also
called mathematical, out of the cube the earth was produced; out of the pyramid
the fire; out of the octahedron the air; out of the eicosahedron the water; and
out of the dodecahedron the sphere of the universe.

'And herein again Plato follows Pythagoras.' CHAPTER XXXVIII ---- OF THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE WORLD.

'PARMENIDES: there are wreaths twisted round one upon the other, one of the rare
matter, and the other of the dense; and between them others of light and
darkness mixed; and that which surrounds them all like a wall is solid.

'Leucippus and Democritus extend a tunic and a membrane in a circle round the
world.

'Epicurus: the boundary of some worlds is thin, and of others dense: and of
these part are in motion, and part immovable.

'Plato: fire first, then ether, after that air, next water, and earth last: but
sometimes he combines the ether with the fire.

'Aristotle: first impassible ether, that is a fifth body; after that passibles,
fire, air, water, and earth last. Of these the celestial portions have the
circular motion assigned to them: and of the portions ranged beneath them the
light have the upward, and the heavy the downward motion.

'Empedocles: the places of the elements are not entirely fixed and limited, but they all in a certain way partake one of another.' CHAPTER XXXIX ---- WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF THE INCLINATION OF THE WORLD.

'DIOGENES, Anaxagoras: after the world was established, and had brought forth
the living beings out of the earth, the world was somehow spontaneously inclined
towards its southern side, perhaps from design, in order that some parts of the
world might be uninhabitable and some habitable, in consequence of cold, and
torrid heat, and a temperate climate.

'Empedocles: when the air yielded to the impulse of the Sun, the polar Bears became inclined, and the northern regions were elevated, and the southern depressed, and the whole world accordingly.' CHAPTER XL ---- OF THE OUTSIDE OF THE WORLD, WHETHER IT IS A VACUUM.

'THE Pythagoreans: outside the world there is a vacuum, into and out of which
the world breathes.

'The Stoics: infinite (vacuum), into which the world is also dissolved by the
conflagration.

'Poseidonius: not infinite, but sufficiently large for the dissolution.

'Plato, Aristotle: no vacuum either outside the world or inside.' CHAPTER XLI ---- WHICH ARE THE RIGHT AND WHICH THE LEFT SIDES OF THE WORLD.

'PYTHAGORAS, Plato, Aristotle: the right parts of the world are the eastern,
from which the motion begins, and the left are the western.

'Empedocles: the right is the region of the summer solstice, and the left the region of the winter solstice.' CHAPTER XLII ---- OF THE HEAVEN; WHAT IS ITS SUBSTANCE.

'ANAXIMENES: it is the circumference of the outer zone.

'Empedocles: the heaven is solid, formed from air compressed by fire into a
crystallized form, and encompassing the whole elements of fire and air in each
of the hemispheres.

CHAPTER XLIII ---- OF DAEMONS AND HEROES.

42 'IN connexion with the discourse concerning gods we must inquire into that
which concerns daemons and heroes.

'Thales, Pythagoras, Plato, the Stoics: daemons are beings of the nature of
souls: heroes also are souls which have been separated from their bodies; and
the good souls are good daemons, and the bad souls evil daemons.

'But Epicurus admits none of these opinions.' CHAPTER XLIV ---- OF MATTER.

'Matter is the substratum to generation and decay and the other changes.

'The Schools of Thales and Pythagoras, and the Stoics: matter is wholly and
thoroughly subject to change and alteration and flux.

'The School of Democritus: the primary elements are impassible, namely, the
atom, the vacuum, and the incorporeal.

'Aristotle and Plato say that matter is corporeal, without form, specific character, shape, or quality, so far as it depends on its own nature, but receptive of the specific forms, as it were a nurse, and a mould, and a matrix. But those who say that matter is water, or fire, or air, or earth, no longer speak of it as without form, but as body: while those who say that it is the indivisible bodies and atoms, do regard it as without form.' CHAPTER XLV ---- OF THE IDEA.

'AN "idea" is an incorporeal entity (οὐσία), subsisting itself, and by itself,
but giving its image to portions of formless matter, and becoming the cause of
their manifestation.

'Socrates and Plato suppose the ideas to be separable from the matter,
subsisting in the thoughts and in the presentations of god, that is, of the
mind.

'Aristotle allowed the specific forms and ideas to remain, not however as
separate from the matter, having freed himself from the notion of its being done
by god.

'The Stoic followers of Zeno said that the ideas are thoughts of our own.' CHAPTER XLVI ---- OF THE ORDER OF THE STARS.

'XENOCRATES thinks that the stars move on one superficies.

'The other Stoics that some are before others in height and depth.

43 'Democritus puts the fixed stars first, and next to these the planets, after
which the Sun, the Day-star, the Moon.

'Plato next to the position of the fixed stars sets first the planet called
Phaenon, that is Saturn: second Phaethon, that is Jupiter; third the Fiery,
Mars; fourth the Day-star, Venus; fifth Stilbon, Mercury; sixth the Sun; seventh
the Moon.

'Of the Mathematicians some agree with Plato, but some put the Sun in the centre
of all.

'Anaximander, and Metrodorus of Chios, and Crates think that the Sun is placed highest of all, next to him the Moon, and beneath them the fixed stars and planets.' CHAPTER XLVII ---- OF THE COURSE AND MOTION OF THE STARS.

'ANAXAGORAS, Democritus, Cleanthes: all the fixed stars pass from east to west.

'Alcmaeon and the Mathematicians: the planets move in an opposite direction to
the fixed stars; for theirs is the contrary course from west to east.

'Anaximander: they are borne along by the circles and spheres on which they are
each set.

'Anaximenes: the stars do not revolve beneath the Earth, but around it.

'Plato and the Mathematicians: the Sun, the Day-star, and Stilbon (Venus and Mercury) have equal orbits.' CHAPTER XLVIII ---- WHENCE THE STARS RECEIVE THEIR LIGHT.

'METEODORUS: the fixed stars are all illumined by the Sun.

'Heracleitus and the Stoics: the stars are fed from the exhalation of the Earth.

'Aristotle: the heavenly bodies have no need of nourishment; for they are not
perishable but eternal.

'Plato: there is a common nourishment of the whole world and of the stars from themselves.' CHAPTER XLIX ---- OF THE SO-CALLED DIOSCURI.

'XENOPHANES: what appear like stars upon the ships are little clouds which shine
in consequence of a certain kind of motion.

'Metrodorus: they are flashes from the eyes which look at them with fear and amazement.' CHAPTER L ---- OF AN ECLIPSE OF THE SUN.

'THALES was the first who said that the Sun is eclipsed from the Moon (which is
of an earthy nature) coming perpendicularly under it; and that by reflexion in a
mirror she is seen situated beneath the Sun's disk.

'Anaximander: from the closing of the orifice of the breathing-hole of the Sun's
fire.

'Heracleitus: in consequence of the turning of the boat-like figure, so that the
concavity is above, and the convexity below facing our eyes.

'Xenophanes: by extinction, and then again there rises another Sun in the east.
But he has incidentally mentioned an eclipse of the Sun lasting over the whole
month, and again a total eclipse, so that the day seemed like night.

'Some say that it is a condensation of the invisible clouds coming over the
Sun's disk.

'Aristarchus sets the Sun among the fixed stars, and makes the Moon move round
the Sun's orbit, and the Sun's disk to be overshadowed in consequence of these
inclinations.

'Xenophanes: there are many suns and moons, corresponding to the climes, and sections, and zones of the Earth: and at a certain season the Sun's disk falls into some section of the Earth which is not inhabited by us, and thus, as if stepping into a hole, suffers eclipse. But the same author says that the Sun goes forward into infinity, but seems to revolve because of its distance.' CHAPTER LI ---- OF AN ECLIPSE OF THE MOON.

'ANAXIMANDER: from the closing of the orifice of its circumference.

'Berossus: because of the turning of the dark side towards us.

'Heracleitus: because of the turning of the boat-like figure.

'Of the Pythagoreans some say that it is an outshining and obstruction by our
Earth or the counter-earth: but the more recent say that it is in consequence of
the spreading of a flame which is gradually kindled in an orderly manner, until
it produces the complete full moon, and decreases again in like manner until the
conjunction, at which it is entirely extinguished.

'Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, and the Mathematicians agree that it effects its monthly obscurations by travelling round with the Sun and sharing its illumination; but the eclipses by falling into the shadow of the Earth when that comes between the two luminaries, or rather when it obstructs the light from the Moon.' CHAPTER LII ---- OF THE MOON'S ASPECT, AND WHY IT HAS AN EARTHLIKE APPEARANCE.

'THE Pythagoreans say that the Moon has an earthlike appearance, because it is
inhabited like our Earth, but by larger animals and more beautiful plants. For
the animals upon it are fifteen times as large, and emit no bodily secretion;
and that the day is longer in the same proportion.

'Anaxagoras: on account of an unevenness in the mixture, because of its being
both cold and earthy: for the misty part is mingled with the fiery, whence the
Moon is also said to shine with false light.

'The Stoics: because of the admixture of air in its substance its composition is not pure.' CHAPTER LIII ---- OF THE MOON'S DISTANCES.

'EMPEDOCLES: the Moon is distant from the Sun twice as far as from the Earth.

'The Mathematical School: eighteen times as far.

'Eratosthenes: the Sun's distance from the Earth is four millions and eighty thousand stades: but the Moon's distance from the Earth seven hundred and eighty thousand stades.' CHAPTER LIV ---- OF YEARS.

'A YEAR of Saturn is a period of thirty years: of Jupiter twelve; of Mars two;
of the Sun twelve months; and the same for Mercury and Venus, for they run an
equal course. But the Moon's is thirty days: for this is the complete month from
first appearance to conjunction.

'The Great Year some suppose to consist in a period of eight years, but others
in nineteen years, and others in fifty-nine. Heracleitus makes it consist of
eighteen thousand solar years: Diogenes of three hundred and sixty-five years,
as many as the year has days according to Heracleitus: but others of seven
thousand, seven hundred, and seventy-seven years.' So widely do the aforesaid
persons differ from each other in regard to things in the heavens above. But now
look also at their opinions about the Earth.

CHAPTER LV ---- OF THE EARTH.

'THALES and his followers say that the Earth is one.

'Hicetas the Pythagorean says that there are two, this and the antipodal earth.

'The Stoics: the Earth is one, and finite.

'Xenophanes: from the lower part its roots reach into infinity, and it is
composed of air and fire.

'Metrodorus: the Earth is the deposit and sediment of the water, and the Sun of the air.' CHAPTER LVI ---- OF THE FIGURE OF THE EARTH.

'THALES and the Stoics: the Earth is spherical.

'Anaximander: it is like a stone pillar supporting the surfaces.

'Anaximenes: like a table.

'Leucippus: like a kettle-drum.

'Democritus: like a disk in its extension, but hollow in the middle.' CHAPTER LVII ---- OF THE POSITION OF THE EARTH.

'THE followers of Thales say the Earth is the centre.

'Xenophanes: the Earth first, for its roots reach into infinity.

'Philolaus the Pythagorean: first, fire in the centre; for this is the hearth of
the universe: second, the antipodal Earth, and third, the Earth which we
inhabit, opposite to the antipodal both in situation and revolution; in
consequence of which the inhabitants of the antipodal Earth are not seen by
those in this Earth.

'Parmenides was the first to mark off the inhabited parts of the Earth under the two tropical zones.' CHAPTER LVIII ---- OF THE EARTH'S MOTION.

44 'ALL the others say that the Earth is at rest.

'But Philolaus the Pythagorean says that it revolves round the fire in an
oblique circle, in like manner as the Sun and Moon.

'Heracleides of Pontus, and Ecphantus the Pythagorean make the Earth move, not
however by change of place, but by rotation, turning like a wheel on an axle,
from west to east, about its own centre.

'Democritus: at first the Earth used to change its place, owing to its smallness
and lightness; but as in the course of time it grew dense and heavy, it became
stationary.'

After the utterance of these different opinions by the noble philosophers
concerning the Earth, hear now what they say of the Sea.

CHAPTER LIX ---- OF THE SEA, HOW IT WAS COMPOSED, AND WHY IT IS SALT.

45 'ANAXIMANDER says that the Sea is the remnant of the original moisture, the
greater part of which was dried up by the fire, and the remainder changed
through its burning heat.

'Anaxagoras: when the water, which in the beginning was a stagnant lake, was
burnt up by the Sun's revolution, and the greasy part evaporated, the remainder
subsided into saltness and bitterness.

'Empedocles: the Sea is the sweat of the Earth when scorched by the Sun, because
of the increased condensation.

'Antiphon: the sweat of the hot part, from which the included moisture was
separated, turned salt by being boiled down, which happens always in the case of
sweat.

'Metrodorus: from being drained through the earth it has partaken of its
density, just as liquids which are strained through ashes.

'Plato and his followers: of the elementary water the part formed out of air,
being condensed by cooling, became sweet; but the part formed from earth, being
evaporated by heat and burning, became salt.' So much, then, concerning the Sea.
But as to those who professed to give physiological explanations about the whole
world, and things celestial and ethereal, and the conception of the universe,
how little they knew even of their own nature, you may learn from their
discordant utterances on these points also, as follows.

CHAPTER LX ---- OF THE PARTS OF THE SOUL.

46 'PYTHAGORAS, Plato: in the first analysis the Soul has two parts; for it has
one part rational and another irrational. But in close and exact consideration,
its parts are three: for they distinguish the irrational into the irascible and
the appetitive.

'The Stoics: it is composed of eight parts; five senses, sight, smell, hearing,
taste, touch; and a sixth, speech; a seventh, generation; and an eighth, the
actual ruling principle, from which proceeds the extension of all these through
their proper organs, in a similar manner to the tentacles of the polypus.

'Democritus, Epicurus: the Soul consists of two parts, its rational faculty
being settled in the breast, and the irrational diffused over the whole
complexity of the body.

'But Democritus thought that all things, even dead bodies, naturally partake of a certain kind of soul, because in an obscure way they have some warmth and sensation, though the greater part is dissipated.' CHAPTER LXI ---- OF THE EXILING FACULTY.

'PLATO, Democritus: it is in the head as a whole.

'Straton: between the eyebrows.

'Erasistratus: about the membrane of the brain, which he calls the epicranis.

'Herophilus: in the cavity of the brain, which is also its base.

'Parmenides: in the breast as a whole.

'Epicurus, and all the Stoics: in the heart as a whole.

'Diogenes: in the arterial cavity of the heart, which is full of breath.

'Empedocles in the composition of the blood.

'Others in the membrane of the pericardium: and others in the diaphragm. Some of
the more recent philosophers say that it reaches through from the head to the
diaphragm.

'Pythagoras: the vital power is around the heart; but the rational , and
intelligent faculty in the region of the head.' So far, then, as to their
opinions on these matters. Do you not think therefore that with judgement and
reason we have justly kept aloof from the unprofitable and erroneous and vain
labour of them all, and do not busy ourselves at all about the said subjects
(for we do not see the utility of them, nor any tendency to benefit and gain
good for mankind), but cling solely to piety towards God the creator of all
things, and by a life of temperance, and all godly behaviour according to
virtue, strive to live in a manner pleasing to Him who is God over all? But if
even you from malice and envy hesitate to admit our true testimony, you shall be
again anticipated by Socrates, the wisest of all Greeks, who has truthfully
declared his votes in our favour. Those meteorological babblers, for instance,
he used to expose in their folly, and say that they were no better than madmen,
expressly convicting them not merely of striving after things unattainable, but
also of wasting time about things useless and unprofitable to man's life. And
this shall be testified to you by our former witness Xenophon, one of the
best-known of the companions of Socrates, who writes as follows in his
Memorabilia: 47

CHAPTER LXII

[XENOPHON] 'No one ever yet saw Socrates do or heard him say anything impious or
unholy. For he did not discourse about the nature of the universe or the other
subjects, like most of them, speculating upon the condition of the cosmos, as
the Sophists call it, and by what forces of necessity the celestial phenomena
severally are produced: rather he used to expose the foolishness of those who
troubled themselves about such things.

'And the first point he used to consider in regard to them was, whether they go
on to study such matters, because they think that they have already an adequate
knowledge of human affairs, or deem that they are doing their proper work in
neglecting human interests and speculating on the divine.

'And he used to wonder that they did not clearly see that it is impossible for
men to discover these things, since even those who pride themselves most highly
on the discussion of these matters do not agree in opinion with each other, but
are just like madmen in their mutual feelings.

'For as among madmen some have no fear even of things fearful, while others are
afraid where no fear is; so some of these think it. no shame to say or do
anything and everything even in a crowd, while others think it not right even to
go out among men: and some honour neither temple, nor altar, nor anything else
belonging to the gods, while others worship any casual stocks and stones and
wild beasts. Also of those who study anxiously the nature of the universe some
think that "being" is only one, others that it is infinite in multitude: some
too think that all things are in perpetual motion, and others that nothing can
ever be moved: and some that all things are being generated and perishing, but
others that nothing could ever be generated or perish.

'He also used to ask the following questions about them: whereas those who study
human affairs think that whatever they have learned they will be able to
practise both for themselves and for whomsoever they may wish, do those who
search after things divine think in like manner that when they know by what
forces of necessity phenomena are severally produced, they will be able whenever
they please to make winds and rains and seasons, and whatever else of this kind
they may need? Or, without even hoping for anything of this sort, are they
satisfied merely to know how such phenomena are severally produced?

'Such, then, was the nature of his remarks about those who busied themselves
with these matters: but he himself was always discoursing of human interests,
inquiring what was, pious, what impious; what noble, what base; what just, what
unjust; what sanity, what madness.'

These, then, were the opinions of Socrates. And next after him Aristippus of
Cyrene, and then later Ariston of Chios, undertook to maintain that morals were
the only proper subject of philosophy; for these inquiries were practicable and
useful, but the discussions about nature were quite the contrary, neither being
comprehensible, nor having any use, even if they were clearly understood. For it
would be no advantage to us, not even if soaring higher in the air than Perseus,

'O'er ocean's wave, and o'er the Pleiades,'

we could with our very eyes survey the whole world, and the nature of all
'beings,' of whatever kind that is. For we certainly shall not be on that
account wiser, or more just or brave or temperate, nay, not even strong, or
beautiful, or rich, without which advantages happiness is impossible.

Wherefore Socrates was right in saying that of existing things some are above
us, and others nothing to us: for the secrets of nature are above us, and the
conditions after death nothing to us, but the affairs of human life alone
concern us. And thus, he said, he also dismissed the physical theories of
Anaxagoras and Archelaus, and studied only

'Whate'er of good or ill our homes have known.' 48

And he thought besides that their physical discussions were not merely difficult
and even impossible, but also impious and opposed to the laws. For some
maintained that gods do not exist at all, and others, that the Infinite, or
Being, or the One, are gods, and anything rather than those who are generally
acknowledged. Their dissension again, he said, was very great: for some
represented the All as infinite, and others as finite; and some maintained that
all things are in motion, and others that nothing at all moves.

Moreover the following words of Timon of Phlius in his Silli seem to me the best
of all on these very subjects:

'Say then, who urged them to the fatal strife?

Echo's attendant rout: who filled with wrath Against the silent, sent upon
mankind A fell disease of talk, and many died.' 49

Do you see how at last these noble sages scoff at each other? For instance, the
same author, besides what I have quoted, describes their mutual jealousy and
their battles and quarrels in the following style:

'There baneful Discord stalks with senseless shriek, Of murderous Strife the
sister and ally, Who, blindly stumbling round, anon her head, With ponderous
weight set firm, uplifts to hope.' 50

Since, however, we have now exhibited the dissension and fighting of these sages
among themselves, and since the wholly superfluous, and unintelligible, and to
us utterly unnecessary study and learning of all the other subjects in which the
tribes of philosophers still take pride, have been refuted not by our
demonstrations but by their own; nay more, since we have also plainly set forth
the reason why we have rejected their doctrines and preferred the Hebrew
oracles, let us at this point conclude our treatise on The Preparation for the
Gospel; but the more complete treatise on The Demonstration of the Gospel it now
remains for us to consider from a different basis of argument, which the
question still needs for those who are to deal with its teaching.

It remains, therefore, to make answer to those of the circumcision who find
fault with us, as to why we, being foreigners and aliens, make use of their
books, which, as they would say, do not belong to us at all; or why, if we
gladly accept their oracles, we do not also render our life conformable to their
law.

[Footnotes moved to end and numbered] 1. 791 b 1 Aristocles, a Fragment
preserved by Eusebius.

2. 793 a 6 Theocritus of Chios, Bergk, Poet. Lyr. p. 676 3. 794 c 1 Atticus, a
Fragment preserved by Eusebius.

4. 795 a 1 Hom. Il. ii. 872 5. 795 a 7 Archilochus, Fr. vi 6. 795 d 2 Plato,
Phaedrus, 349 D 7. 796 a 3 Hom. Il. i. 526 (Lord Derby) 8. 796 c 1 Cf.
Aristotle, Nicom. Ethics, VII. xiii. 3 9. 796 c 7 Hom. Il. vi. 147-9 10. 797 a 1
Cf. Hom. Il. xii. 326 11. 797 b 3 Cf. Plato, Republic, ii. 361; x. 613 A 12. 798
a 7 Hom. Il. xxii. 262 13. c 9 Atticus, Fr. iii 14. d 3 Pindar, Fr. Incert. 129
(Boeckh) 15. d 6 Plato, Laws, iv. 715 E 16. d 8 ibid. Timaeus, 29 E 17. 801 d 3
Plato, Timaeus, 30 A 18. d 10 ibid. 41 B 19. 803 b 7 Plato, Timaeus, 29 F 20.
806 a 1 Hom. Il. ii. 478 21. c 1 Atticus, Fr. vi 22. c 2 Cf. Plato, Timaeus, 40
A 23. c 5 ibid. 39 B 24. 808 a 1 Homer, Il. xii. 239 25. 809 b 3 Plato,
Phaedrus, 346 B 26. 809 b 5 Plato, Phaedo, 72 E 27. 811 b 1 Plotinus, Ennead.
iv. lib. 2: a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 28. 812 d 4 Porphyry against
Boëthus On the Saul, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius 29. 813 d 2 Cf. Plato,
Laws, x. pp. 885, 900, 907 30. 815 b 1 Cf. Plato, Phaedrus, 248 B 31. 816 d 1
Aristocles, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius: cf. Diels, Doxographi Graeci, p.
464, n. 9 .

32. 818 c 1 Porphyry, On the Soul, in answer to Boëthus 33. 819 a 1 Numenius, a
Fragment preserved by Eusebius 34. 822 d 1 Longinus, Fr. vii 35. 823 b 6 Hom.
Il. xviii. 376 36. 824 a 1 Plotinus, Ennead. iv. 7, p. 456 (Volkmann) 37. 830 a
6 Plutarch, On the Opinions of Philosophers, 889 F 38. 838 d 4 Plutarch, 888 D
39. 830 d 6 Plutarch, 878 C 40. 841 d 2 Plutarch, 879 A 41. 842 b 7 ibid 886 D
42. 845 c 2 Plutarch, 882 B 43. 846 c 2 Plutarch, 889 A 44. 850 c 4 Plutarch, De
Placitis Philosophorum, 896 A 45. 861 a 1 ibid. 896 F 46. d 3 Plutarch, ibid.
898 E .

47. 853 c 1 Xenophon, Memorabilia of Socrates, I. i. 11 48. 855 a 3 Homer, Od.
iv. 392 49. b 6 Timon, Fr. 9 (Mullach I. p. 84); cf. Clem. Alex., Strom. V. 325
Sylb., Homer, Il. i. 8-10 50. c 5 Timon, Fr. 5; cf. Homer, Il. iv. 440-3 This
text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the
public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 35: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 2
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 2

BOOK II

CONTENTS

I. Epitome of Egyptian theology, and how it was transmitted to the Greeks; and
that we have had good reason for abandoning it all p. 45 a That the theology
current among the Greeks is of later introduction p. 52 b II. Epitome of the
mythological tales among the Greeks concerning their gods and heroes p. 52 d
III. Of the secret initiations and cryptic mysteries of their polytheistic
delusion p. 61 c IV. By what considerations we were led to withdraw from the
opinions of the Greeks concerning the gods p. 67 d V. Summary of the preceding
arguments p. 69 b VI. That what they call the temples of their gods are the
tombs of dead men p. 71 a The opinion of the ancients concerning the gods p. 73
b Of the physical and forsooth more venerable theology of the Greeks p. 74 a
VII. What Plato thought of the theology of the ancients p. 75 d VIII. Of the
theology of the Romans p. 78 a

PREFACE The theology of the Phoenicians is of the character described above, and
the word of salvation teaches us in the gospel to escape from it without looking
back, and earnestly to seek the remedy for this madness of the ancients.

Now it must be manifest that these are not fables and poetic fictions containing
some theory concealed in covert meanings, but true testimonies, as they would
say themselves, of ancient and wise theologians, comprising records of earlier
date than all poets and historians, and deriving the credibility of their
statements from the names and history of the gods prevailing to the present day
in the cities and villages of Phoenicia, and from the mysteries celebrated among
the inhabitants of each. This must be manifest, I say, from the confession both
of the other historians and especially of their reputed theologians; for they
hereby testified that the ancients who first composed the account of the gods
did not refer at all to figurative descriptions of physical phenomena, nor make
allegories of the myths concerning the gods, but preserved the histories in
their literal form. For this was shown by the words already quoted of the
authors whom I have mentioned; so that there is no longer need to search up
forced physical explanations, since the proof which the facts bring with them of
themselves is quite clear.

Such, then, is the theology of the Phoenicians. But it is time to pass on and
review that of the Egyptians also. in order to observe carefully and understand
exactly whether our revolt from them is not well judged and reasonable, and
whether it has not been successful upon the sole evidence of the gospel first of
all among the Egyptians themselves, and then among those also who are of like
mind with them.

Now the whole Egyptian history has been translated at large into the language of
the Greeks, and especially the part concerning their theology, by Manetho the
Egyptian, both in the Sacred Book written by him, and in other of his works.
Moreover, Diodorus, whom we mentioned before, collected his narratives from many
sources, and described the customs of the several nations with the utmost
possible accuracy: and being an eminent man, who had won no small reputation for
learning among all lovers of literature, and had made a collection of all
ancient history, and connected the earliest with the subsequent events, he
adopted the theology of the Egyptians as the commencement of his whole treatise.

I think it better, therefore, to draw the representation of the subject before
us from that treatise, as his writings are likely to be better known to the
Greeks. This, then, is what he narrates word for word: 1

CHAPTER I

[DIODORUS] 'The Egyptians say that in the original creation of the universe
mankind came into existence first in Egypt by reason of its temperate climate
and the nature of the Nile. For as that river caused great fertility and
supplied food self grown, it gave an easy sustenance to the living creatures
that were born.

2 'The gods, they say, had been originally mortal men, but gained their
immortality on account of wisdom and public benefits to mankind, some of them
having also become kings: and some have the same names, when interpreted, with
the heavenly deities, while others have received a name of their own, as Helios,
and Kronos, and Rhea, and Zeus, who is by some called Ammon; and besides these
Hera and Hephaestus, and Hestia, and lastly Hermes.

'Helios, they say, was the first king of the Egyptians, having the same name
with the celestial luminary: some, however, of the priests say that Hephaestus
was the first who became king, because he was the discoverer of fire.

'Kronos reigned next, and having married his sister Rhea begat, according to
some authors, Osiris and Isis. but according to most, Zeus and Hera, who for
their valour received the kingdom of the whole world. Of these were born five
gods, Osiris, and Isis, and Typhon, and Apollo, and Aphrodite. Osiris is
Dionysus, and Isis is Demeter; and Osiris, having married her and succeeded to
the kingdom, did many things for the general benefit, and founded in the Thebaid
a city of a hundred gates, which some called Diospolis, and others Thebes. . . .
3 He also erected a temple to his parents Zeus and Hera, and golden shrines of
the other gods, to each of whom he assigned honours, and appointed the priests
to attend to them. Osiris also was the discoverer of the vine, and was the first
to make use of bare land, and to teach the rest of mankind agriculture. Above
all he honoured Hermes, who was endowed with an excellent genius for contriving
what might benefit the common life.

4 'For he was the inventor of letters, and arranged sacrifices for the gods, and
invented a lyre, and taught the Greeks the explanation (ερμηνειαν) of these
matters, from which circumstance he was called Hermes. He also discovered the
olive-tree.

5 'Osiris, after travelling over the whole world, set up Busiris in Phoenicia,
and Antaeus in Aethiopia and Libya; and himself led an expedition with his
brother Apollo, who, they say, was the discoverer of the laurel. 6 In the
expedition with Osiris there went his two sons, Anubis and Macedon; and he took
with him also Pan, who is especially honoured by the Egyptians, and from whom
Panopolis is named.

'And when he was near Taphosiris the tribe of Satyrs was, brought to him: and,
being fond of music, he carried about with him a band of musicians, amongst whom
were nine maidens skilful in singing and well educated in other respects, who
among the Greeks are called Muses, and whose leader is Apollo. And since every
nation welcomed Osiris as a god because of the benefits bestowed by him, he left
memorials of himself behind him everywhere.

7 'In India he founded not a few cities; and also visited the other nations,
those about Phrygia, and crossed the Hellespont into Europe. 8 His son Macedon
he left as king of Macedonia; and Triptolemus he put in charge of agriculture in
Attica.

'Afterwards he passed from among men to the gods, and from Isis and Hermes
received temples and all the honours which are, held among the gods to be most
distinguished. These two also taught men his initiatory rites, and introduced
many customs, concerning him in the way of mysteries.

9 'He was killed by Typhon his brother, a wicked and impious, person, who,
having divided the body of the murdered man into, twenty-six parts, gave a
portion to each of his accomplices in the, assault, wishing all to share in the
pollution.

'But Isis, being the sister and wife of Osiris, avenged the murder, with the aid
of her son Horus; and, having slain Typhon and his accomplices near what is now
called the village of Antaeus, she became queen of Egypt.

'And having found all except one part of the body of Osiris, they say that round
each part she moulded out of spices and wax the figure of a man corresponding in
size to Osiris, and gave them to the priests throughout all Egypt to be
worshipped: she also consecrated one of the animals found among them, of
whatever kind they wished.

10 'The sacred bulls, both Apis so called, and Mnevis, were consecrated to
Osiris, and all the Egyptians in common were taught to worship them as gods,
because these animals had helped the labours of the discoverers of wheat, both
in sowing and in the common course of husbandry. 11 Isis swore to accept the
company of no man any more; and when she herself had passed from among men, she
received immortal honours, and was buried at Memphis.

'So the parts of Osiris which had been found again are said to have been
honoured with burial in the manner described; but they say that the member which
had been cast into the river by Typhon was deemed worthy by Isis of divine
honours no less than the rest.

'For she set up an image of it in the temples, and instituted worship, and made
the initiations and sacrifices paid to this deity especially honourable. And as
the Greeks received their orgiastic rites and Dionysiac festivals from Egypt,
they also worship this member in their mysteries, and in the initiatory rites
and sacrifices of this god, and call it Phallus.

12 'But those who say that the god was born in Boeotian Thebes of Semele and
Zeus talk, they say, at random. For when Orpheus had landed in Egypt and
received initiation, he took part also in the Dionysiac mysteries, and, being
friendly to the Cadmeans and honoured by them, he changed the place of the god's
birth to please them; and the multitude, partly through ignorance and partly
from their desire that the god should be called a Greek, gladly welcomed the
initiations and mysteries.

'And for the transference of the birth and initiatory rites of the god Orpheus
found occasion as follows. Cadmus, a native of the Egyptian Thebes, among other
children begat Semele; and she having been violated by somebody or other became
pregnant, and after seven months gave birth to a child, just such as the
Egyptians consider Osiris to have been.

'And when the child died, Cadmus covered it with gold, and appointed the proper
sacrifices for it, and also assigned the fatherhood to Zeus, thus magnifying
Osiris, and taking away the reproach of the mother's seduction.

'Wherefore among the Greeks also a story was given out that Semele, the daughter
of Cadmus, gave birth to Osiris by Zeus.

'Afterwards when the mythologists came forward, the story filled the theatre,
and became to succeeding generations a strong and unalterable belief. And the
most illustrious heroes and gods of the Egyptians are, it is said, universally
claimed by the Greeks as their own.

13 'Hercules, for example, was by birth an Egyptian, and moved by his valour
travelled over much of the known world: but the Greeks claimed him as their own,
though in truth he was different from the son of Alcmena who arose at some later
time among the Greeks.

'Perseus also, it is said, was born in Egypt, and the birth of Isis was
transferred by the Greeks to Argos, while in their mythology they said that she
was lo, who was transformed into a cow: but some think the same deity to be
Isis, some Demeter, some Thesmophoros, but others Selene, and others Hera.14
'Osiris, too, some think to be Apis, and some Dionysus, some Pluto, some Ammon,
some Zeus, and others Pan.

'Isis, they say, was the discoverer of many remedies, and of medical science:
she also discovered the medicine of immortality, by which, when her son Horus
had been treacherously attacked by the Titans, and was found dead under the
water, she not only raised him up again and gave him life, but also made him
partake of immortality.

15 'Horus they say was the last of the gods who reigned over Egypt, and his name
by interpretation is Apollo: he was taught medicine and soothsaying by his
mother Isis, and benefited mankind by his oracles and cures.

'Most authors agree that in the time of Isis certain giants of great size,
arrayed in monstrous fashion, stirred up war against the gods Zeus and Osiris.
Also that the Egyptians made it lawful to marry sisters, because Isis had been
married to Osiris her brother.'

Such are their stories about these deities: but concerning the animals held
sacred in Egypt, there is an account prevailing among them of the following
kind:

16 'Some say that the original race of gods, being few and overpowered by the
multitude and impiety of the earth-born men, made themselves like certain
irrational animals, and so escaped: and afterwards, by way of rendering thanks
for their safety, they consecrated the natures of the very animals whose
likeness they had taken.

'But others say that in their encounters with their enemies their leaders
prepared images of the animals which they now honour, and wore these upon the
head, and had this as a mark of their authority: and when they were victorious
over their foes, they ascribed the cause to the animals whose images they wore,
and deified them.

17 'Others allege a third cause, saying that the animals have been so honoured
because of their usefulness. For the cow bears calves, and ploughs, and sheep
bear lambs and supply clothing and food by their milk and cheese, and the dog
helps men in hunting, and keeps guard; and for these reasons the god whom they
call Anubis has, they say, a dog's head, meaning that he was a bodyguard of
Osiris and Isis.

'But some say that when Isis was searching for Osiris the dogs led the way
before her, and drove off the wild beasts, and the men who encountered them.

'The cat too, they say, is useful against asps and the other venomous reptiles:
the ichneumon breaks the crocodiles' eggs, and even destroys the crocodiles, by
rolling itself in the mud, and leaping into their mouths when open, and, by
eating away their entrails, leaves them quite dead.

'Of the birds the ibis, they say, is useful against snakes and locusts and
caterpillars and the hawk against scorpions and horned serpents, and the smaller
venomous beasts, and because of its helping in divinations: the eagle also,
because it is a kingly bird.

18 'The he-goat, they say, has been deified, like Priapus among the Greeks,
because of its generative organ, for this animal has the strongest propensity to
lust; and that member of the body which is the cause of generation is rightly
honoured, as being the source of animal nature. And speaking generally, not only
the Egyptians, but also not a few other nations have consecrated that member in
their initiatory rites, as the cause of the reproduction of living beings.

'The priests who succeed to the hereditary priesthoods in Egypt are initiated in
the mysteries of this deity: the Pans also and the Satyrs, they say, are
honoured among men for the same reason; and therefore most persons dedicate
images of them in the temples very similar to a he-goat; for this animal is
traditionally said to be extremely lustful.

'The sacred bulls Apis and Mnevis are held in like honour as the gods, both on
account of their help in agriculture, and because men ascribe the discovery of
the fruits of the earth to them.

'Wolves are worshipped because of the likeness of their nature to dogs, and
because in old times when Isis, with her son Horus, was going to fight against
Typhon, Osiris, they say, came from Hades to the aid of his wife and child in
the likeness of a wolf.

'But others say that the Ethiopians, having invaded Egypt, were driven away by a
multitude of wolves; and on this account the city is called Lycopolis. 19 The
crocodile.is said to be worshipped because the robbers from Arabia and Libya are
afraid to swim across the Nile on account of the crocodiles,

'They say too that one of their kings, being pursued by his own hounds, took
refuge in the marsh, and then was taken up by a crocodile and, strange to say,
carried over to the other side.

'Other causes also are alleged by some for the worship of the irrational
animals. For when in old time the multitude revolted from the kings, and agreed
that they would no longer have kings to rule over them, some one formed the idea
of supplying them with different animals as objects of worship, so that while
they severally worshipped that which was honoured among themselves, and despised
that which was held sacred among others, the Egyptians might never be able all
to agree together. 20 When any of the animals mentioned dies, they wrap it in
fine linen, and beat their breasts in lamentation, and bury it in the sacred
sepulchres. And whosoever destroys any of these animals wilfully, incurs death,
except if he kill a cat or the ibis; for if any one kills these, whether
wilfully or not, he incurs death in any case.

21 'Moreover, if a dog is found dead in a house, they all shave their whole body
and make a mourning; and if wine, or corn, or any other of the necessaries of
life happen to be stored in the house, they could not bear to use it any more.

'Apis they maintain at Memphis, and Mnevis in Heliopolis, and the he-goat at
Mendes, and the crocodile in the lake Moeris, and the other beasts in sacred
enclosures, offering them wheat-flour, or groats boiled in milk, and various
kinds of cakes mixed with honey, and the ilesh of a goose, either boiled or
roasted.

'But to the carnivorous animals they throw many kinds of birds, and in company
with each male animal they keep the most beautiful females, whom they call
concubines.

22 'When Apis dies and has been magnificently buried, they seek another like him
; and when he is found, the people are released from their mourning, and he is
brought first to Nilopolis. And at that time only the calf is seen by women, who
stand before him and expose themselves; but at all other times they are
forbidden to come in sight of this deity. For after the death of Osiris they say
that his soul passed into Apis.'

Such is the unseemly theology, or rather atheism, of the Egyptians, which it is
degrading even to oppose, and from which we naturally revolted with abhorrence,
when we found redemption and deliverance from so great evils in no other way
than solely by the saving doctrine of the gospel, which announced the recovery
of sight to the blind in understanding. Their graver theories and systems of
natural science, we shall examine a little later, after we have discussed the
mythology of the Greeks. The Egyptian and Phoenician mythologies having become
thus mixed and combined, the superstitious belief of the ancient error has
naturally gained the mastery in most nations. But, as I said, we have yet to
speak of the notions of the Greeks.

Now the character assumed by the solemnities of Egyptian theology is that which
we have already set forth, and that the Greek doctrines are mere fragments and
misunderstandings of the same we have frequently stated already upon the
judgement of the writers quoted: this will, however, be made further manifest
from the Greek theology itself, since, in their own records concerning the gods,
they bring nothing forward from native sources, but fall into the fables of
foreign nations: for they are shown to make use of similar statues and the very
same mysteries, as we may learn from the history of these matters, which the
author before mentioned, who brought the Libraries together into one body,
narrates in the third and fourth books of the treatise before quoted, having
commenced his history from the times of Cadmus. Now, that Cadmus came after
Moses is proved by the exact successions of the chronological writings, as we
shall show in due season. So that Moses is proved to be earlier even than the
gods of Greece, seeing that he is before Cadmus, while the gods are shown to
have come later than the age of Cadmus. Hear, however, the historian's own
words: 23

CHAPTER II

[DIODORUS] 'Cadmus, the son of Agenor, is said to have been sent from Phoenicia
by the king to search for Europa. who had been carried off by Zeus: when he
failed to find her, he came into Boeotia and founded the Thebes of that country;
and having married Harmonia the daughter of Aphrodite, begat of her Semele and
her sisters.

'And Zeus, after union with Semele, was entreated to make his intercourse with
her like that with Hera. But when he came to her in godlike fashion with
thunderings and lightnings, Semele was unable to bear it, and being pregnant,
miscarried with the child, and herself perished from the fire. But Zeus took the
child and delivered him to Hermes, and sent him away to the cave in Nysa, lying
between Phoenicia and the Nile: and being thus reared by the Nymphs, Dionysus
became the discoverer of wine, and taught men the culture of the vine.

'He discovered also the drink prepared from barley, which is called zyilius. He
used to lead about with him an army not only of men, but also of women, and
punished the impious and unjust.

24 'He went on an expedition also into India for three years: and from that
circumstance the Greeks established triennial sacrifices to Dionysus, and think
that the god makes his appearances among men at that time: and all men worship
him for his gift of wine, just as they worship Demeter for the discovery of corn
as food.

25 'But there is said to be also another Dionysus, much earlier in time than
this one, whom some call Sabazius, a son of Zeus and Persephone, whose birth,
and sacrifices, and ceremonies they represent at night, and in secret, because
of the shame attendant upon their intercourse. He was the first who attempted to
yoke oxen, and from this they represent him with horns. But Dionysus, the son of
Semele, who is of later date, was delicate in body, and eminently beautiful, and
very prone to amorous pleasures; in his expeditions he led about a multitude of
women armed with spears made into thyrsi.

'They say also that he is accompanied in his travels by the Muses, who are
virgins and extremely well trained, and charm the soul of the god by singing and
dancing. Silenus too, as his tutor, contributes much to his progress in virtue.
As a remedy against the headaches resulting from too much wine, his head is
bound up with a band.

'And they call him Dimetor, because the two Dionysi were of one father, but two
mothers. They also set a reed in his hand, because the men of old drank unmixed
wine and became maddened, and beat each other with their staves, so that some
were even killed, and from this cause they introduced the custom of using reeds
instead of clubs.

26 'He is called Bacchius from the Bacchae, and Lenaeus from the treading of the
grapes in wine-presses, and Bromius from the roar of thunder which took place at
his birth.

'They also say that he leads about Satyrs with him, who afford him pleasure and
delight in their dances and their goat-songs; and that he established dramatic
spectacles and a system of musical recitations. Such are the statements
concerning Dionysus.

27 'Priapus is said to be the son of Dionysus and Aphrodite, because men filled
with wine are naturally excited to amorous pleasures. But some say that the
ancients gave to the human organ of generation the mythological name Priapus.

'Others affirm that, because the genital member is the cause of the generation
of mankind, therefore it had for ever received immortal honour: as indeed the
Egyptians also said that Isis, in her search for the members of Osiris, when she
could not find the male organ, appointed it to be worshipped as a god, and set
it up in the temple.

'Nay, even among the Greeks, not only in the Dionysiac rites, but also in all
others, this god receives a certain honour, being brought in with laughter and
jesting in their sacrifices: as is also Hermaphroditus, who got his name as
being begotten of Hermes and Aphrodite.

'This god, they say, appears at certain times among men, and is born with the
bodily form of man and woman combined: but some say that such things are
prodigies, and, being produced but rarely, are significant sometimes of evil and
sometimes of good.

28 'The Muses are daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne, but some say of Uranus and
Gé. Most mythologists also make them virgins, and say that they got their name
from initiating men, that is teaching them the liberal arts.

Now with respect to Heracles the Greeks tell such, stories as follow:

29 'Of Zeus and Danae the daughter of Acrisius was born Perseus, and of Perseus
and Andromeda Electryon, and of him Alcmena, by his union with whom Zeus begat
Heracles, making the night which he passed with her thrice as long as usual: and
this was the only intercourse sought by Zeus, not on account of amorous desire,
as in the case with the other women, but chiefly for the sake of begetting a
son.

'But Hera being jealous delayed Alcmena's labour, and brought Eurystheus into
the world before the proper time, because Zeus had proclaimed that the child
which should be born that day was to reign over the Persidae.

'And when Alcmena was delivered, she exposed the child, as it is said, through
fear of Hera: but Athena admired the child, and persuaded Hera to give it the
breast: and when the boy dragged at her breast with a violence beyond his age,
Hera in great pain threw the child down, and Athena took it up and persuaded the
mother to nurse it.

30 'After this Hera sent two serpents to destroy the child, but the boy,
undismayed, strangled the serpents by squeezing their necks in either hand. When
Heracles was grown to be a man, Eurystheus, who had the kingdom of Argolis,
ordered him to perform twelve labours.

31 'And when he had fallen into much trouble, Hera sent a frenzy upon him, and
through vexation of soul he became mad. As the disease increased, being out of
his mind, he attempted to kill his companion and nephew lolaus, and when he
escaped, slew his own sons begotten of Megara, daughter of King Creon, by
shooting them down with arrows as if they were enemies.

32 'After this he quieted down, and served Eurystheus in the twelve labours. He
also slew the Centaurs, and among them Cheiron, who was renowned for his skill
in healing.

33 'It is said that there was a peculiar coincidence in the birth of this god
Heracles. For the first mortal woman visited by Zeus was Niobe, daughter of
Phoroneus, and the last was Alcmena, mother of Heracles, whom they trace as
descended from Niobe in the sixteenth generation. And with her Zeus ended his
intercourse with mortal women.

34 However, after finishing his labours, Heracles gave his own wife Megara to
live with his nephew Iolaus, because of the calamity about his children; and for
himself asked Iole, the daughter of Eurytus, in marriage, and, on her father's
refusal, he fell sick, and received an oracle that he would be delivered from
his sickness, if he first became sold into slavery.

'So he sails to Phrygia and is bought by one of his friends, and becomes a slave
of Omphale, queen of those who were at that time called Maeonians, but now
Lydians: and during the time of his slavery he has a son Cleolaus born to him of
a slave. And, having married Omphale, he gets sons by her also.

35 'But as he was on his way back to Arcadia, and stayed as guest with King
Leos, he secretly seduced his daughter, and left her with child, and came back.

36 'After this again he married Deianeira the daughter of Oeneus, Meleager being
now dead. 37 And having taken captive the daughter of Phyleus, by intercourse
with her he begat Tlepolemus. While he was supping with Oeneus, the servant made
a mistake about something, and Heracles struck him with his fist and killed him.

'When on his journey he came to the river Evenus, he found the Centaur Nessus
ferrying people across the river for hire. He ferried Deianeira over first, and,
being enamoured of her for her beauty, tried to do violence to her; but when she
cried out to her husband, Heracles shot the Centaur; and Nessus in the midst of
his embrace, being at the point of death through the sharpness of the wound,
told Deianeira that he would give her a philtre, so that Heracles might never
wish to wed any other woman.

'He bade her therefore take of the blood which was dropping from the point of
the arrow, and, after mixing it with oil, anoint therewith the tunic of
Heracles: and this Deianeira did, and kept the philtre by her.

38 'Again, Heracles took captive the daughter of Phylas, and by his union with
her begat a son Antiochus: and yet again he took captive Astyaneira, the
daughter of King Armenius, and by her begat a son Ctesippus.

39 'And Thespius the Athenian, son of Erechtheus, having begotten fifty
daughters by different wives, and being ambitious that they should get children
by Heracles, entertained him at a splendid feast, and sent his daughters to him
one by one: and he deflowered them all in one night, and became the father of
the so-called Thespiadae.

40 'He took Iole also captive, and, having to perform a sacrifice, he sent to
his wife Deianeira and asked for the cloak and tunic which he was accustomed to
wear for sacrifices: and she anointed the tunic with the philtre which the
Centaur had given her, and sent it.

'And Heracles had no sooner put on the tunic than he fell into the greatest
misery. For the arrow had been poisoned with the blood of the hydra, and so the
tunic began to prey upon the flesh of his body because of its burning heat, so
that in his extremity of pain he slew the messenger who had brought it, and, in
accordance with an oracle, cast himself into the fire, and so ended his life.
Such is the story of Heracles.

41 'Now with regard to Asclepius they say that he was the son of Apollo and
Coronis, and studied zealously the science of healing, and rose to such a height
of fame, that many of the sick who were given over in despair were, beyond all
expectation, cured by him; so that Zeus was enraged, and smote him with a
thunderbolt and killed him; and Apollo, being enraged because of the death of
his son, slew the Cyclopes who had forged the thunderbolt for Zeus: but Zeus was
enraged at their death, and commanded Apollo to serve as a slave with Adrnetus,
and took this revenge upon him for his crimes.'

This, then, is what Diodorus has set forth in the fourth book of his Bibliothecae.
And as to the rest of their theology, the same author again asserts that the
Greeks borrowed it from the other nations, for in the third book of the same
history he writes as follows:----

42 'Now the people of Atlas say that their first king was Uranus, and of him
were born by many wives five and forty sons, of whom eighteen were by a wife
Titaea; and she, having been a virtuous woman and the author of many good deeds,
was deified after her death, and had her name changed to Ge.

'Uranus also had daughters, Basileia, and Rhea who was also called Pandora. And
because Basileia brought up her brothers with maternal affection, she was called
Meter.

'And afterwards, when Uranus was dead, she lived with her brother Ilyperion, and
bore two sons, whom she named Helios and Selene.

'But the brethren of Rhea were afraid of them, and slew Ilyperion, and drowned
Helios in the river Eridanus. Selene, on learning this, threw herself down from
a roof, and Meter became mad and wandered about the country, with her hair
loose, driven frantic by drums and cymbals, until she too disappeared
altogether.

'And the multitude, astonished at the catastrophe, transferred Helios and Selene
to the stars of heaven, and regarded their mother as a goddess, and set up
altars, and worshipped her with performances by drums and cymbals.

43 'The Phrygians say that Maeon was king of Phrygia and begat a daughter named
Cybele, who first invented a pipe, and was called the Mountain Mother. And
Marsyas the Phrygian, who was friendly with her, was the first to join flutes
together, and he lived in chastity to the end of his life.

'But Cybele became pregnant by intercourse with Attis, and when this was known,
her father killed Attis and the nurses: and Cybele became mad and rushed out
into the country, and there continued howling and beating a drum.

'She was accompanied by Marsyas, who entered into a musical contest with Apollo,
and was defeated, and flayed alive by Apollo.

'And Apollo became enamoured of Cybele and accompanied her in her wanderings as
far as the Hyperboreans, and ordered the body of Attis to be buried, and Cybele
to be honoured as a goddess.

'Wherefore the Phrygians keep this custom even to the present day, lamenting the
death of the youth, and erecting altars, and honouring Attis and Cybele with
sacrifices.

'And afterwards, at Pessinus in Phrygia, they built a costly temple, and
instituted most magnificent worship and sacrificial rites.

44 'After the death of Hyperion the sons of Uranus divided the kingdom among
themselves, the most illustrious of them being Atlas and Kronos. And of these
Atlas took the regions along the coasts of the ocean, and became an excellent
astronomer: and d he had seven daughters who were called the Atlantides, and
these, by union with the comeliest gods, became the founders of the most
numerous race, and gave birth to such as for their worth became gods and heroes;
thus the eldest of them, Maia, by union with Zeus became mother of Hermes.

45 'But Kronos, surpassing all in arrogance and impiety, married his sister
Rhea, and of her begat Zeus. There had been also another Zeus, the brother of
Uranus and king of Crete, far inferior in fame to him of later birth.

'This latter then became, king of the whole world; but the other became king of
Crete, and begat ten sons who were called Curetes: and his sepulchre, they say,
is still shown in Crete.

'Now Kronos reigned in Sicily and Libya and Italy: but his son Zeus desired a
life the opposite to his father's. And some say that he succeeded to the kingdom
by his father's voluntary retirement, others that he was chosen by the multitude
because of their hatred to his father.

'So when Kronos with the Titans made war against him, Zeus was victorious in
battle, and marched over the whole inhabited world. He excelled in bodily
strength and all virtues, and showed b the greatest zeal in punishment of the
impious and benefits to the good; in return for which, after his departure from
among men, he was called Zeus, because he was thought to liave been the author
of the noble life (ζην) for mankind.

'These then are the principal heads of the theology held among the Atlanteans.'

These the Greeks also are said to borrow. So Diodorus writes in the third volume
of his histories: and in the sixth, the same author confirms the same theology
from the writings of Euemerus the Messenian, speaking word for word as follows:
46

'With regard then to gods the men of old have handed down to their posterity two
sets of notions. For some, say they, are eternal and imperishable, as the Sun
and Moon and the other heavenly bodies, and besides these the winds, and the
rest who partake of the like nature with them; for each of these has an eternal
origin and eternal continuance. Other deities they say were of the earth; but,
because of the benefits which they conferred on mankind, they have received
immortal honour and glory, as Heracles, Dionysus, Aristaeus, and the others like
them.

'Concerning the terrestrial gods many various tales have been handed down in the
historical and mythological writers. Among the historians Euemerus, the author
of the Sacred Record, has written a special history; and of the mythologists
Homer, Hesiod, Orpheus, and such others as these, have invented very marvellous
myths concerning the gods: and we shall endeavour to run over what both classes
have recorded concisely and with a view to due proportion.

'Euemerus, then, was a friend of King Cassander and, having boon constrained for
his sake to perform some important services for the king, and some long
journeys, says that he was carried away southwards into the ocean; for, having
started on his voyage from Arabia Felix, he sailed many days across the ocean,
and landed on some oceanic islands, one of which is that called Panchaea, in
which he saw the Panchaean inhabitants, who were eminent in piety, and honoured
the gods with most magnificent sacrifices and notable offerings of silver and
gold.

'The island also was sacred to the gods ; and there were many other things to be
admired both for their antiquity, and for the ingenuity of their manufacture,
the particulars concerning which we have recorded in the books preceding this.

'Also therein on a certain exceedingly high hill is a temple of Zeus Triphylius,
erected by himself at the time when he reigned over the whole inhabited world,
being still among men. In this temple there is a golden pillar, on which is
inscribed in the Panchaean language a summary of the acts of Uranus, Kronos, and
Zeus.

'After this he says that Uranus was the first king, a gentle and benevolent man,
and learned in the motion of the stars, who also was the first to honour the
celestial deities with sacrifices, on which account he was called Uranus.

'By his wife Ilestia he had sons Pan and Kronos, and daughters Rhea and Demeter:
and after Uranus, Kronos became king and, having married Rhea, begat Zeus and
Hera and Poseidon.' And Zeus, having succeeded to the kingdom of Kronos, married
Hera and Demeter and Themis, of whom he begat children, of the first the
Curetes, of the second Persephone, and of the third Athena.

'And when he had come to Babylon he was entertained as a guest by Belus: and
afterwards on arriving at the island Panchaea, which lay by the ocean, he built
an altar to his own grandfather Uranus: and thence he came through Syria to the
sovereign of that time Casius, of whom mount Casius is named; and came into
Cilicia and conquered in war Cilix the ruler of the country; and visited very
many other nations and was honoured among all, and was proclaimed a god.' After
narrating these and similar tales concerning the gods as if they were mortal
men, he further says : 47

'With regard to Euemerus who composed the Sacred Record, we will be satisfied
with what has been said ; but the legends of the Greeks concerning the gods we
will try to run over briefly, following Hesiod and Homer and Orpheus.'

Then he appends in order the mythologies of the poets. Let it suffice us,
however, to have made these extracts from the theology of the Greeks, to which
it is reasonable to append an account of the initiatory rites in the inner
shrines of the same deities, and of their secret mysteries, and to observe
whether they bear any becoming mark of a theology that is truly divine, or arise
from regions below out of long daemoniacal delusion, and are deserving of
ridicule, or rather of shame, and yet more of pity for those who are still
blinded. These matters are unveiled in plain terms by the admirable Clement, in
his Exhortation to the Greeks, a man who had gone through experience of all, but
had quickly emerged from the delusion as one who had been rescued from evil by
the word of salvation and through the teaching of the Gospel. Listen, then, to a
brief statement of these matters also.48

CHAPTER III

[CLEMENT] 'Explore not then too curiously the secret shrines of impiety, nor the
mouths of caverns full of prodigies, or the Thesprotian cauldron, or the
Cirrhaean tripod, or the brazen urn of Dodona: leave also to antiquated fables
the old stump held sacred amid desert sands, and the oracle there, now decayed
with the oak itself. The fountain certainly of Castalia is silently forgotten,
and another fountain of Colophon; the other oracular streams also are in like
manner dead. And so, though emptied late of their vain glory, they have
nevertheless been clearly proved to have run dry together with their own
fabulous stories.

'Describe to us also the useless oracles of the other kinds of divination, or of
frenzy rather, the Clarian, Pythian, Didymean Apollo, Amphiaraus, and
Amphiiochus. Join also with them, if you will, observers of prodigies, and
augurs, and the unholy interpreters of dreams: and bring and set together beside
the Pythian god those that divine by wheat-flour, and by barley, and the
ventriloquists still held in honour among the multitude. Yea more, let the
shrines of the Egyptians and the necromancies of the Tyrrhenians be consigned to
darkness. These are in very truth mad sophistry-schools of unbelieving men, and
gambling houses of pure fraud. Partners in this jugglery are the goats that have
been trained for divination, and crows taught by men to utter oracles to men.

'And what if I were to give you a catalogue of the mysteries? I shall not dance
them out, as they say Alcibiades did, but according to the word of truth I will
thoroughly lay bare the jugglery that is concealed in them, and those so-called
gods of yours, to whom the mystic rites belong, I shall wheel in as it were upon
the stage of life before the spectators of truth.

'The Bacchanals celebrate in their orgies the frenzy of Dionysus, keeping their
monthly holiday with a feast on raw flesh, and, in performing the distribution
of the flesh of the slaughtered victims, are crowned with their wreaths of
serpents, and shout upon Eva, that Eva, through whom the deception crept in [and
death followed in its train]: a consecrated serpent, too, is the symbol of the
Bacchic orgies.

'Therefore, according to the exact pronunciation of the Hebrews, the name Heva,
with an aspirate, is at once interpreted as the female serpent. Deo too and Kore
have already become a mystic drama, and Eleusis celebrates by torchlight the
wandering, and the rape, and their mourning.

'I think, too, that we ought to trace the etymology of "orgies" and "mysteries,"
the one from the anger (οργης) of Deo aroused against Zeus, and the other from
the pollution (μυσους) which had occurred with regard to Dionysus. Or even if
you derive it from a certain Myus of Attica, who perished in hunting, as
Apollodorus says, I do not grudge that your mysteries have been glorified by the
honour of a name which is engraved upon a tomb.

'In another way also you may think of your mysteries as mytheria
(hunting-stories) by the correspondence of letters. For fables such as these do
most especially make prey of the most barbarous of the Thracians, the most
senseless of the Phrygians, the most superstitious of the Greeks.

'Ill betide him then who first taught men this imposture, whether he were
Dardanus, who instituted the mysteries of the Mother of the gods, or one Eetion,
who established the orgies and initiations of the Samothracians, or that famous
Phrygian Midas, who learned the cunning imposture from Odrysus and then spread
it among his subjects.

'For never will I be cajoled by that Cyprian islander Cinyras, who dared to
transfer the lewd orgies of Aphrodite from night to day, in his desire to deify
a harlot of his own country.

'But others say that Melampus son of Amythaon brought over from Egypt to Hellas
the festivals of Deo, her grief so famed in song. These for my part I should
call evil authors of impious fables, and parents of deadly superstition, as
having in the mysteries implanted a seed of wickedness and corruption in man's
life.

'And now, for it is time, I will prove that your orgies themselves are full of
imposture and quackery: and if you have been initiated, you will laugh all the
more at these your venerated fables. And I shall proclaim the hidden secrets
openly, and not let modesty hinder me from speaking of things which you are not
ashamed to worship.

'First then, the daughter of the foam, the Cyprus-born, the beloved of Cinyras,
Aphrodite I mean,

"Enamour'd of the source from which she sprang," 49

'those mutilated members of Uranus, those lustful members, which after their
excision did violence to the waves, how wanton the members, of which your
Aphrodite becomes the worthy fruit! In the mystic celebration of this pleasure
of the sea a lump of salt and a phallus are delivered as a symbol of generation
to those who are being initiated in the adulterous art: and they pay a piece of
money to her, as lovers to a harlot.

'The mysteries of Deo, and the amorous embraces of Zeus with Demeter his
mother, and the wrath of----I know not what to call her now----his mother or
wife, Demeter, on account of which wrath, they say, she was called Brimo; the
supplications of Zeus, and the drink of gall, the plucking out of the victim's
heart, and unspeakable deeds,----these things the Phrygians celebrate in honour
of Attis, and Cybele, and the Corybantes.

'They have also made up a story that Zeus, having torn off parts of a ram,
brought and threw them into the lap of Deo, paying a fraudulent penalty for his
violence, as though they had been parts of himself.

'The watchwords of this initiation, if set before you merely for amusement,
will, I know, stir your laughter, although you may not be willing to laugh
because of the exposures. "I ate out of the drum, and drank out of the cymbal, I
danced the κερνοπηορια, I slipped into the bridal-chamber." Are not these
watchwords an outrage? Are not the mysteries a farce?

'But what if I should add the rest of the story? Demeter has a child, and her
daughter grows up, and again this Zeus who begat her seduces his own daughter
Pherephatta, after her mother Deo, forgetting his former crime, and he
approaches her in the form of a serpent, it being thus proved who he was.

'Accordingly, in the Sabazian mysteries the sign for those who are initiated is
"The god gliding over the breast"; and this is a serpent drawn over the breast
of those who are initiated, a proof of the incontinence of Zeus. Pherephatta
also gives birth to a son in the form of a bull.

'At all events, a certain sham, poet says:

"Bull begets serpent, serpent begets bull.

Upon the mount the herdsman's secret goad." 50 calling, I suppose, the reed
which the Bacchanals brandish a herdsman's goad.

'Would you have me narrate to you also Pherephatta's gathering of flowers, and
her basket, and her seizure by Aidoneus, and the chasm opening in the earth, and
the swine of Eubuleus that were swallowed up with the two goddesses, on account
of which in the Thesmophoria they throw down swine, when they visit the caves.

'This fable the women in every city celebrate with festivals in d various ways,
the Thesmophoria, Scirophoria, Arretophoria, dramatizing the rape of Pherephatta
in many ways.

'As to the mysteries of Dionysus, they are perfectly inhuman: for when he was
yet a child, with the Curetes circling round him in a war-dance, and the Titans
had treacherously crept in, they beguiled him with childish toys, did these
Titans, and tore him in pieces while yet an infant, as the poet of this mystery,
Orpheus the Thracian, says: "Cone, humming top, and dolls that bend their limbs,
Fair golden apples from the guardian Nymphs. Of sweetest song, daughters of
Hesperus." 51

'Nor will it be useless to set forth for condemnation the useless symbols of
this mystery: dice, ball, hoop, apples, humming-top, mirror, and lock of wool.

'So then Athena, having stolen away the heart of Dionysus, was called Pallas
from the pulsation of the heart: and the Titans, who had torn him in pieces, put
a cauldron on a trivet, and threw in the limbs of Dionysus, and, having first
boiled them down,

"Then pierc'd with spits and held them o'er the fire." 52

'But afterwards Zeus suddenly appears----I suppose, if he was a god, he
perceived the savour of the roasting flesh, for your gods acknowledge that
savour to be their perquisite,----and with a thunderbolt he smites the Titans,
and delivers the limbs of Dionysus to his son Apollo to bury: and he did not
disobey Zeus, but bore the dead body, mangled as it was, to Parnassus and there
deposited it.

'If you wish to be initiated in the orgies of the Corybantes also, two of them
slew the third brother, and wrapped up the head of the corpse in a purple cloth,
and put a wreath upon it, and carried him on a brazen shield, and buried him
under the side of Mount Olympus.

'These are their mysteries, murders in short, and burials! And their priests,
whom those concerned call "Lords of the Mysteries," invent more wonders to add
to the tragedy, forbidding to set a whole root of parsley on the table, because
they think forsooth that parsley has sprung from the blood which streamed forth
from the Corybant; just as the women who celebrate the Thesmophoria guard
against eating the seeds of the pomegranate, for the drops which fell on the
ground from the blood of Dionysus they suppose to have grown into pomegranates.

'As they call the Corybantes Cabeiri, they also proclaim the festival as the
Cabeiria. For these very two fratricides, having carried off the chest in which
the member of Dionysus was deposited, brought it by sea to Tyrrhenia, as
purveyors of a noble cargo! And here they lived in exile, and imparted to the
Tyrrhenians their highly venerable doctrine of religion, the chest and its
contents, for them to worship; for which cause some not unreasonably will have
it that Dionysus is called Attis, as having been mutilated.

'And what wonder if Tyrrhenians, who were barbarians, are initiated in such
foul passions, when there is found among the Athenians, and in the rest of
Hellas----I blush even to say it----the shameful legend of Deo.

'For Deo, wandering in search of her daughter Kore in the neighbourhood of
Eleusis----this place is in Attica----grows weary, and sits down in sorrow upon
a well. This is forbidden to those who are admitted to the mysteries even to the
present day, lest the initiated should seem to be imitating the goddess in her
mourning.

'Now at that time Eleusis was inhabited by the Earth-born: their names were
Baubo, and Dysaules, and Triptolemus, also Eumolpus and Eubuleus. Triptolemus
was a herdsman, Eumolpus a shepherd, and Eubuleus a swineherd. And from these
last grew the flourishing family of the Eumolpidae, and that of the Heralds, the
Hierophants I suppose, at Athens.

'And then Baubo----for I shall not shrink from telling it----having received
Deo hospitably, offers her a draught. And when she refused to take it, and would
not drink----for she was full of sorrow----Baubo became much annoyed as being
forsooth disdained, and exposed herself to the goddess: and Deo, pleased at the
sight, at last reluctantly accepted the draught, because she was delighted at
what she saw.

'These are the secret mysteries of the Athenians! These are the things which
Orpheus records! But I will set before you the very words of Orpheus, that you
may have the master of mysteries himself as witness of their shamelessness: "She
spake, and quick her flowing robes withdrawn Showed all the secret beauty of her
form. The child lacchus, laughing, stretched his hand To touch her tender
breasts, and Baubo smil'd;

Then, too, the goddess smil'd with cheerful thought, And took the shining bowl
which held the draught." 53

'There is also the watchword of the Eleusinian mysteries: I fasted, I drank the
draught, I took from the chest, finished the work and put it back into the
basket, and from the basket into the chest.54 Noble indeed the sights, and
becoming to a goddess!

'Worthy rather are these mysteries of night, and of torch-light, and of the
great-hearted, or rather weak-minded, people of the Erechtheidae, and of the
other Greeks also, "men for whom there remain after death things that they
little look for,"

'To whom then does Heracleitus the Ephesian address this foreboding? "To
night-walkers, sorcerers, bacchanals male and female, to the initiated."55 These
he threatens with what follows death; to these he predicts the fire. For they
receive an unholy initiation in what men regard as mysteries.56

'Custom therefore, and vain opinion, and the mysteries of the serpent are a kind
of fraud devoutly observed by men who, with spurious piety, promote their
abominable initiations and profane orgiastic rites.

'What also are those mystic chests? For I must lay bare their holy things, and
tell out their forbidden secrets. Are they not sesame-cakes, and pyramids, and
balls, and flat cakes full of knobs, and lumps of salt? A serpent also, mystic
symbol of Dionysus Bassarus?

'And besides these are there not pomegranates, and shoots of fig-trees, and
reeds, and ivies, and round cakes also, and poppies?

'These are their holy things! And there are in addition the secret symbols of
Themis, wild marjoram, a lamp, a sword, a woman's comb, which is an euphemistic
and mystical name.

'O barefaced shamelessness! In times of old for modest men pleasure was veiled
in night, and night in silence: but now the night that is sacred to wantonness
is the talk of those who are to be initiated, and the fire exposes their lewd
passions by the light of torches.

'Quench thou the fire, O Hierophant! Blush for thy lights, O bearer of the
torch! That flame exposes thine lacchus. Suffer the night to conceal the
mysteries: let darkness pay respect to your dignified orgies. The fire is no
hypocrite : its duty is to expose and to punish.

'These are the atheists' mysteries. And atheists I rightly call them, since they
have not known Him who is truly God, but worship a child torn in pieces by
Titans, and a poor wailing woman; and things for very shame unmentionable they
shamelessly worship, and so are involved in a twofold atheism: the first, in
that they are ignorant of God, not acknowledging Him who is God indeed; and the
other and second delusion this, that they regard those which are not as though
they were, and call them gods who have no true being, or rather no being at all,
but have only received the name.' So far this author.

CHAPTER IV With good reason then do we avow that we have been freed from all
this, and rescued from the long and antiquated delusion as from some terrible
and most grievous disease. First, we have been delivered by the grace and
beneficence of Almighty God, and secondly by the ineffable power of our
Saviour's teaching in the Gospel, and thirdly by sound reasoning, because we
judged that it is an unholy and impious thing to honour with the adorable name
of God mortals who have long been lying among the dead, and have not even left a
memory of themselves as virtuous men, but have handed down examples of extreme
incontinence and wantonness, of cruelty also and insanity, for those who come
after them to follow. For must it not be the extreme of folly for lovers of
temperance to yield the first place to the base and licentious, and for the wise
and sensible to render august worship to those who have lost their senses, and
those who practise justice and benevolence to those who, through excess of
cruelty and inhumanity, are involved in the pollutions of infanticide and
parricide? And does it not surpass every excess of impiety to degrade the
adorable and all-holy name of God to parts of the human body, male and female,
which we may not speak of, and to the irrational nature of brute beasts; and to
honour as divine such foul and inhuman deeds as, even in the case of human
malefactors would, if proved, fall under the inexorable penalties of the laws?
But why need we spend time in proclaiming to every man, barbarian and Greek
alike, his deliverance from the evils described, and in bringing to light the
reasonableness of our revolt from gods falsely so called, when already the
greater number even of the most superstitious, having woke up as it were from a
deep slumber, and cleared the eye of the soul of its ancient film, became
conscious of the deep folly of the error of their fathers, and took their stand
upon reasoning, and withdrew from the old path, and chose the other way?

Some of these made a bold assault, and with broad derision poured contempt upon
the whole mythology of their own forefathers; while others, who shrank from the
dogma of atheism, neither stood upon their old ways, nor withdrew from them
altogether, but, with the purpose of glossing over and explaining their own
dogma, gave to the true histories of the gods who had been celebrated among them
the title of fables invented by poets, and said that physical theories were
concealed in them. And however much they fail to bring any proof whatever of the
truth of these theories, it will nevertheless be necessary for us to set forth
for examination their solemn doctrines, that thus we may prove the
reasonableness of that retreat from them which was provided for us solely by the
teaching of our Saviour in the Gospel. Come then, let us take up their argument
from the beginning and examine it.

CHAPTER V.

Now by the Greek theology I mean the popular and more mythical theology, which
also prevailed much earlier among the Phoenicians and Egyptians and the other
nations of whom mention was made in our preceding books; and the character of
this has been proved to be something of the kind which has been already made
manifest by the words quoted from the Greek historians themselves. And this
character we have with good reason set before our readers in the beginning of
this our Preparation for the Gospel for their judgement and decision, that both
we and those who as yet have no experience of this subject, may learn for
ourselves what we were long ago, and from what sort of forefathers we have
sprung, by how great evils we were previously fettered, and in how great a
stupor of impiety and ignorance of God our souls were buried, and then were
favoured with an uprising and deliverance from all these evils at once by the
sole teaching of the Gospel, provided for us in no other way than by the
manifestation of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who is God. For not in a mere part of
the earth, nor in a corner of the land of one nation, but throughout the whole
inhabited world, where the power of the most superstitious delusion especially
prevailed, He, like a sun of intelligent and rational souls, spread abroad the
beams of His own light: He translated us all, of every race of mankind,
barbarians and Greeks alike, as it were from a terrible darkness and most gloomy
and obscure night of superstitious error into the bright and shining day of the
true worship of God the King of all.

Certainly the statements that have been already quoted have plainly taught us, that those who in cities and villages have been excited about this delusion of many gods were all universally serving and worshipping images of the dead, and statues of men who have long since passed away. For the men of old, because of the extreme savageness of their life at that time made no account of God the Creator of all, nor paid any heed to the divine judgement which takes vengeance on wrong doing, but cast themselves headlong into every kind of profanity. For at that time there were no laws yet established for the guidance of life, no civilized government set in order among men, but they led a loose and wandering life like that of the beasts: and some of them, like irrational animals, cared for nothing beyond the filling of their belly, and among these the first kind of atheism found a home; but others, being in some small degree stirred by natural instincts, conceived that God, and God's power, was some good and salutary thing, and because they wished to find Him, they raised their souls aloft to heaven, and there stopping short in thought, and being astonished at the various beauties of the luminaries which gave and received light in heaven, declared that these were gods. But a third and different class cast themselves down upon earth, and seeing those who had been thought to excel their contemporaries in wisdom, or had become masters of the multitude by strength of body and power of government, such as giants or tyrants, or even sorcerers and quacks, who after some falling off from holier ways had devised their evil arts of sorcery, or others who had been the authors of some common benefit to human life,----to these, both while yet living and after death, they gave the title of gods. And from this cause the houses of their gods are mentioned as being tombs of the dead, as Clement relates in his Exhortation to the Greeks, bringing forward Greeks themselves as witnesses of his statement. Listen then again, if it please you, to what he writes in the following style:57

CHAPTER VI

[CLEMENT] 'Naturally therefore superstition, having somewhere found a beginning, has
become a fountain of senseless wickedness; and afterwards, as it was not
checked, but gained increase and rushed on in full flood, it has created a
multitude of daemons, sacrificing hecatombs, celebrating public festivals,
setting up statues, and building temples, which indeed----for I will not keep
silence even on this, but will convict them----were called euphemistically
temples, but were in reality tombs, that is to say, tombs which had got the name
of temples. But now, I pray you, forget at length your superstition, and be
ashamed to worship tombs.

'In the temple of Athena at Larissa in the Acropolis is the tomb of Acrisius,
and at Athens in the Acropolis the tomb of Cecrops, as Antiochus says in the
ninth book of his Histories. And what of Erichthonius? Is he not buried in the
temple of Athena Folias? And Ismarus the son of Eumolpus and Daeira, is he not
buried in the precincts of the Eleusinium, which lies under the Acropolis? And
the daughters of Celeus, are they not buried at Eleusis?

'Why should I tell you of the women who came from the Hyperboreans? There are
two called Hyperoche and Laodice, who are buried in the precinct of Artemis at
Delos, which is in the temple of the Delian Apollo.

'Leander says that Cleomachus is buried at Miletus in the Didyrnaeum. Here, if
we follow Zeno of Myndus, it would not be right to pass over the monument of
Leucophryne, who is buried in the temple of Artemis in Magnesia, nor yet the
altar of Apollo in Telmessus, which also, the story says, is the monument of
Telmesseus the soothsayer.

'Ptolemy too, the son of Agesarchus, in his first book concerning Philopator
says that Cinyras and the descendants of Cinyras are buried in Paphos in the
temple of Aphrodite.

'Were I, however, to go over all the tombs which are worshipped by you, "all
time would not suffice for me to tell"; [Homer, Od. xx. 351] while you, if no
shame for these audacities steals over you, may wander round with your faith in
the dead, utterly dead yourselves:

"Ah! wretched men, what evil doom is this?" 58 A little further on he says: 59

'Another new god the Roman Emperor has deified with great solemnity in Egypt,
and almost in Greece; his favourite Antinous, who was extremely beautiful, was
deified by him, as Ganymede was by Zeus.

'For lust, when free from fear, is not easily restrained: and men now celebrate
the sacred nights of Antinous, the shame of which was known to the lover who
shared his vigils.'

He also adds:

'And now the favourite's tomb is the temple and city of Antinous: for just as temples are held in reverence, so, I suppose, are tombs, pyramids, mausoleums, and labyrinths----other temples these of the dead, as those before mentioned were tombs of the gods.' And again, a little further on: 60

'Come then, let us also briefly make the round of your games, and put an end to
these great sepulchral festivals, the Isthmian, Nemean, and Pythian, and besides
these the Olympian. At Pytho the Pythian dragon is worshipped, and the festival
of the serpent is proclaimed as the Pythia. At the Isthmus the sea cast up a
miserable carcass, and the Isthmian games are a lamentation for Melicertes: at
Nemea another child Archemorus is buried, and the boy's funeral games are called
Nemea. Pisa is the tomb in your midst, O Panhellenes, of a Phrygian charioteer,
and the Zeus of Phidias claims as his own the Olympian games, which are the
funeral libations of Pelops.' So speaks our author.

Now take thou up our argument again from the beginning, and observe the downfall
of superstitious error. By nature and by our self-taught ideas, or rather ideas
taught by God, there is a something noble and salutary that indicates the name
and being of God: for all men had taken this for granted in their common
reasonings, since the Creator of all things had implanted this conviction by
innate ideas in every rational and intelligent soul.

They had not, however, chosen the course which accords with reason. For only
some one or two perchance, or at most a very few others, whose memory is
recorded in the oracles of the Hebrews, could not adapt their idea of God to any
of the things that are seen, but with unperverted reasonings led up their
thoughts from visible things to the Creator of the whole world and the great
Maker of the universe; and with purified eyes of the understanding perceived
that He alone is God, the Saviour of all, and sole giver of good gifts. But the
rest wandered about in all kinds of mental blindness, and were carried into an
abyss of ungodliness, so that like wild beasts they limited the beautiful, and
useful, and good to the pleasure of the eyes and the flesh. And in this way, as
I have said before, the discoverers of the things supposed to be good and useful
to the body, or certain governors, or tyrants, or even sorcerers and poisoners,
though of mortal nature and subjected to the misfortunes of humanity, were
called saviours and gods as givers of good things, and men transferred, the
august conception which was implanted in them by nature to those whom they
supposed to be benefactors. And accordingly so great a mental paralysis
possessed them, that they took no account of the iniquities of those whom they
regarded as gods, nor blushed at the shameful tales reported of them, but in all
these things admired the men because of the benefits provided by them, or
because of the governments and tyrannies which were then first established. For
example, as I said before, since at that time no laws were yet administered, nor
punishment suspended over evil deeds, they recorded as rightful and brave deeds,
adulteries and sodomy, and incestuous and unlawful marriages, and bloodshed and
parricides, and murders of children and brethren, and moreover, wars and
seditions actually carried on by their own champions, whom they both accounted
and called gods, and bequeathed the remembrance of them as worshipful and brave
to later generations.

Such was the ancient theology which was transformed by certain moderns of
yesterday's growth, who boasted of having a more reasonable philosophy, and
introduced what they called the more physical view of the history of the gods,
by devising more respectable and ingenious explanations for the legends: yet
they neither escaped altogether the fault of their forefathers' impiety, nor, on
the other hand, could endure the self-manifested wickedness of their so-called
gods.

So, in their eagerness to palliate the fault of their fathers, they changed the
legends into physical narratives and theories, and boasted, as the more mystical
view, that the things which give nourishment and increase to the nature of the
body are those which the legends set forth.

Going on from this point, these men also gave the title of gods to the elements
of the world, not just merely to sun and moon and stars, but also to earth and
water, and air and fire, and their combinations and resultants, and moreover to
the seasonable fruits of the earth, and all other produce of food both dry and
liquid: and these very things, regarded as causes of the life of the body, they
called Demeter, and Kore, and Dionysus, and other like names, and, by making
gods of them, introduced a forced and untrue embellishment of their legends. But
it was in a later age that these men, as if ashamed of the theologies of their
forefathers, added respectable explanations, which each invented of himself, to
the legends concerning their gods; for no one dared to disturb the customs of
their ancestors, but paid great honour to antiquity, and to the familiar
training which had grown with them from their boyhood. Their elders, however,
besides their deifications of men, gave equal rank to their consecrations of
brute animals, because of the benefit derived from them also for the causes
previously assigned; and they devoted equal religious worship to the brutes, and
with libations, sacrifices, mystic rites, and hymns, and songs, exalted the
honours paid to them, in the same manner as to the men who had been deified. And
so they marched on to such a pitch of evil, that, through excess of unbridled
lust, they consecrated with divine honours those parts of the body that lead to
impurity, and the unrestrained passions of mankind, while their so-called
theologians declared that in these things there is no need at all to use solemn
phrases. We must, then, hold it to have been proved on the highest testimony,
that the oldest generations knew nothing more at all than the history, but
adhered to the legends only. Since, however, we have once begun to glance at the
august and recondite doctrines of the noble philosophers, let us go on and
examine these also more fully, that we may not seem to be ignorant of their
wonderful physical theories. But before we make our exposition of these
doctrines, we must first indicate the mutual contradiction even here of these
admirable philosophers themselves. For some of them make random statements, and
set forth their opinions according to what comes into the mind of each
individually: for they do not agree one with another even in their physical
theories. While others more candidly sweep away the whole system, and banish
from their own republic not only the indecent stories about the gods, but also
the interpretations given of them; though sometimes they speak softly of the
legends through fear of the punishment threatened by the laws.

Listen then to the Greeks themselves speaking by the mouth of the one noblest of
them all, now banishing and now again adopting the legends. Thus their admirable
Plato, when he lays bare his own preference, with great boldness forbids
altogether the thinking or saying such things concerning the gods, as had been
said by them of old, whether they contained anything latent indicated in
allegorical meanings, or were spoken without any allegorical meaning at all. But
at other times he speaks softly of the laws, and says that we ought to believe
the legends about the gods, though there is nothing indicated by them in
allegorical meanings. But when at last he has dissociated his own theology from
the ancient legends, and has stated his physical theories about the heaven, and
sun, and moon, and stars, and moreover about the whole cosmos, and the parts of
it severally, he again specially and separately goes through the ancient
genealogical accounts of the gods just as follows word for word in the Timaeus.

CHAPTER VII.

[PLATO] 'To tell of the other divinities and to learn their origin is beyond our
power; but we must give credence to those who have spoken in former times, who
being, as they said, the offspring of gods had, I suppose, a clear knowledge of
their own ancestors. It is impossible therefore to disbelieve children of the
gods, even though they speak without certain or probable proofs; but as they
assert that they are reporting family histories, we must, in obedience to the
law, believe them.

'On their authority then let the origin of these gods be admitted and stated by
us as follows. The children of Earth and Heaven were Oceanus and Tethys; and
their children Phorcys, and Kronos, and Rhea, and the rest of them: and from
Kronos and Rhea sprang Zeus and Hera, and all whom we know as their reputed
brethren, and still others who were their offspring.' 61

These things, says Plato, 'we must in obedience to the law believe,' even
though, he admits, they are stated 'without certain or probable proofs.' And we
must observe how he indicates that the names and genealogies of the so-called
gods have no hidden meaning to be explained by physical theories. But again, in
another place the same author, laying open his own deliberate opinion, has used
these words:62

'In the first place, said I, the author of that greatest lie about the greatest
gods told a bad lie, how Uranus did the deeds which Hesiod says he did, and how
Kronos took revenge upon him.

'Again, even if the doings of Kronos and his treatment by his son were true, I
should not have thought that they ought to be thus lightly told before young and
thoughtless persons, but that they should be buried in silence, as the best
thing; or if there were any necessity to tell them, then as few as possible
should hear them in secret, after sacrificing no mere pig, but some great and
scarce victim, so that very few might have a chance of hearing them.

'Why yes, said he, these stories certainly are mischievous.

'Aye, and they must not be told in our city, Adeimantus; nor must a young hearer
be told that he would be doing nothing remarkable in committing the worst
injuries nor in inflicting every kind of punishment upon his father for injuring
him, but would be doing just what the first and greatest of the gods did.

'Nor do I myself think that such stories are fit to be told.

'Nor yet, said I, about gods going to war with gods and plotting and fighting
(untrue as such things are) ought anything at all to be said, if at least the
future guardians of our city are to regard it as very disgraceful to be lightly
quarrelling one with another. Much less must we invent fables about wars of the
giants, and work them in embroidery, with numberless other quarrels of all kinds
of gods and heroes against their own kith and kin. But if there were any chance
of our persuading them, that no citizen was ever at enmity with a fellow
citizen, and that such a thing was unholy, rather should tales of this kind be
told to children from the first by old men and old women and by those of mature
age, and the poets should be compelled to make their tales like these.

'The chaining, too, of Hera by her son, and the hurling of Hephaestus out of
heaven by his father, when he was going to defend his mother from a beating, and
all the battles of the gods that Homer has invented, must not be admitted into
the city, whether they are composed with or without allegorical meanings.' By
these words, then, the philosopher clearly teaches that both the legends of the
ancients concerning the gods, and the physical explanations of these legends
supposed to be expressed in allegories are to be rejected; so that it can no
longer be denied that there is good reason for our Saviour's teaching in the
Gospel, which bids us to abandon these legends, seeing that they have been
rejected even by their own friends.

Hence it comes that I admire the ancient Romans for the manner in which, when
they perceived that all the physiological theories of the Greeks concerning the
gods were absurd and unprofitable, or rather were forced and inconsistent, they
excluded them, legends and all, from their own theology. This too you may learn
from the Roman Archaeology of Dionysius of Halicarnassus: for he, in his second
book, when relating the history of Romulus, the first founder of the city of
Rome, while recounting his other good deeds, writes on this point especially in
the following manner: 63

CHAPTER VIII

[DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS] 'But he knew that good laws and zeal in honourable
pursuits render a state religious and temperate, and observant of justice, and
brave in war: and for these things he took much forethought, beginning with the
laws concerning acts of worship paid to gods and daemons.

'Temples therefore, and precincts, and altars, and the erection of statues, and
their forms and emblems and powers, and gifts whereby they had conferred benefit
on our race, and festivals of all such kinds as ought to be kept in honour of
each god or daemon, and sacrifices wherewith they delight to be honoured by men,
and sacred truces also and national festivals, and seasons of rest from labour,
and all such matters he established in a manner similar to the best of the
customs among the Greeks. But the traditional fables concerning them, in which
there are any slanders or accusations against them, he considered to be wicked
and unprofitable and unseemly, and unworthy not to say of gods but even of good
men, and he excluded them all, and trained men both to speak and think all that
was excellent concerning the gods, imputing to them no practice unworthy of
their blessed nature.

'For among the Romans there is neither any story of Uranus being mutilated by
his own children, nor of Kronos devouring his own offspring through fear of
their attack, nor of Zeus overthrowing the dynasty of Kronos, and shutting up
his own father in the prison of Tartarus; nor yet of wars, and wounds, and
bonds, and servitudes of gods among men.

'Nor is any black-robed or mournful festival held among them, with women's
wailings and lamentations over gods that vanished from sight, such as are
celebrated among the Greeks in reference to the rape of Persephone, and the
sufferings of Dionysus, and all other things of a like kind.

'Nor would any one see among them, even though their customs are now corrupted,
any wild enthusiasms, nor Corybantic frenzies, nor Bacchanalian revels and
secret initiations, no all-night vigils of men and women together in the temples
of the gods, nor any other of the monstrosities akin to these, but all things
concerning the gods practised and spoken of with reverence, such as is seen
neither among Greeks nor barbarians.

'And what I have admired most of all, though countless races have come to settle
in the city, who were strictly bound to worship their ancestral gods with the
rites of their own country, the city has never by public consent sought to
imitate any of the foreign customs, a propensity which has occurred to many
states ere now: but even if any sacred rites have been introduced in accordance
with oracles, the city adapted them to its own institutions, and cast out all
mythical quackery, as for example the rites of the Idaean goddess.

'For in her honour the Consuls celebrate sacrifices and games every year
according to the laws of the Romans: and her priests are a Phrygian man and
Phrygian woman, and these go about the city beggmg for the goddess, as their
custom is, with images fastened round their breasts, and rattling cymbals and
accompanied by their followers playing on flutes the music of the Mother.

'But of the home-born Romans none proceeds through the city either so begging,
or accompanied by flutes and dressed in an embroidered robe, nor celebrates the
goddess with Phrygian orgies by any law or decree of the Senate.

'So cautious is the attitude of the state towards foreign customs concerning the
gods, shunning as ill-omened all vain display in which there is anything
unbecoming.

'But let no one suppose me to be ignorant that some of the Grecian legends are
useful to mankind; some exhibiting the works of nature allegorically, and others
composed for the sake of consoling human misfortunes, and others removing
troubles and terrors of the soul and overthrowing unsound opinions, and others
invented for the sake of some other utility.

'But although I know these things as well as anybody, I am nevertheless
cautiously disposed towards them, and I prefer to accept the theology of the
Romans, considering that the benefits derived from the Hellenic legends are
small, and not capable of benefiting many, but only those who have searched out
the purposes for which they are made. And those who have taken part in this
branch of philosophy are rare; while the great mass unversed in philosophy loves
to take the tales concerning the gods in the worse senses, and is affected in
one of two ways; either it despises the gods as tossed about in great misery, or
else it abstains from none of the most disgraceful and lawless doings, seeing
that they are attributed to the gods.

'On these subjects, however, let inquiry be left to those who study merely the
theoretical part of philosophy: but of the polity established by Romulus I
thought these points worth recording.'

Such, we see were the opinions entertained by the best philosophers, and by
the ancient and most eminent men of the Roman empire concerning the theology of
the Greeks----opinions which give no admission to physical theories in their
legends concerning the gods, nor to their gorgeous and sophistical impostures.

Since, however, we have once entered upon their refutation, let us go on and
consider their interpretations and theories, to see what, after all, they carry
with them that is venerable and worthy of the gods; and let us not say anything
as of ourselves, but make use, on all points, of their own words, so that we may
again learn their views from themselves.

[Footnotes moved to the end and numbered] 1. 45 a 1 Diodorus Siculus, I. c. 10

2. b 4 c. 13 3. d 5 Diod. I. c. 15 4. 46 a 4 Diod. I. 16 5. b 1 Diod. I. 17 6. b
4 Diod. I 18 7. c 7 Diod. I, 19 8. c 8 Diod. I. 20 9. d 8 Diod. I. 21 10. 47 b 1
Diod. I. 21 11. b 5 Diod. I. 22 12. d 3 Diod. I. 23 13. 48 b 6 Diod. I. 24 14. c
3 Diod. I. 25 15. d 7 Diod. I. 27 16. 49 a 6 Diod. I. 86 17. b 9 Diod. I. 87 18.
d 11 Diod. I. 88 19. 50 c 5 Diod. I. 89 20. 50 d 10 Diod. I. 83 21. 51 a 4 Diod.
I. 84 22. c 1 Diod. I. 85 23. 52 d 1 Diod. IV. 2 24. 53 b 3 Diod. IV. 3 25. b 9
Diod. IV. 4 26. d 12 Diod. IV. 5 27. 54 a 7 Diod. IV. 6 28. d 1 Diod. IV. 7 29.
54 d 7 Diod. IV. 9 30. 55 b 3 Diod. IV. 10 31. b 8 Diod. IV. 11 32. c 6 Diod.
IV. 12 33. c 8 Diod. IV. 14 34. d 3 Diod. IV. 31 35. a 5 Diod. IV. 36 36. 56 a 1
Diod. IV. 33 37. a 4 Diod. IV. 34 38. 56 c 5 Diod. IV. 37 39. c 9 Diod. IV. 29
40. d 6 Diod. IV. 37, 38 41. 57 a 4 Diod. IV. 71 42. c 1 Diod. III. 57 43. 58 a
1 Diod. III. 58 44. 58 c 6 Diod. III. 60 45. d 6 Diod. III. 61 46. 59 c 3-60 d
10 Diod. vi, Fragment i, preserved by Eusebius only 47. 60 d 12 Diod. vi,
Fragment i continued 48. 61 c 4 Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the
Heathen, c. ii. p. 10 P.

49. Hesiod, Theogonia, 200 50. Cf. Arnobius, Against the Heathen, v. 21 51.
Orphic Fragm. 196 (Hermann xvii) 52. Homer, Iliad, ii. 426 53. 68 c 6 Orphic
Fragm. 215 ; see Lobeck, Aglaophamus, vol. ii. p. 819 54. d 11 Bywater, Heracl.
Rell. cxxii; cf. Clem. Al. Strom, iv. p. 630 P.

55. d 14 Heracl. Rell, cxxiv 56. d 16 ibid, cxxv 57. 71 a 1 Clem. Alex.
Exhortation, c. iii. p. 39 P.

58. 72 a 5 Homer, Od. xx. 351 59. a 7 Clem. Al. Exhortation, c. iv. p. 43 P.

60. b 13 ibid. c. ii. p. 29 P.

61. Plato, Timaeus, p. 40 62. 76 c 2 Plato, Republic, ii. 377 E 63. 78 a 1
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Archaeology, ii. 18 This text was transcribed
by Peter Kirby, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy
freely.

Greek text is rendered using HTML entities.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 36: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 5
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 5

BOOK V

CONTENTS

I. Further proof that the prophetic and oracular shrines among the heathen
belonged to evil daemons, and how they have all been destroyed and have failed
since our Saviour's teaching in the Gospel p 178 b II. The manner of the
daemoniacal operation p 181 a III. That the superstition of the Greeks
concerning the gods consisted of many divisions and various opinions p 182 e IV.
That the prophetic and oracular shrines among the heathen belonged to evil
daemons p 184 a V. That the mythical narratives related concerning gods contain
covert histories of daemons p 187 a VI. That their so-called good daemons are
agents of death p 190 a VII. That they minister also to amorous pleasures; and
the kind of pleasures in which they severally delight p 191 b VIII. That they
are drawn down by incantations, and compelled against their will to serve the
designs of men p 193 a IX. That they cannot withdraw of their own accord p 195 b
X. The kind of methods by which their wonderful gods are subjected to the
impostors p 197 d XI. That the daemons whom men have supposed to be gods taught
them their own curious arts p 199 d XII. That they themselves taught men how to
array their images for magical rites p 200 b XIII. That they showed the proper
forms of their own statues p 201 a XIV. That they encourage the practice of
magic p 202 a XV. That they love the lifeless blocks p 203 c XVI. Of the oracles
that have failed p 304 d XVII. That the daemons whom they worship as gods
actually die p 205 d XVIII. Of the oracles mentioned among the Greeks of old
times p 208 b

XIX. Apollo charged with commanding twice seven boys and maidens to be sent out
by the Athenians to the Cretans to be sacrificed p 209 c XX. How Apollo has been
the cause of death to many by the ambiguity of his responses p 210 b XXI. How
again by an ambiguous response he caused Croesus to lose his own kingdom p 212 c
XXII. How they used to mislead inquirers by deluding them through the responses
p 213 d XXIII. That by their darkness and obscurity they concealed their own
ignorance p 214 d

XXIV. That, being unable to give any help in the misfortunes of war, they used
to quibble and deceive their suppliants by ambiguous responses p 216 b XXV. The
answers to the Lacedaemonians p 219 a XXVI. The like to the people of Cnidos p
220 b XXVII. How they incited those who consulted them to war against each other
p 221 b XXVIII. That the treatment of Lycurgus the law-giver of the
Lacedaemonians was not worthy of a god p 222 d XXIX. That they failed to give
answers about matters of importance p 224 c XXX. That, in advising men what to
do, they were guided by ordinary human reasonings p 225 b XXXI. That their
recommendations were for the most part unphilosophical p 225 c XXXII. That they
used to take part with the wrongdoers p 226 d

XXXIII. That in accordance with the opinions of the multitude they injudiciously
belauded the poets, who had displayed nothing worthy of the philosophical life p
227 a XXXIV. That they exhorted men to glorify pugilists and athletes with
honours equal to those of the gods p 230 a XXXV. That they used to flatter
tyrants p 233 a XXXVI. That they bade men worship lifeless matter p 233 d

CHAPTER I

THOUGH the statements already set forth were sufficient to prove that those who
have been honoured among the heathen as gods in every city and country district
were not gods nor yet good daemons, but the very contrary, yet I am not sorry
still further to strengthen the same argument even superabundantly by more
numerous and ample proofs, since the demonstration thereof clearly shows the
deliverance from the evils of former times which was provided for all men by our
Saviour's teaching in the Gospel Hear therefore how Greeks themselves confess
that their oracles have failed, and never so failed from the beginning until
after the times when the doctrine of salvation in the Gospel caused the
knowledge of the one God, the Sovereign and Creator of the universe, to dawn
like light upon all mankind.

We shall show then almost immediately that very soon after His manifestation
there came stories of the deaths of daemons, and that the wonderful oracles so
celebrated of old have ceased. But already it has been proved above that, until
after the teaching of the Gospel, the human sacrifices which were formerly so
cruelly and ruthlessly perpetrated among all the heathen have never admitted any
cessation of evils: and on the present occasion it is a good thing to add to
this that not only the superstitious worship of daemons but also the multitude
of ruling powers among the heathen became from that time extinct. For almost in
every city and village you might in old times see kings, and tyrants, and local
governors, and lords, and ethnarchies and multitudes of rulers, by reason of
which they were continually rushing into wars against one another, and ever
perpetually at work in raiding country districts, and besieging cities, and
making slaves and captives of their neighbours, being wildly driven by their
local daemons into mutual wars. Which being so, I leave it to you to consider
for yourself in what kind of confusion of mutual evils and misfortunes the whole
of life was entangled.

Since then it was only after the time of our Saviour's abode among men that
these troubles together with the delusion of polytheism were removed all at once
out of the way, must we not wonder exceedingly at the great mystery of the
exhibition of true salvation in the Gospel? For thereby all at once in the whole
world inhabited by man houses of prayer and temples were set up and consecrated,
in cities and villages and in the deserts of barbarous nations, to the sovereign
Ruler and Creator of all things and the only God; and books and lectures, and
all kinds of learning, and instructions containing exhortations concerning the
highest virtue and the mode of life accordant with true godliness, have been
delivered in the hearing of men and women and children alike, while all the
oracles and divinations of daemons are dead.

Nor, since the divine power of our Saviour in the Gospel shone forth like light
upon all men, is any man now so mad as to dare to propitiate the murderous and
bloodthirsty and misanthropic and inhuman daemons by the murder of his
best-beloved, and by the slaughter of men in sacrifices, such as the sages and
kings of old, being verily possessed by daemons, loved to practise. But with
regard to the fact that the evil daemons no longer have any power to prevail
since our Saviour's advent among men, the very same author who is the advocate
of the daemons in our time, in his compilation against us, bears witness by
speaking in the following manner:

[PORPHYRY] 'And now they wonder that for so many years the plague has attacked the city, Asclepius and the other gods being no longer resident among us. For since Jesus began to be honoured, no one ever heard of any public assistance from the gods.' 1 This is Porphyry's statement in his very words. If then, according to this confession, 'since Jesus began to be honoured no one ever heard of any public assistance from the gods, because neither Asclepius nor the other gods were any longer resident,' what ground is there henceforth for the opinion that they are gods and heroes? For why do not rather the gods and Asclepius prevail over the power of Jesus? If indeed, as they would say, He is a mortal man----perhaps they would even say that He is a deceiver----while they are gods and saviours, why then have they all fled in a body, Asclepius and all, having turned their backs to this mortal, and given over all humanity forthwith into the power of Him who, as they would say, is no longer living? But He even after death, ever continues to be honoured every day among all nations, plainly showing the certainty and divinity of the life after death to those who are able to discern it.

Moreover though He is one, and as might be supposed alone, He drives away the
multitude of the gods throughout the whole world, and bringing their honours to
naught, so prevails that they are gods no longer, nor exercise any power, nor
anywhere show themselves, nor reside as they were wont in the cities, because
they were no gods but evil daemons; while only His honours, and those of the God
of the universe who sent Him down, increase every day, and advance to greater
dignity over all humanity.

Whereas on the contrary those gods, if indeed there were any who really cared
for things on earth, ought to have utterly put aside His deception, if any there
were, and themselves to bestow their own remedies and benefits abundantly on
all. But in fact they have often attempted this by means of those at various
times in power who have made most violent war upon the teaching of our Saviour.
Nevertheless, they found the object of their attempt impracticable, as the
divine power of our Saviour always more than conquered them all, and overthrew
all the insurrections of the evil daemons against His teaching, and drove the
daemons themselves away; for evil daemons verily they were, though falsely
supposed to be gods or even good daemons.

CHAPTER II

THESE then, being certain daemons who dwell about the earth and underground, and
haunt the heavy and cloudy atmosphere over the earth, and have been condemned,
for causes which we shall afterwards allege, to inhabit this dark and earthly
abode, love to dwell in graves and monuments of the dead and in all loathsome
and impure matter, and delight in bloodshed and gore and the bodies of animals
of all kinds, and in the exhalation from the fumes of incense and of vapours
rising out of the earth. These and their rulers, who are certain powers of the
air, or of the nether world, having observed that the human race was grovelling
low about the deification of dead men, and spending its labour very zealously
upon sacrifices and savours which were to them most grateful, were ready at hand
as supporters and helpers of this delusion; and gloating over the miseries of
mankind, they easily deceived silly souls by certain movements of the carved
images, which had been consecrated by them of old in honour of the departed, and
by the illusions produced by oracles, and by the cures of bodies, which these
same daemons were secretly ravaging by their own operation, and then again
releasing the men and letting them go free from suffering.

Hereby they the more drove the superstitious headlong into supposing sometimes
that they were heavenly powers and certain real gods, and at other times that
they were the souls of the deified heroes. From this cause the belief in the
polytheistic error began now to be regarded by the multitude as something
greater and more venerable, as their thought passed from what was visible to the
invisible nature of those who were hidden in the statues, and so confirmed the
delusion more strongly.

Thus then at length the terrestrial daemons, and 'the world-rulers' that haunt
the air, and the 'spiritual hosts of wickedness,' 2 and the leader of them all
in malice, were regarded among all men as the greatest of gods; the memory also
of those long dead came to be thought worthy of greater worship. For the shapes
of the consecrated images in the various cities were thought to wear the
semblance of dead men's bodies, but of their souls and their divine and
incorporeal powers the evil daemons made counterfeit presentations by abundance
of fictitious miracles; until at length their consecrated ministers themselves
used continually to exaggerate the folly of the illusion, and prepare most of
their contrivances by evil arts of jugglery, while the evil daemons again took
the lead themselves in teaching these tricks to their ministers. These daemons
at all events were the authors of the imposture which was the beginning of the
mischief to all human life, as was in fact proved in the preceding book.

CHAPTER III

SINCE, therefore, these wicked and earthly daemons, as well as the aerial and
infernal spirits, whom the divine oracles call 'world-rulers' and 'spiritual
hosts of wickedness, and principalities, and powers,' 3 at one time played the
part of good daemons, and at another assumed the semblance of heavenly deities,
and again at other times metamorphosed themselves into heroes, and in some cases
by their deeds let the evidence of their wickedness directly appear, the
delusion naturally went on increasing much among mankind. For some admitted that
they were gods, and others that they were heroes and daemons but not gods: and
while entitling some of the daemons good, but calling others bad, they yet
affirmed that it was necessary to propitiate the bad also, on account of the
damage they could inflict: so that their whole manufacture of deities fell into
several classes. The first kind is that which consists of the luminaries which
are seen in the sky, and these they say were the first to be called gods (θεούς)
because of their running (θέειν), and because they are the cause of our
beholding (θεωρεῖν) things visible. The second class is that which has been
advanced to great honour because of the benefits said to be conferred by them on
our common life: and this kind they themselves acknowledge to have been begotten
of men, bringing forward as examples the so-called heroes, Heracles, and the
Dioscuri, and Dionysus, and the corresponding deities among the barbarians. From
this class, after separating and putting aside the more disgraceful acts
recorded of them, they assumed a third kind of deification, and called it
mythical. Of this kind, indeed, they became ashamed, although it was real and
most ancient; so they have changed it into a better agreement, as they say, with
natural laws, by allegories of a more figurative nature, according to certain
theories which they devised.

Yet even at this stage of deception they were not satisfied to stop: for after
having degraded the venerable and adorable name of God to the level of their own
passions, they further invented a fourth manner of deification, not worthy even
of refutation, because it manifestly carries with it its own shame.

Then by giving to their own foul and unbridled lusts the name of gods, an Eros,
and Aphrodite, and Desire, and by calling speech Hermes, and reasoning Athena,
they have adopted these also in their own theology, and thus remodelled human
actions into the fifth kind of deities. For they made images to represent the
operations of war and of art, and assigned them to certain gods, the operations
of war to Ares and Athena, and those of art to Hephaestus and certain others. In
addition to all these they brought in a sixth and seventh kind, consisting of
daemons, a truly versatile and multiform class, pretending at one time to be
gods, and at another to be souls of the dead; nor did they give us any aid to
the cultivation of virtue in the soul, but always made a mock of every person
who feared the gods, carrying him down into the depths by their delusive error.

Even this class, though it was wicked throughout, they have divided into two,
the mischievous and the beneficent, and given them the titles of good and bad.

These things being so, I think it is necessary for us to put aside the matters
that do not even need refutation, and to consider the sequel of our argument
concerning daemoniacal operation, of which we took a partial and preliminary
view in the preceding book, and will now complete what remains.

Come then, let us now at last proceed to the actual proofs. And I will place
first those which are drawn from the book which Plutarch has written On the
Cessation of Oracles: where, on the point that the prophetic and oracular
shrines among the heathen are the abodes of evil daemons, he writes in the
following manner: 4

CHAPTER IV

[PLUTARCH] 'Now though they are right who say that Plato, by his discovery of the element which underlies the qualities generated (which element they call matter), released the philosophers from many great difficulties: yet to me it seems that those men solved more and greater difficulties, who set the race of daemons midway between gods and men, and discovered that it, in a manner, brings together and unites our society with them; whether this doctrine comes from the Magi and Zoroaster, or is Thracian and derived from Orpheus, or Egyptian, or Phrygian, as we conjecture from seeing that with the initiations in both regions there are mingled many symbols of mortality and mourning in the orgiastic performance of their sacred rites. Among the Greeks Homer is seen to make use of both the names indifferently, and occasionally to call the gods daemons. But Hesiod is the first who plainly and definitely set forth four races of rational beings----gods, then daemons, then heroes, and, last of all, men: he seems, however, to make a change from this order, so that the men of the golden age are set. apart as a numerous class of good daemons, and the demi-gods as heroes.' Then he says next:

'But upon these matters it is not necessary for us to dispute with Demetrius:
for whether the time be more or be less, whether it be fixed or indefinite, in
which the soul of a daemon and the life of a hero undergo change, it will none
the less be proved, in the judgement of whomsoever he chooses, by the testimony
of wise men of old, that there are certain natures on the confines, as it were,
between gods and men, susceptible of mortal influences and involuntary changes,
whom it is right for us, according to the custom of our fathers, to regard and
address as "daemons," and to hold in reverence.' To this, after other matters,
he adds:

'It seems to me to be no unreasonable postulate that those who preside over the
oracles are not gods, who ought rightly to be kept clear from matters pertaining
to earth, but daemons in the service of gods. But to take as it were a handful
out of the verses of Empedocles, and charge these daemons with sins, and
infatuations, and heaven-sent wanderings, and to imagine them dying deaths like
men, I consider too bold and barbaric.' 5 Again he adds to what has been quoted
the following:

'For in daemons also, as in men, there are degrees of virtue; some having but a
feeble and obscure remnant, a sort of residue, of the part subject to passion
and destitute of reason, while in others this part is large and hard to be
extinguished; and traces and symbols of this are in many places preserved by
sacrifices and initiations and mythologies, and retained in scattered fragments.
Now with respect to the Mysteries, in which we might obtain the, chief
indications and elucidations of the truth concerning daemons, 'I must keep a
religious silence,' as Herodotus says: but as to festivals and sacrifices, as
well as days of ill omen mourning, on which the eating of raw flesh and the
rending of victims, and fasting and beating of the breast are practised, and
again in many places obscene language at the temples, "and other frantic
excitements with tumult and tossing of the head," these, I should say, are
performed not in honour of any god, but as propitiatory offerings for the sake
of averting evil daemons. And it is neither credible that gods demanded or
accepted the human sacrifices offered of old, nor, without cause, would kings
and generals have submitted to them by giving up their sons and devoting and
sacrificing them; but they were trying to avert and to satisfy the anger and
sullenness of harsh and stubborn powers of vengeance, or the furious lusts of
some, who were neither able nor willing to have intercourse of bodies with
bodies. But just as Heracles besieged Oechalia for the sake of a maiden, so
oftentimes strong and violent daemons, demanding a human soul that is enveloped
in a body, . . . bring pestilences upon cities and barrenness of the soil, and
stir up wars and seditions, until they succeed in obtaining the object of their
desire.' 6

Hereby the philosopher before mentioned clearly proved that the sacrifices
described above were offered in honour of evil daemons in all the cities. Or
even if among these there were, as they say, some who were by nature good, or
even gods, what need was there to offer worship to the bad, when they ought to
have been driven away by the good? For if indeed they had some good champions,
surely it was right to have confidence in these without caring at all for the
worse kind, and to turn away the adverse powers by modest words and prayers, not
by obscene language. But when they did nothing of this kind, but tried to make
supplication to the evil daemons by a foul and licentious life and unseemly
words, and by feeding on raw flesh, and rending victims asunder, and by human
sacrifices, how was it even possible that doing such deeds, and pursuing
practices pleasing to the wicked, they should be received as friends by the
Supreme God, or by the divine Powers subject to Him, or by any good beings at
all? But in fact it is. manifest to all that he who practises the things that
are dear to the wicked can never be a friend of the good. So then it was not to
gods, nor yet to good daemons, but only to the wicked, that those of whom I have
spoken paid worship. And this argument is still further confirmed by Plutarch,
in the passage where he says that the mythical narratives told as concerning
gods are certain tales about daemons, and the deeds of Giants and Titans
celebrated in song among the Greeks are also stories about daemons, intended to
suggest a new phase of thought. Of this kind then perhaps were the statements in
the Sacred Scripture concerning the giants before the flood, and those
concerning their progenitors, of whom it is said, 'And when the angels of God
saw the daughters of men that they were fair, they took unto them wives of all
that they chose,' and of these were born 'the giants the men of renown which
were of old.' For one might say that these daemons are those giants, and that
their spirits have been deified by the subsequent generations of men, and that
their battles, and their quarrels among themselves, and their wars are the
subjects of these legends that are told as of gods. Plutarch indeed, in the
discourse which he composed On Isis and the gods of the Egyptians, speaks as
follows word for word: 7

CHAPTER V

[PLUTARCH] 'THEY therefore do better who think that the incidents recorded
concerning Typhon and Osiris and Isis refer to sufferings neither of gods nor of
men, but of certain mighty daemons, whom Plato and Pythagoras and Xenocrates and
Chrysippus, following the ancient theologians, state to have been stronger than
men, and far superior in power to our nature; having, however, their divine
element not unmixed nor unalloyed, but sharing both in the nature of the soul
and the bodily sense, which is susceptible of pleasure and pain, and in all the
feelings which, being engendered by these alternations, trouble some of them
more and some less. For various degrees of virtue and vice are found in daemons
just as in men. Thus the deeds of the Giants and Titans celebrated in song among
the Greeks, and many unholy practices of Kronos, and the contests of Python with
Apollo, and the banishments of Dionysos, and the wanderings of Demeter, fall
nothing short of the acts of Osiris and Typhon, which one may hear everywhere
made the subject of licentious fables. Also the things which, being veiled in
mystic rites and initiations, are kept secret and out of sight, have a similar
relation to the gods.' 8 Presently he adds:

'Empedocles even asserts that the daemons suffer punishment for any sins and
offences which they have committed:

"The angry ether drives them down to sea;

Sea spits them out upon the solid earth;

Earth flings them to the blazing Sun; he back To ether's whirling depths. Thus
each from each Receives, and all reject the hateful crew:" 9

until having been thus chastened they recover once more their natural place and
rank. Akin to these and suchlike stories are said to be the legends told
concerning Typhon, how that he committed dreadful crimes out of envy and spite,
throwing everything into confusion, and filled both earth and sea all full of
evils, and then was punished for it.'

Having put forward these statements, and worked out the argument more fully in
the book which I have mentioned, Plutarch relates the like stories also in his
book On the Cessation of Oracles, in the following manner: 10

'This man ascribed his inspiration to daemons, and had much to say about Delphi, and there was none of the stories told here about Dionysos, nor of the sacred rites performed, of which he had not heard; but those also he asserted to be mighty sufferings of daemons, and the same of the story about the Python, and that the slayer's banishment was not for nine years nor to Tempe, but that he was driven out and entered into another world: and afterwards, in the revolutions of nine Great Years having become pure and a true Phoebus in brilliancy, he returned thence and took possession of the oracle, which was guarded in the meantime by Themis. Such, he said, was the case also with the legends of Typhon and the Titans, that there were battles of daemons against daemons, then banishments of the conquered, or punishments by a god of those who had committed sins, such as Typhon is said to have committed upon Osiris, and Kronos on Uranos; gods, whose honours among us have become more obscure, or have altogether ceased, since they have departed into another world. For I learn that the Solymi, who are neighbours of the Lycians, used to pay the highest honours to Kronos: but after he killed their chief rulers Arsalos, and Arytos, and Tosibis, and fled, and departed to some place or other----for they cannot tell whither----he was neglected, but Arsalos and his companions were addressed as gods by the name Sciri, and the Lycians make their imprecations both public and private in their name. Many stories like these you may gather from the mythologies. But if we call certain daemons by the customary names of the gods, it is not to be wondered at, said the stranger; for each of them likes to be called after the god with whom he has been associated, and of whose power he partakes: even as among us one is Dius, and another Athenaeus, and a third Apollonius, or Dionysius, or Hermaeus. But though some of these by accident were rightly so named, the greater part received names not at all befitting them, but changed in derivation from the names of gods.' So much says Plutarch in his careful treatise On the Cessation of Oracles, showing, in addition to the other points, that the daemons are subject to death, the very thing which I shall bring forward at the proper time. But meanwhile, let us collect whatever else concerning the power and operation of the good daemons, as he calls them, is set forth at another time by the author of the compilation against us in the book which he entitled Of the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles: for now again, as indeed often before, I shall make use especially of him as a witness and evidence of the delusion about those whom they imagine to be gods, in order that they may be put to shame at being stricken by their own spears and arrows. For thus the demonstration of the matters which lie before us, being derived from the very friends of their gods, who have both been esteemed devout, and have accurately examined the account of their own religion, will be found complete and irrefutable.

Now the author aforesaid writes as follows in his book which he entitled Of the
Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, wherein he protests against betraying the
secrets of the gods, and binds himself by oath and exhorts others to conceal
what he shall say and not publish it to many.

What then Avere these matters of such importance? He affirms that Pan is a
servant of Dionysos, and that he being one of the good daemons appeared once
upon a time to those who were working in the fields. What ought a good deity, or
at all events the advent of a good deity, to confer on those to whom the
manifestation of the good has been vouchsafed? Did then any good result to the
beholders of this good daemon, or have they found him an evil daemon, and
learned this by practical experience? This admirable witness says indeed that
those to whom this blessed sight was vouchsafed all died at once; for thus he
speaks: 11

CHAPTER VI

[PORPHYRY] 'IN other cases also ere now some were shown to be servants of
certain gods, as Pan of Dionysos: and this has been made clear by Apollo of
Branchidae in the following verses. For nine persons were found dead; and when
the inhabitants of the country district inquired the cause, the god made answer:

"Lo! where the golden-horned Pan In sturdy Dionysos' train Leaps o'er the
mountains' wooded slopes! His right hand holds a shepherd's staff, His left a
smooth shrill-breathing pipe, That charms the gentle wood-nymph's soul. But at
the sound of that strange song Each startled woodsman dropp'd his axe, And all
in frozen terror gaz'd Upon the Daemon's frantic course.

Death's icy hand had seiz'd them all, Had not the huntress Artemis In anger
stay'd his furious might. To her address thy prayer for aid." '

Hast thou now heard how Apollo of Branchidae described both the figure and the
deeds of the daemon whom Porphyry calls good? See then also the noble
achievements of the rest, for the sake of which forsooth they abandoned their
life in heaven, and chose the company of men instead.

Surely it was their duty at any rate to set an example of temperance, and to
suggest what was profitable and beneficial to mankind: but they did nothing of
the kind. Hear what things are brought to light by him, who had searched out the
most unutterable secrets, and was favoured with the knowledge of things
forbidden. At one time he says that some of these good daemons are the slaves of
amorous pleasures, and then that others delight in drums and flutes, and women's
clatter; and that others again take pleasure in wars and battles, and Artemis in
hunting, and Deo in the fruits of the ground; that Isis is still mourning for
Osiris, and Apollo uttering oracles. Such are the benefits conferred on mankind
by those whom they call good daemons! Now listen to the proofs of this. 12

CHAPTER VII

[PORPHYRY]

'NE'ER mid the immortal gods an idle threat Or unaccomplish'd doom to seers
inspir'd Spake Hecate; but from the almighty mind Of Zeus descends in brightest
truth array'd.

Lo! by my side walks Wisdom with firm step, Leaning on oracles that ne'er can
fail. In bonds secure me: for my power divine Can give a soul to worlds beyond
the sky.'

Perhaps then on this account the soul is of threefold form and parts: and one
part of it is irascible, and another concupiscent, by which latter it is invited
to amorous indulgence. These are not my ideas, do not suppose it, but what you
have heard from the writer before mentioned; from whom again the following is
taken:

'But what utterly perplexes me is, how, being invoked as superiors, they receive
orders as inferiors; and while requiring their worshipper to be just, they
submit when bidden themselves to do injustice; and, while they would not listen
to one who invokes them, if defiled by sensual pleasure, do not hesitate
themselves to lead any whom they meet into lawless indulgence.' This also you
may find in the same author's Epistle to Anebo the Egyptian. 13 And in the
aforesaid treatise Of the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, in addition to
what has been quoted, he speaks as follows:

'Moreover, some of them have plainly shown what office is assigned to each, as
the Didymaean Apollo does in what follows: (the inquiry was, whether a man is
bound to take an oath which one has tendered to him):

"Rhea, great mother of the blessed gods, Loves flutes and rattling drums and
female rout. The din of war is bright-helm'd Pallas' joy.

Latona's daughter o'er the rocky steep With spotted hounds pursues the savage
beast.

Great Juno sends the soft rain's welcome sound;

Rich crops of full-ear'd grain are Deo's care: And Pharian Isis by Nile's
fruitful stream With wildered steps her fair Osiris seeks."'

If then 'flutes, and the rattle of drums, and a throng of women' are the care of
the Mother of the gods, we ought surely to practise these things to the neglect
of every virtue, because the aforesaid goddess has no care for modesty or any
other devout practice: as also the din of battle, and conflicts, and wars are
dear to Athena, and not peace nor the things of peace. Also let Artemis
'Latona's daughter' care for her spotted hounds, because, as a huntress, she
wages war afield with the wild bea,sts, and for the other goddesses in like
manner the offices enumerated. Well then what would these things contribute
towards the divinely favoured and blessed life? But consider whether what he
adds next seems to you to be the mark of a divine, or of a vicious and utterly
wicked nature. 14

CHAPTER VIII

[PORPHYRY] 'THIS also was rightly declared by Pythagoras of Rhodes, that the
gods who are invoked over the sacrifices have no pleasure therein, but come
because they are dragged by a certain necessity of following, and some of them
more, and some less.

'Some however, having made as it were a custom of being present, attend more
readily, and especially if they happen to be of a good nature: but others, even
if they are accustomed to be present, are eager to do some harm, and especially
if any one seems to behave rather carelessly in the performances.

'For as Pythagoras had made these statements, I learned, by close observation of
the oracles, how true his words are. For all the gods say that they have come by
compulsion, yet not simply so, but as it were, if I may so speak, by compulsion
under the guise of persuasion.

'In what goes before we have mentioned those statements of Hecate, as to the
means by which she says she is made to appear:

"The lightsome air and boundless realm of stars, Unsullied home of deity, I
leave, To tread the fruitful earth at thy command:

Thou know'st the secret spell, which mortal man Has learn'd, to charm immortal
spirits down."

'And again:

"I come at sound of thy persuasive prayer, Which man inspir'd by heavenly
counsels learn'd."

'And still more plainly:

"What need of thine, by spells that bind the gods, Calls Hecate from swiftest
ether down?"

'And then:

"Some from the sky thy wheel with mystic charm Draws swiftly, though unwilling,
down to earth. And others floating midway on the winds, From the bright empyrean
far remov'd, As ominous dreams thou dost to mortals send, Service unseemly laid
on powers divine."

'And again:

"Some from their lofty home above the sky Down through mid air with Harpies
swift descending Bow to the mystic spells that bind the gods, And rushing
swiftly down to Deo's earth Bring messages to man of things to come."

'And again another is compelled to say:

"Hear the unwilling voice thy power constrains."'

After this again the author says:

'For they give out answers for their own compulsion, as will be shown by
Apollo's answer as to means of compelling him. It is expressed thus:

"Strong to compel and weighty is this name."

'Then he added:

"Then come thou swiftly at these words, Drawn from my heart in mystic chant, The
while I quench the sacred fire.

Thus nature dares thy birth divine, Immortal Paean, to declare."

'And again Apollo himself speaks:

"A stream of heavenly light from Phoebus flowing, Veil'd in the clear breath of
the purest air, By soothing song and mystic spell allur'd Falls like a glory
round the prophet's head, Pierces the delicate membrane of the brain, Fills the
soft coating of the inward frame, Thence surging upward in hot stream returns,
And through the living pipe gains welcome voice."'

To this the writer adds the remark:

'Nothing could be plainer than this, nothing more godlike and more natural; for
that which comes down is a spirit; and an emanation from the heavenly power
having entered into an organized and living body, uses the soul as a basis, and
through the body, as its organ, utters speech.' But this is sufficient to prove
that they suffer compulsion; and that they also request to be set free, as if it
were not in their own power to withdraw, you may learn from what follows.

CHAPTER IX

[PORPHYRY] 'Now that the gods so summoned are eager to withdraw, will be shown
by such passages as the following, where they say:

"But now release the king; for mortal frame No longer can the present god
endure."

'And again:

"Why with long prayers torment this mortal frame?"

'And again:

"Go now, return with speed; thy saving work On me is done.'

'And how to dismiss them, Apollo himself will teach us, saying:

"Cease then thy cunning spells, let the man rest, Free the old image from its
willow bands, And from my limbs with vigorous hand rend off The linen shroud."

'He told also the mode of dismissal:

"Lift thy foot up high before thee, Stop the muttering from the cave;"

and the verses that follow these.' To which he adds, if they are still tardy in
the dismissal:

"Unwrap the linen cloud, and set the prophet free."

'Again at another time he gave a form of dismissal such as this:

"Ye Nymphs and Naiads with the Muses join To set Apollo free; and then in songs
Exalt the praises of the archer god."

'At another time he says:

"Now loose the wreaths, with water bathe my feet, Rub out the magic lines, and
let me go. The branch of laurel from my right hand take, And both my eyes, both
nostrils wipe with care:

Then raise, O friends, this mortal from the ground."'

Upon this the author further remarks:

'So then he exhorts them to rub out the lines, that he may go free; for these
hold him fast, as indeed does also the form of dress in which he is arrayed,
because it bears representations of the gods who have been invoked.' By these
quotations I think it has been clearly shown that there is nothing at all worthy
of deity, nothing either great or truly divine in these spirits who have fallen
to such a depth of degradation as to be drawn and dragged down by any common
men, not by reason of any attainment in virtue and wisdom, but merely by their
pursuing and practising the arts of magical imposture.

Neither, therefore, did Pythagoras the Rhodian speak rightly, nor would the author of this testimony of theirs, nor any man whatsoever call them with good reason gods, nay, nor yet good daemons, dragged about as they are by mortal men and mere impostors, not according to their own judgement, but dragged by force and compulsion, and without having in themselves the power of release from their bonds. For if the deity is not subject to force or to compulsion, but is in nature superior to all things, being free and incapable of suffering, how can they be gods who are beguiled by juggling tricks managed by means of such dresses, and lines, and images?----beguiled, I say, by wreaths also and flowers of the earth, and withal by certain unintelligible and barbarous cries and voices, and subdued by ordinary men, and, as it were, enslaved by bonds, so that they cannot even keep safe in their own control the power of independence and free will.

How, too, can they be called good daemons if they are dragged down by force and
compulsion? For what is the cause that they give themselves up grudgingly and
not of their own free will to those who need help?

If they are good and make their appearance for a good purpose, and if there is,
as was said, any benefit to the soul from them, they ought surely to welcome the
good by choice, and anticipate the suppliants by their benefits instead of
waiting to be compelled. But if the transaction was not honourable and not
beneficial, and therefore its occurrence not according to their mind, how then
could they be good, if they practised what is neither honourable nor expedient?
Or how can they deserve to be admired and honoured with divine worship who are
enslaved by common impostors of the most abandoned character, and compelled to
perform what is neither honourable nor expedient contrary to their judgement,
and are led and dragged down, not because they approve of men's morality, nor to
promote virtue or any branch of philosophy, but by forbidden practices of
impostors? Such practices the same author has mentioned again in his Epistle to
the before-mentioned Egyptian, as though he were consulting a prophet upon
secret truths, and requesting to be taught by him the words in which they
accomplish these results. For he asks as in doubt, and speaks somewhat as
follows. 15

CHAPTER X

[PORPHYRY] 'BUT what utterly perplexes me is, how, though invoked as superiors,
they receive orders as inferiors, and while requiring their worshipper to be
just, submit when bidden themselves to do injustice; and, while they would not
listen to one who invokes them, if defiled by sensual pleasure, do not hesitate
themselves to lead any whom they meet into lawless indulgence.

'They also give orders that their interpreters must be abstainers from animal
food, that they may not be tainted with the vapours from the carcases, though
they are themselves mightily allured by the vapours from the sacrifices; also
that the initiate must not touch a dead body, though it is by means of dead
animals that the gods are for the most part brought down.

'But much more absurd than this is the notion that a man under the power of any
ordinary master should employ threats, not merely to a daemon perchance or to a
dead man's soul, but to the royal Sun himself, or the Moon, or any of the
deities in heaven, and try to frighten them by lies, in order that they may
speak the truth.

'For to say that he will batter the heavens, and publish the secrets of Isis, and show the forbidden mystery at Abydos, and stop the sacred boat, and scatter the limbs of Osiris for Typhon,----is not this the last excess of stupidity on the part of him who threatens things of which he has neither knowledge nor power, and of degradation to those who have been frightened at so vain an alarm, and at mere fictions, like very silly children?

'And yet Chaeremon the sacred scribe records these things as common talk among
the Egyptians, and they say that these and other such methods are most forcible.

'What meaning have the very prayers, which speak of him who arose out of a
marsh, and is seated upon the lotus, and voyages in a ship, and changes his
shapes hourly, and is transfigured according to the signs of the zodiac? For
thus they say he is beheld by our eyes, not knowing that what they are attaching
to him is the peculiar affection of their own imagination.

'If these things are spoken symbolically, as being symbols of his powers, let
them tell us the interpretation of the symbols. For it is evident that if it was
what the sun undergoes, as in eclipses, the same thing would have been seen by
all who gaze upon him.

'Further, what is meant by the unintelligible names, and among these the
preference of the barbarous names over those which properly belong to each
deity? For if he who hears looks to the thing signified, the thought remaining
the same is sufficient to show it, whatsoever the name may be.

'For, I suppose, the god invoked was not an Egyptian by birth: and even if he
was an Egyptian, yet surely he did not use the Egyptian language, nor any human
language at all. For either these were all impostors' tricks, and symbols of the
passions which affect us, veiled by the titles which they ascribe to the gods,
or else we have been unconsciously holding ideas concerning the deity contrary
to his real condition.' After these statements he again expresses his doubts to
the Egyptian, saying:

'If some are passionless (though others are subject to passions, and for this
reason, they say, phalli are set up to these latter, and obscene phrases
uttered), quite useless will be those invocations of gods which profess to
summon them to aid, and to appease their wrath, and to make expiation, and yet
more useless the arts by which gods are said to be constrained. For the
passionless nature can neither be enticed, nor forced, nor compelled by
necessity.' And then he adds again: 16

'Vain has their study of wisdom been, who worried the divine mind about finding
a runaway slave, or buying a farm, or perchance about a marriage, or commerce.
Or if there has been no neglect of wisdom, and if her associates speak most
truly on other subjects, but nothing sure or trustworthy in regard to happiness,
then they were neither gods nor good daemons, but only that deceiver as he is
called.' So far then let these quotations suffice from this work of Porphyry.
Moreover, these noble gods themselves became the first instructors in this evil
art of imposture. For whence could men know these things, except from the
daemons themselves having revealed their own case, and published one against
another the spells that bind them? Do not suppose that this is our own
statement: for we do not admit that we either understand or wish to know any of
these things. Yet in proof of the absurdity of these practices, and at the same
time in our own defence for withdrawing from them, let us bring forward our
witness to these facts, who is regarded as a wise man among his acquaintances,
and both knows and expounds accurately his own system. The same author then, in
the aforesaid collection of oracles, speaks thus word for word. 17

CHAPTER XI

[PORPHYRY] 'BUT not only have they themselves informed us of their mode of life,
and the other things which I have mentioned, but they also suggested by what
sort of things they are pleased and prevailed upon, and moreover by what they
are compelled, and what one ought to sacrifice, and what day to avoid, and what
sort of figure should be given to their statues, and in what shapes they
themselves appear, and in what kind of places they abide; and of all the things
whereby men thus honour them there is not one which they were not taught by the
daemons themselves. As the proofs which confirm this are many, we will bring
forward a few out of the number, not to leave our statement without witness.'

CHAPTER XII

'THAT they themselves suggested how even their statues ought to be made, and of
what kind of material, shall be shown by the response of Hecate in the following
form:

"My image purify, as I shall show: Of wild rue form the frame, and deck it o'er
With lizards such as run about the house;

These mix with resin, myrrh, and frankincense, Pound all together in the open
air Under the crescent moon, and add this vow."

'Then she set forth the vow, and showed how many lizards must be taken:

"Take lizards many as my many forms, And do all this with care. My spacious
house With branches of self-planted laurel form.

Then to my image offer many a prayer, And in thy sleep thou shalt behold me
nigh."

'And again in another place she described an image of herself of this same
kind.'

CHAPTER XIII

'MOREOVER they have themselves indicated how they appear with regard to their
forms, and from these their images were set up as they are. Sarapis for example
says of himself, after seeing Pan:

"A brilliant light shone through the god's own house;

He came, the mighty god, and met me there. My matchless strength, and glow of
lordly fire, And waving curls he saw, which from my head On either side play
round my radiant brows, And mingle with the red beard's sacred locks."

'Pan also taught men a hymn concerning himself, which runs as follows: 18

"To Pan, a god of kindred race, A mortal born my vows I pay; Whose horned brows
and cloven feet And goat-like legs his lust betray,"

and the rest.

'Hecate also speaks of herself thus:

"Do all anon: a statue too therein; My form----Demeter bright with autumn fruits, White robes, and feet with golden sandals bound.

Around the waist long snakes run to and fro, Gliding o'er all with undefiled
track, And from the head down even to the feet Wrapping me fairly round with
spiral coils."

'And the material, she says, must be

"Of Parian stone or polish'd ivory."

CHAPTER XIV

'IN many cases the gods, by giving signs of their statements beforehand, show by
their knowledge of the arrangement of each man's nativity that they are, if we
may so say, excellent Magians and perfect astrologers. Again he said that in
oracular responses Apollo spake thus:

"Invoke together Hermes and the Sun On the Sun's day, the Moon when her day
comes, Kronos and Aphrodite in due turn, With silent prayers, by chiefest Magian
taught, Whom all men know lord of the seven-string'd lyre."

'And when they cried "You mean Ostanes," he added:

"Call with loud voice seven times each several god." '

The same writer also alleges what follows:

'The symbols of Hecate are wax of three colours, white and black and red
combined, having a figure of Hecate bearing a scourge, and torch, and sword,
with a serpent to be coiled round her; and the symbols of Uranus are the
mariners' stars nailed up before the doors. For these symbols the gods
themselves have indicated in the following verses. The speaker is Pan:

"Evil spirits drive afar:

Then upon the fire set wax Gleaming fair with colours three, White and black
must mingle there With the glowing embers' red, Terror to the dogs of hell.

Then let Hecate's dread form Hold in her hand a blazing torch, And the avenging
sword of fate;

While closely round the goddess wrapp'd A snake fast holds her in his coils, And
wreathes about her awful brow.

Let the shining key be there, And the far-resounding scourge, Symbol of the
daemons' power."'

By these and the like quotations this noble philosopher of the Greeks, this
admirable theologian, this initiate in secret mysteries, exhibits The Philosophy
to be derived from Oracles as containing secret oracles of the gods, while
openly proclaiming the plots laid against men by their wicked and truly
daemoniacal power. For what benefit to human life can there be from these evil
arts of sorcery? Or what pleasure to the gods in this scrupulous care about
lifeless statues? Of what divine power can there be a likeness in the formation
of such shapes? Why should he not have counselled us to study philosophy rather
than to practise magic and pursue forbidden arts, if the path of virtue and
philosophy is sufficient for a happy and blessed life? But he, continuing his
own refutation, adds to what has been mentioned the following: 19

CHAPTER XV

[PORPHYRY] 'Now that they love the symbols of their features is signified by
Hecate comparing them with what men love, as follows:

"What mortal longs not for the features carv'd In bronze, or gold, or silver
gleaming bright?

What god loves not this pedestal, whereon I weave the tangled web of human
fates?"'

He has made it clear that not only the features are dear, but that also, as I
said, the gods themselves are confined therein, and dwell in the underlying
likeness as it were in a sacred place: for they could not be supported on earth,
except on sacred ground: and that ground is sacred which bears the image of the
deity; but if the image be taken away, the bond which held the deity on earth is
loosed. By all these testimonies, then, I think it is clearly proved that their
gods were found to be daemons haunting the earth and enslaved to passions:
wherefore it seems to me that I have followed sound reason in turning away from
them.

You see, for instance, how they say that their magic figures and images of that
kind hold them fast in certain spots of ground: though they ought, if, as they
say, there is any real divinity in them, to set foot in no other place, except
only in the thought of the soul, and that thought too purified from all filth
and from every stain, and adorned with modesty and righteousness and all the
other virtues. For when these previously exist in a man's soul as in a truly
hallowed place, the advent of a divine Spirit would naturally follow; nor would,
souls already prepared by virtuous and godly practice for the reception of the
Deity have had any further need of the evil arts of sorcery. So that they of
whom we were just now speaking are expressly convicted on all this evidence of
being certain daemons who haunt the earth, and are the slaves of passion and of
bodily pleasures. Listen, however, next to what statements the same writer makes
concerning the cessation of their celebrated oracles.

CHAPTER XVI

'"OF Pytho and of Claros, sacred shrines Of Phoebus, let my tongue speak
reverent words.

Erewhile ten thousand oracles divine Gush'd forth on earth in flowing streams,
and breath Of dizzy vapours. Some the earth herself, Wide opening her deep
bosom, back received, And some the course of countless time destroy'd. The Sun
alone, which lights our mortal life, Hath still his spring in Didyma's deep
vale, Where flows the sacred stream from Mycale: And still beneath Parnassus'
lofty peaks Springs Castalie's fair fount; mid Clarian rocks Still from the cave
prophetic voices sound."

'But to some people of Nicaea he gave this response:

"Nought can restore the Pythian voice divine:

Enfeebled by long ages, it hath laid The keys of silence on the oracle.

Yet still to Phoebus bring your offerings due." '

To this we may here opportunely add the words of Plutarch from the book which he
has written On the Cessation of Oracles. 20

[PLUTARCH] 'When Ammonius had ceased, Tell us rather, my Cleombrotus, said I,
about the oracle: for the reputation of the deity there was great in former
times, but now it seems to be fading away.

'But as Cleombrotus kept silence and looked down, Demetrius said that there was
no need for men to inquire and doubt about the state of things there, when they
saw the decay of the oracles here, or rather the failure of all except one or
two: but we ought to consider generally through what cause they have grown thus
feeble.

'For why need we speak of the others, when Boeotia, which in former times, as
far as oracles were concerned, spake with many voices, is now completely
forsaken by them, just as streams run dry, and a great drought of inspiration
has overspread the land. For in no other place now except at Lebadeia does
Boeotia enable inquirers to draw from the well of prophecy: but of the rest,
silence has overtaken some and utter desolation others.' In addition to this the
same author speaks of their daemons dying, as follows: 21

CHAPTER XVII

'THE opinion, said he, that those who preside over the oracles are not gods----for gods ought rightly to be kept free from the affairs of earth----but daemons who are servants of gods, seems to me no unfair assumption. But to take as it were a handful out of the verses of Empedocles, and to lay sins and frenzies and heaven-sent wanderings upon these daemons, and to imagine them dying deaths like men, I consider too bold and barbaric. Hereupon Cleombrotus asked Philip who the young man was, and whence he came; and when he had learned his name and city, he said, We are not ourselves unconscious, Ileracleon, that we have entered upon strange arguments: but in dealing with great subjects it is not possible to arrive at a probable opinion without employing great principles.

'But you are yourself unconsciously taking back what you grant. For you admit
that daemons exist; but, in claiming that they are not wicked and not mortal,
you no longer have daemons to defend. For in what do they differ from the gods,
if they are both in regard to essence incorruptible, and in regard to virtue
free from passion and from sin?

'While Heracleon was silently pondering in himself some answer to this, Philip
said to him, Nay, Heracleon, that daemons are wicked was admitted not only by
Empedocles, but also by Pinto, and Xenocrates and Chrysippus: and moreover when
Democritus prayed that he might meet with favourable apparitions, it was evident
that he knew of others perverse and mischievous, with certain propensities and
impulses.

'Now with regard to the death of such beings, I have heard a story from a man
who was no fool nor braggart. For the father of Aemilianus the rhetorician,
whose hearers some of us have been, was Epitherses, my fellow citizen and
grammar-master. He said that once on a voyage to Italy he embarked in a ship
carrying merchandise and many passengers: and at evening off the Echinades the
wind dropped, and the ship drifted and came near to Paxi; that most of them were
awake, and were drinking after they had supped. And suddenly a voice was heard
from the island Paxi, some one calling aloud on Thamus, so that they were
amazed. For Thamus was the pilot, an Egyptian, not even known by name to many of
those on board. Though called twice however, he kept silence, but the third time
he answered him that called. He then raised his voice higher and said, "When
thou art come off Pelodes, announce that the Great Pan is dead."

'On hearing this, Epitherses said they were all struck with amazement, and began
to take counsel together, whether it were better to do what was commanded, or
not to meddle with the matter, but let it pass; whereupon Thamus decided, that
if there should be wind, he would sail past and keep quiet, but if the wind
should fail and a calm come on near the place, he would report what he had
heard.

'When therefore he was come off Pelodes, as there was neither wind nor sea,
Thamus looking from the poop towards the land spake as he had heard, that "The
Great Pan is dead": and he had no sooner ceased speaking than there came a loud
lamentation, not of one but of many, mingled with amazement.

'And inasmuch as there were many persons present, the tale was soon spread in
Rome, and Thamus was sent for by Tiberius Caesar. And Tiberius so fully believed
the story, that he made thorough inquiry and research about Pan; and the learned
men of his court being present in great number conjectured that it was Pan the
son of Hermes and Penelope.

'So then Philip had witnesses to his story in some of those who were present,
and had heard it from the aged Aemiiian. But Demetrius said that there were many
desert islands scattered about among those on the coast of Britain, some of
which were named after daemons and heroes. And that he himself, being sent by
the Emperor to make an investigation and survey, sailed to the nearest of the
desert islands, which had but few inhabitants, and these all sacred persons
inviolable to the Britons.

'Very soon after his arrival there arose a great commotion in the air, and many
portents in the sky, and violent blasts of wind, and falling of thunderbolts.
And when this abated, the islanders said that one of the higher powers had been
extinguished; for as a lamp, they said, while lighted does no harm, but being
extinguished is hurtful to many, so great souls are benignant and harmless in
their shining, but their extinction and dissolution oftentimes, as now, cause
winds and storms, and often infect the air with pestilent diseases.

'There was however one island there, in which Kronos was confined and guarded in
his sleep by Briareus; for his sleep had been artfully contrived to keep him
bound; and there were many daemons about him as attendants and servants.'. So
far Plutarch. But it is important to observe the time at which he says that the
death of the daemon took place. For it was the time of Tiberius, in which our
Saviour, making His sojourn among men, is recorded to have been ridding human
life from daemons of every kind: so that there were some of them now kneeling
before Him and beseeching Him not to deliver them over to the Tartarus that
awaited them.

You have therefore the date of the overthrow of the daemons, of which there was
no record at any other time; just as you had the abolition of human sacrifice
among the Gentiles as not having occurred until after the preaching of the
doctrine of the Gospel had reached all mankind. Let then these refutations from
recent history suffice.

CHAPTER XVIII BUT since the matters which have been mentioned are not known to
all, it seems to me well to pass from this point to subjects which are
self-evident to all the learned, and to examine the oracular responses of most
ancient date which are repeated in the mouth of all Greeks, and are taught in
the schools of every city to those who resort to them for instruction.

Take up again therefore the ancient records from the beginning, and observe what
kind of answer the Pythian god gives to the Athenians when afflicted with a
pestilence on account of the death of Androgeus. The Athenians were all
suffering from a pestilence for one man's death, and thought to receive the help
of the gods.

What advice then does this saviour and god give them? To cultivate justice and
benevolence and all other virtue in future, some one will perhaps suppose; or to
repent of the offence, and to perform some holy and religious rites, as the gods
would thereby be propitiated. Nay, nothing of the kind. For what indeed did
their admirable gods, or rather their utterly wicked daemons, care for these
things? So again they say what is natural and familiar to themselves, things
merciless and cruel and inhuman, plague upon plague, and many deaths for one. In
fact Apollo bids them every year send of their own children seven grown youths,
and as many maidens, fourteen innocent and unconcerned persons for one. and that
not once only but every year, to be sacrificed in Crete in the presence of
Minos: so that even to the time of Socrates, more than five hundred years
afterwards, this dreadful and most inhuman tribute was still kept in memory
among the Athenians. And this it was that caused the delay in the death of
Socrates. This answer of the oracle is at once stated and very justly condemned
in a vigorous argument by a recent author, who has composed a separate work on
The Detection of Impostors: to whose own words, and not mine, now listen, as he
aims his stroke at the author of the response in the manner following: 22

CHAPTER XIX

[OENOMAUS] 'WHAT then? When the Athenians had caused the death of Androgeus, and
suffered a pestilence for it, would they not have said that they repented? Or if
they did not say so, would it not have been proper for thee to say "Repent,"
rather than to say this?

"Of plague and famine there shall be an end, If your own flesh and blood, female
and male, By lot assigned to Minos, ye send forth Upon the mighty sea, for
recompense Of evil deeds: so shall the god forgive."

'I pass over the fact that you gods are indignant at the death of Androgeus at
Athens, but sleep on while so many die in all places and at all times: though
thou knewest that Minos at that time was master of the sea, and of mighty power,
and all Hellas was paying court to him: he Avas therefore a lover of justice,
and a good lawgiver, and seemed to Homer to be

"Frequent in converse close with mighty Zeus," 23

and after death he became a judge in Hades: and thou for this offence wouldst
exact these penalties on his behalf!

'But I pass over these matters just as you gods do, and also the fact that after
letting the murderers escape ye bade them send the innocent to death, yea, sent
them to a man whom ye were about to exhibit as a judge of all mankind, but who
in this very case knew not how to give judgement. And yet how many ought you
gods in justice to send to the Athenians in place of these youths, whom ye
unjustly slew in revenge for Androgeus? ' This same writer, after recalling the
story about the Heracleidae, counts up the number of persons whose death Apollo
has caused by the ambiguity of his responses, in the following words. 24

CHAPTER XX

[OENOMAUS] 'BUT since I happen to have mentioned this subject, let me now relate
the incidents of the narrative concerning the Heracleidae. For they once set out
to invade the Peloponnese by way of the Isthmus, but failed in the attempt. So
Aristomachus the son of Aridaeus, because his father had perished in the
invasion, comes to thee to learn about the way: for he was eager as his father
had been. And thou tellest him,

"Heaven shows the way to victory through the straits."

'So he starts on the enterprise by way of the Isthmus, and is killed in battle.
His son Temenus, unhappy son of hapless sire, was the third who came to thee,
and thou gavest the same promise to him as to his father Aristomachus: and he
said, "But my father trusted thee, and perished in the invasion."

'Then thou said'st, I do not mean "straits" on land, but on "the broad-bosomed,"
because, I suppose, it was difficult for thee to say simply "by the sea." And he
went by sea, after making them think that he was making his incursion by land,
and he encamped midway between Navatus and Typaeum. He killed with his spear
Carnus son of Phylander, an Aetolian knight, doing, as I think, quite rightly.
And when a plague presently fell upon them, and Aristodemus died, they returned
again, and Temenus came and complained of his failure, and was told that he had
brought upon himself the penalty for the messenger of the god, and he heard the
poem concerning his vow to the Carnean Apollo, which told him in the oracular
answer,

"Thou sufferest vengeance for my prophet's death."

'What then says Temenus? "What must I do? And how can I appease you?"

"To the Carnean god due honour vow."

'O most accursed, and most shameless prophet! Dost thou then not understand that
he who hears the word "straits" will miss its meaning? Yet knowing this thou
none the less givest this answer, and then lookest on at his mistake.

'But the word "strait" was ambiguous, and chosen in order that, if he were
victorious, thou mightest seem to be the cause of his victory; but, if defeated,
not at all to blame for his defeat, being able to take refuge in "the
broad-bosomed." But the man went on "the broad-bosomed," and did not succeed;
and again, an excuse is found in the death of thy messenger Carnus.

'Yet how, most noble god, didst thou, to whom Carnus was so dear, bid him be
inspired for others, but not for himself? And though thou shouldest have saved
Carnus, who was but one, how didst thou suffer him to die, and for his death
didst bring an Homeric plague upon the multitude, and dictate vows for the
plague?

'And if he had accomplished nothing by his vow, another excuse would have been
found for thy quibble, and ye would never have ceased, they on their side
inquiring, and thou quibbling, so that whether they were victorious or defeated
thy malpractice would not have been detected. For their passion and eagerness
were strong enough to mislead them, so as to make them not distrust thee, even
if they were to be slain a thousand times.

'To this it is worth while to add the story of Croesus. He reigned over Lydia,
having received the government as it had come down to him from a long line of
ancestors. Then hoping to succeed somewhat beyond his forefathers, he was minded
to show piety towards the gods, and, after making trial of them all, he
preferred the Apollo of Delphi, and proceeded to adorn his temple with bowls and
ingots of gold, and a countless multitude of offerings, and made it in a short
time the richest of all temples in the world; nor in his magnanimity did he omit
all that sufficed for sacrifices.

'So after he had made such loans to the god, the Lydian king naturally felt
confidence in his magnificent works of piety, and resolved to make an expedition
against the Persians, expecting to increase his empire greatly by the alliance
of the god.

'What then did the wonderful oracle-monger do? That very same Delphian, Pythian,
friendly god contrives that his suppliant, his dear friend, his client should
not only fail to win the foreign empire, but also be driven from his own, the
god not doing this at all purposely, I think, but rather in ignorance of what
was to happen: for surely it was not with any knowledge of the future (since he
was no god nor any superhuman power) that he craftily contrived his response to
suit either event, and with the seeming affirmation,

"The Halys crossed, Croesus a mighty empire shall destroy," 25

overturned the kingdom of Lydia which had come down from a succession of
ancestors to the pious king, great and ancient as it was, and rendered to his
favoured worshipper this fruit of his extreme zeal towards him.' After this hear
what indignation the writer not unreasonably utters. 26

CHAPTER XXI

[OENOMAUS] 'IT seems then that thou dost verily know all things that are worth
no more than sand, but knowest nothing that is excellent. For example, that "the
smell of a strong-shelled tortoise boiling should strike on thy senses," is a
piece of knowledge worth but sand, not being even true in itself, but
nevertheless becoming to the braggart and the shameless, who looks supercilious
over his empty bits of knowledge and tries to persuade Croesus the Lydian
captive not to despise him.

'For he relying upon the trial (of the oracles), intended soon after to ask thee
whether he should make an expedition against the Persians, and to make thee his
adviser concerning his insane and grasping policy. And thou didst not shrink
from telling him, that

"The Halys crossed, Croesus a mighty empire shall destroy." 27

'That certainly was well contrived, that it mattered nought to thee, if he
should suffer some strange disaster from being incited by an ambiguous oracle to
attack a foreign empire, nor if certain bitter and malicious persons, instead of
duly praising thee for having driven a madman headlong, went so far as to accuse
thee of having uttered a phrase which was not even equally balanced, that the
Lydian king might hesitate and take counsel; but they said that the word
"καταλῦσαι" could be understood by the Greeks only in one way, not to be driven
from his own empire, but to acquire the empire of another.

'For Cyrus, the semi-Mede or semi-Persian, or, as he was called in the riddle,
"the mule," being of a royal race by his mother, but of an ordinary stock on his
father's side, shows incidentally the inflated poetry, but especially the blind
divination of the soothsayer, if he did not know that the riddle would be
misunderstood.

'If, however, he was thus playing with him not from ignorance but from insolence
and malice, heavens! how strange are the playthings of the gods. And if it was
not this, but that the things must of necessity so happen, this is of all
deceitful speeches the most wicked. For if it must so happen, why nevertheless
dost thou, unhappy god, sit at Delphi chanting empty and useless prophecies? And
of what use art thou to us? And why are we so mad, who run to thee from all
quarters of the earth? And what right hast thou to the savour of sacrifices?'
This plain speaking of Oenomaus in the Detection of Impostors is not free from
cynical bitterness. For he will not admit that the oracles which are admired
among all the Greeks proceed from a daemon, much less from a god, but says that
they are frauds and tricks of human impostors, cunningly contrived to deceive
the multitude. And since I have once mentioned these matters, there can be no
objection to hearing other refutations also; and first, that in which the same
author says that he had been himself deceived by the Clarian Apollo: he writes
as follows: 28

CHAPTER XXII

[OENOMAUS] 'BUT forsooth I too must take some part in the comedy, and not pride
myself on not having fallen into the common derangement; and I must tell of the
bargain in wisdom, which I myself imported out of Asia, from thee, O Clarian
god:

"In the land of Trachis lieth Thy fair garden, Heracles, Where all flowers for
ever blooming, Laden with perpetual dews, Culled all day, yet ne'er diminish."
29

'Then I myself also, impotent fool that I was, became elated by the "Heracles,"
and the "garden of Heracles in its bloom," dreaming of a certain Hesiodic
"sweat" because of the name Trachis, and on the other hand of an "easy" life
because of the blooming garden.

'Then, on my inquiring further whether the gods were inclined to help me, some
one of the multitude, swearing by the very gods that were to help, said that he
certainly had heard that this very answer had been given from thee to one
Callistratus, a merchant of Pontus.

'When I heard this, what, thinkest thou, was my indignation, at being forsooth
robbed by him of my "virtue"? But although dissatisfied I nevertheless began to
inquire whether the merchant also had been at all flattered by the "Heracles."
So then it appeared that he also was in some trouble, and was bent upon gain,
and expecting from his gain some pleasant kind of life.

'So as it appeared that the merchant was no better treated than myself, I would
no longer accept the oracle, nor the "Heracles," but disdained to share the same
treatment, when I saw the troubles that were actually present and the pleasures
that existed only in hope.

'However, it appeared that none went without his share in the oracle, neither
robber nor soldier, neither lover nor mistress, neither flatterer, nor
rhetorician, nor sycophant. For of what each man desired, the trouble came
first, while the joy was only expected.'

Having made these statements, he immediately adds, how after a second and third
inquiry he found that the wonderful prophets knew nothing, but were concealing
their own ignorance simply by the obscurity of their ambiguous language. So he
speaks as follows:

CHAPTER XXIII

[OENOMAUS] 'But since my business was now so forward, and I wanted only a man to
act as a stranger's guide to wisdom, and he was difficult to find, I requested
thee also to point out such an one:

"On Eupelians and Achaeans obligation he will lay, And, if true, for his
conjecture shall receive no little pay."

'What sayest thou? If I was desirous of becoming a sculptor or painter, and was
seeking for teachers, was it sufficient for me to hear Ἔν τε τοῖσιν Εὐπέλευσιν,
or rather should I not have said that the speaker was mad?

'This, however, thou art perhaps not able to understand, for the characters of
mankind are very obscure: but whither I had better travel from Colophon is no
longer a matter so unintelligible to the god:

"When a man large stones projecteth from a widely-whirling sling, With the blows
he slays grass-eating geese unutterably great."

'Now who will interpret for me what in the world is meant by these "grass-eating
geese unutterably great"? Or the "widely-whirling sling"? Will Amphilochus, or
the god of Dodona, or wilt thou at Delphi, if I should come thither? Wilt thou
not go and hang thyself with thy "widely-whirling sling," and take thy
unintelligible verses with thee? ' But now, after such censures as these, it is
time to observe again from the beginning how the same author confutes the most
ancient oracular responses, those at Delphi, which are held forsooth in the very
highest admiration in the histories of Greece.

'Vast was the Persian host in arms against the Athenians, nor was there any
other hope of safety for them, except the god only. So they, not knowing who he
was, invoked him as the helper of their forefathers. This was the Apollo at
Delphi. What therefore did this wonderful deity do? Did he fight in defence of
his friends? Did he remember the "libations and burnt offerings," and the
customary honours which they paid to him in sacrificing their hecatombs? Not at
all. But what said he? That they should flee, and provide a wooden wall for
their flight: thus indicating the navy, by means of which alone he said that
they could be saved when their city was burned. O mighty help of a god!

'Then he pretends forsooth to foretell a siege not only of the other buildings
in the city, but also of the very temples consecrated to the gods. But this was
what all might expect from the invasion of the enemy, apart from any oracle.'

Very naturally therefore the writer again makes sport of this delusion of the
Greeks, and censures it in the following words:

CHAPTER XXIV

[OENOMAUS] 'PERHAPS, however, such answers as I have described are those of an
intentional mischief-maker; find we ought rather to bring forward for judgement
his other answers which were given to the Athenians. So then let the responses
to the Athenians be read: 30

"Wretches, why sit ye here? Fly, fly to the ends of creation, (Quitting your
homes, and the crags which your city crowns with her circlet.) Neither the head,
nor the body is firm in its place, nor at bottom Firm the feet, nor the hands
(nor resteth the middle uninjured.

All----all ruined and lost). Since fire and impetuous Ares, Speeding along in a Syrian chariot, hastes to destroy her. Not alone shalt thou suffer; full many the towers he will level, Many the shrines of the gods he will give to a fiery destruction.

Even now they stand with dark sweat horribly dripping, Trembling and quaking for
fear."

'Lo! there you have the oracle that was given to the Athenians. Is there
perchance anything prophetic in it? "Yes, surely," some one will say, "for you
had so much confidence in him yourself: and this will be known, if you add what
was further said to them when they besought him to help them." So then, let it
be added: 31

"Pallas has not been able to soften the lord of Olympus, Though she has often
prayed him, (and urged him with excellent counsel).

Yet once more I address thee in words than adamant firmer When the foe shall
have taken (whatever the limit of Cecrops Holds within it, and all which divine
Cithaeron shelters), Then far-seeing Zeus grants this to the prayers of Athene;

Safe shall the wooden wall continue for thee and thy children;

Wait not the tramp of the horse, not the footmen mightily moving Over the land,
but turn your back to the foe, and retire ye.

Yet shall a day arrive when ye shall meet him in battle.

Holy Salamis, thou shalt destroy the offspring of women, When men scatter the
seed, or when they gather the harvest."

'Thy Zeus is worthy of himself, O son of Zeus! Thy Athena also is worthy of
Athena, O brother of Athena! And this eagerness and counter-eagerness well
become the father and the daughter, or rather the gods in general! And this
ruler of Olympus, too weak to destroy this one city without bringing against it
that countless host from Susa, was forsooth a mighty god, having dominion over
the world, and persuasive withal, as moving so many nations from Asia into
Europe, but yet unable in Europe to overthrow one single city. 32

'And thou too, the prophet so bold and so ready also to run needless risks for
nothing, dost thou not cry pity? (so the men Blight say, on whose behalf "Pallas
has not been able to soften the lord of Olympus"). Or was it that Zeus was wroth
not with the men, but with the stones and timber? And then wast thou to save the
men, and he to burn the buildings with foreign fire? Because he had at the
moment no thunderbolt?

'Or rather are we somewhat bold, and foolhardy in forbidding you gods to talk
such nonsense? But how knewest thou, O prophet, that

"Holy Salamis shall destroy the offspring of women,"

but didst not further know whether it would be,

"When men scatter the seed, or when they gather the harvest"?

'And how knewest thou not even this, that a man might say that "the offspring of
women" were either those of his own kindred, or might say that they were "the
enemies," if he scented the evil device?

'But we must wait for what will happen, for happen one or other of these must.
For in truth "Salamis the holy" would not have been inappropriate even in case
of defeat, as being called by such an epithet in compassion: and the naval
battle that was to take place either

"When men scatter the seed, or when they gather the harvest,"

is beplastered with poetical bombast, in order that, by this artifice, the
prediction might escape detection, and it might not be clearly seen at the
moment, that a naval battle does not take place in winter.

'Now too it is not difficult to see the stage-play, and the wheeling in of the
gods, the one beseeching and the other refusing to yield, so useful for the
coming event, and the unexpected turn of the war, the one if they should be
saved, the other if they should be destroyed. For if they should be saved,
behold! the prayers of Pallas have been foreshown, which were able to turn the
anger of Zeus: or if not, even this result is not unprovided for by the prophet;
for "Pallas is not able to soften Zeus." And to meet half-evil fortunes the
artist mixed the oracle, as though Zeus had on the one hand fulfilled his own
purpose, but on the other hand had not disregarded the request of his daughter.

'And as to the "towers," it might perhaps have been false that many would be
destroyed, if they had attacked them with reeds instead of iron and fire, though
in this case even with reeds so great an army could at all events have
accomplished something. "But it was I," says he, "who discovered the wooden wall
which alone could not be destroyed." Yes, it was thy advice, but not a prophecy,
not unlike that "Haste, oh! haste thee away, nor blush to behave like a coward."

'He therefore who solved that riddle was as good as thyself in discerning that
the city of the Athenians was the Persian's avowed cause for the invasion, and
the whole expedition was directed against this city first and chiefly. For even
I myself, who am no prophet, should have discerned this, and bidden not only the
Lydian king, but also the Athenians to turn their backs and flee. For "Yet shall
a day arrive when ye shall meet him in battle," for there cometh on "the tramp
of the horse and the footmen mightily moving." Also that they must flee in
ships, and not on the mainland: for it would have been ridiculous, as they had
ships, and dwelt by the sea, not to have collected their goods in all haste, and
put on board all the provisions they had, and made their escape, giving over the
land to those who chose to take it.'

These then were the answers given to the Athenians: but those given to the
Lacedaemonians were utterly weak and ridiculous. For either, says he, the whole
city shall be besieged, or it shall mourn the loss of the king. From every
circumstance, it was natural for any one to guess this, that either one or the
other would happen. But surely it was no divination of a god to use such
ambiguity in ignorance of the future, when he ought to have given help, and
appeared opportunely as saviour of the Greeks, and rather to have procured the
victory over the enemies and barbarians for the Greeks, as his own friends. And
if he had not power to do this, he should at least have provided that they
should suffer no harm, and not be conquered. But even this he failed to do, nay,
he did not even know how the circumstances of their defeat would turn out.
Wherefore on this point also hear how his censure is expressed.

CHAPTER XXV

[OENOMAUS] 'BUT, thou wilt say, one must not give the same advice to the
Lacedaemonians. That is true. For thou knewest not, O sophist, as in the case of
Attica, what course the affairs of Sparta would take. Therefore thou wast afraid
lest thou shouldest bid them flee, and then they should flee, and the enemy
never invade them.

'Since therefore it was necessary to say something, this is what thou saidst to
the Lacedaemonians:

"O habitants of Sparta's spacious streets, Either your glorious city shall be
sacked By Perseus' warrior sons, or else a king Sprung from the race of mighty
Heracles Must die, and all Laconia mourn his fate." 33

'Again there is the combination most unlike prophecy. However, let it pass, that
we may not seem to be both wearisome and incompetent by trampling upon thee
twice for the same fault; but let us examine the remaining facts.

'In so great a danger all were looking to thee, and thou wast both their
informant of the future, and their adviser as to present action. And while they
believed thee trustworthy, thou wast sure that they were fools; and that the
present opportunity was convenient for drawing on the simpletons, and driving
them headlong, not only to the schools of sophistry at Delphi and Dodona, but
also to the seats of divination by barley and by wheat-flour, and to the
ventriloquists.

'For at that time not only the gods were believed, but also cats and crows, and
the delusions of dreams. It was not difficult therefore to see that they would
neither have accepted both misfortunes rather than one, nor the greater instead
of the less, and it was less that one, even their king, should fall instead of
all.

'So then with the fall of the city there would be no escape for him either; but
if he were posted somewhere else by himself, perhaps something unexpected might
happen. The remaining course then was for those who reasoned thus to send the
king to carry on the war, and stay at home themselves out of danger, awaiting
the event.

'For him therefore, taking his stand with a few against that immense host,
destruction was manifest; but Sparta had a respite from fear, and hopes of the
unexpected: while the trick would be equally undetected, whether the city
escaped or was captured.

'Why so? Because it had not been said, forsooth, that the city should be saved
if the king died, but that either he should perish alone or the whole city
together: and this answer could not be called to account in either case, whether
he were to perish alone or not alone. Such is the fruit of arrogance and folly.'

Such was the course in this case. But it would not be right to pass by the
answer which he gave to the Cnidians, when they offered vows and prayed for the
alliance of the god.

CHAPTER XXVI

[OENOMAUS] 'THE Cnidians also suffered something like this, when Harpagus made
an expedition against them. For when they tried to cut through the Isthmus there
and make their city an island, at first they stuck close to the work; but when
they had to face the labour, they were for giving up and consulting the oracle.
And thou saidst to them:

"Fence not the isthmus off, nor dig it through:

Jove would have made an island, had he wished": 34

and the lazy cowards were persuaded, and turned back from the work, and gave
themselves up to Harpagus. But mark the cunning trick: for since it was not
certain that they would escape, even if they dug the trench, thou didst stop
them from this; but in not bidding them to continue the work, thou dost promise
their escape.

'To this however thou didst add, not that it was better for them not to dig it,
but that it was not the pleasure of Zeus that it should be an island. So then in
discouraging them the chances were evenly balanced; but in giving them
encouragement the promise of escape preponderated: in this case then it was safe
for the sophist to deter them. And so, without telling them anything of what
they had come for, thou sentedst them away with the idea that they had heard
something good.'

Now I think these instances sufficiently convict the feebleness both of the
givers and receivers of the responses, and that there is no truth or inspiration
to be found in their declarations. But you will see the mischievous disposition
either of the evil daemons or of the men who played false with the divinations,
if you learn how in the war of Greeks against each other they irritated those
who consulted them, whereas they ought to have been arbiters of peace and
friendship. At one time, therefore, this Delphian god again irritates the
Lacedaemonians, as if they were his friends and familiars, against the
Messenians, and at another time gives an answer against the Lacedaemonians to
the Messenians, if the latter should propitiate the daemons again by human
sacrifice. Listen now to this story also.

CHAPTER XXVII

[OENOMAUS] 'WHEN wisdom is associated with divination she will review such
answers as these, and will permit no random discourse, inasmuch as she makes all
things sure by their moorings to herself, and assigns their degrees of
precedence. Nor will she permit the Pythian prophet, in his folly, to prophecy
either to these, or to the Lacedaemonians about the Messenians, and the land
which the Messenians held after defeating the Lacedaemonians by a stratagem.

"Set not thy hand to deeds of war alone, So Phoebus bids; for as by stratagem
The people hold Messenian soil, so now Shall they be caught by arts which they
first used." 35

'Wisdom bids them rather think of peace and frugality and contentment. But they
perhaps, though disciplined by the laws of Lycurgus, had come to inquire from
insatiate desire and vainglory, that they might not seem to be inferior in
battle to Messenians, though reputed to have been bred up in habits of
endurance.

'But surely if they had been thus bred up in habits of endurance, they would
have been content with little, and would have had no need of fighting, and arms,
and the rest of such folly.

'This was the answer to the Lacedaemonians against the Messenians; but on the
other hand the answer to the Messenians against the Lacedaemonians was as
follows; for thou didst give oracles to the Messenians also against the
Lacedaemonians, and not only to the Lacedaemonians against the Messenians:

"A virgin of the race of Aepytus The lot shall choose, whom to the infernal gods
Thou must devote, Ithome thus to save." 36

'For I do not accept the false inventions, that the victim chosen from the race
of Aepytus was not a pure virgin, and therefore the Messenians could not offer
the sacrifice. For it is thy nature to make confusion.'

Such then are the statements of ancient history. And in our own days also one
might observe thousands of similar cases, in which from ancient times even to
our own the successive rulers at one time rushed into unprofitable wars by the
advice of the oracles, at another time were foiled by the obscurity of the
responses, or again were misled from the actual deceit of the oracles.

What need to tell how at times in the greatest crises either of battle-array
against the enemy, or of danger in bodily sickness, men gained no help or
healing from the supposed gods. But their answers from the oracles always and
constantly turn out to be such as the ancient histories prove them to have been.
But of those Pythian responses which Were most celebrated among the Greeks there
was a certain one addressed to Lycurgus, to whom at his coming the Pythoness
addressed that famous answer:

'To my rich shrine thou com'st, Lycurgus, dear To Zeus and all who in Olympus
dwell:

Whether to hail thee god or mortal man Doubts my prophetic soul, yet hope
prevails To welcome thee as god. To seek good laws, Lycurgus, thou art come;
such will I give.'

These, with the additional lines, were the words of the oracle. Let us then
examine closely what observations were made in answer thereto in the criticism
before quoted. The author writes thus: 37

CHAPTER XXVIII

[OENOMAUS] 'BUT when the precursor and model of Tyrtacus once came to thee, thou
saidst he had come from hollow Laccdaemon, "a friend of Zeus and all who in
Olympus dwell," and that thou wert in doubt, "whether to hail him god or mortal
man, yet hope prevailed to welcome him as god," because he came "to seek good
laws."

'But, if he was a god, how was it that the "friend of Zeus and all who in
Olympus dwell" did not understand civic law?

'However, since such matters as have been shown to this most godlike of men by
the voice of the god cannot perhaps be discovered without a god's help, let us
look at the divine utterance, and the things which thou didst teach Lycurgus:

"To seek good laws, Lycurgus, thou art come; such will I give."

'Give then, I should say: for no such gift as this didst thou ever yet promise
to any man.

"So long as to the oracles ye pay Your promises and vows, and justice due To
fellow citizens and strangers give, Show to the aged reverence sincere, Duly
respect the sons of Tyndarus, Menelaus and the deathless heroes, who In noble
Lacedaemon dwell enshrined, So long far-seeing Zeus shall guard your home."

'Apollo! What divine teaching and exhortation! And for this no long voyage is
needed, nor a journey from Peloponnesus to Delphi, or even to the very
Hyperboreans, whence, as they say, in accordance with the response of another
prophetess, Asteria,

"Founders and priests of fragrant Delos came."

'I suppose that this Lycurgus never had a nurse, nor ever sat in a company of
old men, from whom, as well as from her, he might have heard nobler and wiser
lessons than these.

'Perhaps, however, thou wilt add something more, if Lycurgus entreat thee to
speak plainly.

"If some should lead aright, and others follow,"----

I shall still say that this comes from the same company, and request Lycurgus
not to desist, for the chance that he may go back to Sparta with some political
lesson received from thee.

"Two ways there are diverging far apart, This leading on to freedom's glorious
home, That to the hateful cell of slavery. This manly valour treads and concord
true, And to this path be ye the peoples' guides.

Through hateful strife and baneful cowardice Men reach the other path; of that
beware."

'Thou bid'st them to be manly: this we have often heard even from the cowardly.
But also to be of one mind: this we have heard not only from the wise, but ere
now from the very leaders of sedition: so we can excuse thee from giving us this
exhortation.

'Nevertheless being a prophet didst thou not know that we have received it many
a time and from many persons, who had neither eaten greedily of the laurel, nor
drunk the water of Castalia, nor ever been supercilious about wisdom?

'Tell us then about manliness, tell us about freedom, tell us about concord, in
what way they are engendered in a state, and bid not us, who are ignorant, to
lead the peoples in this path, but lead us thyself. For it is a noble path, but
difficult for us and formidable.' To this he adds further remarks.

CHAPTER XXIX [OENOMAUS] 'THOU art ready to speak of marriage also:

"From Argive pastures choose a well-bred foal Of dark-maned sire."

'And about children:

"Astion, of race most honourable, None gives thee honour; but thy Labda soon
Conceives, and bears a mighty rock, (to crush The tyrants, and on Corinth
justice do)."

'About a colony:

'"Gainst men of gold lead forth a numerous host, Brass on thy shoulders, iron in
thine hand."

'About vainglory:

"No spot on earth can match Pelasgia's soil, What soil with thine, Pelasgia, can
compare? The mares of Thrace, or Sparta's beauteous dames, Or men who drink fair
Arethusa's fount."

'And it seems to me that thou art no better than the so-called marvel-mongers,
nay not even than the rest of the quacks and sophists. At them, however, I do
not wonder, that they throw men over for pay; but I do wonder at thee, the god,
and at mankind, that they pay to be thrown over.

'Then the famous Socrates, in answer to him who asked whether he should marry or
not, said neither, but that he would repent of both: and to the man who wished
for children he said that he would not do right, if, instead of trying how, if
he should have children, he might treat them in the best way, he made no account
of this but was only considering how he might get them.

'And when another man had determined to travel, because things were not well
with him at home, he said that he was not taking right counsel; for he would go
away and leave his country where it was, but would take his folly with him,
which would make him disagreeable to the people there just as much as to those
at home. And not only when he was questioned, but also of his own accord he
often resorted to such conversations.'

CHAPTER XXX

'FOR twenty days before the Dog-star rise, And twenty days that follow next
thereon, In shady bower let Bacchus be thy leech:' 38

'A medical and not a prophetical answer given to the Athenians when troubled by
the burning heat.

"Grandson of Presbon, son of Clymenus, Thyself, Erginus, would'st the race
prolong:

'Tis late; yet give the old plough a new tip."

'For a young woman to be wedded to an old man, if he desires children, this is
the advice not of a prophet, but of one who understands nature. Desire, however,
sets the weaklings beside themselves.'

CHAPTER XXXI

'FOR this reason, if thou canst not persuade them to learn something worthy of
the school of a god instead of their contemptible questions, I recommend thee to
take a rod to them rather than to say to Archilochus of Paros after he had
thrown away his substance in political follies, and in sorrow had come to
consult thee:

"To Thasos, Archilochus, go, and dwell in that glorious island."

'For he would have profited more had he been told in this other way:

"Archilochus, come to thy senses, in poverty make no bewailing."

'Or to the Cretans who had come to thee:

"Dwellers in Phaestus and Tarra and wave-beaten headland of Dium, Hear ye my
bidding, and offer the Pythian lustrations to Phoebus In pious devotion, so
dwell ye for ever in Creta's fair island, Worshipping wealth and Zeus in customs
not those of your fathers."

'It would have been better for them to be told:

"Dwellers in folly and madness and self-conceited elation, Hear ye my bidding,
and offer at home in pious devotion Lustrations your folly to purge; so dwell ye
in wisdom for ever Worshipping wealth in customs not those of your sires but
divine."

'Beware lest thou need lustration more than Crete, for inventing lustrations
such as those of Orpheus and Epimenides.'

CHAPTER XXXII 'BUT why, O wisest of gods, if Charilaus and Archelaus, the kings
of Lacedaemon,

"Give to Apollo as his share of gain One half, it were far better for
themselves?"

'To what other Apollo dost thou mean? For surely thou dost not claim this for
thyself, O most shameless prophet, lest any one should rebuke thee, as sharing
so basely with the robbers.'

Enough, however, of this subject. So come, let us append to it the verses in
which at another time Apollo admires Archilochus, a man who in his own poems
employed against women all kinds of foul and unspeakable abuse, which any modest
man would not endure even to listen to: Euripides also he admires though he was
expelled from the school and philosophy of Socrates, and is caricatured upon the
stage even to the present day: besides these Homer also, whom the noble Plato
banishes from his own republic, as in no respect profitable, but as having been
the author of language which utterly corrupts the young. For these reasons again
the author before mentioned scoffs at the soothsaying god as follows:

CHAPTER XXXIII

[OENOMAUS]

'"IMMORTAL and renowned in song thy son, Telesicles, among all men shall be."

'Now this son was Archilochus.

"A son, Mnesarchus, thou shalt have, whom all Mankind shall honour, who to noble
fame Shall rise, encircled with the festal grace Of sacred crowns."

'The son was Euripides.

'Homer was told:

"Life hath a twofold destiny for thee; This shall in darkness veil twin orbs of
light; That with immortal gods, in life, in death, Shall set thee equal."

'And for this cause it was said of him:

"Happy and hapless, born to either doom."

'The speaker is not a man, but one who has sometimes insisted that he must not

"As god be careless of the woes of men."

'Come then, thou god, be not careless even of us. For we desire, if it be not
wrong, some of us worthy fame, others sacred crowns, others equality with the
gods, and others immortality itself. 'What then was that, for which Archilochus
seemed to thee worthy of heaven? Grudge not to other men that upward path, thou
of all gods best friend to man! What dost thou bid us do? Or must we, of course,
do what Archilochus did, if we would show ourselves worthy of the home of you
gods? Abuse bitterly the maidens who are unwilling to marry us, and associate
with profligates far baser than the basest of men? But not without poetry, for
that is the language of gods, as well as of god-like men like Archilochus. And
no wonder perhaps. For through excellence in this art the home is well ordered,
and the private life is happy, and cities are kept in concord, and nations are
well governed.

'Not unnaturally therefore he was regarded by thee as a servant of the Muses,
and his murderer deemed worthy neither of admission to you gods, nor of speech
from you, because he had slain a man of skilful speech.

'There was no injustice then in the threat against Archias, nor anything
inopportune in the Pythia avenging Archilochus though long since dead, and
commanding the blood-guilty one to depart out of the temple; for he had slain a
servant of the Muses.

'To me at all events thou didst not appear to be out of order in avenging the
poet; for I remembered the other poet also, and the sacred crowns of Euripides;
though indeed I was in doubt, and desirous of hearing, not that he had been
crowned, but how these crowns were "sacred"; nor that his fame sprang up, but in
what way it was "noble" fame.

'For he used to be applauded in the crowds, I know: also he was agreeable to
tyrants, this too I know: and he practised an art which won admiration not only
for the lover of it himself, but also for the city of Athens, because it alone
gave birth to tragic poets.

'If therefore the applause is a competent judge, and the table in the Acropolis,
I have nothing more to say, since I see Euripides supping in the Acropolis, and
the commons both of the Athenians and the Macedonians applauding. But if apart
from these the gods have any vote, and that trustworthy, and not inferior to the
vote of the tyrants or to that of the crowds, come tell us, for which of his
excellences did you gods give your vote in favour of Euripides, that we may
hasten at full speed to heaven in the track marked out by your praises.

'For surely there is no lack even now of Sapaeans or Lycambes ready to be
caricatured, nor in the present day would either a Thyestes, or an Oedipus, or
the hapless Phineus object to be made a subject of tragedy; nor would they, I
think, be envious of any one who desired the friendship of the gods: but even
those of old, if they had learned that there would be a certain Euripides, a man
who came to be dear to the gods for having dressed them up, they would, I think,
have ceased to care for their old misfortunes, and instead of giving their mind
to better ways would have turned to making verses. And if they heard
loud-sounding names of men of former times, they would use them for their
journey to heaven, that on their arrival they might sit in Olympus among the
boxers, in the hall of Zeus. For this is what the poet at Delphi says.

'Now let us look at the question which "the happy" Homer asks of the god: for I
suppose it was something about heaven, and important enough to call forth an
answer from the god; otherwise he would not so readily have pronounced him
"happy," and in addition to this happiness have awarded him an answer.

"Thou seek'st a fatherland, but none is thine. A motherland thou hast, nor near,
nor far From Minos' realm: there is thy doom to die, When from the tongues of
schoolboys thou hast heard A long-drawn hymn thou canst not understand."

'Was it then a terrible thing, O thou wisest of men, or rather of gods, if this
"happy" man should know neither where on earth he sprang from his mother's womb,
nor where he should close his eyes and lie? I should have thought it of equal
importance, whether a Homer or one of the beetles came to consult the god on
these points, and that the god could no more have given any guidance on such
unknown matters to Homer than to a beetle.

'As for example, if a beetle did not spend his life and his old age on that same
dunghill on which he was begotten, but fell in with an adverse wind, and a cruel
beetle-daemon, who caught him up into the air and carried him away by force to
some other land and some other dunghill, and then he came to Delphi and inquired
which was the dunghill of his fatherland, and what land would receive him when
dead.' Let this suffice then about the poets.

CHAPTER XXXIV BUT since this wonderful god by his own responses has deified not
only poets but even boxers and athletes, the author before mentioned seems to me
to pass an appropriate censure on this also in the following words:

[OENOMAUS]

'O thou who knowest to number the sands and to measure the ocean Who hast ears
for the silent, and knowest the dumb man's meaning.' 39

'I would that thou wert ignorant of all such things, but knewest this, that the
art of boxing is no better than that of kicking, that thou mightest either have
immortalized asses also, or else not Cleomedes boxer of Astypalaea, in such
words as these:

"Last of the heroes was he, Cleomedes of Astypalaea;

Now no longer a mortal with sacrifice honour him duly." 40

'For what then, O ancient interpreter of the religion of the Greeks, as Plato
calls thee, didst thou deify this man? Was it because at the Olympic games he
struck his antagonist a single blow and laid open his side, and thrust in his
hand and seized his lung?

'By Apollo! how godlike a deed! Or was it not that alone, but also because,
being punished by a fine of four talents for this act, he did not submit, but in
wrath and indignation turned his anger against the boys in the school, by
pulling away the column which upheld the roof. Is it for these deeds then, thou
manufacturer of gods, that we ought to honour Cleomedes?

'Or wilt thou add this also, as the other proof at once of his manliness and his
friendship with the gods, that having stepped into a sacred chest, and pulled
the cover over it, he could not be caught by his pursuers when they wished to
drag him out? A hero then no longer mortal art thou, O Cleomedes, for inventing
such contrivances to attain immortality.

'The gods at least were immediately sensible of thy good deeds, and snatched
thee up to heaven, just as Homer's gods snatched Ganymede; but him they chose
for his beauty, and thee for thy strength, and for the good use made of it!

'I wish therefore, O prophet, as I said, that thou hadst let alone the sand and
the sea, and instead of them hadst learned how much boxing is worth, that thou
mightest regard the pugnacious asses as gods, and the wild asses as the very
best of the gods: and there would have been some proper oracle over the death of
a wild ass, rather than over thy boxer:

"Chief of the deathless gods is a wild ass, not Cleomedes;

Now no longer a mortal with sacrifice honour him duly."

'For indeed you must not wonder, if even a wild ass should lay claim to
immortality, as being fully provided with divine qualifications, and should not
endure what he heard, but should threaten that with a blow he would knock even
Cleomedes himself into the pit, and not permit him to go up to heaven.

'For he would say that he was more worthy of the very gifts of the gods than
Cleomedes, as being ready to fight not with him alone, even if he were to use
thongs of iron, but also with the Thasian boxer, both at once, him I mean on
account of whose statue the gods were aggrieved, and made the land of the
Thasians barren.

'About this man also we trust to no human testimony but to that of the same god.
And from these facts I clearly perceived that boxing was, as we said, a godlike
pursuit, though most persons, even those who think themselves wise, were not
aware of it: or they would have given up being gentlemen, and would have
practised the art of the Thasian boxer, whom the gods, though they did not grant
immortality to him, as they did to Cleomedes, yet loved much.

'Thus his statue of bronze exhibited a power beyond the images of other men, by
falling down upon his enemy who was scourging it, which seems to show a kind of
divine solicitude.

'But the senseless Thasians, having no experience in things divine, were
indignant and accused the statue of a crime, and exacted punishment, and
ventured to sink it in the sea.

'They did not escape however, these Thasians, but the gods showed them how great
a wrong they had dared to commit, by sending a famine upon them as the minister
of divine justice, which with difficulty taught them what the counsels of the
gods were; and thou the most philanthropic of gods didst send them help in thine
own fashion, saying:

"Bring thy banished ones home, and gather a liberal harvest."

'But again the stupid people supposed that they must recall the men who were in
banishment: but they were mistaken; for as the gods have no love at all for
mankind, what care they about men being recalled from banishment, in comparison
with their care for statues? For this of course the land gained no help towards
being relieved of its barrenness, but that some wise person who understood the
mind of the gods conceived that the banished one was the statue which had been
drowned in the sea. And so it was. For no sooner was it set up again, than
immediately the land began to flourish, and the Thasians thenceforward (enjoying
abundant harvests) wore long hair in honour of Ceres.

'Must not then these be clear proofs that a godlike athleticism is honoured by
the gods? For again the gods were wroth because of an insult to the statue of a
conqueror in the pentathlum, and for this the Locrians were famished, like the
Thasians, until they found a remedy in thy oracle, running thus:

"Hold the dishonoured in honour, and then shalt thou plough up thy land."

'For neither did the Locrians perceive the meaning of the gods before they had
thee to help them in the matter. But they had cast the pentathlete Euthycles
into prison, on a charge of having received bribes against his country: and not
only so, but after he was dead they committed outrages upon his statues, until
the gods could not endure their conduct, and sent the most violent famine upon
them. And they would have utterly perished by the famine, had there not come
help from thee, saying that they ought to honour men trained and fattened, who
are no less dear to the gods than the oxen which the millers fatten, and by
sacrificing which men sometimes win your assent. Not less perhaps, but even much
more, than fat cattle do you delight in fat men, so that sometimes you grow
angry with a whole city and a whole nation, because one or two persons do wrong
to these failings.

'How I wish then, O prophet, thou hadst been our trainer instead of prophet, or
both prophet and trainer together, that as there is a Delphic oracle so there
might have been a Delphic gymnasium. For it would not have been inappropriate to
the Pythian contest that the gymnasium also should be Pythian.' To this I will
append what he says by way of proving that the gods whom we are discussing are
also flatterers of tyrants.

CHAPTER XXXV

'"HAPPY the man who now to my sacred dwelling approacheth, Cypselus, son of
Aetion, king of illustrious Corinth." 41

'So then tyrants also are happy, and not only those who conspire against
tyrants:

"Cypselus, who shall work full many misfortunes to Corinth,"

and Melanippus, who wrought many blessings for the city of Gela.

'But if Cypselus was "happy," O thou miserable god, how could Phalaris fail to
be liappy too, being of like character with Cypselus? So that your oracle would
have run better in this other way:

"Phalaris, happy art thou, and Melanippus likewise, Leaders and guides of
mankind in the pathways of heavenly discord."

'But I have also heard an oracle of thine in prose concerning Phalaris, praising
and honouring him, because after he had discovered their conspiracy and tortured
them, he admired their endurance and released them. So Loxias and his father
Zeus voted Phalaris a respite from death, because he behaved mercifully towards
Chariton and Melanippus. But I wish thou hadst just taught us about death and
life, that life is a most noble thing. To all this let us add the following:'

CHAPTER XXXVI

'"FAR better will Methymna's dwellers fare, If Dionysus' wooden head they
honour."

'For the cities offer sacrifice and keep festivals not only to wooden heads of
Dionysus, but also to heads of stone, and bronze, and gold; not only to wooden
heads but also to actual heads of Dionysus, and to very many of the other gods
of Hesiod.

'For verily there are

"Three times ten thousand on the fruitful earth,"

not immortals, but rulers of mankind of wood and stone: and if they

"Man's insolence or just behaviour scanned," 42

there never would have been raised a crop of nonsense so great, that at length
the evil has reached even to you gods, having passed over to Olympus, where, as
they say,

"The abode of the gods is for ever secure."

'Yet surely if it were "secure," it would not be accessible to nonsense, nor
would any one of the Olympians have reached such a pitch of insanity as to turn
a log of olive-wood into a god. This log became entangled in the meshes of a
net, and was dragged up by the Methymnaeans, who caught it in their nets twice,
it may be, and thrice, or oftener in the same place, and thence ran out into the
Libyan sea, and did not cast it out upon the land: for if they had done that, it
would not have stuck fast in the meshes, no, by Dionysus!

'But as the top of the log was like a head (Apollo! what a strange
contrivance!), one might ask, what business had it in the sea? Why, what else,
to be sure, except that it sat waiting until some insane men (for I will not
say, gods also) should meet with it, and believe it to be fallen not from Zeus,
but from Poseidon, and then should carry it off to their town, as if it were
some lucky prize, though in reality it was unlucky, and no prize, but a
firebrand? Or perhaps it was not enough that of itself it utterly ruined them,
but an increase of infatuation, so to say, fetched from Delphi gave it new
strength and intensity.' So far Oenomaus. But now, after what has been stated,
pass again to The Philosophy to be derived from Oracles of the author who has
made the compilation against us, and read from the responses of the Pythian god
concerning Fate, and see whether it will not occur to you also that the account
of the celebrated oracles is still more inconsistent with any divine power.

[Footnotes have been numbered and placed at the end] 1. 179 d 9 Porphyry,
Against the Christians 2. 181 d 10 Ephes. vi. 12 3. 182 c 3 Ephes. vi. 12 4. 184
a 1 Plutarch, On the Cessation of Oracles, c. x. p. 414 5. 184 c 9 Plutarch, On
the Cessation of Oracles, c. xii. p. 416 C ibid. c. xvi. p. 418 E b I Plutarch,
ibid. p. 417 B 6. 185 a 1 Plutarch, b 9 Herod. ii. 171. 185 c 3 Pindar, Fr. 121
(224) 7. 187 a 1 Plutarch, On Isis and Osiris, c. xxv. p. 360 D 8. 187 d 3
Plutarch, On Isis, cc. xxvi, xxvii. p. 361 C 9. 187 d 5 Empedocles, Fr. 32 10.
188 b 1 Plutarch, On the Cessation of Oracles, c. xxi. p. 421 B 11. 190 a 1
Porphyry, Of the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles 12. 191 b 1 Porphyry, Of
the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles 13. 191 d 6 Porphyry, Epistle to
Anebo, § 28 (Parthey) 14. 193 a 3 Porphyry, Of the Philosophy to be derived from
Oracles 15. 197 d 1 Porphyry, Epistle to Anebo, § 28 16. 199 a 3 Porphyry,
Epistle to Anebo, § 4 17. 198 d 2 Porphyry, Of the Philosophy to be derived from
Oracles 18. 201 c 1 The same lines are quoted above, 124 b 3 19. 203 c 2
Porphyry, Of the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles 20. 205 b 4 Plutarch, On
the Cessation of Oracles, c. 5, p. 411 E 21. 205 d 3 Plutarch, l. c., c. xvi, p.
418 E 22. 209 b 2 Oenomaus, The Detection of Impostors, a Fragment preserved by
Eusebius 23. 209 d 8 Hom. Od. xix. 179 24. 210 b 2 Oenomaus, The Detection of
Impostors 25. 212 b a cf. Herod. i. 53 26. 212 c 1 Oenomaus 27. 212 c 3 Herod.
i. 47: cf. p. 457 a 28. 213 d 3 Oenomaus, ibid.

29. 214 a 10 Hesiod, Works and Days, vv. 287-290 30. 216 b 5 Herodotus, vii. 140
(Rawlinson's translation) 31. 216 d 4 Herod. vii. 141 (Rawlinson) 32. 218 b 4
Herod, i. 55 33. 219 b I Herod. vii. 220 34. 220 c 2 Herod. i. 174 35. 221 c 1
Pausanias, iv. 12

36. 221 d 8 Compare the version of the oracle in Pausanias, iv. 9 Herod, i. 65;
Themistius, Or. V (xix. p. 225; Theodoret 141) 240 37. 222 d 1 Oenomaus 38. 225
c 6 Pausanias, ix. 37 39. 230 b 4 Herod. i. 47 40. 230 c 3 Plato, Republic, 427
C 41. 233 a 1 cf. Herod. v. 92. b 6 cf. Athenaeus, xiii. 78 42. 233 d 8
Hesiod,Works and Days, 250; Hom. Od. xvii. 487 This text was transcribed by
Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy
freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 37: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 6
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 6

BOOK VI

CONTENTS Preface p. 236 a

I. The seeming prophecies of the daemons in the oracles are conjectures from the
course of the stars, like those made by men. p. 236 d II. They destroy our free
will by asserting that our purposes are set in motion by Fate p. 238 b III. They
were not able even to defend their own consecrated shrines when struck by
lightning p. 238 d IV. They say that the decrees of Fate may be annulled by
magic p. 240 d V. They utter lying prophecies p. 241 c VI. Refutation of the
argument in defence of Fate p. 242 a

VII. How their philosophers refuted the opinions even of their gods concerning
Fate by truer reasoning. From Oenomaus p. 255 b VIII. On the same subject. From
Diogenianus p. 262 a IX. On the same subject. From Alexander Aphrodisiensis p.
268 a X. How the argument for Fate is refuted from Mathematical science. From
Bardesanes p. 273 b XI. How refuted also from the interpretation and testimony
of the Divine Scriptures. From Origen p. 281 a

PREFACE In the books which we have already completed we have sufficiently
exposed the character of the oracles; and the divine power of our Saviour has
exhibited in the teaching of His Gospel an excellence worthy of God and at the
same time beneficial to man; for by it alone, and by no other teaching,
deliverance from the daemoniacal phantoms, which had from the beginning over
shadowed and afflicted the whole life of man, was secured for all.

Now let us examine their false doctrines about fate, and so restore the true
account of the same subject, in order that the daemons who have been supposed to
inspire the oracles may be shown not only by the wickedness of their system, but
also by the error and falsity of their opinions, to be worthless and impotent.
Consider therefore whether it will not occur to you also that the account of
them is inconsistent with divine power, both from what I shall set before you in
refutation of their doctrine concerning fate, and from the very manner in which
they are said to perform their divinations. For it is not said that they have
gained the knowledge of future events beforehand by any superior power, but that
they guess what is coming from observation of the motion of the stars, just as
men do. Thus, it is said, they have no power either to help, or to effect
anything at all, except what is in accordance with fate. And the evidence of
this shall be that self-same daemons' advocate, who in his book entitled Of the
Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, speaks word for word as follows:

CHAPTER I

[PORPHYRY] 1 'The gods, if they speak with a knowledge of things determined by
fate, declare that their utterances are derived from the course of the stars,
and almost all the truthful gods acknowledge this.' Then a little farther down
he says:

'Apollo was asked of what sex a woman's child would be, and by the stars he said
it would be female, having learned this from the time of conception: and thus he
speaks:

"The shoot springs forth from earth, whose thirsty meads All freshening moisture
from their mother drain, While life still stirs within her its due time. No boy
she bears, 'tis but a feeble girl; The Moon with Venus watched the chaste
embrace That brings thee soon, O friend, a female child."

'See how from the time of conception, because the Moon was then approaching
Venus, he said that a girl would be born. Moreover from those signs they
foretell diseases; for listen:

"A baneful poison ravages his breast And pours its cruel pangs o'er all the lung,"---- 'and so on: to which he adds:

"So wrought the purpose of the Fates, which urged Their deadly strife, to slay
thee by disease, Since Saturn treads on high his baneful path."

'And after some other verses:

"But the Destroyer, hastening on to meet The star of Saturn, forced thee to
conclude Life's fated day, and robbed thy soul of hope. For this thy godlike
father's sacred heart Warned thee to shun the baneful god of war."'

These things show that their divination is not from any divine power in them,
but from observation of the stars according to mathematical principles; so that
in this they differ nothing from other men, nor show any work of a higher or
more divine nature. But see how they also destroy our free-will, by referring
not only external events and things independent of us, but also our own
purposes, to the course of the stars.

CHAPTER II

[PORPHYRY] 2 'Thus also Apollo spake concerning a certain man, explaining at the
same time whence came his eagerness for war:

"In Mars he hath a vehement natal star, Which drives him on, yet not unto the
tomb: For Jupiter's decree foretold it thus, And soon shall give him glory from
the war."

'And again on another man:

"Saturn's long hair outspread and cruel rays Saddened the hapless boy's
tempestuous life."' So great a horror of Fate have these brave gods, as to
confess that they cannot even defend their own temples when struck by lightning!
Much hope there must be then for men to get help by prayer from those who are
not even able to help themselves! Of what use is it henceforth to be pious, and
to worship and serve the gods, who can give no help at all even to themselves?
Hear, however, what the oracle says:

CHAPTER III

[PORPHYRY] 3 'Thus even shrines and temples have their destinies, and Apollo's
own temple had been destined to be struck by lightning, as he says:

"Offspring of Erichthonius' godlike race, Boldly ye come mine oracle to ask When
shall this fairest shrine be laid in dust.

Hear then this utterance of the voice divine, That issues from the laurel-shaded
cave. When high in air the warring winds resound, And storms embattled meet with
thundering crash, While the wide world lies wrapped in silent frost, And the
imprisoned air no outlet finds, A blazing torch falls, where it will, to earth.

Whereat the wild beasts on the mountain tops Flee in swift terror to their dens,
nor stay To scan with trembling eyes Jove's fallen bolt.

Shrines of the blessed, trees of stateliest growth, Steep mountain peaks, fair
ships upon the sea All shattered lie beneath those wings of fire.

Fair Amphitrite too, Poseidon's bride, Cleft by that awful stroke shrinks
moaning back.

Ye therefore, though by mighty pain oppressed, Bear with brave souls the
counsels of the Fates That know no change: for whatsoe'er the lot Their whirling
spindles twine, his awful brow Zeus nods on high to fix the changeless doom.

Thus in long ages past this fairest shrine By fiery bolts from heaven was doomed
to fall."'

If therefore by the spindles of the Fates even the shrines of the venerable gods and their holy temples are conquered by 'wings of fire,' what hope can be left for mortal men to escape from their destiny? If, moreover, there is no help from the gods, but one must in any case 'Bear with brave soul the counsels of the Fates That know no change,' what is the meaning, some one may say, of our useless zeal concerning the gods? Or what need to assign a portion 'of libation and burnt-offering,' and the honour thereof, to those who are not worthy even of these things, if they have no power to help us at all? For then we ought not to ascribe the bestowal of good things to them, but to that (destiny) which they confessed to be the cause of the evil. For if anything either good or the reverse is destined for men, it will of necessity occur, and, whether the gods will or not, it will come to pass. We ought therefore to worship Necessity only, and care little, or rather nothing, for the gods, as being able neither to annoy nor to benefit us. But then if He, who is God over all, is sole ruler of the Fates, and sole Lord over them also----for, as the Oracle says:

'Whate'er the lot Their whirling spindles twine, his awful brow Zeus nods on high, to fix the changeless doom'---- why then dost thou not put aside all else, and confess that the universal Monarch and the Lord of Fate is the only God, and only Giver of good, and Saviour? Seeing that for Him alone it is easy to turn and change even what you call 'The counsels of the Fates That know no change:' so that the man who has been consecrated to the all-ruling God, and worships only Him, is enslaved neither to necessity nor to fate, but. as being free and released from every bond, follows without hindrance the divine dispensations of salvation. Such is the path which true reason shows: but see by what means this author, the contrary, that the decrees of fate are dissolved.

CHAPTER IV

[PORPHYRY] 4 'For when a certain man prayed that he might be visited by a god,
the god said that he was unfit because he was bound down by nature, and on this
account suggested certain expiatory sacrifices, and added:

"A blast of daemon power with gathered force The fortunes of thy race hath
overrun, Which thou must scape by magic arts like these."

'Hereby it is clearly shown that the use of magic in loosing the bonds of fate
was a gift from the gods, in order to avert it by any means.'

It is Porphyry who tells you this, not I. But how was it, that he who advised to
loose the bonds of fate by magic arts, though he was himself a god, did not
annul the destiny of his own temple to be burned by lightning? And how can we
fail to see what is the character of him who encourages the use of magic, and
not of philosophy? Besides all this the same author confesses that the gods
speak falsely.

CHAPTER V

[PORPHYRY] 5 'But further, the exact knowledge of the course of the stars, and
the consequences dependent on them, is unattainable by men, and not by them
only, but also by some of the daemons. Hence when consulted they speak falsely
on many matters.' To this again he adds:

'Also, they say, it is the surrounding atmosphere that compels the oracles to be
falsified, and not that the deities present willingly add the falsehood. For
they often declare beforehand that they are going to speak falsely: but the
inquirers persist, and compel them to speak, because of their folly. Apollo, for
instance, once upon a time, when the condition of the atmosphere was, as we
stated, unfavourable, said:

"Cease from these words of power, lest I speak false."

'And that what I was saying is true, will be shown by the oracles.

'For example, one of the gods when invoked made answer:

"To tell the constellations' sacred course This day befits not; all prophetic
power Lies bound and fettered in the silent stars."' And he adds:

'It is shown therefore whence the falsehood often arises.'

CHAPTER VI Is there not now an end of all doubt in your judgement, that there
was nothing divine at all in the responses of the gods? For how could the divine
ever speak falsely, being in nature most truthful, since surely the divine is
truthful? And how could a good daemon ever deceive the inquirers by false
statements? Or how could that which is 'fettered' by the course of the stars be
superior to man?

Nay, a mortal man who paid any little regard to virtue would never lie, but
would choose rather to reverence the truth; nor would he lay the blame of a lie
upon any necessity of fate or course of the stars. But even if any one were to
bring fire or sword against his body, to compel him to pervert the word of
truth, yet even against this he would reply in freedom's tone:

'Come fire, come sword;

Burn, and scorch up this flesh, and gorge thyself With my dark blood : for
sooner shall the stars Sink down to earth, and earth rise up to heav'n, Than
fawning word shall meet thee from my lips.' 6 But the deluding and deceitful
daemon makes pretences and cajoles the senseless, in order that whenever he
should fail of foretelling what was to come, he might provide himself an excuse
for his blunder in fate. So when the daemon had by his oracular answers made
everything depend on fate, and had taken away the freedom arising from
self-determined action, and subjugated this also to necessity, see into what a
deadly pit of evil doctrines he has plunged those who believe him. For if we
must refer not only external events, but also the desires founded upon reason,
to the stars and fate, and if human judgements are extorted by some inexorable
necessity, there will be an end of your philosophy, an end also of religion: nor
is there, as we thought, any praise of virtue for the good, nor any friendship
with God, nor any worthy fruit of self-denying toils, if universal causation has
been usurped by necessity and fate. So then it is not right to blame those who
offend in the affairs of life, nor yet the impious and the most infamous, nor
even to admire the virtuous; but on this principle, as I said, there will be an
end also of the great glory of philosophy, if it is made dependent not on
voluntary study and discipline, but on necessity imposed by the stars.

See then into what an abyss of evil doctrines these wonderful gods have cast men
down, and observe how this doctrine urges on and encourages to recklessness, and
injustice, and countless other evils, bringing about an entire overthrow of the
whole life.

If, for example, a man were at once to give credit to the marvellous responses
of the gods, that truthfulness or falsehood, and the will to start upon an
expedition or any other business, or the unwillingness to undertake such
matters, was no work of ours but of inexorable fate, would he not choose to be
careless and indolent in all matters that could not be performed without labour
and pains and exertion on our own part? For if he thought that this or that
would take place by fate, whether we took trouble and care about it or not,
would he not certainly wish to choose the easier course, and give himself, up to
carelessness, since the result to be attained would be brought to pass by fate
and necessity?

Hence one may hear the multitude say, This will be accomplished, if it is
destined for me, and why need I give myself trouble? For if he who set out on an
expedition, did this not from his own choice, but from being driven by external
necessity, so also evidently would the man who set himself to robbery and
plundering graves and all other practices whether impious and lawless or orderly
and prudent: for this would be a consequence of the doctrine of fate.

How then would the man who believed that he was undertaking these practices not
of his own will, but under external necessity, be likely to give heed to one who
admonished him and taught him not to give himself over abjectly to the practices
before mentioned? For he would say to his monitor, as has been said by some
before our time, Why, sir, do you admonish me? For this of course does not rest
with me, to change my purpose, since fate has determined it beforehand. What
need then to exert myself for things which I shall not be able even to desire,
unless this also is my destiny. And if it is so destined, I shall desire it even
without your teaching, being led thereto by fate. Why then do you trouble
yourself to no purpose? But if you mean to say that your exhortation and
teaching is also brought about by necessity, to exhort and persuade me thus, yet
even in this case what need to be so earnest? For the exhortation is idle and
useless. Since if it is so fated, I shall be diligent; and if it is not so
fated, the result will be that we both take trouble in vain.

Must not the man who holds this opinion rather give up indolently and say to
himself, Come, let me not care to toil, nor trouble myself to no purpose: for
that which, is fated will of necessity come to pass? But if a man is diligent
about anything, or teaches or encourages himself or another, either to obey or
to disobey, and to sin or not to sin, and to rebuke sinners, and to praise them
that do well, is it not clearly proved that he has left us the reality of our
power and free-will, and simply attaches to it the name of fate; just as if any
one were to call by the name of evil that natural goodness, by the presence of
which the living being is best governed? In the same way (since we plainly feel
ourselves compelled by no external cause in chastening our sons, and scourging
our domestics when they have done amiss, and in wishing or not wishing this or
that, but feel that we make such movements quite independently by our own power)
he would be wrong who said that these things are done according to fate, with a
view to paralyse our own exertions and the exhortations and admonitions given to
others, which we see to be the chief sources of success in human affairs.

Moreover this doctrine would overthrow laws, which are made for the sake of
their usefulness to man. For what need is there to command or forbid those who
are constrained by a necessity of a different kind? Nor will it be right to
punish offenders, since for the same reason they have done no wrong, nor to
award honours to the doers of the noblest deeds, though these customs of reward
and punishment have severally been a chief cause of checking injustice and of
readiness to do good. But further, this opinion would overthrow piety towards
the deity, if, fettered as we are by the necessities of fate, neither God
Himself, nor the ministers of these oracular gods give us any help either in
answer to our prayers or for our piety. And would it not be most shameless and
impudent to say that we are moved like lifeless puppets pulled by strings this
way and that by some external power, to will of necessity to do this or that,
and to choose other things against our will? For we plainly feel ourselves
desiring this or that by our own impulse and motion, and again we take ourselves
to task for carelessness, and feel that we succeed or not from this cause, and
suffer no compulsion from any external source, but choose some things by
voluntary determination, and shun and decline others of our own deliberate
purpose. So evident therefore is the argument for free-will that, in the same
way as the feeling of pain and pleasure, and seeing and hearing this or that, is
perceived not by reasoning but by actual sensation, so we consciously feel
ourselves moving of ourselves and of our own purpose, and choosing some things
and rejecting others; thus the freedom and independence of the rational and
intelligent nature in us is in any case justly to be acknowledged. And although
the mass of mankind are perplexed by countless things happening to us contrary
to our purpose, we must in this case distinguish the nature of the circumstances
in which we are placed, and take into consideration the law by which things not
in our own power come to pass. For thus the cause of these events also will be
attributed to no irrational fate, but to another law, dependent on the
providence of the universe. Let us then examine the problem carefully. That both
the existence and the government of all things depend as a whole on the
providence of God, the statutes of true religion plainly declare. But then the
several events being caused according to their particular kind, some by habit,
some by nature, some by impulse and impression, and others by reasoning and our
own judgement and purpose, and some again produced according to a primary law,
and others according to effects contingent upon the primary occurrences, render
the arrangement of the whole complex and intricate, the author of the universe
having allotted to each class of beings a proper and distinct constitution of
nature.

Though it would be difficult, therefore, for any one to examine fully the
principle of all the rest, yet that of freewill he may more easily learn in the
following manner. Man is not a thing of one simple kind, nor consisting of one
nature only, but is composed of two opposites, body and soul, the former
attached contingently as an instrument to the soul, but the intelligent essence
subsisting in accordance with its primary law, and of these the one is
irrational and the other rational, and the one perishable but the other
imperishable, and the one mortal but the other immortal; so that we have a body
of the same kind as brute beasts, but a soul akin to the rational and immortal
nature. In this case then surely it is natural, that this double product,
inasmuch as it partakes of a double nature, should regulate its life in a
twofold and diverse manner, at one time serving the bodily nature, and at
another welcoming with the diviner part its proper liberty. Thus the same man is
both a slave and free, having had such a combination of soul and body allotted
to him by God, for reasons known to Himself.

If therefore any one were to subject the natural functions either of the body or
of the soul to necessity as their cause, calling it 'fate,' he would miss the
proper name. For if there were some irresistible necessity of fate, and if many
of the functions which by nature belong to the body and the soul are thereby
impeded, and if ten thousand other external things combine by some accident in
attaching themselves contrary to nature to both soul and body, how can fate and
nature be the same thing? For if they say that fate is unalterable, and that
nothing d can happen contrary to it (because necessity is inexorable), and if,
as I said, many things happen both to soul and body contrary to their natural
functions, a man would not use right names, if he said that fate and nature are
the same. So then of our inward experiences part must depend upon reasoning and
the choice that is in our own power, such as are the natural functions of the
soul, and part on the nature of the body, and another part must be incidental to
them, I mean to soul and body, but effects due by nature to others: yet no one
could rightly detach either the free-will of the soul, or the natural action of
the body, nor yet the contingency of external things from Him who is their
Author. For God Himself, the God of the universe, has been shown to be the
Creator both of things in our own power and of things dependent on nature, and
of things accidental. For the declaration of the divine Scripture, 'He spake,
and they were made: he commanded and they were created,' 7 must be understood
universally of all things. So then if, at any time when we form certain
purposes, other things happen contrary to our intention, we must remind
ourselves, that this is owing, as we said, to that twofold and heterogeneous
character of the combination in us, I mean of soul and body, in consequence of
which the essence of the soul, which is of an intelligent and rational nature,
in a body which is by nature childish, shares the position of an irrational
being contrary to its own nature: and the mind, which is naturally wise, often
in consequence of some accident becomes silly, from being distraught by
excessive ailments, say, of the body.

Oftentimes too old age, having in the course of nature overtaken the body,
deprives the understanding of the right judgements of its prime, by blunting the
rational power of the intelligent soul contrary to nature.

Injuries again and pains and mutilations, which have happened to the body
contrary to its nature, accidentally overcome the free-will of the soul, when it
gives in to the pains because of its connexion with the body: so that an
inevitable bond is found to have been thrown in the way of the freedom of the
soul, at one time by the nature of the body, at another by accidents coming from
without.

Nevertheless the power of our free-will has, as we said, reached such a pitch of
courage and strength, as to dare in many cases to encounter and oppose the
bodily nature and the accidents from without. The bodily nature invites the man
to amorous desire, but the soul having bridled the passion by sound reason
becomes master of the bodily nature. And again the one, necessitating hunger and
thirst and cold and feelings of this kind, invites to the remedies and
satisfactions which are in accordance with nature; but the will being persuaded
by sound reasons, and having voluntarily embraced certain ascetic counsels, by
many days' fasting and endurance beats off the natural desire of the body,
choosing and preferring this course by excellence of reason.

Then again the one naturally delights in all pleasures, and in the easy movement
of the body: but the will from a desire of virtue welcomes the life of labour
and hardship. But there are also some who have turned to evil, and 'changed the
natural use into that which is against nature, . . . men with men working
unseemliness.' 8

Thus then reason does not give way in all things to nature, but conquers in
many, as also it is conquered; and the man now leads, and now is himself led, so
that in some cases even prematurely he hastens by violent hands to release
himself from the body, whenever he judges life to be unprofitable for him. If
then his whole contest were with the proper nature of the body only, this would
be tolerable: but since God has planted his civil and social life in the midst
of a multitude, so that he is made to pass his time among wild beasts and
venomous reptiles, and amid fire and water and the surrounding air, and the
perverted and diverse natures in all these, his conflict and resistance is
naturally not only against his own bodily nature intimately connected with him,
but also against the countless accidents from without, in the midst of which he
who leads this mortal life must live, so that he has to hold out bravely against
these also.

Ere now, for instance, many such and such kinds of food, and such and such
temperatures of the atmosphere, and sudden frosts, and burning heats, and very
many other things, though moving naturally according to certain laws proper to
them, yet by falling accidentally upon us, have caused no common disturbance of
our independence because of the connexion with the body; for our bodily nature
cannot withstand the assaults from without, but is overpowered and conquered by
the external circumstances which occur according to their proper nature.

Again, we pass our lives in company with a multitude of men who share the same
nature with us, and, acting on their individual right, take away our
independence by the free exercise of their own choice: therefore in this way
again we shall naturally be subject to the purposes of others, when their
independent power thus in a manner makes use of us, either against the body or
in regard to the soul. For as our bodily nature is often overpowered by things
which assail it from without, so sometimes our will also, being disturbed by a
thousand external wills, is induced by its own independent decision to give
itself up to the external forces; and sometimes is rendered better, and
sometimes worse: since bad company is apt to corrupt, just as on the contrary
the intercourse of honourable men makes us better. For 'evil communications
corrupt good manners,' 9 just as the company of the good saves and improves. And
though the rational faculty of the soul is carried this way and that by the
arguments of those who encounter it from without, yet the proper virtue of the
rational essence gains strength again, and proves its power to be truly divine
and godlike, when by holding out against all external circumstances, and gaining
the victory over them all by a free spirit, without abating aught of its own
virtue, it is prepared for the study of philosophy. When however it is careless,
it is affected by the evil with the worst results, just as also it is improved
by careful attention from without.

What need after this to say, that 'both fruitfulness and barrenness in souls and
bodies' 10 such as these, brought about by some accident in a manner proper to
the government of the world and right and good for the whole, work a vast amount
of disturbance of every kind to individual portions, and especially to our
independence. But over all existing things universally, both those that occur
through us and our causation, and those that come accidentally from without, and
those that are due to the operations of nature, there rules one almighty and
all-powerful providence of God that extends through all, which also arranges
most things by diviner laws inexpressible by us, guiding the whole in due
obedience to the rein, and changing many even of natural consequences to suit
the occasion, and working and co-operating with our wills, and at other times
assigning their proper place to external circumstances. When these things have
been divided in this manner into three classes, those which depend on ourselves,
those which take place according to natural law, and those which are accidental,
and when all are summed up in one law which proceeds from the counsel of God,
there will be no room for the doctrine of fate.

Thus we shall have found that the source of evil, about which many have doubted, has place in nothing natural, neither in bodies, nor in spiritual substances, much less in things that occur accidentally from without: it will be found, I say, solely in the self-determined motion of the soul, and in this, not when following the course of nature it walks in the straight road, but when it departs from the king's highway, and turns by its own decision into the course contrary to nature, being its own master. For the soul having obtained this excellent gift from God is free and master of itself, having assumed the determination of its own motion: but the divine law united with it by nature, like a beacon and a star, calls to it with a voice from within and says, 'Thou shalt walk in the king's highway, thou shalt not turn aside to the right hand nor to the left,' teaching us that 'the king's highway' is the path in accordance with right reason. 11 For the Creator of all implanted in every soul this natural law as a helper and defender in its actions; and while by His law He showed it the right way, by the self-determined freedom bestowed on it He declared the choice of the better course to be deserving of praise and approbation, and of greater honours and rewards for its good deeds, because it performed them not under compulsion but by its own independent decision, though it had the power of choosing the opposite: so that, on the other hand, that soul which chose the worst acts was deserving of blame and punishment, as having 'proprio motu' transgressed the law of nature, and given birth to a source and fount of wickedness, and used itself basely not from any external necessity but of free determination and judgement. 'The chooser then is answerable, God is not to blame.' 12 For God made neither nature nor yet the substance of the soul evil: since a good Being may not create anything but what is good. Everything, then, that is according to nature is good: and every rational soul possesses by nature the good gift of free-will, which has been given for choosing what is good. But when it acts wickedly, it is not nature that should be blamed: since evil comes to it not by nature but against nature, being a matter of choice but not an effect of nature. For when one who had power to choose the good, instead of choosing this, voluntarily rejected the better part and claimed the worse, what room for excuse could be left to him after becoming the cause of his own disease, and disregarding the innate law which was, as it were, his preserver and healer? The man then who pays no regard to all these considerations, but thinks everything dependent upon necessity and the course of the stars, and asserts that the causes of the perversity of men's offences proceed not from us but from the power that moves all things----must he not be introducing an unholy and impious argument? For if either he should suppose the course of the world to be automatic and undesigned, he would be convicted at once as an atheist, besides being blind to the all-wise harmony and arrangement of the universe revolving in its eternal motion with beauty and order. If on the other hand he shall confess that God's providence is the guiding and moving force which presides over all and administers all by a law of perfect wisdom, even thus he will not have escaped from the absurdity of impiety; since as to the sins committed among men he acquits the offenders of having committed any of their wrong deeds of their own determination, but attributes the cause of the evils to the general providence, miscalling it necessity and fate, and saying that it is the cause of all the foul and infamous deeds and cruelty and bloodguiltiness among men. And who could be more impious than the man who represents the God of the universe, the very Maker and Creator of this world, as by compulsion forcing one man, who is unwilling to commit an impiety, to do so, and to be an atheist of necessity, and a blasphemer against God Himself; and forcing another, whom He constituted by nature a male, to bear the woman's part contrary to nature, not of his own will but under compulsion from Him; and a third to become a murderer not of his own determination but driven by a necessity from God; so that he cannot reasonably blame the offenders, but must either believe that these are no sins at all, or declare God to be the author of all evils? For whether God Himself, being present with all things, and seeing all and hearing all, compels men to act thus, or Himself constituted the course of the universe and the motion of the stars such as we see it, to effect and to compel such actions, He who arranged such an instrument, and contrived the net for ensnaring the prey, must Himself be also the one to blame for those who are caught therein.

Whether therefore by Himself alone, or else by some necessity contrived by
Himself, He entangles the unwilling in these evils. Himself and no other must be
the author of all evil; and it could no longer be justly said that man was prone
to sin, but the doer thereof was God. And what statement could be more impious
than this?

He then who brings in fate, directly thrusts out God and God's providence, just
as he who makes God ruler over all must overthrow the argument concerning fate.
For either God and fate must be the same thing, or different the one from the
other: the same thing, however, they cannot be. For if they say that fate is a
certain chain of causes which has come down unbroken and unchanged from the
course of the heavenly bodies, must there not be prior to fate the corporeal
elements out of which even the heavenly bodies are composed, and of which
heavenly bodies one would naturally say that fate is some accidental
conjunction? But how could that which is accidental to the elements be the same
thing with the God who is over all, if indeed the elements are considered
lifeless and irrational in their proper nature, while God apart from bodies is
essential life and wisdom, bestowing the benefit of His creative work both upon
the particular elements and on the arrangement of the universe?

God, therefore, and fate are not the same thing. But then if they are different,
which is the stronger? Why, nothing is nobler, nothing more mighty than God.
Therefore He will conquer and prevail over the bad; else, by yielding to fate
when it does evil, He would draw the blame upon Himself, because being able to
restrain the evil-working necessity He did not restrain it, but let it loose for
the ruin and destruction of all things; or rather He wrought this Himself, if He
is to be represented as Maker and Creator of all things even of fate itself. But
supposing Him to take no account of the administration of the world, there would
again rise up the atheists' voice, against which we ought to shut our ears,
since the Divine providence and power display themselves manifestly both in the
universal effects of perfect wisdom and skill, and in the indubitable evidences
in ourselves of the free and self-governing power of the rational soul. For in
accordance with this power, though ten thousand obstacles from without by some
accident oppose both the body's nature and the independent efforts of our will,
nevertheless the freedom of virtue in the soul holds out against all, showing
that the choice of the good, so far as in us lies, is irresistible and
invincible. And this the present time of our Saviour's teaching has proved by
actual facts. For to show that these are not mere sounds and empty words, you
have the opportunity of witnessing the conflict of the godly, and of observing
those who by voluntary choice have accepted the sufferings of the contest for
religion: sufferings of which countless multitudes both of Greeks and Barbarians
throughout the whole world inhabited by man have given proof, by gladly enduring
all bodily outrages, and going through every kind of torture with a cheerful
countenance, and finally accepting with a glad welcome the release of the soul
from the body in many various forms.

Yet surely in this case no reason would permit us to name fate as the cause. For
where, pray, did the course of the stars ever in the world's history bring forth
such champions of piety? Or at what time before our Saviour's teaching was sown
broadcast among all men, has human life exhibited such a conflict throughout the
whole world inhabited by man? Or where has all time produced a school of
doctrines such as these, able to overthrow superstitious error, and to teach all
men, both Greeks and Barbarians, the knowledge of the One God over all? And to
whom among the celebrated sages of all time, Barbarian or Greek, was there ever
vouchsafed such a fate as this, to make the doctrine proposed by him give light
to the whole world, and be known even to the ends of the earth, and to win the
reputation of a God among those devoted to him? But if these things were not in
the beginning, nor have ever happened, nor been heard of, then the cause of them
was not a chain of causes and a necessity. For there would have been nothing to
hinder others also from receiving long ago the same nativity and fate by the
same revolution and cycle of the stars. From what kind of fate then has our
Saviour God appeared and been proclaimed throughout the whole world, while those
who were of old esteemed gods among both Greeks and Barbarians have been
overthrown, and not otherwise overthrown than by the teaching of the new God?
And what sort of fate announced to all men that God is the Creator of all
things, and compelled them to affirm that there is no such thing as fate? And
how did fate force men both to say and to think that fate itself does not exist?
And what of those who for the sake of our Saviour's pious teaching have for a
long time past endured all kinds of conflicts, and are even yet carrying on the
struggle?

They found therefore one and the same destiny, to be brought into subjection
under one system and doctrine, and to display one mind and will, and the same
virtue of soul, to accept one and the same kind of life, to love the same
doctrine, and to endure contentedly the same sufferings for their steadfast
piety. But what sound reason would allow us to say this, that young and old
together, of every age, and of either sex, men of barbarous nature, slaves and
free, learned and uneducated, not born in a corner of the earth nor under these
same stars with us, but throughout the whole world inhabited by man, have been
forced by a necessity of fate to prefer a certain doctrine to all the customs of
their forefathers, and to welcome death for the religion of the One God over
all, and to be thoroughly instructed in the teaching concerning the immortality
of the soul, and to prefer a philosophy that consists not in words but in deeds?
For these are the things that even a blind man could clearly see to be the
proper effects of no necessity, but of learning and instruction, being manifest
proofs of voluntary purpose and free-will.

There would be countless other arguments to prove the proposition, most of which
I shall omit, and for my part be contented with what I have stated; but I will
leave you to consider your own reading of your venerable philosophers, that so
you may learn how much wiser and better than your oracular deities was the man
who convicted their wonderful responses of falsehood, and castigated the Pythian
god himself for his answers concerning fate. So listen again to him who entitled
his own writing, 'The detection of impostors,' and note with what a fine
vigorous spirit he corrects the error of the multitude, and indeed of Apollo
himself, by what he writes as follows word for word:

CHAPTER VII

[OENOMAUS] 13 'To think then that thou should'st sit in Delphi unable, even should'st thou wish it, to keep silence! So Apollo, the son of Zeus, now wishes, not because he wishes, but because he is ordained by necessity to wish! But since I have been led on, I know not how, into this argument, I am inclined to pass over all the rest, and inquire into a matter that is appropriate and well worth inquiry. For, so far as it depends on the philosophers, there has been lost out of human life, whether one likes to call it a rudder, or ballast, or foundation----there has been lost the governing power of our life, which we suppose to be absolute over the highest necessity; but Democritus, unless I am mistaken, and Chrysippus think to prove the noblest of man's faculties, according to the former, a slave, and according to the latter, half-enslaved. Their argument, however, is worth no more than a man can claim for the things of man: but if deity also now makes war upon us, good heavens, what will become of us?' 'But that is not likely nor just, if at least we may conjecture from these responses following:

"Hated of all thy neighbours, belov'd of the blessed Immortals, Sit thou still,
with thy lance drawn inward, patiently watching."

'"What then? says the Argive; if I should so wish, is it in my power, and can I,
if it shall please me, sit still, patiently watching?" "It is in thy power,"
thou would'st say, "and thou canst; or how should I have enjoined this on thee?"

"Carystus, heir of noble Cheiron's race, Forsake thy native Pelion, and seek
Euboea's cape: there thou art doomed to found A sacred home. But haste, and
tarry not." 14

'Is there then anything really dependent on man, O Apollo, and have I power
to will to "forsake Pelion"? Yet surely I used to hear from many wise
men, that if it is fated for me to "seek Euboea's cape," and
"found a sacred home," I shall both come thither and settle, whether
thou tell me or not, and whether I should will it or not. If, however, there is
any need for me too to will what necessity forces me to will even if I should he
unwilling----but thou, O Apollo, art more worthy to be believed, and so I am
inclined to give heed rather to thee:

"Tell thou the Parians, Telesicles, I bid thee found in the Aerian isle A city
fair to view."

'Yes, surely' (some one will perhaps say in vain conceit, or to confute thee),
'I shall tell them, even if thou bid me not: for so it is fated: and the "Aerian
isle" is Thasos, and the Parians will come to it, when my son Archilochus shall
have explained to them, that this island was formerly called Aeria. I suppose
therefore that thou, being terrible in taking vengeance, wilt not bear with him,
so ungrateful and audacious as he is, since if thou hadst not chosen to inform
him, he would never have given the message, nor would his son Archilochus have
led the colony of Parians, nor would the Parians have inhabited Thasos.

'I know not therefore whether thou sayest these things without knowing what thou
sayest. But since we seem to be at leisure to hold even a long conversation, and
since the subject is of no slight importance, tell me this, for perhaps a few
points out of many are sufficient.

'Are we, I and thou, anything? You will say, Yes. But whence do we know this?
Whereby did we determine that we do know it? Is it not the fact that nothing
else is so satisfactory a proof (of our existence) as our conscious sensation
and apprehension of ourselves?

' What again? How did we ever find out that we are animals ? And how that among
animals we are, as I should say, men, and among men one an impostor, and another
an exposer of impostors; but as thou would'st say, the one a man, the other a
god, and the one a prophet, the other a false accuser? And let it be as thou
sayest, if I be proved wrong.

'But how do we know that we are conversing at the present moment? What sayest
thou? Did we not rightly judge our apprehension of ourselves by that which is
most immediate, the fact itself? Evidently so. For we found nothing else either
higher than it, or prior to it, or more trustworthy.

'For if this is not to be so, then let not hereafter one named Alcmaeon come to
thee at Delphi, after he has slain his mother, and been driven from home, and is
longing to return home. For he knows not either whether he himself is anything
at all, nor whether he is driven from home, nor whether he is longing for home.
But even if Alcmaeon is mad, and imagines things that do not exist, yet the
Pythian god at least is not mad. And thou must not speak to him thus:

"How to return to thy home thou seek'st, son of Amphiaraus."

'For even thou knowest not yet whether any son of Amphiaraus is consulting thee,
nor whether thou, the consulted, art anything at all, and able to answer
concerning the matters on which he consults thee.

'Neither therefore let Chrysippus, the author of the semi-slavery, whatever that
exactly is, attend in the Porch, nor think that those drivellers will attend
there to listen to him, the Nobody: neither let him take his stand and struggle
about nothing against Arcesilaus present in person, and Epicurus not present.

'For what Arcesilaus is, and what Epicurus, or what the Porch is, or what the
young men, or what the Nobody, he neither knows nor can know; for he knows not
even, what comes far earlier, whether he himself is anything.

'But neither will you gods nor Democritus endure that any one should talk thus:
for there is no more trustworthy criterion than that of which I speak; nor if
there seem to be any others, could they be made equal to this, or, if made
equal, could not surpass it.

'So then, some one may say, since thou, O Democritus, and thou, O Chrysippus,
and thou, O prophet, are indignant if any one should wish to deny your
consciousness of yourselves----for of those many books of yours it is no longer
possible to deny the existence----come, let us also be indignant on the other
side.

'How, pray? Is this self-consciousness to be the most trustworthy and primary
evidence wherever it pleases you? but where it pleases you not, is there some
occult power, Fate, or Destiny, to tyrannize over it?----a power having for each
of you a different meaning, proceeding according to one from god, and according
to another from those minute bodies which are carried down, and tossed up, and
twirled round, and broken up, and separated, and combined by necessity?

'For lo! the manner of our self-consciousness is the same in which we are also
conscious of our voluntary or enforced actions. And we are not unconscious of
the great difference between walking and being carried, or between choosing and
being compelled.

'But do you ask the reasons for which I bring these matters into the discussion?
Because thou, O prophet, hast failed to perceive things over which we have
power, and thou that knowest all things seemest not to know these which are fast
moored to our own will.

'And it was evident that this would be the source of no little trouble: for he
who knows not the source, which was the cause of the consequences, would be
likely, I suppose, to know the consequences themselves!

'Evidently then he was an impudent prophet who foretold to Laius 15 that his son
would kill him: for the son surely would be master of his own will, and neither
any Apollo, nor any higher than he, would be able by any power to attain to a
knowledge of things which neither exist at present, nor need ever come into
existence.

'For surely the most ridiculous of all things is this, the mixture and
combination of the two notions, that there is something in men's own power, and
that there is nevertheless a fixed chain of causation. For, as the wiser sort
say, it is like the account in Euripides.

'For that Laius should choose to beget a child, was in the power of Laius
himself, and this had escaped the notice of Apollo: but after he had begotten a
son, there lay upon him an inevitable necessity of dying by his son's hand. In
this way therefore the necessity dependent on the future event supplied to the
prophet his presentiment of what would take place.

'But I suppose the son also, as well as the father, was master of his own will:
and as the latter had the power of begetting or not, so the son had the power of
slaying or not. Now this is the character of all your oracular answers: and this
was that which the Apollo of Euripides said:

"And all thy house shall wade through streams of blood:" 16

'namely, that the son shall be blinded by his own hand, on account of the
marriage with his mother and of the sovereignty to which he succeeded for his
solution of the riddle; and that his sons shall fall by mutual slaughter,
because of the banishment of the one from the kingdom, and the ambition of the
other, and the marriage of the exile at Argos, and the expedition of seven
ridiculous chieftains, and the battle: and since these things were separately
dependent on many causes and powers, how could it be possible for thee to
understand, or for the chain of causes to bind them together?

'For if on the contrary Oedipus being his own master had not wished to reign,
or, having wished and accomplished this, had not chosen to marry Jocasta, or
after marrying had not been puffed up with pride, nor been desponding and
disagreeable, how could the several events have been brought to pass? How could
he have torn out his eyes? Or how could he have cursed his sons with the curse
described by Euripides and thee?

'In what way too could the events which followed these have taken place, if
there were no causes existing before thou could'st tell anything about the
future? And again, if the sons had agreed and reigned together, or if they had
made an arrangement to reign by turns and adhered to the terms settled; or if he
who was banished had determined to go off not to Argos but to Libya or to the
Perrhaebi; or if after having arrived at Argos he had decided to be a
salt-fish-monger, and not to take a rich wife but some poor workwoman or
huckstress; or if Adrastus had not given him his daughter, or if he had given
her, but Polynices had b not desired to return home; or if, though desiring it,
he had restrained himself; or if Adrastus had given no heed to his request for
alliance in war; or if neither Amphiaraus nor Tydeus nor the several other
commanders of divisions would follow Adrastus; or if, though they followed,
Polynices on arriving had not fought with his brother, but either had reigned
together with him by agreement, or, if he refused, had retired, being persuaded
by what Euripides says:

"How foolishly thou com'st thine home to sack;" 17 'or if, not this one, but the
other had listened to those other Euripidean subtleties:

"Are sun and night content to serve man's need, And wilt thou bear no equal in
the house?" 18 'how in any such case could they have joined battle, "and all the
house of Laius waded through blood"?

'However, these things, you will say, have come to pass. They have come to pass:
but by what way didst thou attain to the knowledge of them? Dost thou not see
how frequently the whole action of the play has been broken through by the power
which lies in us who perform the action? And so I will take whatever supposed
case thou wilt, and cut across that chain of yours, and show that it is
impossible.

'Yet thou wilt say that thou knowest the last links of the supposed case. Yes,
but the whole case has been regulated by the force of our interruption of the
chain.

'Or perhaps thou dost not understand what I mean? Yet in every supposed case, O
prophet, there are the living beings often making either few or many fresh
beginnings therein. And these beginnings having cut across the events preceding
them always themselves bring others on: and these latter may proceed as long as
no other beginning supervenes from any source, commanding the events which come
after it to conform not to those which went before but to itself.

'Now such afresh beginning may be either an ass, or a dog, or a flea. For
surely, by Apollo! thou wilt not rob even the flea of his free will: but the
flea will act upon a certain impulse of his own, and being sometimes mixed up
with human affairs will make himself the commencement of some new course; and
thou art unconsciously consulting this kind of animal.

"Trachis, the home of godlike Heracles, Thou hast destroyed, O Locrian ; and on
thee Zeus hath sent curses, and shall yet send more."

'What sayest thou? Had it not then been destined by you gods to be destroyed?
And why are we mortals to blame, and not that necessity of yours? Thou doest not
justice, O Apollo, nor art right in laying the punishment upon us who do no
wrong.

'And this Zeus of yours, I mean the necessity of your necessity, why does he
take vengeance upon us, and not upon himself (if he must punish some one), for
having shown the necessity to be of such a character? And why too does he
threaten us? Or why, as if we were the masters of this event, do we suffer
famine for it? Moreover it will either be rebuilt by us, or not; and whichever
it may be, this has been fixed by fate.

'Cease therefore from thy wrath, O Zeus, the lord of famine: for that which has
been destined will be, and that is what thy chain has been appointed to do: and
we are nothing compared to it. And thou too cease, Apollo, from uttering vain
oracles: for just that which will be, will be, even though thou keep silence.
And what is to be done to us, O Zeus and Apollo, who are not at all the causes
of your enactment of law, enactment, that is, of necessity. Or what have we to
do with your threatened curses, which yourselves deserve to bear for what we
were compelled by necessity to do? "Oeteans, rush not in blind frenzy on."

'Why, Apollo, we are not "rushing on," but are being driven, and not by "blind
frenzy," but by that necessity of yours.

'And how is it, O Apollo, that thou praisest that famous Lycurgus, who was not
virtuous either willingly or by choice, but unwillingly? That is if a man can be
virtuous unwillingly. But what ye do now is just as if one were to praise and
honour those who are beautiful in body, but to blame and punish the ugly.

'For the wicked might justly say to you, You did not permit us, O ye gods, to
become virtuous; and not only so, but you even forced us to be wicked. And as to
the virtuous, if they walk about with their elbows stuck out, one will not
permit it, but will say to them, O Chrysippus and Cleanthes and the rest of your
band, since you have been made to be virtuous, I give praise to virtue, but no
praise to you in whom virtue resides.

'Nay, even Epicurus, against whom you, Chrysippus, so often railed, I acquit of
the charges, so far at least as you can judge. For how is he to blame, who was
not of his own accord luxurious or unjust, as you so often reproached him?

"Well ordered lives the gods approving view, And welcome holy offerings of the
just."

'Now it seems to me that you gods would not say this, unless you were persuaded
that men seek the objects of their pursuit not involuntarily but with a will:
and after what has been already proved, no sophist either divine or human will
dare to say that whatever men will is ordained by fate: or else we shall no
longer use reasoning with him, but take a stout strap, as for an unruly boy, and
curry his ribs right well.'

Thus did Oenomaus inveigh, against the soothsayer. And if you do not like this
kind of argument, yet take and read the extracts from the other philosophers
concerning fate, which are fit to overthrow not only the oracles that have
already been quoted, but also generally all the other contrivances in defence of
the dogma. For since not only unlearned and simple persons, but also many who
prided themselves greatly upon education and philosophy, have e'er now been
dragged into agreement with the dogma, I think it absolutely necessary to set
forth the mutual contradictions of the philosophers themselves, for an accurate
examination of the problem. First then I will quote for you from Diogenianus the
arguments concerning fate, which he urged against Chrysippus as follows:

CHAPTER VIII

[DIOGENIANUS] 19 'In addition to all this it is worth while to quote also the
opinions of Chrysippus the Stoic on this subject. For in his first book Of Fate
wishing to show that all things are comprehended under necessity and fate, he
employs among certain other testimonies the following expressions in the poet
Homer:

"For me the hateful doom of death, E'en from my birth assigned, too soon hath
yawn'd," 20

'and:

"Though the time shall come For him to suffer all such things as fate Decreed,
when first his thread of life was spun;" 21

'and again :

"His fate I say no mortal e'er hath shunned." 22

'But he does not observe that the expressions elsewhere used by the Poet are
directly opposed to these, I mean those which Chrysippus himself employs in his
Second Book, when he wishes to prove that there are also many things caused by
us, as for example:

"They by their own presumptuous folly died", 23 and this:

"Perverse mankind, whose wills, created free, Charge all their woes on absolute
decree;

All to the dooming gods their guilt translate, And follies are miscalled the
crimes of fate." 24

'For these expressions and such as these are opposed to the idea that all things
take place according to fate. Nor indeed was he able to perceive even this, that
Homer by no means bears witness to his dogma even in those former verses. For it
will be found from them that he suggests not that all things are brought to pass
according to fate, but rather that certain things occur according thereto.

'For the passage---- "For me the hateful doom of death, E'en from my birth assigned, too soon hath yawned "----

'could not mean that all things occur according to fate, but only just that he
was soon to die: for most truly it is fated that every being born into life must
die.

'Moreover the passage---- "Though the time shall come For him to suffer all such things as fate Decreed, when first his thread of life was spun "----

'has the same meaning. For it does not say that all things which are to befall
him hereafter will occur according to fate, but that certajn things will occur
to him according to necessity. For what else than this is signified by the
distinction "such things as"? And many things, though not all, are laid upon us
according to necessity.

'Again, the verse---- "His fate I say no mortal e'er hath shunned"----

'is a very good statement. For who could possibly escape things that of
necessity occur to every living being? So that Chrysippus, far from having Homer
voting with him in the opinion that all things take place according to fate,
would have him as an opponent; since the latter has often and plainly stated
that many things occur through our causation, but can nowhere be found to say
expressly that all things occur according to necessity.

'And inasmuch as a poet does not promise us the true nature of real things, but
imitates all kinds of human passions, and dispositions, and opinions, it would
be suitable for him often to make contrary statements: but it would not befit a
philosopher to make contrary statements, nor to use the testimony of a poet for
this purpose.' After other matters, he says, also:

'But Chrysippus thinks that he brings another strong proof of the presence of
fate in all things, in the adoption of names of this kind. For he says that
destiny (πεπρωμενην) is a certain arrangement determined (πεπερασμενην) and
concluded, and that fate (ειμαρμενην) is a kind of bond woven (ειρομενην) either
out of the will of Zeus, or of any other cause.

' Moreover the goddesses of fate (Μοιρας) have been so called from some one of
them having been assigned (μεμερισθαι) and allotted to each of us. In the same
way he says that the word το χρεων ("the debt") is used, meaning the portion
that falls to our share and is due to us according to fate. And the number of
the Fates suggests the three periods in which all things revolve, and by which
they are fulfilled.

'Lachesis is so called from casting lots (λαγχανειν) for each man's destiny:
Atropos from the unchanging (ατρεπτον) and unalterable character of the
distribution; and Clotho from all things being twisted together (συγκλεκωσθαι)
and woven, and from their having only one appointed solution. For by this and
the like silly talk he thinks that he proves the necessity present in all
things.

'But it occurs to me to wonder if in speaking thus he was not conscious of his
own nonsensical talk. For let it be granted that men entertained these notions
when they imposed the names that have been set forth, according to his own
etymologies, and supposed that fate had bound all things fast, and that the
causes which had been from eternity predetermined were immutable in all real
existences and all passing events.

'What then, Chrysippus? do you follow all the opinions of mankind, and does not
one of them appear to you to be mistaken on any point, and are all men capable
of seeing the truth?

'How then say you that there is no man who does not seem to you as mad as
Orestes and Alcmaeon, except the wise? And there have been, say you, only one or
two wise, and the rest for their folly have been equally mad with those whom I
have named?

'And how do you refute the errors of those opinions of theirs about riches, for
example, and fame, and sovereignty, and pleasure in general, things which most
men have thought good? How say you, too, that the established laws and the
constitutions of states have all been wrong? Or why did you write such a
multitude of books, if on no point mankind held mistaken opinions?

'For we must not say that, when they hold the same opinions with you, they judge
rightly, but when they differ, are mad.

'For in the first place even you do not call yourself wise, much less do we,
that we should make their concurrence with your opinion a criterion of their
good judgement at any time; and further, even if this were true, why should you
say that they are all equally mad, instead of commending them, in as far as they
appeared to be of the same opinions with you, for having got hold of a right
opinion, and considering them to be wrong, in as far as they dissented from you?

'Not even thus, however, was it natural to suppose that their opinion is an
adequate evidence of the truth; and every one would acknowledge, not that he is
mad, as you think, but that he is far removed from wisdom.

'It will be ridiculous therefore for you to use these men, whom vou would
declare to be no better than yourself in understanding, as bearing witness by
their imposition of the names, unless indeed it has happened that those who
originally gave these names were wise men----a thing which you cannot possibly
prove.

'However, let it be granted to you that this is so, and that those names are
given with their significations as you wish, and that this circumstance has not
been a result of false opinions: where then do they indicate that all things
without exception are in accordance with fate, and not rather these only, if
any, with which fate is concerned.

'For the number of the Fates, and their names, and Clotho's spindle, and the
thread wound upon it, and the ball of this thread, and all other such things
mentioned in that story, indicate the immutability and eternal fitness of the
causes in all things which are bound by necessity to take place thus, and all
which are hindered from being otherwise.

'And there would be many things of this nature; but others are not so; and to
some of these latter men ascribed gods as rulers and creators, and of some they
supposed us to be ourselves the causes, and of others again nature, and of
others fortune: and of this last they wished to indicate the changefulness and
instability, and its turning now this way and now that; and to show this kind of
casualty in affairs by an image, they represented Fortune as standing on a
globe.

'Or are not even these opinions held among mankind? For if at times men confuse
the causes, and think that those things which are the results of fate or fortune
proceed from a divine power, and that the things of which we are the cause
depend on fate, yet surely it is manifest to every one that they think there are
all these causes in things.

'So the result is that neither the notions adopted by mankind, nor the
imposition of such names as have been mentioned, bear testimony to the opinion
of Chrysippus.' To this he next adds:

'Such are some of the proofs that he has used in his first book Concerning Fate,
but in the second he tries to solve the absurdities that seem to follow from the
statement that all things are subjected to necessity, the same absurdities which
we set forth at the beginning: for example, that it destroys the earnest desire
on our own part in regard to censure, and praise, and exhortation, and all
things which appear to be consequent upon our own causation.

'In the second book then he says it is evident that many things do originate
with us, but nevertheless even these are connected by fate with the general
arrangement of the whole.

'And he has employed certain examples of the following kind. That a man's cloak
should not be lost, was fated, he says, not absolutely but with the condition of
its being carefully kept: and that this or that man should be saved from the
hands of the enemy, with the condition of his fleeing from the enemy: and the
birth of children, with the willingness to cohabit with a wife.

'For just as it would be absurd, says he, if, upon some one's saying that
Hegesarchus the boxer would come off from the fight without a single scratch, a
man were to recommend Hegesarchus to fight with his hands down, because it was
fated that he was to come off untouched, whereas he who made the assertion said
so because of the man's superabundant caution against being hit; so it is also
in all other cases.

'For many things cannot take place without the addition of our willing them, and
bringing into play the most intense earnestness and zeal concerning them,
because it was fated, he says, that they were to take place with this condition.

'Here then again one may wonder at the man's want of discernment and
consideration, both of the sensible evidences and of the inconsequence of his
own arguments. For I imagine that just as what we call sweet is the direct
opposite of what is called bitter, and black of white, and hot of cold, so what
depends on us is the direct opposite of what depends on fate; if at least it is
assumed that one calls the effects of fate whatever things take place absolutely
whether we will or no, and effects of our action whatever things come to their
fulfilment from our diligence and energy, or fail of fulfilment in consequence
of our carelessness and indolence.

'If therefore my diligence in guarding the cloak be the cause of its being
saved, and a man's will to consort with his wife the cause of the children being
born, and the will to flee from his enemies the cause of his escape from being
killed by them, and the fighting bravely against his antagonist and guarding
against the blows from his hands the cause of his coming off from the contest
without a scratch, how is the dependence on fate to be maintained here? For if
these results follow from fate, they cannot be said to follow from our will: but
if from us, then evidently not from fate, because these cannot concur one with
the other.

'But, says he, they will follow from our will, that will however having been
included in fate. But how included (I should say), if at least both the guarding
the cloak and the not guarding it proceeded from my free will? For thus it is
evident that its preservation also would be in my power.

'Also from the very distinction which Chrysippus makes, it becomes evident that
our causation is freed from fate. For, says he, it is fated that the cloak be
preserved, if thou guard it: and that there will be children, if also thou
shouldst will it; but otherwise none of these things would have to take place.
But in the case of things predetermined by fate we should never employ these
pretended conditions.

'So we do not say that every man will die, if so and so should happen, and that
he will not die if it should not happen, but simply that he will die, whatsoever
may be done to prevent his dying at all; nor do we say that a certain man will
be incapable of feeling pain, even if he do this or that; but that every man is
capable of feeling pain, whether he wish it or not: and so of all other things
which are fated to be in this way and no other.

'So that if it is necessary that this or that should take place, if we should
wish it, but otherwise not, it is manifest that our wishing or not wishing was
not previously constrained by any other cause, but was in our own power.

'And if this was not subject to necessity, it is evident also that the
occurrence of this or that was not eternally predetermined, unless even the very
wish to guard the cloak, or the unwillingness, was a consequence of some fate
and the effect of some external necessary cause.

'But in this latter case the power of our free will is utterly destroyed, and
the cause of the cloak being saved or being lost would no longer be in me;
wherefore also I should reasonably be free from blame if it were lost (for its
loss was due to some other cause), and on the other hand I should deserve no
praise if it were saved, because even this was not my doing. But you were as
positive with your argument as if you could make all sure.' So far the writer
before mentioned. But to this let us subjoin also our extracts from the writings
of Alexander of Aphrodisias, a man very illustrious in philosophical studies,
who also himself in his book On Fate used such statements as follow to overthrow
the dogma.

CHAPTER IX

[ALEXANDER APHRODISIENSIS] 25 'The causes of events are divided into four kinds,
as the divine Aristotle has shown: for of causes some are efficient, and some
material; there is also among them the formal cause; and besides these three
there is the final cause, for the sake of which the thing is done.

'So many are the different kinds of causes: for whatever is a cause of anything
will be found to be included under one of these classes. For although all events
do not require so many causes, yet those which require the most do not exceed
the said number.

'But the difference between them will be more easy to recognize, if it be seen
in some example of what occurs. Let us then show the distinction of causes in
the case of a statue. Now as the "efficient cause" of the statue there is the
artist who made it, whom we call the sculptor: and as "matter," the bronze
substance, or stone, or whatever that may be which is shaped by the artist
according to his art: for this also is a cause of the production and existence
of the statue.

'Again, the form also, which is produced in this substance by the artist, is
itself a cause of the statue: wherefore the form is either a man throwing a
quoit, or a javelin, or it is of some other definite shape.

'These, however, are not the only causes of the production of the statue, but
the end for the sake of which it has been made----that is either the honour of
some person, or piety towards a god----is inferior to none of the causes of its
production. For without a cause the statue would not have been made at all.

'Since therefore the causes are so many, and their mutual differences easily
recognized, we might justly reckon fate among the efficient causes, as bearing a
relation to its own effects analogous to the art which creates the statue.

'This being so, it would follow that we should direct our argument to efficient
causes: for thus it will be known whether we ought to regard fate as the cause
of all things that are done, or to make room also for some other things besides
this as being efficient causes of certain things.

'Now Aristotle, in making his classification of all things that are done, says
that some of them are done for the sake of something, the doer of them having
before him a certain aim and end of what is done; and others for the sake of
nothing, namely all such as are not done in consequence of any purpose of the
doer, nor have reference to any definite end, being such as, for instance,
either holding fast a straw or twisting it about, and either stroking or pulling
one's hair, and all actions of this kind.

'For that these things are done is well known; but they are without the final
cause which is the purpose to be gained. Of things therefore which are done in
this way, without aim or object, there can be no reasonable classification.

'But of those things which have reference to something, and are done for the
sake of something, some take place according to nature, others according to
reason. For those which have nature as the cause of their production advance
according to certain numbers and definite order to some end, on reaching which
they cease to be produced----unless any obstacle hinder them in their natural
course to this appointed end.

'Also those things which are done according to reason have some end; for nothing
done according to reason is done at random, but they all have reference to some
end.

'Now things which are done according to reason are all such as are produced by
the doers reasoning about them, and contriving in what way they may be done. In
this way are produced all things which are done according to the rules of art,
and those which result from a deliberate purpose.

'And these differ from the products of nature, because these latter have both
their origin and the causes of the special character with which they are
produced in themselves (for their nature is of this special character); and
because they are produced in a certain order, although the nature which is their
efficient cause does not employ any reasoning about them, in the same way as do
the arts.

'But the results of art and of deliberate purpose have the origin of their
movement and their efficient cause from without, and not in themselves, and the
maker's calculation concerning them guides their production.

'A third class among things done for some end, namely those that are believed to
result from chance or spontaneous action, and which differ from those that are
primarily done with some purpose in this way, that in the latter case the means
which precede the end are employed for the sake of the end, while in the former
cases the actions preceding the end are done for some other end, but while so
done for another purpose there occurs to them as an end that which is said to be
spontaneous and accidental.

'Now these things being so, and all things that are done having been distributed
into these four kinds, it follows upon this that we should see among which of
the efficient causes we must set fate.

'Is it among those things which are done for no purpose? Or is this altogether
unreasonable? For we always use the name fate in regard to some end, and say
that this has been brought about in accordance with fate. Wherefore we must
necessarily set fate among the things which have a final cause.'

After making these distinctions word for word, the aforesaid author next
establishes them more at length, and shows that fate is nothing else than the
consequences of natural law; because in actions performed according to our
reasoning and according to art the necessity of fate is not discerned. But he
affirms that many natural consequences are hindered from occurring, and that
these cases are called contrary to nature, just as in the operations of art
there are many things said to be contrary to art. If then any things at all are
done contrary to natural law, they must also be done contrary to fate, since the
decrees of fate are nothing else than the laws of nature.

[ALEXANDER APHRODISIENSIS] 26 'We see, for instance,' he says, 'that the body,
from being thus or thus constituted by nature, is liable to diseases and death
according to its natural constitution: not, however, in all cases alike, nor of
necessity. For oftentimes careful treatment, and changes in the mode of life,
and the directions of physicians, and the counsels of the gods avail to drive
off a condition of this kind.

'In the same way in the case of the soul also one might find, contrary to the
natural condition, preferences and practices and modes of life different in each
of those who were improving from discipline and studies, and better counsels. .
. .

'For example, when the physiognomist once said some absurd things about Socrates
the philosopher, very far removed from his chosen course of life, and was being
derided for it by the companions of Socrates, Socrates said that Zopyrus had
made no mistake: for he would have been of such a character, as far as it
depended on his nature, had he not become better than his nature through the
discipline of philosophy.' Such are the effects of nature, which, he says,
differ not at all from those of fate. 27

'But the results of chance are of the following kind, when a thing has been done
for one purpose, and there occurs not that for which it was done, but something
else which was not even expected at first. For when a man, in digging for
another purpose, and not to find treasure, has lighted upon a treasure, he has
found it, he says, by chance. Also when a man has gone into the market for some
other purpose, and falls in with his b debtor with money in his hand, and
receives what is due to him, men say he has recovered his money by chance. Also
when the horse, in hope of food or for some other purpose, has escaped from
those who were holding him, but is met in his flight and course by falling into
the hands of his masters, he is said by some to have been saved accidentally.
Under such conditions these cannot be the results of fate.

'There are also some causes undiscoverable by human reason, which are believed
to occur in consequence of certain antipathies, the real cause of their
occurrence being unknown. Such are the effects which certain amulets have been
presumed to produce, though they have no reasonable and probable cause to
produce these effects: incantations also, and certain conjurings of this kind.
For the cause of these things is acknowledged by all men to be obscure: for
which reason they call them αναιτιολογετα, things of which the cause cannot be
explained.

'And there are besides these many things which occur contingently, and whichever
way it happens, and neither can these be according to fate.

'By contingent events are meant those wherein it was possible that they might
not happen, as is also made clear by the very expression, "whichever way it
happens": 28 as for example, the moving of one's own limbs, and the casual
turning of the neck, and stretching out a finger, and lifting the eyebrows, or
that one who is sitting should stand up, and one who is moving should become
still, and one who is talking become silent; and in thousands of cases one would
find that there existed a power capable of the opposite effects, and these cases
cannot depend on fate: for the things which depend on fate do not admit the
opposite of their actual condition.

'Moreover, a man's power of deliberation is not given to him without purpose:
yet he would have this power of deliberation to no purpose, if he performed his
actions from necessity. But it evidently appears that man alone has from nature
this advantage over the other animals, that he does not follow the impressions
of sense as they do, but has in his reason a judge of the circumstances which
befall him: and by using this, if the things presented by sense are, on
examination, such as they at first appeared, he assents to the impression, and
so will pursue them: but if they appear to be different, he no longer abides by
his previous conception, after reason has proved the representations false, in
consequence of his deliberating upon them.29

'At any rate we deliberate only about things which we have power to do: and
whenever we act without having deliberated, we often repent and blame ourselves
for our want of consideration: and further, if we see others acting
inconsiderately, we charge them with doing wrong, and bid them consult such and
such advisers, as knowing that such actions are in our own power.30

'That their argument about fate is false, is sufficiently testified by the fact
that even its champions themselves are not able to conform to their own
statements. For they profess to exhort and to teach, and they advise men to
learn and to be educated, and they reprove and punish those who do things that
are not right, as sinning of their own will.31 Moreover, they leave behind them
very many books, by which they expect the young to be educated. They would have
ceased, therefore, from being so eager in their arguments if they had observed
that (in their books) they claim forgiveness for involuntary offenders, but say
that voluntary transgressors deserve punishment, implying evidently that to
offend or not lies in their own power.32

'Thus even according to their own account the necessity arising from fate is
abolished, and it is established that free-will is ours by nature, with the
limitation that there are also very many things not in our own power, as the
effects of natural laws, and the accidents of fortune, though even these are
contrary to the doctrine of fate, as we have previously shown.'

These statements we have abridged out of a great many, because in the opinions
expressed on our side the argument in favour of free-will is of great length:
and with this doctrine the utterances of the philosophers which we have quoted
concurred, confirming by their testimony our sacred Scriptures, and convicting
of falsehood the opinions concerning fate not only of the multitude of mankind
but also of the wonderful oracular gods. And some of these extracts were
sarcastically aimed against the famous answers of oracles, and some were
objections urged against the wonderful philosophers by their own associates. Now
therefore it is time to examine also the arguments of the astrologers against
the Chaldean sect, of those, I mean, who profess this mischievous charlatanism
as a learned study. And my proofs on this subject I shall present to you from
one who is by birth a Syrian, and has pursued his inquiries to the highest point
of Chaldean science. The man's name is Bardesanes, and in his Dialogues with his
companions it is recorded that he spake as follows:

CHAPTER X

[BARDESANES] 33 'It is by natural law that man is begotten, is nourished,
reaches maturity, begets children, eats, drinks, and sleeps, grows old and dies:
and this is the case of every man and of every irrational animal.

'And as to the other living creatures, which have only an animal soul, and are
begotten wholly by sexual intercourse, they are almost wholly borne along in the
course of nature. A lion is carnivorous, and takes revenge if he be injured: and
therefore all lions are carnivorous and take revenge. Ewe lambs eat grass, and
touch no flesh, and if injured take no revenge: and every lamb's character is
the same.

'A scorpion eats earth, and injures those who have not injured him, striking
with a venomous sting: and all scorpions have the same evil disposition. An ant
knows by nature the advent of winter, and by toiling through the whole summer
stores up food for itself: and all ants work in like manner.

'A bee makes honey, and also feeds upon it: and all bees follow the same
husbandry. And I might have set before you many kinds of animals, which being
unable to depart from their own nature might have caused you much wonderment.
But I thought I had given sufficient proof from the examples set forth, that all
other animals according to the community or diversity of nature given to each
are borne along pleasantly by necessity.

'But men alone, having as their special privilege the mind, and the reason which
proceeds from it, in what they have in common follow nature, as I said before,
but as to their special gift are not governed by nature.

'For they do not all even eat the same food: some feed like lions, and others
like lambs: they have not one fashion of raiment: there is not one custom, nor
one law of civil society among them, nor one impulse of desire for things: but
each man chooses a life for himself according to his own will, not imitating his
neighbour, except in what he chooses.

'For his freedom is subject to no slavery, and if ever he shall voluntarily be a
slave, this also is a part of his freedom, that he is able to be a voluntary
slave.

'How many of mankind, and especially among the Alans, eat raw flesh, like wild
beasts, without tasting bread, and not because they have it not, but because
they are not willing! Others, like tame animals, taste no flesh: some eat only
fish; while others never taste fish, not even if they be starving. Some drink
water, some drink wine, and some drink strong liquor.

'And in short there is a great difference among mankind in food and drink, as
they differ even in the eating of vegetables and fruits. Moreover some, like
scorpions and like asps, injure without having been injured; and some, like
other animals, revenge themselves when injured: and others ravage like wolves,
and steal like weasels; while others, like lambs and goats, are pursued by men
of like feelings with themselves, and do no injury to those who injure them.
Some also are called good, and some bad, and some just.

'Whence we may understand that man is not altogether led by nature (for of what
kind shall we say his nature is?): but is borne one way according to nature, and
another way according to will. Wherefore he incurs praise and blame and
condemnation in matters dependent on will: but in matters dependent on nature he
has immunity from blame, not out of pity, but from reason.' And afterwards he
says: 34

'Men enacted different laws in each country, some written, and some unwritten:
of which I shall mention some, according to what I know and remember, beginning
from the beginning of the world.

'Among the Seres it is law that none should murder, nor fornicate, nor steal,
nor worship graven images: and in that very great country you cannot see a
temple, nor a harlot, nor a reputed adulteress, no thief dragged off to justice,
no homicide, no murdered man.

'For among them no man's free-will was compelled by the fiery planet Mars in
mid-heaven to kill a man with the sword, nor by the conjunction of Venus with
Mars to consort with another man's wife, though of course Mars was in mid-heaven
every day, and Serians were being born every day and every hour.

'Among the Indians and Bactrians there are many thousands of those called
Brahmans, who according to the tradition of their forefathers and of their laws
neither commit murder, nor worship images, nor taste animal food, nor are ever
intoxicated, as they never taste wine or strong drink, have no communication
with evil, but devote themselves to God; whereas the other Indians are guilty of
murder and fornication and drunkenness, and worship images, and in almost
everything follow the course of fate.

'But in the same clime of India there is a certain tribe of Indians who hunt
down the strangers that fall in their way, and sacrifice and eat them; and
neither the beneficent stars have hindered them from blood-guiltiness and
unlawful marriages, nor have the maleficent compelled the Brahmans to do evil.

'Among the Persians it was lawful to marry their daughters, and sisters, and
mothers: and these unholy marriages the Persians practised not only in that
country and that clime, but also any of them who migrated from Persia, those who
are called Magusaei continue to practise the same iniquity, handing down the
same laws and customs to their children in succession.

'And of these there are still many in Media and in Egypt, and in Phrygia, and in
Galatia. Yet surely Venus was not found in the regions and houses of Saturn,
with Mars in close company with Saturn, at the nativities of all of them.

'Among the Geli it is customary for the women to till the ground, and build
houses, and do all the labour, and to consort with whom they will, and not be
blamed by the men; nor is any called an adulteress, because they are all hard
workers, and consort with all, and especially with strangers.35

'The Gelan women neither perfume themselves nor wear dyed garments, but are all
barefooted, although the Gelan men adorn themselves with soft clothing, and
various colours, and wear gold ornaments and perfume themselves, and this not
from any effeminacy in other respects, for they are brave, and very warlike, and
much given to hunting.

'And it was not the lot of all the Gelan women to find Venus an evil influence
in Capricornus or in Aquarius, nor of all their men to have the Paphian goddess
with Mars in Aries, where the Chaldean students say that those who are both
brave and luxurious are born.

'Among the Bactrians the women use every kind of distinguished ornament and
every kind of perfume, and receive more attendance than the men from handmaidens
and young pages: they promenade on horseback with great show, and adorn their
horses with much gold and precious stones: nor are they chaste, but consort
promiscuously with their slaves and with strangers, having immunity in this
respect, and are not blamed by their husbands, over whom they in a manner
domineer.

'Yet surely the laughter-loving Aphrodite is not in her own regions in
mid-heaven with Zeus and Ares at every birth of the women in Bactria. But in
Arabia and Osrhoene, not only are adulteresses put to death, but even those who
are suspected are not let off without punishment.

'Among the Parthians and Armenians murderers are put to death, sometimes by the
judges, and sometimes by the blood-relations of the murdered. And if any man
murder his wife, or a childless brother, or an unmarried sister, or a son or
daughter, he is not accused by any one, the law being such in those countries;
but among the Greeks and Romans the murderers of their kinsmen and relations are
subjected to greater punishment.

'Among the Atri he who steals anything worth an obol is stoned, among the
Bactrians he who steals trifles is spit upon, among the Romans he is severely
beaten: for such are their laws.

' From the river Euphrates, and as far as the Ocean towards the East, he who is
reviled as a murderer, or a thief, is not at all indignant: but he who is
reviled for sodomy avenges himself even to the death: among the Greeks, however,
even their wise men are not blamed for having favourites.

'In the same East those who suffer outrage, if it become known, are put to death
by brothers, or fathers, or kinsmen, and are not thought worthy of burial in
open day.

'Among the Gauls the young men give themselves in marriage openly, not regarding
this as a matter of reproach, because of the law among them. Yet it cannot
possibly have been the lot of all in Gaul who thus impiously suffer outrage to
have the morning-star with Mercury setting in the houses of Saturn and regions
of Mars at their nativities.

'In Britain many men have the same wife: but in Parthia many wives have one
husband, and they are all chaste and obedient to him according to the law.

'The Amazons are all without husbands, but like the brute creatures once in the
year about the vernal equinox they pass beyond their own frontiers and consort
with men of the neighbouring countries, counting this a sort of festival: and
conceiving by them they return home, and according to the law of nature
necessarily bear children at one season, and the males who are born they expose,
but rear the females: and they are warlike, and attentive to gymnastic
exercises.

'Mercury in conjunction with Venus in the houses of Mercury makes modellers, and
painters, and bankers; but in the houses of Venus perfumers, or singing-masters,
and actors of dramatic poems.

'Among the Taïni and Saraceni, and in the inland part of Libya, also among the
Moors, and among the Nomads by the mouth of the Ocean, and in the further part
of Germany, and in the inland region of Sarmatia, and in Scythia, and in all the
nations on the north of the Pontus, and in all Alania, and Albania, and Otene,
and Saunia, and in Chryse, there is not a banker to be seen, nor modeller, nor
painter, nor architect, nor geometer, nor singing-master, nor actor of dramatic
poems; but the character proceeding from the operation of Mercury and Venus is
wanting in that whole circuit of the world.

'The Medes all cast out the still-breathing corpses to the dogs whom they
carefully rear: yet they have not all of them Mars with the Moon in Cancer
beneath the earth at their birth in the daytime.

'The Indians burn their dead, and with them burn their wives with their own
consent: and surely all the Indian women who are burnt alive have not the Sun
with Mars, in Leo, or in the region of Mars, beneath the earth at their birth in
the night.

'Most of the Germans die by strangulation, and surely the majority of Germans
have not the Moon and the hour of their birth intercepted by Saturn and Mars.

'There are men born in every nation, every day, and with every kind of nativity:
but law and custom prevail in each division of mankind because of man's
free-will. Thus their nativity does not compel the Seres to murder against their
will, or the Brahmans to eat flesh, or the Persians to abstain from unlawful
marriages, or the Indians to cease to be burned, or the Medes to cease from
being eaten by dogs, or the Parthians to give up polygamy, or the women in
Mesopotamia to be unchaste, or the Greeks to cease from practising athletic
exercises with their bodies naked, or the Romans to cease to rule, or the Gauls
to cease from effeminacy, or the other barbarous nations to converse with those
whom the Greeks call Muses. But as I said before, each nation and each man uses
his own freedom as he will and when he will, and is also a slave of his nativity
and the nature which clothes him with flesh, sometimes according to his will,
and sometimes contrary to his will. For everywhere and in every nation there are
rich and poor, rulers and ruled, healthy and sickly, each according to the lot
of his nativity.

'These arguments, O Bardesanes, said I, have entirely persuaded me. But the
astrologers say that this earth is divided into seven zones, and that one of the
seven stars rules each zone; and that the different laws have not been enacted
by men for themselves, but the will of each ruling star prevails in his own
region, and is regarded by those under his rule as law.

'He replied: This answer of theirs, O Philip, is not true. For although the
earth is divided into seven zones, yet nevertheless we find many differences of
laws in the same division. For there are neither seven laws corresponding to the
seven stars, nor twelve corresponding to the signs of the zodiac, nor thirty-six
corresponding to the decani, but numberless laws.

'You ought also to remember what I said before, that in the same clime and same
region of India there are Indians who are cannibals, and there are those who
abstain from animal food; also that the Magusaei marry their daughters not only
in Persia, but also in every nation where they may dwell, observing the laws of
their forefathers, and the initiatory rites of their mysteries.

'Also, we gave a list of many barbarous nations living in the South and West and
East and North, that is in different climes, who have no share in the science of
Hermes.

'How many wise men, think you, have set aside badly constituted laws? And how
many laws have been abolished from being impracticable? How many kings after
gaining power over nations have changed the laws that were before their time and
established their own? Yet none of the stars had lost its proper clime.

'Yesterday the Romans having become masters of Arabia changed the laws of the
barbarians. For one free-will follows another free-will. But I will now set
forth for you a fact which might convince even the incredulous.

'The Jews who received a law through Moses all shed the blood of their male
children by circumcising them on the eighth day, not waiting for the appearance
of a star, nor respecting the influence of clime, nor yielding to any law of a
foreign country: but whether they are in Syria, or Gaul, or Italy, or Greece, or
Parthia, or wherever they may be, they perform this rite.

'And this is not dependent on nativity, for all Jews cannot have the same natal
stars. Moreover every seventh day, wherever they may be, they abstain from all
work, and neither travel nor use fire: nor does his nativity compel a Jew either
to build or to demolish a house, to work, to buy or to sell on the sabbath day,
although on that same day Jews beget and are begotten, and sicken and die: for
these are things not dependent on freewill.

'In Syria and Osrhoene many used to mutilate themselves in honour of Rhea:
hereupon king Abgar at one stroke commanded that those who cut off the genital
organs should also have their hands cut off, and from thenceforth no one in
Osrhoene mutilated himself.

'And what shall we say concerning the sect of the Christians? For we who hold
those opinions have arisen in multitudes in different climes, in every nation
and region, and though many in number, are called by one name.

'And neither in Parthia do the Christians, Parthians though they are, practise
polygamy, nor do those in Media cast their dead to dogs, nor do those in Persia,
though they are Persians, marry their daughters, nor among the Bactrians and the
Gauls do they form unnatural unions, nor do those in Egypt worship Apis or the
dog, the he-goat, or the cat. But wherever they are, they are neither overcome
by ill-constituted laws and customs, nor does their nativity, regulated by their
ruling stars, compel them to practise the evils forbidden by their teacher, but
they submit to sickness and poverty and sufferings and reputed infamies.

'For as the free man of our idea is not compelled to be a slave, and, even if he
be compelled, resists those who compel him, so also the man whom we regard as a
slave cannot easily escape from his subjection.

'For if we could do all things, we ourselves should be the all, even as, if we
could do nothing, we should be instruments, as I said before, of others, and not
masters of ourselves. But with God's approval all things are possible and
irresistible; for nothing can resist His will. For even the things which seem to
resist, resist only because He is kind, and allows each nature to have its own
privilege, and its freedom of will.' So far the Syrian. And when I have
mentioned one thing more, I will conclude the discussion. For since we have made
sufficient extracts from the non-Christian writings, whilst those from the
sacred Scriptures are still wanting, and since these are what we most need for
The Preparation of the Evangelic Demonstration, it would be well to examine
these also, that our argument may be deficient in none of the considerations
proper to the question before us. From this source I shall also make our present
subject clear to you.

You would not, however, be able to understand the bare letter of the sacred
oracles, since in most points they are obscurely expressed. And therefore I
shall set before you their interpreter: and if you are not envious of stronger
minds, you know perhaps the man, who to this present time still takes rank in
the companies of Christ by the works which he has bequeathed, nor indeed is
unknown even to those without for the zeal which he has displayed in their
studies also. Consider then how many and how excellent determinations on the
subject before us the admirable Origen has given in his Commentaries on Genesis,
and how he traced out the argument concerning Fate.

CHAPTER XI

[ORIGEN] 36 'One of the things most necessary to resolve is the statement that
the lights, which are no other than the sun and moon and stars, are given "for
signs"; not only because the nations who are alien to the faith of Christ
stumble upon the topic of Fate, since all things upon earth, and the
circumstances of each individual man, perhaps of brute animals also, are
supposed by them to occur by the combination of the so-called wandering stars
with those, in the zodiac; but also because many of those who are supposed to
have received the faith are distracted by the doubt whether all human affairs
are not ruled by necessity, so that it is impossible for them to take place
otherwise than as the stars, according to their different configurations, bring
them to fulfilment.

'Now the consequence for those who hold these doctrines is that they utterly
destroy our free-will, and therefore also both praise and blame, and
commendable, or on the other hand blame-able actions.

'But if this is the case, there is an end of the proclaimed judgement of God,
and of threatenings against sinners that they shall be punished; also, on the
other hand, of the privileges and beatitudes promised to those who have devoted
themselves to the better life: for none of these things will any longer have a
good d reason for their occurrence.

'Also if any one would look at the consequences to himself of the doctrines he
holds, (he would see that) both his faith will be vain, and Christ's advent of
no avail, and all the dispensation of law and prophets, and the labours of the
Apostles to establish the churches of God through Christ.

'Unless perchance Christ Himself having, according to these so daring thinkers,
been subjected to the necessity arising from the motion of the stars by the
birth which He assumed, both did and suffered all, because those extraordinary
powers were bestowed on Him not by God the Father of all things, but by the
stars. From which arguments, atheistical and impious as they are, it follows
also that believers must be said to believe in God because led to do so by the
stars.

'But we would ask of them with what purpose God made such a world, that some of
the dwellers therein being men should take the place of women, not having been
in any way themselves the cause of the outrage, while others placed in the
condition of wild beasts, by the course of the world having made them such,
because God had so arranged the whole, give themselves over to most cruel and
utterly inhuman practices, such as murder and piracy?

'And what must we say of the things which occur among men and of the sins
committed by them, countless as they are, when they are acquitted of all blame
by the champions of these grand doctrines, who ascribe to God the cause of all
things evil and blameable?

'But if some of them, as if apologizing for God, say that the good God is
another who has not the government of any of these things, and impute such evils
as these to the Demiurge of the world----in the first place they will not even
thus be able to prove what they wish, that He is just. For how could He, who
according to them is the author of so much evil, be reasonably called just?

'And in the second place we must inquire what they will ever say about
themselves? Are they subject to the course of the stars, or are they freed from
it, and in their life have no influence wrought upon them from that source? For
if they shall say that they are subject to the stars, it is evident that the
stars granted them the power of perceiving this, and the Demiurge by the motion
of the universe will have suggested the doctrine concerning the higher god whom
they have invented; and this they do not wish.

'But if they shall answer that they are exempt from the laws of the Demiurge
which depend upon the stars, in order that their statement may not be a denial
incapable of proof, let them endeavour to convince us more irresistibly, by
showing the difference between a mind subject to nativity and fate, and another
free from them. For it is evident to those who know men of this kind that, when
required to give them an explanation, they will be quite unable to do so.

'In addition to what has been said, prayers also are superfluous, being employed
in vain. For if it has been fixed by necessity that this or that should happen,
and if the stars do this, and nothing can take place contrary to their mutual
combination, we are unreasonable in asking God to grant us this or that.

'But why need I prolong the discussion, by proving the impiety of the trite
topic concerning fate so hackneyed by the multitude without examination? For
what I have already said is sufficient for an outline.

'Let us, however, remember from what point we have come upon our present
subject, while examining the passage "Let the lights be for signs." 37 They who
learn the truth on any matters have either been eyewitnesses of the facts, and
so give a faithful description of this or that circumstance, because they saw
what was done and suffered by the actors and sufferers, or else they learn this
or that from having heard the report of those who were in no way the causes of
what happened.

'But let us at present exclude from our argument the possibility that the actors
or sufferers, by relating what they have done or suffered, bring one who has not
been present to a knowledge of the facts.

'If therefore the man, who is informed by one who is in no way the cause of the
events, that this or that has occurred or will occur to certain persons, fails
to distinguish that an informant concerning something that has occurred or will
occur is in no way the cause of the matter being of this or that character, he
will suppose that the man who has represented to him that this or that has taken
place, or this or that will take place, has himself done or will do the things
of which he informs him, but will evidently be mistaken in his supposition.

'Just as if any one having met with a prophetic book which foreshowed the story
of the traitor Judas, after learning what was to take place should think, on
seeing it fulfilled, that the book was the cause that this or that happened
afterwards, because he had learned from the book what would be afterwards done
by Judas; or again should suppose that the cause was not the book but the man
who wrote it at first, or he who inspired him, say, to speak, namely God.

'But just as in the case of the prophecies concerning Judas the very expressions
when examined show that God was not the author of Judas' betrayal, but only
foreshowed it because He foreknew what acts would follow from this man's
wickedness through his own fault; so if any one were to plunge deep into the
question of the foreknowledge of all things by God, and by those in whom He
imprinted, as it were, the language of his own foreknowledge, he would
understand that neither He who foreknew was in any way the cause of the things
foreknown, nor the instruments which received the impressions of the words of
the foreknowledge of Him who foreknew.

'That God indeed knows long before that every thing which is to be will happen,
is evident, even apart from Scripture, from the very idea of God to the man who
understands the excellence of the power of the Divine mind.

'But if it is necessary to prove this from Scripture also, the prophecies are
full of examples of this kind, and so also is the description by Susanna of God
as knowing all things before they come to pass, where she speaks as follows: "O
God, the Eternal, the discerner of secrets, that knowest all things before they
be, Thou understandest that these have borne false witness against me." 38

'And most clearly in the third Book of Kings both the name of the king who waste
reign and his deeds were recorded many years before they came to pass, being
predicted as follows: "And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month, on the
fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in the land of Judah:
and he went up unto the altar that is in Bethel, to sacrifice unto the calves
that he had made." 39 Then after a few words: "And behold, there came a man of
God out of Judah by the word of the LORD unto Bethel, and Jeroboam was standing
upon his altar to burn incense. And he cried against the altar by the word of
the LORD, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the LORD: Behold a son is to be
born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he sacrifice
the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men's bones
shall he burn upon thee. And he gave a sign in that day, saying, This is the
sign which the LORD hath spoken, saying, Behold, the altar shall be rent, and
the ashes that are thereon shall be poured out."

'And after a few words it is shown, that "both the altar was rent, and the ashes
poured out from the altar according to the sign which the man of God had given
by the word of the LORD."

'Isaiah also came long before the captivity in Babylon, and some time after that
captivity came Cyrus the king of the Persians who assisted in the building of
the temple in the times of Ezra; and in Isaiah there is the following prophecy
concerning Cyrus by name: "Thus saith the LORD God to Cyrus mine anointed, whose
right hand I have holden, that nations should obey before him, and I will break
the strength of kings, I will open doors before him, and cities shall not be
shut. I will go before thee, and make mountains plain, I will break in pieces
doors of brass, and shatter bars of iron: and I will give thee treasures of
darkness, hidden unseen treasures will I open to thee, that thou mayest know
that I am the LORD God, which call thee by thy name, the God of Israel. For
Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel my chosen, I will call thee by my name, and
will accept thee." 40

'From this passage it is clearly shown that, for the sake of the people whose
benefactor Cyrus had been, though he knew not the religion of the Hebrews, God
granted to him the rule over many nations. And these facts one may learn also
from the Greeks who recorded the history of Cyrus the subject of the prophecy.

'Moreover in Daniel, in the time of the Babylonian monarchs, there are shown to
Nebuchadnezzar the kingdoms that should come after him. And they are shown by
the image, in which the kingdom of Babylon is called gold, the Persian silver,
the Macedonian brass, and the Roman iron. 41

'Again in the same prophet the events concerning Darius and Alexander, and the
four successors of Alexander king of Macedon, and Ptolemy, the ruler of Egypt,
who was surnamed Lagos, are thus foretold: "Behold, an he-goat came from the
west over the face of the whole earth: ... and the goat had a horn between his
eyes. And he came to the ram that had the horns, which I saw standing before the
river, and ran upon him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come close unto
the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake
both his horns, and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, and he
cast him upon the ground, and trampled upon him, and there was none to deliver
the ram out of his hand. And the he-goat magnified himself exceedingly. And when
he was grown strong, his great horn was broken, and there came up from beneath
it other horns towards the four winds of heaven, and out of one of them came
forth one strong horn, and waxed exceeding great toward the south and toward the
west." 42

'And why need I mention the prophecies concerning Christ, as for instance the
place of His birth, Bethlehem, and the place where He was brought up, Nazareth,
and the flight into Egypt, and the miracles which He wrought, and how he was
betrayed by Judas who had been called to be an Apostle? For all these are signs
of God's foreknowledge.

'Moreover the Saviour Himself says, "When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed by
armies, then ye shall know that her desolation is at hand." 43 For He foretold
what afterwards happened, the final destruction of Jerusalem.

'Since then we have given proofs concerning God's foreknowledge, it will not be
inopportune, in order to explain how the stars are for signs, to observe that
the motion of the stars is so ordered, that the so-called planets follow a
course opposite to the fixed stars, in order that from the configuration of the
stars signs of all things that happen concerning each individual man, and
generally, may be made known: I do not say "known" by men, for the power of
truly understanding from the motion of the stars the case of each one of those
who are doing or suffering whatever it may be, is far too great for man: but
"known" by the powers which for many reasons must necessarily know these things,
as we shall show to the best of our power in what follows.

'But from certain observations, or even from the teaching of angels who had
transgressed their own order, and to afflict our race taught something about
these things, men got to understand them, and then thought that those stars from
which they supposed themselves to receive the signs were the causes of those
things which the Scripture says that they signify. And these very matters we
will immediately discuss in a summary way, but very carefully, according to the
best of our ability.

'We will therefore propose for consideration the following questions:

'(1) How our freedom is preserved, if God foreknows from eternity the things
which are supposed to be done by every man?

'(2) In what way the stars are not efficient causes of human affairs, but only
signs of the same?

'(3) That men cannot have exact knowledge of these affairs, but the signs are
set forth by powers greater than man's.

'(4) What is the cause of God's having appointed the signs for the information
of those powers? This shall be the fourth subject of inquiry.

'Let us look then at that first question, about which many of the Greeks were
scrupulous, because they thought that all things are made subject to necessity,
and that our freedom can in no way be maintained, if God foreknows future
events: for so they rashly accepted an impious dogma, rather than admit that
which, as they say, gives glory to God, but destroys our freedom, and therefore
destroys praise and blame, the merit of virtues and the culpability of vices.

'And they say, if God knew from eternity that this or that man would be unjust
and would commit certain acts of injustice, and if God's knowledge is
infallible, then the man foreseen to be of such a character will certainly be
unjust, as he will commit these acts of injustice, and it is impossible that he
should not do injustice: and if it is impossible that he should not do
injustice, his doing injustice is compelled by necessity, and it will be
impossible that he should do anything else than that which God foreknew. But if
it is impossible for him to do anything else, and if no man is to be blamed for
not doing an impossibility, we have no right to blame the unjust.

'From the unjust man and deeds of injustice they pass on to the other kinds of
sin, and then on the other hand to what are considered good deeds; and it
follows, they say, upon God's having foreknown the future that our free-will
cannot possibly be maintained.

'In answer to whom we have to say that, when God was contemplating the beginning
of His creation, since nothing takes place without a cause, he travelled over in
His mind every future event, and saw that, when this has occurred, that follows,
and if this consequence occurs, that third thing follows: and when this third is
settled, that other will occur; and thus having travelled on to the end of all
things, he knows the things that will be, though He does not at all cause the
occurrence of everything that He knows.

'For just as, if a man should see another to be rash through ignorance, and
through his rashness to be thoughtlessly walking on a slippery road, and should
perceive that he will slip and fall, he does not become the cause of the other's
slipping; so we must consider that God, having foreseen of what character each
man will be, discerns also the causes of this his future character, and that he
will commit these sins, or perform those good deeds.

'And if we must speak freely, we shall not say that foreknowledge is the cause
of events (for God does not meddle with the man whom He has foreknown to be
about to sin, at the time of his sinning): but we shall say something more
strange and yet true, that the future event is the cause that the foreknowledge
of it is of such a character. For it does not take place because it has been
known, but it has been known because it was about to take place.

'We must however make a distinction. For if any one interprets the expression,
"It will certainly be," as if there were a necessity that what is foreknown must
take place, we do not grant him this: for we shall not say that, since it was
foreknown that Judas would become a traitor, there was an absolute necessity for
Judas to become a traitor. In fact in the prophecies concerning Judas there are
reproaches and accusations of Judas recorded, which prove to every one his
culpability. But blame would not have attached to him, if he was of necessity a
traitor, and if it was not possible for him to be like the other apostles.

'Now see if this is not made clear by the express statements which we will bring
forward, running thus: "Nor let there be any to have compassion on his
fatherless children,... because that he remembered not to show mercy, but
persecuted the poor and needy man, and the broken in heart, to slay them. Yea,
he loved cursing, and it shall come unto him: and he delighted not in blessing,
and it shall be far from him." 44

'If, however, any one shall explain the expression, "It will certainly be," by
saying that though certain events will be in accordance with its indication, yet
that it was possible also for it to have been otherwise, this we admit as true.
For though it is "not possible that God should lie," 45 yet it is possible,
concerning things that may either happen or not happen, that He should know
either that they will happen or that they will not happen.

'But we will state this more clearly in the following way. If it is possible for
Judas to be an Apostle like Peter, it is possible for God to perceive concerning
Judas that he will continue an Apostle like Peter: if it is possible for Judas
to become a traitor, it is possible for God to know concerning him that he will
be a traitor.

'But if Judas will be a traitor, and God has foreknowledge of the two
contingencies before mentioned, of which only one can possibly be realized, then
as He foreknows the truth, He will foreknow that Judas will become a traitor: it
being at the same time possible that the object of His knowledge might also come
to pass in the other way. And God's knowledge would say, "though it is possible
for this man to do this, yet the contrary also is possible; but whereas both are
possible, I know that this he will do."

'For though God might say, "It is not possible that this or that man should
fly," He cannot say in like manner, in giving an oracle, for instance,
concerning any one, that it is not possible for this man to act temperately. For
there is absolutely no power in the man of flying at all, but there is a power
of acting temperately, and of acting intemperately.

'And as he possesses both these powers, the man who gives no heed to words of
exhortation and discipline gives himself over to the worse power; but he who has
sought the truth and purposed to live according to it, gives himself over to the
better power. The one does not seek for what is true, because he inclines
towards pleasure: but the other inquires concerning the truth, because he is
persuaded by the general opinions of mankind and by words of exhortation.

'Again, the one chooses pleasure, not because he has no power to resist it, but
because he makes no effort; while the other despises it, because he sees the
indecency that there is often in it.

'To show, however, that God's foreknowledge imposes no necessity on those
concerning whom He has conceived such knowledge, will add to what I have already
said the following argument, that in many places of the Scriptures God commands
the prophets to preach repentance, without claiming for Himself the knowledge,
whether those who hear will return or will continue in their sins: as in
Jeremiah it is said, "It may be they will hearken and will repent." 46

'For it is not from ignorance whether they will hear or not that God Says, "It
may be they will hearken and will repent"; but He shows, as it were, from the
expression, that there was the even balance of the things that might happen,
lest His foreknowledge, if previously announced, should make the hearers to
fall, by presenting an idea of necessity, as though it were not in their own
power to return; and thus His foreknowledge should itself become, as it were,
the cause of their sins: or again, lest those who, from ignorance of the good
foreknown, are able in their conflict and resistance against vice to live a life
of virtue, should because of the foreknowledge relax in their efforts and cease
to take a vigorous stand against sin, from expecting that what had been foretold
would certainly come to pass. For in this way also the foreknowledge of the good
to come would be a kind of hindrance.

'So then God, in arranging all things in the world beneficially, with good
reason made us blind to future events. For the knowledge thereof would have made
us give up the contest against vice, and from appearing to have been clearly
perceived would have weakened us and made us to cease from the struggle against
sin, and so to become more readily subjected to it.

'At the same time also the fact that there had come to this or that man the
foreknowledge that he would in any case be good, would be at variance with his
becoming noble and good. For in addition to our natural qualities there is need
of great earnestness and exertion in order to become noble and good: but the
previous acquisition of the knowledge that one will in any case be noble and
good gradually relaxes the endeavour. Wherefore it is to our advantage that we
know not whether we shall be good or bad.

'But since we have said that God made us blind to future events, see whether we
can explain a certain disputed expression from Exodus, "Who made man dumb or
deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?",47 in this way, that He may
be seen to have made the same man both blind and seeing, seeing in reference to
things present, but blind to things to come. For it is not necessary on the
present occasion to explain the words dumb and deaf.

'That very many things, however, which are not in our power, are causes of many
things which are in our power, we will ourselves admit: and if they, I mean the
things which are not in our power, did not take place, certain of the things
which are in our power could not be done. But of the things in our power this or
that is done in consequence of these antecedents which are not in our power, it
being possible upon the same antecedents also to do other things than those
which we do.

'And if any one claims that our free-will is independent of everything, so that
we do not choose a certain course in consequence of this or that having happened
to us, he forgets that he is a part of the world, and encompassed by association
with mankind and with his surroundings.

'However, I think it has been fairly proved in a summary manner, that God's
foreknowledge does not in any way necessitate the foreknown events. So now,
come, let us also contend for the fact that the stars are in no way the causes,
but only the signs, of what happens among mankind.

'Now it is clear that if this or that configuration of the stars were supposed
to be an efficient cause of certain things that happen to the man (for this be
the present subject of inquiry), the configuration which there may have been,
say, to-day affecting this man, cannot be thought to have been the cause of the
past circumstances affecting another or others: for every efficient cause is
prior to its effect.

'But as far as we can judge from the doctrines of those who profess such arts,
things prior to the configuration are supposed to be foretold concerning the
men.

'For they profess that in some such manner as follows, when they have learned
the hour of this or that man's birth, they can discover how each of the planets
was situated vertically either to this or that degree of the sign of the zodiac,
or of the minute divisions therein, and what star of the zodiac was on the
eastern horizon, and what on the western, and what on the Meridian, and what on
the Anti-Meridian.

'And when they have settled the places of the stars, which they think they have
figured for themselves, as having had such a configuration at the moment of a
certain man's nativity, then by the time of his birth they search out not only
future events, but also the past, and things that had happened before the birth
and before the generation of the man in question, concerning his father, of what
country he is, rich or poor, whole in body or maimed, good or bad in moral
disposition, of large possessions or of none, of this or that occupation. The
same also concerning his mother, and elder brothers, if there happen to be any.

'Now let us admit at present that they discover the true place (of the stars),
although on this very point we shall afterwards show that it is not so: let us
inquire therefore of those who suppose that human affairs are brought under
necessity by the stars, in what way the configuration of to-day, which is of a
certain kind, can possibly have been the cause of earlier events.

'For if this is impossible, in proportion as the truth is disccovered concerning
the time of the earlier events, it is clear that the stars moving thus in the
heaven cannot have caused the past events which took place before they were in
this position. But if so, perhaps one who admits that they tell true, from
observing what is said about future events, will say that they tell true not
because the stars cause the events but only because they signify them.

'But if any one assert that though the stars are not the cause of the past
events, yet other configurations have been the causes of their production, and
that the present configuration has only indicated them, but that nevertheless
things to come are foreshown from the present configuration of a certain
person's nativity; let him prove the difference between being able to show that
some things have been discerned with truth from the stars as efficient causes,
but other things merely from their indications.

'And if they are not able to assign the difference, they will candidly agree
that none of the things which concern mankind are caused by the stars, but as we
have said before are only indicated, if so it be; which is the same as if one
learned both past and present events not from the stars, but from the mind of
God, by some prophetic utterance.

'For just as we before showed that the argument on behalf of our free-will is
not at all impaired by God's knowing what every man will do, so neither do the
signs which God appointed to give indications hinder our free-will. But like a
book which contains future events in the language of prophecy, it is possible
that the whole heaven, being as it were a book of God, may contain the things to
come.

'Wherefore in the Prayer of Joseph we may understand in this way what is said by
Jacob, "For I read in the tablets of heaven all things that shall happen to you
and to your sons." 48 Perhaps also the saying, "The heaven shall be rolled
together as a scroll," 49 shows that the lessons therein contained significant
of the things to come will be accomplished and, so to say, fulfilled, just as
the prophecies are said to have been fulfilled by having come to pass.

'And thus the heavenly bodies will have been for signs, according to the
expression which says, "Let them be for signs." 50 But Jeremiah, to recall us to
ourselves, and to take away the fear consequent upon the things supposed to be
indicated by the stars, and perhaps suspected also of proceeding from them,
says, "Be not dismayed at the signs from heaven." 51

'Let us look at a second attempt to show how the stars cannot possibly be
efficient causes, but, if anything, significations. For it is possible to learn
the fortunes of one man from an infinite number of nativities (but this we state
as a hypothesis, granting the possibility that a knowledge of them may be
attained by men): for to take an instance, whether such a man will suffer so and
so, and will die by falling among robbers and being slain, this, says the
astrologer, we may learn both from his own nativity, and, if he happen to have
several brothers, from the nativity of each of them.

'For they think that the nativity of each includes that a brother will die by
robbers, and in like manner the nativity of the father, and that of the mother,
and of his wife, and of his sons, and of his servants, and of his best friends;
perhaps also of the very men who are to kill him.

'How then, to grant them this, is it possible that the man whose fortune is
involved in so many nativities should come under the configuration of the stars
in this nativity rather than in the others? For the assertion that the
configuration in this or that man's particular nativity has been the cause of
these events, but that the configuration in the nativity of these others has not
been the cause but only the indication, is incredible.

'And it is silly to say that the nativity of all included in each an efficient
cause of this man's being killed, so that in fifty nativities (I am speaking
according to the hypothesis) it was contained that this or that man was to be
killed. Nor do I know how they will be able to maintain that, though the
configuration at the nativity of nearly all men in Judaea was such that they
received circumcision on the eighth day, were mutilated, and ulcerated, and
likely to suffer inflammation and wounds, and at their very entrance into life
were in need of physicians, yet that of the Ishmaelites in Arabia was such that
they were all circumcised when thirteen years old. For this is stated in history
concerning them.

'And again that of certain tribes among the Aethiopians the knee-caps are cut
away, and one of the breasts of the Amazons. For how do the stars produce these
effects in these nations? I think that, if we were to give our attention to it,
we should not be able even to fix anything true to say concerning them.

'As there are so many modes of prognostication current, I do not understand how
men ran upon the difficulty of saying that the methods of augury and of
sacrifice do not contain the efficient cause, but only give signs, and yet do
not say the same of the study of the stars and casting of nativities.

'For if events are known (to grant that they are known), and if they are
produced from the same source from which the knowledge is derived, why are the
events to be caused by the stars rather than by the birds, and why by the birds
rather than by the entrails of the sacrifices, or by the shooting stars? These
reasons, however, will at present suffice for overthrowing the opinion that the
stars are efficient causes of human affairs.

'But as to the assumption which we have allowed, because it did not damage our
argument, that it is possible for men to understand the celestial
configurations, and the signs, and the things signified, let us now examine
whether this is true.

'It is said then by those who are clever in such matters, that the man who is to
ascertain truly the results of the science of nativities must know not only in
which of the twelve signs of the zodiac the planet is, but also in what degree
of the sign, and in what minute, and the more exact say, in what second; and
this they say he must do in the case of each of the planets, examining their
relative position to the fixed stars.

'Again on the Eastern horizon it will be necessary, they say, to see not only
what sign was thereon, but also the degree, and the minute, or the second.

'Since then the hour comprises, to speak broadly, half a sign of the zodiac, how
is it possible for any one to find the minute, if he has not the proportionate
division of the hours? How, for instance, know that a certain man is born at the
fourth hour, and at the half-hour, and quarter, and eighth, and sixteenth, and
thirty-secondth part of the hour?

'For they say that the indications (given by the planets) vary greatly in
consequence of the ignorance not only of the entire hour, but even of the exact
division of it. For example, in the birth of twins the interval is often a very
small part of an hour, and there occur many differences in the incidents and
actions in their cases, because, as the astrologers say, of the relative
position of the stars, and because the subdivision of the zodiacal sign which
was on the horizon was not ascertained by those who are supposed to have
observed the hour.

'For it is impossible for any one to say that the interval between the birth of
this child and of that is the thirtieth part of an hour. Let us, however, grant
them the point concerning their calculation of the hour. Now there is a current
theorem, which shows that the Ecliptic moves like the planets from West to East
one degree in a hundred years, and that this in the long course of time alters
the position of the signs, the calculated sign being one, and the visible
figure, as it were, another. And the results, they say, are found not from the
visible figure, but from the calculated sign, and this cannot possibly be
ascertained.

'But let this also be granted, that the calculated sign is ascertained, or that
from the visible sign the true can be ascertained. Yet they will themselves
acknowledge that they are not able entirely to preserve the conjunction, as they
call it, of the planets which happen to be in these configurations, when, for
instance, the malign indication from a certain planet is obscured, because it is
overlooked by this other of more benign power, and to such or such a degree
obscured: or frequently again when the obscuration of the malign planet by the
aspect of the more benign is impeded, from the fact that another has entered
into the configuration in a certain way, so as to be significant of misfortune.'

'I think too that any one who has given attention to these subjects must despair
of the comprehension of them as being in no way accessible to man, but reaching
only, if at all, to an indication. And if any one has had experience of the
facts, the liability of those who talk, or even of those who have written, on
the subject to failure in their conjectures, will be better known to him, than
their supposed ability to succeed.

'For instance, Isaiah, seeing that these things cannot be discovered by man,
says to the daughter of the Chaldeans, who beyond all men made the greatest
profession of this art, "Let now the astrologers of the sky stand up and save
thee,... let them announce to thee what shall come upon thee." 52 For hereby we
are taught that those who are entirely devoted to the study of these matters are
unable to foreshow what the Lord has purposed to bring upon each nation.' So far
the author mentioned. But in fact this whole discussion of ours is summed up in
two chief points, that those who have been supposed in each city to give
oracular responses are not gods, and that they are not even good daemons, but
are on the contrary a class of jugglers, cheats, and deceivers, who for the
destruction and perversion of true religion have put forward, besides all other
delusion among mankind, especially this delusion about Fate. And since no one
from the beginning except Jesus our Saviour has ransomed the whole human race
from this delusion, we have had good reason for dealing seriously with all the
present subjects in the commencement of the Preparation for the Gospel, in order
that we might learn by facts from what ancestors we are sprung, and by what kind
of delusion they were formerly possessed, and from how manifold and great
blindness and ungodliness both we ourselves and all men living have emerged, and
have found the cure for that long and inveterate daemoniacal activity in the
saving doctrine of the Gospel only.

[Footnotes numbered and placed at the end] 1. 236 d 3 Porphyry, On the
Philosophy to be derived from Oracles.

2. 238 b 1 Porphyry, ibid.

3. 238 d 2 Porphyry, On the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles.

4. 240 d 4 Porphyry, On the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles.

5. 241 c 1 Porphyry, ibid.

6. 242 c 2 Euripides, Syleus Fr., cf Eur. Phoen. 521 7. 247 a 3 Ps. cxlviii. 5
8. 248 a 4 Rom. i. 26, 27 9. 249 a 6 Menander, i Cor. xv. 33 10. 249 b 9 cf
Plato, Rep. 546 A 11. 250 a 11 Num. xx. 17 12. c 6 Plato, Rep. x. 617 E 13. 255
b 1 Oenomaus, The Selection of Impostors 14. c 9 Herodotus, vii. 148 15. 258 a 9
Euripides, Phoenissae, 19 16. c 9 Euripides, Phoenissae, 20 17. 259 c 1
Euripides, Phoenissae, 570 18. c 4 ibid. 541 19. 262 a 1 Diogenianus, Answers to
Chrysippus 20. a 6 Hom. Il. xxiii. 78 21. b 2 Il. xx. 127 22. b 6 Il. vi. 488
23. c 3 Od. i. 7 24. c 5 Od. i. 32 (Pope) 25. 268 a 1 Alexander Aphrodisiensis,
On Fate, c. iii. p. 8 (Bruns 1882) 26. 270 c 7 Alex. Aphrod. c. vi. p. 16 27.
271 a 4 ibid. c. viii 28. d 2 Alex. Aphrod. c. ix 29. d 11 ibid. c. xi, much
altered and abridged 30. 272 b 3 ibid. c. xii. p. 42 31. 272 c 1 Alex. Aphrod.
c. xviii. p. 62 32. c 7 ibid. c. xix. p. 64 33. 273 b 4 Bardesanes, On Fate. A
fragment preserved in Greek only by Eusebius 34. 274 d 10 Bardesanes. Compare
Clementine Recognitions, ix. c. 19 35. 275 d 7 Cf. Clem. Recogn. ix. c. 22 36.
281 a 3 Origen, On Genesis, tom, iii; Philocalia, c. xxiii 37. 283 a 9 Gen. i.
14 38. 284 b 2 Susanna, 42 39. b 7 I Kings xii. 32 40. d 12 Isa. xlv. 1 41. 285
b 6 Dan. ii. 39 42. c 4 Dan. viii. 5 43. 286 a 3 Luke xxi. 20 44. 288 b 4 Ps.
cix. 12, 16 45. c 5 Heb. vi. 18 46. 289 b 11 Jer. xxvi. 3 47. 290 b 2 Exod. iv.
11 48. 292 b 1 Prayer of Joseph; see Schurer, Jewish People, Div. II. vol. iii.
p. 127 f.

49. c 1 Isa. xxxiv. 4 50. c 6 Gen. i. 14 51. d 1 Jer. x. 2 52. 295 c 7 Isa.
xlvii. 13 This text was transcribed by Peter Kirby, and amended by Roger Pearse,
2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 38: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 7
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 7

BOOK VII

CONTENTS

I. Concerning the mode of life of the original Hebrews, and the good reasons for
our preferring their divine Scriptures to the doctrines of our forefathers p.
298 d II. Recapitulation of the theology of other nations, and its evil effects
on their mode of life p. 299 b

III. Exposition of the character of the Hebrews, and their modes of thought
concerning the Maker and Framer of the Universe p. 301 b IV. Their opinions
concerning the immortality of the soul, and the substance of the body p. 302 b
V. How for their piety they were rewarded with the recorded theophanies and
oracles p. 303 d VI. That apart from Judaism before the time of Moses they were
illustrious for piety p. 304 b VII. That Moses himself has recorded in his own
writings the lives of those Hebrews who lived before his time p. 305 a

VIII. That we showed good judgement and wise consideration in accepting their
history : also a brief survey, according to the authors quoted, of the lives of
the men beloved of God, both those before the flood and those who afterwards
continued till the generation of Moses p. 306 b IX. Of the doctrinal theories of
the Hebrews p. 313 b X. Of general Providence, and the constitution and
construction of the world p. 314 a XI. The opinions of the Hebrews concerning
God as the First Cause of the Universe p. 317 c XII. On the theological doctrine
of the Second Cause p. 320 c XIII. Philo concerning the Second Cause p. 322 d
XIV. Aristobulus on the same p. 324 a XV. On the constitution of rational
creatures p. 324 c XVI. On the adverse powers p. 328 a XVII. On the nature of
man p. 330 b XVIII. Philo on the soul p. 331 b XIX. That matter is not uncreated
p. 333 c XX. On the same subject from Origen's Commentaries on Genesis p. 334 d
XXI. Philo on the same p. 336 b XXII. That matter is not uncreated, nor the
cause of evil p. 337 b

CHAPTER I

NEXT as to the Hebrews, and their philosophy and religion which we have
preferred above all our ancestral system, it is time to describe their mode of
life. For since it has been proved that our abandonment of the false theology of
Greeks and barbarians alike has not been made without reason, but with
well-judged and prudent consideration, it is now time to solve the second
question by stating the cause of our claiming a share in the Hebrew doctrines.
When therefore we have the necessary leisure, we shall prove that our borrowing
what was profitable from barbarians brings no blame upon us; for we shall show
that the Greeks and even their renowned philosophers had plagiarized all their
philosophic lore and all that was otherwise of common benefit and profitable for
their social needs from barbarians: but that nothing at all has yet been found
among any of the nations like the boon which has been provided for us from the
Hebrews, will become manifest in the following manner.

CHAPTER II

ALL the rest of mankind, from the very first establishment of social life and
for all subsequent time, persisted in attending to bodily sense only, because
they had formed no clear conception concerning the soul within them, and
believed that nothing more than what was seen had any real subsistence; they
therefore referred beauty and utility and the sole good to bodily pleasure. And
as they thought that this alone was to be earnestly desired, as being the only
good and agreeable and pleasant thing, and sufficient for the enjoyment of a
happy life, they believed it to be the greatest of gods, and have deified it;
even life itself they did not desire, if there was to be no participation in
bodily pleasure, and they cherished life not for the sake of mere living but for
living in pleasure, and prayed that this as the only good might be granted to
their children.

Hence some conjectured that sun, moon, and stars were the sources of supply for
the life in the flesh; and being also struck with a kind of wonder at beholding
their light, pronounced them the first gods, and declared them to be sole causes
of the universe. But others again have bestowed the title of gods upon the
fruits of the earth, and the moist and dry and hot elements, and the other
component parts of the world by which their bodies were nourished and fattened,
and made the life of the flesh and its pleasure their pursuit: and others, long
before them, with barefaced effrontery deified their own passions, and pleasure
their mistress, saying that love, and desire, and lust ruled the very gods
themselves. By others, certain tyrants and potentates, who had provided and
invented pleasures for them, were deified, both during life and after death, in
return for the enjoyments which they had gained from them. Others again, by
becoming the playthings of evil spirits and daemons, gave yet greater strength
to the passionate part of their soul, by procuring pleasures from them also
through the customs of their worship. Others, who could not endure any of these
things, introduced atheism as far better than such theology as this: and others
yet more shameless than all these declared the philosophic and thrice-blessed
life to be no other than the life of pleasure, having defined pleasure as the
consummation of all good. And so in this way the whole race of mankind having
become enslaved to the goddess, or rather the foul and licentious daemon,
pleasure, as to a harsh and most cruel mistress, was involved in all kinds of
miseries. 'For,' as the holy Apostle says, 'their women changed the natural use
into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the
natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men
working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error
which was due.' 1 In this way both Greeks and barbarians, wise and simple,
falling to the ground and on their belly, worshipped pleasure as a goddess; they
cast themselves down on their faces like reptiles; they believed in her as an
irresistible and inexorable deity, and were content. In songs also and hymns,
and in the festivals of gods, and in their public spectacles, they were
initiated in the orgies and celebrated the unseemly rites of none other than
foul and licentious pleasure; so that this, above all, has been rightly
abolished among us. 'For the devising of idols was the beginning of
fornication.' 2 So great had been the manifold variety, to speak briefly, of the
theology of the other nations, attached to impure and abominable pleasure as its
one principle, but. like a hydra of many necks and many heads, carried out into
many various divisions and sections. When therefore they had entrenched
themselves in so great an error, naturally in their service of the goddess and
evil daemon, pleasure, evils upon evils gathered round them, while they defiled
the whole of life with mad passions for women and outrages on men, marriages
with mothers, and incest with daughters, and had surpassed in their excess of
wickedness the savage nature of wild beasts. Such then was the character of the
ancient nations, and of their false theology, as exhibited in the preceding
books by the Greek historians and philosophers whom we have brought together.

CHAPTER III

IF therefore you have had a general view of the mode of life among the ancients,
now set your mind to observe next how the children of the Hebrews alone among so
many go off on the opposite course. For of all mankind these were the first and
sole people who from the very first foundation of social life devoted their
thought to rational speculation; and having set themselves to study reverently
the physical laws of the universe, first as to elements of bodies, earth, water,
air, fire, of which they perceived that this universe consisted, the sun also,
and moon, and stars, they considered them to be not gods, but works of God; for
they perceived that the nature of bodily substance is not only irrational but
also lifeless, inasmuch as it is ever in flux and liable to perish. They further
argued that it is not possible that the order of the whole cosmos, so well and
wisely composed, and full as it is of living beings both rational and
irrational, should have a spontaneous cause ascribed to it, nor possible to
suppose the creative principle of the living to be lifeless, nor the formative
principle of the rational to be itself irrational. But since a building could
never be spontaneously composed of timber and stones, nor yet a garment be
completed without a weaver, nor cities and states without laws and an order of
government, nor a ship without a pilot, nor the smallest instrument of art exist
except through an artificer, nor a ship ever gain a sheltering harbour without a
good pilot, therefore neither can the nature of the universal elements, lifeless
and irrational as it is, ever by its own law apart from the supreme wisdom of
God attain to reason and life. With these thoughts then and such as these the
fathers of the Hebrew religion, with purified mind and clear-sighted eyes of the
soul, learned from the grandeur and beauty of His creatures to worship God the
Creator of all.

CHAPTER IV AND next, as they became conscious that they were themselves no small
part of the whole, they believed that the one part of themselves was precious
(and that this was also the true man, which is discerned in the soul), and that
the other part holds the place of an envelope of the former, and that this is
the body. And so having thus distinguished them, they concentrated their whole
thought and diligence upon the life of the inner man. This they reasoned must be
well-pleasing with God the Creator of all, who seemingly had endowed man's
nature with dominion over all things upon earth, not so much by strength of body
as by excellence of soul: for of existing things some were inanimate, as stones
and stocks; and some partakers of a living force, as the plants that grow out of
the earth; and some admitted to share in sensation and the impulse of
perception, such as are the irrational animals: but all these were subjected, to
the service of the one sole race of mankind, constrained thereto not by vigour
and strength of body, but by the exercise of reason and by excellence of soul,
whereby they have comprehended that the privilege of rule and royalty over all
things upon earth has been granted originally from the Author of the universe.

Starting from this thought, they determined to honour the body and the pleasures
of the body no higher than the other creatures upon earth; but the ruling
principle in themselves akin, as it were, to the Ruler of all, and the soul's
rational and intelligent faculty, godlike and capable of true knowledge,
bearing, as it were, the likeness of the God over all, this alone they held in
high esteem.

Then as they reflected that there was no other good than God the giver of all
good things, they declared that the knowledge of Him, and His friendship, were
the consummation of all happiness, because on Him alone depends the cause of
life itself, and soul, and body, and all things necessary to them. To Him
therefore they have eagerly consecrated themselves wholly, body and soul, making
their whole life dependent upon Him, and determining to devote themselves to Him
only, and to nothing else among things visible.

Having then thus been shown to be both lovers of God and beloved by Him, they
were declared to be true worshippers and priests of the Most High God, or were
deemed worthy to be called 'a chosen generation and a royal priesthood and holy
nation of God,' 3 and have bequeathed to their descendants a seed of this true
religion. Do you not think then that we have with reason preferred these to the
Greeks, and accepted the histories of godly men among the Hebrews rather than
the gods of Phoenicia and Egypt, and the blasphemous absurdities about those
gods?

CHAPTER V

OBSERVE then further to what a degree of godly virtue these men are said to have
advanced. The Deity having accepted them for the general piety and wisdom of
their life, and especially for their devotion to His service, now vouchsafed to
them diviner oracles and manifestations of Himself and visions of angels,
correcting the defects of their mortal nature by suggestions to guide their
conduct, and revealing to them the knowledge of doctrines and precepts worthy of
God: so that their minds were enlightened no longer by mere arguments and
conjectures, but by the bright light of truth itself; and so inspired by God
they pondered over the attainment of things future, as if already present, and
prophesied what was to happen universally to the human race.

Such are the examples of the excellence of the Hebrews contained in the much
celebrated and truly divine oracles, which we have preferred to the fables and
the follies of the Greeks and of our forefathers: for these latter contained the
foulest tales concerning their gods, while the other contained religious
teaching concerning men beloved of God.

CHAPTER VI

THESE things were known among the forefathers of the Jews from long ages past,
far before Moses and the Jewish nation existed. For indeed it is well to make
this distinction also clear, that Judaism was not yet in existence at that time,
but those of whom I speak were Hebrews alike by name and in character, and as
yet neither were nor were called Jews. And you may know the difference between
Hebrews and Jews thus: the latter assumed their name from Judah, from whose
tribe the kingdom of Judah was long ages afterwards established, but the former
from Eber, who was the forefather of Abraham. And that the Hebrews were earlier
than the Jews, we are taught by the sacred writings. But as to the manner of
their religion, Moses was the first author of legislation for the Jews, and
taught them to observe a certain day of rest, and to keep it with the utmost
care for a reminder of the study of the holy scriptures; he taught them also the
distinction between animals that might or might not be eaten, and yearly
festivals, and certain bodily purifications, another long period also being more
religiously observed in accordance with certain covenants. But the Hebrews who
were earlier in time than Moses, having never heard of all the Mosaic
legislation, enjoyed a free and unfettered mode of religion, being regulated by
the manner of life which is in accordance with nature, so that they had no need
of laws to rule them, because of the extreme freedom of their soul from
passions, but had received true knowledge of the doctrines concerning God. But
now after remarks of this kind, it is time to go through the written records.

CHAPTER VII So then the great theologian Moses, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, if ever
any was, and understanding well the customs of his forefathers, by way of
preface to the sacred laws has committed to indelible records the lives of the
forefathers of the Hebrews, and the blessings which God vouchsafed to them, and
on the other hand the characters and the punishments of other godless and
impious nations, because he thought that this would be a needful lesson for
those who were to be taught his laws, both for avoidance of the like customs to
those of the wicked, and for encouragement to adopt the life of the godly.

It was needful besides that they should not be ignorant, that before them, and
before his own written laws, many of their forefathers by right use of reason
had already been honourably distinguished for excellence in religion; who having
been called friends of God and prophets, gained in his writings eternal
remembrance; who also were no aliens in race to these for whom he was ordaining
his laws.

Wherefore also it was the more necessary for them, as being by birth descendants
of righteous men beloved of God, to show themselves emulous of the piety of
their forefathers, and to be eager to obtain from God equal blessings with those
who had begotten them. Nor must they grow sluggish and discouraged as if this
were impossible, nor renounce the hope of those blessings for themselves; for
they were possible, and had been gained with entire success by their own
forefathers; whose portraits he was handing down to those who were being
instructed in the things of God, recounting the lives of the men of old, and
delineating as in painted likenesses the peculiar virtue of each one.

CHAPTER VIII NOR is there anything to hinder us from briefly running over their
history. First then we will take those before the Mood, according to the
contents of Moses' own writing. For, as before, we ought, I think, to examine
the ancestral history of the Hebrews from no other sources than their own, since
we learned the Egyptian history from Egyptians, and the Phoenician from their
own writers, as again the Grecian history from those illustrious among Greeks,
and their philosophy from the philosophers, and not from those who were ignorant
of philosophy. For from what other source would it be proper to inquire about
the healing art than from those who are well skilled in it? In accordance then
with this rule, I think we ought to receive the history of the Hebrews from the
learned among the Hebrews, and not from any other source. As then the story
holds among them, from the beginning before the Flood, from the first creation
of mankind and for the following generations there have been a certain number of
righteous men beloved of God: one of whom 'hoped to call upon the name of the
Lord God.' 4

Now this shows that to none but the Creator of all things he gave the title both
of Lord and God of the universe: for he was persuaded that not only by creative
power had He well and orderly disposed the whole, but also, like the lord as it
were of a great city, was the ruler of the whole, and dispenser, and master of
the house, being at once Lord, and King, and God. The first to lay to heart the
idea and the name of this Being as Lord and God was the godly man of whom I
speak, and who in place of all substance, and title, and abundance, or rather in
place of all good, 'hoped to call upon the name of the Lord God,' having
procured Him for a treasure to himself of blessings both of soul and body. In
consequence of this it is recorded that he was the first to be called among the
Hebrews a true man. At all events he is named Enos, which is 'true man,' by a
well-applied appellation. For it is said that we ought to consider and to call
no other a 'true man' than him who attains to the knowledge of God and to piety,
who is at the same time full of knowledge and of reverence. For those who are
not of this character, but differ in nothing from irrational animals, as driven
headlong after the belly and lust, the Hebrew Scripture teaches us to call
beasts rather than men, being accustomed to use names in their proper meaning.

Accordingly its custom is to call such men now wolves and dogs, and now swine
feeding on refuse and delighting in it; and again reptiles and serpents,
answering to the manifold forms of wickedness. But if at any time it is
necessary to denote the man of the common multitude and the race itself, again
it uses a suitable and natural appellation, and indicates man as a whole by the
name of Adam, because it suggests that this is the proper and natural name of
the progenitor and forefather of all men, a name implying according to its
translation into the Greek language 'the earthborn.' So Enos is recorded as the
first of the beloved of God among the Hebrews, since he first 'hoped to call
upon the name of the Lord God,' proving the truly rational faculty of the soul
to be both capable of knowledge and of understanding the true worship of the
Godhead: the first of which would be a proof of true knowledge of God, and the
second of his hope in the God whom he knew. For not to neglect nor put in a
secondary place the true knowledge of God, but ever and through all to 'hope to
call upon the name of the Lord God,' partly as lord of the household, and partly
as a gracious and good Father, this must be the thrice blessed end of all.

Such then was he who among the Hebrews has been introduced as the first true
man, not Adam, the earthborn by name, who for transgressing God's commandment
fell from his better lot, but the very first of God's beloved, who 'hoped to
call upon the name of the Lord God.'

Judging therefore by sound reasoning we ourselves also were well pleased to
imitate such a character as this, and welcomed the statement of the history as
profitable and most beneficial to us; and made a vow that, equalling the example
of the man of whom I speak, we would call upon the name of the Creator and Lord
of all with a steadfast and good hope. But now after him of whom we have spoken
there was another who 'pleased the Lord, and was not to be found,' as Moses
says,5 'because God translated him' for the high perfection of his virtue. For
difficult it is to find the truly wise.

Such, however, is he who is perfect in God, he who is withdrawn from the
converse of the multitude. For the man of a different character, who frequents
the marketplaces and courts and taverns and shops and the general crowd,
hustling and being hustled, is swallowed up in the very gulf of wickedness. But
he who is taken by God, and translated from this world to that, though he cannot
be seen or found by men, has become the friend of God, and is found by God.

Him the Hebrews love to name Enoch: and the name would signify the grace of God.
We deemed it therefore a blessed thing to emulate the life of this example also
as being good.

Again after these a third appeared: Noah who has received testimony as 'a
righteous man in his generation.' 6 And the following will be proofs of his
righteousness. A great foulness and darkness of indescribable wickedness had
overtaken the whole human race, and the giants talked of by every mouth were
carrying on with ungodly and impious efforts their wars with God which are still
so celebrated: and already the fathers of this their brood, whether they had
sprung from some condition mightier than man's nature, or in whatever way
endowed, are said to have begun the teaching of curious arts among men, and to
have introduced devices of witchcraft and other mischievous sorcery into their
life, so that the whole human race had fallen under one sentence of judgement
with God. And so when all were about to be destroyed by one decree, this one man
alone, of whom we are now speaking, is found 'righteous in his generation,'
together with his family. While therefore all who were upon the earth were being
destroyed by a flood, and the earth itself purged from the former evils by a
sudden deluge of waters, the friend of God with his sons and their wives were
most wonderfully preserved by God, as a spark to kindle the life that was to
follow. This man then also would be a primitive model, a living and breathing
image, who had given an example to his posterity of the character that is
pleasing to God.

Such were those before the Flood. And there were others again who came after it,
conspicuous for piety, whose memory is preserved by the sacred oracles. One of
these is announced as 'priest of the Most High God,' called by his Hebrew name a
'king of righteousness.' 7 For all these there was not one word about bodily
circumcision, nor yet about the Jewish commandments of Moses: and therefore it
is not right either to call them Jews, nor yet Greeks, because they did not
believe in more gods than one like Greeks or the other nations. But they would
be more properly called Hebrews, either because of Eber, or rather because of
the interpretation of the name. For by interpretation they are a kind of
'passengers,' who have set out on their journey from this world to pass to the
contemplation of the God of the universe. For they are recorded to have
travelled the straight path of virtue aright by natural reasoning and by
unwritten laws, and to have passed beyond carnal pleasures to the life of
perfect wisdom and piety.

Among all these then let us count also the celebrated progenitor of the whole
nation, Abraham, to whose righteousness the oracles bear witness; again the
righteousness not of the law of Moses, for that was not yet in existence, since
Moses arose in the seventh generation after Abraham; but nevertheless he also is
pronounced to be eminently righteous and pious, like those who have been
mentioned above. So at least the Scripture says: 'And Abraham believed God, and
it was counted unto him for righteousness.' 8 The answer indeed of God foretells
that he shall be 'a father of many nations,' and says expressly that 'in him
shall all the nations and all the tribes of the earth be blessed,' 9 directly
prophesying the things which are being now accomplished in our time. But this
Abraham, after he had been made perfect in righteousness which he had
successfully maintained, not by the law of Moses, but by faith, and after the
appearances of God which are recorded, when about to be called the father of a
true-born son even in his old age, is the first who in accordance with a divine
command circumcises himself, and enjoins the performance of this rite upon his
posterity, whether as a manifest signification of the great multitude of the
children to be born of him, or that the children might have a paternal mark to
show whether they were living in emulation of their forefathers, or falling away
from their virtue, or for any other causes whatsoever they were, which we have
not now leisure to discuss carefully.

Such then was the character of Abraham set forth like the former for our
imitation. And next to him Isaac is exhibited as the successor both to his
father's knowledge of God and to divine favour, having received this from his
father as the noblest and most blessed of all inheritances. United to one wife,
once only, say the sacred oracles, he begat children: but being made thereby the
father of twin children, he is said to have set this limit to his intercourse
with his wife in his extreme self-control.

Here let me bring before you Jacob, who was also called Israel, a man who received a double name in consequence of the unusual eminence of his proper virtues. When exercised indeed in practical habits and modes of life, and experiencing troubles on behalf of religion, he was called Jacob, a name which when translated into the Greek language means a man in training, an athlete; but when afterwards he receives the rewards of victory over his opponents and is crowned, and is already in the enjoyment of the blessings of contemplation, then his name also is changed by the God who communes with him, who both vouchsafes to him a vision of God, and bestows by his new name the rewards of diviner gifts and honours. And so the answer of God says to him: 'Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name, for thou hast had power with God, and shalt prevail with men' 10---- where Israel indicates 'the man who beholds and contemplates': since the very name when translated means 'a man beholding God.'

Such then was the character of this man, from whom arose the Twelve Tribes of
the Jewish nation. And countless things might be told concerning the life of
these men, and their philosophic endurance and discipline, some things viewed
literally, and some in allegorical suggestions: of which things others have
spoken, as well as myself in my treatise 'Concerning the numerous offspring of
the men of old.' Such then were these patriarchs.

Besides them I can tell you of another, whose name was Job, whom the sacred
oracles testify to have been a man 'blameless, true, just, and devout,
abstaining from every evil thing.' 11 Though he did not belong at all to the
Jewish race, he has received witness for all right deeds of religion.

Now as to the children of Jacob, they cherished the knowledge of God and the
piety inherited from their forefathers, and advanced the fame of the elder
Hebrews to a high degree of glory, so that at length they annexed the government
of all Egypt.

Joseph indeed having first been crowned with the rewards of chastity, and
afterwards having received the government of Egypt, displayed the divinely
favoured character of the Hebrews: and him too we have made it our prayer to
emulate, though he had been made a slave by the plot of his brethren, a slave
too of an Egyptian. For I pass by all the rest of his advantages in regard to
beauty and strength of body and comeliness, though the Scriptures record that he
excelled all in prime of beauty: but his qualities of soul how could any one
describe, though he purposed to speak his praise in a manner worthy of his
virtue. The story is that he had by nature the stamp of gentle birth, and the
nobility of his disposition blooming upon his face: and so excellently was he
endowed with the eminent graces of piety, that his soul shone bright in chastity
and justice, in prudence and manliness, and above all in knowledge and piety
towards the God of all, which his parents are said to have implanted in his soul
from the cradle. So when his master's wife fell madly in love with him, and
tried to drag him as young and beautiful into licentious and amorous
intercourse, and attempted first to cajole him with words, and then besought him
with entreaties, and at last ventured to lay violent hands upon him, and had
recourse now to immodest and shameless embraces, the hero recalling the memory
of the piety of his forefathers, and showing himself both in words and deeds the
religious man and true Hebrew, shakes off the base and licentious woman, putting
her aside with a stronger hand, and running away as from some terrible and
raging beast finds safety in flight.

Afterwards with sober reasoning he reflects as follows within himself and says:
'If my master from trusting me knoweth none of the things in his house, and hath
given into my hands all that is therein, . . . how then shall I do this great
wickedness, and sin against God?' 12 For which the God of the universe, crowning
him as a victor with the rewards of virtue, gives over to him the royalty and
governance over his masters and over Egypt itself. Moreover, he also as a Hebrew
of the Hebrews, and not a Jew (because the Jewish nation did not yet exist), has
been received among the thrice blessed and most highly favoured friends of God.
But after the Hebrews who have been mentioned, the race of their descendants
began to grow into a great multitude, and the Jewish nation, which they
constituted, now went on multiplying daily and waxing great, until the influence
of the pious conduct of their godly forefathers of old began little by little to
be weakened and blunted, while the effects of their intercourse with Egyptians
gained so much strength over the multitude of whom I speak, that they forgot the
virtue of their forefathers, and came round in their modes of living to like
customs with the Egyptians, so that their character seemed to differ in nothing
from the Egyptians. At this point then, when they had turned out such as I have
described, the God of their forefathers sends forth Moses as a leader and
lawgiver, thus verifying the promises given by the oracles to their progenitors:
and then having performed by his hand the wonders that are recorded and the
extraordinary signs from heaven, He promulgates a law that was suited to the
moral condition of those who heard it. For they were unable through moral
weakness to emulate the virtue of their fathers, inasmuch as they were enslaved
by passions and sick in soul; so He gave them the polity that corresponded to
their condition, ordaining some things openly and clearly, and implying others
enigmatically, by suggesting symbols and shadows, but not the naked truth, for
them to keep and observe. And so the Jewish polity began about that time with
Moses, and continues in accordance with the voices of their own prophets until
the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ. For this also was a prophecy of Moses
himself and the prophets who followed, that the customs and ordinances of Moses
should not fail before those of the Christ appeared, the ordinances, that is, of
the new covenant, which has been proclaimed to all nations through our Saviour;
and thus these ordinances found a fulfilment in the way which had been
announced. But since we have briefly described the life of the Hebrews before
Moses, and shown the character of their religion, it is time to consider the
method of their doctrine also, from the writings of Moses and the prophets who
followed him.

CHAPTER IX

FIRST of all then that admirable theologian and lawgiver himself, in founding by
his own writing a polity in accordance with religion for the Jewish people, did
not think it fit to employ the common and trite preambles to his books; but
after he had collected every law enjoining what ought to be done and forbidding
what ought not to be done, and the public and civic arrangements concerning
their mutual contracts, he thought it right to make his teaching begin with
their ancestral theology, because he considered no other instruction to be
proper to laws pertaining to religion, than that theology which had come down to
him from their forefathers.

He begins therefore with God according to the hereditary doctrines of the
theology of their Hebrew progenitors, not as was the wont of Egyptians, nor yet
of Phoenicians, or the other nations, who like them degraded the adorable name
to a multitude of gods, and regarded the luminaries in the sky as visible gods,
and as unseen and invisible gods either the departed from among men, or the
daemons of earth and air, according to the statements which we have previously
proved. But having made his whole narrative begin with the universal Cause and
Creator of things visible and invisible, he shows that He is the Lawgiver of the
constitution of the universe, and establishes Him as king of the world, as of
one great city.

He teaches us therefore at the outset to regard Him as the real Author and Ruler
not only of the laws which he is himself about to ordain presently for men, but
also of the laws of universal nature.

CHAPTER X IN fact he represents Him as King and Lawgiver of the whole world: for
by His decree and power all things have received their being, and by His laws
and limitations again the whole duration of time is directed in its course and
order. For by God's word and law first of all the firmament of heaven is firmly
fixed, and the heavy and solid earth is wonderfully poised contrary to its
proper nature upon the lighter elements: by the divine word and law the
alternating course of night and day is carried round, and by God's word and law
the sun himself and moon and the circling host of other stars fulfil their
proper course in seemly order; and by the law of the universal King the tropical
changes, and periodical revolutions, and yearly cycles, and annual seasons are
completed in the all-harmonious concert of the universe; by God's law winter
gives way to spring, and spring to the next change of seasons, the depths also
of ocean surging up in the flood-tides of winter are yet by divine law shut off
in their proper seas, so that they dare not transgress the bounds of their
sacred laws; and the dry substance of the earth, being watered by streams of
rain and snowstorms supplied likewise by divine law in due measure, brings forth
innumerable kinds of plants and animals: in a word, nature the universal mother,
subjected to God's command, obeys the divine laws and the counsel of the
all-ruling God. For not without design, nor as it chanced, nor by spontaneous
and irrational impulse, has this so vast system been arranged; nor is this great
and most beautiful construction the work of a causeless nature; but it is a
creation of the all-wise Architect of the universe, and is directed by the same
Being's words and sacred laws.

Having begun from this point, and assigned the laws which concern the nature of
the universe before treating of human legislation, the prophet exhorted men
before all things to give their mind to God the universal King, and not
carelessly to forsake His laws; since the sun himself, the heaven, and the
world, the earth and all things upon earth, and all that are considered works of
nature serve His commandments and ordinances and sacred laws and words.

Wherefore, in just consequence, even more ought the human race, being no small
part of the whole, to adhere closely to the divine ordinances, and not be
surpassed by the partial elements. For in the beginning the earth received its
law from Him who said: 'Let the earth bring forth grass, yielding seed after its
kind, and fruit-tree bearing fruit.' 13 And at His word the earth, exhibiting
its readiness to obey His law, never yet even to the present time disregarded
the divine command.

Thus also when God said: 'Let the waters bring forth the moving things that have
living souls, and fowls that fly in the firmament of heaven:' 14 at the word,
the element of water performed its work, and is now still seen rendering its
obedience to His law.

If then sun and moon and stars, having been appointed by the divine law to
perform their proper courses, and 'to be also for signs and for seasons and for
days, and for years,' 15 do not disregard their code of laws, what excuse can
still be left for you to obtain pardon if you despise the laws of God? By this
preliminary teaching the admirable author convinced us, and with good reason
made us emulous of his own divine knowledge and piety; because we have been
unable to find anything like this among the theologians of the nations before
mentioned.

Then after the primary theology he passes on to the second doctrine which is
both physical and philosophical. That is to say, next to the knowledge of God,
and the arrangement of the universe, he advances in order to that which is by
nature second; the doctrine, that is, concerning the nature of man, because next
to the knowledge of God it is necessary for one to know himself. For this reason
he next teaches us what man is, and what it is that leads him to the knowledge
and worship of God, and what is the life that corresponds to the ruling part of
man. Having therefore drawn the distinction, between body and soul, he defines
the true man as placed in the soul, partaking of an intelligent and incorporeal
and rational essence, as having been created after the image of God; but the
body as being an earthly envelope of the soul: and to these he adds a third,
'the breath of life,' 16 a power uniting and combining that which was taken from
the ground with that which had been made after the image of God.

He relates also that the man thus described has his first abode in the
thrice-blessed Paradise of God, full of immortal and eternal blessings; but that
having been subjected to the law of God, like the rest of the creatures in the
beginning of the world, he through heedlessness and transgression of the divine
command forfeited this most enviable life. This is the philosophy which Moses
teaches in the preface to his sacred laws, making as it were a proclamation that
we are not to disregard our proper dignity, and the likeness to the divine
nature which we received, and from which we had been further endowed with the
immortality of the soul; because it is not lawful for a king's image to be
obliterated. But the original and true image of the God of the universe is His
own Word, who is very Wisdom, and very Life, and Light, and Truth, and
whatsoever man can conceive of noble and good: and the human mind is an image of
an image, inasmuch as it is acknowledged to have been made after the image of
God. And for those who were to observe the sacred laws, this preliminary
instruction he thought it necessary to receive, and to remember what was the
part of them taken out of the earth and to be resolved into earth again, and
what the better part in us like to God, and how we ought to behave towards each
of the said parts, and not to treat with outrage and impiety the man after the
image of God, nor to defile him with foul and unlawful practices; but ever to
keep the desire for that first and thrice-blessed abode and life, and to be
eager to recur to it, making it our prayer to win that first and thrice-blessed
life and dignity, and also to prepare here already for our departure thither;
because otherwise it is not possible for the profane and unpurified to tread
those sanctuaries, from which the first man through heedlessness has fallen by
despising the divine command.

After this the Hierophant adds another most conclusive doctrine, teaching us not
to doubt that there is lying in wait for each of us an evil daemon, a slanderer
and hater of goodness, plotting from the beginning against the salvation of men.

He calls him 'Dragon' and 'Serpent,' 17 black and a lover of darkness, full of
venom and wickedness: and says that he through envy of our divinely inspired
life, still tries to trip up and drag down every one of those who are adhering
to God; and that by his deceit the forefathers of our race fell from their
diviner lot: wherefore also we must be always on the watch against the
mischievous crafts of the said daemon. But why should I thus anticipate, when I
ought at once to describe the several things which I have stated out of the
Scriptures themselves? Let us then begin with God, after having in the first
place invoked His aid through our Saviour.

CHAPTER XI THEIR system then sets forth the first principle of theology by
beginning from the power which made and organized the universe, not by
syllogistic reasoning or plausible arguments, but in a more dogmatic and
didactic manner of divination by aid of the Holy Ghost, under whose inspiration
Moses commenced his doctrine of God in the following manner: 'In the beginning
God created the heaven and the earth.' 18

Then he says: 'God said, Let there be light, and there was light.' 19 And again:
'God said, Let there be a firmament: and it was so.' 20 And again: 'God said,
Let the earth bring forth grass, yielding seed after his kind and in his
likeness, and every fruit-tree yielding fruit, whose seed is in itself, after
his kind, upon the earth: and it was so.' 21 And again: 'God said, Let there be
lights in the firmament of the heaven, to give light upon the earth, and let
them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years: and it was so.'
22And again: 'God said, Let the waters bring forth moving creatures of living
souls after their kind, and all the fowls of the heaven after their kind: and it
was so.' 23 And again: 'Let the earth bring forth four-footed beasts and
creeping things and wild beasts of the earth after their kind: and it was so.'
24 The Scripture then by saying in these places 'God said' represents the divine
command, and that God willed all things to be thus made, not, however, that we
need suppose Him to speak with a voice and words. But summing up the whole
statement, it says: 'This is the book of the generation of heaven, and earth, in
the day that God made the heaven and the earth, and all things that are
therein.' 25

Such is the theology of the Hebrews, instructing us that all things subsist by
the creative Word of God: and afterwards it teaches that the whole world was not
left thus desolate by Him who constructed it, as an orphan by his father, but
that it is for ever administered by the providence of God; so that God is not
only the Organizer and Maker of the whole, but also the preserver, and
administrator, and king, and ruler, presiding for ever over the sun itself and
moon and stars and the whole heaven and world, overlooking all things with His
great eye and divine power, and present with all things both in heaven and
earth, and arranging and administering all things in order. And in the very same
way the succeeding prophets also with corresponding inspiration spake at one
time in the person of God Himself, saying: 'I am a God at hand, saith the Lord,
and not a God far off. Shall a man do anything in secret, and I not know it? Do
not I fill the heaven and the earth? saith the Lord.' 26 And at another time
they spake of God thus: 'Who measured the water with His hand, and the heaven
with a span, and all the earth with His fist? Who set the mountains by measure,
and the hills by a balance? Who knew the mind of the Lord, and who became His
counsellor?' 27 And again: 'Who set the heaven for a canopy, and spread it out
as a tent to dwell in.' 28 And again: 'Lift up your eyes on high, and see who
hath showed all these.' 29 And then: 'The LORD God that created the heaven, and
fixed it, that established the earth and that which is therein, and giveth
breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk thereon, I am the
LORD God.' 30 And presently: 'I stretched forth the heaven by Myself, and
established the earth.31 I am the LORD God: there is none beside Me.' 32 And
again: 'Thus shall ye say unto them: The gods which made not the heaven and the
earth, let them perish from the face of the earth, and from under the heaven.
The Lord who made the earth by His power, established the world by His wisdom,
and by His understanding stretched out the heaven, and brought up clouds from
the end of the earth; He made lightnings for rain, and brought forth winds out
of His treasures. Every man is become too brutish for knowledge.' 33 And again:
'Whither shall I go from Thy spirit, and where can I be hidden from Thy
presence? If I go up into heaven, Thou art there: if I make my bed in hell,
there Thou art. If I should take my wings in the morning, and dwell in the
uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall Thy hand lead me.' 34

These and the like are the statements of the theologians later than Moses, who
were themselves also Hebrews, and spake concerning God in accordance with their
earliest forefathers. But listen now to those who were before Moses, men beloved
of God and highly blessed, the first Hebrews, and the very first of them all,
Abraham, who has been pronounced the forefather of the whole Jewish race.

'And Abraham said to the king of Sodom, I will lift up mine hand unto the Most
High God, who created the heaven and the earth.' 35 And even before Abraham
Melchizedek is introduced as priest of the Most High God, blessing Abraham in
these words: 'Blessed be Abraham of the Most High God, who delivered thine
enemies into thy hand: and blessed be the God who created the heaven and the
earth.' 36 In addition to this the narrative introduces Abraham as conversing
thus with his servant: 'Put thine hand under my thigh, and I will make thee
swear by the LORD the God of heaven, and the God of the earth.' 37 And he adds:
'The LORD the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that took me from my
father's house, and from the land where I was born.' 38

Besides all these passages, in the appearance of God to Moses himself, when
Moses asked whom he must believe God to be, the answer says: 'I AM THAT I AM.
Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.' 39

Let these extracts suffice as examples from among ten thousand in the theology
of the Hebrews. Is it then right to set in comparison with them the theologies
of the wise men of Greece? Some of whom declared that there is no God at all,
and others assert that the stars are gods, and that they are red-hot masses of
metal, fixed in the sky like studs and plates, and others that God is an
artistic fire proceeding in a regular course; and others that the world is not
administered by divine providence, but by a kind of irrational nature; and
others that things in heaven alone are administered by God, but not things on
earth also; and again that the world is uncreated, and was not made by God at
all, but subsists spontaneously and accidentally; and others that the complex
whole is made up of certain indivisible and minute corpuscles devoid of life and
reason. The doctrines, however, drawn from the oracles of the Hebrews concerning
the God of the universe are briefly such as I have described: and after the God
of the universe the next thing is to review the doctrines of the Hebrew
philosophy concerning the first principle of things created.

CHAPTER XII

THALES of Miletus declared that the first principle of all things is water,
Anaximenes the air, Heracleitus fire, Pythagoras numbers, Epicurus and
Democritus corporeal atoms, Empedocles the four elements. Let us therefore look
also at the oracles of the Hebrews.

Next to the Being of the God of the universe, which is without beginning and
uncreate, incapable of mixture and beyond all conception, they introduce a
second Being and divine power, which subsisted as the first beginning of all
originated things and was originated from the first cause, calling it Word, and
'Wisdom, and Power of God.' 40 And the first to teach us this is Job, saying:
'But whence was wisdom found? And what is the place of understanding? Man
knoweth not the way thereof, nor yet was it found among men,41... but we have
heard the fame thereof. The Lord established the way thereof, and He knoweth the
place thereof.' 42 And David also somewhere in the Psalms, addressing Wisdom by
another name, says: 'By the word of the LORD were the heavens established':43
for in this manner he celebrated the Word of God the Organizer of all things.
Moreover, his son Solomon also speaks as follows in the person of Wisdom
herself, saying: 'I Wisdom made counsel my dwelling, and knowledge and
understanding I called unto me.44 By me kings reign, and rulers decree
justice.'45 And again:

'The LORD created me as the beginning of His ways unto His works, from
everlasting He founded me, in the beginning or ever He made the earth, and
before the depths were made, 46. . . before the mountains were settled, and
before all hills He begat me;47 . . . when He was preparing the heaven I was
beside Him;48 . . . and as He was making safe the fountains beneath the
heaven,49 . . . I was with Him arranging. I it was in whom He daily delighted,
and I was rejoicing before Him in every season when He was rejoicing in having
completed the habitable world.' 50 So Solomon speaks in Proverbs. And the words
also which follow are somewhere spoken in Wisdom's own person: 'But what wisdom
is, and how she came into being, I will declare, and will not hide mysteries
from you; but I will trace her out from the beginning of creation.' 51 To which
he afterwards adds: 'For she is an understanding spirit, holy, alone in kind,
manifold, subtil, freely moving, clear, undefiled, . . . all-powerful,
all-surveying, and going through all intelligent, pure, and most subtil spirits.
52

'For wisdom is more moving than any motion; she penetrateth and passeth through
all things by reason of her pureness. For she is a breath of the power of God,
and a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty: therefore doth nothing
defiled find entrance into her. For she is an effulgence from everlasting light,
an unspotted mirror of the working of God, and an image of His goodness. . . .
And she reaches from end to end with full strength: and sweetly doth she order
all things.' 53

Moreover, the sacred Scripture introduces this divine Word in various ways as
sent from the Father for the salvation of mankind: and so it relates that it was
He who showed Himself to Abraham and to Moses and to the other prophets beloved
of God, and taught them so many things in oracles, and prophesied the things to
come, whenever it mentions that God or the Lord appearedand entered into
converse with the prophets. That He also became known to all men as having been
sent by the Greater to be a Saviour of the sick and a physician of souls, the
Scripture thus declares: 'He sent His Word and healed them, and delivered them
from their destructions.' 54 And again at another time it says: 'His Word shall
run swiftly.' 55 Whence the teaching of the Gospel also in renewing the doctrine
of the prophets and fathers makes the theology clear in the following way: 'In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The
same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him
was not anything made, that hath been made. In Him was life; and the life was
the light of men.' 56 With good reason then does Moses in his perfect wisdom,
when commencing his account of the creation of the world, inspired by the same
Spirit declare that in the beginning aforesaid 'God created the heaven and the
earth'; and introduces God communing with Him, as with His own and first-born
Word, upon the creation of man, in the passage where he writes: 'And God said,
Let us make man in our image and after our likeness.'57 This the Psalmist also
hinted, when describing the First Cause he said: 'He spake, and they were made;
He commanded, and they were created':58 plainly supposing the direction and
command of the First Cause to the Second, as of a father to a son. For. of
course it is quite manifest that every one who speaks at all speaks to another,
and he who commands, commands some other than himself. But expressly mentioning
again two Lords both together, that is to say Father and Son, Moses in his
narrative of the punishment of the ungodly speaks thus: 'And the LORD rained
brimstone and fire from the LORD upon Sodom and Gomorrah.' 59 In accordance with
which David also said in a Psalm: 'The LORD said unto my lord, sit thou on My
right hand, until I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet.' 60 And
further on he hinted at His secret and utterly ineffable generation, saying:
'From the womb I begat thee before the morning star.' 61

Lest, however, you should suppose that these are my subtleties, I will offer you
as interpreter of the meaning of the Scripture a man of Hebrew race, who
received from his forefathers an accurate knowledge of the history of his
country, and had learned the doctrine from his teachers; that is, if you accept
Philo as such a man. Listen then to him, how he interprets the divine
utterances.

CHAPTER XIII

[PHILO IUDAEUS] 62 'WHY as if speaking of another God does He say, "In the image
of God I made man," 63 and not in the image of Himself? With consummate beauty
and wisdom is this oracle expressed. For nothing mortal could be made in the
likeness of the Most High God and Father of the universe, but in the likeness of
the second God, who is the Word of the former. For it was right that the
rational character in the soul of man should be impressed on it by the divine
Word; since the God who is prior to the Word is superior to every rational
nature; and it was not lawful for any created thing to be made like to Him who
is set above the Word in the most excellent and unique nature.' This is what I
wish to quote from Philo's first book of Questions and Answers. But the same
author in the first book On Agriculture also calls the Word the First-born Son
of God, in the following phrase:

'All these things then God the Shepherd and King guides according to justice,
having set over them as a law His own right Reason (Word) and First-born Son,
who is to receive the charge of this sacred flock, as a lieutenant of a great
king.' 64 Also again in the second book the same author writes as follows word
for word:

'If therefore any one wishes to escape the difficulties which present themselves
in the questions thus raised, let him say freely that nothing material is so
strong as to be able to support the weight of the world. But the eternal Word of
the everlasting God is the most strong and firm support of the universe.

'He it is who, being extended from the middle to the ends and from the
extremities to the middle, runs the full length of nature's invincible course,
bringing all the parts together and binding them fast. For the Father who begat
Him made Him an indissoluble bond of the universe.

'Naturally therefore will neither all earth be dissolved by all water which its
bosom contains, nor will fire be extinguished by air, nor on the other hand will
air be burnt up by fire, since the divine Word sets Himself as a boundary of the
elements, like a vowel between consonants, in order that the universe may be
harmonious as in the case of music expressed in writing, since He by the
persuasion of His concurrence mediates and reconciles the threatenings of the
adverse elements.' 65

Thus speaks Philo. And Aristobulus also, another wise man of the Hebrews, who
flourished under the rule of the Ptolemies, confirms the doctrine as inherited
from his fathers, addressing to Ptolemy himself the Interpretation of the sacred
laws, in which he speaks as follows.

CHAPTER XIV

[ARISTOBULUS] 66 'BUT the same metaphor might be used also in the case of
wisdom: for all light comes from it. Wherefore also some who were of the
Peripatetic School have said that it holds the place of a torch: for by
following it continuously men will be kept undisturbed through their whole life.
But more clearly and more beautifully one of our forefathers, Solomon, said that
wisdom subsisted before heaven and earth. This accords with what was said
before.'

These then and such as these are the philosophical opinions which the Hebrews
have held on this point. Is not this then of all statements the most honourable
to God, as referring the beginning of the constitution of the universe to the
rational and all-wise power of God, or more precisely to the very Wisdom and
very Word of God, rather than to the lifeless and irrational elements? Be that
as it may; such are the opinions of the Hebrews concerning the beginning of the
universe. And now let us consider what they teach concerning the constitution of
the rational creatures, who came after that first Beginning.

CHAPTER XV

NEXT to the being of God the Universal King, which is without beginning and
unbegotten, they teach that Beginning which is begotten from no other source
than the Father, being both First-born and fellow worker of the Father's will,
and perfectly likened unto Him. And this Beginning is before all originate
things which followed, on which account also they are wont to call it the Image
of God, and Power of God, and Wisdom of God, and Word of God, nay further the
Great 'Captain of the host of the Lord,' 67 and 'Angel of the great Counsel.' 68
But the intelligent and rational Powers which came after this Beginning pass
man's nature to describe, both for multitude and for variety of form, except as
far as it is possible to think thereon by the examples drawn from the analogy of
things visible, sun, moon, and stars, and heaven itself which encompasses them
all together within and beneath itself.

'For there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another
glory of the stars,' says the divine Apostle; 'for one star differeth from
another star in glory.' 69 In this way, therefore, we must think of the order in
incorporeal and intelligent Beings also, the unutterable and infinite power of
the God of the universe embracing all of them together; and the second place,
next to the Father, being held by the power of the Divine Word, at once creative
and illuminating. For which reason also the Hebrews are wont to call Him 'True
Light,' 70 and 'Sun of Righteousness.' 71 And next after this second Being there
is set, as in place of a moon, a third Being, the Holy Spirit, whom also they
enroll in the first and royal dignity and honour of the primal cause of the
universe, He also having been appointed by the Maker of the universe for a
ruling principle of the created things which came after, those I mean which are
lower in rank, and need the help which He supplies. But this Spirit, holding a
third rank, supplies those beneath out of the superior powers in Himself,
notwithstanding that He also receives from another, that is from the higher and
stronger, who, as we said, is second to the most high and unbegotten nature of
God the King of all: from whom indeed God the Word is Himself supplied, and
drawing as it were from an ever-flowing fountain which pours forth Deity,
imparts copiously and ungrudgingly of the radiance of His own light to all, and
especially to the Holy Spirit Himself, who is closer to Him than all and very
near; and then to the intelligent and divine powers after Him. But the
Unoriginate Beginning of the whole, which is the fountain of all good, and cause
of Deity and life as well as of light and every virtue, being also first of the
first and beginning of all beginnings, or rather far beyond any beginning and
any first and every thought that can be expressed or conceived, communicates
wholly whatsoever is comprehended in His ineffable powers to His First-begotten
alone, as being alone able to contain and receive that abundance of the Father's
perfections which by the rest can neither be reached nor contained. But the
partial gifts He dispenses to those who are in part worthy through the
ministration and mediatorship of the Second, in the measure attainable by each:
and of these gifts the perfect and supremely holy have been bestowed by the
Father on Him who is third from Himself, and receives the gifts through the Son,
but is ruler and leader of those who follow.

Hence the whole body of Hebrew theologians, after Him who is God over all, and
after Wisdom His Firstborn, regard as God the third holy Power which they call
Holy Spirit, and by which they were enlightened and inspired.

Next after heaven, and sun, and moon, they say 'star differeth from star in
glory.' 72 Now though for mortal nature it is not possible to find the number of
the stars, nevertheless the oracles of the Hebrews say that God the King of All
is not ignorant of the numbers and of the names of the heavenly host. Wherefore
in them it is said: 'Who telleth the numbers of the stars, and calleth them all
by names.' 73

Thus then after those first luminaries which are reckoned among incorporal
powers, and excel in power and essence of intellectual light, there are
countless tribes and families of stars and a vast difference incomprehensible to
us, but not to the Maker of the universe. And therefore, to represent them as
comprehensible to God alone, one of their theologians says: 'Ten thousand times
ten thousand ministered unto Him, and thousand thousands stood before Him': 74
showing by the number that to God they are comprehensible, but by the greatness
of the number that to us they are infinite; in accordance with our custom of
calling things that are many and infinite 'ten thousand,' as an expression of
exceeding multitude. A certain other prophet also, in discoursing of their
nature, thus speaks of the Maker of them all as divine, saying: 'O LORD, my God,
how greatly art Thou magnified; Thou didst clothe Thyself with honour and
majesty. Who coverest Thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out
the heaven like a curtain: . . . who maketh His angels winds, and His ministers
a flaming fire.' 75

Now do not suppose that the beings here mentioned partake of the nature of this our mortal and earthly fire, nor yet of the winds proceeding from the irrational nature of air: but just as God Himself, though He is in His nature incorporeal and immaterial, and pure mind, or rather above mind, and above all reason, is yet called in a figurative way wind, and fire, and light, and certain other names adapted to mortal ears; so the divine Scriptures address the intelligent and rational Beings, angels, and archangels, and spirits, and divine powers, and heavenly hosts, principalities, and powers, and thrones, and dominions,76 as if they were myriads upon myriads of stars and luminaries, and say that the Sun of Righteousness and His fellow the Holy Spirit rule and preside over all.77 But all of them, with the Son Himself and Holy Spirit, all intelligent and rational living beings, together with those that are seen in heaven, and the heaven itself and all that it contains within it----all these are commanded by the sacred and prophetic Scripture to render to Him alone who is God over all, who through all and in all is universal King and Ruler and cause of the whole world, as being the Framer and Maker and Guardian and Saviour of all, to render, I say, to Him His becoming praise and the worship that is proper to God, saying: 'Praise ye God from the heavens: praise Him in the heights. Praise Him, all ye angels of His: praise Him, all His hosts. Praise Him, sun and moon: praise Him, all ye stars and light. Praise Him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that are above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the LORD: for He spake, and they were made; He commanded, and they were created; He made them fast for ever and ever: He gave them a law, and it shall not pass away.' 78

Such are the doctrines received from the Hebrews, which we have preferred to the
erroneous polytheism and daemonism of the Greeks, knowing and duly honouring
divine powers as servants and ministers of God the universal King, but
confessing Him alone as God, and worshipping Him alone, whom heaven itself, and
all things that are in heaven, and things above heaven were taught to worship
and praise and celebrate as God: for even the Only-begotten of God and
First-born of the whole world, the Beginning of all, commands us to believe His
Father alone true God, and to worship only Him.

CHAPTER XVI

NEXT we must consider what the Hebrew oracles deliver to us concerning the adverse power also. They teach that the divine powers set over the whole world by the will of the Father----'the ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall inherit salvation' 79----and the holy angels of God and archangels, and all the intelligent nature which is the minister of blessings, being full of light, and almoner of all the blessings that are bestowed on men from God, are the attendants of God the sole King of all; and next that, like the stars of heaven, they circle round the Sun of Righteousness 80 and His fellow the Holy Spirit, and enjoy the supply of their light, and for that reason are naturally compared to the luminaries in heaven. But the nature which is turned away from these, and for its own wickedness is deprived of the company of the better spirits, and contrary to the former has exchanged light for darkness, Scripture calls by the names which befit the badness of their disposition. The leader for instance of their fall, who had been the cause both for himself and for others of their apostasy from, the better angels, as having fallen down utterly beneath the piety of the more godlike, and wrought for himself the venom of malice and impiety, and become the author of darkness and folly in consequence of his wilful departure from the light----him the Scripture is wont to call dragon and serpent, and black and creeping, an engenderer of deadly poison, a wild beast, and a lion devouring mankind, and the adder among reptiles. The divine words say that the cause of his falling away was frenzy of mind and distraction of thought, and describe as follows both his fall and his insanity: 'How is the day star, which did rise in the morning, fallen from heaven! He is crushed to the ground, which did send forth to all the nations. And thou saidst in thine heart, I will ascend into the heaven; above the stars of heaven will I set my throne. ... I will be like unto the Most High.' 81 And again: 'Thus saith the Lord: Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a god, I have dwelt in the habitation of God.' 82 And again: 'Thou art the sealing of the pattern, and crown of beauty; thou wast born in the pleasaunce of the paradise of God; every precious stone was thy covering,' 83 and the rest. And to this he adds: 'Thou wast in the holy mountain of God, in the midst of the stones of fire; thou wast blameless in thy days, from the day that thou wast created, till thine unrighteousness was found in thee.84 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thy knowledge was corrupted with thy beauty; because of the multitude of thy sins I have cast thee to the ground.' 85 By these passages then we have learned directly the former association of him of whom we speak with the diviner powers, and his fall from the better sort through his own arrogance and rebellion against God. Under him there is besides a countless race involved in similar offences, which for their impiety fell from the lot of the pious angels, and in exchange for their former lightsome and divine surrounding, and their honour in the King's palace, and a life passed among the blessed and angelic choirs, received by the just judgement and sentence of the mighty God an abode in Tartarus, the place befitting the impious, which is called by the divine word the abyss, and darkness, not such as with us, but that which is made known by the divine oracles. And of this race a small fragment left on the earth and in the sublunar air to exercise the athletes of piety, has become a joint cause of the polytheistic delusion of mankind which is no better than atheism. But upon these also holy Scripture has set appropriate names, more plainly when it calls them evil spirits and daemons, 'principalities and powers, world-rulers, and spiritual hosts of wickedness'; 86 but figuratively, when it is encouraging the beloved of God to have no fear of the crowd of hostile daemons, by what it says: 'Thou shalt go upon the asp and adder: the lion and the dragon shalt thou tread under thy feet.' 87 A proof of their hatred of God is that they wish themselves to be proclaimed gods, and steal away for themselves the honours intended for God, and attempt to entice the simple by divinations and oracles as lures and baits, and draw them away from looking up to the God of the whole world, and drag them down into the pit of utter destruction in impious, and godless superstition. Wherefore an effort to flee with all speed from their deceits was made by the Hebrews alone from the earliest ages, by expressly teaching that 'all the gods of the nations are daemons.' 88 But now, by God's grace we may say, through our Saviour's teaching in the Gospel all nations from all parts of the earth have been delivered from the bondage of the daemons, and sing the praise of that God whom we have learned to be the only Saviour, and King, and God of the whole world.

CHAPTER XVII

HERE again the Phoenician and Egyptian account of the origin of animal life
introduced spontaneous generation of all living beings upon the earth including
even man, and described one and the same nature as springing forth in the like
fortuitous manner from the earth, supposing that there is no difference at all
between the irrational and the rational soul and being.

These at least were the doctrines set forth in the statements of their writers
which have been previously quoted. But again with good reason we have preferred
the Hebrews as having defined the circumstances of the original constitution of
man with great beauty and wisdom and truth. For the one part of ourselves they
say is divine and immortal, being neither carnal nor corporeal by nature, and
this they say is the true man made in the image and likeness of God; and he is
the work of God, and not of chance nor of spontaneous growth, but of the
universal Cause Himself, when by divine decree He had willed that the earthly
regions should not be without a share of intelligent and rational being, that so
the befitting hymn of praise should ascend to Him from all creatures in heaven
and earth and sky, which possess reason and are able to apprehend His divine
nature.

Thus then it is contained in the oracles of the Hebrews: 'And God said, Let us
make man in our image, and after our likeness: and God created man, in the image
of God created He him.' 89 And again: 'And God took dust from the earth and
formed man, and breathed breath of life into his face; and man became a living
soul.' 90 This again is interpreted by Philo the Hebrew, adding yet the
following to his sayings which have been quoted.

CHAPTER XVIII

[PHILO IUDAEUS] 91 'BUT whereas the others, who said that our mind is a part of
the ethereal nature, connected man by kinship with the ether; the great Moses
did not liken the form of the reasonable soul to any of the things created, but
said that it was a genuine coinage of that divine and invisible Spirit, marked
and stamped by the seal of God, the impress of which is the eternal Word. "For
God," says he, "breathed breath of life into his face, and man became a living
soul." 92 So that he who receives that breath must be made like to Him that
sends it forth.

'Wherefore also it is said that man was made iu the image of God, but not in the
image of anything created. It naturally followed then that, as man's soul was
fashioned after the likeness of the archetypal Word of the First Cause, so his
body, being raised up toward heaven the purest portion of the universe, should
lift its eyes on high.' So far Philo. With good reason then does the sacred
Scripture affirm that man was not made in the same way as the other animals;
because some of them came forth from the earth at one command of God the King of
all, and others again at His bidding flew up out of the watery element: but of
the living creatures upon earth only the most beloved of God, ourselves, have
been made in our soul after the image and likeness of God. And in reference to
this man is also regarded as having the nature of a ruler and a king, and is the
only one of the creatures upon earth that has powers of reasoning, creating,
judging, and legislating, and is capable of learning arts and sciences. For only
the soul in man is an intelligent and rational essence, in which the other
animals on earth do not participate.

They therefore are serfs, and fill the place of servants to man: while he as
lord and ruler enslaves and subjugates those that are far superior in bodily
strength, but inferior by their privation in regard to the intelligent essence.

He therefore, they say, was created with a certain singular excellence after the
image and likeness of God by God Himself. And for this reason he is able to
attain to a presentation of the concept of God, and to form perceptions of
wisdom and righteousness and every virtue, to calculate also the courses of sun
and moon and stars, and the cycles of days and seasons, thanks to the kinship
with heaven, which man alone of mortal things exhibits. But the outward frame
enveloping this part of man is essentially different in kind and born of the
earth, yet this also itself is a work of God taken from earth and returning to
earth. And therefore we ought to care for this part as much as a master cares
for a brute beast when distressed, and to treat it gently, and feed it just as a
slave well attached to the service of human life; but the master within, as
being of noble birth and in nature akin to God, we must honour in liberal ways,
as having also received honour from the First Cause of all. The oracles at least
say that the Universal King, having adorned man's original nature with divine
powers and with the likeness of God, allotted his first mode of life in
accordance with the gifts which He had bestowed, and associated him with divine
companies in a Paradise of good things.

Also that God on His part had in the beginning as an all-kind Father bestowed
these blessings upon him, but that he by wilful choice fell away from these
happier conditions, and for neglect of a divine command passed by exchange into
the condition of mortality.

Wherefore also it is our highest concern to make piety our very first aim, and
to amend the first transgression by a sequel of happier omen; and so to hasten
on to the recurrence and restoration of our proper state. For the true end of
man's nature is not here on earth sinking down into ruin and destruction, but in
yonder place from which the first man fell away. And therefore it is necessary
to win back again the purity and likeness to God of the intelligent being within
us; and to this all men must zealously strive with all their might to return, by
devotion to piety and virtue.

Such were the philosophic doctrines concerning man's nature taught by the
Hebrews originally, before any Greeks had even come into the world: for these
being of yesterday and quite newly sprung up from the earth, designed to steal
away the doctrines of barbarians, and did not abstain from those of the Hebrews,
as our discourse in its progress will presently show. But since it was peculiar
to the Hebrew doctrines to regard the Supreme God as the one sole Creator of all
things, including the substance underlying bodies, which the Greeks call hylé
(matter), whereas countless multitudes of barbarians and Greeks alike stood
opposed to this opinion, some of them declaring that matter was the source of
evil and subsisted without beginning, and others that in its own nature it had
neither quality nor shape, but by the power of God had acquired its orderly
arrangement together with its qualities; we must therefore show that the opinion
of the Hebrews upholds a far better doctrine, approaching the question with
logical demonstration, and overthrowing the opposite argument with correct
reasoning.

I shall quote then the words of those who before our time have thoroughly
examined the doctrine, and first of Dionysius, who in the first book of his
exercitations Against Sabellius writes on the subject before us as follows:

CHAPTER XIX

[DIONYSIUS ALEXANDRINUS] 93 'NOR are they free from impiety who regarding matter
as unoriginate give it over into the hand of God for orderly arrangement,
inasmuch as being originally passible and changeable it yields to the
alterations impressed upon it by God.

'For let them explain clearly from what source like and unlike originally
subsist in God and in matter. For then we must further think of some higher than
each of them, a thought which it is not lawful to entertain concerning God. For
whence came it that they are unoriginate, a property said to be alike in both,
and whence a third conceived to be higher than either of them?

'For if God is the absolutely unoriginate, and if the being unoriginate is, as
one might say, His very essence, matter cannot be unoriginate; for matter and
God are not the same: but if each is what it properly is, namely matter and God,
while the unoriginate is attached to both, this manifestly is different from
each of them, and earlier and higher than both.

'The idea however that these subsist together from the beginning, or rather that
this one of them, the matter, subsists of itself, is utterly overthrown by the
difference of their opposite conditions.

'For let them tell us the cause for which, though both be unoriginate, God on
the one hand is impassible, unchangeable, immovable, actively operative, while
the other is on the contrary passible, changeable, unstable, transformable.

'How then could they harmonize and agree in their course? Did God adapt Himself
to the nature of matter, and so work it artistically? But this surely is absurd,
that God should work like men, as a goldsmith, and a stonecutter, and in all the
other handicrafts in which materials can be shaped and modelled.

'But if He gave to matter such qualities as He chose according to His own
wisdom, and set His seal upon it in the manifold forms and varieties of shape
and pattern of His own workmanship, then this is both a reverent and true
account, and gives additional confirmation to the belief that God the real
substance of the universe is unoriginate,

'For together with the being unoriginate He also combined His proper mode of
existence. There is much then to be said against these men also, but it does not
lie in our way now: yet in comparison with the most atheistical polytheists
these are the more reverent.' Such are the extracts from Dionysius: but listen
also to what Origen says.

CHAPTER XX

[ORIGEN] 94 'IF it is a difficulty to any one that, because of the case of human
artists, he cannot admit that God furnished the existing world without any
substratum of unoriginate matter, since neither can a statuary make his proper
work without bronze, nor a carpenter without timber, nor a builder without
stones, we must question him about God's power, whether God, if He wills to
establish whatever He chooses, there being no defect nor weakness in His will,
cannot establish that which He chooses.

'For as, according to all who bring in providence in their own argument, the
qualities which were non-existent are established by Him as He chooses for the
orderly arrangement of the whole by His unspeakable power and wisdom, so, the
reason being the same in both cases, His will is able to bring into existence
all the substance that He needs.

'For to those who will not admit that this is so we shall put the question,
whether it does not follow from their argument that God by a lucky chance found
the substance unorigiuate, without which, had it not been supplied to Him by its
unoriginate character, He could have produced no work at all, but would have
continued to be no Creator, no Father, no Benefactor, no Good Being, nor
anything else that is with good reason predicated of God.

'Whence also came the measurement of just so much of the substratum of matter as
to suffice for the establishment of a world of the actual size? For it would
seem as if some providence anterior to God must have supplied Him with the
matter, providing that the art existing in Him should not have mere empty ideas
from the want of any substance, with which He could co-operate in embellishing
the world with so great beauty.

'Whence also has matter become capable of receiving every quality which God
wills, unless God Himself made it for His own use just so much and such as He
wished to have?

'At all events if we admit as a hypothesis that matter is unoriginate, this is
what we shall say to those who wish to have it so; if without any providence
supplying the, material substance to God it has become such as it is, what could
providence, if it existed, have done more than their spontaneous chance?

'And if God Himself, when matter was non-existent, chose to prepare it, what
would His wisdom and divine power have done more than that which, as supposed,
arose from the unoriginate? For if it is found that the same result would have
been produced by providence, which was produced even without providence, what
reason is there why we should not dispense with the Demiurge and the Artificer
in the case of the world-order also?

'For just as it is absurd in the case of this ordered world, so skilfully
contrived, to say that it has become such without help from a wise Artificer, so
it is also equally unreasonable that the matter, being of such extent, and such
quality, and so pliable to the Artificer, the Word of God, has been unoriginate.

'In answer, however, to those who compare the fact that no workman makes
anything without material, we must say that they are comparing dissimilar cases.
For providence supplies every artificer with his material, as coming from some
former art either human or divine. This then will at present suffice in answer
to those who, because it is said, "And the earth was invisible and unarranged,''
95 think that material substance is unoriginate.' So far this author. But the
Hebrew Philo also in his book Concerning Providence gives the following account
of matter:

CHAPTER XXI

[PHILO IUDAEUS] 96 'BUT concerning the quantity of the material substance, if it
has indeed been created, there is this to be said. With a view to the creation
of the world God estimated an exactly sufficient quantity of matter, so that
there might be neither deficiency nor excess. For it would have been absurd
that, whereas particular artists whenever they are making anything, and
especially any costly thing, measure the quantity of materials that will
suffice, yet He who devised numbers and measures and their equivalent relations
to each other, should not have taken thought for a sufficiency.

'I shall therefore confidently assert that the world needed neither less nor
more material substance for its furnishing, since otherwise it would not have
been perfect, nor complete in all its parts; whereas now it has been well
wrought and completed out of a perfect supply of material substance. For it is
the proper mark of a workman thoroughly skilled in his art to see that he has
sufficient material before beginning any fabric.

'Although therefore a man, even if he were superior in knowledge to all others,
being unable entirely to escape from error which is natural to mortals, might
perhaps be deceived in regard to the quantity of the matter, when practising his
art, adding to it at one time as too little, and at another time taking from it
as too much; yet He who is a kind of fountain of all knowledge was not likely to
supply Himself with too little or too much of anything, inasmuch as He employs
measures elaborated to a marvellous exactness, all satisfactory.

'But he who chooses to prate at random, might as well at once bring forward
against us the works of all artists as having gained an advantage in their
construction by the addition or diminution of something in the materials.
However that may be, it is the part of sophistry to invent quibbles, but of
wisdom to examine thoroughly everything in nature.'

Let this suffice to show the character of Philo's opinions. Maximus too, a man
not undistinguished in the Christian life, has composed a special treatise
Concerning Matter; from which I think it will be useful to quote some sentences
of moderate length, for the accurate decision of the question before us.

CHAPTER XXII

[MAXIMUS] 97 'I DO not suppose that you any more than myself are ignorant that
it is impossible for two unoriginate things to subsist together, although you
certainly seem to have attached to your argument this presupposition, that it is
absolutely necessary to affirm one of two things, either that God is separate
from matter, or on the other hand that He is inseparable from it.

'Should any one therefore choose to say that He is united with it, that will be
an assertion that the Uncreate is one only; for each will be a part of the
other, and being parts each of the other they will not be two uncreated, but one
consisting of different parts; for as we do not say that man though consisting
of different parts is broken up into the small coin of many created things, but,
as reason requires, we say that man is one being of many parts created by God,
so, if God is not separate from matter, we must necessarily say that the
Uncreated is one only.

'But if any one shall affirm that He is separate, there must of necessity be
something that is intermediate between the two, which also makes their
separation evident. For it is impossible that one thing can be proved to be
separate from another, when there is no third in which the separation between
them is found. And this stands true not only in this and any single case, but in
very many.

'For the argument which we used in the case of two uncreated beings must
necessarily succeed equally well, if the uncreated things were admitted to be
three. For in their case also I should ask, whether they are separated one from
another, or on the contrary each united to his neighbour.

'So if any one should choose to say that they were united, he will receive the
same answer as the first; but if, on the contrary, that they are separated, he
cannot avoid the necessary existence of something that separates them.

'But if perchance any one should say that there is also a third statement which
may fitly be made concerning things uncreated, that is, that God is not
separated from matter, nor on the other hand united with it as a part, but that
God exists as it were locally in matter or matter in God, let him receive the
conclusive answer, that if we call matter the place of God, we must of necessity
say that He can also be contained, and is circumscribed by matter.

'Moreover He must be carried about like matter in a disorderly way, and does not
remain settled and constant in Himself, when that in which He exists is carried
now this way and now that. And besides this we must also say that God has
existed in things of worse nature. For if matter was once without order, and He
wishing to change it for the better put it into order, there was a time when God
was in things without order.

'I might also fairly ask this question, whether God completely filled matter, or
was in some portion only of it. If then any one should choose to say that God
was in some portion of matter, he makes Him very much smaller than matter, if
indeed a part of it contained the whole of Him: but if he should say that God is
in all matter, he has to explain how He was to work upon it. For he must either
say that there was a sort of contraction of God, and that when this was effected
He wrought upon that part from which He had receded; or else that He wrought
upon Himself together with the matter, not having any place into which He could
withdraw.

'If however any one shall say that matter is in God, it is equally necessary to
inquire whether it is by God's being separated from Himself, just as tribes of
living creatures subsist in the air, by its being divided and parted for the
reception of the creatures that arise in it; or whether matter is in God as in a
place, that is, as water is in land.

'For if we should say, "As in the air," we must necessarily say that God is
divisible: but if, "As water is in land," and if matter was in confusion and
disorder, and moreover contained evils, we are compelled to say that God is the
place of disorder and evil: which seems to me an irreverent statement, nay more,
a dangerous one. For you claim the existence of matter in order to avoid calling
God the author of evil, and while wishing to escape from this you say that He is
the receptacle of evil.

'Now if you had said that from the nature of existing creatures you supposed
matter to be uncreated, I should have had much to say about matter in proof that
it cannot possibly be uncreated. But since you said that the origin of evil was
the cause of such a supposition, I therefore think it well to proceed to the
examination of this latter point. For when a clear statement has been given of
the mode in which evils exist, and of the impossibility of denying that God is
the author of evil, if matter is attributed to Him, I think that such a
supposition is utterly overthrown.

'You say then that co-existing from the beginning with God there is matter
without qualities, out of which He formed the beginning of this world? ' 'Such
is my idea.'

'Well then, if matter was without qualities, and if the world has been made by
God, and there are qualities in the world, God must have been the maker of the
qualities.'

'That is true.'

'Now since I heard you say before, that it is impossible for anything to be made
out of the non-existent, answer me this question of mine. Do you think that the
qualities of the world have not been produced out of pre-existing qualities?'

'I think so.' 'But are something else besides the substances?'

'That is so.'

'If then God made the qualities neither out of pre-existing qualities, nor out
of the substances, because they are not themselves substances, we are compelled
to say that they have been made by God out of non-existents. And hence I thought
it was too much for you to say, that it was impossible to suppose that anything
has been made by God out of non-existents.

'However, let the argument on this point stand as follows: Even among ourselves
we see men making some things out of what is non-existent, however much they
seem to be making them in some material: as for instance let us take our example
in the case of architects. For they make cities not out of cities, and temples
in like manner not out of temples.

'But if, because there are substances underlying these things, you suppose that
they make them out of existing things, your argument deceives you. For it is not
the substance that makes the city, or the temples, but the art which is employed
about the substance; and the art is not produced out of some underlying art in
the substances, but is produced out of an art which is non-existent in them.

'But I suppose you will meet my argument in this way, that the artist makes the
art which is in the material substance out of the art which he has in himself.
Now in answer to this I think it may fairly be said, that it is not produced
even in the man out of any underlying art. For it is not possible to grant that
the art exists independently by itself, since it is one of the accidents, and
one of those things which have existence given to them at the moment when they
are produced in a substance.

'For the man will exist even apart from his skill as an architect, but this will
have no existence unless there be first a man. And hence we are compelled to say
that it is the nature of the arts to be produced in men out of what is
non-existent. If therefore we have now shown this to be so in the case of men,
why was it not proper to say that God was able to make not only qualities but
also substances out of what was non-existent? For the proof that it is possible
for something to be made out of what is non-existent shows that this is the case
with the substances also.

'But since you are anxious to inquire concerning the origin of evil, I will pass
to the discussion of that subject. And I wish first to ask you a few questions.
Do you think that evils are substances, or qualities of substances?

'I think it is right to say that they are qualities of substances.

'But matter, we said, has no quality nor shape?

'So I declared in the preface to my argument.

'If therefore evils are qualities of substances, and matter had no qualities,
but God, you said, was the maker of qualities, God must be also the creator of
evils. When therefore even in this way it is impossible to say that God is not
the cause of evils, it seems to me superfluous to attach matter to Him. But if
you have anything to say against this, begin your argument.

'If our inquiry arose out of contentiousness, I should not think it right to
give a second definition of evils: but since it is rather for the sake of
friendship and the benefit of our neighbour that we are examining the questions,
I think it right to allow a new definition concerning them.

'I think it must have been long manifest to you, that my purpose and my earnest
desire in our arguments is, that I do not wish to gain a victory by plausible
statement of falsehood, but that the truth should be shown by means of accurate
inquiry. And I clearly understand that you also are so disposed. Wherefore
employ without any diffidence whatever kind of method you think will enable you
to find the truth: for by employing the better method you will benefit not only
yourself, but certainly me also on matters of which I am ignorant.' 'I think you
plainly admitted that evils also are a kind of substances? ' 'Yes, for I do not
see them existing anywhere apart from substances.'

'Since then you say, my good sir, that evils also are substances, it is
necessary for us to examine the definition of substance. Is it your opinion that
substance is a kind of concrete body? '

'It is.'

'And does the concrete body subsist of itself independently, not requiring
anything from whose previous existence it may receive its being? '

'Just so.' 'And do you think that evils depend on action of some kind? ' 'So it
seems to me.' 'And do actions come into being at the moment when the agent is
present?' 'Such is the case.' 'And when the agent does not exist, there will
never be any action of his? ' 'There will not.'

'Well then, if substance is a kind of concrete body, and this requires nothing
in union with which it may begin to exist, and if evils are actions of some
agent, and if actions do require something in union with which they begin to
exist, evils cannot be substances.

'But if evils are substances, and murder is an evil, murder will be a substance:
yet surely murder is an action of some one, and so murder is not a substance. If
however you mean that the agents are substances, I too agree. For example, a man
who is a murderer, in respect of his being man is a substance: but the murder
which he does is not a substance, but a work of the substance.

'So we say in one case that the man is evil, because of his committing murder,
and in a contrary case that he is good, because of his doing good. And these
names are attached to the substance in consequence of its accidents, which are
not itself: for the substance is not murder, nor again adultery, or any of the
like evils. But just as the grammarian is named from grammar, and the
rhetorician from rhetoric, and the physician from the art of physic, though his
substance is neither the art of physic nor yet rhetoric, nor grammar, but
receives the name from its accidents, from which it seems fit to be so called,
although it is neither one nor the other of them, in like manner it appears to
me that the substance also acquires an additional name from what are thought to
be evils, though it is neither of them.

'And in like manner if you imagine some other being in the mind as the cause of
evils in men, I would have you consider that he also, inasmuch as he works in
them and suggests the doing evil, is himself evil in consequence of what he
does. For he too is said to be evil for this reason that he is the doer of
evils. But the things which any one does are not himself, but his actions, from
which he receives the name of being evil.

'For if we were to say that he himself is what he does, and if he does
murders and adulteries and thefts and all the like, then he himself is these:
and if he is himself these, and these gain real existence at the time of being
done, and in ceasing to be done cease to exist, and it is by men that they are
done----then the men must be the makers of themselves and the causes of their
own being and ceasing to be.

'Whereas if you say that these are his actions, he has the character of being
evil from what he does, not from what constitutes his substance. But we said
that a man is called evil from the accidents pertaining to his substance, which
are not the substance itself, as the physician from the art of physic.

'If then each man is evil in consequence of his actions, and if his actions
receive a beginning of existence, then that man also began to be evil, and these
evils too had a beginning. And if this is so, a man will not be without a
beginning in evil, nor evils un-originate, because we say that they originate
with him.'

'The argument against your opponent you seem to me, my friend, to have completed
satisfactorily. For from the premises which you assumed for your argument you
seemed to draw the conclusion fairly. For in very truth, if matter was without
qualities, and God is the maker of qualities, and evils are qualities, then God
must be the maker of evils.

'As to the argument then against that opponent, let us grant that it has been
well stated: but in my opinion it is false to say that matter has no qualities;
for of no substance whatever is it permissible to say that it is without
qualities. For while describing what kind of thing matter is, the speaker
indicates its quality by saying that it is without qualities, for that is a
certain kind of quality.

'Therefore, if you please, take up the argument again from the beginning against
me; since in my opinion matter has qualities eternally and without beginning.
For so I maintain that evils arise from the emanation of matter, in order that
God may not be the cause of evils, but matter the cause of them all.'

'I welcome your ready zeal, my friend, and commend your earnestness in these
discussions. For certainly every one who wishes to learn ought not to assent
simply and at random to what is said, but should make a strict examination
of'the arguments. For even if the opponent by giving a false definition affords
his adversary an opportunity of drawing such a conclusion as he pleases, it does
not follow that he will persuade the hearer of this, but if he shall say what
seems possible to be said fairly. From which one of two things must follow; for
either he will gain the full benefit of hearing an answer to the question which
seems to be stirred, or he will convict his opponent in the argument of saying
what is not true.

'I think then that you ought not to have stated that matter possesses qualities
eternally. For if this is so, of what will God be the maker? For whether we say
substances, these we affirm existed before; or on the other hand qualities,
these also were there.

'Since therefore substance exists, and qualities also, it seems to me
superfluous to say that God is a creator. But that I may not seem to be
arranging an argument for myself, do you now answer the question, in what way do
you say that God is a creator? Is it that He changed the substances so that they
were no longer those which they once were, but became others different from
them? Or that He kept the substances the same that they were before, but changed
their qualities? '

'I do not at all think that there has been any change of substances: for this
appears to me an absurd thing to say. But I assert that there has been a certain
change of the qualities, in respect to which I say that God is a creator; just
as if one should chance to say that a house has been made out of stones, of
which we cannot say that they are no longer stones in their substance, when the
stones have become a house.

'For I say that the house has been made by the quality of construction, the
former quality of the stones having evidently been changed. Just so it seems to
me that God also, while the substance remains, has made a certain change in its
qualities, in reference to which I say that the creation of this world has come
from God.'

'Since therefore you assert that a certain change of the qualities has come from
God, answer me a few questions which I propose to ask. Tell me now whether like
myself you also think that evils are qualities of substances? '

'I think so.' 'And were these qualities in matter eternally, or had they a
beginning of existence?' 'I say that these very qualities were eternally
co-existent with matter.' 'But do you not say that God has made some change of
the qualities?' 'That is what I say.' 'Was the change then for the better or for
the worse? ' 'I am disposed to say, for the better.'

'Well then, if evils are qualities of matter, and God changed its qualities for
the better, we are compelled to ask, whence came the evils. For the qualities
did not remain of the same kind as they were by nature. Either, if there were no
evil qualities previously, but such qualities, you say, have grown around the
matter from the first qualities having been changed by God, God must be
responsible for the evils, as having changed what were not evil qualities so
that they now are evil.

'Or do you not think that God changed the evil qualities for the better, but say
that the rest, and so many only as were neither good nor bad for the purpose of
arranging the world, have been changed by God? ' 'So I held from the beginning.'

'How then do you say that He has left the qualities of the bad as they were? Was
it that He was able to annihilate them also, but had not the will; or that He
had not the power? For if you say that He had the power but not the will, you
must necessarily admit that He is responsible for them, because though He had
power to bring evils to an end, He permitted them to remain as they were,
especially at the time when He began to operate on matter.

'For if He had taken no care at all about matter, He would not have been
responsible for what He permitted to remain. But when He began to operate on a
certain portion of it, but left a portion as it was, though He had power to
change that also for the better, it seems to me that He incurred the
responsibility of causing it, as having left a portion of matter to be
mischievous in the destruction of the part on which He operated.

'Moreover in regard to this part it seems to me that the very greatest wrong has
been done: this part, I mean, of matter which He so arranged that it now
participates in evils. For if one were to examine the facts carefully, he would
find that matter has now fallen into a worse condition than its former disorder.
For before it was arranged in order, it might have had no sensation at all of
evil; but now each of its parts becomes sensible of evils.

'Now let me give you an example in the case of a man. For before he was
fashioned and made a living creature by the Creator's skill, he had from his
nature the advantage of not participating in any evil at all: but from the time
of his being made man by God, he also receives the sensation of approaching
evil, and this, which you say has been done by God for the benefit of matter, is
found rather to have been added to it for the worse.

'But if you say that the reason why evils have not been made to cease was that
God was not able to annihilate them, you will be asserting that God is deficient
in power: and the want of power will mean either that He is by nature weak, or
that being overcome by fear He has been brought into subjection by some greater
power.

'If then you will dare to say that God is weak by nature, you seem to me to be
in danger for your very salvation: but if through being overcome by fear from
the greater power, the evils will be greater than God, as prevailing over the
impulse of His will; which seems to me an absurd thing to say of God.

'For why will not rather these evils be gods, as being able according to your
argument to overcome God, since we say that God is that which has the authority
over all things?

'I wish, however, to ask you a few questions also about matter itself. So tell
me now, whether matter was something simple or compound: for the diversity of
its products brings me round to such a mode of examining this subject. Since if
matter was simple and uniform, but the world compound, and composed out of
different substances and mixtures, (it is impossible to say that it has been
made out of matter, because compounds cannot be composed out of a single thing
which has no qualities); for "compound" signifies a mixture of several simple
things.

'But if on the other hand you should choose to say that matter is compound, you
must of course say that it has been composed out of certain simple things. Now
if it was composed out of simple things, those simple things once existed by
themselves, and matter has come from their composition; whence also it is shown
to be created.

'For if matter is compound, and compounds are constituted out of simples, there
was once a time when matter did not exist, that is to say, before the simples
came together. But if there was once a time when matter did not exist, but never
a time when the uncreate did not exist, matter cannot be uncreate. Henceforward,
however, there will be many uncreate things. For if God was uncreate, as well as
the simple elements out of which matter was composed, the uncreate will not be
two only. But is it your opinion that no existing thing is contrary to itself?'

'It is.' 'And is water contrary to fire? ' 'It appears to me contrary.' 'And in
like manner darkness to light, and heat to cold, and also moist to dry? ' 'I
think it is so.'

'Therefore if no existing thing is contrary to itself, (and these are contrary
to each other) they will not be one and the same matter, nor yet from the same
matter. I wish, however, to ask you again another question like this. Do you
think that the parts of a thing are not destructive one of another? '

'I do.' 'And that fire and water, and the rest in like manner, are parts of
matter? '

'They are so.'

'Well then? Do you not think that water is destructive of fire, and light of
darkness, and all the other similar cases? ' 'I do think so.'

'Therefore if the parts of a thing are not destructive one of another, while the
parts of matter are destructive one of another, they will not be parts one of
another: and if they are not parts one of another, they will not be parts of the
same matter: nay more, they will not themselves he matter, because, according to
the adversary's argument, no existing thing is destructive of itself.

'For nothing is contrary to itself; because it is the nature of contraries to be
contrary to others. As for example white is not contrary to itself, but is said
to be the contrary of black: and light is shown in like manner not to be
contrary to itself, but appears to have that relation to darkness, and very many
other things of course in the same way.

'If therefore there were also one kind of matter only, it would not be contrary
to itself: but since such is the nature of contraries, it is proved that the one
only kind of matter has no existence.' So far the author before mentioned. And
since the discourse has now been sufficiently extended, we will pass on to the
eighth book of the Preparation for the Gospel; and after invoking the help of
God, will fill up what is wanting to the preceding speculation.

[Footnotes moved to end and numbered] 1. 300 b 9 Rom. i. 26, 27 2. d 7 Wisdom
xiv. 12 3. 303 b 6 i Pet. ii. 9 4. 306 d 2 Gen. iv. 26 5. 308 a 10 Gen. v. 24 6.
c 6 Gen. vi. 9 7. 309 a 8 Gen. xiv. 18-20 8. 309 d 3 Gen. xv. 6 9. d 5-7 Cf.
Gen. xvii. 5; xviii. 18; xii. 2 10. 310 d 1 Gen. xxxii. 28 11. 311 a 5 Job i. 1
12. 312 a 4 Gen. xxxix. 8 13. 315 b 4 Gen. i. 11 14. c 1 ibid. 20 15. c 8 ibid.
14 16. 316 a 5 Gen. ii. 8 17. 317 a 6 Gen. iii. 1 18. d 2 Gen. i. 1

19. d 4 ibid. 3 20. d 5 Gen. i. 6 21. d 6 ibid. 11 22. d 9 ibid. 14 23. 318 a 1
ibid. 20 24. a 4 ibid. 24 25. a 11 Gen. ii. 4 26. 318 c 7 Jer. xxiii. 23, 24 27.
d 1 Is. xl. 12, 13 28. d 6 ibid. 23 29. d 7 ibid. 26 30. d 8 Is. xlii. 5, 6 31.
d 12 Is. xliv. 24 32. 319 a 1 Is. xlv. 5, 6 33. a 3 Jer. x. 11-14 34. b 1 Ps.
cxxxix. 7 35. c 4 Gen. xiv. 22 36. c 8 ibid. 19 37. d 2 Gen. xxiv. 2

38. d 4 ibid. 7 39. d 9 Ex. iii. 14 40. 320 d 2 i Cor. i. 24 41. d 3 Job xxviii.
12 42. d 6 ibid. 22 43. d 9 Ps. xxxiii. 6 44. 321 a 1 Prov. viii. 12 45. a 3
ibid. 15 46. a 4 Prov. viii. 22 47. a 6 ibid. 25 48. a 7 ibid. 27 49. a 8 ibid.
28 50. a 9 ibid. 30 51. b 6 Wisd. of Sol. vi. 22 52. b 9 ibid. vii. 22 53. c 9
ibid. viii. 1 54. 321 d 13 Ps. cvii. 20 55. d 15 Ps. cxlvii. 15 56. d 19 John i.
1 57. 322 b 1 Gen. i. 26 58. b 4 Ps. xxxiii. 9, cxlviii. 5 59. c 3 Gen. xix. 24
60. c 7 Ps. cx. 1 61. d 1 Ps. cx. 3 62. d 11 Philo Iudaeus, a Fragment preserved
by Eusebius alone 63. d 11 Gen. ix. 6 64. 323 b 3 Phil. i. Noah's husbandry, bk.
1.

65. 823 b 9 Phil. i. Noah's husbandry, bk. ii.

66. 324 a 1 Aristobulus. Cf. 375 d, 663 c 67. d 5 Joshua v. 14 68. d 6 Isa. ix.
6 69. 325 a 5 i Cor. xv. 41 70. 325 b 3 John i. 9 71. b 4 Mal. iv. 2 72. 326 b 1
i Cor. xv. 41 73. b 6 Ps. cxlvii. 4 74. c 4 Dan. vii. 10 75. 826 d 1 Ps. civ. 1
76. 327 a 6 Cf. Col. i. 16 77. b 1 Mal. iv. 3 78. c 3 Ps. cxlviii. 1 79. 328 a 4
Heb. i. 14 80. b 6 Mal. iv. 2 81. 328 d 7 Isa. xiv. 12 82. 329 a 2 Ezek. xxviii.
2 83. a 4 ibid. 12 84. a 8 ibid. 14 85. b 1 ibid. 17 86. d 5 Eph. vi. 12 87. d 8
Ps. xci. 13 88. 330 a 7 Ps, xcvi. 5 89. 330 d 12 Gen. i. 26 90. 331 a 1 Gen. ii.
7 91. b 1 Philo Iud. tom. i. p. 332 M 92. b 6 Gen. ii. 7 93. 333 c 6 Dionysius
of Alexandria, Against Sabellius, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius only 94. 334
d 1 Origen, Commentary on Genesis, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius alone 95.
336 a 8 Gen. i. 2 96. b 5 Philo Iud. On Providence, tom. ii. p. 625 M. Fragment
preserved by Eusebius alone 97. 337 b 3 Maximus: cf. Origen, Philocalia, c. 24;
Methodius, On Free Will I, 5. 1 This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003.
All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 39: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 9
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 9

BOOK IX

CONTENTS I. The Greek historians who mentioned the Jewish nation p. 403 b II.
Theophrastus concerning the Jews, from Porphyry On Abstinence from Animal Food,
Bk. i p. 404 a III. Porphyry on the illustrious philosophy of the Jews in
ancient times p. 404 c IV. Hecataeus concerning the Jews p. 408 a V. Clearchus
on the same, from Bk. i, On Sleep p. 409 b VI. Clement, Strom. i, concerning
those who have mentioned the Jewish nation. p. 410 b VII. Numenius the
Pythagorean philosopher concerning the Jews, from Bk. i, On the Good p. 411 b
VIII. The same concerning Moses and the Jews, from Bk. iii, On the Good p. 411 d
IX. Choerilus the poet concerning the Jews p. 412 a X. Oracles of Apollo
concerning the Hebrews, from the works of our contemporary Porphyry p. 412 d XI.
The foreign historians who mentioned the Flood described by Moses, from
Josephus, Antiquities, Bk. i p. 414 a XII. Concerning the Flood, from the
writings of Abydenus p. 414 d XIII. The long life of the ancients mentioned by
many authors, from Josephus, Antiquities p. 415 b XIV. On the building of the
Tower, from Abydenus p. 416 a XV. Mention of the same by many others, from
Josephus, Antiquities p. 416 d XVI. On Abraham the forefather of all the
Hebrews, from the same p. 417 a XVII. Eupolemus concerning Abraham, from the
work of Alexander Polyhistor On the Jews p. 418 c XVIII. Artapanus on the same,
from the same work of Polyhistor p. 420 a XIX. Molon on the same, from the same
work p. 420 d XX. Philo on the same p. 421 c XXI. Demetrius concerning Jacob p.
422 d XXII. Theodotus concerning the same p. 426 b XXIII. Artapanus concerning
Joseph p. 429 b XXIV. Philo concerning Joseph p. 430 b XXV. Aristeas concerning
Job p. 430 d XXVI. Eupolemus concerning Moses p. 431 c XXVII. Artapanus
concerning the same p. 431 d XXVIII. Ezekiel concerning the same p. 436 d XXIX.
Demetrius concerning the same p 439 b XXX. Eupolemus concerning David and
Solomon and Jerusalem p. 447 a XXXI. Letter of Solomon to Vaphres, King of Egypt
p. 448 a XXXII. Letter of Vaphres to King Solomon p. 448 b XXXIII. Letter of
Solomon to Suron (Hiram), King of Phoenicia p. 448 d XXXIV. Letter of Suron to
Solomon p. 449 b XXXV. Timochares concerning Jerusalem p. 452 b XXXVI. The
Author of The Metrical Survey of Syria on the same p. 452 d XXXVII. Philo
concerning the waters of Jerusalem p. 452 d XXXVIII. Aristeas concerning the
same p. 453 c XXXIX. Eupolemus concerning the prophet Jeremiah p. 454 b XL.
Berossus on the Captivity of the Jews by Nabuchodonosor p. 455 b XLI. Abydenus
concerning Nabuchodonosor p. 456 d XLII. Josephus concerning the authors who
have mentioned the Jewish nation p. 458 b

CHAPTER I

Now since we have surveyed the proofs that our acceptance of the Hebrew oracles
has not been made without just reasoning, but with carefully tested judgement
and thought, it is time to observe that the most illustrious of the Greeks
themselves have not been unacquainted with the affairs of the Hebrews; but some
of them testified to the truth of the historical narratives current among them
as well as to their mode of life, while others treated doctrinal theology also
in the same manner as they did.

I will bring forward in the first place the subjects which naturally come first,
showing how many of the Greek historians have mentioned by name both Jews and
Hebrews, and the philosophy anciently taught and practised among them, as well
as the history of their forefathers from the earliest times. And I shall begin
my account with their mode of life, so as to teach you that it is not without
sober reasoning that we have preferred their philosophy to that of the Greeks.
At all events not only their own sacred books, but also the most illustrious of
the Greek philosophers, famous even in our own day, bear witness that the duties
of practical morality are performed by them in accordance with the rules which
have been already examined in the preceding Book. So now take and read the
statements of Theophrastus contained in the writings of Porphyry On Abstinence
from Animal Food, as follows:

CHAPTER II

[PORPHYRY] 1 'NEVERTHELESS,' says Theophrastus, 'though the Syrians [of Judaea],
because of their original mode of sacrifice, continue to offer animal sacrifices
at the present time, if any one were to bid us sacrifice in the same way, we
should revolt from the practice. For instead of feasting upon what had been
sacrificed, they made a whole burnt-offering of it by night, and by pouring much
honey and wine over it they consumed the sacrifice more quickly, in order that
even the all-seeing sun might not be a spectator of the dreadful deed.

'And while doing this they fast throughout the intermediate days; and all this
time, as being a nation of philosophers, they converse with one another about
the Deity, and at night they contemplate the heavenly bodies, looking up to
them, and calling upon God in prayers. For these were the first to dedicate both
the other animals, and themselves, which last they did from necessity and not
from any desire.'

CHAPTER III ALSO in the fourth book of the same treatise Porphyry narrates
concerning the same people such things as the following:

[PORPHYRY] 2 'The Essenes then are Jews by birth, but united among themselves
even more closely than the rest of the Jews.

'They abhor pleasures as wickedness, and regard self-control and resistance to
the passions as virtue. Marriage they disdain for themselves, but choose the
sons of others while still easily moulded towards learning; and regarding them
as their kindred, impress them with their own moral dispositions: thus without
destroying marriage, and the succession of the race thereby produced, they guard
themselves against the wantonness of women.

'They despise riches, and there is among them a wonderful community of goods, so
that it is impossible to find any one exceeding others in wealth. For they have
a law that those who eater the sect give up their substance to the common fund
of the order, so that among them all there is seen neither humiliation of
poverty nor excess of wealth; but every one's possessions being mixed up
together, they all have one property like brothers.

'Oil they consider a defilement, and if any one be anointed against his will, he
has his body wiped: for they think it becoming to have a dry skin, and always to
wear white.

'The superintendents of their common interests are elected, and they are
severally chosen for their offices by the whole body. They have no one city of
their own, but a number of them make their abode in each city, and their means
are mutually thrown open to those of the sect who have come from elsewhere; and
they are received as familiar friends by those whom they have never seen before:
for which reason when they travel they bring nothing with them for expenses.

'They change neither robe nor sandals before they are altogether ragged, or worn
out by time. They neither buy nor sell anything, but each gives what he has
himself to the man that wants it, and receives from him in return what is useful
to him: and even without this return there is no hindrance to their getting a
share from whomsoever they will.

'With regard to the Deity, however, their piety is of a peculiar kind. For they
utter no common words before the sun has risen, but address to him certain
prayers handed down by their fathers, as if entreating him to rise. After this
they are dismissed by the superintendents to the crafts known to each, and after
working vigorously till the fifth hour they then assemble again in one place,
and having girded themselves with loin-cloths, so proceed to wash their body
with cold water.

'After this purification they meet in a building of their own, in which none of
another sect is permitted to join them; but being themselves purified, they come
into the dining-room as if entering some holy place. And when they have quietly
taken their seats, the baker sets loaves in a row before them, and the cook sets
before each a single dish of one kind of meat. Then the priest first says a
prayer over the food, as being pure and clean, and it is unlawful for any to
taste the food before the prayer. And when they have finished the meal he again
offers a prayer, and thus they honour God both at the beginning and at the end.

'Then they lay aside their robes as holy, and turn to work again till evening;
when they come back and sup in like manner, the guests sitting down with them,
if there happen to be any present.

'And neither clamour nor tumult ever profanes their house, but in conversation
they give way in turn to each other; and to those outside the silence of those
within seems like some awful mystery. The cause of this is their constant
sobriety, and their limitation of food and drink to the satisfying of hunger.

'To those who desire to join the sect admission is not immediately granted, but
for the space of a year while one remains outside they prescribe the same mode
of life, and give him a shovel, an apron, and a white robe. And when in this
period he has given proof of self-control, he approaches more nearly to their
mode of life, and partakes of the purer waters for ablution.

'He is not, however, admitted as yet to the life of the community. For after the
proof of his endurance his moral disposition is tested by two more years, and,
if found worthy, he is then enrolled in their company.

'But before he touches the common food, they make him swear tremendous oaths:
first that he will reverently worship God, then that he will observe justice
towards men, and will harm no man either of his own will or under command, but
will always hate the unjust and succour the righteous; that he will show
fidelity to all, but especially to those in power, for it is not without God's
will that the government is acquired by any man: also that, if he be himself a
ruler, he will never be insolent in using his authority, nor outshine his
subjects in dress or any excessive adornment: that he will always love the
truth, and expose liars; keep his hands clear of theft, and his soul of unholy
gain; and will neither hide anything from the members of the sect, nor disclose
any secret of theirs to others, though any one should press him by violence even
unto death.

'In addition to this, he swears that to no one will he impart their doctrines
otherwise than he himself received them, and will abstain from, robbery, and
will guard with equal care the books of their sect, and the names of the angels.

'Such are the oaths; and those who are found guilty and expelled, perish by a
miserable fate. For being bound by their oaths and by their customs, they cannot
partake of the food which other men have, but eating grass and wasting away by
famine, they thus perish. So for this reason they have taken compassion upon
many in the extremity of their distress, and received them back, considering
that they had suffered punishment enough for their offences in being thus
tortured to death.

'The shovel they give to those who intend to be members of the sect, because
they do not themselves sit down without having dug a trench a foot deep, and
covered themselves with their cloak, so as not to insult the eyes of God. And so
great is their simplicity and sparingness in regard to food, that they do not
need to ease nature on the seventh day, which they are accustomed to keep for
singing hymns to God and for rest.

'From this asceticism they have acquired so great endurance, that though they be
racked and wrenched and burned, and pass through all the instruments of torture,
in order to make them blaspheme their Lawgiver, or eat some unaccustomed food,
they cannot endure to do either.

'And this they clearly showed in the war against the Romans: since they cannot
endure either to fawn on their tormentors, or to shed tears, but smiling in the
midst of their pains, and bantering those who applied the tortures, they
cheerfully gave up their lives with the hope of receiving them again. For indeed
this opinion is firmly fixed among them, that though their bodies are
perishable, and their material substance not lasting, their souls remain for
ever immortal; and coming from the subtlest ether, drawn down by some natural
force, they become entangled with the body, but when they are released from the
bonds of the flesh they then rejoice, as if delivered from long bondage, and are
borne up aloft.

'From such a mode of life then, and from their training in truth and piety,
there are naturally many among them, who even foreknow the tilings to come, as
being brought up among sacred books, and various purifications and utterances of
the prophets: and they seldom, if ever, go wrong in their predictions.' This was
the testimony of Porphyry, drawn probably from ancient records, both to the
piety and the philosophy of the persons aforesaid, in the fourth book of his
careful work On Abstinence from Animal Food.

CHAPTER IV BUT Hecataeus of Abdera, who was both a philosopher and very
competent in active life, devoted a special book to the history of the Jews, and
gives very many details concerning them, from which it will for the present
suffice to quote the following:

[JOSEPHUS] 3 'For most of the strongholds and villages in the country belong to
the Jews; and one strong city Jerusalem, about fifty furlongs in circumference,
which is inhabited by about a hundred and twenty thousand men, and is called
Hierosolyma.

'And here about the middle of the city is a stone enclosure, about five hundred
feet in length, and a hundred cubits wide, with two gates: and herein is a
square altar, of unhewn stones collected and just put together in a rough state,
twenty cubits long on each side, and the height ten cubits.

'And beside it is a large building, wherein, is an altar and a candlestick, both
of gold, two talents in weight: and upon these is a light which is never
extinguished either day or night. But there is no image nor any votive offering
at all, nor any plant, absolutely nothing of the nature of a grove or anything
of this kind. 'And there arc priests who pass both their nights and days in the
temple, performing certain purifications, and never drinking any wine while
there.' After these statements, lower down:

'He has borne witness that they also served in the army of king Alexander, and
afterwards of his successors. And I will quote what he says was done by a Jew in
the expedition when he was himself present: he speaks as follows:

'When therefore I was marching towards the Red Sea, among the other Jewish
horsemen who escorted us, we were accompanied by a man named Mosollam, a person
of great spirit, and good strength, and acknowledged by all to be the best
archer among either the Greeks or Barbarians.

'So while many were marching along the road, and a certain soothsayer was taking
auguries, and requiring all to halt, this man asked what they were waiting for.
And when the soothsayer showed him the bird, and said, that if it remained in
the same place, it was expedient for all to halt, but if it rose and flew
forward, they should advance, and if it flew back, they must retire again, then
this man made no reply, but drew his bow and shot, and hit the bird and killed
it.

'And when the soothsayer and some others were indignant and began to curse him,
he said, Why are ye so mad, unhappy men? Then taking the bird into his hands, he
said, For how could this bird, which could not foresee how to save itself, have
given us any sound information concerning our march? For had it been able to
foreknow what would happen, it would not have come to this place, for fear lest
Mosollam the Jew should shoot at and kill it. These are the statements of
Hecataeus.'

CHAPTER V

[JOSEPHUS] 4 'BUT Clearchus the Peripatetic philosopher, in his first book
Concerning Sleep, attributes to Aristotle the philosopher a statement such as
follows concerning the Jews, writing word for word thus:

'But though it would be too long to tell the greater part, it will not be amiss
to go through those of his statements which are alike marvellous and
philosophical. Now, said he, understand clearly, Hyperochides, I shall seem to
you to relate what is as marvellous as dreams. Then Hyperochides modestly
replied, Yes, that is the very reason why we all desire to hear it.

'Well then, said Aristotle, according to the rule of the rhetoricians, let us
first describe the man's origin, that we may not disobey the teachers of the
narrative style.

'Tell it so, if you please, said Hyperochides.

'Well then, the man was by origin a Jew, from Coele-Syria. Now these are
descendants of the philosophers of India; and philosophers, it is said, are
called among the Indians Calani, but among the Syrians they are called Judaeans,
having taken their name from the place. For the place which they inhabit is
called Judaea: and the name of their city is very awkward, for they call it
Hierusalem.

'This man then, who was hospitably entertained by many on his way down from the
inland districts to the sea-coasts, was Greek not only in language but also in
spirit. And as at that time we were dwelling in Asia, the man having landed in
the same neighbourhood fell into conversation with us and some others of the
studious sort, to make trial of their wisdom. And as he had lived in intimacy
with many of the learned, he imparted somewhat more than he received.' Such is
the story of Clearchus.

CHAPTER VI THIS man is mentioned also by our Clement in his first Miscellany, in
what he says as follows:

[CLEMENT] 5 'Clearchus the Peripatetic says that he knew a Jew who associated
with Aristotle.' And afterwards he adds:

'But Numa the king of the Romans, though he was a Pythagorean, received benefit
from the teaching of Moses, and forbade the Romans to make an image of God in
the shape of man or any animal. So in the first hundred and seventy years,
though they built themselves temples, they made no image, neither in sculpture
nor yet in painting.

'For Numa used to teach them in secret, that it was not possible for the Perfect
Good to be reached by language, but only by the mind.' Further than this, in
what follows below, he speaks thus: 6

'But most plainly does Megasthenes, the historian who lived with Seleucus
Nicator, write as follows in his third book On Indian Affairs.

'All that has been said about nature among the ancients is said also among the
philosophers outside Greece, partly among the Indians by the Brachmans, and
partly in Syria by those who are called Jews.' Besides this Clement also
mentions Aristobulus the Peripatetic and Numenius the Pythagorean, saying: 7

'Aristobulus, in his first book addressed to Philometor, writes in these words:
Plato too has followed our legislation, and has evidently studied carefully the
several precepts contained in it.

'And others before Demetrius, and prior to the supremacy of Alexander and of the
Persians, have translated both the narrative of the Exodus of our fellow
countrymen the Hebrews from Egypt, and the fame of all that happened to them,
and their conquest of the land, and the exposition of the whole Law.

'So it is perfectly clear that the philosopher before-mentioned has borrowed
much, for he is very learned; as also was Pythagoras, who transferred many of
our precepts into his own system of doctrines.

'And Numenius, the Pythagorean philosopher, writes expressly: "For what is
Plato, but Moses speaking in Attic Greek?" ' So far Clement.

CHAPTER VII

ALSO from the Pythagorean philosopher himself, I mean Numenius, I will quote as
follows from his first book On the Good:

[NUMENIUS] 8 'But when one has spoken upon this point, and sealed it by the
testimonies of Plato, it will be necessary to go back and connect it with the
precepts of Pythagoras, and to appeal to the nations of good repute, bringing
forward their rites and doctrines, and their institutions which are formed in
agreement with those of Plato, all that the Brachmans, and Jews, and Magi, and
Egyptians arranged.' So much then on these points.

CHAPTER VIII ALSO in his third book the same author makes mention of Moses,
speaking as follows: 9

'And next in order came Jannes and Jambres, Egyptian sacred scribes, men judged
to have no superiors in the practice of magic, at the time when the Jews were
being driven out of Egypt.

'So then these were the men chosen by the people of Egypt as fit to stand beside
Musaeus, who led forth the Jews, a man who was most powerful in prayer to God;
and of the plagues which Musaeus brought upon Egypt, these men showed themselves
able to disperse the most violent.'

Now by these words Numenius bears witness both to the marvellous wonders
performed by Moses, and to Moses himself as having been beloved of God.

CHAPTER IX

[JOSEPHUS] 10 'CHOERILUS also, an ancient poet, has mentioned the Jewish nation,
and how they served with king Xerxes in his expedition against Greece. And thus
he speaks:

"Next passed a nation wondrous to behold, Whose lips pronounced the strange
Phoenician tongue;

Upon the hills of Solyma they dwelt By the broad inland sea. Rough and unkempt
Their close-cropped hair, and on their heads they wore The smoke-dried skin
flayed from a horse's face."

'Now that he spake this concerning Jews is evident from the fact that
Hierosolyma lies on the mountains called by the Greeks Solyma, and that near it
is the Asphaltic lake, which is very broad as the poet says, and larger than any
of the lakes in Syria.' Such then is this man's testimony.

CHAPTER X BUT Porphyry, in the first book of his Philosophy from Oracles,
introduces his own god as himself bearing witness to the wisdom of the Hebrew
race as well as of the other nations renowned for intelligence.

It is his Apollo who speaks as follows in an oracle which he is uttering; and
while still explaining the subject of sacrifices, he adds words which are well
worthy of attention, as being full of all divine knowledge:

[PORPHYRY] 'Steep is the road and rough that leads to heaven, Entered at first
through portals bound with brass.

Within are found innumerable paths, Which for the endless good of all mankind
They first revealed, who Nile's sweet waters drink. From them the heavenward
paths Phoenicia learned, Assyria, Lydia, and the Hebrew race:' 11 and so forth:
on which the author further remarks:

'For the road to the gods is bound with brass, and both steep and rough; the
barbarians discovered many paths thereof, but the Greeks went astray, and those
who already held it even perverted it. The discovery was ascribed by the god to
Egyptians, Phoenicians, Chaldeans (for these are the Assyrians), Lydians, and
Hebrews.

'In addition to this Apollo also says in another oracle:

"Only Chaldees and Hebrews wisdom found In the pure worship of a self-born God."
12 'And being asked again, for what reason men speak of many heavens, he gave
the following response:

"One circle girds the world on every side, In seven zones rising to the starlit
paths:

These, in their sevenfold orbits as they roll, Chaldees and far-famed Hebrews
'heavens' surnamed."'

"With regard then to the name Jews and Hebrews, and their religion and
philosophy of old renown, let these extracts suffice: but concerning their
ancestral history observe how many writers have agreed.

Moses, in his ancient history of the whole world, had given an account of a
deluge, and how he whom the Hebrews call Noe was preserved with his family in an
ark made of wood; and Josephus, in the first book of his Antiquities, sets forth
in the following manner how the historical writers. Berossus the Chaldee, and
Hieronymus the Egyptian, and Nicolaus of Damascus, make mention of the same
things.

CHAPTER XI

[JOSEPHUS] 13 'THIS deluge and the ark are mentioned by all who have written
histories of the Barbarians, among whom is Berossus the Chaldean. For in
narrating the circumstances of the flood, he describes it thus:

'It is said that there is still a portion of the vessel in Armenia near the
mountain of the Cordyaei, and that persons scrape off and carry away some of the
pitch. And the people use what they carry away chiefly for charms to avert
misfortunes.

'This is mentioned also by Hieronymus the Egyptian, who wrote The Archaeology of
Phoenicia, and by Mnaseas, and several others. Nicolaus also of Damascus gives
an account of them in his ninety-sixth book, speaking thus: There is above
Minyas a great mountain in Armenia called Baris, to which, as the story goes,
many fled for refuge at the time of the deluge and were saved; and a certain man
borne on an ark landed on the top of the mountain, and the remains of the
timbers were preserved for a long time. Now this must be the same of whom Moses,
the Lawgiver of the Jews, wrote.' So writes Josephus.

CHAPTER XII BUT after mentioning the Median and Assyrian records from the work
of Abydenus, I will set before you his statements concerning this same story, as
follows:

[ABYDENUS] 14 'After him reigned among others Sisithrus, to whom Kronos foretold
that there would be a great rain on the fifteenth day of Desius, and commanded
him to hide everything connected with literature at Heliopolis in the country of
the Sippari.

'And when Sisithrus had accomplished this, he straightway sailed up towards
Armenia, and immediately what God had predicted overtook him. But on the third
day, when the rain had abated, he proceeded to let loose some of the birds, to
try whether they saw land anywhere that had emerged from the water.

'But as they were met by a vast unbroken ocean, and were at a loss where to find
a haven, they came safe back to Sisithrus, and others after them did the same.

'But when he was successful with the third set, for they came back with their
feet full of mud, the gods removed him from men's sight: but in Armenia the ship
supplied the people of the country with wooden amulets as antidotes to poison.'
These then are his statements.

CHAPTER XIII BUT again, as Moses asserted that the first generations of mankind
had been long-lived, Josephus brings forward the Greek writers as witnesses of
this statement also, speaking as follows:

[JOSEPHUS] 15 'From comparing the life of the men of old with the life now, and
the short years that we live, let no one suppose that the statements concerning
the former are false, inferring that they did not attain to that length of life
from the fact that men do not now extend the time of their life so long.

'For as they were beloved of God, and created by God Himself, and as their kinds
of food were better fitted for a longer continuance, it was natural for them to
live so many years.

'Further, God may have granted them a longer life on account of their virtue,
and the usefulness of the arts which they invented, astronomy and geometry,
things which they could not have announced with certainty, had they not lived at
least six hundred years, for by that number the great year is completed.

'And the truth of my argument is testified by all who have written on ancient
history among Greeks and Barbarians. For both Manetho who recorded the Egyptian
History, and Berossus who collected the Chaldean annals, and Molos, and
Hestiaeus, and in addition to them the Egyptian Hieronymus, and the compilers of
Phoenician history, agree with what I say. Hesiod too, and Hecataeus, and
Hellanicus, and Acusilaus, and besides these Ephorus and Nicolaus record that
the ancients lived a thousand years. So on these matters let men speculate each
as it may please him.'

CHAPTER XIV

AGAIN, whereas Moses wrote an account of the building of the tower, and how from
one language men passed into the confusion of many dialects, the author just
before mentioned, in his work entitled Of Assyrian History, bears the like
testimony, speaking as follows:

[ABYDENUS] 16 'But there are some who say that the men who first arose out of
the earth, being puffed up by their strength and great stature, and proudly
thinking that they were better than the gods, raised a huge tower, where Babylon
now stands: and when they were already nearer to heaven, the winds came to the
help of the gods, and overthrew their structure upon them, the ruins of which
were called Babylon. And being up to that time of one tongue, they received from
the gods a confused language; and afterwards war arose between Cronos and Titan.

[JOSEPHUS] 17 'And the place in which they built the tower is now called
Babylon, because of the confusion of what at first was clear in their language.
For the Hebrews call confusion "Babel." '

CHAPTER XV 'THE Sibyl also mentions this tower and the diversity of language
among mankind, speaking thus: 18

'"When all mankind were of one language, some built a very lofty tower,
intending by it to mount up to heaven. But the gods sent winds against the tower
and overthrew it, and gave to each man a peculiar language, and for this reason
it came to pass that the city was called Babylon." And the plain which is called
Sennaar in the country of Babylonia is mentioned by Hestiaeus, who speaks thus:
"But those of the priests who escaped took the sacred things of Zeus Enyalios,
and came to Sennaar in Babylonia: afterwards they were scattered thence, and
everywhere formed their communities from speaking the same language, and took
possession of the land which each lighted upon."'

CHAPTER XVI

AGAIN, as Moses has set forth at large the history of Abraham the forefather of
the Hebrews, Josephus says that the foreign historians also bear witness to him,
writing as follows:

[JOSEPHUS] 19 'Berossus mentions our father Abraham, not by name, but in these
terms: "In the tenth generation after the flood there was among the Chaldeans a
righteous and great man, experienced also in heavenly things."

'But Hecataeus has done something more than mentioning him; for he left behind
him a book which he had composed concerning him.

'And Nicolaus Damascenus, in the fourth book of his Histories, speaks thus:20
"Abraham was king of Damascus, having come as a stranger with an army from the
land which lies beyond Babylon, called Chaldaea. But after no long time he
removed from this country also, and migrated with his own people into what was
then called Canaan, but now Judaea, and so did afterwards the multitude of his
descendants, concerning whom I shall relate in another discourse what is
recorded in history. Even now the name of Abraham is glorified in the district
of Damascus, and a village is pointed out which is called from him the
Habitation of Abraham."

'When in later times a famine had fallen upon the land of Canaan, Abraham having
been informed that the Egyptians were in prosperity was eager to cross over to
them, both to partake of their abundance, and to be a hearer of their priests,
to learn what they said about the gods; intending either to follow them, if they
were found superior, or to bring them over to the better belief, if his own
opinions were preferable.' Then next he adds:

'And he associated with the most learned of the Egyptians, and the result was
that his virtue and his consequent reputation became more illustrious from this
cause.

'For whereas the Egyptians delight in different customs, and disparage one
another's usages, and are for this reason ill-disposed towards each other, he by
conferring with them severally, and discussing the arguments which they used in
defence of their own practices, proved them to be empty and devoid of all truth.

'Being therefore admired by them in their conferences as a very wise man, and
strong not only in intelligence but also in persuasive speech on whatever
subjects he undertook to teach, he freely imparts to them the science of
arithmetic, and also communicates to them the facts of astronomy. For before
Abraham's arrival the Egyptians were ignorant of these subjects; for they passed
from the Chaldees into Egypt, and thence came also to the Greeks.' So writes
Josephus.

CHAPTER XVII AND with this agrees also Alexander Polyhistor, a man of great
intellect and much learning, and very well known to those Greeks who have
gathered the fruits of education in no perfunctory manner: for in his
compilation, Concerning the Jews, he records the history of this man Abraham in
the following manner word for word:

[ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR] 21 'Eupolemus in his book Concerning the Jews of Assyria
says that the city Babylon was first founded by those who escaped from the
Deluge; and that they were giants, and built the tower renowned in history.

'But when this had been overthrown by the act of God, the giants were dispersed
over the whole earth. And in the tenth generation, he says, in Camarina a city
of Babylonia, which some call the city Uria (and which is by interpretation the
city of the Chaldees), + in the thirteenth generation + Abraham was born, who
surpassed all men in nobility and wisdom, who was also the inventor of astronomy
and the Chaldaic art, and pleased God well by his zeal towards religion.

'By reason of God's commands this man came and dwelt in Phoenicia, and pleased
their king by teaching the Phoenicians the changes of the sun and moon and all
things of that kind. And afterwards the Armenians invaded the Phoenicians; and
when they had been victorious, and had taken his nephew prisoner, Abraham came
to the rescue with his servants, and prevailed over the captors, and made
prisoners of the wives and children of the enemy.

'And when there came to him ambassadors asking that he would ransom them for
money, he did not choose to trample upon the unfortunate, but on receiving food
for his young men restored the booty; he was also admitted as a guest into the
temple of the city called Argarizin, which being interpreted is "Mount of the
Most High," and received gifts from Melchizedek, who was the king, and the
priest of God.

'But when there came a famine Abraham removed into Egypt with all his household,
and dwelt there, and the king of Egypt took his wife in marriage, Abraham having
said that she was his sister.

'He also related fully that the king was unable to consort with her, and that it
came to pass that his people and his household were perishing. And when he had
called for the soothsayers, they said that the woman was not a widow; and thus
the king of Egypt learned that she was Abraham's wife, and gave her back to her
husband.

'And Abraham dwelt with the Egyptian priests in Heliopolis and taught them many
things; and it was he who introduced astronomy and the other sciences to them,
saying that the Babylonians and himself had found these things out, but tracing
back the first discovery to Enoch, and saying that he, and not the Egyptians,
had first invented astrology.

'For the Babylonians say that the first man was Belus, who is Kronos; and that
of him was born a son Belus, and Chanaan; and that this Chanaan begat the father
of the Phoenicians, and that his son was Churn, who is called by the Greeks
Asbolus, and is father of the Aethiopians, and a brother of Mestraim the father
of the Egyptians. But the Greeks say that Atlas invented astrology, and that
Atlas is the same as Enoch: and that Enoch had a son Methuselah, who learned all
things through angels of God, and thus we gained our knowledge.'

CHAPTER XVIII

'ARTABANUS in his Jewish History says that the Jews were called Ermiuth, which
when interpreted after the Greek language means Judaeans, and that they were
called Hebrews from Abraham. And he, they say, came with all his household into
Egypt, to Pharethothes the king of the Egyptians, and taught him astrology; and
after remaining there twenty years, removed back again into the regions of
Syria: but that many of those who had come with him remained in Egypt because of
the prosperity of the country.

'In certain anonymous works, however, we found that Abraham traced Lack his
origin to the giants, and that they dwelling in Babylonia were destroyed by the
gods for their impiety; but that one of them, named Belus, escaped death and
settled in Babylon, and lived in a tower which he had built, and which was
called Belus from the Belus who built it: and that Abraham having been
instructed in the science of astrology came first into Phoenicia, and taught
astrology to the Phoenicians, and afterwards passed on into Egypt.'

CHAPTER XIX

'BUT Molon, the author of the collection Against the Jews, says that at the time
of the Deluge the man who survived departed from Armenia with his sons, being
driven out of his home by the people of the land; and after crossing the
intermediate country came into the mountain-district of Syria which was
uninhabited.

'After three generations Abraham was born, whose name is by interpretation
"Father's friend," and that he became a wise man, and travelled through the
desert. And having taken two wives, the one of his own country and kindred, and
the other an Egyptian handmaiden, he begat by the Egyptian twelve sons, who went
off into Arabia and divided the land among them, and were the first who reigned
over the people of the country: from which circumstance there are even in our
own day twelve kings of the Arabians, bearing the same names as the first.

'But by his lawful wife he had one son, whose name in Greek is Γέλως,
"laughter." Abraham died of old age, but Gelos and a wife of his own country had
eleven sons, and a twelfth, Joseph, and Moses was in the third generation from
him.' So much says Polyhistor; and to this he adds, after some sentences, what
follows:

'But not long after God commanded Abraham to offer his son Isaac as a whole
burnt-offering to Him. And he led his son up to the mountain, and heaped up a
pyre, and set Isaac thereon; but when about to slay him he was forbidden by an
Angel, who provided him with a ram for the offering: and Abraham took down his
son from the pyre, and offered the ram.'

CHAPTER XX 'PHILO also speaks of this in the first book of his work Concerning
Jerusalem: 22 [PHILO] " Ἔκλυον ἀρχεγόνοισι τὸ μυρίον ὥς ποτε θεσμοῖς Ἀβραὰμ
κλυτοηχὲς ὑπέρτερον ἅμματι δεσμῶν παμφαές, πλήμμυρε, μεγαυχητοῖσι λογισμοῖς,
θειοφιλῆ θέλγητρα. Λιπόντι γὰρ ἀγλαὸν ἕρκος αἰνοφύτων, ἔκκαυμα βριήπυος αἰνετὸς
ἴσχων, ἀθάνατον ποίησεν ἑὴν φάτιν, ἐξ ὅτ' ἐκείνου ἔκγονος αἰνογόνοιο πολύμνιον
ἔλλαχε κῦδος." and the rest: to which after a few lines he adds:

" Ἀρτίχερος θηκτοῖο ξιφηφόρον ἐντύνοντος λήμματι, καὶ σφαράγοιο παρακλιδὸν
ἀθροισθέντος, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν ἐν χείρεσσι κερασφόρον ὤπασε κριόν." and the rest that
follows this.' This then from the fore-mentioned work of Polyhistor. But
Josephus also in the first book of his Antiquities mentions the same author in
the following passage:

[JOSEPHUS] 23 'Now it is said that this Afren made an expedition into Libya and
subdued it; and his grandsons having settled there called the land Africa after
his name.

'And my statement is confirmed by Alexander Polyhistor, who speaks thus:

'"But Cleodemus the prophet, who is also called Malchas, in narrating the
history of the Jews even as Moses their Lawgiver has narrated it, says that by
Chettura Abraham had many sons: and he also mentions their names, calling three
of them Afer, Assur, and Afran.

'And from Assur Assyria was named; and from the other two, Afra and Afer, a city
Afra and the country Africa. And these, he says, joined Hercules in his
expedition against Libya and Antaeus: and Hercules having married the daughter
of Afra begat of her a son Diodorus. And of him was born Sophonas, from whom the
barbarian Sophae are called." ' Let it suffice then that the story of Abraham is
briefly set forth in these quotations.

CHAPTER XXI Now let us return to Polyhistor.

[ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR] 24 'Demetrius says that when Jacob was seventy (seven)
years old he fled to Charran in Mesopotamia, having been sent away by his
parents on account of the secret enmity with his brother Esau (the cause of
which was that his father had blessed him thinking that he was Esau), and also
in order that he might take a wife from that country.

'Jacob therefore set out for Charran in Mesopotamia, having left his father
Isaac a hundred and thirty-seven years of age, and being himself seventy-seven
years old.

'So after spending seven years there he married two daughters of his uncle
Laban, Leah and Rachel, when he was eighty-four years old: and in seven years
more there were born to him twelve sons; in the eighth year and tenth month
Reuben, and in the ninth year and eighth month Symeon, and in the tenth year and
sixth month Levi, and in the eleventh year and fourth month Judah. And as Rachel
did not bear she became envious of her sister, and gave her own handmaid Zilpah
to be Jacob's concubine, at which same time Bilhah conceived Nephthalim, in the
eleventh year and fifth month, and bare a son in the twelfth year and second
month, and Leah called him Gad: and of the same mother in the same year and
twelfth month he begat another son, who was also named by Leah Asher.

'And in return for the mandrake apples, which Reuben brought ia and gave to
Rachel, Leah again conceived in her womb, and her handmaid Zilpah at the same
time, in the twelfth year and third month, and bare a son in the same year and
twelfth month, and called his name Issachar.

'And again Leah bare another son in the thirteenth year and tenth month, and his
name was Zabulon; and the same Leah bare a son named Dan in the fourteenth year
and eighth month. And at the same time when Leah bare a daughter Dinah, Rachel
also conceived in her womb, and in the fourteenth year and eighth month bare a
son, who was named Joseph, so that in the seven years spent with Laban there
were born twelve children.

'But when Jacob wished to go back to his father in Canaan, he was requested by
Laban to stay six years more, so that in all he abode twenty years with Laban in
Charran.

'And when he was on his way to Canaan an Angel of the Lord wrestled with him,
and touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh, and he was benumbed and went lame:
wherefore the sinew on the thigh of cattle is not eaten. And the Angel said to
him, that henceforth he should no longer be called Jacob but Israel.

'And he came to another city of the land of Canaan called Sikima, having with
him his children, Reuben twelve years and two months old, Symeon eleven years
and four months, Levi ten years and six months, Judah nine years and eight
months, Nephthalim eight years and ten months, Gad eight years and ten months,
Asher eight years, Issachar eight years, Zabulon seven years and two months,
Dinah six years and four months, Joseph six years and four months.

'Now Israel dwelt beside Emmor ten years; and Israel's daughter Dinah was
defiled by Sychem the son of Emmor, she being sixteen years and four months old.
And Israel's sons Symeon being twenty-one years and four months old, and Levi
twenty years and six months, rushed forth and slew both Emmor and his son
Sychem, and all their males, because of the defilement of Dinah: and at that
time Jacob was a hundred and seven years old.

'So when he was come to Luz of Bethel, God said that his name was no longer to
be Jacob but Israel. Thence he came to Chaphratha, and thence journeyed to
Ephratha, which is Bethlehem, and begat there a son Benjamin; and Rachel died
after giving birth to Benjamin, when Jacob had lived with her twenty-three
years.

'Thence Jacob came to Mambri of Hebron, to his father Isaac. Now Joseph was at
that time seventeen years old, and he was sold into Egypt, and had remained in
the prison thirteen years, so that he was then thirty years old; and Jacob was a
hundred and ten years old, one year before which time Isaac died, being a
hundred and eighty years old.

'And Joseph having interpreted the king's dreams, governed Egypt seven years, in
which time he married Aseneth daughter of Pentephres the priest of Heliopolis,
and begat Manasseh and Ephraim: and then there followed two years of the famine.

'But though Joseph had prospered for nine years, he did not send to his father,
because he was a shepherd, as were Joseph's brethren: and with the Egyptians it
is disgraceful to be a shepherd. And that this was the reason why he did not
send for him, Joseph himself declares. For when his kindred came, he told them
that, if they should be summoned by the king and asked what was their
occupation, they should say that they were breeders of cattle.

'And at the dinner they could not understand why in the world Joseph gave
Benjamin a portion five times as much as theirs, as it was not possible for him
to consume so much flesh. He had done this because his father had had seven sons
by Leah, and two by his mother Rachel: therefore he set five portions before
Benjamin, and himself took two; so they had seven portions, as many as the sons
of Leah received.

'In like manner also while giving to each two changes of raiment, to Benjamin he
gave five, and thirty pieces of gold, and sent to his father in the same
proportion, so that his mother's house might be equal to the other.

'Now from the time when Abraham was chosen from among the Gentiles and migrated
into Canaan they had dwelt in that land, Abraham twenty-five years, Isaac sixty
years, Jacob a hundred and thirty years; so that all the years in Canaan were
two hundred and fifteen.

'And in the third year of the famine in Egypt, Jacob came into Egypt, being a
hundred and thirty years old, Reuben forty-five years, Symeon forty-four, Levi
forty-three, Judah forty-two years and three months, Asher forty years and eight
months, Nephthalim forty-one years and seven months, Gad forty-one years and
three months, Zabulon forty years, Dinah thirty-nine years, Benjamin
twenty-eight years.

'Joseph, it is said, was in Egypt thirty-nine years; and from Adam until
Joseph's brethren came into Egypt there were three thousand six hundred and
twenty-four years; and from the Deluge until Jacob's coming into Egypt one
thousand three hundred and sixty years; and from the choice of Abraham from
among the Gentiles and his coming from Charran into Canaan until Jacob and his
family came into Egypt two hundred and fifteen years.

'But Jacob came from Charran to Laban, when he was eighty years old, and begat
Levi, and Levi was afterwards seventeen years in Egypt from the time of his
coming from Canaan into Egypt, so that he was sixty years old when he begat
Clath; and in the same year in which Clath was born Jacob died in Egypt, after
he had blessed the sons of Joseph, being himself one hundred and forty-seven
years old and leaving Joseph fifty-six years old. And Levi was a hundred and
thirty-seven years old when he died; and when Clath was forty years old he begat
Amram, who was fourteen years old when Joseph died in Egypt being a hundred and
ten years old: and Clath was a hundred and thirty-three years old when he died.
Amram took to wife his uncle's daughter Jochabet, and when he was seventy-five
years old begat Aaron and Moses; but when he begat Moses Amram was seventy-eight
years old, and Amram was a hundred and thirty-six years old when he died.' These
statements I quote from the work of Alexander Polyhistor. Next let me add the
following:

CHAPTER XXII

[THEODOTUS] 25 'Now Theodotus says in his work Concerning the Jews that Sikima
took its name from Sikimius son of Emmor; for he was also the founder of the
city: and in his book Concerning the Jews he describes its situation as follows:

"Rich was the land, well-watered, browsed by goats, Nor far from field to city
was the road. No leafy copse the weary wanderer found:

Yet from it two strong mountains close at hand, With grass and forest trees
abounding, rise.

Midway a narrow path runs up the vale, Beneath whose farther slope the sacred
town Of Sikima mid sparkling streams is seen Deep down the mountain's side,
around whose base E'en from the summit runs the well-built wall."

'Afterwards, he says, it was subdued by the Hebrews, when Emmor was the ruler:
for Emmor begat a son Sychem. Thus he speaks:

"Thence Jacob from the wandering shepherd-life Sought Shechem's spacious
streets, where o'er his tribe Emmor with Sychem ruled, a stubborn pair."

'Then concerning Jacob and his arrival in Mesopotamia, and the marriage of his
two wives, and the birth of his children, and his coming from Mesopotamia to
Shechem, he says:

"To Syria rich in cattle Jacob came From broad Euphrates' loud-resounding
stream, To shun his twin-born brother's bitter wrath.

Him Laban gladly welcomed to his home, Laban his mother's brother, who alone
O'er Syria ruled, his sons as yet new-born.

He then his youngest daughter for a wife To Jacob promised, but was loth to
give.

Contriving thus a crafty wile, he sends Leah, the elder, to the marriage-bed.

Such fraud could not escape the husband's eye, But for the other daughter seven
more years He served, and both his cousins took to wife.

Eleven sons he gat both wise and brave, And one fair daughter, Dinah, whose
bright face And faultless form a noble soul expressed."

'From the Euphrates Jacob, it is said, came to Shechem to Emmor; and he welcomed
him, and gave him a part of his country. So Jacob himself was a landholder, but
his sons, eleven in number, were shepherds, and his daughter Dinah and his wives
wrought wool. And Dinah while yet a virgin came to Shechem when there was a
great festival, wishing to see the city: and Sychem the son of Emmor saw her and
loved her, and seized and carried her off to his own home, and ravished her.

'But afterwards he came with his father to Jacob, to ask her fur his partner in
marriage; but he said he would not give her, until all the inhabitants of
Shechem were circumcised and followed the customs of the Jews: and Emmor said he
would persuade them.

'With regard to the need of their being circumcised, Jacob says:

"It is forbidden by our Hebrew laws To bring a bridegroom to our daughters'
home, Save one who boasts to come of kindred race."

'Then a little lower down about circumcision:

"The God, who Abraham from his home had called, Bade him from heaven to set the
blood-stained seal On flesh of every male; and it was done. And changeless still
the law which God decreed."

'When Emmor therefore was gone into the city, and was exhorting his subjects to
be circumcised, one of Jacob's sons, whose name was Symeon, being unwilling to
bear his sister's disgrace in a politic manner, determined to slay Emmor and
Sychem: and this determination he communicated to his brother Levi, and took him
as an accomplice and set forth to do the deed, alleging an oracle, that God said
He would give ten nations to Abraham's descendants to destroy.

'And this is how Symeon speaks to Levi:

"For well have I remembered God's own word, To give ten nations o'er to
Abraham's sons."

'But God, it is said, had put this thought into their mind, because the
inhabitants of Shechem were ungodly men. And this is what he says:

"The Shechemites who spared no guest that came, Nor bad nor good regarded, God
would smite. No law nor justice in their state was found, But all their thoughts
were set on deeds of death."

'Levi therefore and Symeon came armed into their city, and first killed those
who came in their way, and then murdered both Emmor and Sychem.

'And of their slaying them he speaks thus:

"So fiercely then on Emmor Symeon rushed, And smote his head, and in his left
hand seized His throat, but quickly left him gasping still, For other task
appeared. Levi meanwhile Seized Sychem, fiercely raging, by the hair And dashed
with force resistless to the earth:

Vainly he clasped the victor's knees, who drave His keen sword deep twixt neck
and shoulder-blade, And swiftly from his breast the spirit fled."

'And when the other brethren heard of their deed, they came to their aid, and
sacked the city, and rescuing their sister carried her back with the captives to
their father's abode.'

CHAPTER XXIII To this let us add what comes next concerning Joseph out of the
same work of Polyhistor:

[ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR] 26 'Artapanus says, in his book Concerning the Jews, that
Joseph was a descendant of Abraham and son of Jacob: and because he surpassed
his brethren in understanding and wisdom, they plotted against him. But he
became aware of their conspiracy, and besought the neighbouring Arabs to convey
him across to Egypt: and they did what he requested; for the kings of the
Arabians are offshoots of Israel, being sons of Abraham, and brethren of Isaac.
And when he had come to Egypt and been commended to the king, he was made
administrator of the whole country. And whereas the Egyptians previously
occupied the laud in an irregular way, because the country was not divided, and
the weaker were unjustly treated by the stronger, he was the first to divide the
land, and mark it out with boundaries, and much that lay waste he rendered fit
for tillage, and allotted certain of the arable lands to the priests.

'He was also the inventor of measures, and for these things he was greatly
beloved by the Egyptians. He married Aseneth a daughter of the priest of
Heliopolis, by whom he begat sons. And afterwards his father and his brethren
came to him, bringing much substance, and were set to dwell in Heliopolis and
Sais, and the Syrians multiplied in Egypt.

'These he says built both the temple in Athos and that in Ileliopolis, and were
called Ermiuth. Soon afterwards Joseph died, as did also the king of Egypt. So
Joseph while governor of Egypt stored up the corn of the seven years, which had
been immensely productive, and became master of Egypt.'

CHAPTER XXIV

'PHILO also, in his fourteenth book Concerning Jerusalem, testifies to the truth
of the sacred Scriptures, speaking as follows:

"For them the mighty lord of all the land A happy home prepared----he, now most high, Who from the ancient stock of Abraham And Isaac sprang, and Jacob rich in sons Claimed as his sire----Joseph of royal dreams The wise interpreter, who seated high On Egypt's throne now sways the sceptre's power, Much tossed erewhile by waves of fickle fate:" 27 and so forth. So much concerning Joseph.'

CHAPTER XXV BUT hear also what the same author tells concerning Job:

'Aristeas says, in his book Concerning the Jews, that Esau married Bassara in
Edom and begat Job. This man dwelt in the land of Uz, on the borders of Idumaea
and Arabia.

'He was a just man, and rich in cattle; for he had acquired "seven thousand
sheep, and three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen, five hundred
she-asses at pasture"; 28 and he had also much arable land.

'Now this Job was formerly called Jobab: and God continually tried him, and
invoked him in great misfortunes. For first his asses and oxen were driven off
by robbers; then the sheep together with their shepherds were burned up by fire
which fell from heaven, and not long after the camels also were driven off by
robbers; then his children died, from the house falling upon them; and the same
day his own body also was covered with ulcers.

'And while he was in evil case, there came to visit him Eliphaz the king of the
Temanites, and Bildad the tyrant of the Shuhites, and Zophar the king of the
Minnaei, and there came also Elihu the son of Barachiel the Zobite.

'But when they tried to exhort him, he said that even without exhortation he
should continue steadfast in piety even in his sufferings. And God being pleased
with his good courage, relieved him from his disease, and made him master of
great possessions.' So much says Polyhistor on this subject.

CHAPTER XXVI AND concerning Moses the same author again brings forward many
things, which are worth hearing:

[ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR] 'But Eupolemus says that the first wise man was Moses,
and that he was the first to teach the Jews letters, and from the Jews the
Phoenicians received them, and from the Phoenicians the Greeks, and that Moses
was the first to give written laws to the Jews.' 29

CHAPTER XXVII

'AND Artapanus says, in his book Concerning the Jews, that after the death of
Abraham, and of his son Mempsasthenoth, and likewise of the king of Egypt, his
son Palmanothes succeeded to the sovereignty.

'This king behaved badly to the Jews; and first he built Kessa, and founded the
temple therein, and then built the temple in Heliopolis.

'He begat a daughter Merris, whom he betrothed to a certain Chenephres, king of
the regions above Memphis (for there were at that time many kings in Egypt); and
she being barren took a supposititious child from one of the Jews, and called
him Mouses (Moses): but by the Greeks he was called, when grown to manhood,
Musaeus.

'And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he
taught mankind many useful things. For he was the inventor of ships, and
machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and
for war, and invented philosophy. Further he divided the State into thirty-six
Nomes, and. appointed the god to be worshipped by each Nome, and the sacred
writing for the priests, and their gods were cats, and dogs, and ibises: he also
apportioned an especial district for the priests.

'All these things he did for the sake of keeping the sovereignty firm and safe
for Chenepbres. For previously the multitudes, being under no order, now
expelled and now set up kings, often the same persons, but sometimes others.

'For these reasons then Moses was beloved by the multitudes, and being deemed by
the priests worthy to be honoured like a god, was named Hermes, because of his
interpretation of the Hieroglyphics.

'But when Chenephres perceived the excellence of Moses he envied him, and sought
to slay him on some plausible pretext. And so when the Aethiopians invaded
Egypt, Chenephres supposed that he had found a convenient opportunity, and sent
Moses in command of a force against them, and enrolled the body of husbandmen
for him, supposing that through the weakness of his troops he would easily be
destroyed by the enemy.

'But Moses with about a hundred thousand of the husbandmen came to the so-called
Nome of Hermopolis, and there encamped; and sent generals to pre-occupy the
country, who gained remarkable successes in their battles. He adds that the
people of Heliopolis say that this war went on for ten years.

'So Moses, because of the greatness of his army, built a city in this place, and
therein consecrated the ibis, because this bird kills the animals that are
noxious to man. And he called it Hermes' city.

'Thus then the Aethiopians, though they were enemies, became so fond of Moses,
that they even learned from him the custom of circumcision: and not they only,
but also all the priests.

'But when the war was ended, Chenephres pretended to welcome him, while in
reality continuing to plot against him. So he took his troops from him, and sent
some to the frontiers of Aethiopia for an advanced guard; and ordered others to
demolish the temple in Diospolis which had been built of baked brick, and build
another of stone from the quarries of the neighbouring mountain, and appointed
Nacheros superintendent of the building.

'And when he was come with Moses to Memphis, he asked him whether there was
anything else useful for mankind, and he said the breed of oxen, because by
means of them the land is ploughed: and Chenephres having given the name Apis to
a bull, commanded the troops to found a temple for him, and bade them bring and
bury there the animals which had been consecrated by Moses, because he wished to
bury the inventions of Moses in oblivion. 'But when the Egyptians were alienated
from him, he bound his friends by an oath not to report to Moses the plot which
was being contrived against him, and he appointed the men who were to kill him.

'When however no one would obey him, Chenephres reproached Chanethothes, whom he
had especially addressed; and he, on being thus reproached, promised to make the
attempt when he found an opportunity.

'And Merris having died about this time, Chenephres professed to give the body
to Moses and Chanethothes to carry it over into regions beyond Egypt and bury
it, supposing that Moses would be slain by Chanethothes.

'But while they were on the way, one of those who were cognizant of the plot
reported it to Moses; and he being on his guard buried Merris himself, and
called the river and the city thereby Meroe. And this Merris is honoured by the
people of the country not less highly than Isis.

'Then Aaron the brother of Moses, having learned about the plot, advised his
brother to flee into Arabia; and he took the advice, and sailed across the Nile
from Memphis, intending to escape into Arabia.

'But when Chanethothes was informed of the flight of Moses, he lay in ambush
intending to kill him; and when he saw him coming, he drew his sword against
him, but Moses was too quick for him, and seized his hand, and drew his sword
and slew Chanethothes.

'So he made his escape into Arabia, and lived with Raguel the ruler of the
district, having married his daughter. And Raguel wished to make an expedition
against the Egyptians in order to restore Moses, and procure the government for
his daughter and son-in-law; but Moses prevented it, out of regard for his own
nation: and Raguel forbidding him to march against the Arabs, ordered him to
plunder Egypt.

'About the same time Chenephres died, having been the very first person attacked
by elephantiasis; and he is said to have incurred this misfortune because he
ordered the Jews to wear linen garments and not to wear woollen clothing, in
order that they might be conspicuous, and be punished by him.

'But Moses prayed to God now at last to put an end to the sufferings of the
tribes. And God being propitiated, fire, it is said, suddenly blazed up out of
the earth, and went on burning though there was no wood nor any other fuel in
the place. And Moses was frightened at the occurrence and took to flight; but a
divine voice spake to him, to march against Egypt, and rescue the Jews and lead
them into their old country.

'So he took courage and determined to lead a hostile force against the
Egyptians: but first he came to his brother Aaron. And when the king of Egypt
heard of the arrival of Moses, he called him before him, and asked what he had
come for: and he said, Because the Lord of the world commanded him to deliver
the Jews.

'And when the king heard this, he shut him up in prison. But when it was night,
all the doors of the prison-house opened of their own accord, and of the guards
some died, and some were sunk in sleep, and their weapons broken in pieces.

'So Moses passed out and came to the palace; and finding the doors opened he
went in, and the guards here also being sunk in sleep he woke up the king. And
he being dismayed at what had happened bade Moses tell him the name of the God
who sent him, scoffing at him: but Moses bent down and whispered in his ear, and
when the king heard it he fell speechless, but was held fast by Moses and came
to life again.

'And he wrote the name in a tablet and sealed it up; and one of the priests who
made light of what was written in the tablet was seized with a convulsion and
died.

'Also the king told him to work some sign for him, and Moses threw down the rod
which he held and turned it into a serpent; and when they were all frightened,
he seized it by the tail and took it up, and made it a rod again.

'Then he went forth a little, and smote the Nile with the rod, and the river
became flooded and deluged the whole of Egypt, and it was from that time its
inundation began: and the water became stagnant, and stank, and killed all
living things in the river, and the people were perishing of thirst.

'But when these wonders had been wrought, the king said that after a month he
would let the people go, if Moses would restore the river to its proper state;
and he smote the water again with his rod, and checked the stream.

'When this was done, the king summoned the priests from above Memphis, and said
that he would kill them all, and demolish the temples, unless they also would
work some wonder. And then they by some witchcraft and incantations made a
serpent, and changed the colour of the river.

'And the king, being puffed up with pride at what was done, began to maltreat
the Jews with every kind of vengeance and punishment. Then Moses, seeing this,
both wrought other signs, and also smote the earth with his rod, and brought up
a kind of winged animal to harass the Egyptians, and all their bodies broke out
in boils. And as the physicians were unable to heal the sufferers, the Jews thus
again gained relief.

'Again Moses by his rod brought up frogs, and besides them locusts and lice. And
for this reason the Egyptians dedicate the rod in every temple, and to Isis
likewise, because the earth is Isis, and sent up these wonders when smitten by
the rod.

'But as the king still persisted in his folly, Moses caused hail and earthquakes
by night, so that those who fled from the earthquake were killed by the hail,
and those who sought shelter from the hail were destroyed by the earthquakes.
And at that time all the houses fell in, and most of the temples.

'At last after having incurred such calamities the king let the Jews go: and
they, after borrowing from the Egyptians many drinking-vessels, and no little
raiment, and very much other treasure, crossed the rivers on the Arabian side,
and after traversing a wide space came on the third day to the Red Sea.

'Now the people of Memphis say, that Moses being acquainted with the country
waited for the ebb, and took the people across the sea when dry. But the people
of Heliopolis say, that the king hastened after them with a great force, having
also with him the consecrated animals, because the Jews were carrying off the
property which they had borrowed from the Egyptians.

'There came, however, to Moses a divine voice bidding him to smite the sea with
the rod [and that it should divide]: and when Moses heard it, he touched the
water with the rod, and so the stream divided, and the force passed over by a
dry path.

'But when the Egyptians went in with them and were pursuing them, a fire, it is
said, shone out upon them from the front, and the sea overflowed the path again,
and the Egyptians were all destroyed by the fire and the flood: but the Jews
having escaped this danger spent forty years in the wilderness, God raining down
meal for them like millet, similar in colour to snow. And Moses they say was
tall and ruddy, with long white hair, and dignified: and he performed these
deeds when he was about eighty-nine years old.'

CHAPTER XXVIII

'WITH regard to Moses being exposed by his mother in the marsh, and taken up and
reared by the king's daughter, Ezekiel the tragic poet gives an account, taking
up the narrative from the beginning when Jacob and his family came into Egypt to
Joseph. And he tells it as follows, bringing Moses forward as the speaker: 30
"When Jacob from the land of Canaan down To Egypt came, with threescore souls
and ten, He there begat a multitudinous race, Who much endured and long, by
wicked men And tyrant's hand to this our day crushed down. For when he saw our
people had waxed strong, The king with subtle craft our fathers ruled, And some
in making bricks ho sore oppressed, And some in raising heavy stones to build
His lofty towers, for their despite contrived.

Next he commands that all the Hebrew race Cast every man-child in the Nile's
deep flood. And I have often heard my mother tell, How at that time she hid me
for three months:

Fearing detection then, she wrapped me close In rough attire, and laid me
secretly 'Mid the thick rushes by the river's bank. My sister Miriam close at
hand kept watch, Till Pharaoh's daughter with her maids came down To bathe her
shining limbs in the cool stream.

She saw the babe, and straightway took it up, And knew its Hebrew birth. My
sister then Ran up, and to the princess thus she spake:

'Wilt thou I find as nurse for this fair child Some Hebrew wife?' The princess
bade her speed, And to her mother quick she told the tale, Who came with speed,
and took me in her arms.

Then spake the Pharaoh's daughter, 'Take this child To nurse, good dame, and I
will pay thy wage.' 'Moses' the name she gave, to mark the fact That from the
river's brink she drew me forth."

'To this farther on in the tragedy Ezekiel adds more on the following points,
bringing Moses forward as speaking:

"So when my time of infancy was past, My mother led me to the princess' home,
But first she told me all the tale, my birth And kindred, and God's gifts of
old. The princess then through all my boyhood's years, As I had been a son of
her own womb, In royal state and learning nurtured me. But when the circle of
the days was full, I left the palace, urged to lofty deeds By my own soul, and
by the king's device.

Then the first day I saw two men at strife, Egyptian one, and one of Hebrew
race. And when I saw that we were quite alone, None else in sight, I to the
rescue came, Avenged my kinsman, and the Egyptian slew, And buried in the sand,
that none might see What we had ventured, and lay bare the deed. But on the
morrow's dawn again I saw Two of our kin in deadly strife, and cried, 'Why
smitest thou thy weaker brother thus?' But he replied, 'And who made thee a
judge, Or ruler here? Me also wouldest thou slay, As that man yestermorn?' Then
to myself In fear I said, 'How came that deed abroad?' All this was quickly
carried to the king. And Pharaoh sought to take away my life. His plot I
learned, and from his hands escaped, And now to other lands am wandering forth."

'Then, concerning the daughters of Raguel he adds this:

"But here, behold! some seven fair maids I see."

'And on his asking them what maidens they were, Zipporah replies:

"The land, O stranger, bears the common name Of Libya, but by various tribes is
held Of dark-skinned Aethiops: yet the land is ruled By one sole monarch, and
sole chief in war. This city has for ruler and for judge A priest, the father of
myself and these."

'He then describes the giving drink to the cattle, and adds the account of his
marriage with Zipporah, bringing forward Chum and Zipporah as speaking in
alternate verses:

"Ch. 'Yet this thou need'st must tell me, Zipporah.' Z. 'My father gave me for
this stranger's wife.'"

CHAPTER XXIX

'DEMETRIUS described the slaying of the Egyptian, and the quarrel with him who
gave information about the deceased man, in the same way as the writer of the
Sacred Book. He says, however, that Moses fled into Midian, and there married
Zipporah the daughter of Jothor, who was, as far as one may conjecture from the
names, one of the descendants of Keturah, of the stock of Abraham, from Jexan
who was the son of Abraham by Keturah: and from Jexan was born Dadan, and from
Dadan Raguel, and from Raguel, Jothor, and Hobab: and from Jothor Zipporah, whom
Moses married.

'The generations also agree; for Moses was seventh from Abraham, and Zipporah
sixth. For Isaac, from whom Moses descended, was already married when Abraham at
the age of a hundred and forty married Keturah, and begat by her a second son
Isaar. Now he begat Isaac when he was a hundred years old; so that Isaar, from
whom Zipporah derived her descent, was born forty-two years later than Isaac.

'There is therefore no inconsistency in Moses and Zipporah having lived at the
same time. And they dwelt in the city Madiam, which was called from one of the
sons of Abraham. For it says that Abraham sent his sons towards the East to find
a dwelling-place: for this reason also Aaron and Miriam said at Hazeroth that
Moses had married an Aethiopian woman.

'Ezekiel also speaks of this in the Exodus, adding to the tradition the dream
that was seen by Moses and interpreted by his father-in-law. And Moses himself
talks with his father-in-law in alternate verses, as follows: 31 "Methought upon
Mount Sinai's brow I saw A mighty throne that reached to heaven's high vault,
Whereon there sat a man of noblest mien Wearing a royal crown; whose left hand
held A mighty sceptre; and his right to me Made sign, and I stood forth before
the throne.

He gave me then the sceptre and the crown, And bade me sit upon the royal
throne, From which himself removed. Thence I looked forth Upon the earth's wide
circle, and beneath The earth itself, and high above the heaven.

Then at my feet, behold! a thousand stars Began to fall, and I their number
told, As they passed by me like an armed host: And I in terror started up from
sleep."

'Then his father-in-law thus interprets the dream:

"This sign from God bodes good to thee, my friend. Would I might live to see thy
lot fulfilled! A mighty throne shalt thou set up, and be Thyself the leader and
the judge of men! And as o'er all the peopled earth thine eye Looked forth, and
underneath the earth, and high Above God's heaven; so shall thy mind survey All
things in time, past, present, and to come."

'With regard to the burning bush, and the mission of Moses to Pharaoh, he again
brings Moses forward as holding converse alternately with God. Moses speaks
thus:

"Ha! see! What sign is this from yonder bush? A marvel such as no man might
believe. A sudden mighty fire flames round the bush, And yet its growth remains
all green and fresh.

What then? I will go forward, and behold This wondrous sign, that passes man's
belief."

'Then God speaks to him:

"Stay, Moses, faithful servant, draw not nigh, Ere thou hast loosed thy shoes
from off thy feet: The place thou standest on is holy ground; And from this bush
God's word shines forth for thee.

Fear not, My son, but hearken to My words. Of mortal birth, thou canst not see
My face;

Yet mayest thou hear the words I came to speak.

Thy fathers' God, the God of Abraham, Of Isaac, and of Jacob, I am God.

I do remember all My gifts to them, And come to save My people Israel; For I
have seen their sorrows and their toils.

Go then, and signify thou in My name, First to the Hebrews gathered by
themselves, Then to the king of Egypt, this My will, That thou lead forth My
people from the land."

'Then lower down Moses himself speaks some lines in answer:

"I am not eloquent, O Lord, but slow Of speech my tongue, and weak my stammering
voice To utter words of mine before the king?"

'Then God in answer to this says to him:

"Thy brother Aaron I will send with speed:

First tell thou him all I have told to thee; And he before the king, and thou
with Me Alone shalt speak, he what he hears from thee."

'With regard to the rod, and the other wonders thus he speaks in alternate
verse:

"God. 'Say, what is that thou holdest in thine hand? ' M. 'A rod, wherewith to
smite or beasts or men.' God. 'Cast it upon the ground, and flee in haste; For a
fierce serpent will affright thine eye.' N. 'Lo! there I cast it. Save me,
gracious Lord!

How huge, how fierce! In pity spare Thou me.

I shudder at the sight in every limb.' God. 'Fear not: stretch forth thy hand,
and seize the tail.

Again 'twill be a rod. Now thrust thy hand Into thy bosom: take it out again.

See, at My word, 'tis leprous, white as snow.

Now thrust it in again, 'tis as before.' " To this, after some words that he has
interposed, he adds the following:

'Now this is what Ezekiel says in The Exodus, when he brings forward God
speaking of the signs, as follows:

"With this thy rod thou shalt work all these plagues. The river first shall flow
all red with blood, And every spring, and stream, and stagnant pool.

Then frogs and lice shall swarm o'er all the land.

Next ashes from the furnace sprinkled round In ulcers sore shall burst on man
and beast. And swarms of flies shall come, and sore afflict The bodies of the
Egyptians. After that On those hard hearts the pestilence and death Shall fall.
And heaven's wrath let loose on high Shall pour down fire and hail and deadly
storm On man, and beast, and all the fruits of earth.

Then shall be darkness over all the land For three whole days, and locusts shall
devour All food, all fruits, and every blade of grass.

Moreover I will slay each first-born child, And crush this evil nation's wanton
pride.

Yet none of these My plagues shall touch the king, Until he see his first-born
son lie dead:

Then will he send you forth in fear and haste. This also speak to all the Hebrew
race:

'This month shall be the first month of your year, Wherein I bring you to that
other land, As to the fathers of your race I sware.' Also command the people, in
this month, At evening ere the moon's full orb appear, To sacrifice the Passover
to God, And strike the side-posts of the door with blood: So shall My messenger
of death pass by. But the flesh eat ye roast with fire at night.

Then will the king drive forth your gathered host In haste; but ere ye go, I
will give grace To this My people in the Egyptians' eyes, So that each woman
from her neighbour's store All needful vessels freely shall receive, Silver and
gold, and raiment meet for man, To make requital for their evil deeds. And when
ye shall have reached your promised land, Take heed that, from the morn whereon
ye fled From Egypt and marched onward seven whole days, From that same morn so
many days each year Ye eat unleavened bread, and serve your God, Offering the
first-born of all living things, All males that open first the mother's womb."

'And again concerning this same feast he says that the poet has spoken with more
careful elaboration:

"And when the tenth day of this month is come, Let every Hebrew for his
household choose Unblemished lambs and calves, and keep them up Until the
fourteenth day; and then at eve Offer the solemn sacrifice, and eat The flesh
and inward parts all roast with fire.

Thus shall ye eat it, with your loins girt up, And shoes upon your feet, a staff
withal Held ready in your hand; for in great haste The king will bid them drive
you from his land.

Let each man's eating for the lamb make count; And when the victim has been duly
slain, Take a full bunch of hyssop in your hand, Dipped in the sacred blood, and
therewith strike The posts and upper lintel of the door; That death may pass
o'er every Hebrew's house.

Keep ever thus this feast unto the Lord, Eating for seven days unleavened bread,
And in your houses let no leaven be found. For ye shall be delivered, and the
Lord Shall lead you forth from Egypt in this month, Henceforth to be tho first
month of your year."

Again, after some other passages he further says:

'Ezekiel also, in the drama which is entitled The Exodus, brings forward a
Messenger describing both the condition of the Hebrews and the destruction of
the Egyptians, as follows:

"For when king Pharaoh from his house set forth With all this crowd of countless
men-at-arms, With horsemen, and with four-horsed chariots, In serried ranks in
front and on each flank, The embattled host was dreadful to behold. The centre
footmen held in phalanx deep With spaces for the chariots to drive through. And
on the right wing and the left were set The best of all the Egyptian chivalry.
The numbers of our army which I asked, Were thousand thousands brave well-armed
men. The Hebrews, when o'ertaken by our host, Lay some in groups hard by the Red
Sea shore Worn out with toil, and others with their wives To feed their tender
infants were intent:

Cumbered with flocks and herds and household goods. The men themselves with
hands not armed for fight, At sight of us, set up a doleful cry, And all, with
hands uplift to heaven, invoked Their fathers' God. Great was their multitude;
But on our side all jubilant our camp Behind them close we pitched, where by the
sea There lies a city, Baal-zephon hight. And as the sun was near his western
couch, We waited, longing for the fight at dawn, Trusting our mighty host and
deadly arms. But now the signs of heaven's own wrath began, A dread and wondrous
sight. For suddenly A pillar of cloud rose high above the earth Midway between
the Hebrew camp and ours: And then their leader Moses took his rod Of power
divine, which late on Egypt wrought So many baneful signs and prodigies.

Therewith he struck the waves, and the deep sea Was cleft asunder; and with
eager steps Their host rushed swiftly o'er that briny path.

We then upon their track without delay Trod the same path, and marching forward
met The darkness of the night; when suddenly, As if fast bound in chains, our
chariot wheels Refused to turn; and from the sky a flame As of a mighty fire
before us shone. Their God, methinks, was there to succour them: For they no
sooner reached the farther shore, Than close at hand we heard the mighty roar Of
surging waves; and one in terror cried:

'Flee from the vengeful hand of the Most High, For it is He that helps our
enemies, And works for our destruction.' Then the sea Surged o'er our path, and
overwhelmed our host." And again soon after:

'Thence they went forward three days, as Demetrius himself says, and the Holy
Scripture agrees with him: but as he found there no sweet water, but bitter, at
God's command he cast the wood of a certain tree into the fountain, and the
water became sweet. And thence they came to Elim, and found there twelve springs
of water, and threescore and ten palm-trees. As to these, and the bird which
appeared there, Ezekiel in The Exodus introduces some one who speaks to Moses
concerning the palm-trees and the twelve springs thus:

''See, my lord Moses, what a spot is found Fanned by sweet airs from yonder
shady grove. For as thyself mayest see, there lies the stream, And thence at
night the fiery pillar shed Its welcome guiding light. A meadow there Beside the
stream in grateful shadow lies And a deep glen in rich abundance pours From out
a single rock twelve sparkling springs.

There tall and strong, and laden all with fruit, Stand palms threescore and ten;
and plenteous grass Well watered gives sweet pasture to our flocks."

'Then lower down he gives a full description of the bird that appeared:

"Another living thing we saw, more strange And marvellous than man e'er saw
before. The noblest eagle scarce was half as large: His outspread wings with
varying colours shone; The breast was bright with purple, and the legs With
crimson glowed, and on the shapely neck The golden plumage shone in graceful
curves: The head was like a gentle nestling's formed:

Bright shone the yellow circlet of the eye On all around, and wondrous sweet the
voice. The king he seemed of all the winged tribe, As soon was proved; for birds
of every kind Hovered in fear behind his stately form:

While like a bull, proud leader of the herd, Foremost he marched with swift and
haughty step." And after a few words he adds that:

'Some one asked how the Israelites got weapons, as they came out unarmed. For
they said that after they had gone out a three days' journey, and offered
sacrifice, they would return again. It appears therefore that these who had not
been overwhelmed in the sea made use of the others' arms.'

CHAPTER XXX

'BUT Eupolemus says, in some comment on the prophecy of Elias, that Moses
prophesied forty years; then Jesus the sou of Nave thirty years, and he lived a
hundred and ten years, and pitched the holy tabernacle in Silo.

'And afterwards Samuel rose up as a prophet: and then by God's -will Saul was
chosen king by Samuel, and died after a reign of twenty-one years.

'Then his son David reigned, who subdued the Syrians which live beside the river
Euphrates, and Commagene, and the Assyrians in Galadene, and the Phoenicians; he
also made expeditions against the Edomites, and Ammonites, and Moabites, and
Ituraeans, and Nabathaeans, and Nabdaeans.

'And again he made an expedition against Suron king of Tyre and Phoenicia; and
compelled these nations to pay tribute to the Jews; and contracted a friendly
alliance with Vaphres king of Egypt.

'And when David wished to build a temple for God, he entreated God to point out
to him a place for the altar; whereupon there appeared to him an angel standing
above the place, where the altar is built in Jerusalem, who commanded him not to
build the temple, because he was defiled with men's blood and had passed many
years in war.

'And the angel's name was Dianathan; and he bade him commit the building of the
temple to his son, but himself to prepare the things pertaining to the building,
gold, silver, brass, stones, cypress wood and cedar.

'And on bearing this David built ships in Aelan a city of Arabia, and sent
miners to the island Drphe which lies in the Red Sea, and contains gold mines.
And thence the miners transported the gold into Judaea.

'When David had reigned forty years he gave over the government to Solomon his
son, who was twelve years old, in the presence of Eli the High Priest and the
twelve princes of the tribes, and delivered to him the gold and silver and brass
and stone and cypress wood and cedar. Then David died, and Solomon was king, and
wrote to Vaphres king of Egypt the letter which is transcribed below.

CHAPTER XXXI '"KING SOLOMON TO VAPHRES KING OP EGYPT, HIS FATHER'S FRIEND,
GBEETING.

"KNOW thou that I have succeeded to the kingdom of my father David by the help
of the Most High God, who has also enjoined on me to build a temple to the God
who made heaven and earth: and withal to write to thee, to send me some of thy
peoples, who shall stay and help me, until we shall have completed all things
that are required, according to the injunction laid on me."

CHAPTER XXXII '"KING VAPHRES TO SOLOMON THE GREAT KING GEEETING.

"I REJOICED much when I read thy letter, and both I and all my kingdom kept a
festive day in honour of thy succession, to the throne after a man so good and
approved by so great a God. But as to what thou writest to me concerning the men
among our peoples here, I have sent thee eighty thousand, and have clearly
explained to thee their numbers and the places from which they come: from the
Sebrithitic nome tea thousand, and from the Mendesian and Sebennytic twenty
thousand: from the nomes of Busiris Leonto-polis and Athribites ten thousand
each. And do thou carefully provide what things they require, and for the rest,
that they may be in good order, and may be restored to their own country, as
soon as they cease to be wanted."

CHAPTER XXXIII '"KING SOLOMON TO SURON KING OP TYRE AND SIDON AND PHOENICIA, HIS
FATHER'S FRIEND, GREETING.

"KNOW thou that I have received the kingdom from my father David by help of the
Most High God, who also enjoined on me to build a temple to the God who made the
heaven and the earth, and withal to write to thee to send me some men from thy
peoples, who shall stay and help us until we have fulfilled the requirement of
God, according to the injunction laid upon me. I have written also to Galilee,
and Samaria, and the land of Moab, and Ammon, and Gilead, to supply them with
necessaries from the country every month, ten thousand cors of corn (a cor is
six artabae) and ten thousand homers of wine (the homer of wine is ten
measures): and oil and the rest shall be supplied to them from Judaea, and from
Arabia, victims for sacrifice on which to feed."

CHAPTER XXXIV '"SURON TO SOLOMON THE GREAT KING GREETING.

"BLESSED be God, who made the heaven and the earth, who hath chosen a worthy son
of a worthy father. As soon as I read thy letter I rejoiced greatly, and gave
praise to God for thy succession to the kingdom.

"And as to what thou writest concerning the men in our various peoples, I have
sent thee of Tyrians and Phoenicians eighty thousand, and as chief architect I
have sent thee a man of Tyre, of a Jewish mother of the tribe of David: on
whatsoever thou shalt ask him of all things under heaven, relating to
architecture, he will give thee advice, and will carry out the work.

"And with regard to necessary provisions, and to the servants whom I send to
thee, thou wilt do well in commanding the local governors, that all things
necessary he provided." '

'When Solomon with his father's friends had passed over to mount Lebanon with
the Sidonians and Tyrians, he transported the timber which had previously been
cut by his father to Joppa by sea, and thence by land to Jerusalem. And he began
to build the temple of God when he was thirteen years old: and the work was done
by the nations before-mentioned, and the twelve tribes of the Jews supplied the
hundred and sixty thousand with all things necessary, one tribe each month; and
they laid the foundations of the temple of God, sixty cubits in length, and
sixty cubits in breadth, but the breadth of the building and of the foundations
was ten cubits, for so had Nathan the prophet of God commanded him.

'And they built alternately a course of stone and a beam of cypress-wood,
fastening the two courses together with bronze cramps of a talent in weight. And
when he had built it thus, he boarded it outside with planks of cedar and
cypress, so that the stone building was not visible: and covered the temple with
gold on the inside, by piling up bricks of gold five cubits long, and nailing
them to the walls with silver nails of a talent in weight, four in number, and
shaped like a breast.

'Thus he covered it with gold from floor to roof, and the ceiling he made of
golden panels, and the roof he made of brass, that is of brass tiles, having
smelted brass and poured it into moulds. He made also two columns of brass, and
covered them with pure gold, a finger's breadth in thickness.

'And the columns were as high as the temple, and in size each pillar ten cubits
in circumference: and they stood one on the right side of the house, and the
other on the left. He made also golden lamp-stands, weighing ten talents each,
having taken as a pattern the lamp-stand set by Moses in the tabernacle of the
Testimony.

'And he set them on either side of the shrine, some on the right and some on the
left. He made also seventy golden lamps, so that there might be seven burning on
each lamp-stand. He built also the gates of the temple, and adorned them with
gold and silver, and roofed them over with panels of cedar and cypress.

'He made a porch also on the north side of the temple, and supported it on
forty-eight pillars of brass. He made also a brazen laver, twenty cubits in
length, and twenty cubits in width, and five cubits high. And upon it he made a
brim projecting on the outside towards the base one cubit, in order that the
priests might stand up on it, and wash their feet and hands. Also he made the
bases of the laver, twelve in number, molten and chased, and of the height of a
man, and set them at the hinder side beneath the laver, on the right side of the
altar.

'He made also a brazen step two cubits high, near the laver, that the king might
stand upon it, when praying, so that he might be seen by the Jewish people. Also
he built the altar of twenty-five cubits by twenty cubits, and twelve cubits
high.

'He made also two brazen rings of chain-work, and set them upon machines rising
twenty cubits in height above the temple, and they cast a shadow over the whole
temple: and to each net-work he hung four hundred brass bells of a talent in
weight, and the net-works he made solid, that the bells might sound, and
frighten away the birds, that they might not settle upon the temple, nor nest
upon the panels of the gates and porches, and defile the temple with their dung.

'He also surrounded the city Jerusalem with walls and towers and moats, and
built a palace for himself.

'And the Lord's house was at first called the Temple of Solomon (Ἱερὸν
Σολομῶνος); afterwards by a corruption the city was named Hierusalem from the
Temple, but by the Greeks was called Hierosolyma after the king's name.

'And when he had completed the Temple and the walls of the city, he went to
Shiloh, and offered a thousand oxen for a burnt-offering. And he took the
Tabernacle, and the altar, and the vessels which Moses made, and brought them to
Jerusalem, and put them in the house.

'Moreover the Ark, and the golden altar, and the lamp-stand, and the table, and
the other vessels he deposited there, as the prophet commanded him.

'And he offered to God an immense sacrifice, two thousand sheep, three thousand
five hundred calves. And the whole amount of gold which was expended upon the
two pillars and the temple was four millions six hundred thousand talents: and
upon the nails and the rest of the furniture one thousand two hundred and
thirty-two talents of silver: and of brass for the columns and the laver and the
porch eighteen thousand and fifty talents.

'And Solomon sent away both the Egyptians and the Phoenicians each to their own
country, having given to every man ten shekels of gold; now the shekel is a
talent. And to Vaphres the king of Egypt he sent ten thousand measures of oil, a
thousand measures of dates, a hundred vessels of honey, and spices.

'And to Suron at Tyre he sent the golden pillar which is dedicated in the temple
of Zeus at Tyre.

'But Theophilus says that Solomon sent the gold that remained over to the king
of Tyre; and that he made a life-sized figure as an image of his daughter, and
made the golden column into a covering for the statue.

'And Eupolemus says that Solomon made also a thousand golden shields, each of
which weighed five hundred staters of gold. He lived fifty-two years, of which
he reigned forty in peace.'

CHAPTER XXXV

'TIMOCHARES, in his Life of Antiochus, says that Jerusalem has a circuit of
forty furlongs, and is difficult to take, being shut in on all sides by abrupt
ravines: and that the whole city is flooded with streams of water, so that even
the gardens are irrigated by waters which flow off from the city. But the
country from the city as far as forty furlongs is without water: but beyond the
forty furlongs again it is well watered.'

CHAPTER XXXVI

'THE author of the Metrical Survey of Syria says in his first book that
Jerusalem lies upon a lofty and rugged site: and that some parts of the wall are
built of polished stone, but the greater part of rubble; and that the city has a
circuit of twenty-seven furlongs, and that there is also within the place a
spring which spouts up abundance of water.

CHAPTER XXXVII

'PHILO too says, in his Account of Jerusalem, that there is a fountain, and that
it is dried up in winter, but becomes full in summer. And in his first Book he
speaks thus:

"Νηχόμενος δ' ἐφύπερθε τὸ θαμβηέστατον ἄλλο δέρκηθρον συναοιδὰ μεγιστούχοιο
λοετροῖς ῥεύματος ἐμπίπλησι βαθὺν ῥόον ἐξανιείσης." 32 'And so forth. Again,
lower down he adds to these a description of the refilling:

"For flashing from on high the joyous stream, Flooded by rain and snow, rolls
swiftly on Beneath the neighbouring towers, and spreading o'er The dry and dusty
ground, far-shining shows The blessings of that wonder-working fount."

'And the rest that follows. Then again, concerning the High Priest's fountain
and the canal that carries off the water, he proceeds as follows:

"A headlong stream by channels under ground The pipes pour forth,"

'And all that follows this.' Thus far then our quotations from Alexander
Polyhistor.

CHAPTER XXXVIII BUT Aristeas also, in the book which he wrote Concerning the
Interpretation of the Law of the Jews, gives the following account of the waters
in Jerusalem:

[ARISTEAS] 33 'Now the house looks towards the East, and the back part of it to
the West. The whole site is paved with stone, and has slopes towards the proper
places for the influx of the waters for the purpose of washing away the blood
from the sacrifices: for many myriads of cattle are offered on the several
feast-days.

'And there is an inexhaustible reservoir of water, as would be expected from an
abundant spring gushing up naturally from within; there being moreover wonderful
and indescribable cisterns under ground, of five furlongs, according to their
showing, all round the foundation of the temple, and countless pipes from them,
so that the streams on every side met together. And all these works have been
fastened with lead at tbe bottom and the side-walls, and over these has been
spread a great quantity of plaster, all having been carefully wrought.'

CHAPTER XXXIX

BESIDES this, as Polyhistor has made mention of the prophecy of Jeremiah, it
would be a most unreasonable thing for us to pass it over in silence. Let this
then also be set down:

[POLYHISTOR] 'Then Jonachim: in his time prophesied Jeremiah the prophet. He was
sent by God, and found the Jews sacrificing to a golden image, the name of which
was Baal.

'And he foreshowed to them the calamity which was to come. Jonachim then
attempted to burn him alive: but he said that with that fuel they should cook
food for the Babylonians, and as prisoners of war should dig the canals of the
Tigris and Euphrates.

'When Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Babylonians, had heard of the predictions of
Jeremiah, he summoned Astibares, the king of the Medes, to join him in an
expedition. And having taken with him Babylonians and Medes, and collected a
hundred and eighty thousand infantry and a hundred and twenty thousand cavalry,
and ten thousand chariots, he first subdued Samaria, and Galilee, and
Scythopolis, and the Jews who lived in the region of Gilead; and afterwards took
Jerusalem, and made Jonachim, the king of the Jews, a prisoner. And the gold
that was in the temple, and the silver and brass, they chose out and sent to
Babylon, except the Ark and the tables that were in it: but this Jeremiah
retained.'

CHAPTER XL To this I must necessarily append also the account of the captivity
of the Jews under Nebuchadnezzar:

[JOSEPHUS] 34 'Nebuchadnezzar having encountered the rebel and joined battle
with him, both mastered him, and brought the country at once under his own rule.

'And it happened that his father Nabopallasar fell sick at this time, and
departed from life in the city of Babylon, after having reigned twenty-one
years. And when Nebuchadnezzar heard soon after of his father's death, he set in
order the affairs of Egypt and of the rest of the country, and having committed
the prisoners of the Jews and Phoenicians and Syrians, the nations near Egypt,
to certain of his friends, came to Babylon.' After other statements he says:

'So then Nebuchadnezzar, after be had begun the wall before-mentioned, fell sick
and died, after a reign of forty-three years, and his son Evil-Merodach became
master of the kingdom.

'He governed the affairs of the kingdom in a lawless and outrageous manner, and
was plotted against and put to death by his sister's husband Neriglisar, after
having reigned two years.

'And after he was slain Neriglisar, who had plotted against him, succeeded to
the government and reigned four years. His son Chabaessoarach succeeded to the
kingdom, though he was but a boy, and held it nine mouths; but because be showed
many evil dispositions, a plot was made against him by his friends, and he was
beaten to death.

'Upon his death, those who had plotted against him met together, and by common
consent conferred the kingdom on Nabonuedus, who was a Babylonian and one of the
same conspiracy.

'In his reign the walls of Babylon adjacent to the river were handsomely
repaired with baked brick and asphalt. And in the seventeenth year of his reign
Cyrus came from Persia with a great force, and, after subduing all the rest of
the kingdom, invaded Babylonia.

'Nabonnedus, on being informed of his advance, met him with his army, and having
joined battle was defeated, and fled with a few attendants, and was shut up in
the city Borsippus.

'And Cyrus having taken Babylon, and ordered the demolition of the outer walls
of the city because the city had proved very troublesome to him, and hard to
take, moved his army to Borsippus, to besiege Nabonnedus.

'But as Nabonnedus did not wait for the siege, but gave himself up beforehand,
Cyrus treated him in a kindly manner, and, giving him Carmania to dwell in, sent
him away from Babylonia. The rest of his time therefore Nabonnedus passed in
that country, and there ended his life.

'This narrative contains the truth in agreement with our books. For in them it
is written that Nebuchadnezzar in the eighteenth year of his reign laid waste
our temple, and it remained unregarded fifty years. But in the second year of
the reign of Cyrus the foundations were laid, and it was completed again in the
tenth year of the reign of Darius.' Thus far Josephus.

CHAPTER XLI I FOUND also the following statements concerning Nebuchadnezzar in
the work of Abydenus Concerning the Assyrians:

[ABYDENUS] 'Now Megasthenes says that Nebuchadnezzar was braver than Hercules,
and made an expedition against Libya and Iberia, and, having subdued them,
settled a part of their inhabitants on the right shore of Pontus.

'And afterwards, the Chaldeans say, he went up to his palace, and being
possessed by some god or other uttered the following speech:

'"O men of Babylon, I Nebuchadnezzar here foretell to you the coming calamity,
which neither Belus my ancestor, nor Queen Beltis are able to persuade the Fates
to avert.

'"There will come a Persian mule, aided by the alliance of your own deities, and
will bring you into slavery. And the joint author of this will be a Mede, in
whom the Assyrians glory. O would that before he gave up my citizens some
Charybdis or sea might swallow him up utterly out of sight; or that, turning in
other directions, he might be carried across the desert, where there are neither
cities nor foot of man, but where wild beasts have pasture and birds their
haunts, that he might wander alone among rocks and ravines; and that, before he
took such thoughts into his mind, I myself had found a better end."

'He after uttering this prediction had immediately disappeared, and his son
Amil-marudocus became king. But he was slain by his kinsman Iglisar, who left a
son Labassoarask. And when he died by a violent death, Nabannidochus, who was
not at all related to him was appointed king. But after the capture of Babylon,
Cyrus presents him with the principality of Carmania.' Also concerning the
building of Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar the same author writes thus:

'It is said that all was originally water, and called a sea. But Belus put a
stop to this, and assigned a district to each, and surrounded Babylon with a
wall; and at the appointed time he disappeared.

'And afterwards Nebuchadnezzar built the wall which remained to the time of the
Macedonian empire, and was furnished with gates of brass.' After other
statements he adds:

'When Nebuchadnezzar had succeeded to the kingdom, he fortified Babylon with a
triple circuit of walls in fifteen days, and he changed the course of the river
Armacales, which is a branch of the Euphrates, and also of the Acracanus. To
protect the city of the Sippareni he dug out a reservoir having a circuit of
forty parasangs and a depth of twenty fathoms, and put gates to it, by opening
which they irrigated the plain; and they call them Echetognomones.

'He also walled off the inundation of the Red Sea, and built the city Teredon at
the place of the incursions of the Arabs. His palace too he adorned with trees,
and gave it the name of the Hanging Gardens.'

I have wished to make these quotations from the book before mentioned, because
in the prophecy of Daniel it is said that Nebuchadnezzar, walking in the palace
of his kingdom in Babylon, in proud thought spoke out arrogantly and said: 'Is
not this great Babylon, which I have built for the royal dwelling place, by the
might of my power and for the glory of my majesty? ' 35 While the word is yet in
his mouth the catastrophe which followed has come upon him. This then is enough
for me to have quoted on the present subject.

CHAPTER XLII BUT after all let me add the statements from the Antiquity of the
Jews by Josephus, where, after quoting word for word the sayings of numberless
writers, he adds the following:

[JOSEPHUS] 36 'Nevertheless the records of the Syrians and Chaldeans and
Phoenicians suffice for the proof of our antiquity, and in addition to them so
many writers among the Greeks, and yet further in addition to those mentioned
Theophilus, and Theodotus, and Mnaseas, and Aristophanes, and Hermogenes,
Euemerus also, and: Conon, and Zopyrion, and many others perhaps (for I have not
read all the books) have made no slight or passing mention of us.

'Most, however, of the persons mentioned missed the truth of our earliest
history because they had not read our Sacred Books: nevertheless all alike have
borne testimony concerning our antiquity, the subject on which I proposed to
speak at this time. Demetrius Phalereus, however, and Philo the elder, and
Eupolemus, did not go far astray from the truth. And they deserve to be excused,
for it was not in their power to follow our scriptures with entire accuracy.' So
says Josephus. And any one who is pleased to read his statements concerning the
Antiquity of the Jews will find very many testimonies agreeing with those which
I have set forth.

Also there pours in upon me a further great crowd of writers both ancient and
modern as witnesses, who set their seal upon the like judgement with the authors
who have been quoted; but being anxious to preserve the due limits of my
discourse, I leave their utterances for students to search out and examine, and
will myself pass on to fulfil the remainder of my promise.

[Footnotes numbered and moved to end] 1. 404 a Porphyry. On Abstinence from
Animal Food, ii. 26 2. 404 d 2 Porphyry, On Abstinence from Animal Food, iv. 11
= Josephus, Jewish War, II. viii. 2-12 3. 408 b 1 Josephus, Against Apion, i.
22, p. 456 4. 409 b 3 Josephus, Against Apion, p. 454 5. 410 b 3 Clement of
Alexandria, Strom, i. c. 15, p. 358 (Potter) 6. 410 c 12 Clement Al., Strom. i.
c. 15, p. 360 7. d 9 ibid. c. 22, p. 410 8. 411 c 1 Numenius, On the Good, a
Fragment preserved by Eusebius.

9. d 3 Numenius, ibidem 10. 412 a 4 Josephus, Against Apion, i. 22, p. 454 11.
412 d 10 Porphyry, Of the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, a Fragment
preserved by Eusebius.

12. 413 c 1 Quoted by Justin M., Exhortation to the Greeks, c. xi B, and c. xxiv
E 13. 414 a 1 Josephus, Ant. i. c. 3, § 6 14. 414 d 4 Abydenus, Assyrian
History. Cf. Cyril of Alexandria, Against Julian, i. p. 8 15. 415 c 2 Josephus,
Ant. i. 3, 9 16. 416 b 3 Abydenus, Assyrian History. Cf. Cyril of Alexandria,
ibidem, p. 9 17. 416 c 3 Josephus. Ant. i. e. 4, § 3 18. d 2 Cf. Rzach,
Sibylline Oracles, iii. 97-110 19. 417 b 4 Josephus, Ant. i. c. 7, § 2 20. 417 c
1 Nicolaus Damascenus, Universal History, a Fragment.

21. 418 c 7 Alexander Polyhistor, Of the Jews, a Fragment preserved by Eusebius.

22. 421 c 3-422 a 1 Unintelligible Fragments referring to Abraham and Isaac from
a so-called poem on Jerusalem by a certain Philo.

23. 422 a 6 Josephus, Ant. i. c. 15 24. 422 d 2 Alexander Polyhistor, Fragment;
cf. p. 418 c 1 25. 426 b 1 Theodotus, On the Jews, a Fragment preserved by
Polyhistor.

26. 429 c 1 Alexander Polyhistor.

27. 430 c 1 Philo, Concerning Jerusalem.

28. d 6 Job i. 3 29. 431 c 3 A Fragment of Eupolemus, On the Kings of Judaea,
quoted by Clement of Alexandria, Strom, i. c. 23, p. 413 P 30. 487 a 1 Ezekiel,
The Exodus; cf. Clement of Alexandria, Strom. i. 414 P 31. 440 a 2 Ezekiel, The
Exodus.

32. 453 a 3 These lines are so corrupt as to defy translation.

33. 453 d 1 Aristeas, § 88 (Wendland).

34. 455 b 3 Josephus, Against Apion, i. 19 35. 457 d 9 Dan. iv. 30 36. 458 b 5
Josephus, Against Apion, i. 23 This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003.
All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 40: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - INTRODUCTION
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Introduction LONDINI ET NOVI EBORACI

[image omitted] APUD HENRICUM FROWDE ΕΥΣΕΒΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΠΑΜΦΙΛΟΥ ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΚΗΣ
ΠΡΟΠΑΡΑΣΚΕΥΗΣ

ΛΟΓΟΙ ΙΕ EUSEBII PAMPHILI EVANGELICAE PRAEPARATIONIS

LIBRI XV AD CODICES MANUSCRIPTOS DENUO COLLATOS RECENSUIT ANGLICE NUNC PRIMUM
REDDIDIT NOTIS ET INDICIBUS INSTRUXIT E. H. GIFFORD, S.T.P.

OLIM ARCHIDIACONUS LONDINENSIS TOMUS III. PARS PRIOR

OXONII E TYPOGRAPHEO ACADEMICO

M. CM. III

OXONII Excudebat Horatius Hart Typographus academicus

INTRODUCTION

1. THE AUTHOR. The prominent position occupied by Eusebius of Caesarea in the
Arian controversy and the Council of Nicaea has given rise to so many important
treatises on his life and character, that it would be quite superfluous to
prefix a formal biography to the present edition of one among his many literary
works. It will be sufficient to mention a few of the best sources of information
accessible to the English reader.

(1) The article in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography on Eusebius
of Caesarea by the late Bishop G. E. L. Cotton.

(2) Testimonies of the Ancients, in favour of and against Eusebius, collected by
Valesius (Henri de Valois), and appended to the Prolegomena on The Life and
Writings of Eusebius in Dr. McGiffert's English edition of the Church History
(Parker, Oxford, 1890).

(3) The very interesting and learned Introduction to the Greek text of the
Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, edited for the Clarendon Press by the late
Dr. W. Bright, Canon of Christ Church, and Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical
History, Oxford, 1872.

(4) Bishop Lightfoot's article, Eusebius of Caesarea, in Smith and Wace's
Dictionary of Christian Biography (ii. 308-48), of which Dr. McGiffert says with
perfect truth: 'Lightfoot's article is a magnificent monument of patristic
scholarship, and contains the best and most exhaustive treatment of the life and
writings of Eusebius that has been written.' In each of these works the student
will find abundant references to earlier sources of information.

There is, however, one interesting and important |vi question concerning
Eusebius, for a satisfactory explanation of which I have sought in vain even in
these copious and excellent biographies. What was the true relation of Eusebius
to Pamphilus? In other words, What is the exact meaning of the title Εὐσέβιος ὁ
Παμφίλου? The inquiry is interesting because it is in connexion with Pamphilus
that we first hear of Eusebius; and it is not unnecessary, because the older
traditional explanations are very various, while in our own more critical days
we find the title sometimes rendered as 'Eusebius Pamphilus,' and even as
'Eusebius the beloved of all,' a strange designation for one who was so well
hated by his more orthodox brethren.

It will be convenient to begin with the summary account of the traditional
notices given by Fabricius in his great work Bibliographia Graeca, Tom. vi. p.
30: 'Eusebius Pamphili, not the martyr's son, nor his sister's son
(consobrinus), nor his slave, but a friend so peculiarly intimate that he took
his name from him.' On the supposed relationship it is sufficient to quote
Bishop Lightfoot's judicious remark: 'Nicephorus Callistus (H. E. vi. 37) makes
him a nephew (ο τουτου αδελφιδους) of the martyr. Yet it is somewhat strange
that he himself should never allude to this connexion, if it were so close. On
the contrary, he speaks of his becoming acquainted with Pamphilus in such a
manner as to suggest that there was no existing relationship which brought them
together.' In a note on the passage already quoted Fabricius defends the
rendering 'friend of Pamphilus' by supposed examples of a similar usage. 'Thus
C. Avianus Philoxenus acquired the name Avianus from his friend Flaccus Avianus,
as Cicero writes, Epist. ad Familiares, xiii. 35: "The name Avianus he received
because there was no man with whom he was more intimate than with Flaccus
Avianus, who, as I think you know, was my own most intimate friend."' |vii Of
this example it is enough to say that the Latin usage is no authority for the
Greek. In the same note Fabricius adds: 'Etiam Iudas Iacobi et Petrus Damiani
dictus uterque a fratre.' On Luke vi. 16 Ιουδαν Ιακωβου Meyer remarks that it is
usually rendered '"Judas the brother of James," and therefore the son of
Alphaeus; but without any foundation in exegesis. . . . Hence here and in Acts
i. 13, we must read "Judas son of James," of which James nothing further is
known': and on Acts i. 13 Meyer again remarks that 'The relationship is
arbitrarily defined as "brother of (the younger) James." It is: son of (an
otherwise unknown) James.' This interpretation is now almost universally
accepted. Thus Huther on Jude 1 writes: 'It is arbitrary to supply to Ιακωβου
αδελφος instead of the usual supplement υιος,' and Reuss, Introduction to Jude:
'Cette derniere formule doit signifier necessairement "fils de Jacques," et non
frere de Jacques.' Compare Viger, De Idiotismis Graecis, p. 12 'o( vel involvit
substantivum ὑιος aut παῖς, filius, vel pro illo sumitur.' On which Hermann
remarks Annot. ad Vig. De Idiot, p. 701 'Σωκρατης ο Σωφρονισκου significat aut
hunc fuisse Sophronisci unicum, aut illum esse cui pater fuerit Sophroniscus,
quo ab aliis Socratibus distinguatur. Σωκρατης Σωφρονισκου dicitur qui
Sophroniscum, non alium, habet patrem.'

Even, however, if we could admit the rendering 'brother of James,' this
extension of the genitive of kindred would not justify its further extension to
the relation of 'friend': and the same objection applies to 'Petrus brother of
Damianus,' as to whom see Fabric. Tom. viii. p. 88; Tom. xiii. p. 814.

St. Jerome, writing about sixty years after the death of Eusebius, speaks of him
as the 'friend, eulogist, and companion' of Pamphilus: Apolog. adv. Rufin. i. 9
'Ipse Eusebius amator et praeco et contubernalis Pamphili tres libros scripsit
elegantissimos vitam Pamphili continentes.' Again in the Preface to his
translation of the work of |viii Eusebius On the names of places in Holy
Scripture Jerome mentions that 'he took his surname from the blessed martyr
Pamphilus'; while in the Preface to his Commentary on Isaiah and elsewhere he
calls him simply 'Eusebius Pamphili.'

If it seems strange that Jerome, who lived in the next generation to Eusebius,
has failed to give a correct paraphrase of his adopted name, we must remember
that Latin, not Greek, was Jerome's native language, and that in the Preface to
his translation of the Chronicon of Eusebius he speaks in the strongest terms of
the difficulty of rendering 'the peculiar and, so to speak, the native idiom of
the language.' On this point the Greek writers of Church History are better
witnesses than Jerome. Socrates in the first words of his Ecclesiastical History
(circ. 430 A. D.) calls him simply Ευσεβιος ο Παμφιλου, without any comment on
the surname, which ought therefore to be taken in its usual and well-known
sense.

Sozomen, a contemporary of Socrates, in his Hist. Eccles. i. 1. 9 writes
Ευσεβιος ο επικλην Παμφιλου, where επικλην may imply a patronymic, and may be
illustrated by Xenophon, Oeconom. vii. 3 ονομαζοντες με Ισχομαχον πατροθεν
προσκαλουνται. In a much later age Photius, Epist. 73, begins a bitter invective
against the reputed heretic with the words EusebioV o tou Pamfilou eite douloV
eite sunhqhV. Upon this the editor Baletta makes the usual remark that 'Eusebius
was the disciple and friend of the martyr Pamphilus, from whom he took his
surname': but it is evident that Photius himself either was or pretended to be
ignorant of the actual meaning of the title; and his insolent insinuation, eite
douloV, is of course rightly rejected, as we have seen, by Fabricius. Bishop
Lightfoot in the article already referred to writes with just indignation: 'It
was either a blundering literalism or an ignoble sarcasm, which led Photius (Ep.
73 Baletta) to suggest the |ix explanation that he was the slave of Pamphilus.
Any man might have been proud to wear the slave's badge of such a devotion.' We
come at last to the positive testimony of one who at least knew the proper sense
of the title ο Παμφιλου. The oldest MS. of the Praeparatio Evangelica (Paris, n.
451) has a Scholion on the passage i. 3 (Vig. 7 c 3) which refers to the works
of earlier Christian writers. 'Such,' says the Scholiast, 'as were holy Justin,
Athenagoras, Tatian, Clement the author of the Miscellanies, Origen, and
moreover Pamphilus himself the father of our present author Eusebius, Παμφιλος ο
του παροντος Ευσεβιου πατηρ.'

Dr. Harnack in his description of this MS. in Texte u. Untersuch. i. 1. 34
remarks on this Scholion: 'It is worthy of notice that Pamphilus is described as
the father of Eusebius (Ευσεβιος ο Παμφιλου). So obscure already was the
Scholiast's historical knowledge.' In a foot-note to this passage Dr. Harnack
asks 'why Pamphilus is mentioned here at all. Did the author perhaps think of
Lucian, or allow himself to be misled by the title of the Apology for Origen?'
Again on p. 177 Dr. Harnack says: 'This Scholion is of later origin. . . . Add
to this that the learned Arethas cannot have supposed Pamphilus to be the father
of Eusebius.' As to Dr. Harnack's first objection, there is nothing to surprise
us in the Scholiast's mention of Pamphilus as one of the 'recent authors' of
whom Eusebius might have been thinking. His literary work was of a different
character, less popular, and less generally known than the writings of the
Apologists previously mentioned, and for these reasons, as it seems, the
Scholiast in adding his name to theirs introduces it by the words καὶ αυτος ετι
Παμφιλος.

Dr. Harnack's passing remark that 'the Scholion is of later origin' is not
accepted by his very learned co-editor Oscar v. Gebhardt, who made a most
careful examination of the Codex, and assigned this particular Scholion to the
|x hand of Arethas himself (Texte u. Unters. i. 3. 183, n. 70).

Thus, instead of an ignorant Scholiast of a later age, we have the learned
Archbishop Arethas asserting that the title is to be understood in its proper
sense, 'Eusebius son of Pamphilus,' and this we shall find to be consistent with
all that we know of the relations between Pamphilus and Eusebius.

Pamphilus, we know, was many years older than Eusebius, was the director as well as the partner of his studies, and is always mentioned by him in terms not only of admiration and affection but of the most profound respect. Thus he calls him 'the great glory of the diocese of Caesarea, most admirable of the men of our time1,' of all my companions by me most fondly regretted, a man most glorious of the martyrs of our time for every virtue2,' 'the name to me thrice dear,' 'a man who through his whole life shone pre-eminent in every virtue3'; and when we add to such language the still more remarkable expressions quoted by Bishop Lightfoot 4 from Cureton's edition of the Syriac Martyrs of Palestine, that 'heavenly martyr of God,' 'my lord Pamphilus,' 'for it is not meet that I should mention the name of that holy and blessed Pamphilus without styling him "my lord5"'----with such testimony of filial reverence we can hardly doubt that when Eusebius adopted the patronymic o Pamfilou, he meant it in its full and proper significance, that henceforth he would call no man 'father' save this best and dearest friend of his early manhood. 'How else,' as Bishop Lightfoot says,' could he express the strength of his devotion to this friend, who was more than a friend, than by adopting his name. He would henceforward be known as "Eusebius of Pamphilus."' Let us only complete the title, 'Eusebius son of Pamphilus,' and so do justice to the old Scholiast, that is, to the learned archbishop himself. |xi A further explanation of the patronymic may probably be found in the prevalent custom of adoption. We know that Pamphilus 'had gathered about him a collection of books which seems to have been unrivalled in Christian circles' (Lightfoot, ibid.), and of which Eusebius became the possessor and made a catalogue (Eus. Hist. Eccl. vi. 32). It is therefore most probable that Pamphilus had made Eusebius his heir, and 'the only way in which a childless individual could acquire an heir was by adopting him' (Prof. W. M. Ramsay, Expositor, Sept. 1898, p. 204). Cf. Hermann, Political Antiquities of Greece, § 120 'The appointment of an heir, even by will, could take place only by adoption.' This statement that the heir was necessarily an adopted son is confirmed, among other passages, by Plato, Laws 924 A, and by Isaeus 66. 31 ουτε αν εισεποιουν εις τουτον τον κληρον υιον Αρισταρχω, 'they would not have represented that a son had been adopted by Aristarchus into this inheritance.' If Eusebius was thus made the heir of Pamphilus, his legal and usual designation would henceforth be 'Ευσεβιος ο Παμφιλου.' And in any case, whether he was actually adopted, or took the patronymic as a symbol of respect and affection, the only true rendering is, I believe, 'Eusebius son of Pamphilus.'

2. THE DATE. The work itself contains no direct statement of the date at which
it was written, and it is difficult to determine this very closely from the
allusions to contemporary events, especially to the persecutions of the
Christians and the subsequent prosperity of their religion. The persecution
commenced by Diocletian (February 24, A. D. 303), and continued by Galerius,
ceased by his edict A. D. 311. Speaking of this persecution Eusebius says (Eccl.
Hist. viii. 16) that having begun to decrease after the eighth year 'through the
grace of God it ceased altogether in the tenth year.' After the defeat of
Maxentius (A. D. 312) Constantine and Licinius gave freedom to the Christians,
which was confirmed by the Edict |xii of Milan late in the same year (Eus. Eccl.
Hist. x. 5). With these historical statements we have to compare the allusions
to the condition of the Christians in the two portions of the great apologetic
work of the same author.

We may notice first certain passages which seem to have been written just
before, or immediately after, the final cessation of the persecution.

Praep. Ev. 584 a, b 'Even up to the present time the noble witnesses (martyrs)
of our Saviour throughout the whole inhabited world, while practising "not to
seem but to be" just and devout, have suffered all things that Plato
enumerated.' Here the words εις δευρο πεπονθασιν imply that the persecution if
not still raging had very recently ceased.

Another passage which seems to have been written before the persecution had come
to an end is found in the Demonstration of the Gospel, iii. 5. 78. Commenting on
our Saviour's prophecy (Matt. xxiv. 9; Luke xxi. 12) that his disciples should
be brought before rulers and kings for His name's sake, he adds 'and shall
suffer all kinds of punishment for no fault or other good reason, but all this
solely for His name's sake: and we may marvel at the prediction when we see this
working up to the present time: for the confession of the name of Jesus is wont
to inflame the wrath of the rulers, so that though no fault has been committed
by one who confesses Christ, they punish him cruelly for His name's sake.' Here
again the present tenses εις δευρο θεωρουντας ενεργουμενον seem to imply that
persecution was still raging. A strong contrast to the language of these earlier
passages is found in the Demonstration, v. 3. 11 'Who therefore on seeing the
Churches of our Saviour flourishing (ανθουσας) in the midst of the cities, and
in villages and country places throughout the whole inhabited world, and the
peoples being ruled (κυριευομενους) by Him. . . .' |xiii

Again in the Praep. Ev. 9 d 7 Eusebius speaking of the Christian religion says:
'after these many years of persecution it shines forth far more brightly, and
daily becomes more conspicuous, and grows and multiplies more and more.' From
such a description it is evident that a great change had occurred in the policy
of the Roman Emperors towards the Christian religion, and we may fairly conclude
that the earlier passages were written shortly before or shortly after the
cessation of the persecution, and the later after some years of peace and
prosperity.

Considering that the Preparation and the Demonstration are the two connected
portions of one great work which must have been a long time in execution, we
cannot be surprised at finding indications of different dates occurring in
different parts of the two treatises. And though unable to fix a precise date
either for the commencement or for the completion of the whole work, we can
hardly be wrong in saying that it was begun about the year 312 A.D., but not
finished till a few years afterwards. On this latter point we have an
interesting note of time in Praep. Ev. 135 c 4 'many of the most highly inspired
even of their chief hierophants, and theologians, and prophets, who were
celebrated for this kind of theosophy, not only in former times but also
recently in our own day, under cruel tortures (διὰ βασανων αικιας) before the
Roman courts declared that the whole delusion was produced by human frauds.' The
passage evidently refers to the punishment of the false prophets and hierophants
described by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. ix. 11 'Licinius on arriving at the city of
Antioch made a search for impostors, and tortured (βασανοις ηκιζετο) the
prophets and priests of the newly erected statue, asking them "for what reason
they practised their deception." And when under the stress of torture they were
no longer able to conceal the matter, they declared that the whole mystery was a
fraud contrived by the art of Theotecnus. He therefore meted out just |xiv
judgement to all of them, and first put Theotecnus himself to death, and then
his confederates in the imposture, after innumerable tortures (μετα πλειστας
οσας αικιας).'

These executions took place immediately after the death of Maximinus in A. D.
313, and were followed by a further decree of toleration for the Christians. We
cannot be wrong therefore in saying that the words 'recently in our time'
(εναγχος καθ ημας) were written neither before nor much after A. D. 314.

3. THE OCCASION. The time thus indicated in the work itself was especially
opportune for such a defence of Christianity as Eusebius was undertaking.
Persecution had ceased for the present, and there was no immediate need of such
appeals to the justice or mercy of Pagan Emperors as had formed a chief subject
of the first Christian Apologists. But the remembrance of the sufferings endured
especially by the martyrs of Palestine, and witnessed if not actually shared by
Eusebius himself, was still fresh; nor could there be any assurance that
persecution would not be renewed under emperors less favourable to Christianity
or less prudent than Constantine. The wavering attitude of the emperor himself
at this period is well described by Gibbon, c. xx 'The devotion of Constantine
was more peculiarly directed to the genius of the Sun, the Apollo of Greek and
Roman mythology; and he was pleased to be represented with the symbols of the
God of Light and Poetry.' . . . 'As long as Constantine exercised a limited
sovereignty over the provinces of Gaul, his Christian subjects were protected by
the authority, and perhaps by the laws, of a prince who wisely left to the gods
the care of vindicating their honour. If we may credit the assertion of
Constantine himself, he had been an indignant spectator of the savage cruelties
which were inflicted by the hands of Roman soldiers on those citizens whose
religion was their only crime.' |xv

If the prudent policy of the emperor was dictated by a sense of the growing
power of Christianity in the State, nothing could help so much to strengthen
this feeling and turn it into a permanent conviction as a full exhibition of the
contrast between the effete superstitions and gross immorality of Paganism and
the pure and vigorous spirit of the new religion. The conflict was not ended,
but it had assumed a new character: persecution had failed, but other weapons
not less formidable remained. The old charges of atheism, apostasy, and
hostility to the State though often refuted were constantly renewed. Learning
and philosophy lent their aid both in attacking the supposed credulity of the
Christians, and in endeavouring to infuse new life into the ancient Polytheism.

Porphyry, the most learned and able philosopher of his age and the bitterest
opponent of Christianity, was but lately dead, and had left behind him a work in
fifteen books Against the Christians. As far as we can judge from the fragments
that remain this was the most comprehensive and powerful attack that had yet
been made upon the new faith. Eusebius was keenly alive both to the ability of
the author, and to the dangerous character of his criticism: and there was need
as well as opportunity for a new and comprehensive defence of the truth so
vehemently attacked.

4. THE METHOD. In explaining the plan of his treatise Eusebius promises (7 a 1)
that his purpose shall be worked out in a way of his own, differing from the
methods of the many Christian authors who had preceded him. This promise is
further explained (17 a 1) as meaning that his arguments will not depend on his
own statements, but will be given in the very words of the most learned and best
known advocates of the Pagan religions, that so the evidence alleged may not be
suspected of being invented by himself. The cogency of |xvi this mode of
argument truthfully and fairly conducted is unquestionable, but it had not in
this case such entire novelty as Eusebius seems to claim for it. We shall find
as we proceed that many of his arguments are the same as those of the earlier
Apologists, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen;
that he constantly borrows long passages from their writings, including the same
quotations from Greek authors, reproduced word for word with due
acknowledgement. Those earlier authors had in fact adopted the very same method
which Eusebius announced as distinctive of his own work. The quotations thus
borrowed are however few in comparison with the great multitude gathered by
Eusebius himself from all parts of the Greek literature of a thousand years,
from works both known and unknown of poets, historians, and philosophers. The
peculiar value of the Praeparatio resulting from this wealth of quotation is
universally acknowledged. 'This book is almost as important to us in the study
of ancient Philosophy as the Chronicon is with reference to History, since in it
are present specimens of the writings of almost every philosopher of any note
whose works are not now extant' (G. E. L. Cotton, Dict. Gk. and R. Biogr.,
'Eusebius,' 116b).

'The Preparation exhibits the same wide range of acquaintance with the classical
writers of Greece which the History exhibits in the domain of Christian
literature. The list of writers quoted or referred to is astonishing for its
length (see Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vii. 346). Some of these are known to us, even
by name, only through Eusebius, and of several others he has preserved large
portions which are not otherwise extant. . . . It was chiefly the impression
produced by this mass of learning which led Scaliger to describe it as "divini
commentarii," and Cave to call it "opus profecto nobilissimum" (H. L. i. p.
178)' (Lightfoot, Smith and "Wace's Dict. Chr. Biogr. ii. 331). |xvii

5. THE STYLE. It follows from the nature of the method thus described that the
value of the treatise does not depend on the literary style of Eusebius. His
part in the work is that of an editor or compiler rather than of an original
author. His own contributions are small, except in a few places such as Book VI,
chapter 6, on the subject of Fate and Free Will, and the earlier chapters of
Book VII, in which he describes the religious ideas and mode of life of the
original Hebrews. For the most part he is content to give short notices of the
numerous authors whom he quotes, and such brief comments as serve either to
connect the passages selected or to explain their meaning and force.

It is thus a matter of less importance that his own style is not attractive: the
sentences are often of inordinate length, and the constructions awkward and
confused. On the other hand the diction is simple, appropriate, and free from
all affectation of eloquence or rhetorical artifice. Bishop Lightfoot's
judgement is, as usual, very accurate when he speaks of the want of 'rhetorical
vigour and expression,' but adds that 'the forcible and true conceptions which
it exhibits from time to time, more especially bearing on the theme which may be
briefly designated "God in history," arrest our attention now, and must have
impressed his contemporaries still more strongly; while in learning and
comprehensiveness it is without a rival.' The same great critic passes a less
favourable judgement on the arrangement of the contents: 'The divisions,' he
says, 'are not kept distinct; the topics start up unexpectedly and out of
season.' On this point I may be allowed to plead on behalf of Eusebius that if
he deserves the censure, it is not from want of very careful endeavours to avoid
it. His best defence is to be found in his very frequent explanations of the
purpose and arrangement of his work. |xviii

6. THE CONTENTS. In his first sentence Eusebius shows us that the proper title
of his proposed work as a whole is The Demonstration of the Gospel (Αποδειξις
Ευαγγελικη), of which the first part (Προπαρασκευη της Ευαγγελικης Αποδειξεως,
or more briefly Ευαγγελικη Προπαρασκευη) is intended to explain beforehand the
objections which are likely to be urged against the Christians and their
religion by both Greeks and Jews.

These objections refer to three main points:---- (i) The abandonment of the ancestral religion of the Greeks (5 a 2).

(ii) The acceptance of the foreign doctrines of the Barbarians, i. e. Jews (5
b).

(iii) The inconsistency of rejecting the Jewish sacrifices, rites, and general
manner of life, while appropriating their sacred Scriptures and promised
blessings (5 c). The third point, however, is not included in the Preparation
for the reason stated in the closing sentence (856 a 6), but is left for
consideration in the Demonstration. The fifteen books containing the discussion
of the first two points are divided into five groups of three each, and this
distribution is clearly indicated at the beginning of each group in Books I, IV,
VII, X, XIII, while in the first chapter of Book XV we have a clear summary of
the whole preceding argument, showing how the several divisions have been
treated each in three books. The first three books discuss the threefold system
of Pagan Theology, Mythical, Allegorical, and Political (788 b 3-d 3). The next
three, IV-VI, give an account of the chief oracles, of the worship of daemons,
and of the various opinions of Greek philosophers on the doctrines of Fate and
Free Will.

Books VII-IX give reasons for preferring the religion of the Hebrews founded
chiefly on the testimony of various authors to the excellency of their
Scriptures and the truth of their history. |xix In Books X-XII Eusebius argues
that the Greeks had borrowed from the older theology and philosophy of the
Hebrews, dwelling especially on the supposed dependence of Plato upon Moses. In
the last three books the comparison of Plato with Moses is continued, and the
mutual contradictions of other Greek philosophers, especially the Peripatetics
and Stoics, are exposed and criticized. A like orderly arrangement is observed
in the smaller divisions of each group.

Book I. After stating the general purpose and plan of his intended work
(chapters 1-5), Eusebius takes a brief survey of the earliest notions of the
origin of the world, of mankind, and of the gods from the writings of Diodorus
Siculus, Plutarch, Xenophon, Plato, and Porphyry (chapters 6-9, 17 b-30 d),
showing that a simpler worship of sun, moon, and stars had preceded the endless
theogonies and bloody sacrifices of the manifold forms of superstition among the
heathen nations. The remainder of the book (31 a-42 d) is occupied by Philo's
translation of Sanchuniathon's account of the Phoenician theology. In Book II
the religions of Egypt and of Greece are described in the words of Diodorus and
of Clement of Alexandria; after which Eusebius himself states his reasons for
rejecting both the gross legends of the older mythology and the physical
explanations by which later philosophers endeavoured to throw a decent veil of
allegorical interpretation over the shameless obscenities of their ancestral
religion, and ends the book by a description of the comparatively purer religion
of Rome from Dionysius of Halicarnassus. In Book III the physical explanations
of the Greeks and the allegorical theology of the Egyptians are further
described in the language of Plutarch, Diodorus, and Porphyry, with brief
criticisms by Eusebius himself (chapters 1-8). Then after quoting the Orphic
Hymn, in which Zeus is described as the All, both body and soul |xx of the
universe, with Porphyry's comments upon it, Eusebius proceeds 'to examine
quietly and at leisure what after all the verses declare Zeus to be' (102 a). On
this passage Gesner founded a charge of forgery against our author, whom he
supposed to have introduced the verses in order to show that the Orphic poem
taught the existence of the One true God, and even Cudworth strangely fell into
the same error (Intellectual System, iv. 17). Fortunately Eusebius, while
refuting Porphyry, has given us his own interpretation of the verses, showing at
considerable length (102a-108a) that they represent the world as a great animal
to which the name of Zeus is applied, his mind being nothing else than the
ether. Compare Valckenaer, Diatribe de Aristobulo, xxvi. After quoting Porphyry
again on the physical theologies of Greece and Egypt (108b-117d), Eusebius
himself exposes their contradictions and absurdities in the five remaining
chapters of the book (118 a-127 c). In the second group of three books (IV-VI)
he passes on from the mythical and physical systems of Greek theology to the
political forms of religion upheld and enforced by the laws of the several
states.

Books IV and V are mainly occupied with discussions on the oracles and their
pretended prophecies and healings, which are attributed both by Eusebius and by
the witnesses whom he quotes to the activity of evil daemons. The evidence on
these subjects is for the most part taken from Porphyry's work On the Philosophy
to be derived from Oracles, fragments of which are preserved by Eusebius, and
his extant and well-known work On Abstinence from Animal Food. The last nine
chapters are devoted to the subject of human sacrifices, the chief witnesses
being Porphyry, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and Diodorus Siculus. In Book V the
nature and operation of daemons, the incantations by which they may be
controlled, and their regard for the images in which they are supposed to be
|xxi present, are described in extracts from Plutarch On the Cessation of
Oracles, from Porphyry's works already mentioned, and from his Epistle to Anebo.
The latter half of the book is occupied by a most interesting and witty satire
upon the oracles from the work of Oenomaus entitled The Detection of Impostors.

Book VI is devoted to the subject of Fate and Free Will in connexion with
astrology, the evidence being supplied by Porphyry, Oenomaus, Diogenianus,
Alexander of Aphrodisias, Bardesanes the Syrian, and Origen. In the sixth
chapter we have a good specimen of the clear argumentative style of Eusebius
himself: with much force and earnestness he defends 'the freedom of the Will
against the fatalism of pagan religion,' and especially of the Stoic
philosophy.' By the independence with which he maintains the cause of Liberty,
Morality, and Duty it is evident that no such teaching as that of Pelagius had
as yet disturbed men's minds, or called forth the decisions of the Church on the
doctrines of grace' (Dictionnaire des Sciences philosophiques, ii. 340). The
next group consisting of Books VII-IX deals with the religion of the Hebrews. Of
Book VII the first half (298 d-322 d) is the work of Eusebius himself,
describing the lives and religion of the Patriarchs, and the doctrines of Moses
and the Prophets on Divine Providence, on God as the First Cause of the
Universe, and on the Word as the Second Cause. In the latter half of the book
the same subjects are illustrated from Jewish and Christian authors, Philo,
Dionysius of Alexandria, Origen, and Methodius.

Beck VIII consists of the history of the Septuagint as described by Aristeas, of
quotations concerning the Exodus and the Law from Philo, Josephus, and Eleazar
the High Priest, on the Biblical anthropomorphisms from Aristobulus, and two
accounts of the Essenes from Philo, followed by his views of Creation, and of
Providence.

Book IX contains the testimony of heathen writers |xxii who have made mention of
the Jews, a third account of the Essenes by Porphyry, quotations by Josephus
from Hecataeus of Abdera, Clearchus the Peripatetic, Choerilus the poet,
Abydenus, author of the Assyrian History, the Sibyl, and others on the Deluge
and Tower of Babel. The remaining twenty-six chapters of the book are chiefly
occupied by several important extracts from the work of Alexander Polyhistor,
Concerning the Jews, which include long passages from the Iambic poems of
Theo-dotus and Ezekiel on events in Jewish history, the spurious letters of
Solomon to Vaphres king of Egypt, and Suron (Hiram) of Tyre; with descriptions
of Jerusalem and other matters by various authors. In the next group, Books
X-XII, Eusebius gives examples from Clement, Porphyry, and Diodorus of the
plagiarism of Greek authors both from each other and, as they argue, from the
much older Scriptures of the Hebrews. The testimony to their antiquity is drawn
from the Chronography of Africanus, and from Tatian, Clement, and Josephus. In
Book XI Eusebius proposes to show the agreement of Plato, as the representative
of Greek Philosophy, with the Hebrew Scriptures. Adopting the threefold division
of Ethics, Dialectic, and Physics, he notices the moral teaching of the sacred
writers, their literary methods, accurate reasoning, and correct use of
significant names, their knowledge of the natural world, and their contemplation
of the 'true being' of things unseen (chapters 1-9). He then quotes the comments
of Numenius, and his saying, What else is Plato than Moses speaking Attic
Greek?, and Plutarch's treatise on the Ei0 at Delphi (10, 11).

Other points of comparison are the ineffable nature of God, His unity, the
Second Cause as contemplated by Philo, Plotinus, Numenius, and Amelius, the
Third Divine Power of the Ps.-Platonic Epinomis (chapters 12-30). The nature of
the Good and of the Ideas, as stated by Plato in the Republic and Timaeus, is
illustrated by |xxiii quotations from Numenius, Philo, and Clement of Alexandria
(21-25). The existence of evil powers, the immortality of the soul and the
Divine image, as taught in the Alcibiades and Phaedo, and illustrated from
Porphyry's answer to Boethus On the Soul, the creation of the world and of the
heavenly bodies, the goodness of God's works, their changes and dissolution, the
resurrection of the dead, and the final judgement, are all brought into the
comparison, and illustrated from the Timaeus, Republic, Politicus, and Phaedo,
and from a fragment of Plutarch On the Soul. In Book XII the comparison of Plato
with the Hebrew Scriptures is continued on the simple instruction of children,
the need of faith, the qualifications of rulers as described in the Laws, the
Gorgias, and the Republic (chapters 1-9); the picture of the just man and his
fate in the Republic; Paradise and the garden of Zeus, and the origin of mankind
male and female, in the Symposium; the Deluge, the right foundation of law,
religious training, the use of poetry, music, and wine, and the control of the
passions, all illustrated from the Laws (chapters 10-28).

Other subjects brought into the comparison are the contrast of true philosophy
and spurious wisdom (Theaetetus), the education of women (Republic), and
passages of the Laws and Republic corresponding to the Hebrew Proverbs and laws
of Moses on 'the memory of the just,' riches and poverty, and the honour due to
parents, on slaves, landmarks, and thieves (chapters 29-42). Other coincidences
are found in the use of certain examples and figures of speech, in the division
of a nation into twelve tribes, in the situation of the chief city, and in
Plato's thoughts on faults in education (Republic), on atheism, on God, and
Divine providence (Laws). In Book XIII Eusebius quotes with approval Plato's
opinions on the absurdities of Greek mythology in the Timaeus, Republic, and
Eutliyphron (chapters 1-5), on stedfast adherence to truth even unto death in
the Crito |xxiv and the Apology of Socrates (chapters 6-11), adding the
testimonies of Aristobulus and Clement to the agreement of Plato and other Greek
philosophers with the Hebrew Scriptures (chapters 12, 13). The remainder of the
book treats of matters in which Plato's teaching is condemned concerning the
belief of the common people (Timaeus and Republic), a multitude of inferior gods
and daemons, the nature of the soul (Timaeus) criticized by the Platonist
Severus, the worship of the heavenly bodies (Laws and Timaeus), the treatment of
women (Laws and Republic), unnatural vice, and the laws of murder. In Book XIV
the consistent truth of Hebrew doctrines adopted by Christians is contrasted
with the contradictions and conflicts of Greek philosophers, showing how Plato
criticized his predecessors in the Theaetetus and Sophista, and was himself
criticized by his followers in the successive Academies, who in their turn are
subjected to the keen satire of Numenius (chapters 1-9). The subject is
continued in quotations from Porphyry, Xeno-phon, Plato, Plutarch, and
especially from Aristocles On Philosophy against the schools of Parmenides who
rejected the evidence of the senses, of Aristippus, Metrodorus, and Protagoras
who believed them alone, and of the Pyr-rhonists who believed nothing at all.
The doctrines of Epicurus are refuted from the writings of Aristocles, Plato,
and Dionysius of Alexandria (chapters 21-47). In Book XV the moral character of
Aristotle is defended against the slanders of Epicurus and others by Aristocles;
but where he differed from Plato and the Hebrews in regard to virtue and
happiness, the ideas of God and His providence, the creation of the world, the
fifth corporeal essence, the nature of the heavenly bodies, and the immortality
of the soul, his doctrines are severely criticized by Atticus the Platonist
(chapters 2-9). His description of the soul as an enteleceia is further
criticized by Plotinus, Porphyry, and Atticus (10-13); |xxv the Stoic philosophy
is discussed by Aristocles, Areius Didymus, Porphyry, Longinus, and Plotinus
(14-22), and the remainder of the book is occupied with a long extract from
Plutarch, De placitis Philosophorum, on the various physical theories of the
world, followed by the judgement of Socrates on such questions from the
Memorabilia of Xenophon.

After this survey of the contents of the Preparation as described chiefly by
Eusebius himself, I think we are in fairness bound to acquit him of the charge
of confusion in the divisions of the work and the arrangement of its topics. His
occasional repetitions are for the most part confined to quotations, and
especially to certain well-known and striking passages of Plato which are used
more than once in different branches of the subject, and with different
applications.

7. QUOTATIONS. The literary value of the Preparation for the Gospel will be most
fully appreciated by considering a separate list of the chief fragments of
ancient authors for the preservation of which we are indebted to Eusebius in
that work.

(a) Fragments of Poetry.

1. An interesting epigram by Callimachus on the simplicity of the primitive
statues (99 b): this is contained in a fragment of Plutarch, De Daedalis
Plataeensibus.

2. A fragment of Euripides, Melanippe Captiva, on the characters of bad and good
women (466 d).

3. Large extracts in iambic verse from the Exodus, a tragedy by the Jewish
dramatist Ezekiel (438 c 10-446 d 2), on which see Schürer, Jewish People, ii.
3. 224.

4. Fragments of an epic poem On Jerusalem by a Jew named Philo, 421 c, d, 430 c,
453 a. Cf. Schürer, ibid. 222.

5. Eight extracts from the epic poem of Theodotus On the Jews, describing
Sichem, and narrating the story of the sons of Emmor (426 b-429 a). Cf. Schürer,
ibid. 224. |xxvi 6. Many of the oracles quoted by Oenomaus in The Detection of
Impostors (209 c-234 a).

7. All the oracles contained in the work of Porphyry On the Philosophy to be
derived from Oracles (123 d-124 b, 145 a-146 b, 168 b, 175 c). These oracles
with their contexts are carefully edited by Wolff in his work Porph. De Philos.
ex Oraculis haurienda, of which they form the chief substance.

8. Pindar, Fr. Incert. 2 (105), Paean. 10 (33), both in 687 b.

9. The remarkable epigram on the Tetragrammaton and the Name of seven vowels
(520 a).

10. Part of the Orphic Hymn to Zeus, of which vv. 19-42 (except two or three)
are found first in the fragment of Porphyry Peri Agalmatwn preserved by Eusebius
P. E. 100 c 5-101 c 1.

(b) Historical Fragments.

1. In history we have first the long extract from the translation by Philo
Byblius of Sanchuniathon's Phoenician History contained in a fragment of
Porphyry's work Against the Christians preserved by Eusebius (31 a-42 b). If we
could fully trust Porphyry's testimony to the truthfulness of Philo, and to the
genuineness and antiquity of the work of Sanchuniathon, the historical value of
the extract could hardly be over-estimated: and we cannot wonder that the
question of its authenticity has been a most fruitful source of criticism and
controversy from the time of Scaliger and Grotius to our own days. 'Few
problems, in fact, in the circle of Semitic studies and of ancient history in
general are of more importance than this.' So writes M. Renan. Memoire sur
l'Origine et le Caractere veritable de l'Histoire phenicienne qui porte le nom
de Sanchoniathon, p. 6.

2. Diodorus Siculus. In 59 c 2-61 a we have an interesting fragment of the sixth
book of the Bibliotheca, confirming his account of the sources of Greek theology
from the Ιερα αναγραφη, or Sacred Record of Euemerus, |xxvii and adding the
wonderful narrative of Euemerus concerning his voyage to the fabulous island of
Panchaea in the Indian Ocean.

3. The large fragments of Philo Judaeus first known from Eusebius will be found
in 322 d 11 on the Word or Second God, in 336 b Concerning Providence, in 355
c-361 b on the Exodus and the Law from a work otherwise unknown, entitled
Hypothetica, and in 379 a-400 a a very long and important passage from the
Apology for the Jews.

These fragments will be found placed together at the end of the sixth volume of
Richter's edition of the Greek text of Philo.

4. Among the most important of the historical fragments preserved for us by
Eusebius are the long extracts from the work of Alexander Polyhistor Concerning
the Jews, which occupy the larger part of Book IX, and have been very carefully
edited in a special monograph by Dr. J. Freudenthal. The value of these extracts
is much increased by quotations from lost works of authors otherwise unknown,
Eupolemus, Artapanus, Molon, a certain Philo, and Demetrius, who all wrote on
the history of the Jews. On the importance of the fragments see Schürer, ibid.
ii. 3. 197.

5. The extract from the Chronicon of Julius Africanus (487 d-491 b) was edited
from Eusebius by Dr. Routh in Rell. Sacr. ii. 269-78, who enlarged the text from
Georgius Syncellus and added copious notes (423-37).

6. From the lost work of Abydenus On Assyrian History we have most interesting
notices of the Flood of Sisithrus, i. e. Noah (414 d), of the Tower of Babel
(416 b), of Nebuchadnezzar's madness and of his fortification of Babylon (456
d).

(g) Philosophical Fragments.

It is in the region of Greek Philosophy that the wealth of quotation is most
remarkable.

1. Among the Neo-Platonists we find Atticus, whose commentary on the Timaeus is
sharply criticized by |xxviii Proclus, but of whose own writings there remain
only the important fragments preserved by Eusebius; the first of which describes
the threefold division of Philosophy into Ethics, Physics, and Logic, and
eulogizes Plato as 'a man from nature's mysteries new-inspired,' and 'in very
truth sent down from the gods, in order that Philosophy might be seen in its
full proportions,' (509 b-510 a). Also in the long and important extracts
contained in Book XV, chapters 4-9, 12, 13, Atticus appears as a passionate
defender of Plato against Aristotle.

2. From the Epitome of Areius Didymus we have a short extract on the Platonic
Ideas (545 b), and several passages on the Stoic doctrines in Book XV, chapters
15, 20.

3. Numenius the Neo-Pythagorean is known almost exclusively from the long and
numerous extracts preserved by Eusebius. From the contemplation of true 'Being'
with Plato (525 c-527 a) he passes on to the nature of 'the First and Second
God' (537 a), and to 'the only Good' transcending all essence, which can be
contemplated only apart from sense 'in a certain, immense, ineffable, and
absolutely Divine solitude' (543 d). In 650 d we find him defending Plato for
'preserving both life and truth' by withdrawing from Athens; and in 727 b-739 he
describes The revolt of the Academics against Plato, under the leaders of the
three, or more, Academies.

4. The fragments of Aristocles the Peripatetic contain an interesting criticism
of Socrates and Plato, and of the divergent Socratic Schools (510 b-511 c), a
defence of the veracity of the senses against the Eleatics Xenophanes and
Parmenides (756 b-757 d), a long refutation of the Sceptics Pyrrho and Timon
(758 c-763 d), strong and able censures of the Sophists, Cyrenaics, and
Epicureans (764 c-768 d), and lastly a defence of the moral character of
Aristotle against the slanderous |xxix attacks of Epicurus, Timaeus of
Tauromenium, Alexinus the Eristic, Eubulides, Demochares, Cephisodorus, and
Lycon (791 a-793 c).

5. Of the three known fragments of Euemerus, the most important is contained in
a fragment of the sixth book of Diodorus Siculus, itself preserved by Eusebius
(Diod. Sic. iv. 179, Dindorf).

6. On the falsehood of oracles we have first a valuable fragment of Diogenianus
directed against the fatalism of Chrysippus (136 d 3); then the vigorous and
amusing invective of Oenomaus occupying no less than eighteen chapters of Book V
(209 b-234 c); and the long series of extracts from the work of Porphyry On the
Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, mentioned above (p. xxvi).

7. Of other works of Porphyry Eusebius has preserved many fragments of the
Epistle to Anebo (92 a, 197 c, 740 d), on which see Parthey's edition of
Iamblichus De Mysteriis; a large part of the treatise De Statuis (97 d 2 note);
several fragments of a work On the Soul, against Boethus; three long extracts
from the Philological Lecture; fragments of the famous treatise Against the
Christians (31 a, 179 d, 485 b).

8. A fragment attributed to Plotinus on the Entelecheia of Aristotle, which is
inserted by Creuzer after Ennead. iv. 2.

9. From Plutarch's treatise on the Daedala, or primitive wooden statues at
Plataeae, and the worship connected with them Eusebius has preserved two very
interesting fragments (83 c, 99 b); and though the long extracts from the
Stromateis (22 b-25 b) and the De placitis Philosophorum (836 a-852 c) are not
the work of Plutarch, but a compilation by some unknown writer from the Epitome
of Aetius, this very ancient error in the title does not detract from their
value. We are equally indebted for their preservation to Eusebius, to whose
accuracy and fidelity Diels (Proleg. 5-10) pays an emphatic and even
enthusiastic testimony. |xxx

8. CONCLUSION. The work which has been my chief occupation and my delight for
several years is now drawing to a close. I have to renew my thanks to friends
already mentioned in the Preface to vol. i; to Dr. Sanday, whose counsel and
encouragement first led me to add to the English translation a revised text; to
Dr. Redpath, by whose many useful suggestions and careful correction of the
proof-sheets I have been aided throughout; to Dr. John Mayor, the Professor of
Latin in the University of Cambridge, and Dr. Joseph Mayor; to the Rev. W. R.
Inge, one of the rare students of Plotinus; to Dr. H. H. Turner, F.R.S.,
Savilian Professor of Astronomy; and last not least to the Delegates, Secretary,
and other Officers of the Clarendon Press, to whose unfailing kindness and
invaluable help I am most deeply indebted. Of the inadequacy of my own work I am
painfully conscious. To do full justice to so large a compilation from all
branches of ancient literature the editor himself should be historian, poet,
philosopher, archaeologist, astronomer, ethnologist; and I certainly am none of
these. For all errors and defects which remain un-corrected I can only trust to
receive the indulgence for which old age not often pleads in vain.

CORRECTIONS

PART I 153 c 3 'how far they proceed who need'] read 'how far in need.' 168 c 3
'Then fragrant incense and dark blood of grapes'] read 'Dark blood of grapes
pour'd on the blazing pyre.' 302 d 1 'mariners' stars'] read 'star-fish.'

210 d 7 'He killed with his spear Carnus son of Phylander an Aetolian knight']
read 'Hippotes son of Phylander kill'd with his spear Carnus the Aetolian.' 224
d 3 'No spot on earth . . .' Omit this line.

294 c 3 'not only'] read 'I do not mean.' 404 b 11 'upon God'] read 'upon them
as gods.' 448 d 5 'as soon as they cease to be wanted'] read 'as being no longer
wanted.'

PART II 634 c 9 ' had become indestructible'] read when once created were
indestructible.' 642 b 1 'and by those who are growing elderly and'] read 'and
as they grow older.' 734 b 4 ' such as they were '] read 'whether few or many.'
734 c 2 ' house '] read ' room.' 737 b 1 ' to the leadership'] read '
Hegesinus.' Cf. note.

756 d 7 ' the existing thing'] read ' being.' 778 a 8 ' simultaneous circular
revolution'] read ' synodical revolution.' 782 c 9 'show evidence'] read ' find
evidence.' 823 b 9 'it is '] read ' they are.' 826 c 1 'universals'] read '
wholes.' 830 d 7 'wrist'] read ' palm.' 836 b 4 'the sun out of] read ' the Sun,
or out of.' 850 a 5 ' pillar supporting the surfaces'] read ' pillar: but of the
surfaces....' See note.

[Footnotes have been placed at the end] 1. 1 Eus. H. E. viii. c. 13.

2. 2 Mart. Pal. c. vii.

3. 3 ibid. xi.

4. 4 Dict. Biogr. ii. 311 a.

5. 5 ibid. 310 b. This text was transcribed by Peter Kirby, and reformatted by
Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy
freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 41: THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL - PREFACE TO THE ONLINE EDITION
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr.
E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Preface to the online edition

E.H.Gifford published his massive edition and translation in 5 volumes in 1903.
Vol. 1 and vol. 2 contained the Greek. Vol. 3 was split into two physical
volumes -- part 1 and part 2. This contained the English translation that
appears here. Vol. 4 was the last, and contained the notes, mainly philological.
The English translation was also reprinted separately. This remains the only
English translation. His edition has been superceded by that of Karl Mras,
Eusebius Werke 8, in the 'Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller' series 43
Berlin (1954-6). This text is reprinted by the French editors J. Sirinelli and
Edouard des Places in the Sources Chrétiennes series. Sirinelli &c. also
included a French translation. At the head of each book stands a summary,
formatted in this edition as a table of contents. These are found in most of the
manuscripts, and are generally considered to be authorial by editors such as K.
Mras or J. Sirinelli. In the medieval manuscripts, the text is divided into
chapters and excerpts from the summary placed at the head of each 'chapter' as a
chapter title. It is very hard to find definite information, but the division
into chapters is probably later than Eusebius, as is the creation of the chapter
titles. The works of St. Augustine, for instance, were divided into chapters in
the 6th century, and an early 5th century manuscript of his De Civitate Dei,
from Africa, and quite likely from his own scriptorium, has none. (Augustine did
however compose summaries of the contents, which circulated separately.) As may
be seen from book 1, even in Gifford's version, the chapter divisions do not in
fact match the numbered sentences in the summaries, again indicating that the
division in chapters is later than the author of the summaries. The Praeparatio
is perhaps best known from a narrow-minded attempt by Edward Gibbon in his
Vindication to use it to 'prove' that Eusebius advocated deceit. The smear needs
little discussion here. While Gibbon would like us to believe that Eusebius is
really saying in book 12, chapter 31 that the bible is a lie so deceit is fine,
some will feel that instead that it is simply part of his theme that the bible
contains narrative fiction in order to get conceptually difficult truths into
the uneducated. The reader is invited to read all of book 12 and decide for
themselves.

There is one problem with the translation, which is as annoying as unnecessary.
For some reason, Gifford did not always translate the summaries literally, but
felt free to add to them, combine, abbreviate or alter them, in order to use
them as table of contents himself. Possibly this is because the Greek numbers in
the summaries do not align with the chapter divisions. He did not however place
them in the text as per the manuscripts, as is done in Mras and Sirinelli. To
illustrate the sort of changes Gifford made, I have rendered as literally as I
can from Sirinelli's French translation the Greek summary of book 1 (which is
divided into 10 chapters) as follows:

Gk. Number Greek text Mras' chapter no Text chapter to which the contents relate
1. What the treatise on the Gospel promises 1 1 2. The charges usually brought
against us by those who try to slander our doctrines 2 2-3 3. That we did not
adopt the sentiments of the word of salvation without inquiry 3 3-4 4. Our
adoption of belief in the greatest blessings is not uncritical as to time 4 4-5
5. We did not forsake the superstitious errors of our fathers without sound
reason 5 5-6

6. What the Greeks have written on the subject of the first origins of the
world, and how we have abandoned it for good reasons 7 7

7. On the disagreements between the philosophers on the system of the universe;
we separate from them after a critical examination 8 8 8. The ancients
worshipped no other gods than the stars visible in the sky 9 9 9. They knew
nothing about the gods or about setting up carved images

9 10 The stories about the gods among other nations are of later introduction

9

11. Summary of the theology of the ancient Phoenicians. Some authors who wrote
about them. That we have reason to reject them. 10 10

It would be useful if someone with more Greek than myself would translate these
again, to replace the defective versions in Gifford, particularly since both
Mras and Sirinelli suggest that they may be by Eusebius himself.

Gifford also used Gibbon's mistranslation of pseudos as 'falsehood' in the entry
and text of book 12, chapter 31. The word is rendered 'fiction' in R.G. Bury's
Loeb edition (1967, book 2, 663D-E, p.125) of Plato's Laws, which seems to fit
the sense better, unless we are to suppose Eusebius to mean that the Hebrew
scriptures contain intentional falsehoods! Modern readers will be aware of the
difference between a lie and a piece of educational fiction, but the confusion
is not uncommon among uneducated people, even today. The manuscripts are
discussed in detail by Mras. These are the extant manuscripts.

Siglum

Location Shelfmark & Notes

Date /

Century

1st Family

Books 1-5 only

A Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Français Codex Parisinus Graecus 451. Parchment.
The "Arethas" codex.

Written by Baanes for Arethas, then Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia.

Contains books 1-5 on ff. 188r-322r. A quaternion is missing, so the PE starts
at I, 3, 5, and the end of Justin' Cohortatio and Tatian Discourse to the Greeks
are missing. A second quaternion has dropped out, creating another lacuna at II,
3, 12-6, 21. PE. bk. 2 starts on f. 213v; 3 on 231v; 4 on 259v; 5 on 289r.

Written in minuscule, very clear and beautifully. The running titles in uncial
or semi-uncial. The MS was copied from an exemplar in uncials.

Arethas, the proprietor and corrector of the MS (A2), covered it with notes. It
also contains notes from many hands of the XIV and XVth centuries (A3).

Originally in the royal collection at Fontainbleu in the 16th century. There are
two old numbers on f.1r - 1169 and 2271. On the last page is the numeral '403'.
It consists of 59 quaternions and two extra leaves. 10 quaternions and a leaf
have fallen out and been lost. Cover: 25cm x 19 cm. Pages: 24.5cm x 18.5 cm.
Written area: 14.5 cm ('bis' 15) x 11 cm. Margins: top=4cm, bottom=6cm, sides
6.5-7cm. 26 lines per page, 40 characters a line.

Contents: 1. Clement of Alexandria, Protrepicus; 2. Clement of Alexandria,
Paedagogus; 3. Justini epistulam ad Zenam; 4. Justin, Cohortatio ad gentiles; 5.
Eusebius, P.E. bks 1-5; 6. Athenagoras, Apology for the Christians; 7.
Athenagoras on the Resurrection; 8. Eusebius, Against Hierocles.

Subscriptio on f.401v in semi-uncial: ἐγράφη χειρὶ Βαάνους νοταρίον Ἀρέθα
ἀρχιεπισκόπου Καισαρείας Καππαδοκίας· ἔτει κόσμου SYKB. (=6422, i.e. 914AD). and
then underneath a price of 20 gold solidi (nomismata) for the writing of the
codex, and 6 for the parchment. The subscriptio is in the hand of Arethas
himself. 914

H Venice, San Marco Library. Codex Marcianus Graecus 343. Parchment. Contains
books 1-5 on ff. 6-204r. A copy of of A made before that MS' missing quaternions
were lost, and so supplies the text of the lacunae in books 1 and 2. Once the
property of Cardinal Bessarion. Also contains Eusebius, Against Hierocles; and
Tatian, Discourse to the Greeks (the latter was on the missing quaternion at the
start of the PE in A). 280 folios. On f.280v is the name Petros Karnabakas.
Boards: 26cm x 19 cm. Pages: 19.5cm x 12 cm. 28 (sometimes 29) lines per page.
27-30 characters a line. Written in minuscule by a single scribe, but the
summaries at the start of each book are in semi-uncial. 11

2nd Family

Complete

B Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Français Codex Parisinus Graecus 465. Paper. 207
leaves. Written by a monk, Longinus, who gives his name in the subscriptio on
f.207r (and who also, in 1272, wrote Cod. Par. Grae. 443, of Dionysius the
Areopagite). On fol. 207v is a notice which tells us that a certain Kaludas was
in Constantinople in 1453, and transferred the MS to his brother-in-law when he
died at 7am on the 5th October 1454 in the district of Ainos.

Soon afterwards it came to Italy. It was prepared for sale in the 16th century
by the addition of a paper double-sheet glued on the front (since become
detached), and a majuscule title added. In the 17th century, the MS belonged to
the orientalist A. Galland, who gave it to the royal library ("olim
Gallandianus" in the 1740 catalogue, t. 2, p. 65). This MS is missing book 12,
but full of errors. Belongs to the group O(G)NDV. 1250-1275

I Venice, San Marco Library. Codex Marcianus Graecus 341. Paper. Contains book
12. 299 folios. Given to the monastery of St. Mark by Bessarion. Two hands, both
of the second-half of the 15th century. The first two leaves are copied from B.
Based on a manuscript of the first family, but influenced by the second.

Size; Leaves: 28.5 x 20cm; written area 21 x 12.5 cm. Scribe Ia wrote ff.1-265v,
and 295-300; scribe Ib wrote ff.266-294. This MS has a distinctive feature in
ff.295-300: an extract of the table of contents of book 15, followed by chapters
3, 16, 17, and 18, and then others in further disarray. 15

O Bologna, University Library Codex Bononiensis University 3643. Bombazin paper.
Contains book 12. 244 folios. Written by two different hands at the end of the
13th century. I and O are the most important representatives of the second
family. The last page has the numeral '244' on it. Boards: 34cm x 25 cm; leaves:
33cm x 24 cm; writing area: 26 bis 27 cm x 18 bis 20 cm. One of the writers was
a monk named Nicephorus (mentioned on fol. 244v). The old top and bottom margins
have been cut off. Given to the library in the 18th century (an inventory of
1720 lists 3643 and 3644 - the DE - on p.16 no. XIV) as part of a collection by
Count Aloysius Ferdinandus Marsilius (Count Alois Ferdinand Marsigli), who was a
general of Emperor Leopold I and had campaigned against the Turks in Hungary and
Turkey, and, according to a letter preserved at the library, acquired the MSS as
booty whenever a town was sacked. MS belongs with BN(D)V. 13 (end)

N Naples, Bibliotheca Nazionale Codex Neapolitanus graecus II A 16. Paper.
Contains book 12. 401 folios. 17/18 century binding of the Farnese, so the MS
came to Naples from Rome. Binding: 31cm x 23 cm; Pages: 29cm x 21 cm; Written
area: 20 cm x 14.5 cm, 30 lines per page ff.1-338r, on from there 31 per page,
45-52 letters per line. Written by a single scribe. Red running titles and
initials. No scholia, only some brief notes in the margins. Corrections by the
original scribe, and a second writer. A third hand is visible at a few places.
Not directly related to any other MS - rather an independent member of the
BOV-class. Text is closer to O in books 1-9, 14-15. Closer to B for the rest. 15

D Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Français Codex Parisinus Graecus 467. Paper.
Contains book 12. Written by the Cretan, Michael Damascene; part written by a
second hand. 386 folios. Related to N. Original binding of the period of king
Francis II. The 9th book - by the other hand - is a copy of I or j. The rest is
a brother of N. There are no scholia. 16

G Florence, Medicean-Laurentian library Codex Laurentianus VI 9. Paper. A copy
of O, for which it can supplement passages unreadable or lost. Listed in
Bandini's catalogue of the library in 1764. 329 folios. Boards (s.XVI): 31.5 cm
x 22 cm; pages: 30.5cm x 22 cm; written area: 21.5 cm x 15 cm. 30 lines a page,
around 50 letters per line. Written by a single scribe. Date appears on f.328v,
6852 of the world (=1344AD). 1344

V Mount Athos, Vatopedi Monastery Codex Batopedianus 180. Illustrated MS. 382
folios. A good representative of the second family (BON), but has only one good
reading itself. MRAS had only photographs. Supposedly 382 pages, 28cm x 21 cm.
31 lines per page, 47-52 letters per line. No scholia. Belonged to the imperial
library in Constantinople, according to the catalogue of the MSS at Vatopedi.
Very ornamented in a way unlike the other MSS. 1335 j Venice, San Marco Library
Codex Marcianus 342. Parchment. Copy of I. Fol. 242v says it was finished on 1st
December 1470. Written by the monk Kosmas in Rome. Contains the same excerpt as
in I from the table of contents of book 15 and the same chapters in the same
sequence as in I. 1470

E Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Français Codex Parisinus Graecus 468. Paper.
Copied from j. Likewise has the same chapter orders and excerpt from the summary
as I. 16 F Florence, Medicean-Laurentian library Codex Laurentianus Plut. VI 6.
Parchment. Direct copy of G. 15

C Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Français Codex Parisinus Graecus 466. Parchment.
Direct copy of G. Once known as the Codex. Rich. Montacutii, used by Vigerus.
15/16

Naples, Bibliotheca Nazionale Codex Neapolitanus II AA 15. Books 1-8 copied from
N. Books 9-15 from I or j. [unspecified]

Rome, Vatican Library Codex Ottobonianus 265. Copied from the above, with
readings from I or j in the margin. [unspecified] Rome, Vatican Library Codex
Ottobonianus 366. Copied from I or j. [unspecified] Oxford, St. John's College
[Shelfmark unknown]. A late copy of D. [unspecified] Rome, Vatican Library Codex
Urbinas 6. A copy of N. [unspecified] Rome, Vatican Library Codex Vaticanus
1303. An apograph of N. 15, second half

Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit Codex Vossianus 197. Contains only
book 9. Related to EI and corrected from the Stephanus edition. [unspecified]
There are thus two classes of manuscript: A, supplemented by H; and on the other
hand BOVND, with B transitional.

There are also substantial citations in Theodoret, Græcarum affectionum curatio
(Remedy for the diseases of the Greeks). These vary between the two families.
George Trapezuntios made a Latin translation. The earliest known edition is from
Venice in 1470 via Nicolaus Jenson. This seems to be based on I or j. D and E
were the basis of the Robert Stephanus edition of 1544. The process of
converting the printed text to HTML was somewhat awkward. Gifford used the
format favoured by the Oxford Movement translations of the 1840's, with much use
of the margin, and introduced some innovations himself. The page numbers of
vols. 3 and 4 are very small, and Gifford himself ignores them. Instead he
placed the page numbers of the Greek in the margin, together with the division
of the page into four sections, labelled a, b, c and d, also in the margin. The
footnotes appear at the bottom of the page, and use the Greek page number,
section, and line number of the printed text. Thus 123 c 11 would be the 11th
line after the marginal 'c' following the 'p.123' in the margin. For an online
edition, these reference points would be almost impossible to transcribe. They
have been omitted. Instead convention footnote numbers have been created, and
linked to the notes which have been necessarily moved to the end. Usually
Gifford's ref. is preserved, however. The majority of the work consists of large
near-verbatim chunks copied from pagan philosophers. Often these are now lost,
which gives the work its value. Gifford set these in a slightly smaller
font-size, so that Eusebius' comments stood out. The citations also are in
single quotes. I have been unable to find a format which works online as well,
so the citations are in the same size font.

Gifford also placed at the head of each page, in the margin the name of the
current philosopher in capitals, and often when a new one was introduced. This
has been represented by using [PLATO] etc at the start of a new chunk of text,
as seemed appropriate. The edition is around 1000 pages, and has been very hard
to scan. Peter Kirby and I have been discussing the idea for a couple of years,
without result. My own attempt to scan book 12 ground to a halt, as the format
chosen was too difficult for the time available. The project got off the ground
a few months ago when Peter scanned the introduction, and then book 1 with
selected embedded footnotes, then 3, 5, and 6. In response I started to work on
scanning other books, starting with 2 and 4, evolving a format as we went, and
reformatted or added footnotes to his books. Unfortunately we had neglected to
keep in touch as closely as we might, and both of us did book 5. In most books,
every footnote has been included. In some of those books done first, some
biblical references have been omitted, and this is indicated by the legend
'selected footnotes.' The order of scanning was 1-6, then 15 down to 7. I
entered Greek text using the SPIonic font with polytonic accents *; Peter in
unicode without accents.

Roger PEARSE

19th July 2003 * Note: all the SpIonic has been converted to unicode with
accents. RP. 14th November 2005.

Bibliography

K. MRAS, Eusebius Werke: Achter Band. Die Praeparatio Evangelica. Griechischen
Christlichen Schriftsteller 21. Berlin (1954). Very detailed lists of MSS,
including lists of books containing facsimiles of the pages.

J. SIRINELLI and É. des PLACES, Eusèbe du Césarée: La Préparation Évangélique.
Sources Chrétiennes 206. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, (1974). This text was
transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 42: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 1
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 1
EUSEBIUS: SON OF PAMPHILUS 1 THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL

BOOK 1

INTRODUCTION 2

SEE now, Theodotus,3 miracle of bishops, holy man of God, I am carrying through4
this great work with the help of God and our Saviour the Word of God, after
completing at the cost of great labour my Preparation for the Gospel {2} in
fifteen books.

Grant then, dear friend, my request, and labour with rue henceforward in your
prayers in my effort to present the Proof of the Gospel from the prophecies
extant among the Hebrews from the earliest times. I propose to adopt this
method. I propose to use as witnesses those men, beloved by God, whose fame you
know to be far-spread in the world: {2} Moses, I mean, and his successors, who
shone forth with resplendent godliness, and the blessed prophets and sacred
writers. I propose to shew, by quotations from them, how they forestalled events
that came to the light long ages after their time, the actual |2 circumstances
of the Saviour's own presentment of the Gospel, and the things which in our own
day are being fulfilled by the Holy Spirit before our very eyes. It shall be my
task to prove that they saw that which was not present as present, and that
which as yet was not in existence as actually existing; and not only this, but
that they foretold in writing the events of the future for posterity, so that by
their help others can even now know what is coming, and look forward daily to
the fulfilment of their oracles. What sort of fulfilment, do you ask? {3} They
are fulfilled in countless and all kinds of ways, and amid all circumstances,
both generally and in minute detail, in the lives of individual men, and in
their corporate life, now nationally in the course of Hebrew history, and now in
that of foreign nations. Such things as civic revolutions, changes of times,
national vicissitudes, the coming of foretold prosperity, the assaults of
adversity, the enslaving of races, the besieging of cities, the downfall and
restoration of whole states, and countless other things that were to take place
a long time after, were foretold by these writers. But it is not now the time
for me to provide full proof of this. I will postpone most of it for the
present, and perhaps, from the truth of what I shall put before you, there will
be some guarantee of the possibility of proving what is passed over in silence.

CHAPTER 1 The Object and Contents of the Work.

IT seems now time to say what I consider to be desirable at present to draw from
the prophetic writings for the proof of the Gospel. {4} They said that Christ,
(Whom they named) the Word of God, and Himself both God and Lord, and Angel of
Great Counsel, would one day dwell among men, and would become for all the
nations of the world, both Greek and Barbarian, a teacher of true knowledge of
God, and of such duty to God the Maker of the Universe, as the preaching of the
Gospel includes. They said that He would become a little child, and would be
called the Son of Man, as born of the race of Mankind. They foretold the |3
wondrous fashion of His birth from a Virgin, and—strangest of all—they did not
omit to name Bethlehem5 the place of His birth, which is to-day so famous that
men still hasten from the ends of the earth to see it, but shouted it out with
the greatest clearness. As if they stole a march on history these same writers
proclaimed the very time of His appearance, the precise period of His sojourn on
earth.

It is possible for you, if you care to take the trouble, to see with your eyes,
comprehended in the prophetic writings, all the wonderful miracles of our
Saviour Jesus Christ Himself, that are witnessed to by the heavenly Gospels, and
to hear His divine and perfect teaching about true holiness. How it must move
our wonder, when they unmistakably proclaim the new ideal of religion preached
by Him to all men, the call of His disciples, and the teaching of the new
Covenant. {5} Yes, and in addition to all this they foretell the Jews' disbelief
in Him, and disputing, the plots of the rulers, the envy of the Scribes, the
treachery of one of His disciples, the schemes of enemies, the accusations of
false witnesses, the condemnations of His judges, the shameful violence,
unspeakable scourging, ill-omened abuse, and, crowning all, the death of shame.
They portray Christ's wonderful silence, His gentleness and fortitude, and the
unimaginable depths of His forbearance and forgiveness. The most ancient Hebrew
oracles present all these things definitely about One Who would come in the last
times, and Who would undergo such sufferings among men, and they clearly tell
the source of their foreknowledge. They bear witness to the Resurrection from
the dead of the Being Whom they revealed, His appearance to His disciples, His
gift of the Holy Spirit to them, His return to heaven, His establishment as King
on His Father's throne and His glorious second Advent yet to be at the
consummation of the age. In addition to all this you can hear the wailings and
lamentations of each of the prophets, wailing and lamenting characteristically
over the calamities which will overtake the Jewish people because of their
impiety to Him Who had been foretold. {6} How their kingdom, that had continued
from the days of a remote ancestry to their own, would be utterly destroyed
after their sin against |4 Christ; how their fathers' Laws would be abrogated,
they themselves deprived of their ancient worship, robbed of the independence of
their forefathers, and made slaves of their enemies, instead of free men; how
their royal metropolis would be burned with fire, their venerable and holy altar
undergo the flames and extreme desolation, their city be inhabited no longer by
its old possessors but by races of other stock,6 while they would be dispersed
among the Gentiles through the whole world, with never a hope of any cessation
of evil, or breathing-space from troubles. And it is plain even to the blind,
that what they saw and foretold is fulfilled in actual facts from the very day
the Jews laid godless hands on Christ, and drew down on themselves the beginning
of the train of sorrows. But the prophecies of these inspired men did not begin
and end in gloom, nor did their prescience extend no further than the reign of
sorrow. They could change their note to joy, and proclaim a universal message of
good tidings to all men in the coming of Christ: they could preach the good news
that though one race were lost every nation and race of men would know God,
escape from the daemons,7 cease from ignorance and deceit and {7} enjoy the
light of holiness: they could picture the disciples of Christ filling the whole
world with their teaching, and the preaching of their gospel introducing among
all men a fresh and unknown ideal of holiness: they could see churches of Christ
established by their means among all nations, and Christian people throughout
the whole world bearing one common name: they could give assurance that the
attacks of rulers and kings from time to time against the Church of Christ will
avail nothing to cast it down, strengthened as it is by God. If so many things
were proclaimed by the Hebrew divines, and if their fulfilment is so clear to us
all to-day, who would not marvel at their inspiration? Who will not agree that
their religious and philosophic teaching and beliefs must be sure and true,
since their proof is to be found not |5 in artificial arguments, not in clever
words, or deceptive syllogistic reasoning, but in simple and straightforward
teaching, whose genuine and sincere character is attested by the virtue and
knowledge of God evident in these inspired men? Men who were enabled not by
human but by divine inspiration to see from a myriad ages back {8} what was to
happen long years after, may surety claim our confidence for the belief which
they taught their pupils.

Now I am quite well aware, that it is usual in the case of all who have been
properly taught that our Lord and Saviour Jesus is truly the Christ of God to
persuade themselves in the first place that their belief is strictly in
agreement with what the prophets witness about Him. And secondly, to forewarn
all those, with whom they may enter on an argument, that it is by no means easy
to establish their position by definite proofs. And this is why in attacking
this subject myself I must of course endeavour, with God's help, to supply a
complete treatment of the Proof of the Gospel from these Hebrew theologians. And
the importance of my writing does not lie in the fact that it is, as might be
suggested, a polemic against the Jews. Perish the thought, far from that! For if
they would fairly consider it, it is really on their side. For as it establishes
Christianity on the basis of the antecedent prophecies, so it establishes
Judaism from the complete fulfilment of its prophecies. To the Gentiles too it
should appeal, if they would fairly consider it, because of {9} the
extraordinary foreknowledge shown in the prophetic writers, and of the actual
events that occurred in agreement with their prophecies. It should convince them
of the inspired and certain nature of the truth we hold: it should silence the
tongues of false accusers by a more logical method of proof, which slanderers
contend that we never offer, who in their daily arguments with us keep pounding
away with all their might with the implication forsooth that we are unable to
give a logical demonstration of our case, but require those who come to us to
rest on faith alone. |6 My present work ought to have something to say to a
calumny like this, as it will assuredly rebut the empty lies and blasphemy of
godless heretics against the holy prophets by its exposition of the agreement of
the new with the old. My argument will dispense with a longer systematic
interpretation of the prophecies, and will leave such a task to any who wish to
make the study, and are able to expound such works. And I shall take as my
teacher the sacred command which says "sum up many things in few words," and
aspire to follow it. I shall only offer such help in regard to the texts, and to
the points which bear on the subject under consideration, as is absolutely
necessary for their clear interpretation.

{10} But I will now cease my Introduction and begin my Proof. As we have such a
mob of slanderers flooding us with the accusation that we are unable logically
to present a clear demonstration of the truth we hold, and think it enough to
retain those who come to us by faith alone, and as they say that we only teach
our followers like irrational animals to shut their eyes and staunchly obey what
we say without examining it at all, and call them therefore "the faithful"
because of their faith as distinct from reason, I made a natural division of the
calumnies of our position in my "Preparation" of the subject as a whole. On the
one side I placed the attacks of the polytheistic Gentiles, who accuse us of
apostasy from our ancestral gods, and make a great point of the implication,
that in recognizing the Hebrew oracles we honour the work of Barbarians more |7
than those of the Greeks. And on the other side I set the accusation of the
Jews, in which they claim to be justly incensed against us, because we do not
embrace their manner of life, though we make use of their sacred writings. Such
being the division, I met the first so far as I could in my Preparation for the
Gospel by allowing that we were originally Greeks, or men of other nations who
had absorbed Greek ideas, and enslaved by ancestral ties in the deceits of
polytheism. But I went on to say that our conversion was due not to emotional
and unexamined impulse, {11} but to judgment and sober reasoning, and that our
devotion to the oracles of the Hebrews thus had the support of judgment and
sound reason. And now I have to defend myself against the second class of
opponents, and to embark on the investigation it requires. It has to do with
those of the Circumcision, it has not yet been investigated, but I hope in time
to dispose of it in the present work on the Proof of the Gospel. And so now with
an invocation of the God of Jews and Greeks alike in our Saviour's Name we will
take as our first object of inquiry, what is the character of the religion set
before Christians. And in this same inquiry we shall record the solutions of all
the points investigated.

CHAPTER 2 The Character of the Christian Religion.

I HAVE already laid down in my Preparation that Christianity is neither a form
of Hellenism, nor of Judaism, but that it is a religion with its own
characteristic stamp, and that this is not anything novel or original, but
something of the greatest antiquity, something natural and familiar to the godly
men {12} before the times of Moses who |8 are remembered for their holiness and
justice. But now let us consider the nature of Hellenism and Judaism, and
inquire under which banner we should find these pre-Mosaic saints, whose
godliness and holiness is attested by Moses himself. Judaism would be correctly
defined as the polity constituted according to the Law of Moses, dependent on
the one, omnipotent God. Hellenism you might summarily describe as the worship
of many Gods according to the ancestral religions of all nations. What then
would you say about the pre-Mosaic and pre-Judaic saints, whose lives are
recorded by Moses, Enoch for instance, of whom he says:

"And Enoch pleased God."

Or Noah, of whom he says again:

"And Noah was a man righteous in his generation ''

Or Seth, and Japheth, of whom he writes:

"Blessed be the Lord God of Seth (Shem), . . . and may God make room for
Japheth."

Add to these Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, include as is right the patriarch Job,
and all the rest who lived according to the ideals of these men; they must, you
may think, have been either Jews or Greeks. But yet they could not properly be
called Jews, inasmuch as the system of Moses' Law had not yet been brought into
being. {13} For if (as we have admitted) Judaism is only the observance of
Moses' Law, and Moses did not appear until long after the date of the men named,
it is obvious that those whose holiness he records who lived before him, were
not Jews. Neither can we regard them as Greeks, inasmuch as they were not under
the dominion of polytheistic superstition. For it is recorded of Abraham that he
left his father's house and his |9 kindred altogether, and cleaved to the One
God alone, Whom he confesses when he says:

"I will stretch out (my hand) to the most-high God, who created the heaven and
the earth."

And Jacob is recorded by Moses as saying to his house and all his people:

"2. Remove the strange gods from your midst, 3. and let us arise and go to
Bethel, and make there an altar to the Lord that heard me in the day of
affliction, who was with me, and preserved me in the way wherein I went. 4. And
they gave to Jacob the strange gods, which were in their hands, and the
ear-rings in their ears, and Jacob hid them under the terebinth that is in
Shechem, and destroyed them to this day."

These men, then, were not involved in the errors of idolatry, moreover they were
outside the pale of Judaism; yet, though they were neither Jew nor Greek by
birth, we know them to have been conspicuously pious, holy, and just. {14} This
compels us to conceive some other ideal of religion, by which they must have
guided their lives. Would not this be exactly that third form of religion midway
between Judaism and Hellenism, which I have already deduced, as the most ancient
and most venerable of all religions, and which has been preached of late to all
nations through our Saviour. Christianity would therefore be not a form of
Hellenism nor of Judaism, but something between the two, the most ancient
organization for holiness, and the most venerable philosophy, only lately
codified as the law for all mankind in the whole world. The convert from
Hellenism to Christianity does not land in Judaism, nor does one who rejects the
Jewish worship become ipso facto a Greek. From whichever side they come, whether
it be Hellenism or Judaism, they find their place in that intermediate law of
life preached by the godly and holy men of old lime, which our Lord and Saviour
has raised up anew after its long sleep, in accordance with Moses' own
prophecies, and those of the other prophets on the point. Yes, Moses himself
writes prophetically in the oracles |10 addressed to Abraham, that in days to
come {15} not only Abraham's descendants, his Jewish seed, but all the tribes
and nations of the earth will be counted worthy of God's blessing on the common
basis of a piety like Abraham's.

"1. And the Lord said to Abram, Go forth out of thy land, and from thy kindred,
and from the house of thy father, and come hither into the land which I shall
shew thee. 2. And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee and
magnify thy name, and thou shalt be blessed, 3. and I will bless those that
bless thee, and I will curse those that curse thee, and in thee all the tribes
of the earth shall be blessed."

And again God said:

"Shall I hide from Abraham my servant that I shall do? For Abraham shall become
a great and numerous nation, and in him all the nations of the earth shall be
blessed."

How could all the nations and families of the earth be blessed in Abraham, if
there was no connection between him and them, either of spiritual character or
physical kinship? There was assuredly no physical kinship between Abraham and
the Scythians, or the Egyptians, or the Aethiopians, or the Indians, or the
Britons, or the Spaniards: such nations and others more distant than they could
not surely hope to receive any blessing because of any physical kinship to
Abraham. It was quite as unlikely that all the nations would have any common
claim to share the spiritual blessings of Abraham. {16} For some of them
practised marriage with mothers and incest with daughters, some of them
unmentionable vice. The religion of others lay in slaughter, and the deification
of animals, idols of lifeless wood, and superstitions of deceiving spirits.
Others burned their old men alive, and commended as holy and good the customs of
delivering their dearest to the flames, or feasting on dead bodies. Men brought
up in such savage ways |11 could not surely share in the blessing of the godly,
unless they escaped from their savagery, and embraced a way of life similar to
the piety of Abraham. For even he, a foreigner and a stranger to the religion
which he afterwards embraced, is said to have changed his life, to have cast
away his ancestral superstition, to have left his home and kindred and fathers'
customs, and the manner of life in which he was born and reared, and to have
followed God, Who gave him the oracles which are preserved in the Scriptures.

If Moses then, who came after Abraham and established a polity for the Jewish
race on the basis of the law which he gave them, had laid down the kind of laws
which were the guide of godly men before his own time, and such as it was
possible for all nations to adopt, so that it should be possible for all the
tribes and nations of the world to worship according to Moses' enactments; {17}
which is the same as saying that the oracles foretold that through Moses'
lawgiving men of all nations would worship God and follow Judaism, being brought
to it by the law, and would be blessed with the blessing of Abraham—then it
would have been right for us to be keeping the enactments of Moses. But if the'
polity of Moses was not applicable to the other nations, but only to the Jews
and not to all of them, but only to the inhabitants of Judaea, then it was
altogether necessary to set up another kind of religion different from the law
of Moses, that all the nations of the world might take it as their guide with
Abraham, and receive an equal share of blessing with him.

CHAPTER 3 That the System of Moses was not Suitable for All Nations. THAT the
enactments of Moses, as I said, were only applicable to the Jews, but not to all
of them, and certainly not to the dispersed (among the Gentiles), only in fact
to the inhabitants of Palestine, will be plain to you if you reflect thus. For
the law of Moses says: |12

{18} "Thrice in the year shall all thy males appear before the Lord thy God."

And it defines more exactly at what place they should all meet, when it says:

"Three times in the year shall thy males appear before the Lord, thy God, in the
place which the Lord shall choose."

You see that it does not bid them meet in each city, or in any indefinite place,
but "in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose." There thrice a year it
enacts that they must assemble together, and it determines the times, when they
must meet at the place where the rites of the worship there are to be
celebrated. One season is that of the Passover, the second,' fifty days later,
is called the Feast of Pentecost, and the third is in the seventh month after
the Passover, on the Day of Atonement, when all the Jews still perform their
fast. And a curse is laid on all who do not obey what is enacted. It is plain
that all who were to meet at Jerusalem thrice in the year and perform their
rites would not be able to live far from Judaea: but they live all round its
boundaries. If then it would be impossible even for the lews whose home is the
farthest from Palestine to obey their law, {19} it would be absurd to hold that
it could be applicable to all nations and to men in the uttermost parts of the
earth.

Hear now in what way women after childbirth are bidden by the same Lawgiver to
go and present their offerings to God, as follows:

"And the Lord spake to Moses, saying, Speak to the children of Israel, and thou
shalt say to them, Whatsoever woman shall have conceived and borne a male-child
shall be unclean seven days.''

And he adds after saying something else:

"6. And when the days of her purification shall have been fulfilled for a son or
a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of a year old without blemish for a whole
burnt-offering, and a young pigeon or a turtle-dove for a sin-offering to the
door of the tabernacle of witness to the priest, 7. she shall present [them]
before the Lord. And the priest shall make atonement for her, and shall purify
her from the issue of her blood; this is the law of her who bears a male or a
female." |13

Again, in addition to this the same law bids those who have contracted
defilement by mourning or touching a corpse only to be purified by the ashes of
an heifer, and to abstain from their accustomed work for seven days. This is
what it says:

"10. And it shall be a perpetual statute to the children of Israel and to the
proselytes in the midst of them. 11. He that touches the dead body of any soul
of man shall be unclean seven days, 12. shall be purified on the third day and
shall be made clean on the seventh day. {20} And if he be not purified on the
third day, and on the seventh day, he shall not be clean. 13. Every one who
touches the dead body of a soul of a man, if he shall have died, and he be not
purified, he has defiled the tabernacle of the witness of the Lord. That soul
shall be cut off from Israel, because the water of cleansing has not been
sprinkled on him. He is unclean, uncleanness is on him. 14. And this is the law:
if a man die in a house, everyone that goeth into that house, and all the things
that are in the house, are unclean seven days. 15. And every open vessel which
is not bound with a fastening, shall be unclean; 16. and every one who shall
touch on the face any man slain by the sword, or a corpse, or a human bone, or a
sepulchre, shall be unclean seven clays. 17. And they shall take for the unclean
of the burnt ashes of purification, and shall pour it into a vessel, 18. and
shall take hyssop. And a clean man shall clip it, and sprinkle it on the house
and the furniture and the souls that are therein, and on him that has touched
the human bone, or the slain man, or the dead, or the sepulchre. 19. And the
clean man shall sprinkle it on the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh
day, {21} and he shall wash his garments, and shall wash [his body] with water,
and shall be unclean until the evening. 20. And a man, if he be defiled, and not
purified, that soul shall be cast out of the congregation, because the water of
purification has not been sprinkled on him; and this shall be a perpetual law to
you." |14

When Moses made this law he even determined the ritual of the sprinkling with
water. He said that a red heifer without spot must be completely burnt, and that
a portion of its ashes must be cast into the water, with which those who had
been defiled by a corpse were to be purified. Where the heifer is to be burnt,
where the woman is to bring her offerings after childbirth, where she is to
celebrate the other rites, is not in doubt. It is not to be done indifferently
in every place, but only in that place which he defines. This is plain from his
enactment, when he says:

"And there shall be a place, which the Lord your God shall choose, in which his
name shall be called upon, there shall ye bear whatsoever I bid you to-day."

And he explains in accurate order, adding:

"13. Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy whole burnt-offerings in any
place, which thou mayst see, 14. but in the place which the Lord thy God shall
choose, in one of thy cities; there shall thou offer thy whole burnt-offerings,
and there shall thou do whatsoever I bid you to-day."

And he makes this addition:

"{22} 17. Thou shall not be able to eat in all thy cities the tenth of thy corn
and wine and oil, the firstborn of thy herd and thy flock, and all thy vows
whatsoever thou hast vowed, and thy thank-offerings, and the firstfruits of
thine hands. 18. But before the Lord shall thou eat it in the place which the
Lord thy God shall choose for himself, thou and thy sons and thy daughter, and
thy servant, and thy maid, and the stranger8 {1} that is in thy cities."

And proceeding he confirms the statement, where he says:

"But thou shall take thy holy things, if thou hast any, and thy vows, and shall
come to the place, which the Lord thy God shall choose for himself.''

And again:

"Thou shall tithe a tenth of all the produce of thy seed, the produce of thy
field year by year. And thou |15 shall eat it in the place {2a} which the Lord
thy God shall choose to have his name called on there."

And then in considering what ought to be done if the place designated by him
were far off, and the yield of fruit large, how the year's fruits for the whole
burnt-offering could be carried to the place of God, he lays down the following
law:

"23. And if the journey be too far for thee, and thou art not able to bring
them, because the place is far from thee, which the Lord your God shall choose
to have his name called on there, because the Lord thy God shall bless thee; 24.
and thou shall sell them for money, {2b} and shall take the money in thy hands,
and shall go to the place which the Lord thy God shall choose. 25. And thou
shall give the money for whalsoever thy soul desireth for oxen or sheep, or
wine, or slrong drink, or for whalsoever thy soul desireth and thou shall
consume it there before the Lord."

And he again sets his seal on the actual place, when he says:

"19. Every firstborn that shall be born of thy kine and sheep, thou shall offer
the males to the Lord thy God; thou shall not work with thy firstborn calf, and
thou shall not shear thy firstborn sheep: 20. thou shall eat it before the Lord
year by year, {2c} in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, thou and
thy house."

Next notice how he arranges the celebration of the feasts, not anywhere in the
land, but only in the appointed place. For he says:

"Observe the month of new corn, and thou shall keep the Passover lo the Lord thy
God, sheep and bulls, in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose."

And he again reminds them, saying:

"5. Thou shall not be able to sacrifice the passover {2d} in any of the cities
which the Lord thy God gives thee; 6. But in the place which the Lord thy God
shall choose, to have his name called on there, thou shall sacrifice the
passover at even at the setting of the sun |16 at the time when them earnest out
of Egypt. 7. And thou shalt boil and eat it in the place which the Lord thy God
shall choose."

Such, then, is the law of the Feast of the Passover. Hear that of Pentecost:

"9. Seven weeks in full shalt thou number to thyself, from when thou beginnest
to put the sickle in the corn, 10. and thou shalt keep a feast of weeks to the
Lord thy God, according as thy hand has power in whatsoever things the Lord thy
God gives thee to bless thee. 11. And thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy
God, thou and thy son, and thy daughter, thy servant, and thy maid, {3a} and the
Levite that is in thy cities, and the proselyte; and the orphan, and the widow
that is among you, in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose for himself,
to have his name called on there."

And hear where he commands the third feast to be celebrated:

"13. And thou shalt keep the feast of tabernacles when thou gatherest in from
thy corn-floor and from thy wine-press, 14. and shalt rejoice in thy feast, thou
and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy servant, and thy maid, and the widow,
{3b} in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose for himself."

As he is so insistent on the selected place, and says so many times that they
are to meet there in all their tribes and in all their families, the law could
hardly apply to those living even a little way from Judaea, and still less to
the nations of the whole world, especially as he allows no pardon to those who
transgress his ordinances, and invokes a curse on those who do not carry them
all out to the minutest detail, in the following words:

"{3c} Cursed is he who continueth not in all things written in this law to do
them."

Consider, again, other instances of the impossibility of all men following the
law of Moses. He makes a distinction between voluntary transgressions and those
hard to evade, and after assigning penalties to sins which deserve |17 the
severest punishment, he provides laws by which those who sin unwittingly are to
receive different treatment. One of these runs as follows:

"27. And if a soul of the people of the land shall sin unwittingly by doing
anything contrary to the commandments of the Lord that ought not to be done, and
shall transgress, 28. and his sin shall be known to him, wherein he hath sinned
[in it], then shall he bring [his gift] a kid of the goats, a female without
blemish, {3d} he shall bring it for his sin that he hath sinned 29. in the place
where they slay the whole burnt-offerings, 30. and the priest shall take of the
blood."

You see here how one who has sinned unintentionally is required to present
himself at the place where the whole burnt-offerings are sacrificed. And this is
the place the law has already so often mentioned, when it says:

"The place which the Lord thy God shall choose."

But, indeed, the Lawgiver himself perceived the impossibility for all mankind to
carry out the law, and clearly noted it by not promulgating his law universally
for all, but with this limitation:

"If a soul sin unwittingly of the people of the land."

And he lays down a second law which says: {4a}

"And if a soul hear the voice of the swearing of an oath, and he is a witness or
has seen or been conscious of it, if he do not report it, he shall bear the
iniquity."

What is he to do? He is to take the victim in his hands and go with all speed to
the purification. And of course that must take place where the whole
burnt-offerings are sacrificed. And once more a third law:

"2. The soul, it says, which shall touch any unclean thing, or carcases of
unclean cattle, and should take from it, he also himself is defiled and
transgresses, 3. or if he touch the uncleanness of a man, and by all the
uncleanness that he touches be defiled, and {4b} know it not, and afterwards
should know it and transgress." |18

Here the only thing necessary for the polluted person is for him to go once more
to the sacred place, and offer for the sin which he has sinned a female animal
from his flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats, for his sin. And the law was the
same in the case of a soul, which shall "swear pronouncing with his lips to do
evil or to do good, whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath,
and it be hid from him; and when he knoweth of it and is guilty in one of those
things, and shall confess the sin that he hath sinned:"he too, the law says,
taking the same offering, is to go with all speed to the sacred place, and the
priest is to pray on his behalf for the sin, and his sin shall be forgiven. And
another law besides those I have quoted makes this provision:

"The soul which shall be really unconscious, and shall sin unwittingly in any of
the holy things of the Lord, even he shall bear a ram for his transgression to
the Lord. [And he shall bear it again to the high-priest to the place, that is
to say the chosen place."

And he adds a sixth law in these words:

"{4d} And the soul which shall sin and do one thing against the commandments of
the Lord, which it is not right to do, and hath not known it, and shall have
transgressed and contracted guilt, he shall even bring a ram to the High Priest,
and the priest shall make atonement for his trespass of ignorance, and he knew
it not, and it shall be forgiven him."

The following is a seventh, law:

"2. The soul which shall have sinned and surely overlooked the commandments of
the Lord, and shall deal falsely in the affairs of his neighbour in the matter
of a deposit, or concerning association (in business), or plunder, or has in any
way wronged his neighbour, 3. or has found that which was lost, and has lied
concerning it, and shall have sworn unjustly concerning any one of all the
things, whatsoever a man may do, so as to sin thereby; 4. it shall come to pass,
whenever he so hath sinned and transgressed, that he shall restore the plunder
he has seized, or redress the injustice he has |19 committed, or restore the
deposit which was entrusted to him, {5a} 5. or the lost article he has found of
any kind, about which he swore unjustly, he shall even restore it in full, and
shall add to it the fifth part."

Here, again, after confession and reparation the transgressor had to go with all
speed, putting everything else on one side, to the place, which the Lord our God
should choose, and offer for his sin an unblemished ram, and the priest was to
pray for him before the Lord, and he would be forgiven.{5b} In this careful way
our wonderful Moses distinguished sins done unwittingly and ignorantly from
intentional offences, on which in the government of his people he set rigorous
penalties. For he that would not pardon the unwitting offender before he had
confessed his offence, exacted a small penalty from him in the sacrifice
ordained, by requiring him to repair with all speed {5c} to the sacred place
fostered both the religious spirit and watchfulness of those who worshipped God
by his rule, and of course restrained even more the desires of willing
offenders. What, then, must be our conclusion from all this, when, as we have
said, we find Moses summing up his whole system with a curse, where he says:

"Cursed is everyone, who shall not remain in all the things written in this law.
to do them "?

Was it, then, meant that Moses' future disciples from the ends of the earth must
do all these things, if they were to escape the curse and receive the blessing
promised to Abraham? Were they to go thrice a year to Jerusalem, {5d} and were
the female worshippers of all nations, fresh from the pangs of childbirth, to
undertake so long a journey, to offer the sacrifice ordained by Moses for each
one of their children? Were those who had touched a dead body, or had forsworn
themselves, or had sinned against their will, to come from the ends of the
earth, to run and hasten to the purification that was required by the law, in
order to escape the visitation of the curse? Of course it is clear to you that
it was hard enough to follow Moses' rule of life for those who lived round
Jerusalem, or only inhabited Judaea, and that it was quite out of the question
for the |20 other nations to fulfil it.

Hence, of course, our Lord and Saviour, Jesus the Son of God, said to His
disciples after His Resurrection:

"{6a} Go and make disciples of all the nations,'' and added: "Teaching them to
observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you.''

For He did not bid them to teach the laws of Moses to all nations, but
whatsoever He Himself had commanded: that is to say, the contents of the
Gospels. And agreeably to this His disciples and apostles in considering the
requirements of the Gentiles decided that Moses' enactments were unsuitable to
their needs, since neither they themselves nor their fathers had found them easy
to be kept. As St. Peter says in the Acts: {6b}

"Now therefore why do ye attempt to lay a yoke upon the necks of the disciples,
which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"

And agreeably to this Moses himself for this very reason said that another
prophet would be raised up "like unto him"; and publishes the good news that he
should be a lawgiver for all the nations. He speaks of Christ in a riddle. He
orders his followers to obey him in these prophetic words.

"{6c} 15. A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to you from your brethren,
like unto me, ye shall hear him [whatsoever he saith unto you]. 19. And it shall
|21 be that every soul who will not hear that prophet shall be cast out of its
race."

And that this prophet, who is clearly the Christ, should come forth from the
Jews and rule all nations, he proclaims again when he says:

"{6d} 5. How fair are thy dwellings, O Jacob, and thy tents, O Israel, 6. as
shady groves, and as a garden by a river, and as tents which God pitched. 7.
There shall come a man out of his seed, and he shall rule over many nations, and
his kingdom shall be exalted."

He makes it clear from which tribe of all the twelve that comprised the Hebrew
race, namely the tribe of Judah, Christ the Lawgiver of the Gentiles according
to the prophecy should arise. He is clear as to the date, for it would be after
the cessation of the Jewish monarchy which had been handed down from their
forefathers.

"A ruler shall not fail from Juda, nor a prince from his loins, until there come
the things stored up for him; and he is the expectation of the nations."

What "expectation" could this be, but that expressed in the promise to Abraham
that in him all the families of the earth should be blessed? Moses has,
therefore, made |22 it quite plain from his own words that he was quite well
aware of the failure of the law he had laid down to apply to all nations, and
that another prophet would be necessary for the fulfilment of the oracles given
to Abraham. And this was He, of Whom his prophecy proclaimed the good news that
one should arise from the tribe of Judah and rule all nations.

CHAPTER 4 Why it is we reject the Jews' Way of Life, though we accept their
Writings.

THESE, then, are the reasons why we have accepted and loved as belonging to
ourselves the sacred books of the Hebrews, including as they do prophecies
relating to us Gentiles. And the more so, since it was not Moses only who
foretold the coming of the Lawgiver of the Gentiles after him, but really the
whole succession of the prophets, who proclaimed the same truth with one voice,
as David, when he said:

"Appoint, O Lord, a Lawgiver over them: let the nations know that they are but
men."

See how he too speaks of a second Lawgiver of the nations. And in the same
spirit in another (psalm) he calls on the Gentiles to sing, not the ancient song
of Moses, but a new song, when he says:

"1. Sing to the Lord a new song; | sing to the Lord all the whole earth: | 3.
proclaim among the nations his glory, | among all peoples his wonders: | 4. For
great is the Lord, and very worthy to be praised, | he is terrible above all
gods. | 5. For all the gods of the nations are demons, | but it is the Lord that
made the heavens. | 7. Bring to the Lord ye families of the nations; | 8. bring
to the Lord glory to his name."

And again: .

"10. Say among the nations, The Lord is King. | |23 For he has established the
world, that it shall not be shaken."

And again:

"1. Sing to the Lord a new song, | for he hath done marvellous things, | 2. The
Lord hath made known his salvation; | Before the nations he hath revealed
righteousness. | 3. All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our
God."

And notice how he ordains the new song not for the Jewish race only; the ancient
song of Moses suited them, but for all the nations. This new song is called by
Jeremiah, another Hebrew prophet, "a new covenant"where he says:

"31. Behold the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with
the house of Israel, and with the house of Juda: 32. not according to the
covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand
to lead them out of the land of Egypt: for they abode not in my covenant, and I
disregarded them, saith the Lord. 33. For this is my, covenant which I will make
with the house of Israel, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their minds, and
on their hearts I will write (them), and I will be their God, and they shall be
my people."

You see here that he distinguishes two covenants, the old and the new, and says
that the new would not be like the old which was given to the fathers. For the
old covenant was given as a law to the Jews, when they had fallen from the
religion of their forefathers, and had embraced the manners and life of the
Egyptians, and had declined to the errors of polytheism, and the idolatrous
superstitions of the Gentiles. It was intended to raise up the fallen, and to
set on their feet those who were lying on their faces, by suitable teaching.

"For the law, it is said, is not for the righteous, but for the unjust and
disorderly, for the unrighteous and for sinners, and for those like them."

But the new covenant leads those who, through our Saviour |24 by the grace and
gift of God are raised up, to a rapid march into the kingdom promised by God. It
summons all men equally to share together the same good things. This "new
covenant" Isaiah, another of the Hebrew prophets, calls the "new law,"when he
says:

"3. For out of Sion shall go forth a law, and the word of the Lord from
Jerusalem. And all the nations shall go, and all the peoples shall be gathered
together, and shall say, Let us go up to the Mount of the Lord, and to the house
of the God of Jacob."

This law going forth from Sion, different from the law enacted in the desert by
Moses on Mount Sinai, what can it be but the word of the Gospel, "going forth
from Sion" through our Saviour Jesus Christ, and going through all the nations?
For it is plain that it was in Jerusalem and Mount Sion adjacent thereto, where
our Lord and Saviour for the most part lived and taught, that the law of the new
covenant began and from thence went forth and shone upon all, according to the
commands which He gave his disciples when He said:

"Go ye, and make disciples of all the nations, teaching them to observe all
things, whatsoever I have commanded you."

What could He mean but the teaching and discipline of the new covenant? Since,
then, I have proved my facts, let us proceed to investigate together the
character of the new covenant, and the new song and the new law that were
foretold.

CHAPTER 5 The Character of the New Covenant of Christ.

I HAVE now proved that the old covenant and the law given by Moses was only
applicable to the Jewish race, and only to such of them as lived in their own
land. It did not apply to other nations of the world nor to Jews |25 inhabiting
foreign soil. And I have shown that the ideal of the new covenant must be
helpful to the life of all nations: the members of its kingdom are to be
restricted in no way whatever. Considerations of country, race or locality, or
anything else are not to affect them in any way at all. The law and life of our
Saviour Jesus Christ shows itself to be such, being a renewal of the ancient
pre-Mosaic religion, in which Abraham, the friend of God, and his forefathers
are shown to have lived. And if you cared to compare the life of Christians and
the worship introduced among all nations by Christ with the lives of the men who
with Abraham are witnessed to by Scripture as holy and righteous, you would find
cne and the same ideal. For they too turned their backs on the errors of
polytheism, they relinquished idolatrous superstition, they looked beyond the
whole of the visible creation and deified neither sun nor moon, nor any part of
the whole. They raised themselves to the Supreme God, Himself the Highest, the
Creator of heaven and earth. And Moses himself bears this out in his history of
ancient times when he records Abraham's saying:

"I will stretch forth my hand unto God most high, who hath created the heaven
and the earth."

And when, before this, he introduces Melchizedek, whom he calls the priest of
the Most High God, blessing Abraham as follows:

"Blessed be Abraham by God most high, who hath created the heaven and the
earth."

And you would find that Enoch and Noah were reckoned just and well pleasing to
God in the same way as Abraham. Job, ton, a just, true, blameless, devout man,
averse from everything evil, is recorded as pre-Mosaic. He underwent a |26 trial
of his utter devotion to the God of the Universe when he lost everything he had,
and left the greatest example of holiness to posterity, when he spoke these
philosophic words:

"21. I myself came forth naked from my mother's womb, and naked shall I depart.
The Lord gave, the Lord hath taken away. As the Lord pleased, so it came to
pass. Blessed be the name of the Lord."

That he said this as a worshipper of the God of the universe is made quite clear
when he goes on to say:

"4. For he is wise in mind and mighty and great; 6. Who shakes the (earth) under
heaven from its foundation and its pillars totter. 7. Who commands the sun and
it rises not, and he seals up the stars; 8. Who alone has stretched out the
heaven."

If then the teaching of Christ has bidden all nations now to worship no other
God but Him whom the men of old and the pre-Mosaic saints believed in, we are
clearly partakers of the religion of these men of old time. And if we partake of
their religion we shall surely share their blessing. Yes, and equally with us
they knew and bore witness to the Word of God, Whom we love to call Christ. They
were thought worthy in very remarkable ways of beholding His actual presence and
theophany.

Remember how Moses calls the Being, Who appeared to the patriarchs, and often
delivered to them the oracles afterwards written down in Scripture, sometimes
God and Lord, and sometimes the Angel of the Lord. He clearly implies that this
was not the Omnipotent God, but a secondary Being, rightly called the God and
Lord of holy men, but the Angel of the Most High His Father. Thus he says:

"10. And Jacob went forth ... to Charran, 11. and came to a certain place, and
he slept there. . . . And he |27 took of the stones of the place, and put it at
his head, and lay down to sleep in that place, 12. and he dreamed: and behold, a
ladder fixed on the earth whose top reached to heaven, and the angels of God
ascended and descended on it. 13. And the Lord stood upon it, and said, I am the
God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: fear not, the earth, the land
on which thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed: 14 and thy seed
shall be as the sand of the earth."

To which he adds:

"16. And Jacob arose in the morning, and took the stone, which he had put under
his head, and set it up as a pillar."

Then further on he calls this God and Lord Who appeared to him the Angel of God.
For Jacob says:

"11. For the Angel of God said to me in a dream, Jacob. And I said, What is it?
"

And then:

"12. I have seen, he says, all that Laban does to thee. I am the God that was
seen by thee in the place of God, where thou anointedst for me there a pillar,
and thou vowedst to me there a vow."

This same being who appeared to Abraham is called Lord and God. He teaches the
saint mysteriously of His Father's rule, and speaks some things, as it were, of
another God, which I will examine in their place. Then, again, it is impious to
suppose that the Being who answered Job after his severe trial was the same. For
when He shows Himself first in the whirlwind and the clouds He reveals Himself
as the God of the Universe, but He goes on to reveal Himself in a way which
makes Job say:

"4. Hear me, O Lord, and I will speak. 5. I heard of thee before by the hearing
of the ears, but now mine eye hath seen thee."

And if it is not possible for the Most High God, the |28 Invisible, the
Uncreated, and the Omnipotent to be said to be seen in mortal form, the Being
Who was seen must have been the Word of God, Whom we call Lord as we do the
Father. But it is needless for me to labour the point, since it is possible to
find instances in Holy Scripture. These I will collect at leisure in connection
with my present work to prove that He Who was seen by the patriarchal saints was
none other than the Word of God.

Therefore besides the conception of the Creator of the Universe, we and they
have inherited also the conception of Christ in common. Hence you can find
instances of the pre-Mosaic saints being called "Christs," just as we are called
Christians. Hear what the oracle in the Psalms says about them:

"12. When they were few in numbers, very few, and strangers in the land, 13. and
they went from nation to nation, from (one) kingdom to another people: 14. He
suffered no man to wrong them, and he reproved kings for their sakes, saying:
15. 'Touch not my Christs, and do no evil to my prophets.'"

The whole context shows that this must be referred to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob:
they therefore shared the name of Christ with us.

CHAPTER 6 The Nature of the Life according to the New Covenant proclaimed to All
Men by Christ.

JUST as a life of virtue and a system of holiness is through the teaching of
Christ preached to all nations without any reference to the Mosaic legislation,
so by these men of old time the same independent ideal of holiness was upheld.
They cared nothing for circumcision, nor do we. They did not abstain from eating
certain beasts, neither do we. For instance, Moses introduces Melchizedek,
priest of the Most High God, uncircumdsed, not anointed with prepared |29
ointment according to Moses, knowing naught of the Sabbath, paying no heed
whatever to the commandments afterwards given by Moses to the whole Jewish race,
hut living exactly according to the Gospel of Christ. And yet Moses says he was
the priest of the Most High God, and the superior of Abraham. For he is
introduced as blessing Abraham. Such too was Noah, a just man in his generation,
whom as a kindling seed of the human race Almighty God preserved in the
destruction by the flood when all men on earth were destroyed. He again was
quite ignorant of Jewish customs, he was uncircumcised, he did not follow the
Mosaic law in any point, yet he is recognized as conspicuously just. And Enoch
before him, who is said to have pleased God, and to have been translated, so
that his death was not seen, was another like person, uncircumcised, with no
part or lot in the law of Moses, living a distinctly Christian rather than a
Jewish life. And Abraham himself, coming later than those already named, being
younger than they according to the age men reached in those times, though an old
man in reality, was the first to receive circumcision as a seal, for the sake of
his descendants, and he left it to those who should be born of him according to
the flesh as a sign of their descent from him. He too before he had a son, and
before he was circumcised, by his rejection of idolatry, and his confession of
the one omnipotent God, yea, by his virtuous life alone is shown to be one who
lived as a Christian, not as a Jew. For he is represented as having kept the
commandments and the precepts and the ordinances of God before the enactments of
Moses. That is why God giving the oracle to Isaac says:

"And I will give to thy seed all this land, and in thy seed shall all the
nations of the earth be blessed. Because Abraham thy father heard my voice, and
kept my commandments, and my laws, and my judgments, and my statutes."

So there were before the Mosaic law other commandments of God, and ordinances
not like those of Moses, other laws and precepts of Christ, by which they were
justified. Moses |30 clearly shews that these were not the same as his own
enactments, when he says to the people:

"Hear, Israel, the ordinances and the judgments, all that I speak in your ears
this day, and ye shall learn them, and observe to do them. The Lord your God
made a covenant with you in Choreb; the Lord did not make this covenant with
your fathers, but with you."

See how distinctly he alludes to this covenant, when he says God did not give
the same covenant to their fathers. For if he had said that absolutely no
covenant was given to their fathers it would have been a false statement. For
Holy Scripture testifies that a covenant of some kind was given both to Abraham
and Noah. And so Moses adds that one "not the same" was given to their fathers,
implying that other greater and glorious covenant, by which they were shown
forth as friends of God. So Moses records that Abraham by his faith in Almighty
God attained righteousness when he says:

"Abraham believed in God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."

This text shews clearly that he received the sign of circumcision after his
attainment of righteousness and after the witness to his holiness, and that this
added nothing at all to his justification.

Again, you would find Joseph in pre-Mosaic times in the palaces of the Egyptians
living in freedom not burdened by Judaism. Moses himself, the leader and
lawgiver of the Jews, lived from his babyhood with the daughter of the King of
Egypt, and partook of the Egyptian food without question. What is to be said of
Job the thrice-blessed, the true, the blameless, the just, the holy, what was
the cause of his holiness and justice, was it Moses' commandments? Certainly
not. Was it the keeping of the Sabbath, or any other Jewish observance? How
could that be, if Job was earlier than the time of Moses and his legislation?
For Moses was seventh from Abraham, and Job fifth, preceding him by two
generations. And if you regard his life, you will see it was untouched by the
Mosaic legislation, but not foreign to the teaching of our Saviour. Thus in
reviewing his life in his apology to his friends he says: |31

"12. For I saved the poor from the hand of the powerful, and I helped the orphan
who had no helper. The mouth of the widow blessed me, 14. and I was clad in
righteousness. I put on judgment as a cloak, 15. an eye was I to the blind, a
foot to the lame, 16. I was a father of the weak."

This surely is exactly the same teaching which is preached to us all in the
Gospel. Then again as one well acquainted with the words, "Weep with those that
weep," and "Blessed are they that weep, for they shall laugh"; and "If one
member suffer, all the members suffer with it,"which are included in the Gospel
teaching, he shews his sympathy for the miserable by saying:

"25. And I wept for every weak one—I groaned when I saw a man in difficulties."

Then, again, this holy man forestalls the Gospel teaching, which forbids
unseemly laughter, when he says:

"5. But if I had gone with scorners, and if my foot has hasted to deceit 6. For
I am weighed in a just balance, and the Lord knows my innocence."

And where the Mosaic law says "Thou shall not commit adultery,"and assigns death
as the punishment of adulterers, He who draws out the law of the Gospel
teaching, says: "It was said to them of old time, Thou shall not commit
adultery; but I say unto you, thou shall not desire at all."

Look well at the man of whom we are speaking; he was so good a Christian in his
life that he restrained even his looks when they were wayward, and made it his
boast so to do— for he says:

"9. And if my heart has followed my eye for the wife of another man."

And he gives the reason, as he continues:

"11. For the spirit of a man is not to be stayed, in the case of defiling
another man's wife. 12. For it is a fire burning on every side, and where it
enters, it utterly destroys." |32

Here he shows his incorruptibility:

"7. If, too, I have touched gifts with my hands; 8. then let me sow, and others
eat, and let me be uprooted from the earth."

How he treated his servants we may learn from his teaching here:

"13. And if I have trifled with the cause of my servant, or handmaiden, when
they pleaded with me."

And again he gives the reason:

"14. What, then, should I do, if the Lord should try me? ... 15. Were not they
also formed as I was in the womb? Yea, we were formed in the same womb."

He adds:

"16. I did not cause the eye of the widow to fail. 17. And if I did eat my
morsel alone, and did not share it with the orphan, ... 19. and if I saw the
naked perishing, and did not clothe him."

And again he proceeds:

"24. And if I trusted in a precious stone, 25. and if I rejoiced when my wealth
was great, and if I laid my hand on unnumbered (treasures)."

And again he gives the reason:

"26. Do we not see the sun waxing and waning, and the moon eclipsed? "

So, again, whereas the teaching of the Gospel says:

"43. It was said to them of old time, Thou shall love thy neighbour and hate
thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies": Job wonderfully
anticipating the command by his own original teaching actually carried it out,
for he says:

"29. And if I, too, was glad at the fall of my enemies, and said in my heart, It
is well—30. then let my ear hear my curse."

And he adds:

"But the stranger did not remain outside, and my door was opened to all that
came,"

showing himself no stranger in spirit to Him, who said, "I was a stranger, and
ye took me in."Then hear what he says about offences done unintentionally: |33

"33. Or if too, having sinned unintentionally, I hid my sin. 34. For I did not
stand in awe of a great multitude, so as not to speak boldly before them. And if
I did not let the poor depart (from my door) with an empty bosom . . . 35. And
if I had not feared the hand of the Lord. And as to the written charge which I
had against any . . . 37. I did not rend it and return it, taking nothing from
the debtor."

So and in such ways the pre-Mosaic saints (for from the record of one we may
imagine the life of all), waged their renowned contests for good, and were
reckoned friends of God, and prophets. What need had they of the commandments of
Moses, which were given to weak and sinful men? From all this it is abundantly
proved that the Word of God announced to all nations the ancient form of their
ancestors' religion, as the new covenant does not differ from the form of
holiness, which was very ancient even in the time of Moses, so that it is at the
same time both old and new. It is, as I have shown, very, very old; and, on the
other hand, it is new through having been as it were hidden away from men
through a long period between, and now come to life again by the Saviour's
teaching. And it was in this intermediate period, while the ideal of the new
covenant was hidden from men, and as it were asleep, that the law of Moses was
interposed in the interval. It was like a nurse and governess of childish and
imperfect souls. It was like a doctor to heal the whole Jewish race, worn away
by the terrible disease of Egypt. As such it offered a lower and less perfect
way of life to the children of Abraham, who were too weak to follow in the steps
of their forefathers. For through their long sojourn in Egypt, after the death
of their godly forefathers, they adopted Egyptian customs, and, as I said, fell
into idolatrous superstition. They aimed no higher than the Egyptians, they
became in all respects like them, both in worshipping idols, |34 and in other
matters. Moses tore them from their godless polytheism, he led them back to God,
the Creator of all things; he drew them up as it were from an abyss of evil, but
it was natural for him to build first this step of holiness at the threshold and
entrance of the Temple of the more Perfect. Therefore he forbade them to murder,
to commit adultery, to steal, to swear falsely, to work uncleanness, to lie with
mother, sister or daughter, to do many actions which till then they had done
without restraint. He rescued them from their wild and savage life, and gave
them a polity based on better reason and good law as the times went, and was the
first lawgiver to codify his enactments in writing, a practice which was not yet
known to all men. He dealt with them as imperfect, and when he forbade idolatry,
he commanded them to worship the One Omnipotent God by sacrifices and bodily
ceremonies. He enacted that they should conduct by certain mystic symbols the
ritual that he ordained, which the Holy Spirit taught him in a wonderful way was
only to be temporary: he drew a circle round one place and forbade them to
celebrate his ordinances anywhere, except in one place alone, namely at the
Temple in Jerusalem, and never outside it. And to this day it is forbidden for
the children of the Hebrews outside the boundaries of their ruined mother-city
to sacrifice according to the law, to build a temple or an altnr, to anoint
kings or priests, to celebrate the Mosaic gatherings and feasts, to be cleansed
from pollution, to be loosed from offences, to bear gifts to God, or to
propitiate Him according to the legal requirements. And therefore, of course,
they have fallen under Moses' curse, attempting to keep it in part, but breaking
it in the whole, as Moses makes absolutely clear:

"Accursed is he, who does not continue in all the things written in this law, to
do them."

And they have come to this impasse, although Moses himself foresaw by the Holy
Spirit, that, when the new covenant was revived by Christ and preached to all
nations, his own legislation would become superfluous, he rightly confined its
influence to one place, so that if they were ever deprived |35 of it, and shut
out of their national freedom, it might not be possible for them to carry out
the ordinances of his law in a foreign country, and as of necessity they would
have to receive the new covenant announced by Christ. Moses had foretold this
very thing, and in due course Christ sojourned in this life, and the teaching of
the new covenant was borne to all nations, and at once the Romans besieged
Jerusalem, and destroyed it and the Temple there. At once the whole of the
Mosaic law was abolished, with all that remained of the old covenant, and the
curse passed over to those who became lawbreakers, because they obeyed Moses'
law, when its time had gone by, and still clung ardently to it, for at that very
moment the perfect teaching of the new Law was introduced in its place. And,
therefore, our Lord and Saviour rightly says to those who suppose that God ought
only to be worshipped in Jerusalem, or in certain mountains, or some definite
places:

"1. The hour cometh and now is, when the true worshippers shall neither in this
mountain nor in Jerusalem worship the Father. For God is a Spirit, and they that
worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

So He said, and presently, not long after, Jerusalem was besieged, the holy
place and the altar by it and the worship conducted according to Moses'
ordinances were destroyed, and the archetypal holiness of the pre-Mosaic men of
God reappeared. And the blessing assured thereby to all nations came, to lead
those who came to it from the first step and from the first elements of the
Mosaic worship to a better and more perfect life. Yes, the religion of those
blessed and godly men, who did not worship in any one place exclusively, neither
by symbols nor types, but as our Lord and Saviour requires "in spirit and in
truth," by our Saviour's appearance became the possession of all the nations, as
the prophets of old foresaw. For Zephaniah says the very same thing:

"The Lord shall appear against them, and shall utterly destroy all the gods of
the nations of the earth. |36 And they shall worship him each one from his own
place."

Malachi as well contends against those of the circumcision, and speaks on behalf
of the Gentiles, when he says:

"10. I have no pleasure (in you), saith the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept
a sacrifice at your hands. 11. For from the rising of the sun even to the
setting my name has been glorified among the Gentiles; and in every place
incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering."

By "the incense and offering to be offered to God in every place,"what else can
he mean, but that no longer in Jerusalem nor exclusively in that (sacred) place,
but in every land and among all nations they will offer to the Supreme God the,
incense of prayer and the sacrifice called "pure," because it is not a sacrifice
of blood but of good works? And Isaiah literally shouts and cries his prophecy
to the same effect:

"19. There shall be an altar to the Lord in the land of Egypt. . . . And the
Lord shall be known to the Egyptians ... 20. And he shall send to them a man who
shall save them, . . . 21, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day,
and shall offer sacrifice, and vow vows to the Lord and pay (them). And they
shall he turned to the Lord, and he shall hear them and heal them."

Do we not say truly then that the prophets were inspired to foretell a change of
the Mosaic Law, nay its end and conclusion? Moses lays down that the altar and
the |37 sacrifices should be nowhere else on earth but in Judaea, and there only
in one city. But this prophecy says that an altar to the Lord shall be set up in
Egypt, and that Egyptians shall celebrate their sacrifices to the Lord of the
prophets and no longer to their ancestral gods. It foretells that Moses shall
not be the medium of their knowledge of God, nor any other of the prophets, but
a man fresh and new sent from God. Now if the altar is changed contrary to the
commandment of Moses, it is beyond doubt necessary that the Law of Moses should
be changed also. Then, too, the Egyptians, if they "sacrifice to the Supreme
God," must be admittedly worthy of the priesthood. And if the Egyptians are
priests Moses' enactments about the Levites and the Aaronic succession would be
useless to the Egyptians. The time, therefore, will have come when a new
legislation will be needed for their support. What follows? Have I spoken at
random? Or have I proved my contention? Behold how to day, yes in our own times,
our eyes see not only Egyptians, but every race of men who used to be idolaters,
whom the prophet meant when he said "Egyptians," released from the errors of
polytheism and the daemons, and calling on |38 the God of the prophets! They
pray no longer to lords many, but to one Lord according to the sacred oracle;
they have raised to Him an altar of unbloody and reasonable sacrifices according
to the new mysteries of the fresh and new covenant throughout the whole of the
inhabited world, and in Egypt itself and among the other nations, Egyptian in
their superstitious errors. Yes, in our own time the knowledge of the Omnipotent
God shines forth, and sets a seal of certainty on the forecasts of the prophets.
You see this actually going on, you no longer only expect to hear of it, and if
you ask the moment when the change began, for all your inquiry you will receive
no other answer but the moment of the appearance of the Saviour. For He it was,
of Whom the prophet spoke, when he said that the Supreme God and Lord would send
a man to the Egyptians, to save them, as also the Mosaic oracles taught in these
words: "A man shall come forth from his seed, and shall rule over many nations";
among which nations the Egyptians would certainly be numbered. But a great deal
could be said on these points, and with sufficient leisure one could deal with
them more exhaustively. Suffice it to say now, that we must hold to the truth,
that the prophecies have only been fulfilled after the coming of Jesus our
Saviour. For it is through Him that in our day that old system of Abraham, the
most ancient and venerable form of religion, is followed by the Egyptians, the
Persians, the Syrians and the Armenians. The Barbarians from the end of the
earth, those of them who were of old the most uncivilized and wild, yea, they
that inhabit the isles, for prophecy thought well even to mention them, follow
it as well. And who would not be struck by the extraordinary change—that men who
for ages have paid divine honour to wood and stone and daemons, wild beasts that
feed on human flesh, poisonous reptiles, animals of every kind, repulsive
monsters, fire and earth, and the lifeless elements of the universe should after
our Saviour's coming pray to the |39 Most High God, Creator of Heaven and earth,
the actual Lord of the prophets, and the God of Abraham and his forefathers?
That men a little while before involved in marriage with mothers and daughters,
in unspeakable vice and all sorts of vileness, men who lived like wild beasts,
now converted by the divine power of our Saviour, and become like different
beings, should crowd the public schools and learn lessons of virtue and purity.
That not men only, but women, poor and rich, learned and simple, children even
and slaves, should be taught in their daily occupation in town or country the
loftiest ethics, which forbids to look with eyes unbridled, to be careless even
in words, or to follow the path of custom and fashion. That they should learn
the true ideal of worshipping the Supreme God, and serving Him in every place,
according to the prophecy, which says: "And they shall worship Him each from his
own place."Every one, then, whether Greek or Barbarian, is worshipping the
Supreme God, not running to lerusalem, nor made holy with bloody sacrifices, but
staying at home in his own land, and offering in spirit and in truth his pure
and bloodless offering. And theirs is the new covenant, not according to the
old. Do not allow the covenant of the pre-Mosaic Saints to be called "the old
covenant,"but that which was given to the Jews by the Law of Moses. For the text
which says that the new will be quite unlike the old clearly implies which one
was the old:

"I will make a new covenant, not according to the covenant I made with their
fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt."

"Not according to the covenant of the Mosaic Law,"he says. For that was
introduced to the Jews at the exodus from Egypt. It might have seemed that he
was introducing a new covenant opposed to the religious ideals of the Abrahamic
Saints, if he had not distinctly said:

"Not according to the covenant, which I made with their fathers, in the day that
I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt." |40

He prophesied that the new covenant would not be according to the one enacted at
the time of the Exodus and the wanderings in the wilderness, hut according to
the ancient one under which the pre-Mosaic saints flourished. And, therefore,
for the future you may confidently classify the ideals of religions worshippers
under three heads, not two: the completely idolatrous, who have fallen into the
errors of polytheism; those of the circumcision, who by the aid of Moses have
reached the first step of holiness; and thirdly, those who have ascended by the
stair of Gospel teaching. If you regard this as a mean between the other two,
you will no longer suppose that perverts from Judaism necessarily fall into
Hellenism, nor that those that forsake Hellenism are, therefore, Jews.
Recognizing the third division in the middle, you will see it standing up on
high, as if it were set on a very lofty mountain ridge, with the others left
below on each side of the height. For as it has escaped Greek godlessness,
error, superstition, unbridled lust and disorder, so it has left behind Jewish
unprofitable observances, designed by Moses to meet the needs of those who were
like infants and invalids. And as it stands on high, hear what it says as it
proclaims the law, which suits not Jews alone, but Greeks and barbarians, and
all nations under the sun:

"O man! and all the human race! the Law of Moses, beginning from one race of
men, first called the whole race of the Jews, because of the promise given to
their holy forefathers, to the knowledge of the one God, and released its
servants from bitter slavery to the daemons. But I am the herald to all men and
to the nations of the whole world of a loftier knowledge of God and holiness; I
call them to live according to the ideals of those of Abraham's day, and men
still more ancient of pre-Mosaic date, with whom many of all races are recorded
to have shone in holiness as lights in the world.

And again:

The Law of Moses required all who desired to be holy to speed from all
directions to one definite place; but I, giving freedom to all, teach men not to
look for |41 God in a corner of the earth, nor in mountains, nor in temples made
with hands, but that each should worship and adore Him at home.

And again:

The old law commanded that God should be worshipped by the sacrifice of slain
beasts, of incense and fire and divers other similar external purifications. Hut
I, introducing the rites of the soul, command that God should be glorified with
a clean heart and a pure mind, in purity and a life of virtue, and by true and
holy teaching.

And again:

Moses forbade the men of his time who were defiled with blood to kill; but I lay
down a more perfect law for those who have him for a schoolmaster and have kept
the earlier commandment—when I ordain that men must not be slaves to anger.

And once more:

The Law of Moses enacted to adulterers and the impure that they must not commit
adultery, or indulge in vice, or pursue unnatural pleasures, and made death the
penalty of transgression; but I do not wish my disciples even to look upon a
woman with lustful desire.

And again, it said:

Thou shall not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths;
but I say unto you, Swear not at all, but let your communication be Yea, yea;
Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

And again, it commanded resistance against the unjust, and reprisal, when it
said:

An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; but I say unto you, That ye resist
not evil; but whosoever shall smite thec on thy right cheek, turn to him the
other also. And he who will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him
have thy cloak also.

And again, it exhorts to love your friend, and to hate your enemies; but I in my
excess of goodwill and forbearance lay down the law:

Pray for persecutors, that you may be children |42 of your Father in heaven, who
letteth his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just
and the unjust.

And, moreover, the Mosaic Law was suited to the hardness of heart of the vulgar,
gave ordinances corresponding to those under the rule of sense, and provided a
form of religion, reduced and inferior to the old. But I summon all to the holy
and godly life of the holy men of the earlier days. And in fine, it promises, as
to children, a land flowing with milk and honey, while I make citizens of the
Kingdom of Heaven those who are worthy to enter therein.

Such was the message to all nations given by the word of the new covenant by the
teaching of Christ. And the Christ of God bade His disciples teach them to all
nations, saying:

"Go ye into all the world, and make disciples of all the nations . . . teaching
them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you."

And in giving them to all men both Greeks and barbarians to keep He clearly
revealed the nature of Christianity, the nature of Christians, and the nature of
the Teacher of the words and instruction, our Lord and Saviour the Christ of God
Himself. He set up this new and perfect system throughout the whole world, that
such teaching and such wisdom might be the food, not only of men but of women,
of rich and poor alike, and of slaves with their masters. And yet the introducer
of this new law is represented as having lived in all ways according to the Law
of Moses. And this is a wonderful fact, that though He was going to come forward
as the legislator of a new polity, according to the Gospel of His new covenant,
He did not revolt from Moses as opposed to him and contrary. If He had thought
good to command things opposed to Moses, He would have afforded to godless
sectaries against Moses and the prophets material for much scandal, and to those
of the circumcision a specious handle for attacking Him, particularly in view of
the fact that they actually contrived their plot against His life as a
transgressor and breaker of the law. |43

CHAPTER 7

How Christ, having first fulfilled the Law of Moses, became the Introducer of a
New and Fresh System.

AND now having lived in all ways according to the Law of Moses, He made use of
His Apostles as ministers of the new legislation, on the one hand teaching them
that they must not consider the Law of Moses either foreign or unfriendly to
their own religion, on the other as being the author and introducer of a
legislation new and salutary for all men, so that He did not in any way break
Moses' enactments, but rather crowned them, and was their fulfilment, and then
passed on to the institution of the Gospel Law. Hear Him speaking in this
strain:

3. "I have not come to destroy the law but to fulfil it."

For if He had been a transgressor of the Law of Moses, He would reasonably have
been considered to have rescinded it and given a contrary law: and if He had
been wicked and a law-breaker He could not have been believed to be the Christ.
And if He had rescinded Moses' Law, He could never have been considered to be
One foretold by Moses and the prophets. Nor would His new Law have had any
authority. For He would have had to embark on a new Law, in order to escape the
penalty of breaking the old. But as a matter of fact He has rescinded nothing
|44 whatever in the Law, but fulfilled it. It is, as one might say, Mosaically
perfect. Yet since it was no longer possible for the causes I have stated
already to accommodate the Law of Moses to the needs of the other nations, and
it was necessary, thanks to the love of God the All-good, "that all men should
be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth," He laid down a law suitable and
possible for all. Nor did He forbid His Apostles to preach Moses' Law to all
men, except when it was likely to be a stumbling-block to them, as the apostle
says:

"For that which was impossible by the law, in that it was weak, God sending his
own son in the likeness of sinful flesh," etc.

And it was "impossible "for all the nations to go up thrice a year to Jerusalem
as the Law of Moses required, for a woman after childbirth to hasten there from
the ends of the earth to pay the fees of her purification, and in many other
ways, which you can arrive at for yourselves at your leisure. Since then it was
not possible for the nations living outside Judaea to keep these things even if
they wished, our Lord and Saviour could hardly be said to have rescinded them,
but was the fulfilment of the Law, and gave a proof to those who could see, that
He was indeed the Christ of God foretold by the old Jewish prophets. This He
did, when He gave to all nations through His own disciples enactments that
suited them. And, therefore, we reject Jewish customs, on the ground that they
were not laid down for us, and that it is impossible to accommodate them to the
needs of the Gentiles, while we gladly accept the Jewish prophecies as
containing predictions about ourselves. Thus the Saviour on the one side is our
teacher, and on the other the fulfilment of the Law of Moses, and of the
prophets who followed him. For since as yet the prophecies lacked the fulfilment
of their conclusions and of their words, He must necessarily fulfil them. As for
example the prophecy in Moses says:

"A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to you like unto me, him shall ye
hear in all things, whatsoever that prophet shall speak to you."

He fulfilled what remained to be fulfilled in this prophecy, |45 appearing as
the second Lawgiver after Moses, giving to men the Law of the Supreme God's true
holiness. For Moses does not say simply "a prophet,"but adds "like unto me":
("For a prophet," he says, "shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, like unto
me. Him shall ye hear"), and this can only menu that He who was foretold would
be equal to Moses. And Moses was the giver of the Law of holiness of the Supreme
God. So He that was foretold, to be like Moses, would probably be like him in
being a Lawgiver. And though there were many prophets in later days, none of
them is recorded to have been "like Moses." For they all referred their hearers
to him. Even Scripture bears witness that "a prophet has not arisen like Moses":
neither Jeremiah, nor Isaiah, nor any other of the prophets was like him,
because not one of them was a Lawgiver. When the expectation was that a prophet
who was also a Lawgiver like Moses should arise, Jesus Christ came giving a Law
to all nations, and accomplishing what the Law could not. As He said:

"it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: but I say unto
you, Thou shalt not desire to." And, "It was said to them of old time, Thou
shalt not kill, but I say unto you, Thou shalt not be angry." And, "No more in
Jerusalem, but in every place must you worship." And, "Worship not with incense
and sacrifices, but in spirit and in truth." And all such things that are
recorded of His teaching are surely the laws of a Lawgiver very wise and very
perfect.

Wherefore Holy Scripture says His hearers were "astounded," because He taught
them "as one having authority, and not as the Scribes and the Pharisees"—an
oracle which supplied what was lacking to the fulfilment of the prophecy of
Moses. And the same can be said of the other prophecies about Him, and the
calling of the Gentiles. He was, therefore, the fulfiller of the Law and the
prophets since He brought the predictions referring to Himself to a conclusion.

He ordained that the former Law should stand till He came, and He was revealed
as the originator of the second Law of the new covenant preached to all nations,
as being |46 responsible for the Law and influence of the two religions, I mean
Judaism and Christianity. And it is wonderful that divine prophecy should
accord:

"Behold, I lay in Zion a stone, choice, a cornerstone; precious, and he that
believes on him shall not be ashamed."

Who could be the corner-stone but He, the living and precious stone Who supports
by His teaching two buildings and makes them one? For He set up the Mosaic
building, which was to last till His day, and then fitted on to one side of it
our building of the Gospel. Hence He is called the corner-stone. And it is said
in the Psalms: "22. The stone which the builders refused, the same is become the
head of the corner. 23. This is of the Lord, and it is marvellous in our eyes."
This oracle too indubitably indicates the Jewish conspiracy against the subject
of the prophecy, how He has been set at naught by the builders of the old wall,
meaning the Scribes and Pharisees, the High-Priests and all the rulers of the
Jews. And it prophesied that though He should be despised and cast out He would
become the head of the corner, regarding Him as the originator of the new
covenant, according to the above proofs. So then we are not apostates from
Hellenism who have embraced Judaism, nor are we at fault in accepting the law of
Moses and the Hebrew Prophets, and we do not live as Jews, but according to the
system of the men of God who lived before Moses. Nay, we claim that in this |47
we authenticate Moses and the succeeding prophets, in that we accept the Christ
foretold by them, and obey His laws, and endeavour prayerfully to tread in the
steps of His teaching, for so we do what Moses himself would approve. For he
says, in foretelling that God will raise up a prophet like himself, "and every
soul which doth not hear that prophet shall be cast out from its race."Therefore
the Jews, because they rejected the prophet, and did not hearken to His holy
words, have suffered extreme ruin according to the prediction. For they neither
received the law of Christ of the new covenant, nor were they able to keep the
commands of Moses without some breach of his law; and so they fell under the
curse of Moses, in not being able to carry out what was ordained by him, being
exiled as they were from their mother-city, which was destroyed, where alone it
was allowed to celebrate the Mosaic worship. Whereas we, who accept Him that was
foretold by Moses and the prophets, and endeavour to obey Him prayerfully, must
surely be fulfilling the prophecy of Moses, where he said: "And every soul,
which doth not hear that prophet, shall be cast out from its race."And we heard
just now what the ordinances of the prophet were, which we must obey, their
wisdom, perfection and heavenliness, which he thought fit to inscribe, not on
tables of stone like Moses, nor yet with ink and parchment, but on the hearts of
his pupils, purified and open to reason. On them he wrote the laws of the new
covenant, and actually fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah.

"I will make a new covenant, not according to the covenant which I made with
their fathers. For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of
Israel, I will give my laws into their mind, and upon their heart I will write
them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. |48

CHAPTER 8 That the Christian Life is of Two Distinct Characters. THE one wrote
on lifeless tables, the Other wrote the perfect commandments of the new covenant
on living minds. And His disciples, accommodating their teaching to the minds of
the people, according to the Master's will, delivered on the one hand to those
who were able to receive it, the teaching given by the perfect master to those
who rose above human nature. While on the other the side of the teaching which
they considered was suitable to men still in the world of passion and needing
treatment, they accommodated to the weakness of the majority, and handed over to
them to keep sometimes in writing, and sometimes by unwritten ordinances to be
observed by them. Two ways of life were thus given by the law of Christ to His
Church. The one is above nature, and beyond common human living; it admits not
marriage, child-bearing, property nor the possession of wealth, but wholly and
permanently separate from the common customary life of mankind, it devotes
itself to the service of God alone in its wealth of heavenly love! And they who
enter on this course, appear to die to the life of mortals, to bear with them
nothing earthly but their body, and in mind and spirit to have passed to heaven.
Like some celestial beings they gaze upon human life, performing the duty of a
priesthood to Almighty God for the whole race, not with |49 sacrifices of bulls
and blood, nor with libations and unguents, nor with smoke and consuming fire
and destruction of bodily things, but with right principles of true holiness,
and of a soul purified in disposition, and above all with virtuous deeds and
words; with such they propitiate the Divinity, and celebrate their priestly
rites for themselves and their race. Such then is the perfect form of the
Christian life. And the other more humble, more human, permits men to join in
pure nuptials and to produce children, to undertake government, to give orders
to soldiers fighting for right; it allows them to have minds for farming, for
trade, and the other more secular interests |50 as well as for religion: and it
is for them that times of retreat and instruction, and days for hearing sacred
things are set apart. And a kind of secondary grade of piety is attributed to
them, giving just such help as such lives require, so that all men, whether
Greeks or barbarians, have their part in the coming of salvation, and profit by
the teaching of the Gospel.

CHAPTER 9 Why a Numerous Offspring is not as Great a Concern to us as it was to
them of Old Time. This being so, the question naturally arises, if we claim that
the Gospel teaching of our Saviour Christ bids us worship God as did the men of
old, and the pre-Mosaic men of God, and that our religion is the same as theirs,
and our knowledge of God the same, why were they keenly concerned with marriage
and reproduction, while we to some extent disregard it? And again, why are they
recorded as propitiating God with animal sacrifices, while we are forbidden to
do so, and are told to regard it as impious. For those two things alone, which
are by no means unimportant, would seem to conflict with what 1 have said; they
would imply that in these matters we have not preserved the ancient ideal of
religion. But it is possible for us to refute this charge by a study of the
Hebrew writings. The men renowned for piety before Moses are recorded as having
lived when human life was first beginning and organizing itself, while we live
when it is nearing its end. And so they were anxious for the increase of their
descendants, that men might multiply, that the human race might grow and
flourish at that time, and reach its height; but these things are of little
moment to us, who believe the world to be perishing and running down and
reaching its last end, since it is expressly said that the gospel teaching will
be at the door before the |51 consummation of life, while a new creation and the
birth of another age at no distant time is foretold. Such is one reply, and this
is a second. The men of old days lived an easier and a freer life, and their
care of home and family did not compete with their leisure for religion; they
were able to worship (iod without distraction from their wives and children and
domestic cares, and were in no way drawn by external things from the things that
mattered most. But in our days there are many external interests that draw us
away, and involve us in uncongenial thoughts, and seduce us from our zeal for
the things which please God. The word of the Gospel teaching certainly gives
this as the cause of the limitation of marriage, when it says:

29. But this 1 say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth that they who have
wives be as though they had none. 30. And those that wept as though they wept
not, and they that rejoice as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy as
though they possessed not; 31. and they that use this world as not abusing it,
for the fashion of this world passeth away. 32. But I would have you without
carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things of the Lord, how he may
please the Lord; but he that is married careth for the things of the world, how
he may please his wife, and is divided. 34. And the unmarried woman and the
virgin careth for the things of the Lord how she may please the Lord), that she
may be holy both in body and in spirit; but she that is married careth for the
things of the world, how she may please her husband. 35. And this I speak for
your profit; not that I may cast a cord upon you, but for that which is comely,
and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction. |52

This expressly attributes the decrease of marriage to the evils of the time and
of external circumstances, such as did not affect the ancients. And I might give
this third reason why the godly men of old were so devoted to the procreation of
children. The rest of mankind were increasing in evil, they had fallen into an
uncivilized, inhuman, and savage mode of life, they had given themselves up
completely to godlessness and impiety, while they themselves, a very scanty
remnant, had divorced themselves from the life of the many, and from common
association with other men. They were living apart from other nations and in
isolation, and were organizing a new kind of polity; they were evolving a life
of true wisdom and religion, unmingled with other men. They wished to hand on to
posterity the fiery seed of their own religion; they did not intend that their
piety should fail and perish when they themselves died, and so they had
foresight for producing and rearing children. They knew they could be the
teachers and guides of their families, and considered it their object to hand on
to posterity the inheritance of their own good qualities. Hence many prophets
and righteous men, yea, even our Lord and Saviour Himself, with His apostles and
disciples, have come from their line. And if some of them turned out wicked,
like straw growing up with the corn, we must not blame the sowers, nor those who
tended the crop, just as we should admit that even some of our Saviour's
disciples have erred from the right way through self-will. And this explanation
of the ancient men of God begetting children cannot be said to apply to the
Christians to-day, when by God's help through our Saviour's Gospel teaching we
can see with our own eyes many peoples and nations in city and country and field
all hastening together, and united in running to learn the godly course of the
teaching of the Gospel, for whom I am glad to say we are able to provide
teachers and preachers of the word of holiness, free from all ties of life and
anxious thoughts. And in our day these men are necessarily devoted to |53
celibacy that they may have leisure for higher things; they have undertaken to
bring up not one or two children but a prodigious number, and to educate them in
godliness, and to care for their life generally. On the top of all this, if we
carefully examine the lives of the ancient men of whom I am speaking, we shall
find that they had children in early life, but later on abstained and ceased
from having them. For it is written that "Enoch pleased God after Methusaleh was
born." Scripture expressly records that he pleased God after the birth of his
son, and tells nothing of his having children afterwards. And Noah, that just
man, who was saved alone with his family when the whole world was destroyed,
after the birth of his children, though he lived many years more, is not related
to have begotten more children. And Isaac is said, after becoming the father of
twins by one wife, to have ceased cohabitation with her. Joseph again (and this
was when he lived among the Egyptians) was only the father of two sons, and
married to their mother only, while Moses himself and Aaron his brother are
recorded as having had children before the appearance of God, but after the
giving of the divine oracles as having begotten no more children. What must I
say of Melchisedek? He had no son at all, no family, no descendants. And the
same is true of Joshua, the successor of Moses, and many other prophets.

If there is any question about the families of Abraham and Jacob, a longer
discussion will be found in the book I wrote about the polygamy and large
families of the ancient men of God. To this I must refer the student, only
warning him that according to the laws of the new covenant the producing of
children is certainly not forbidden, but the provisions are similar to those
followed by the ancient men of God. "For a bishop," says the Scripture, "must be
the husband of one wife." Yet it is fitting that |54 those in the priesthood and
occupied in the service of God, should abstain after ordination from the
intercourse of marriage. To all who have not undertaken this wondrous
priesthood, Scripture almost completely gives way, when it says: "Marriage is
honourable, and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulterers God will
judge." This, then, is my answer to the first question.

CHAPTER 10 Why we are not bidden to burn Incense and to sacrifice the Fruits of
the Earth to God as were the Men of Old Time.

I SHOULD give the following reply to those who ask why we do not sacrifice
animals to Almighty God, as the men of God of old did, whom we claim to imitate.
Greek ideas, and what is actually found in the sacred books of the Hebrews, do
not agree about the cultus of the ancient primitive men. The Greeks say that
early men did not ever sacrifice animals, nor burn incense to the gods, but
"herbage, which they lifted up in their hands as the bloom of the productive
power of nature," and burnt grass and leaves and roots in the fire to the sun
and the stars of heaven. And that in the next stage men launching far into
wickedness stained the altars with the sacrifice of animals, and that this was a
sacrifice sinful, unrighteous, and quite displeasing to God. For man and beast
in no way differ in their reasonable soul. So they said that those who offer
animals are open to the charge of murder, the soul being one and the same in man
and brute. This was the view of the ancient Greeks, but it does not agree with
the Hebrew Scriptures. They record that the first men, as soon as they |55 were
created, honoured God with animal sacrifices at the very creation of their life.
For they say:

"And it came to pass after some days that Cain brought of the fruits of the
earth a sacrifice to the Lord. And Abel also brought of the first-born of his
sheep.. . . And God looked upon Abel and his gifts. But Cain and his sacrifices
be regarded not."

Here you will understand that he who sacrificed an animal is said to have been
more accepted by God than he who brought an offering of the fruits of the earth.
Noah again brought to the altar his first-fruits of all clean cattle, and of all
clean fowls; Abraham also is described as sacrificing: so that if we accept the
evidence of Holy Scripture, the first sacrifices thought of by the ancient men
of God were those of animals. And this thought, I hold, was not due to accident,
nor was its source in man, but it was divinely suggested. For when they saw
since they were holy, brought nigh to God, and enlightened by the Divine Spirit
in their souls that there was need of great stress on the cleansing of the sons
of men, they thought that a ransom was due to the source of life and soul in
return for their own salvation. And then as they had nothing better or more
valuable than their own life to sacrifice, in place of it they brought a
sacrifice through that of the unreasoning beasts, providing a life instead of
their own life. They did not consider this was sinful or unrighteous. They had
not been taught that the soul of the brutes was like man's, which has discourse
of reason: they had only learned that it was the animal's blood, and that in the
blood is the principle of life, which they offered themselves, sacrificing as it
were to God one life instead of another. |56 Moses makes this abundantly clear,
when he says:

"For the life of all flesh is the blood, and I have given it to you upon the
altar to make atonement for your sins: for the blood shall make atonement for
the soul. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat
blood."

Note carefully in the above the words, "I gave to you upon the altar to make
atonement for your souls; for the blood shall make atonement for the soul."

He says clearly that the blood of the victims slain is a propitiation in the
place of human life. And the law about sacrifices suggests that it should be so
regarded, if it is carefully considered. For it requires him who is sacrificing
always to lay his hands on the head of the victim, and to bear the animal to the
priest held by its head, as one offering a sacrifice on behalf of himself. Thus
he says in each case:

"He shall bring it before the Lord. And he shall lay his hands on the head of
the gift."

Such is the ritual in every case, no sacrifice is ever brought up otherwise. And
so the argument holds that the victims are brought in place of the lives of them
who bring them. In teaching that the blood of the brutes is their life, it in no
way implies that they share in the essence of thought and reason, for they are
composed of matter and body, in the same way as the vegetation of the earth and
plants. Thus Moses tells that God said in one creative word:

"Let the earth bring forth herb of grass and the fruit tree."

And again in like manner:

"Let the earth bring forth four-footed things, and creeping things, and wild
beasts of the earth after their kind."

We must, therefore, regard the brutes as akin in kind and nature and essence to
the vegetation of the earth and the plants, and conclude that those who
sacrifice them commit no sin. Noah indeed was told to eat flesh, as the herb of
the field.

While then the better, the great and worthy and divine sacrifice was not yet
available for men, it was necessary for |57 them by the offering of animals to
pay a ransom for their own life, and this was fitly a life that represented
their own nature. Thus did the holy men of old, anticipating by the Holy Spirit
that a holy victim, dear to God and great, would one day come for men, as the
offering for the sins of the world, believing that as prophets they must perform
in symbol his sacrifice, and shew forth in type what was yet to be. But when
that which was perfect was come, in accordance with the predictions of the
prophets, the former sacrifices ceased at once because of the better and true
Sacrifice. This Sacrifice was the Christ of God, from far distant times foretold
as coming to men, to be sacrificed like a sheep for the whole human race. As
Isaiah the prophet says of him:

"As a sheep he was led to slaughter, and as a lamb dumb before her shearers."

And he adds:

"4. He bears our sins and is pained for us; yet we accounted him to be in
trouble, and in suffering and in affliction. 5. Hut he was wounded on account of
our sins, and he was made sick on account of our iniquities, the chastisement of
our peace was upon him, and with his stripe we are healed. ... 6. And the Lord
hath given him up for our iniquities ... .9 for he did no sin himself, nor was
guile found in his mouth.''

Jeremiah, another Hebrew prophet, speaks similarly in the person of Christ: "I
was led as a lamb to the slaughter."

John Baptist sets the seal on their predictions at the appearance of our
Saviour. For beholding Him, and pointing Him out to those present as the one
foretold by the prophets, he cried: "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away
the sin of the world.''

Since then according to the witness of the prophets the great and precious
ransom has been found for Jews and Greeks alike, the propitiation for the whole
world, the life given for the life of all men, the pure offering for every stain
and sin, the Lamb of God, the holy sheep dear to God, the Lamb that was
foretold, by Whose inspired and mystic teaching all we Gentiles have procured
the forgive ness of our former sins, and such Jews as hope in Him |58 are freed
from the curse of Moses, daily celebrating His memorial, the remembrance of His
Body and Blood, and are admitted to a greater sacrifice than that of the ancient
law, we do not reckon it right to fall back upon the first beggarly elements,
which are symbols and likenesses but do not contain the truth itself. And any
Jews, of course, who have taken refuge in Christ, even if they attend no longer
to the ordinances of Moses, but live according to the new covenant, are free
from the curse ordained by Moses, for the Lamb of God has surely not only taken
on Himself the sin of the world, but also the curse involved in the breach of
the commandments of Moses as well. The Lamb of God is made thus both sin and
curse—sin for the sinners in the world, and curse for those remaining in all the
things written in Moses' law. And so the Apostle says: "Christ has redeemed us
from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us"; and "Him that knew no
sin, for our sakes he made sin."For what is there that the Offering for the
whole world could not effect, the Life given for the life of sinners, Who was
led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a lamb to the sacrifice, and all this for
us and on our behalf? And this was why those ancient men of God, as they had not
yet the reality, held fast to their symbols. This is exactly what our Saviour
teaches, saying:

"Many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see,
and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not
heard them."

And we, who have received both the truth, and the archetypes of the early copies
through the mysterious dispensation of Christ, can have no further need for the
things of old. |59

He then that was alone of those who ever existed, the Word of God, before all
worlds, and High Priest of every creature that has mind and reason, separated
One of like passions with us, as a sheep or lamb from the human flock, branded
on Him all our sins, and fastened on Hirn as well the curse that was adjudged by
Moses' law, as Moses foretells: "Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree."
This He suffered "being made a curse for us; and making himself sin for our
sakes."And then "He made him sin for our sakes who knew no sin,"and laid on Him
all the punishments due to us for our sins, bonds, insults, contumelies,
scourging, and shameful blows, and the crowning trophy of the Cross. And after
all this when He had offered such a wondrous offering and choice victim to the
Father, and sacrificed for the salvation of us all, He delivered a memorial to
us to offer to God continually instead of a sacrifice. This also the wondrous
David inspired by the Holy Spirit to foresee the future, foretold in these
words:

"I waited patiently for the Lord, and he inclined unto me |, and heard my
calling |. 2. And he brought me up out of a pit of misery |, and from miry clay
|. And he set my feet on a rock | and ordered my steps aright |. 3. And he hath
put a new song in my mouth |, a hymn to our God. |"

And he shews clearly what "the new song" is when he goes on to say:

"7. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not ; |60 but a body hast them prepared
me |; whole burnt-offering; and sin offering thou didst take no pleasure in |.
8. Then said I, Lo, I come: | in the volume of the book it is written of me |,
to do thy will, O God, I desired. |"

And he adds: "I have preached righteousness in the great congregation." He
plainly teaches that in place of the ancient sacrifices and whole
burnt-offerings the incarnate presence of Christ that was prepared was offered.
And this very thing He proclaims to his Church as a great mystery expressed with
prophetic voice in the volume of the book. As we have received a memorial of
this offering which we celebrate on a table by means of symbols of His Body and
saving Blood according to the laws of the new covenant, we are taught again by
the prophet David to say:

"5. Thou hast prepared a table before me in the face of my persecutors |. Thou
hast anointed my head with oil |, and thy cup cheers me as the strongest (wine).
|"

Here it is plainly the mystic Chrism and the holy Sacrifices |61 of Christ's
Table that are meant, by which we are taught to offer to Almighty God through
our great High Priest all through our life the celebration of our sacrifices,
bloodless, reasonable, and well-pleasing to Him. And this very thing the great
prophet Isaiah wonderfully foreknew by the Holy Spirit, and foretold. And he
therefore says thus:

"O Lord, my God, I will glorify thee, I will hymn thy name, for thou hast done
marvellous things."

And he goes on to explain what these things so truly "wonderful" are:

"And the Lord of Sabaoth shall make a feast for all the nations. They shall
drink joy, they shall drink wine, they shall be anointed with myrrh (on this
mountain). Impart thou all these things to the nations. For this is God's
counsel upon all the nations."

These were Isaiah's "wonders."the promise of the anointing with ointment of a
good smell, and with myrrh made not to Israel but to all nations. Whence not
unnaturally through the chrism of myrrh they gained the name of Christians. But
he also prophesies the "wine of joy "to the nations, darkly alluding to the
sacrament of the new covenant of Christ, which is now openly celebrated among
the nations. And these unembodied and spiritual sacrifices the oracle of the
prophet also proclaims, in a certain place:

"Offer to God the sacrifice of praise, and give the Highest thy vows: And call
upon me in the clay of thy affliction, and I will deliver thee, and thou shall
glorify me."

And again:

"The lifting up of my hands is an evening sacrifice."And once more: "The
sacrifice of God is a contrite spirit."

And so all these predictions of immemorial prophecy are being fulfilled at this
present time through the teaching of our Saviour among all nations. Truth bears
witness with the prophetic voice with which God, rejecting the Mosaic
sacrifices, foretells that the future lies with us: |62

"Wherefore from the rising of the sun unto the setting my name shall be
glorified among the nations. And in every place incense shall be offered to my
name, and a pure offering."

We sacrifice, therefore, to Almighty God a sacrifice of praise. We sacrifice the
divine and holy and sacred offering. We sacrifice anew according to the new
covenant the pure sacrifice. But the sacrifice to God is called "a contrite
heart.""A humble and a contrite heart thou wilt not despise."Yes, and we offer
the incense of the prophet, in every place bringing to Him the sweet-smelling
fruit of the sincere Word of God, offering it in our prayers to Him. This yet
another prophet teaches, who says: "Let my prayer be as incense in thy sight."

So, then, we sacrifice and offer incense: On the one hand when we celebrate the
Memorial of His great Sacrifice according to the Mysteries He delivered to us,
and bring to God the Eucharist for our salvation with holy hymns and prayers;
while on the other we consecrate ourselves to Him alone and to the Word His High
Priest, devoted to Him in body and soul. Therefore we are careful to keep our
bodies pure and undefiled from all evil, and we bring our hearts purified from
every passion and stain of sin, and worship Him with sincere thoughts, real
intention, and true beliefs. For these arc more acceptable to Him, so we are
taught, than a multitude of sacrifices offered with blood and smoke and fat.

[All footnotes, biblical references, and indications of the numbering of the
Greek text (beyond the first few) have reluctantly been omitted]

1. [1] The Title: "son of Pamphilus" either by adoption, or E. assumed the name
from affection (G.P.E. vol. iii. p. 2). Genitive of kinship cannot mean "friend
of P."

2. [2] The paging in the margin is that of J. A. Fabricius, who first edited the
opening of the work (pp. 1, 4-17, 18) from the Mavrocordato Codex; R. Stephen
(1545) and the Paris edilion (1628) derive from the Paris Codex (469) which had
lost the beginning of the work up to η παιδισκη και ο προσηλυτος (page 14 of
this translation). [[On odd-numbered pages, the Fabricius pagination is in
parentheses on the right of the line. On even-numbered pages, the pagination is
on the left.]]

3. [3] Theodotus, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, about A.D. 310-340: the
Praeparatio is dedicated to him. See also H.E. vii. 32, 23 for a panegyric of
him.

4. [4] εξανυεται. Lit., is being brought to a conclusion. The introduction was
written last.

5. [1] For Bethlehem as a place of pilgrimage see also 97 c (and note) and 341
b, and Origen, c. Cels. i. 51.

6. [1] αλλοφυλων: so Fabricius.

7. [2] δαιμονων αποφυγην. See Harnack : Expansion of Christianity. Excursus on
"The Conflict with Demons." E. T. i. 152-180. For daemons as fallen angels,
heathen gods, and oracles, cf. P.E. 329. See Jewish legends, Book of Jubilees,
10 3.6.8; 15; 22 17; 1 Enoch 6; 15 8.9.11; 167; 69 2.3; 86, 106 13.14 etc.

8. 1 It is at this point that the Paris Codex 469, the basis of the edition of
Stephen, and the Paris edition of 1628 begins. Up to this point we are dependent
on the edition of the lost Mavrocordato Codex by Fabricius and on his paging.
The paging is now that of Stephen and starts here as page 1. This text was
transcribed by Peter Kirby and Roger Pearse, 2002. All material on this page is
in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 43: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 10
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 10

BOOK X

INTRODUCTION

(461) HAVING considered the passages that predict the Coming among men of the
God that was foretold, we are now called to expound those that refer to His
departure from this life, and to study what the prophets said would (462) happen
to Him from the earliest days of prophecy. And I will begin by expounding those
which have to do with the men that plotted His Death, which will occupy no small
part of the present Book. But before beginning my argument let me repeat what I
have often said about the dispensation of Christ, that we must strictly
distinguish what belongs to His Divinity from what belongs to His Humanity. As
Divine we recognize Him as the Word of God, the Power of God, the Wisdom of God,
the Angel of Great Counsel, and the Great Eternal High Priest, offering
sacrifice for the existence and preservation of all, and propitiating the
Father. (b) And as Human we know Him as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin
of the world, and as a sheep led to the slaughter. And this was the human body,
which as a high priest He took like a lamb or sheep from the flock of humanity,
and offering the firstfruits of the human (c) race, sacrificed them to the
Father. By it He entered into human nature, which could only thus perceive the
Word of God, and His spiritual unembodied power, being able with eyes of flesh
to see nothing higher than flesh and physical things. So that everything that
follows, which may seem to lower His glory, must be taken as conceived of the
Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world, and of His human body. |191
For He was the Lamb that takes away sin, according to John the Baptist, when he
said: "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world," and He
was the Lamb led to the slaughter in the oracle of Isaiah, which said: "He was
led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before her shearers is dumb." And
of Him as of a lamb was it said: "For the sins of my people he was led to
death." For it was necessary that the Lamb of God, taken by the great
High-Priest on behalf of the other kindred lambs, for all the flock of mankind,
should be offered as a sacrifice to God: "For since by man came death, by man
came also the resurrection of the dead," says the apostle; "and as by the
offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation: even so by the
righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of
life." Hence, also, He taught His disciples that He was life and light and
truth, and the other conceptions of His Divinity, whereas to them that were not
initiated into the secrets of His nature, He said: "Why do ye seek to kill me, a
man that has told you the truth?" As then in what has gone before I have dealt
with what specially concerns His Divinity, so now in like manner I will shew the
human sufferings of the Lamb of God, since what occurred before His Passion lies
between the two, partaking both of the nature of His Divinity and His Humanity.
With this necessary proviso, let us now consider the oracles which concern the
traitor Judas, and his fellow-conspirators against Christ, and the events at the
time of His Passion.

CHAPTER 1 From Psalm xl. Of Judas the Traitor, and His Fellow-Conspirators
against Christ.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xl. 1-12.] (464)

As it has been supposed by some that the Book of Psalms merely consists of hymns
to God and sacred songs, and |192 that we shall look in vain in it for
predictions and prophecies of the future, let us realize distinctly that it
contains many prophecies, far too many to be quoted now, and it must suffice for
proof of what I say to make use of two Psalms ascribed to Asaph, written in the
time of David. For Asaph was one of the Temple Musicians then, as is stated in
the Book of Chronicles, and was inspired by the Divine Spirit to speak the
Psalms inscribed with his name. And what do these Psalms include? Predictions of
the siege of Jerusalem, the royal city of the Jewish race, which took place
nearly five hundred years after the prediction. For we read in the 73rd Psalm,
inscribed "A Psalm of understanding for Asaph":

"Wherefore hast thou rejected us, O God, for ever? | Wherefore is thy wrath
kindled against the sheep of thy pasture? | 2. Remember thy congregation, which
thou hast possessed of old, | and hast ransomed as the rod of thy inheritance; |
this Mount Zion wherein thou hast dwelt. | 3. Lift up thine hands against their
pride unto the end: what things hath the enemy done evilly in thy sanctuaries, |
4. and they that hate thee have boasted in the midst of thy Feast: | 5. they
have set up their banners for signs, ignorantly as it were in the entrance
above. | They cut down its doors at once with axes as in a wood of trees, | they
have broken it down with hatchet and stone-cutter. | 7. They have burnt thy
sanctuary to the ground with fire, | and have profaned even with the ground the
dwelling-place of thy name."

This is in Psalm lxxiii.; and Psalm lxxviii. of Asaph contains this:

"O God, the Gentiles have entered into thine inheritance, and defiled thy holy
temple; they have made Jerusalem a store-house of fruits, they have given the
dead bodies of thy servants to be meat for the birds of the air, the flesh of
thy saints to the beasts of the fields." |193

The first of these passages, I mean the one from Psalm lxxiii., was spoken in
David's reign before the building of (465). Solomon's Temple, and it was only
fulfilled the first time by the siege by the Babylonians, and the second time in
the Roman war against the Jews. For what was predicted and proclaimed in the
said Psalms by Asaph was brought to pass in the destruction of the first and
second Temples. And the second passage, from Psalm lxxviii., was fulfilled in
the time of Antiochus, called Epiphanes, who being King of Syria entered
Jerusalem, polluted the Temple, destroyed (b) the Altar, and in his endeavour to
compel the Jews to hellenize, slew countless men and women who were martyrs for
their law and their father's religion, and he inflicted all sorts of punishments
on them. It was therefore to that time, and to Antiochus' successors who
emulated his deeds, that Asaph's prophecies in Psalm lxxviii. refer. And the
Book of those called Maccabees confirms what I say, which has this passage:

"And to Jakeimon and Bacchides there came a (c) deputation of scribes asking for
justice." And it proceeds to say: "And he sware to them saying, We will not
bring evil on yourselves and your friends. And they believed him. And he took of
them sixty men and slew them in one day, according to the word of Asaph, which
he wrote, They gave the dead bodies of thy servants to be meat for the birds of
the air, and the flesh of thy saints to the beasts of the land, their (d) blood
have they poured out like water on every side of Jerusalem, and there was no man
to bury them."

If these events were thus predicted and fulfilled, it is not surprising that in
the same way the oracle quoted from Psalm xl. should announce what would happen
in connection with the plot on our Saviour, though not all men should
understand, that He being the Word of God, Wisdom, Life, and the True Light, and
possessing all the wealth of the good, for our sakes became poor, taking our
flesh, and being made like in kind to mortal man and beggars, taking on Him the
form of a slave and a poor man, and most of all when He fulfilled the Psalmist's
prophecy. He that understands these sayings to refer to |194 Himself, naturally
is blessed at the beginning of the Psalm, as receiving the written promise.

(466) So it proceeds in the rest to speak in the person of a poor man and a
beggar, that is to say of our Saviour Who for our sakes became poor: "I said,
Lord, have mercy on me." And John, the Evangelist, is an independent witness
that the words of this Psalm are spoken in the Person of our Saviour. For he
records, that:

"Jesus once took a towel and girded himself, and washed the feet of his
disciples and said, I know whom I have chosen. But that the Scripture may be
fulfilled, He that eateth with me, the same hath lifted his heel against me."

For He made it clear there that the Scripture referred (b) to was the Psalm
before us, in which it is said: "For the man of my peace, in whom I trusted, he
that ate of my bread hath raised his heel against me." He it is, then, Who says
at the beginning: "I said, Lord, have pity on me, heal my soul, for I have
sinned against thee," and speaks through the whole Psalm. Symmachus gives a
clearer rendering of these words, as follows:

"When I said, O Lord, have pity on me, heal my soul, even if I have sinned
against thee, my enemies have spoken evil against me, when shall he die and (c)
his name perish? And when he comes to gaze on me his heart speaks vanity, it
gathers unrighteousness on itself: and when he goes out he tells it. All they
that hate me have whispered against me with one consent, conceiving evil
concerning me. An unrighteous word is poured out within them, and when he fall
may he never rise up. Yea, even the man who was at peace with me, in whom I
trusted, who did eat of my bread, has magnified himself against me accordingly.
But thou, O Lord, pity me, and raise (d) me, that I may reward them. By this I
shall know that thou wishest it, if my enemy does not revile me. Thou hast
defended me because of my innocence, and shall set me before thee for ever."
|195

And Aquila is in exact agreement with Symmachus. With regard first to the words
which are apparently said in the Person of our Saviour: "Heal my soul, for I
have sinned against thee," you will notice in Symmachus they are not so
rendered, but thus: "Heal my soul, even if I have sinned against thee." And He
speaks thus, since He shares our sins. So it is said: "And the Lord hath laid on
him our iniquities, and he bears our sins." Thus the Lamb of God, that taketh
away the sins of the world, (467) became a curse on our behalf:

"Whom, though he knew no sin, God made sin for our sake, giving him as
redemption for all, that we might become the righteousness of God in him."

But since being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh,
the words quoted are rightly used. And in that He made our sins His own from His
love and benevolence towards us, He says these words, adding further on in the
same Psalm: "Thou hast (b) protected me because of my innocence," clearly
shewing the impeccability of the Lamb of God. And how can He make our sins His
own, and be said to bear our iniquities, except by our being regarded as His
body, according to the apostle, who says: "Now ye are the body of Christ, and
severally members?" And by the rule that "if one member suffer all the members
suffer with it," so when the many members suffer and sin, He too by the laws of
(c) sympathy (since the Word of God was pleased to take the form of a slave and
to be knit into the common tabernacle of us all) takes into Himself the labours
of the suffering members, and makes our sicknesses His, and suffers all our woes
and labours by the laws of love. And the Lamb of God not only did this, but was
chastised on our behalf, (d) and suffered a penalty He did not owe, but which we
owed because of the multitude of our sins; and so He became the cause of the
forgiveness of our sins, because He received death for us, and transferred to
Himself the scourging, the insults, and the dishonour, which were due to us, and
drew down on Himself the apportioned curse, being made a curse for us. And what
is that but the price of our |196 souls? And so the oracle says in our person:
"By his stripes we were healed," and "The Lord delivered him for our sins," with
the result that uniting Himself to us and us to Himself, and appropriating our
sufferings, He can say, "I said, Lord, have mercy on me, heal my soul, (468) for
I have sinned against thee," and can cry that they who plot against Him, not men
only but invisible daemons as well, when they see the surpassing power of His
Holy Name and title, by means of which He filled the world full of Christians a
little after, think that they will be able to extinguish it, if they plot His
death. This is what is proved by His saying: "My enemies have spoken evil of me,
saying, When shall he die and his name perish?" And since they attacked Him with
the words of guile, attempting to entangle Him, as Holy Writ bears witness, (b)
telling us how different charges and accusations were engineered against Him at
different times, He therefore adds: "And if he come to see me, his heart speaks
vanity, he heaps unrighteousness on himself; he has gone out, and spoken the
same against me." After this, too, He clearly reveals the vile traitor himself,
who, after making a covenant with the rulers of the Jews to betray his master,
no more (c) went as he used to the school of His holy teaching, nor went as to
His teacher, nor like the others passed His time with the Saviour, but awaited
and hunted for an opportunity to lay hands on Him. For this is what he is
accused of doing by the Holy Evangelists, of whom Matthew says:

"Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, and
said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they
covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. And from that time he sought an
opportunity to betray him to them."

(d) And Mark says:

"And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray
him unto them. And when they heard it they were glad, and promised to give him
money: and he sought how he might conveniently betray him." |197

And Luke writes thus:

"And Satan entered into Judas that was called Iscariot, being of the number of
the twelve, and he departed and spake with the chief priests and scribes, and
the captains of the Temple, that he might betray him unto them, and they were
glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he sought opportunity to betray him
unto them apart from the multitude."

So the prophecy before us prophesies the same things, when it says:

"And if he came to see me his heart spake vanity, he gathered iniquity on
himself. He went out, and spake the same. Against me all my enemies whispered";

where Symmachus renders:

"Coming in to spy on me, his heart spake vanity, he heaped unrighteousness upon
it: and when he went out he spake against me. All they that hate me (469)
whispered with one voice against me."

Yes, for he alone went into his master as a friend and a disciple, to spy and
search out, while he hid his plot in his own heart. And when he went out, he
spake against Him (b) at once with many of the same mind, betraying the Saviour
to His enemies, and secretly made a pact with the rulers of the Jews, about
other things, but of course about money as well, for which he promised to betray
Him, and about which he whispered with them. Wherefore it says:

"He went out and spake at once. All my enemies whispered against me, against me
they imagined evils. They determined an evil plan against me."

Perhaps the covenant for the money is meant by the "unjust word" of the
prophecy, or perhaps the impious (c) and unjust intentions they had against Him,
supposing that He would be extinguished and destroyed after death, and would no
longer be reckoned among the living. For such is the meaning of: "When he
sleepeth he shall surely never rise up again," which Symmachus has expressed
more clearly: "And falling he will not arise"; where Aquila says: "And whosoever
sleep, he shall not rise again." So |198 far it has spoken generally about all
those who conspired (d) against Him at the time of His Passion; but it goes on
now to speak of the traitor particularly, as of one of His disciples: "For the
man of my peace also, in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, hath lifted up his
heel against me." Instead of which Symmachus again renders: "And a man, who was
at peace with me, in whom I had confidence, who ate of my bread with me, hath
magnified himself against me." For of a truth it is the lowest and most accursed
of men who after sharing a master's table, and the nurture of his instruction,
goes wrong and treats his benefactor in the opposite way to which he has been
treated himself. And since the enemies in their plotting said: "When shall he
die, and his name perish?" and thought that if he lay down he would never rise
up again, therefore (470) our Lord and Saviour praying for the reverse of this,
and assured of an unhindered resurrection by His Father, says:

"Lord, have mercy upon me, and raise me up, and I will reward them. In this I
know that thou hast favoured me, because my enemy shall not triumph over me."

And it is quite clear how after His resurrection from the dead immediate
judgment, that did not tarry, fell on the conspirators, so that death who was
the enemy of His return to life was made ashamed, and they that mocked (b) Him
said, "O death, where is thy sting? O death, where is thy victory? "And those
who have read the history of the times after our Saviour's resurrection, in
Josephus, will remember what troubles fell on the Jews and their rulers,
involved in which they received the right reward for what they did to Him. All
this, then, that fell upon them was the fulfilment of the prophecy: but our
Saviour's Resurrection from the dead proved to all that in Him the Father was
well pleased, as He tells us when He says:

(c) "Have mercy upon me, and raise me up, and I will reward them. By this I know
thou hast favoured me, because my enemy doth not triumph over me."

And notice how in pouring forth this prayer to His God and Father, with what
confidence He witnesses boldly to |199 His own sinlessness, although He had said
before, "Heal my soul, for I have sinned against thee." But I have (d) already
shewn that the words, "I have sinned against thee," are not to be taken
literally, and Symmachus interprets them more clearly when he says, "Heal my
soul, even if I have sinned against thee," as could well be said of our sins,
which our Lord and Saviour took upon Himself. Whereas the words, "Thou hast
protected me for my innocence," exhibit the absolute integrity of His nature, to
which He traces in His teaching the stability and sureness of His life and His
preservation after His Resurrection, when He adds, "Thou hast established me
before thee for ever": or, "And thou wilt establish me before thee for ever,"
according to Symmachus.

CHAPTER 2 From Psalm liv. (471) Also of Judas, and of them that with Him
conspired against Christ.

[Passages quoted, Ps. liv. 2-5, 10-14.]

"2. HEAR my prayer, O God, | and do not despise my supplication. | 3. Attend to
me and hearken to me: | I was grieved in my meditation, and troubled | 4. by the
voice of the enemy, and by the affliction of the sinner. [ For they brought
iniquity against me, and (b) in wrath reviled me. | 5. My heart was troubled
within me, and the fear of death fell upon me. | Fear and trembling came upon
me, and darkness covered me."

And that which follows, to which he adds:

"10. Destroy, O Lord, and divide their tongues, | for I have seen iniquity and
strife in the city. | 11. Day and night it shall go round it upon its walls, |
and iniquity and sorrow 12. and unrighteousness are in the midst of it, | and
usury and craft have not left its streets, (c) 13. For if an enemy had
reproached me, I would have borne it: | And if he that hated me had magnified
himself against me, I would have hid myself from him: | 14. but it was even
thou, O man like-minded, my |200 guide, and my friend, | who in companionship
with me sweetened my food: | we walked in the house of God in unity." (d)

The words:

"If an enemy had reproached me, I could have borne it, and if he that hated me
had magnified himself against me, I would have hid myself from him: but it was
even thou, O man like-minded, my guide and my friend, who in companionship with
me sweetened my food,"

resemble----"For the man of my peace, in whom I trusted, he that ate of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me,"
said of Judas in the previous prophecy. As then there he was shewn to be a man of peace, when he was the Saviour's
disciple and numbered among the apostles, so here he is called like-minded, His guide and His friend. And as there
it was said of him, "He that eateth with me hath lifted up his heel against me," so also here it is said to the same
person, "Who in companionship with me sweetened my food." Yea, for he was privileged to be one of them that
partook of the secret companionship and spiritual food that (472) our Saviour gave His disciples. For to the crowds and
multitudes without He spoke in parables, but only to His disciples, of whom Judas was reckoned one, did He unfold all things.
So it is said, "He that ate my bread hath lifted up his heel against me," and, "who in companionship sweetened my
bread." This Aquila interprets more clearly, "We together (b) supped sweetly on mysteries," and Symmachus, "We joined together in sweet companionship." And instead of, "Thou, O man like-minded, my guide and friend," Symmachus renders, "Thou, O man of like disposition, my guide and my friend." Now if he was privileged to stand so high among the friends of our Saviour, His words about him are natural, "If an enemy had reviled me, I would have borne it," and that which follows.

Then after this prophecy about Judas, He proceeds to foretell His own
preservation and escape from death, in the words:

"I cried unto God, and the Lord saved me. At evening and morning and at noon I
will tell and proclaim, and he shall hear my voice, and shall ransom my soul in
peace."

(c) Thus in prayer He speaks of the time before His death |201 during which
Judas hatched his treachery against Him. And it was then that our Lord and
Saviour, as one who mourned for the destruction and ruin of His friend, and
still more for the casting away of the whole Jewish race, as if in sympathy with
friends gone mad who were very dear to Him, calls all His union with (hem and
instruction of them wasted, in that it has profited them nothing, saying:

"I was grieved with my wasted efforts, and I was moved by the voice of the
enemy, and by the affliction of the sinner. For they fell," He says, "into
iniquity, and reviled me in anger."

This may either be referred to the Jewish rulers, who (d) attempted to catch Him
with enmity and conspiracy, or it may have been spoken of the invisible powers
that fought against Him from without, and inspired the plot that was carried
through by men. And this I think agrees with His words in the Gospels at the
time of the Passion, when He says to His disciples: "My soul is exceeding
sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.'' And again, "Now
is my soul troubled." The words of the Psalm are similar to those, where it
said: "My heart is moved within me, and the fear of death is fallen upon (473)
me; Fear and trembling have come upon me, and darkness hath covered me," in
which He reveals the attacks of the opposing powers upon Him. As then in the
prophets a certain "spirit of adultery "is named, e.g. "They were deceived by a
spirit of adultery" and "the spirit of error in the wilderness," so also the
spirit of death would cause fear, just as the spirit of strength would be the
source of power and divine bravery. So we should call it "the (b) spirit of fear
and trembling," and, indeed, "the spirit of fear and confusion "as well, which
usually comes on nearly all that die as martyrs for their religion, and much
more would be laid on Him that underwent death for all. But whether it was the
spirit of fear and of death, or of fear and trembling, or any other like power
that fell upon Him, at any rate it did not break Him down, for He, like a noble
athlete, threw (c) far from Him the fear of death by His assurance of life, for
He is the Life. And so He drove far off the spirit of fear and trembling which
attacked Him by the power of the spirit of bravery, might, and strength. For
according to Isaiah, "There rested on Him (together with the other |202
spirits), the spirit of counsel and strength." So, too, He puts to flight the
spirit of darkness by the power of His own light. For, "The light shineth in
darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not." You will find similar passages
(d) in Psalm xxi., where again, in His person, it is said, "Many oxen have come
about me: fat bulls hemmed me in. They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a
ramping and roaring lion." And also, "Many dogs have encircled me, the council
of the wicked-doers has surrounded me." And once more:

"Save my soul from the sword, and my only-begotten from the power of the dog.
Save me from the lion's mouth, and my humility from the horns of the unicorns."

Here He clearly calls the evil powers bulls and calves, lions, dogs and
unicorns, who hemmed Him in and surrounded (474) Him at the time of His Passion,
but were not able to do aught against Him. And this follows, only if these parts
of the Psalm refer to our Lord and Saviour: but if they do not refer to Him, but
to some one else, you must yourself reduce the passage to harmony. And
immediately after the prediction of the conspiracy against Him, He continues
also about the mother-city of the Jews, Jerusalem, ,and says, "I saw iniquity
and strife in the city," and that which (b) follows, the meaning of which there
is no time now to expound.

CHAPTER 3 From Psalm cviii.

Still of Judas, and of the Apostle elected in His Room, and of the Jewish
Nation.

[Passage quoted, Ps. cviii. 1-8.]

AND the Apostle Peter is a sufficient witness that this prophecy refers to the
traitor Judas, when, after the Saviour's Ascension, all the apostles being
gathered together with many of the brethren, he stood up in the midst, and said:
|203

"Men and brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy
Ghost spake before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, which was guide to
them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this
ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and
falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
And it was known unto all the (475) dwellers at Jerusalem, insomuch as that
field is called in their proper tongue Aceldama, that is to say, The field of
blood. For it is written in the Book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate,
and let no man dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take."

Peter, then, in saying thus, suggested that another must be chosen in place of
Judas, to fill up the deficient number of the twelve apostles, so that the
prophecy might be fulfilled. And when the lot had been cast, it fell upon
Matthias, and he was numbered with the twelve apostles. Since this was (b) thus
fulfilled, it follows that the person who speaks in this Psalm can only be our
Saviour, Who thought good to anticipate by the record of the Holy Spirit the
very prayer that was sent up by Him to the Father at the time of His Passion,
foretelling what would happen to Him in the future.

He says, then, "O God, pass not over my praise in silence," praying that the
instruction delivered by Him to His disciples and the praise of the new Covenant
might not be lost in silence, but might live to the end of time. "The (c) mouth
of the sinner and the mouth of the crafty "would have special application to
Judas, who went to the Chief Priests and said to them:

"What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with
him for thirty pieces of silver. And from that time he sought opportunity to
betray him unto them."

And after making this covenant against Him, he was one of those that sat down with Him at the Feast of the Passover, when our
Saviour----

"sat down with the twelve, and as they were eating, (d) said unto them, Verily,
verily, I say unto you, that one |204 of you shall betray me. And being very
sorry they began to say unto him, Lord, is it I?"

Among whom was Judas, who opened that mouth of his, full of deceit and irony,
and answered, "Is it I, Rabbi? "a crafty mouth indeed, with which he gave the
signal to the conspirators against our Saviour, saying, "Whomsoever I shall
kiss, that same is he." And he fulfilled his words by acts, when he went to
Jesus, and said to Him, "Hail, Rabbi, and kissed him." And Jesus said to him,
"Friend, wherefore art thou come? "and "Judas, betrayest thou the son of man
with a kiss? "So then in anticipation, he says by the Psalm:

"The mouth of the crafty is opened upon me. They have spoken against me with
crafty tongue, and have encircled me with words of hatred, and have fought
against me without a cause."

Here He has in mind not only Judas, but the other conspirators against Him. For the Gospel relates, that even while the Saviour was still speaking to His
disciples----

"behold, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with
swords and staves from the chief priests and elders of the people! To whom the
Lord said, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves to take me?
I sat daily with you teaching in the Temple, and ye laid no hold on me. But this
is all come to pass, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled."

And He says also in the Psalms: "Instead of loving me, they spake evil of me,
but I continued to pray." This, too, was fulfilled, when, as our Saviour prayed
with the eleven apostles in the place called Gethsemane, and departed from them
a little way, and knelt down to His Father, and prayed a second and a third
time, Judas with the Rulers of the Jews matured his conspiracy, collecting and
leading the multitude of them that were prepared to take Him with swords and
staves. And they did evil to Him instead of good, and gave Him hate in return
for His love, when they were ill-disposed towards the Saviour, and Benefactor
and Teacher, Who had given them such healing and treatment by His words and
teaching and all sorts of benefits. In return for which, |205 since they did
evil to Him instead of good, and gave Him hatred for love, He rightly adds:

"Set a sinner over him, and let Satan stand at his right hand. When he is judged
let him go forth condemned, and let his prayer be turned into sin; let his days
be few, and another take his office."

And the holy apostle, applying this Scripture to the traitor, shewed clearly by
anticipation what would be the end of these things. Now you yourself can see,
how a sinful ruler and head was given to the Jewish race, after their
presumptuous deeds against the Saviour, and how they were forced to serve
strangers and idolaters instead of their ancient godly rulers. Who would not be
struck by the (477) fulfilment of the prediction? For the oracle says, "Let his
days be few," and there is no doubt that the whole period after their plot
against our Saviour was short, during which they appeared to abide, after which
they underwent the siege and were utterly destroyed, and then another took
office, namely the people founded by Christ. And you will understand the rest of
the Psalm in a similar (b) sense. The words that follow, spoken as of certain
children of Judas, "Let his children be orphans," and the like, may be referred
primarily to Judas, and secondarily to all who like him betray the word of
salvation. And you may understand in a similar way, his wife, and the sins of
his father, and of the Jewish Synagogue, which is called his mother. For I think
that this is meant by "let not the sin of his mother be done away." But just as
in the preceding (c) prophecy, our Lord and Saviour was called a beggar and a
poor man, as I have pointed out in expounding, "Blessed is the man that
considereth the poor and needy," so in the present Psalm He is called by these
names. May such and such judgments fall on Judas, He says, and those who have
like desires to his. What those judgments are He adds in these words:

"Because he remembered not to do mercy, and persecuted the poor and the beggar
and the stricken in spirit even unto death. He loved cursing and it shall come
to him; he wished not blessing, and it shall be far off from him."

And a little lower down He again calls Himself a poor man (d) and a beggar, and
says: |206

"And thou, Lord most high, have mercy on me, for thy name's sake, for good is
thy mercy. Save me, for I am poor and a beggar."

And he adds after an interval:

"My knees were weak through fasting, and my flesh was changed for lack of oil,
and I become a jest to them. They saw me, and shaked their heads at me." (478)

And all this was fulfilled, when "The passers-by reviled him, wagging their
heads and saying, He saved others, himself he cannot save." And since, even now,
the Jews draw down the curse of their fathers upon themselves, and are wont with
blasphemy and impious words to anathematize our Lord and Saviour and all that
believe on Him, He goes on to say:

"They shall curse, hut thou wilt bless. May they that arise against me be
ashamed, but thy servant shall rejoice. Let them who speak evil of me be clothed
with shame, and be clothed in confusion as with a cloak. (b) But I will confess
the Lord with my mouth, and amid many will I praise him, for he stood by the
right hand of the poor, to save my soul from the persecutors."

And it is quite clear, even now, to what evils they that invoke curses in their
synagogues have grown accustomed, never at all being able to recover from those
same times, while He offers to His Father in the midst of many nations the
praise of His new Covenant, having the Father working with Him, Who sits at His
own right hand. "Wherefore," (c) He says, "in the midst of many will I praise
him, for he stood at the right hand of the poor." And He assures of His own
preservation after death in the words: "To save my soul from the persecutors."
For after He had said above, "He persecuted the poor man and the beggar and him
that was stricken in heart even unto death," and had shewed forth His own death
outlining the prophecy, He said figuratively, "For he stood at the right hand of
the poor, to save his soul from the persecutors." |207

CHAPTER 4 From Zechariah.

Still of Judas, and of the Money in Return for which He betrayed the Lord, and
of the casting away of the Jewish Race, both Rulers and Ruled.

[Passage quoted, Zech. xi. 7b-14.] (479)

THIS was fulfilled when, according to Luke:

"Judas went away, and spoke with the chief priests (c) and scribes and captains
of the Temple, that he might betray him unto them. And they were glad, and
covenanted to give him money;"

or, according to Mark when, "he went to the chief priests to betray him; and
they were glad and promised to give him money." In each case it is simply money
that is named. But in Matthew the amount is recorded, and it agrees with the
quotation from Zechariah. For Matthew says:

"Then went one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, (d) to the chief priests,
and said to them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? and
they weighed unto him thirty staters."

And this agrees with, "And they weighed my price thirty pieces of silver," spoken by the Lord in the prophecy. And there is added to this, "And the Lord said to me, Drop them into the furnace, and see if it is good metal, as I was tested by them." For which Aquila renders: "And the Lord said to me, Drop them into the furnace, cast them to the potter: very great is the price, at which I was valued by them." And notice how the Lord Himself confesses that a sum of (480) thirty pieces of silver was given for Him. The meaning of His words implies something like this: I the Lord from the very first day ceased not to give to you Jews proofs of My kindness, and in countless ways I did you good, not only through the earliest prophets, but also by My presence in moral teaching and spiritual education, in signs and wonders, and other miracles, and in cures and attentions: now you (b) that were privileged to receive such benefits, give My price or refuse it, demanding of them, it would seem, the fruits of holiness, and the proof of their faith in Him. But they, as |208 the preceding quotation tells, instead of loving Me spoke evil of Me, and laid evil on Me instead of good, and hatred instead of My love, weighing out thirty pieces of silver, as if they valued at that price Him that was sold. But since the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is, He rightly bids them cast it into the furnace, adding, "As I was tested by them." Perhaps the House of God is here (c) called a Furnace. For the Lord says, according to the Septuagint, "Cast them into the Furnace," and adds, "And they cast them into the Furnace, the House of God"; while according to Aquila the Lord says, "Cast it, that is the money, to the potter," and adds, "And I cast it in the House of the Lord to the potter." According to Symmachus, the Lord says, "Cast it into the furnace," (d) and adds, "I cast it into the House of the Lord, into the Furnace." And was not this fulfilled when Judas----

"3. that betrayed the Lord, seeing that he was condemned, repented and returned
the money to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have
betrayed the innocent blood? 4. And they said to him, What is that to us? see
thou to that. 5. And he cast down the money in the Temple and went and hanged
himself. 6. And the chief priests took the money and said, It is not lawful to
put them in the treasury, for it is (481) the price of blood. 7. And they took
counsel, and bought with them the potters' field to bury strangers in: 8.
Wherefore that field is called the field of blood unto this day. 9. Then was
fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet saying, And they took
the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the
children of Israel did value, 10. and gave them for the potter's field, as the
Lord appointed me."

But as this passage is not found in the prophecy of Jeremiah, you must consider whether it is to be supposed that they have been removed through any evil intention, or whether there has been an error in copying, through the |209 mistake of some careless transcriber of the Holy Gospels, who wrote Jeremiah instead of Zechariah, where he ought to have copied, "Then was fulfilled that which was written by Zechariah the prophet," and instead of, "And they cast them into the house of the Lord, into the furnace," wrote in error, "And they bought with them the field of the potter." For the prophecy explicitly states that the money was cast into the Temple of the Lord, so does the Gospel: for, "Judas," it (c) says, "cast the money into the Temple, and departed." And perhaps it was through this money that the Temple was rendered profane, and the words, "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate," were fulfilled. And you may well ask whether the House of God was called a Furnace, because it is there that the souls of men are fashioned as in a crucible by the fire of divine teaching, or convicted of impurity, as if they were fired and tried in a furnace. Hence Aquila says, "I cast the money in the house of the (d) Lord to the potter," clearly teaching that the Divine Word dwells like a potter in the House of the Lord, and moulds and renews the souls of them that enter. But if the price of Him that was valued, there cast down rendered the House profane, it is natural for Him to proceed to say, "And I cast the second rod, the Rope, to break the covenant between Judah and Israel." For from that day the multitude of the nation was cut away from God's ancient providential guardianship. And I suppose the second rod to mean the whole Jewish nation. It is therefore called a Rope in the words, "The one I called Beauty, and the other I called a Rope." And he (482) proceeds to speak clearly of the second: "And I cast away the second rod, the Rope, to break my covenant between Judah and Israel." For they were the Rope and the second rod. But the first rod, called Beauty, was Jerusalem itself, and the Mosaic Worship, and the whole of the old covenant. This is shewn by the prophecy, saying, "And I will take my rod of beauty, and I will cast it away, to break my covenant." You sec that it says that the first rod was the (b) Covenant, and the second rod the Rope, but He threatens to cast them both away, first saying, "And I will take for myself two rods, the one I called Beauty, and the other I called a Rope"; or with Symmachus, "The one I called (c) glory, and the other I called a Rope." For thus he rightly |210 styled the glory and beauty of the whole nation the divine Law, and the Covenant, which it included. For the solemnities of Jerusalem, and the high-priestly ritual, and all the ancient observances of the divine Law and old Covenant, were a fair glory to them that lived under their order. And the multitude of the nation is called a Rope by Moses, (d) when he says: "The portion of the Lord is His people Jacob, and Israel is the Rope of His inheritance." But here it is prophesied that there will be a complete change of the two rods at the time named, so that the ancient Covenant that was therein of old, and its ancient beauty being destroyed, and the Rope and the whole nation broken through, when they had valued for thirty pieces of silver Him that was valued, they should bear the fit dishonour for their impiety. It therefore says, "And I will take my rod of Beauty, and cast it away, and break my covenant." And also, "And I cast away the second rod, the Rope." (483) And when the prophecy goes on to say, "And I will take away three shepherds in one month," I think that it refers to the three divisions of the ancient leaders of the people of God----the King, the Prophet, and the High-Priest----for by those three shepherds all the affairs of the ancients were managed. But since those three offices were destroyed together in our Saviour's time----(for their king reigned not in accordance with the Law, being a foreigner and not a member of the Jewish race; their high-priest was appointed to his office by the Romans, and did not attain his rank by the order of succession of the tribe, nor according to lawful (b) custom; and their prophets that had ceased until John arose were no longer active among them, but they had instead a wicked false prophet who led the people astray)---- He rightly threatens that He will take away at one time the three offices of grace, that had of old adorned the whole nation with wondrous glory, and says, "And I will take away three shepherds in one month, and my heart shall be sorrowful for them." For which Aquila renders, "And my soul was torn asunder for them," Symmachus, "And my soul perished for them," and Theodotion, "And my soul (c) perished about them." And he gives the reason of the perishing of his soul, saying, "For their souls were hardened |211 to me." Instead of this Aquila has, "For their soul was strong in me"; and Symmachus, "And their soul reached its height in me." And a similar expression to the words, "Their souls are hardened to me," of the Septuagint, is found in Jeremiah as spoken by the Lord, namely:

"I have left my home, I have forsaken my inheritance, I have given my beloved
soul into the hand of its enemies. My inheritance has become to me as a lion in
a forest, it has opened on me its voice. Is not my (d) beloved now to me as a
hyaena's cave? "

And then He naturally goes on to say:

"I will not shepherd you, that which is dying may die, that which is failing may
fail, and let the remnant eat each one the flesh of his neighbour."

And after this He says, "I will take my rod of beauty and cast it away." For
which Aquila renders: "And I took my rod, the Glory, and cut it off," meaning
the Mosaic Worship. Thus the first rod mentioned in the beginning of the passage
is said to be the first to be broken and cast away. But when the price of Him
that was valued and the (484) money paid for Him to the traitor was cast into
the House of the Lord as into a furnace, then we see what is prophesied will
happen to the second rod, that is to say to the whole nation in the words, "And
I cast away the second rod, the Rope, to break my covenant between Judah and
Israel." And as the oracle intended clearly their destruction by this, it
naturally goes on to say that they shall no longer recognize the power of things
prophesied, but the Canaanites will, when He says, "And the Canaanites shall
know, my (b) sheep kept for me, because it is the Word of the Lord." Who are
meant by the Canaanites but ourselves, who once were foreigners, and sheep kept
for Christ from all the old heathen and sinful nations? We that have been
converted by His grace, and understanding the things prophesied, have received
the true knowledge of the word of the Lord; yea, we Canaanites know and
understand what was meant; but they that boasted of Israel, and gloried in being
of the (c) seed of Abraham, neither knew nor understood. |212

CHAPTER 5 From Jeremiah.

Still of Judas, Who is named.

[Passage quoted, Jer. xvii. 1-4.]

THOUGH this passage is not found in the Septuagint, yet it is in the Hebrew and
in the editions of the other translators, and is quoted with asterisks in the
more accurate copies of the Septuagint. I have necessarily quoted it, (485)
because it gives the name of the traitor Judas, and teaches that the sin he
committed can never be wiped out. For this I think is implied by the words, "The
sin of Judas is written with a pen of iron, and with the point of a diamond." It
could refer also to the whole Jewish nation, as a threat of the utter
destruction that would overtake them in the immediate train of their indelible
iniquity, an interpretation I have no time now to expound word by word, (b) And
now that I have prepared the way by giving so many examples of prophecies
concerning him that was to betray our Lord and Saviour, and those that conspired
against Him in other ways, let us examine what was foretold in connection with
His actual Passion.

CHAPTER 6 From Amos. Of the Eclipse of the Sun at the Time of Our Saviour's
Passion, and of the Total Destruction of the Jewish Nation.

[Passage quoted, Amos viii. 7-12.]

THIS prophecy foretells the pride, insolence and rebellion of the Jews against
our Saviour, and says that the Lord (486) sware against the presumption of
Jacob, that their insolence |213 against Him should never be forgotten, and that
their land and its inhabitants should undergo suffering and mourning, and that
no more as before should they be punished a little while and then restored, but
that this judgment should last for ever. For He says, "Complete destruction
shall come upon them," meaning that wrath in the time of the Roman Empire would
attack them, that a river should rise on them as on men who before were lifted
up. And then after this anger of God against them, their state, He says, will
again "Come down like the river of (b) Egypt." By which I think is meant, that
the ancient glories of the Jews once so lofty, so prized by God, and as it were
exalted on high, will become like the state of the heathen nations, which flow
and pass by like a river, and will go from height to depth. And He next tells
what will happen at the time of the saving Passion, "In that day," He says,
saith the Lord, "the sun shall set at midday, and the light shall be (c)
darkened on the earth at daytime," and this was plainly fulfilled, when our Lord
was lifted up, according to the Gospel:

"And there was darkness over all the earth from the sixth hour even to the ninth
hour, and about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, Eli, Eli, lama
sabachthani."

This prophecy was thus fulfilled, and it goes on to say:

"And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your song into lamentation.
And I will bring sackcloth (d) on all loins, and baldness on every head: And I
will make him as grief for a dear one, and them with him as a day of pain.
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will send famine upon the earth,
not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the word
of the Lord," etc.

And all this prophecy of what would result from their insolence against the
Christ has been clearly proved to have taken place after their plot against our
Saviour. For it was not before it, but afterwards from that day to this that God
turned their feasts into mourning, despoiled them of their famous mother-city,
and destroyed the holy Temple (487) |214 therein when Titus and Vespasian were
Emperors of Rome, so that they could no longer go up to keep their feasts and
sacred meetings. I need not say that a famine of hearing the Word of the Lord
has overtaken them all, in return for their rejection of the Word of God; since
with one voice they refused Him, so He refuses them.

CHAPTER 7 (b) From Zechariah.

Still concerning the Eclipse of the Sun, and of the Time of the Saving Passion.

[Passage quoted, Zech. xiv. 5-9.]

THIS was fulfilled by the coming of our Saviour, accompanied either by His holy apostles and disciples, or by His holy ones, the divine powers and unembodied spirits, His
(d) angels and ministers, of whom the holy gospel says, "Angels came and ministered unto him." In that day (for this is the usual name given in Holy Scripture to the time of His sojourn on earth) the prophecy before us was fulfilled as well as the other predictions, when at the time of His Passion, "From the sixth hour unto the ninth hour there was darkness over all the earth." Therefore the prophecy says, "In that day there shall be no light." And also, "It shall not be day nor night: but towards evening it shall be light." Where we have, I think, an exact description of the time, when, our Lord being lifted up, though it was day, (488) night filled the atmosphere from the sixth to the ninth hour. And afterwards the darkness cleared, and it was bright daylight, until night fell as usual. So the word of the prophecy implies, "And that day is known to the Lord, and it shall be neither day nor night: and towards evening it shall be light." For it was not day because of the midday darkness; nor was it night because of the returning day, which is shewn by the words, "Towards evening it shall be light."
(b) And the mention of the wintry season is astonishing indeed in the words of the prophecy, which say, "There shall be frost and cold"; for this is supported by the evidence of
|215 the Gospel, which tells how Peter following Jesus warmed himself in the Hall of Caiaphas with the others, where a fire was kindled. John actually mentions the cold, saying,
"The servants and attendants stood round, having made a fire of coals, for it was cold, and they warmed themselves." The prophecy was thus literally fulfilled. And figuratively, as well in regard to the whole Jewish nation the reality of which those things were symbols was also
fulfilled----when the light of salvation shone on them, and they chose darkness rather (c) than light, and the light departed from them, and unspeakable night overwhelmed them, and the eyes of their mind were darkened, so that the rays of the Gospel should not shine in their hearts, and when too their love to God waxed cold. And in them too the rest of the prophecy was fulfilled, when on the day of our Saviour's coming living water came forth from Jerusalem, and the fruitful living word of Gospel Teaching went forth to all nations, beginning from (d) Jerusalem, yea, from Jerusalem itself, and was spread over all the earth, even to the utmost bounds of the world. The Lord and Saviour Himself speaks of this water to the Samaritan woman:

"If thou knewest who it is that asketh thee for drink, thou wouldst have asked
of him, and he would have given thee living water."

And He goes on to teach what advantage would accrue to all that taste of the
living spiritual spring, saying that they that drink thereof, denying the many
evil daemons who ruled them of old, will confess their one Lord and King, and
that the Lord, that once was known only to the Hebrews, will become King of all
nations that believe in (489) Him from all the earth, and that His Name will be
one, encircling all the earth and the wilderness. And who is not struck at
seeing this fulfilled? For the Christian name, derived from the Name of Christ
(and Christ was indeed the Lord) has encircled every place and city and land,
and the very nations that dwell in the wilderness and at the ends of the earth,
as the prophecy foretold. |216

CHAPTER 8 From Psalm xxi. Of What was done at Our Saviour's Passion. At the End
concerning His being succoured in the Morning.

(490) [Passage quoted, Ps. xxi. 2-32.]

THE words, "My God, give ear to me, why hast thou forsaken me?" spoken at the
opening of the Psalm, are recorded by Matthew to have been said by our Saviour
at the time of the Passion:

"And at the sixth hour, there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth
hour, and at the ninth hour Jesus called with a loud voice, Eloim, Eloim, lama
sabachthani, that is to say, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou
forsaken me?"

And the Hebrew words are taken from this prophecy. So, then, the beginning of
the Psalm includes the words "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani" in the same syllables,
which (491) Aquila has thus translated: "My strong one, my strong one, why hast
thou left me?" And everyone will agree that this is equivalent to our Saviour's
words at the time of His Passion. You may therefore be quite convinced that the
Psalm refers to Him and no one else, for its contents harmonize with none other
but Him. The other predictions are exactly fulfilled in Him; and especially the
words, "They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast
lots." It also foretells literally the (b) driving in of the nails, when His
hands and feet were nailed to the Cross, saying "They pierced my hands and my
feet, they numbered all my bones." And the other predictions apply to Him alone,
as my argument will shew. But if any one would apply them to some other person,
whether king, prophet, or other godly man among the Jews, let him prove if he
can how what is written is in harmony with him. For who of those who were ever
born of women has attained such heights of virtue and power, as to embrace the
knowledge (c) of God with unchanging reason, with unruffled soul, and with sober
mind, and to fasten all his trust on God, so |217 as to say, "Thou art He that
took me out of my mother's womb, my hope from my mother's breasts. I was cast on
thee from my mother, from my mother's womb Thou art my God." And who that has
ever been so cared for by God, has also become "a reproach of men "and "the
outcast of the people''? By what bulls and calves can we (d) suppose such a man
to have been surrounded? And in what suffering was he "poured out like water"?
How were "all his bones loosened"? How was "he brought into the dust of death,"
and being brought into the dust of death how does he say those words still and
live and speak? Who are "the dogs "that surround him, that are other than the
beforenamed "bulls and calves"? What gathering of evil men pierced his feet as
well as his hands, stripped him of his raiment, divided some of it among
themselves, and cast lots for the remainder? What was the sword, the dog, and
the lion? Who are they that surrounded him that are called Unicorns? And how
after (492) a struggle with such numbers, after being brought into the dust of
death, can he promise to proclaim His Father's name, not to all, but only to his
brethren? Who are the brethren, and what church is it of which this sufferer
says, "In the midst of the Church I will hymn thee," adding, not the one Jewish
nation but, "All the earth shall understand, and turn to the Lord, and all the
kindreds of the nations shall worship before him"? It is for you yourself to
test every expression in the Psalm, and see if it is possible to apply them to
any chance (b) character. You will find them only applicable to our Saviour, Who
is most true and most to be trusted, and Who applied the words of the Psalm to
Himself, as the Evangelists bear witness: Matthew in the quotations I have
given, and Mark in his own record, where he says:

"And at the sixth hour there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth
hour. And at the ninth hour (c) Jesus cried with a loud voice saying, Eli, Eli,
lama sabachthani, which is to say, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast
thou forsaken me? And certain of them that heard said, He calleth for Elias.''

Let us now proceed to investigate, in what way the |218 expressions of the Psalm
must be referred to Him. And first we will deal with the inscription which says,
"To the end," or according to Aquila, "To the Conqueror," or according to
Symmachus, "Ode of Victory concerning the Succour." I have an idea, based on the
words of the Evangelists, "There was darkness from the sixth hour unto the ninth
hour," that our Saviour's Passion was concluded about the ninth hour, when with
a loud voice He spake the words quoted a little before, and that we should
consider that His Passion was past at eventide on the approach of night. Then
His Resurrection from the dead, which was the Succour of the Father Who
succoured Him, and drew Him to Himself, from the land of death, and received
Him, must have taken place at dawn, as we learn from the Evangelists. For Luke
says, "On the first day of the week at the break of dawn they came [that is the
women], to the sepulchre, bearing the spices which they had prepared, and
certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the
sepulchre. And going in they did not find the Body, because our Saviour was
already risen from the dead." Mark also tells the same story, saying:

"And very early in the morning, on the first day of the week they went to the
sepulchre, at the rising of the sun, and said to one another, Who shall roll us
away the stone from the door of the Sepulchre? for it was very great."

They went, and found it rolled away. And He was already risen. There is the same witness in John: "On the first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene to the sepulchre, while it was still dark, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre." And Matthew too, although he had said, "late on the Sabbath," adds, "As it began to dawn on the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary to see the sepulchre, and behold there was a great earthquake. For the Angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone from the door of the sepulchre." I have necessarily given |219 these quotations to shew the meaning of the "succour at dawn "predicted in the Psalm. For since it tells of our Saviour's Passion, and since the dispensation concerning Him was in no way hindered by the Passion, and the end of the Passion was His Resurrection from the dead and "the succour at dawn," the oracle crowns its description with the final miracle, as if the whole account and the sufferings before the end were incidental to the Resurrection from the dead, and the succour at dawn. For our Lord and Saviour said, (d) "My God, my God, give ear to me, why hast thou forsaken me? "And then added, "I am a worm and no man, a reproach of men, and the outcast of the people"; and in addition to this, "Many oxen have encircled me, fat bulls have hemmed me in"; and gave a clear prediction of His Death in the verse, "Thou hast brought me into the dust of death, for many dogs have surrounded me, the council of the wicked has hemmed me in, they pierced my hands and my feet;" and He gave still further details of His Passion in the words, "They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots." And having given those and similar predictions He did not cease there, but added: "Ye that fear the Lord praise (494) him, for he hath not despised, nor been angered at the prayer of the poor, nor turned his face from him, but when I cried unto him he heard me." How could He claim to have been heard, unless He had had a complete answer to the prayers which He had just uttered, when He said, "Thou hast brought me into the dust of death. Save my soul from the sword, and my only-begotten from the power of the dog"? Nay, having prayed thus, and asked that He might be rescued and saved from these enemies, He adds, '' He hath not despised, nor been angry at the prayer of the poor, nor turned away his face from him: but when I cried unto him, he heard me." He evidently means His Return to life after death, which came to pass through the Succour at dawn, which the Psalm goes on to shew, saying, "But thou, O Lord, do not remove thy help, come to my succour." And it is. this succour that is referred to by the Inscription of the Psalm. So much about the Inscription of the Psalm. Let us now (c) sound the deeper studies of the Hebrews on the words, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani," which were said by. our |220 Saviour in the hour of His Passion in the actual Hebrew words, and which are enshrined in the Psalm. Now Eloeim is a name for God. And you will find it throughout nearly all the Scriptures: and even now in the Septuagint He is called properly by the Hebrew name. Though of course the Hebrews had other expressions for the divine Name----such as Saddai, Jao, El, and the like. This Psalm then uses "Eli, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani," as our Lord Himself does, and not Eloeim. And so Aquila, aware of the distinct meaning of God's Hebrew name of Eloeim, did not, like the other translators, think good to render them "My God, my God"----but "My strong one, my strong one," or more accurately, "My strength, my strength." So that taking this sense the Lamb of God our Saviour, when he said, "Eli, Eli," to His Father, meant, "My strong one, my strong one, why hast thou forsaken me?" And may.be He was crucified, because His Strong One had left Him, as the apostle says, "For he was crucified in weakness, but he liveth by the power of God," implying that He would not have been crucified, unless His Strong One had left Him. And surely it befits the Lamb of God, Who was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before its shearers is dumb, to attribute His own powers to God, and to reckon He had nothing of His own except His Father: wherefore He calls His Father His Strength, just as in Psalm xviii. He gives Him the names of Strength and Refuge, saying:

"I will love thee, O Lord, my strength. The Lord is my foundation, and my
refuge, and saviour. My God, my helper, and I will trust in him; my protector,
the horn also of my refuge, and my succour.

His Strong One forsook Him then, because He wished Him to go unto death, even "the death of the cross," and to be set forth as the ransom and sacrifice for the whole world, and to be the purification of the life of them that believe in Him. And He, since he understood at once His Father's Divine counsel, and because He discerned better than any other why He was forsaken by the Father, humbled Himself even more, and embraced death for us with all willingness, and "became a curse for us," holy and |221 all-blessed though He was, and "He that knew no sin, became sin, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." Yea more----to wash away our sins He was crucified, suffering what we who were sinful should have suffered, as our sacrifice and ransom, so that we may well say with the prophet, He bears our sins, and is pained for us, and he was wounded for our sins, and bruised for our iniquities, so that by His stripes we might be healed, for the Lord hath given Him for our sins. So, as delivered up by the Father, as bruised, as bearing our sins, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter. With this the apostle agrees when he says, "Who spared not his own Son, but delivered him for us all." And it is to impel us to ask why the Father forsook Him, that He says, "Why hast thou forsaken me? "The answer is, to ransom the whole human race, buying them with His precious Blood from their former slavery to their invisible tyrants, the unclean daemons, and the rulers and spirits of evil. And the Father forsook Him for another reason, namely, that the love of Christ Himself for men might be set forth. For no one had power over His life, but He gave it willingly for men, as He teaches us Himself in the words, "No one taketh my life from me: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again."

After this He says, "Far from my salvation are the words of my sins." Instead of
which Aquila translates, "Far from my salvation are the words of my complaint";
and Symmachus, "The words of my lamentations are removed from my salvation." And
in yet a fifth translation it is rendered, "Far from my salvation are the words
of my requests." It I is to be especially remarked that in neither of these
translations does the expression "of my sins "appear, as it sometimes happens
that similar alterations are made in a text by the error of a copyist. And we
must accept the version given by the majority of the translators, unless we can
understand Him to mean that the sins are ours, but that He has made them His
own.

He next says, "My God, I will cry by day, and thou (d) wilt not hear, and by
night, and it shall not be folly for |222 me." Instead of which Symmachus has,
"My God, I will call by day, and thou wilt not hear, and by night, and there is
no silence." He is surely shewing His surprise here that the Father does not
hear Him, He regards it as something strange and unusual. But that Father
reserved His hearing till the fit time that He should be heard. That time was
the hour of dawn, of the Resurrection from the dead, when to Him it could be
more justly said than to any, "In a time accepted I heard thee, and in a day of
salvation I succoured thee. Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the
day of salvation." This, of course, could be said in another sense by our
Saviour, as one always accustomed to be heard by the Father, as if He said, to
put it more clearly: "Is it possible, O Father, that I, Thine only and beloved
Son, should not be heard, when I cry and call to my Father? "For this is the
very point He dwells on in John's Gospel at the raising of Lazarus, when He
says, "Take away the stone from the sepulchre," and "raised his eyes to heaven
and said, Father, 1 thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou
hearest me always." If, then, He heareth Him always, it is not in doubt but in
absolute assurance that He will be heard, as if it were impossible for Him not
to be heard, that He speaks in the form of a question the words: "My God, shall
I cry in the day, and thou not hear?" And we must put a note of interrogation
after "hear," and understand that the answer to the question is a negative. And
He shews that this is right a little further on in the Psalm, when He says:

"He hath not despised, nor been angry at the prayer of the poor, nor turned his
face from him, but when he cried unto him he heard him."

For how could He say negatively, "My God, I will cry by day, and thou wilt not hear," except in the sense I (c) have suggested? And I think He implies this sense when He says, "My God, shall I cry by day, and wilt thou not hear? and by night, and it is not folly for me." "For I do not cry 'Thou wilt not hear,' He says, 'in folly': for I know that I say this inspired by the conviction that it is Thy nature to help and to hear not only me, but all Thy |223 saints. For Thou ever 'dwellest in Thy saints' continually, and art 'the praise' of every godly man that is called 'Israel.' For Thy sake to every one that worships Thee no (d) common praise accrues; in Thee our fathers hoped, and by their trust were saved from the evils that attacked them, 'Unto Thee they cried, and were saved.' Since, then, all Thy saints have had this blessing of Thee, to cry unto Thee and be heard and not be ashamed, how much more readily and specially wilt Thou hear Thy beloved Son that cries? And, if I ask as one who wonders, 'Shall I cry and Thou wilt not hear?' yet shall not My words be regarded as folly. For I know that I utter My prayer, not as one that glories or as one that boasts, but as one of lowly mind. For being gentle and lowly in heart, My words are humble and spoken in humility like My own gentleness, even as I call Myself a worm. For what could be more lowly than a worm? Hence I call Myself 'no man,' since I have descended from (498) My own majesty to such lowliness, that I seem to be no more than a worm, so that I may undergo even death and the destruction of My body. For how else can worms be generated but from the destruction of bodies, and I going to such destruction recognize Myself rightly as a worm and no man. So, too, have I become a reproach of men and the outcast of the people, and I should have become neither unless I had reached the state of a worm at the time of My Passion. For it was then that they who saw Me hanging (b) on the Cross mocked Me, and spake with their lips, and shook their heads saying, 'He trusted in God, let Him deliver him, let Him save him if He desires him.'" This was the clear prophecy of the Psalmist of what was (c) to come to pass a long time after him, and it was fulfilled when, according to Matthew----

"Two thieves being crucified with him, one on the right of the Saviour and one
on the left, the passers-by reviled him, wagging their heads and saying, Woe,
Thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save thyself; if
thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross. Likewise the chief priests
mocking him with the elders and scribes said, he saved others, himself he cannot
save. If he be the King of |224 Israel, let him now come down from the cross,
and we will believe him. If he trusted in God, let him deliver him now if he
will have him, for he said, I am the Son of God."

And according to Luke:

"The people stood beholding, and the rulers with them mocked him saying, He
saved others, let him save himself if he is the Christ, the Son of God, the
chosen."

And according to Mark:

"And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou
that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save thyself and come
down from the cross. Likewise the chief priests, mocking between themselves with
the scribes, said, He saved others, himself he cannot save. Let Christ the King
of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe in him."

Where is the discrepancy between this and the prophecies in the Psalm,

"I am a worm and no man, a reproach of men and the outcast of the people. All
they that saw me reviled me, they spoke with their lips, they shook their heads,
saying, he trusted in the Lord, let him deliver him, let him save him if he
desires him"?

Wonder not if this was said of and fulfilled by the Passion of our Saviour, for
even now He is a reproach among all men who have not yet received faith in Him !
For what is more shameful or worse than any reproach than to be crucified? Yea,
He is an outcast of the people of the Jews, for even to-day that whole race
loves to mock Him, to set Him at naught, and to spit on Him: wherefore the
apostle rightly says:

"We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Gentiles
foolishness."

And that which follows in the Psalm you will find even now said of Him by the
multitude. Such, then, was His prayer concerning the affliction that overtook
Him. And since He knew that His original union with our flesh, and His birth of
a woman that was a Virgin was no worse |225 experience than the suffering of
death, while He speaks of His death He also mentions His birth, saying to the
Father:

"Thou art he that took me out of my mother's womb: Thou wast my hope even from
my mother's breasts. On thee was I cast from my mother: from my mother's womb
thou art my God."

Thus He naturally remembers this to comfort Him in His present affliction.

"For just as Thou wert My Succour," He says, "when I took the body of man, when
Thou, my God and Father, like a midwife didst draw the body that had been
prepared for Me by the Holy Spirit from My travailing mother, putting (d) forth
Thy power, to prevent any attempt or plan of hostile powers, envious of My entry
into humanity. And since at the very Conception Thou didst overshadow that which
was in the womb, so that the rulers of this world might not be aware of the
Conception of the Holy Virgin by the Holy Spirit; which mighty mystery thy
Archangel Gabriel did reveal to Mary, saying: 'The Holy Spirit shall come upon
thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.' Just as the power of
the Highest overshadowed Me when I was conceived, and took Me out of My mother's
womb when I was born, so it is now My sure consolation, that Thou wilt much more
save Me from death. And in this hope I put My trust in Thee, My God, My Lord, My
Father: I put My trust not as now first beginning My hope in Thee, for I trusted
Thee even when I drew My infant food from My mother's breasts, and was thought
to be like human babes powerless and without reason. Such I was not, though I
had a human body: it was not like in power or (b) substance to other bodies, I
was free and unfettered, as Thy Lamb, O God, though at that age nourished with
milk, I mean from My mother's breasts. And no one will think this impossible, if
he remembers that even before I was cast on Thee from My mother, and from the
womb of My mother Thou art My God. For while still carried in the treasury of
her that brought Me forth I saw Thee, My God, (c) as one who continued separate
and untroubled though in |226 such close contact with things of flesh, yea, as
one who had no body yet and was free of all bonds. And so was I cast on Thee
from My mother, on Thee, My God, from My mother's breasts, so that My power was
felt while I was still borne in the womb of the Holy Virgin by My forerunner
John, while he was yet in the womb of Elizabeth, so that, stirred by My
divinity, he leapt for joy, and was filled with (d) the Holy Spirit.

"Bearing such memories in My mind, and ever setting My God and Father before My
eyes, it is not strange that in this present hour of supreme suffering I should
do the same, when in My obedience to Thee, My Father, of My own will and consent
I became a worm and no man, a reproach of men and the outcast of the people. And
now when all who gaze on My body nailed to the Cross think they see a sight of
ill omen and mock Me, pouring such a flood of reviling and satire upon Me,
shewing that they not only think evil of Me and harbour it in their minds, but
speak it without fear and say it openly: for 'They spoke with their lips, and
shook their heads, saying, He (501) trusted in the Lord, let Him deliver him.'

"So now when such troubles hem Me in, I call upon Thee, My Father, who drew Me
out of My mother's womb, on Whom I was cast from My mother, in Whom I trusted
from her breasts, made known to Me and acknowledged as My God even from My
mother's womb, and I beseech Thee not to depart from Me, for affliction is near.
For there comes, He says, yea, is all but come and at the door, afflicting Me
and pressing upon Me the last cloud of all, the cloud of My surpassing trouble.
I do not mean this (b) trouble which now enfolds Me, nor the Cross, nor the
jeers of men, nor the mockery, nor anything at all that I underwent before the
Cross, scourging, insults, nor all My vile treatment from the sons of men; but I
look to the dissolution of the body in death itself, and the descent into Hades
next thereto, and the onset of the hostile powers opposed to God. And I
therefore say, 'Trouble is near, and there is no helper.'"

It is surely the very climax of affliction to have no helper. |227 For Christ
went thither for the salvation of the souls in (c) Hades that had so long
awaited His arrival, He went down to shatter the gates of brass, and to break
the iron bonds, and to let them go free that before were prisoners in Hades.
Which was indeed done, when many bodies of the saints that slept arose and
entered with Him into the true Holy City of God. But the opposing powers, added
to mere human evil, attacked Him, grieving and afflicting Him sorely, though in
His excess of goodness He lamented even over them. (d) But observe how all this
is said, as in the person of Him that was carried in a mother's womb, and born
of a mother, Whom we called the Lamb of God. For the words about the Passion
apply to Him, just as did those about the Incarnate Birth. For that which is
born must die, and that which dies can only travel the road to death which
starts from birth.

This, then, our Lord and Saviour unfolds, not as being in nature without flesh
and body, nor in so far as He is regarded as the Word of God and Divine, but in
so far as He was able to say in His prayer to His Father:

"Thou didst draw me out of my mother's womb, (502) thou wast my hope from my
mother's breasts. I was cast on thee from my mother, thou art my God from my
mother's womb."

He then in His Passion prays such a prayer to His Father, and says:

"Many hostile forces will surround Me, unclean daemons, and spirits of
wickedness, and above all the prince of this world himself the vilest of them
all, who because of their wickedness may well be called after evil beasts, be it
savage (b) bulls, or calves, or lions, or dogs. And as I essay to withstand them
all, but to do them no good, because from the intense evil of their nature they
are incapable of receiving good from Me, with none of them for My helper or
fellow-worker in My contest on behalf of the souls in Hades, am I not right in
saying, 'Trouble is near, and there is no helper'?" Of course it was not to be
expected that any of the evil |228 and hostile powers would have worked with
Him, or aided (c) Him in His mission of good. But surely the bitterest element
in the cup of pain that was His, was that none of the good and favouring angels,
and none of the divine powers, dared to venture to the halls of Death and help
Him in succouring the souls there. For in Him alone was there courage, since to
Him only were the gates of death opened, Him only the janitors of Hades saw and
feared, and He that has the power of death, descending from His royal throne, as
recognizing Him only for His Lord, spoke gently (d) to Him with prayer and
supplication, as Job relates. Yet He, seeing the impious realm of the tyrant so
strong that no heavenly being dared to accompany Him to that bourne, or to help
Him in saving the souls there, cries naturally, "Trouble is near, and there is
ho helper," since the only Being from heaven who could have helped Him had
forsaken Him, so that the glory and independence of His own choice and of His
own victory might be proclaimed to all. And since the only Being that could help
Him was not then His helper, it is natural that His first words should be, "Eli,
Eli, lama sabachthani?" that is, "My God, My God, why (503) hast thou forsaken
me?" For when He was conceived, and when He was brought forth by the Holy Virgin
His Father's power was with Him, when the Holy Spirit came upon the maiden, and
the Power of the Highest overshadowed her, and the Father Himself, as the oracle
shews, drew forth Him that was begotten from her womb. But when in the hour of
His Passion He entered on His struggle with Death, the Helper was no longer with
Him. Yea, I (b) believe His own witness of this. For the words, "Eli, Eli, lama
sabachthani?" which He spoke on the Cross, and which were prophetically foretold
in the Psalm, what else do they mean but that like a great athlete He was
matched |229 against all these adversaries, while Almighty God ordered the
contest and gave the decision? Thus He summons His Father as the overseer of
what is being done, and as the adviser, like a clever Anointer, to come to Him,
especially as He has no other helper, but only Him that governs (c) the content.
And so He says in prayer, "Be not thou far from me, for trouble is near, and
there is no helper." And when with divine eyes He saw His body being suspended
on the tree, the unembodied and invisible powers without in the air hovering
around Him like voracious birds and wild beasts, and knew that almost at once
His body would be a corpse, and fell the powers and rulers of the air surging
around Him on every side, the spirit which now worketh in the children of
disobedience, and the (d) daemons flying over the earth wherever men inhabit,
and perhaps also the wild and dreadful beasts of Tartarus, of which Isaiah said,
addressing Lucifer that had fallen from heaven: "Hades beneath was disturbed to
meet thee, all the giants rose before thee." When, then, He saw all those
without surrounding His crucified body, and preparing to attack Him, He
describes their array when He says: "Many oxen have surrounded me, fat bulls hem
me in. They have (504) opened their mouths against Me, as a lion voracious and
roaring." For most likely they thought that the soul which dwelt in the body of
Jesus was human and like other human souls; and opened their mouths as if to
devour it like the other human souls. So He says, "They opened their mouths on
me, like a lion voracious and roaring." And next He adds, "I am poured out like
water." This may be said to have been fulfilled outwardly and historically, when
One of the soldiers, according to the Evangelist John, (b) "pierced the side "of
the Lamb of God "with a spear, and forthwith came there out blood and water."
But He rather seems to refer to the dying of His entire spiritual being when He
says:

"I am poured out like water, and all my bones are loosened, my heart in the
midst of my body is like melting wax. My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue has cleaved to my throat."

For this is surely a description of a dead body. So, too, |230 He adds, "And
thou hast brought me to the dust of death." And then, starting again from what
was now past, to comfort Himself for what was yet to happen, He describes what
He went through when they plotted against Him. "Many dogs surrounded me, the
council of the wicked hemmed me in," meaning probably both the soldiers and the
Jews who rose against Him.

"27. Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall and
gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. 28. And they stripped him, and put
on him a scarlet robe. 29. And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put
it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before
him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! 30. And they spit upon him, and took the
reed and smote him on the head. 31. And after that they had mocked him, they
took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to
crucify him."

This is almost an exact fulfilment of "Many dogs surrounded me, the council of
the wicked hemmed me in"; moreover, "They pierced my hands and my feet, they
numbered all my bones," and also, "They came staring and looking upon me," and
"They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots,"
were all fulfilled, when they fastened His hands and feet to the Cross with
nails, and when they took His garments and divided them among them. For John's
record is:

"23. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and
made four parts, to every soldier (b) a part: and also his coat. Now the coat
was without seam woven from the top throughout. 24. They said therefore among
themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots whose it shall be; that the
Scripture might be fulfilled, which saith: They parted my garments among them,
and for my vesture did they cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did."
|231

And Matthew witnesses to what was done as follows:

"And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them,
and upon my vesture did they cast lots. And sitting down they watched him."

The dogs that surrounded Him and the council of the wicked were the rulers of
the Jews, the Scribes and High Priests, and the Pharisees, who spurred on the
whole multitude to demand His blood against themselves and against their own
children. Isaiah clearly calls them dogs, when he says: "Ye are all foolish
dogs, unable to bark." For when it was their duty, even if they could not
acquire the character of shepherds, to protect like good sheepdogs their
Master's spiritual flock and the sheep of the house of Israel, and to warn by
barking, and to fawn upon their Master and recognize Him, and to guard the flock
entrusted to them with all vigilance, and to bark if necessary at enemies
outside the fold, they preferred like senseless dogs, yes, like mad dogs, to
drive the sheep wild by barking, so that the words aptly describe them, which
say: "Many dogs have surrounded me, the council of the wicked have hemmed me
in." And all who even now conduct themselves like them in reviling and barking
at the Christ of God in the same way may be reckoned their kin; yea, they who
like those impious soldiers crucify the Son of God, and put Him to shame, have a
character very like theirs. Yea, all who to-day insult the Body of Christ, that
is the Church, and attempt to destroy the hands and feet and very bones, are of
their number, if it be true that:

"We are one body in Christ, and all members one of another, and the head must
not say to the feet, I have no need of you, nor the eyes to the hands."

Thus in times of persecution, it may be aptly said of those who work against the
members of Christ on the side of their enemies: "They pierced my hands and my
feet, they numbered all my bones." Then, too, they divide His garments among
them, and cast lots upon His vesture, when each individual tears and destroys
the glory of His |232 Word, I mean the words of the Holy Scriptures, now this
way, now that, and when they take up opinions about (c) Him from misleading
schools of thought such as godless heretics invent. To crown all this He
addresses the following prayer to His God and Lord and Father: "But thou, O
Lord, take not far off thy help." Left for a little while alone for the shewing
forth of the contest, and stripped to contend with Death without a helper, well
aware that His only succour from His Father will be by the Resurrection from the
dead, He naturally now prays to escape from the (d) array of His adversaries. So
He says: "Thou, O Lord, remove not far thy help, afford me succour. For my
succour will come from thy help," and it is perhaps in reference to His succour
that the whole Psalm is entitled "Concerning the succour at dawn."

"Have regard then to My succour, extending to Me as soon as dawn conies the
succour of the Resurrection from the dead, which I know that I shall receive, if
thou remove it not from Me. Save My soul from the sword, My Only-begotten from
the power of the dog. Thou wilt save Me from the mouth of the lion, and (507) my
lowliness from the horns of the unicorns."

By which I understand Him to mean the powers of the under-world, which it is not
in my power to distinguish and divide into classes, shewing which was the sword
that threatened our Saviour's life, or which one like a dog of death stretched
forth its death-fraught paw, to capture it. For He says: "Save my soul from the
sword, my Only-begotten from the power of the dog." And another evil (b) power
reckoned as one of the wild beasts there, called a lion, opening wide its vast
and yawning mouth of death, essays to devour His soul with the others of them
that go down to Hades, just as long before mighty Death devoured them, being
none other than the lion that opened his mouth before our Saviour, from which He
prayed to His Father to deliver Him, saying: "Save me from the lion's mouth."
And there were other evil and impious powers working (c) against the Unicorn of
God, and attempting to seduce Him |233 from His purpose, from whom too the
Unicorn of God, our Lord having His Father as His only horn, prays that His
lowliness may be saved, saying: "And my lowliness from the horns of the
unicorn." What lowliness, but that wherewith, being in the form of God, He
humbled Himself and emptied Himself, being obedient unto death, even the death
of the Cross. Yea, so low descending, and coming even to this, I mean even to
the sword in Hades, and to the hand of Him that is called its dog. (Whence,
perhaps, the Greeks hearing of some such dog of death, painted it with three
heads): and coming to the throat of the said lion, and subjecting His lowliness
to the attacks of the impious Unicorns, and thus having completed the whole
dispensation of His self-emptying and humiliation, and prayed that now at last
He may receive help and the succour of His Father, He adds: "Thou, O Lord,
remove not thy help far off, attend to my succour." And though He says this, His
Father is not too far off to hear Him, He is not removed far off, He is not
separated by the smallest space, but is actually saying to Him: "While thou
speakest, I will say, I am here." And He, well aware of this, and receiving
succour from His Father, as He had prayed, begins from that point to chant the
Hymn of Triumph, making the Psalm, "Concerning the succour at dawn," in which He
says: "I will recite thy name with my brethren, in the midst of the Church I
will hymn thee." First, of course, to the disciples and apostles, whom He calls
His brethren, He promises to announce the good news of joy and gladness in Him,
And in accordance with this, Matthew teaches, saying;

"And, behold, Jesus met them, that is to say, those with Mary Magdalene, saying,
All Hail. And they came to him and clasped his feet, and worshipped him. Then
Jesus saith to them, Fear not, go tell my brethren, that they must go before me
into Galilee. And there shall they see me."

And John, too, after the Resurrection from the dead, introduces Jesus saying to
Mary:

"Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. Go to my brethren and say
to them, I ascend |234 to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your
God."

Thus He says that He will tell the Name of His Father first to the apostles,
whom He calls His brethren. And after them, with swift progress, He promises
that He will teach the Hymn of His Father to the Church founded in His (d) Name
throughout all the world. It is just as if some supreme teacher of philosophy
should give a course of instruction in the midst of his pupils for them to hear
and and understand, that He in the midst of the Church says: "I will hymn thy
praise," that the Church, learning and hearing His words, might in fit manner
sing back the praises, no longer of the daemons, but of the One Almighty God, by
Him that preached Him. He promises so to do, and from that very point earnestly
bids the Church, and His brethren to hymn the Father's praise. Wherefore He
says: "Ye that fear the Lord praise him, glorify him all ye seed of Jacob." And:
"Let all the seed of Jacob fear him, for he hath not despised, nor been angered
at the (509) prayer of the poor, nor turned away his face from him, but when he
cried unto him he heard him." And thus he clearly shewed His release from the
evils that were named before. For if God heard Him when He cried to Him, when He
prayed for His life to be delivered from the sword, and His Only-begotten from
the dog, and His lowliness from the mouth of the lion, and the horns of the
unicorn, it follows that we must understand Him to be released from them, when
He says: "For God was not (b) angered by his prayer, and turned not his face
from him, but when he called unto him, he heard him." And so it came to pass
that being rescued from His woes, and escaping from death, He sojourned with His
disciples and brethren, and sang His Father's praise "in the midst of the
Church." And notice how He calls Himself "poor," in harmony with the prophecies
already quoted, in which He was called poor and a beggar. And when He has thus
shewn His Resurrection, He (c) again returns to His Father, and says: "From thee
is my praise in the great Church," remembering the great Church of all nations
established throughout all the |235 world, in which the Saviour's praise is for
ever sung, by the will and co-operation of His Father. So He says: "From thee is
my praise in the great Church." For of a truth it is great, this Church,
gathered of every race of mankind, and above all comparison in gravity and
nobility of life, and majesty of belief, while the Jewish nation, and (d) the
synagogue of the Circumcision, is so attenuated in the poverty of its teaching,
and life, and thought, and conceptions of God.

Then He adds: "I will pay my vows in the sight of all that fear him," meaning by "all that fear him," the aforesaid great Church, to which He said: "Ye that fear the Lord, praise him." And what vows does He mean that He will pay, but those which He promised? And what did He promise, but those, of which He said: "I will tell thy Name to my brethren. In the midst of the Church I will praise thee? "And He proceeds: "The poor shall (510) eat and be satisfied, and they that seek the Lord shall praise him----their heart shall live for ever. All the ends of the earth shall remember and shall turn to the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before him. For the Kingdom is the Lord's, and he rules over the nations." In these words He very aptly proclaims the glorious works after His Resurrection, which are fulfilled in the calling of men from all nations, and by the election of men from the ends of the earth, the results of which being visible to all eyes afford evidence of the truth of the words of (b) the Psalm. And we, too, are the poor, whom like beggars in the things of God, the word of salvation nourishes with spiritual bread, the life-giving food of the soul, and affords eternal life. So the Psalm says: "The poor shall eat and be satisfied, and they that seek the Lord shall praise him, their heart shall live for ever." And the peroration of the (c) whole prophecy crowning all----"The generation that cometh shall be announced to the Lord, and they shall announce his righteousness to a people that shall be born, whom the Lord has made"----specifically foretells the Church of the Gentiles, and the generation established on the earth, through our Saviour Jesus Christ. For what could this people be which, it is here said, will be born for God after these things, which did not exist of old, and did not appear |236 among men, but will be hereafter? What was the generation, which was not then, but which it is said will come, but the Church established by our Saviour in all the world, and the new people from the Gentiles, of which the Holy Spirit wonderfully spake by Isaiah, saying, "Who hath heard such things, and who hath seen them thus? The earth was in travail for one day, and a nation was born at once." In this exposition I have but touched the fringe of the subject, but I must now pass on in haste to other topics, since time presses. But whoever cares for the Saviour's bidding, "Search the Scriptures, in which ye think to have eternal life, and those are they that witness of me," let him plunge his mind in each word of the Psalm, and hunt for the exact sense of the truth expressed.1 -------------------- A FRAGMENT OF THE FIFTEENTH BOOK

Given by A. Majus in the New Collection of Ancient Writers. Rome, 1825, tom. 1,
par. 2, p. 173, in the Commentary on Daniel ii. 31.

I THOUGHT it incumbent on me to quote what is said by the famous Eusebius Pamphilus, of Caesarea, in the Fifteenth Book of The Proof of the Gospel; for in expounding the whole vision he says as
follows:----"I believe this in no way differs from the vision of the prophet: for the prophet saw a great sea, just as the King saw a vast image: the prophet again saw four beasts, which he interpreted to mean four kingdoms, just as the King from the gold, silver, brass, and iron, figuratively described four kingdoms: and, once more, as the prophet saw a division of the ten horns of the last beast, and three horns destroyed by one, so the King saw part of the extremities of the image to be iron and part clay. And, moreover, as the prophet, after the vision of the four kings, saw the Son of Man receive universal rule, power and empire, so the King seemed to
|237 see a stone destroy the whole of the image, and become a great mountain that filled the sea. And the explanation is easy, for it was natural that the King, deceived as he was by the outward appearances of life, and admiring the beauty of the visible like colours in a picture, to liken the life of all men to a great image, whereas the prophet was rather led to compare the vast and mighty surge of life to a great sea. So the King, who admired the substances of gold, silver, brass, and iron, which are costly among men, likened the dominant empires that succeed one another in the human world to substances, while the prophet described the same empires under the forms of wild beasts, according to the ideals of their rule. Then again the King, who probably was conceited, and prided himself on the empire of his ancestors, the mutability of human things is revealed, and the end of earthly kingdoms, to purify him of his pride, and to make him realize the instability of human things, or at least the final universal Kingdom of God. For after the first, or the Assyrian Empire, signified by the gold, was to come the Persian, shewn forth by the silver; and thirdly, the Macedonian, portrayed by the brass; and after that, the fourth, that of the Romans, would follow, more powerful than its predecessors, and therefore likened to iron. For it is said of it, 'And the fourth kingdom shall be stronger than iron': just as iron crushes and subdues everything, so did Rome crush and subdue. And after these four, the Kingdom of God was presented as a stone that destroyed the whole image. And the prophet agrees with this in not seeing the final triumph of the Kingdom of the God of the Universe before he has described the course of the four world-powers under the similitude of the four beasts. I consider, therefore, the visions both of the King and the prophets, that there should be four empires only, and no more, to be proved by the subjection of the Jewish nation to them from the time when the prophet wrote."

[Note to the online text: the remainder of books 11-20 is lost.] [A footnote has
been renumbered and moved here] 1. 3 The last five lines are supplied by
Fabricius from another MS.

[Indexes omitted] This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material
on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 44: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 2
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 2

BOOK II.

PREFACE That we have not embraced the Prophetic Books of the (43) Hebrews with
so much Zeal without Aim or Object. IN my survey of the ideal of true religion
brought before all men by the Gospel teaching and of the Life in Christ in the
previous book, I have argued and I (b) believe demonstrated the impossibility of
all the nations living by the Jewish law, even if they wished. My present object
is to resume the argument at a point further back,1 to return to the evidence of
the prophetic books, and to give a more complete answer to the charges of those
of the Circumcision, who say that we have no (c) share whatever in the promises
of their Scriptures. They hold that the prophets were theirs, that the Christ,
Whom they love to call Saviour and Redeemer, was foretold to them, and that it
is to be expected that the written promises will be fulfilled for them. They
despise us as being of alien races, about which the prophets are unanimous in
foretelling evil. I propose to meet these attacks by evidence derived straight
from their own prophetic books, (d) With regard to the Christ of God having been
promised in their land, and His advent preaching salvation to Israel, we should
be the last to deny it ; all would agree that this is the plain teaching of all
their writings. But with regard to the Gentiles being debarred from the expected
benefits in Christ, on the ground that the promise was limited to Israel, it is
quite impossible to yield to what they advance against the evidence of Holy
Scripture. |64

CHAPTER 1 (44) That their Prophets gave their Best Predictions for Us of the
Foreign Nations.

(b) IN the first place, as it is their constant habit to pick out the prophecies which are more favourable to themselves, and to have them ever on their lips, I must array against them my proofs from the prophecies about the Gentiles, making it clear how full they are of predictions of good and salvation for all nations, and how strongly they asserted that their promises to the Gentile world could only be fulfilled by the coming of the Christ. When we shall have reached that point of the argument, I think I shall have proved that it is untrue to say that the hope of the Messiah was more proper for them than for us.
(c) Then having demonstrated that for Jews and Greeks the hope of the promise was on an equality, so that those of the Gentiles would be saved through Christ would be in exactly the same position as the Jews, I shall proceed to show with superabundance of evidence,2 that the divine oracles foretold that the Advent of Christ and the call of the Gentiles would be accompanied by the total collapse and ruin of the whole Jewish race, and prophesied good fortune only for a scanty few easy to number, while their city
(d) with its temple would be captured, and all its holy things taken away----prophecies which have all been exactly fulfilled. How under one head and at the same time holy Scripture can foretell for Israel at Christ's coming both a ransom from evil and the enjoyment of prosperity, and also adversity and the overturning of the worship of God, I will make clear when the proper time comes. For the present let us go on with our first task ; viz., to select a few statements to prove my contentions from a great number of prophecies.

Inasmuch, then, as they always use in argument with us the prophecies about
themselves, which are most favourable, as if the privileges of the old
dispensation were limited to them, it is time for us to array against them the
|65 promises about the Gentiles, as contained in their own prophets.

1. From Genesis. (45) How the Nations of the World will be blessed in the same
Way as those named after Abraham.

[Passage quoted, Gen. xviii. 27.]

The oracle says that God will not hide from the man dear to Him a mystery that
is hidden and secret to many, but will reveal it to him. And this was the
promise that (b) all the nations should be blessed, which had of old been hidden
through all the nations in Abraham's day being given over to unspeakably false
superstition, but is now unveiled in our time, through the Gospel teaching of
our Saviour that he who worships God in the manner of Abraham will share His
blessing. We must not suppose (c) that this oracle referred to Jewish
proselytes, since we have very fully shown in the preceding book the
impossibility of all nations following the law of Moses. And as I have proved in
the same book that the blessing on all nations given to Abraham could only apply
to the Christians of all nations, I will refer those interested to the former
passage.

2. From the same. That all the Nations of the Earth will be blessed in the Seed that is to come from the Line of Isaac. The Lord conferring with Isaac, after saying other things, (d) proceeds ----

[Passage quoted, Gen. xxvi. 3.]

Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was born of the seed of Isaac, according to
the flesh, in Whom all the nations of the earth are blessed, in learning through
Him of Almighty God, and in being taught through Him to bless men dear to God.
So there is reciprocal blessing, they enjoying the same blessing as the men they
bless, according to God's saying to Abraham : " Blessed be they [[Num. xxiv. 9]]
that bless thee."3 |66 (46) 3. From the same. Of many Nations, and Multitudes of
Nations, arising out of Jacob, although only the Nation of the Jews has come
forth from him.

[Passage quoted, Gen. xxxv. 11.]

As it is quite certain that only one nation, that of the Jews, arose from Jacob,
how can this oracle speak truly of a multitude of nations? Since the Christ of
God being born of the seed of Jacob brought together many multitudes of nations
by His Gospel teaching, in Him and (b) through Him the prophecy has attained its
natural fulfilment already, and will attain it still more.

4. From Deuteronomy. The Joy in God of the Nations.

[Passage quoted, Deut. xxxii. 43.]

(c) Instead of "Rejoice ye Gentiles with his people," Aquila 4 reads, "Cry out,
nations of his people." And Theodotion,5 "Exult, ye nations of his people."

5. From Psalm xxi.

How from the ends of the Earth, and from all Nations there shall be a Turning to
God, and how the Generation to come and the People that shall be begotten shall
learn Righteousness.

[ Passage quoted, Ps. xxi. 28. 32.]

This is clear enough to need no interpretation. |67 6. From Psalm xlvi. (47) An
Announcement of Holiness and Purity to the Nations, and the Kingdom of God over
the Nations.

[Passages quoted, Ps. xlvi. i, 2 and 8 ]

This is clear, and needs no interpretation.

7. From Psalm lxxxv. The holiness of the nations.

[Passage quoted, Ps. lxxxv. 8-10.]

8. From Psalm xcv. Of the Holiness of all the Heathen, and of the new Song, and
of the Kingdom of God, and of the Happiness of the World.

[Passages quoted, Ps. xcv. 1-4, 7, and 10.]

This is clear.

9. From Zechariah. Of all the Nations, and of the Egyptians the most
superstitious of them all, of the Knowledge of the only true God, and of the
spiritual Worship and Festival according to the divine Law.

[Passage quoted, Zech. xiv. 16-19.]

(48) This passage clearly implies the calling of all the Gentiles, if we only
regard the sense of what is said about Jerusalem and the tabernacle, to which I
will give the proper interpretation in its right place.

10. From Isaiah. Of the Choice of the Apostles, and the Calling of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Isa. ix. 1-2.]

11. From the same. Of the Calling of the Gentiles.

[ Passage quoted, Isa. xlix. 1.]

In which he adds more about the Gentiles and about (c) Christ. |68

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlix. 6.]

And you could yourself find many such passages, dispersed through the prophets
in the promises to the nations, which there is no time now to select or
interpret. Those that I have chosen are sufficient to prove my point. And this
was simply to demonstrate to the Circumcision, who proudly and boastfully claim,
that God has preferred them (d) before all other nations, and given them a
peculiar privilege in His divine promises, that nothing of the kind is to be
found in the divine promises themselves. And now that I have proved the
inclusion of the Gentiles in the divine promises, I would ask you to consider
the reason of their being called and admitted to the promises. For it will be
good for us to realize the reason why they can be said to be associated in their
benefits. This can only be the coming of Christ, through Whom those of the
Circumcision also agree that they look for their own redemption. I have then
only to prove that the hope (49) of the call of the Gentiles was nothing else
but the Christ of God, looked for as the Saviour, not only of the Jews, but of
the whole Gentile world. And for the present I will give the mere texts of the
prophets without interpretation, as I shall be able to interpret them
individually at leisure more broadly 6 altogether, when with God's help I have
collected the predictions about the nations.

CHAPTER 2 12. From Psalm ii.

(c) Of the Plotting against Christ, and He 7 that is called the Son of God,
receiving His Portion and the Gentiles from the Father.

[Passages quoted, Ps. ii. 1, 2, and 7, 8.] |69

13. From Psalm lxxi. Of Christ's Kingdom, and the Call of the Gentiles, and the
(50) Blessing of all the Tribes of the Earth.

[Passages quoted, Ps. lxxi. 1, 2, 8, 11, 17, 19.]

14. From Psalm xcvii. Of the new Song, and of the Arm of the Lord, and of the
Shewing of His Salvation to all Nations ; the Salvation of the Son is shewn by
the Name in the Hebrew.

15. From Genesis.

How after the Cessation of the Kingdom of the Jews, the (c) Christ Himself
coming will be the Expectation of the Gentiles.

"There shall not fail a prince from Juda, nor a governor from his loins, until
he come in whom it is laid up,8 and he is the expectation of the Gentiles."
[[Gen. xlix. 10]]

16. From Zephaniah. A Shewing forth of the Appearing of Christ, and of the (d)
Destruction of Idolatry, and of the Piety of the Nations towards God.

[Passage quoted, Zeph. ii. 11.]

17. From the same. A Shewing forth of the Day of Christ's Resurrection, and (51)
the Gathering of Nations, and of all Men knowing God, and Turning to Holiness,
and how the Ethiopians will bring Sacrifices to him.

[Passage quoted, Zeph. iii. 8.]

18. From Zechariah. A Shewing forth of the Appearing of Christ, and of the (b)
Fleeing of many Nations to Him, and how the Peoples of the Nations shall be
established in the Lord.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ii. 10.] |70

19. From Isaiah.

(c) A Shelving forth of the Birth of Christ coming from the Root of David, and
the Call by Him of all the Nations.

[Passages quoted, Isa. xi. i, 10.]

20. From the same.

(52) A Shewing forth of the Appearing of Christ, and of the (d) Benefits brought
by him to all the Nations.

[Passages quoted, Isa. xlii. 1-4 and 6-9.]

21. From the same.

(b) A Shewing forth of Christ and his Birth, and the Call of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlix. i.]

22. From the same.

(c) The Shewing forth of the Coming of Christ and of the Call of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlix, 7.]

23. From the same.

(53) A Shewing forth of Christ, and the Call of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Isa. lv. 3-5.]

And now that we have learned from these passages that the presence of Christ was
intended to be the salvation not only of the Jews, but of all nations as well,
let me prove my third point, that prophecies not only foretold that good things
for the nations would be associated with the date of His appearance, but also
the reverse for the Jews. Yes, the Hebrew oracles foretell distinctly the fall
and ruin of the Jewish race through their disbelief in Christ, so that we should
no longer appear equal to them, but better than they. And I will now, present
the bare quotations from the prophets without any comment on them, because they
are quite clear, and because I intend at my leisure to examine them thoroughly.
|71

CHAPTER 3 24. From Jeremiah. (d) Shewing forth the Refusal of the Jewish Race,
and the (54) Substitution of the Gentiles in their Place.

[Passage quoted, Jer. vi. 16.]

25. From the same.

Shewing forth of the Piety of the Nations, and Accusation of the Impiety of the
Jewish Race. Prediction of the Evils to overtake them after the Coining of
Christ.

[Passage quoted, Jer. xvi. 19-xvii. 4.] 9

26. From Amos.

(d) Concerning the Dispersion of the Jewish Race among all the Nations, and the
Renewing of Christ's Coming and Kingdom, and the Call of all the Nations
consequent upon it.

[Passage quoted, Amos ix. 9.]

27. From Micah.

(55) Accusation of the Rulers of the Jewish People, and a Shewing forth of the
Desolation of their Mother-city, and the Appearance of Christ and of the House
of God His Church, the. Entrance of His Word and His Law, and its Shewing to all
Nations.10

[Passages quoted, Mic. iii. 9-iv. 2.]

28. From Zechariah.

Shewing forth of Christ's Appearing, and the Destruction of the warlike
Preparation of the Jews, and the Peace of the. Nations, and the Kingdom of the
Lord unto the Ends of the World.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ix. 9-10.]

29. From Malachi.

(56) Rebuke of the Jewish Race, and Refusal of the Mosaic outward Worship, and
of the spiritual Worship delivered by Christ to all Nations.

[Passage quoted, Mal. i. 10-12.] |72

30. From Isaiah.

(b) The Apostasy of the Jewish Race and the Revelation of the Word of God, and
of the new Law, and of His House, and the Shewing forth of the Piety of all the
Nations.

[Passages quoted, Isa. i. 8, 21, 30; ii. 2-4.]

(57) 31. From the same. The Destruction of the Glory of the People of the Jews,
and the Turning of the Nations from Idolatry to the God of the Universe, and the
Prophecy of the Desolation of the Jewish Cities, and of their Unfaithfulness to
their God.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xvii. 5-11.]

32. From the same.

Shewing forth of the destruction of the Jewish cities, and of the joy of the
Gentiles in God.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xxv. 1-8.]

(d) 33. From the same. The Message of good News to the Church of the Nations
desolate of old, and the Rejection of the Jewish Nation, and Accusation of their
Sins, and the Call of all the Gentiles.

[Passages quoted, Isa. xliii. 18-25 ; xlv. 22-25]

34. From the same.

Shewing forth of the Coming of Christ to Men. And Reproof of the Jewish Race,
and Promise of good Things to all Nations.

[Passages quoted, Isa. 1. 1, 2, 10 ; li. 4, 5.]

(59) 35. From the same.

Reproof of the Sins of the Jewish People, and their Fall from Piety, and the
Shewing forth of the Call of all the Gentiles.

[Passages quoted, Isa. lix. 1-11, 19.]

(d) But although there are a number of prophecies on this subject, I will be
content with the evidence I have |73 produced, and I will return to them again
and explain 11 them at the proper time, as I consider that by the use of these
numerous texts and of their evidence I have given adequate proof that the Jews
hold no privilege beyond other nations. For if they say that they alone partake
of the blessing of Abraham, the friend of God, by reason of their descent from
him, it can be answered that God promised to the Gentiles that He would give
them an equal share of the blessing not only of Abraham but of Isaac and Jacob
also, since He expressly predicted that all nations would be blessed like them,
and summoned the rest of the nations under one and the same (rule of) joy as the
blessed and the godly, in saying: "Rejoice ye Gentiles [[Deut. xxxii. 43; Ps.
xlvii. 9]] with his people," and : "The princes of the peoples were gathered
together with the God of Abraham." And if it is on the kingdom of God they plume
them- (60) selves, as being His portion, it can be answered that God prophesies
that He will reign over all other nations. For he says : "Tell it out among the
heathen that the Lord is [[Ps. xcvi. 10]] King." And again: "God reigneth over
all the nations." And if they say that they were chosen out to act as [[Ps.
xlvii. 8]] priests and to offer worship to God, it can be shewn that the Word
promised that He would give to the Gentiles an equal share in His service, when
He said: "Render to the Lord, O ye kindreds of the nations, render to the Lord
glory and honour: bring sacrifices and come into [[Ps. xcvi. 7.]] his courts."
To which the oracle in Isaiah may be con- (b) joined, which says: "There shall
be an altar to the Lord in the land of Egypt . . . and the Egyptians will know
the Lord. And they shall do sacrifice, and say prayers to the Lord, and offer."
And in this you will understand [[Isa.xix.19]] that it is prophesied that an
altar will be built to the Lord away from Jerusalem in Egypt, and that the
Egyptians will there offer sacrifice, say prayers and give gifts to the Lord.
Yes, and not only in Egypt, but in the true Jerusalem itself, whatever it is
thought to be, all the nations, and the (c) Egyptians forsooth, the most
superstitious of them all, are invited to keep the Feast of Tabernacles, as a
feast of the heart.12 |74 And if it was true long ago: "Jacob is become the
portion of the Lord, and Israel the rope of his inheritance." [[Deut. xxx ii.
9]] Yet afterwards it was also said that all the nations would be given to the
Lord for His inheritance, the Father saying to him : " Desire of me, and I shall
give thee the heathen for thine inheritance." [[Ps. ii. 8]] And it is also
prophesied that He shall rule from sea to sea and to the ends of the world :
"All the Gentiles shall serve him, and in him shall the tribes of the earth be
blessed." [[ Ps. lxxii. ii, 17]] And the reason of this (d) was that the Supreme
God should make known His salvation before all nations. And I have already noted
before that the name of Jesus translated from Hebrew into Greek would give
"salvation," so that "the salvation of God" is simply the appellation of our
Saviour Jesus Christ. And Simeon bears witness to this in the Gospel, when he
takes the infant in his hands, I mean of course Jesus, and prays:

(61) "Now, Lord, lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word
: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, Which thou hast prepared before the
face of all people; A light to lighten the Gentiles." [[ Luke ii.29]]

And this same salvation the Psalmist meant, when he said:

"The Lord declared his salvation, in the sight of the heathen he openly shewed
his righteousness."

And, according to Isaiah, it will be when they behold this very salvation that
all men will worship the supreme God, (b) Who has bestowed His salvation on all
ungrudgingly. And they will worship Him not in Jerusalem below, which is in
Palestine, but each from his own place, and all who are in the isles of the
Gentiles; and then, too, the oracle shall be fulfilled which said that all men
should call no longer on their ancestral gods, nor on idols, nor on daemons, but
on the Name of the Lord, and shall serve Him under one yoke, and shall offer to
Him from the furthest rivers of Ethiopia the reasonable and bloodless sacrifices
of the new Covenant of Christ, to be sacrificed not in Jerusalem below, nor on
the altar there, but in the aforesaid borders of Ethiopia.

(c) And if it be admitted to be a noble privilege to be and |75 to be reckoned
the people of God, and if this one thing is the noblest of the divine promises,
that God should say of those who are worthy of Him, "I will be their God, and
[[Jer. xxxi. 33.] they shall be my people," Israel was naturally proud in days
of old of being the only people of God, but now the Lord has come to sojourn
with us and promises graciously to extend this privilege to the Gentiles,
saying:

"Lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of you, [[Zech. ii. 10.]] and many
nations shall flee unto the Lord, and they shall be to him a people."

On which I may aptly quote : "And I will say to a people (d) that were not my
people, Ye are my people. And they [[Hos.ii. 23.]] shall say, Thou art the Lord
our God." And if it is the Christ and no one else Who is prophesied as springing
from the root of Jesse, and this at least is so strongly held by the Hebrews
themselves, that not one of them questions its truth at all, consider how He is
proclaimed as about to arise to reign not over Israel but over the Gentiles, and
how the Gentiles arc said to be about to hope in Him, and not Israel, inasmuch
as He is the expectation of the Gentiles. Wherefore He is said "to be about to
bring [[Isa. xlii. 1, 6]] judgment to the Gentiles," and "to be for a light to
the Gentiles." And again it is said: "In his name shall the Gentiles trust," and
that He shall be given for salvation not only to the Jews but to all men, even
to those at the ends of the earth. Wherefore it was said to Him by the Father
that sent Him down : (62)

"I gave thee for a covenant of the race, for a light of [[Isa. xlix. 8.]] the
Gentiles, to establish the earth, and to inherit the waste heritages." He says
He is "a witness to the Gentiles," meaning that nations which have never before
learned anything about Christ, when they knew His dispensation, and the might
that was in Him, have called on Him, and that the peoples who did not before of
old know Him, have taken refuge in Him. But why need I say more, since it is
possible from these prophetic sayings which I have laid before you, and from
others to be found in Holy Scripture which I will record at leisure, for any one
who wishes, to collect the words of the (b) prophets, and by their aid to put to
silence those of the Circumcision, who say the promises of God were given to
them alone, and that we who are of the Gentiles are |76 supernumerary 13 and
alien to the divine promises? For I have proved, on the contrary, that it was
prophesied that all the Gentiles would benefit by the coming of Christ, while
the multitudes of the Jews would lose the promises given to their forefathers
through their unbelief in Christ, few of (c) them believing in our Lord and
Saviour, and therefore attaining the promised spiritual redemption through Him.

About which the wonderful Apostle teaches something when he says :

"27. Isaiah also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of
Israel be as the sand ot the sea, the remnant 14 shall be saved : 28. For
finishing the word and cutting it short in righteousness, because a word cut
short 15 will the Lord do upon the earth. 29. And as Isaiah said before, If the
Lord of Sabaoth had not left to us a seed, we should have [[Rom. ix. 27-29]]
been as Sodom, and we should have been like to Gomorrah."

(d) To which he adds after other things:

"1. Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of
the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2. God hath not cast away his
people, which he foreknew. Know ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? how he
intercedes with God, speaking of Israel,16 3. Lord, they have killed thy
prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I only am left, and they seek my
life to take it awny.17 4. But what saith the answer of God to him? I have
reserved to myself 7000 men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal. 5. Even so
then at this present time [[Rom. xi. 1-5.]] also there is a remnant according to
the election of grace."

(63) In these words the Apostle clearly separates, in the falling away of the
whole Jewish people, himself and the Apostles and the Evangelists of our Saviour
like Himself and all the |77 Jews now who believe in Christ, as the seed named
by the prophet in the words: "Unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left unto us a
seed." And he implies that they also are that which is styled in the other
prophecies "the remnant," which he says was preserved by the election of grace.
And with reference to this remnant I will now return to the prophets and explain
what they say, so that the argument may be based on more evidence, that God did
not promise to the whole Jewish nation absolutely that (b) the coming of Christ
would be their salvation, but only to a small and quite scanty number who should
believe in our Lord and Saviour, as has actually taken place in agreement with
the predictions.

36. From Isaiah. That the Divine Promises did not extend to the whole (c) Jewish
Nation, but only to a few of them.

[Passage quoted Isa. i. 7-9.]

This great and wonderful prophet at the opening of his own book here tells us
that the whole scheme of his prophecy includes a vision and a revelation against
Judaea and Jerusalem, then he attacks the whole race of the Jews, (d) first
saying:

" 3. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master's manger, but Israel doth
not know, my people doth not understand." [[Isa. i. 3]]

And then he laments the whole race, and adds :

"4. Woe, race of sinners, a people full of iniquity, an evil seed, unrighteous
children."

Having brought these charges against them in the beginning of his book, and
shewn beforehand the reasons for the later predictions that he is to bring
against them, he goes on to say, "Your land is desolate," though it was not
desolate at the time when he prophesied : "Your cities are burnt with fire." Nor
had this yet taken place, and strangers had not devoured their land. And yet he
says, "Your land, (64) strangers devour it before your eyes," and that which
follows. But if you came down to the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of
those He sent, and to the present time, you would find all the sayings
fulfilled. For the daughter of |78 Zion (by whom was meant the worship
celebrated on Mount Zion) from the time of the coming of our Saviour has (b)
been left as a tent in a vineyard, as a hut in a garden of cucumbers, or as
anything that is more desolate than these. And strangers devour the land before
their eyes, now exacting tax and tribute,18 and now appropriating for themselves
the land which belonged of old to Jews. Yea, and the beauteous Temple of their
mother-city was laid low, being cast down by alien peoples, and their cities
were burnt with fire, and Jerusalem became truly a besieged city. But (c) since,
when all this happened, the choir of the Apostles, and those of the Hebrews who
believed in Christ, were preserved from among them as a fruitful seed, and going
through every race of men in the whole world, filled every city and place and
country with the seed of Christianity and Israel, so that like corn springing
from it, the churches which are founded in our Saviour's name have come into
being, the divine prophet naturally adds to his previous threats against them:
"We should have been as Sodom, (d) and we should have been like unto Gomorrah."
Which the holy Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans more clearly defines and
interprets.

[The passages Rom. ix. 17-29 and xi. 1-5, already quoted 62 c, d, are repeated.]

And to shew that the prophecy can only refer to the (b) time of our Saviour's coming, the words that follow the
text----"unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah," naming the whole people of the Jews as the people of Gomorrah, and their rulers as the princes of
Sodom----imply a rejection of the Mosaic worship, and introduce in the prediction about them the characteristics of the covenant announced to all men by our Saviour, I mean regeneration by water,19 and the word and law completely new. For it says :

(c) "Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom, give heed to the law of God,
ye people of Gomorrah, [[Isa. i. 10.]] What is the multitude of your sacrifices
to me?" .

and that which follows. Thus it takes away what belongs |79 to the Mosaic law,
and introduces in its place another mode of the forgiveness of sins, through the
washing of salvation and the life preached in accordance with it, saying :

"Wash you, be ye clean ; take away the evils from [[Isa. i. 16.]] your souls."

And the prophet himself at once supplies the reason, why he called them rulers
of Sodom, and people of Gomorrah: "For your hands are full of blood." And again
a little further on :

"They have proclaimed their sin as Sodom and (d) made it manifest. Woe to their
soul, because they have taken evil counsel with themselves, saying,20 We will
bind the just, for he is burdensome to us." [[Isa. iii. 9.]]

Since he so very clearly mentions some one's blood, and a plot against some one
just man, what could this be but the plot against our Saviour Jesus Christ,
through which21 and after which all the things aforesaid overtook them?

37. From the same Isaiah.

[Passage quoted Isa. iv. 2.]

And the meaning of "the remnant of Israel" the prophet (66) himself clearly
explains by the words, "All who are registered in Jerusalem, and called holy."
It will be clear to you, if you run through the whole course of this section,
what that day is, in which it is said God will glorify and exalt the remnant of
Israel and those who are called holy and to be written in (the book of) life.
For in the begin- (b) ning of his complete book the prophet having seen the
vision against Judah and Jerusalem, and numbered in many words the sins of the
whole people of the Jews, and uttered threats and spoken about their ruin and
the complete desolation of Jerusalem, brings his vision about them to an end
with the words :

" 30. For they shall be as a terebinth that has cast her leaves, and as a garden
without water. 31. And their strength shall be as a thread of tow, and their
works as sparks of fire, and the transgressors and the [[Isa. i. 30]] sinners
shall be burnt together, and there shall be none (c) to quench them." |80

And having inscribed here the prediction against them, he "lowers his tone"22:
and making another start he enters on a second subject, and as a preface, so to
say, employs such words as these, "The word which came to Isaiah the (d) son of
Amos concerning Judah and Jerusalem"; or, as Symmachus 23 interpreted it, "on
behalf of Judah and Jerusalem." From which one would perhaps expect that he was
about to change to more favourable prophecies about the same peoples on whom his
former predictions had showered sadness. But the succeeding passages would
certainly not confirm the expectation, since they contain nothing at all that is
good with regard to the race of the Jews, or that which is called Israel,
neither for Judah nor Jerusalem. On the contrary, they bring many charges and
accusations against Israel, and gloomy threats against Jerusalem, and prophesy
for all the Gentiles salvation in their call and in the knowledge of the Supreme
God. While in addition to this they tell of the coining of a new Mount, and the
manifesting of another House of God, besides the one in Jerusalem. For he says
after speaking about Judaea and Jerusalem:

(67) "2. In the last days the Mount of the Lord shall be manifest, and the house
of the Lord upon the tops of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the
hills, 3. and all nations shall come to it, and shall say, Come and let us go up
to the Mount of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob." [[Isa. ii. 2.]]

Such are his prophecies about all the Gentiles. Hear what he proceeds to add
about the Jews:

" 6. For he has rejected his people, the house of the God of Jacob,24 for the
land is filled as at the beginning with auguries, as the land of strangers, and
many |81 children of strangers are born to them. 7. For the land was filled with
silver and gold, and there was (b) no end of their treasures."

And that which follows after this, to which he adds:

"9. And they worshipped that which their own fingers had made, and a man bowed
down, and was humbled, and I will not reject them. 10. And now enter ye into the
rocks, and hide yourselves in the earth from the face of the fear of the Lord,
and from the face of his glory, when he arises to shake the earth."

And in this he teaches that there will be a Resurrection of the Lord, at which
all the land of the Jewish people (c) will be shattered. For the whole portion
refers to them, in the following sections as well, saying : "For the day of the
Lord of Sabaoth shall be upon every one that is proud and insolent, and upon
every one that is lofty and exalted." And that which follows. Wherefore it is on
the day of the Lord's Resurrection, that the prophet having first addressed
those who lift themselves up against the knowledge of God, says: "On this very
day"; "the Lord shall be exalted in that very day, and they shall hide all the
work of their hands, bearing them into the caves," (d) clearly showing the
destruction of the idols, which the Jews themselves and all other men cast away
after the appearance of the Saviour, despising all superstitions :

" 20. On that day, he says, a man shall cast away his abominations of gold and
silver which they made to worship vanities."

Thus speaking, it would seem, generally about all men, because of the coming
call of the Gentiles. But he alludes particularly again to the Jewish race under
one head as follows:

"Behold now, the Lord, the Lord of Sabaoth, will take away from Judaea and from
Jerusalem the strong man and strong woman, the strength of bread, and the
strength of water, 2. The giant and the strong man, and the man of war, and the
judge, and the prophet, and (68) the counsellor, and elder, and captain of
fifty, 3. And the wonderful counsellor, and the clever artificer, and the wise
hearer." [[Isa.iii.1-3.]]

And that which follows. Stop at this point, and set |82 beside the above the
introduction to the prophecy, in which it was said: "The word that came from the
Lord to Isaiah the son of Amoz on behalf of Judah and Jerusalem," and see how
much more in accordance with what follows "against" is than "for," unless indeed
some hidden meaning is contained in the words. For how could one about to take
away from Judah and Jerusalem strong (b) man and strong woman, the strength of
bread and the strength of water, and all things that of old were beautiful among
them, introduce his prophecy by saying it was "for" Judah and Jerusalem? And how
could that which follows again be "for" them :

"Jerusalem is forsaken, and Judaea hath fallen, and their tongues [have spoken]
with iniquity, disbelieving [[Isa. iii. 8.]] the things of the Lord "?

Nay, rather, at a time when it should be necessary for the Mountain of the Lord to be proclaimed to all the Gentiles, and the House of God on the Mount, when all (c) the Gentiles meet and say: "Come and let us go up to the Mount of the Lord, and to the House of the God of Jacob": the Scripture using such accusations of the Jewish race, and threatening them so sorely, adds thereto all the sayings I have quoted, and teaches that of the whole Jewish race which will fall away from the holiness of God, there will be left over some of them not immersed in their common evils; and further, that being saved as it were from the sinful and lawless, and embracing piety in sincerity and truth, they will be reckoned worthy of (d) God's Scripture, and will be called holy servants of God. And it means by these, the apostles, disciples, and evangelists of our Saviour, and all the others of the Circumcision, who believed on Him, at the time of the falling away of their whole race. Scripture darkly implies this, when it says: "In that day"----i.e. the day in which plainly all the aforesaid things shall take place connected with the calling of the Gentiles, and the falling away of the Jews----"God shall shine gloriously in counsel on the earth, to uplift and to glorify the remnant of Israel, and there shall be a remnant in Sion, and a remnant in [[Isa. iv. 2.]] Jerusalem, and all who are written for life in Jerusalem (69) shall be called holy." And it was these, who came forth from Judaea and |83 Jerusalem that the preface meant the prophecy to allude to, when it said: "For Judaea and Jerusalem," yea, both the actual Jerusalem, and the figurative Jerusalem thought of as analagous to it. And which of the apostles of our Saviour or of His evangelists, beholding the inspired power (b) by which "their sound is gone out into all lands, and their words to the ends of the earth," and by which all the Churches of Christ from that day to this have their words and teaching on their lips, and the laws of Christ of the new covenant preached by them, would not bear witness to the truth of the prophecy, which says that God openly will exalt and glorify in counsel and with glory the remnant of Israel through all the world, and that the remnant in Sion and the remnant in Jerusalem shall be (c) called holy, all they who are written in the book of life? Instead of the reading of the LXX, "in counsel with glory," Aquila and Theodotion agree in interpreting "for power and glory" indicating the power given to the apostles by God, and their consequent glory with God---- according to the words: "The Lord will give a word to [[Ps. lxviii.11] the preachers with much power." And this which has really come to pass :

" 9. Ye shall hear indeed, and shall not understand : and seeing ye shall see
and not perceive. 10. For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and they hear
(d) with heavy ears, and they have closed their eyes, lest they should ever see
with their eyes, and hear with their ears,25 and turn, and I should heal them.26
11. And I said, Until when, O Lord? And he said, Until the cities be desolated
that none dwell in them, and houses that no men be in them, and the earth be
left desolate. 12. And afterwards God will increase men, and they that are left
on the earth shall be increased." [[Isa. vi. 9.]]

And notice here how they that are left again on the earth, all the rest of the
earth being desolate, alone are said to multiply. These must surely be our
Saviour's Hebrew disciples, going forth to all men, who being left behind (70)
like a seed have brought forth much fruit, namely, the Churches of the Gentiles
throughout the whole world. And see, too, how at the same time he says that only
those will multiply who are left behind from the falling away of |84 the Jews,
while the Jews themselves are utterly desolate: "Their land," he says, "shall be
left unto them desolate." And this was also said to them before by the same
prophet : "Your land is desolate, your cities are burnt with fire, your country
strangers devour it before your eyes."

(b) And when was this fulfilled, except from the times of our Saviour? For up to
the time they had not yet dared to do impiety to Him, their land was not
desolate, their cities were not burned with fire, nor did strangers devour their
land. But from that inspired word, by which our Lord and Saviour Himself
predicted what was about to fall on them, saying : "Your house is left unto you
desolate," from that moment and not long after the prediction they were besieged
by the Romans and brought to desolation. (c) And the word of prophecy gives the
cause of the desolation, making the interpretation almost certain, and showing
the cause of their falling away. For when they heard our Saviour teaching among
them, and would not listen with their mind's ear, nor understood Who He was,
seeing Him with their eyes, but not beholding Him with the eyes of their spirit,
" they hardened their heart, and all but closed [[Isa. vi. 10.]] the eyes of
their mind, and made their ears heavy." As the prophecy says, because of this He
says that their cities would be made desolate so that none should dwell in them,
and their land should become desolate, and only (d) a few of them be left
behind, kept like fruitful and spark-like seed, who it is said, should go forth
to all men, and multiply on the earth. But also even after the departure of
those who are clearly the apostles of our Saviour, he says that "a tenth" will
still remain on Jewish soil:

"And again it shall be for a spoil, as a terebinth, and [[Isa. vi. 13.]] as an
acorn, when it falls out of its husk."

The Scripture, as I suppose, means by this, that after the first siege, which
they are recorded to have undergone (71) in the time of the apostles, and of
Vespasian, Emperor of the Romans, being a second time besieged again under
Hadrian they were completely debarred from entering the place, so that they were
not even allowed to tread the soil of Jerusalem.27 And this he darkly suggests
in the |85 words : "And again it shall be for a spoil, as a terebinth, and as an
acorn when it falls out of its husk " : [[Isa. vii 21.]]

21. "And it shall come to pass in that day, a man will nourish a heifer and two
sheep. 22. And it shall come to pass from their drinking much milk, every one
left on the land shall eat butter and honey."

Here if you inquire to what day the prophet looks forward, (b) you will find it to be the very time of the appearance of our Saviour. For when the prophet says: " Behold a virgin shall ,be with child, and shall bring forth a son," 28 though he interposes many things, yet he prophesies of the things that will come to pass on that very day, that is to say about the time of our Saviour's appearance. For he says that unseen powers, and foes and enemies, (c) allegorically designated flies and bees, will attack the land of the Jews, and that the Lord with the razor of its foes will shave the head of the Jewish race, as if it were one great body, and the hairs from its feet, and its beard----in a word its whole glory. And this being done in the day prophesied when He shall be born of a virgin, he foretells that a man who is left from the destruction of the whole race, that is to say all of them who believe in the Christ of God, shall nourish a heifer of the bulls and two sheep, and from their producing very much milk shall eat butter and honey : and you will understand that this is mystically fulfilled in our Saviour's apostles. For each one of them (d) in the churches which he established by Christ's help, nourished two sheep, that is to say two orders of disciples coming like sheep into the sheepfold of Christ, the one as yet probationary, the other already enlightened by baptism,29 and in addition to these one heifer, the ecclesiastical rule of those who preside with their inspired food of the word, and produced from them a fruitful increase of milk and honey from the food they have laboured to provide. |86

(72) That holy Scripture often likens the multitudes of less perfect disciples
to sheep I need not say; every scripture teaches it. And its comparison of the
perfect man, who being the leader works the body of the Church as a farmer, to
the work of bulls on the soil, the holy apostle uses, when he says:

"Doth God take care for oxen? Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? 30 That
he that ploweth should plow in hope, and that he that thresheth, should thresh
in hope of partaking." [[I Cor ix 9.]]

And if any one is disgusted with such metaphorical interpretation, let him
beware lest refusing to regard figuratively what are called flies, or bees, or a
razor, or a beard, (b) or hairs on the feet, he falls into absurd and
inconsistent mythology. But if these things can only be figuratively understood,
the same may certainly be said of the following :

"18. In that day the mountains shall be consumed, and the hills, and forests,
and shall be devoured from soul to body. And he that flees shall be as one that
fleeth from burning flame, 19. and they that are left of them shall be a number,
and a little child 31 shall write them. 20. And it shall come to pass in that
(c) day, the remnant of Israel shall no more be added, and they that are saved
of Jacob shall no more trust in those that wronged them, and they shall trust in
the God the holy one of Israel in truth, 21. and the remnant of Israel shall
turn32 to the mighty God. 22. And though the people of Israel be as the sand of
the sea, the remnant of them shall be saved. 23. For he will finish the account,
and cut it short in righteousness, for God will make a short account in the
whole world." [[Isa. x. 18.]]

And notice here, that in his denunciations of gloom, he says :

"He that fleeth shall be as one that fleeth from a burning flame; and their remnant shall be a number, (d) and a little child shall write them"----

by which, he emphasizes the scanty number of those of the Circumcision who will
escape destruction, and the |87 burning of Jerusalem. "And they who are left,"
he says, "will be a number": that is they will be amenable to number, or few and
easily numbered. As many, then, as those who believed in our Lord and Saviour
were in comparison of the whole Jewish race, who also were thought worthy of
being enrolled by Him, as the verse shews, which says: "And a little child shall
write them." Having told us before Who the little child was, where he said:
"Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son." And:
"Before the child shall (73) know to call on its father or mother." And since in
this place he says: "A little child shall write them," it can be seen why he
said in the previous one : "And these shall be a remnant in Sion, and a remnant
in Jerusalem, all shall be called holy, and shall be written in [the book of]
life." As therefore among them a remnant is named, and it is they who were
written in [the book of] life, so also here "the remnant from them shall be a
number, and a little child shall write them." And this "remnant from Israel, and
they that are saved from Jacob no more" he says "shall be with those that do
them wrong, but shall (b) trust in the Lord, the Holy One of Israel." So note if
it is not with this very trust that they who went forth from the Jewish race,
those who were left behind in the falling away of Israel, the disciples and
apostles of our Saviour, taking no notice of the rulers of this world, or of the
rulers of the people of the Circumcision who did them wrong of old, went forth
to all the nations, preaching the word of Christ, and by their trust in God (for
according to the prophecy "they were trusting in God, the holy one of Israel, in
truth," for they (c) gave up their whole selves in hope, without deceit or
hypocrisy, but with truth) not only went forth from their own land, but
prospered in that whereto they were sent. And this same remnant was like the
seed of the falling away of Jacob that trusted in the strength of God, and this
remnant of the whole race that once was as the sand of the sea, but not as the
stars of the heaven, was thought worthy of salvation by God, as the Apostle bore
witness saying :

"Isaiah cries concerning Israel, If the number of the (d) children of Israel
shall be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved."

For of the promises gives by the oracle to Abraham |88 concerning those who were
to come after him that "they shall be as the stars of the heaven, and as the
sand of the sea," the friends of God are meant, on the one hand shining like the
heavenly lights, such as were those of old, the prophets and our Saviour's
apostles, to whom He bore witness saying : "Ye are the light of the world" ;
but, on the other, the earth-born who lie upon the ground are compared to the
sand of the shore. The prophetic word speaks rightly in the above, first where
the whole multitude of Israel's sons, fallen from (74) their true and
magnificent virtue to the ground, is compared to the sand of the sea, and then
when it says only the remnant shall be saved. But I have now dealt sufficiently
with the question of the remnant. And he says that this will come to pass, when
"the Lord cutting short and completing his word shall accomplish it through the
whole world" : clearly pointing to the Gospel preaching, by which, the whole
Mosaic circle of symbols and signs and bodily (b) ordinances being taken away,
the complete word of the Gospel given to all men has confirmed the truth of the
prophecy.

"10. And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, and one arising to rule the
Gentiles. In him shall the Gentiles hope, and his rest shall be glory, 11. And
it shall be in that clay, the Lord shall again shew his hand, to be jealous and
to seek 33 the remnant remaining from his people, which is left by the
Assyrians, and from Egypt, (c) and Babylon, and Ethiopia, and from the Elamites,
and from the East, and from the isles of the sea.34 12. And he will raise a
standard to the nations, and will gather together 35 the dispersed of Judah,
from the four corners [[Isa. xi. 10.]] of the earth."

As certain events were many times foretold as about to take place on a definite
day, that is to say, when a certain time had come, I have by the use of
reasoning proved that the said events must follow the appearance of God, for
when He appears, the whole Jewish race falling away, holy Scripture makes it
clear that a scanty few of them will be left behind, (d) while the passage now
in our hands shews in the clearest way both the day, and the time meant by it,
and the events |89 that were to follow it. For it prophesies the birth of the
Christ of the seed of David, and at the same time foretells the falling away of
the Jews. For it says thus :

"Behold, the Lord, the Lord of Sabaoth, will mightily confound the glorious
ones, and the lofty men shall be humbled, and the lofty shall fall by the sword,
and [[Isa. x. 33.]] Libanus shall fall with the lofty."

By Libanus here Jerusalem is meant, as I have shewn elsewhere, which Scripture
threatens shall fall with all its venerable and glorious men within it. And
having thus begun, it says afterwards : "And a rod shall come out of (75) the
stem of Jesse, and a flower shall spring up from his [[Isa. xi. 1]] root." By
showing very clearly that the birth of Christ should be from the root of Jesse,
who was the father of David, it explains upon what birth the call of the
Gentiles should follow, which it had previously only given obscurely in the
prophetic manner. For "the wolf shall feed with the Iamb, and the leopard shall
lie clown with the kid," and such passages, are only intended to shew the change
of savage and uncivilized nations in no way differing from wild beasts to a
holy, mild, and social way of life. And this is what it (b) teaches afterwards
without disguise, in the words : "The whole [earth] shall be filled with the
knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." And moreover the prophetic
word proceeds to interpret itself:

"And there shall be in that day a root of Jesse, and one arising to rule the
Gentiles. In him shall the Gentiles trust, and his rest shall be glory."

Since, then, it had predicted the falling away of the Jewish race in a veiled
way, and then the calling of the Gentiles, first in a veiled way and then
openly, it is natural for it (c) in returning to the same topic to mention those
of the Circumcision who should believe in Christ, that it may not seem to shut
them altogether from hope in Christ.

"For there shall be," it says, "one to arise to rule over the Gentiles."

Who could this be Who is to arise, but the root of Jesse, whom it so clearly
says is to reign over the Gentiles, but not over Israel? Since then it had
taught in various ways of the conversion of the Gentiles consequent upon the
birth and growth of Him Who came from the root of |90 Jesse, and had then
nothing bright to say of those of the Circumcision, it naturally here supplies
the gap in the prediction, saying, "And it shall come to pass in that day," (d)
i.e. in the time of him that is born of the root of Jesse, the Lord moreover
shall put forth His power,36 to be jealous for and to seek the remnant remaining
of His people that were left of such and such enemies. In place of which Aquila
has read :

"And it shall be in that day, the Lord will shew his hand a second time, to
possess the remnant of his people, which shall be left by the Assyrians," etc.

And you will understand this, if you consider that the enemies of the people of
God are certain intelligent and spiritual beings, either evil daemons, or powers
opposed to the word of holiness, who in invisible leadership of the (76) nations
named, in days of old laid siege to the souls of Israel, involved them in
various passions, seducing them 37 and enslaving them to a life like that of the
other nations. When, then, you may almost say that the whole people was taken
captive in soul by these powers, they who were kept safe and intact, unwounded
and undespoiled according to (b) the prophecy received the message, that they
should see the hand of the Lord, and become His possession, according to the
words of the oracle, "the Lord will add to shew his hand, to be jealous for the
remnant remaining of his people." But what will the Lord add? Surely to those to
whom once long before He had proclaimed by the prophets "the hand of the Lord
has been added," yea, to those who are, as it were, preserved in the fall of the
whole people He proclaims that He will add what was lacking to the former. And
these are the mysteries of the new covenant, shewn by the hand of the Lord to
the remnant of the people. (c) But He also says that "He will be jealous of the
remnant that is left of the people." Instead of which Aquila and Theodotion
agree in reading : "that He must acquire the remnant of His people, whatever is
left from the Assyrians, and the other nations that were their enemies." And
this remnant which is left of His people "shall lift |91 up" he says "a standard
to the Gentiles." Through them clearly the Lord will shew His sign among all the
Gentiles, and through them will gather together the lost (d) of Israel and the
scattered abroad of Judah from the four corners 38 of the earth to the Christ of
God, who take refuge in Him through the preaching of His apostles, saying that
those gathered together come from them who of old were exiled and cut off from
the figurative Israel and Judah. The ideals of such souls shew them to be the
true Israel of God, for in contrast to them the weak and sinful nature of Israel
according to the flesh makes Him prophetically call them : "Rulers of Sodom and
people of Gomorrah." [[Rom. xi 5.]]

Thus the "remnant according to the election of grace," and that which is called
in the prophecy, "the remnant that is left of the people," has proclaimed the
sign of the Lord to all the Gentiles, and has joined to God as one people, that
is drawn to Him, the souls of the Gentiles that are brought out of destruction
to the knowledge of the Lord, a people which from the four corners of the earth
even now is welded together by the power of Christ.39 And these same refugees
from the lost race of the Jews, (77) the disciples and apostles of our Saviour
belonging to different tribes, thought worthy of one calling, and one grace and
one Holy Spirit, will cast away all the love, which the tribes of the Hebrew
race had to them, as the prophecy says. Bound together, then, by the same mind
and will, they have not only traversed the continent, but the isles of the
Gentiles also, making plunder of all the (b) souls of men everywhere, and
bringing them into captivity to the obedience of Christ, according to the
oracle, which said :

"And they shall fly in the ships of strangers ; they shall at the same time
spoil the sea, and them from the sun-rising." [[Isa xi. 14.]]

And the remainder of this prophecy you will examine as I have done, testing each
passage by yourself, and while you reject everything inconsistent and unworthy
in it, yet you will recognize the mind of the Spirit, as the Spirit of (c) God
itself suggests your meditation. For time does not |92 allow me to linger on
these subjects, as I must press on to complete the task before me.

"13. And I will command evils for the whole world, and their sins for the
unholy, and I will destroy the pride of the lawless, and will humble the pride
of the insolent, 14. and they that are left shall be more precious than gold
unsmelted, and a man shall be more precious than the stone of Suphir." And
afterwards (d) it adds: "And they that are left shall be as a fleeing
[[Isa.xiii. 11.]] fawn, or as a straying sheep."

In this too the Scripture shews most plainly the small number of the saved in
the time of the ruin of the wicked, so that it is not possible to expect that
absolutely all the circumcised without exception and the whole Jewish race will
attain to the promises of God.

"4. And there shall be in that day a failing of the glory of Jacob, and the
riches of his glory shall be (78) shaken. 5. And it shall be as when one gathers
standing corn, and reaps the grain of the ears; 6. And it shall be as when one
gathers ears in a rich valley, and stubble is left. Or as the berries of an
olive tree are left, two or three on the topmost bough, or four or five on its
branches, thus saith the Lord God of Israel. 7. In that day a man shall trust in
him that made him, and his eyes shall look on the Holy One of Israel, 8. and
they shall not trust in the altars, nor in the work [[Isa.xvii.4. ]] of their
hands, which their own fingers have made."

And in this it is clearly prophesied how Israel's glory (b) and all her riches
will be taken away, and how but a few, easily numbered, like the few berries on
the branch of an olive tree, are said to be left; and these would be those of
them who are believers in our Lord. And immediately after what is said about
these, there is a prophecy of the whole race of mankind turning away from the
error of idolatry, and coming to know the God of Israel.

"Hear ye isles,40 which are forsaken and tortured, (c) hear, what I heard from
the Lord of Sabaoth: the God [[Isa. xxi.10.]] of Israel has announced (it) to
us.

Note the way in this passage also in which he does not call those of the
Circumcision to hear the unspeakable |93 words, but those only, whom he calls
"forsaken and tortured," as were those in the apostolic age who bewailed and
lamented the evil of the life of men.

"4 b. The lofty men of the earth mourned, 5. and the earth waxed lawless through
her inhabitants.41 6b. Therefore, the inhabitants of the earth shall be poor,
(d) and few men shall be left." [[Isa.xxiv.4.]]

Here again having rebuked the transgressors of the law of the covenant of God
who belong to the people of the circumcision, and threatened them with what was
written, he prophesies that some few men of them will be left. And these would
be those named of the apostle "the remnant according to the election of grace."

" 12. Cities shall be left desolate, and houses deserted shall fall to ruin. 13.
All these things shall come to pass in the earth in the midst of the nations, as
if one should strip an olive tree, so shall they be stripped. (79) 14. But when
the vintage is stopped, then shall they cry aloud, and the remnant on the earth
shall rejoice [[Isa. xxiv. 12]] with the glory of God."

And here they who are left alone are said to rejoice, all the others being
delivered to the woes prophesied.

" 3. The crown of pride, the hirelings of Ephraim shall he beaten down. 4. And
the fading flower of glorious hope on the top of the high mountain shall be as
the early fig: he that sees it will desire to swallow (b) it, before he takes it
into his hand. 5. In that clay the Lord shall be the crown of hope, the garland
of glory to the remnant of his people; for they shall be left in [[Is. xxviii.
3.]] the spirit of judgment."

And here he prophesies that the Lord will be "a crown of hope and glory" to the
remnant of his people, not to all their nation, but to those only signified by
the remnant, and names the others in contrast to the remnant of his people "a
crown of shame and hirelings of Ephraim."

"And they that are left in Judaea, shall take root (c) downwards, and bear fruit
upwards, because there shall be a remnant from Jerusalem, and the preserved from
Mount Sion. The zeal of the Lord of Sabaoth will [[Isa.xxxvii. 31.]] do this."
|94

He prophesies that those of the Jewish race that are left according to the
election of grace, will cast root downwards and bear fruit upwards, shewing very
clearly the (d) election of the apostles and disciples of our Saviour. For they,
being left from those of the Circumcision, thrust down into the earth the roots
of their teaching, so that they have fixed and rooted their teaching throughout
the whole world : and they have exhorted men to bear both seed and fruit upwards
towards the heavenly promises.

Thus those men themselves, who were left of the Jewish race, when the rest were
destroyed, alone are said to be saved. The zeal of the Lord has accomplished
this. The zeal of the Lord elected them, in order to provoke the wicked of the
Circumcision to jealousy, and He provoked them to jealousy, according to the
saying of Moses :

"They have provoked me to jealousy by that which is not God,42 and I will
provoke them to jealousy by [[Deut. xxxii. 8.]] that which is not a people. By a
foolish people I will anger them."

"8. Thus saith the Lord, as a grape-stone shall be (80) found in the cluster,
and they shall say, Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it: so will I for the
sake of him that serves me, for his sake I will not destroy all. 9. And I will
lead out the seed of Jacob and Juda, and they shall inherit my holy mountain :
and my chosen and my servants shall inherit it and dwell there. 10. And there
shall be in the forest a fold43 of sheep, and the valley of Achor shall be a
resting-place for the herds of my people, who have sought me.

(b) "11. But ye are they that have left me, and forget my holy mountain and
prepare a table for chance, 12. and fill up the drink-offering to the Demon.44 I
will deliver you up to the sword, ye shall all fall by slaughter, because I
called you and ye did not hear, and did evil [[Isa. lxv. 8.]] before me, and
chose that which I willed not."

In this passage the Scripture distinguishes, and says that but a small seed from
Jacob will attain the promises, and that the elect are those that dwell in the
wood. It points here to the calling of the Gentiles, in which the elect of |95
the Lord and the seed of Jacob are [included], and these (c) would be the
apostles and disciples of our Saviour, and the rest beyond them are subject to
the before-mentioned threats, Scripture stating as clearly as possible, that the
whole Jewish nation could not attain the promises of God, but only the seed
which is named, and those called "the elect of God." For many are called, but
few are chosen. [[Matt. xx.16.]] On them Scripture now proceeds to prophesy that
a new name shall be conferred, saying to the wicked :

"For your name shall be left,45 as a loathing for my (d) chosen, and the Lord
shall destroy you : but my servants shall be called by a new name." [[Is. Ixv.
15.]]

And this new name, which was not known to them of old time, what could it be but
the name of "Christians," blessed through all the world, formed from the name of
our Saviour Jesus Christ?

50. From Micah.

[Passage quoted, Micah ii. 11.]

Micah, too, agrees with the passages from Isaiah in stating (81) that God will
not receive all without qualification, but only those who are left. And as in
Isaiah "their remnant" was called "a seed," so now those of them that are to be
saved are called "a drop." And the choir of the apostles is shewn forth by those
figures, as being a drop and a seed from the Jewish race, a drop from which all
they that have known the Christ of God through the whole world and received His
teaching, have been made worthy of the congregation foretold, having obtained
redemption from their enemies.

"2. And thou Bethlehem, house of Ephratha, art the (b) least among the thousands
of Juda. Out of thee shall come forth my leader, to be for a prince to Israel,
and his goings forth from the beginning are from the days of eternity. 3.
Therefore shall he give them until the time of her that brings forth. She shall
bring forth, and the [[Micah v. 2, 3]] remainder of their brethren shall turn."

And after a little he adds :

"7. And the remnant of Jacob shall be among the nations, in the midst of many
peoples, as dew falling |96 from the Lord, and as lambs on the pasture; that
none (c) may assemble or resist among the sons of men. 8. And the remnant of
Jacob shall be among the nations in the midst of many peoples, as a lion among
cattle 46 in the forest, and as a lion's whelp in the pastures of sheep : as
when he goes through and chooses and carries off, and there is none to deliver.
9. Thine hand shall be exalted against them that afflict thee, and all thine
enemies shall [[Micah v. 7.]] be utterly destroyed."

Nothing surely could be more clear than this; at one and the same time it
proclaims the birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem,47 and His existence before
eternity,48 His Birth of the Virgin, the call of His apostles and disciples, and
their preaching of the Christ carried throughout all the world. For when this
Ruler, Whose goings forth the Scripture says are from eternity, shall have gone
forth from Bethlehem, and when the holy maiden who was to bear Him shall have
brought Him forth, it does not say that all they of the Circumcision will be
saved, but only they that are left, who will be also a remnant of Jacob, and
will be given as dew to all the Gentiles. For the remnant of Jacob, he says,
shall be among the nations, as dew falling from the Lord, and as (82) lambs in a
pasture. Instead of which Aquila translates, "as drops on the grass," and
Theodotion, "as snow on grass." And again, instead of "so that none may assemble
or resist among the sons of men, and no son of men attack," Theodotion reads
"who shall not wait for man, and shall not hope in the son of man." And Aquila
"who shall not await a man, and shall not be concerned with the sons of men." 49

Through which the whole hope of the apostles of our Saviour is [shown to be] not
in man, but in their Lord and Saviour, and He was the Word of God. And it says
lower down :

(b) "And the remnant of Jacob shall be among the nations in the midst of many
peoples, as a lion among the cattle of the forest, and as a lion's whelp in the
|97 pastures of sheep; as when he goes through, and chooses, and spoils, and
there is none to save."

By which I think is meant the bravery and intrepidity of the apostles'
preaching. They threw themselves like a lion and a lion's whelp on the thicket
of the Gentiles and on the flocks of human sheep, they parted the worthy from
the (c) unworthy, and subjected them to the word of Christ. And then His
victories are proclaimed to Him : "Thy hand shall be exalted against them that
trouble thee, and all thy enemies shall be destroyed." And we can see this with
our own eyes.50 For though many have afflicted the word of Christ, and are even
now contending with it, yet it is lifted above them and become stronger than
them all. Yes, verily, the hand of Christ is raised against all that afflicted
Him, and all His enemies who from time to time rise up against His Church are
said to be "utterly destroyed."

52. From Zephaniah.

[Passage quoted, Zeph. iii. 9.]

And in this passage the Lord promised that there will be (83) left for Him a
people meek and lowly, meaning none others but they of the Circumcision who
believed in His Christ. And He again proclaimed that only the remnant of Israel
should be saved, with those called from the other nations, as He shewed in the
beginning of the prophecy.

53. From Zechariah.

[Passage quoted, Zech. xiv. 1, 2.] 51

The fulfilment of this also agrees with the passages quoted on the destruction
of the whole Jewish race, which came upon them after the coming of Christ. For
Zechariah (c) writes this prophecy after the return from Babylon, foretelling
the final siege of the people by the Romans, through which the whole Jewish race
was to become subject to their |98 enemies : he says that only the remnant of
the people shall be saved, exactly describing the apostles of our Saviour.

54. From Jeremiah.

[Passage quoted Jer. iii. 14-16.]

Here again he prophesies that the conversion of Israel will be at the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ, in which He will choose one from a city, and two from a family, very few and small in number, to be shepherds of the nations that have believed on Him and of the nations that have been increased upon the earth through their destined call by them. No more, he says, will they say "the ark of the covenant of the Lord"----for they will no longer run after the more external worship, having received a new covenant.

(84) 55. From the same.

[Passage quoted, Jer. v. 6-10.]

Here once more the charge against their whole race is shewn, and the siege that
came on them, and the remnant again, which he names "the foundation" as
belonging to the Lord. Because being inspired and strengthened by their faith in
the Christ of God, they did not undergo such sufferings as the rest of their
race.

56. From Ezekiel

[Passage quoted, Ezek. vi. 7.]

This also seems to me to agree with the passages from the other prophets. For
whom could you call the "saved" but those called by the others "a remnant, and
the drop, and the dew of that people," by which was signified the band of the
Apostles of our Saviour? They truly being saved from the destruction of all
their race, even in their (d) scattering remembered God, so that it must be
agreed that what was written referred to them.

57. From the same.

[Passage quoted, Ezek. xi. 16.]

And here he has called the same men by another name, meaning by "a little
sanctuary," those of them who shall be saved and survive. |99 58. From the same.
(85)

[Passage quoted, Ezek. xii. 14-16.]

In the dispersion of the whole people He says that even now few in number will
be left for Himself, meaning the same men as in the preceding prophecy. (b) 59.
From the same.

[ Passage quoted, Ezek. xiv. 21.]

This in no way differs from the preceding.

60. From the same.

[Passage quoted, Ezek. xx. 36.]

Here, again, is a clear witness that but few will come under God's staff, and
that this will be when the rest of Israel has fallen away from the promises. But
now that I have proved that the divine prophecies did not foretell good things
to all the members of the Jewish race universally and indiscriminately whatever
happened, to the evil and unholy and those who were the reverse, but to few of
them and those easily numbered, in fact to those of them who believed in our
Lord and Saviour, or those justified before His coming, I consider that I have
shewn sufficiently, that the divine promises were fulfilled (d) not
indiscriminately to all the Jews, and that the oracles of the prophets are not
more applicable to them than to those of the Gentiles who have received the
Christ of God. And the full meaning of the divine promises I will unfold in the
fitting place.

I have but collected these passages, as I was bound to do, in order to refute
the impudent assertions of those of the Circumcision, who, in their brainless
boasting, say that the Christ will come for them only, and not for all mankind.
I wished also to prove that my study of their sacred books (86) had been to good
purpose. In the previous book I have already accounted for our not becoming
Jews, although we have this delight in their prophetic writings. And I explained
there also, as far as was possible, what kind of a life the Christian life is
which is preached to all nations, and the ancient character of the ideal of the
system of the |100 (b) Gospel. So now that this preliminary work is done, it is
high time to attack more mysterious subjects, those which are concerned with the
mystical dispensation relating to our Lord and Saviour, Jesus the Christ of God
: so that we may learn why He made His appearance to all men now, and not
before, and the reason why He began the call of the Gentiles, not in days long
past, but now after the length of ages; and many other things which are germane
to the mysterious theology of His Person.

(c) Now, therefore, let us discuss the subject of His Incarnation, which is my
first topic at this second beginning of my work, which is addressed to
unbelievers, calling on Him Who is, indeed, the Word of God to aid us.

[Footnotes have been renumbered at placed at the end. Greek page locations are
in (), scripture refs in [[]]. This page was scanned at a time when I thought it
possible to include all the notes etc, so this is a complete representation of
this book.] 1. 1 ἄνωθεν ἐπαναλαβών τὸν λόγον, ἐπάνειμι ἐπι. Cf. ἐπαναβεβηκός, P.
E. 130b.

2. 1 ἐκ περιουσίας
: generally a rhetorical figure----"from superabundant evidence." Gifford [P. E. 64 a, 2] quotes Plato, Theat.: "sparring for mere amusement."

3. 1 The words of Balaam. Cf. Gen. xii. 3.

4. 1 Aquila, a Jewish proselyte, probably of Hadrian's time (A.I). 117-138), who
produced a Greek version of O.T. which occupies the third column of Origen's
Hexapla. His version is slavishly literal, and attempts to give a word for word
translation, thus throwing great light on the then state of the Hebrew text. The
Fathers on the whole regard the version as having an anti-Christian bias.
Deutsch (Dict. Bib. III. 1642) would identify A. with Onkelos.

5. 2 Theodotion, like A. first mentioned by Irenaeus (iii. xxi. 1, p. 215),
probably an Ephesian Jewish proselyte. He wrote his version probably about A.D.
180 (it is a very vexed question) or earlier. It occupies the sixth column of
the Hexapla.

6. 1 εὶσ πλάτος.

7. 2 Nominative.

6. 1 εὶσ πλάτος.

7. 2 Nominative.

8. 1 See note, p. 21.

9. 1 Jer. xvii. 1-4 is wanting from LX, but given in some codices with
asterisks. Sec also 484 c.

10. 2 των εθνων απαντων.

11. 1 εχομαλισομεν.

12. 2 την κατα διανοιαν θεωρουμενην σκηνοπηγιαν. Or, "the Feast of Tabernacles
in a spiritual sense."

13. 1 περιττους ειναι.

14. 2 καταλειμμα. LXX : D.F. K.
L.P.---- υπολειμμα
----Aleph A.B.

15. 3 R.V. " For the Lord will execute his word upon the earth, finishing it and
cutting it short." εν . . . συντετμημενον. Omitted by Aleph A.B. 47. W. H.
retain with Western and Syrian.

16. 4 W. H.: κατα του Ισραηλ. E. λεγων περι του Ισραηλ.

17. 5 W.H.: omit του λαβειν αυτην.

18. 1 δασμους και φορους.

19. 2 τον δια λουτρου παλιγγειετιας.

20. 1 LXX takes καθ εαυτων with ειποντες.

21. 2 Paris text has δι ον - ον - αυτους .

22. 1 ὐποστολη χρηται, "a lowering of diet," Plut. 2, 129 c. ; "an evasion,"
Hesych. cf. Heb. x. 39.

23. 2 Symmachus, author of the third great Jewish version of the O.T., which
comes in Origen's Hexapla after that of Aquila. Eusebius (H.E. vi. 17. Dem. Ev.
316c) makes him an Ebionite Christian, and is followed by Jerome. Epiphanius'
statement that he was a Samaritan Jew is to be rejected (see Gwynne's art. in
D.C.B. iv. p. 749). He probably lived in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and wrote
his version aiming at the same literal accuracy as Aquila, but at more
refinement of expression.

24. 3 LXX : οικον του Ισραηλ.

25. 1 S.: και τηι καρδιαι συνωσιν.

26. 2 S.: ιασομαι. E.: ιασωμαι.

27. 1 Cf. H.E. iv. c. 6 ; Tertullian, Apol. c. 16. Origen, c. Celsum viii. ad fin.; Gregory Naz., Orat. xii. After the founding of
Aelia
Capitolina, Milman says, "An edict was issued prohibiting any Jew from entering the new city on pain of death, or approaching its environs so as to contemplate even at a distance its sacred height."---- History of the Jews, Book XVIII. ad fin.

28. 1 Isa. vii. 14. Cf. 98 a, and Origen, c. Celsum, i. 35.

29. 2 το μεν εισετι στοιχειουμενον, το δε ηδη δια του λουτρου πεφωτισμενον.

30. 1 W.H. add : δι ἠμας γαρ εγραφη.

31. 2 E. adds μικρον.

32. 3 S.: εσται. E.: αναστρεψει.

33. 1 E. adds και ζητησαι.

34. 2 LXX : και εχ Αραβιας. E.: και απο των νησων της θαλασσης.

35. 3 E. omits τους απολομενους Ισραηλ, και. (S.) 36. 1 Lit. "moreover shall add
to shew his hand."

37. 2 ὐποσυροντες. Cf. P.E. 317 a, Of the Serpent.

38. 1 Lit. wings.

39. 2 εφελκυσαμενον ενα λαον συνηχε τωι θεωι . . . . συγκροτουμενον.

40. 1 S. omits νησοι.

41. 1 Omission in E of 5 b, 6 a, owing to error of scribe because of τους
κατοικουντας αυτην (5 a) and οι κατοικουντες αυτην (6 a).

42. 1 S. adds: Παρωχυνναν με εν τοις ειδωλοις αυτων----"They have provoked me with their idols."

43. 2 LXX : pl.

44. 3 LXX : τω δαιμονι . . . τηι τυξηι.

45. 1 S.: καταλειψετε 46. 1 LXX : ὠς λεων εν κτηνεσιν εν τωι δρυμωι.

47. 2 Cf. 97 c, 275 a, 340 d, and Origen c. Celsum 453.

48. 3 την προ αιωνος ουσιωσιν----cf. P.E. 314 b, 554 c and 541 a: "It is literally the act which gives to ειναι τε και την ουσιαν." [G.] 50. 1 Interesting as an echo of recent persecution.

51. 2 Zech. xiv. This is a post-exilic prophecy of an eschatological nature,
being one of the fragments appended to Zechariah. It is dependent on Ezekiel
xxxviii. Zechariah's prophecies are confined to cc. i.-viii., and his activity,
according to Zech. i. 1 and vii. 1; was from the second to the fourth year of
Darius. [See Hastings, D.B. iv. 967.] This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse,
2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 45: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 3
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 3

BOOK III

I HAVE now adequately completed the prolegomena1 to (87) my Proof of the Gospel:
I have shewn the nature of our Saviour's Gospel teaching, and given the reason
of our regard for the oracles of the Jews, while we reject their rule of life.
And I have also made it clear that their (88) prophetic writings in their
foresight of the future recorded our own calling through Christ, so that we make
use of them not as books alien to us, but as our own property. And now it is
time for me to embark on my actual work, and to begin to treat of the promises.
How these were actually concerned with the human dispensation of Jesus the
Christ of God, and the teaching of the Hebrew prophets on the theology based on
His Person, and predictions of His appearance among men, which I shall (b) shew
immediately from their clear fulfilment can only apply to Him alone. But I must
first of necessity consider the fact that the prophets definitely made mention 2
of the Gospel of the Christ.

CHAPTER 1 That the Prophets made Mention of the Gospel of the Christ. MY witness
of this shall be from the words of Isaiah, who cries in the Person of Christ:
|102

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has sent me to preach good news
to the poor, to proclaim (c) deliverance to the captives, and recovery of sight
to the [[Isa. lxi. i.]] blind."

Our Saviour, after reading this prophecy through in the Synagogue one day to a
multitude of Jews, shut the book [[Luke iv. 21]] and said: "This day is this
Scripture fulfilled in your ears." And beginning His own teaching from that
point He began to preach the Gospel to the poor, putting in the forefront of His
blessings: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs [[Matt. v. 3.]] is the
kingdom of heaven." Yea, and to those who were (d) hampered by evil spirits, and
bound for a long time like slaves by daemons, He proclaimed forgiveness,
inviting all to be free and to escape from the bonds of sin, when He [[Matt.
xi.28.]] said: "Come unto me, all ye that labour, and are heavy laden, and I
will refresh you." And to the blind He gave sight, giving the power of seeing to
those whose bodily vision was destroyed, and dowering with the vision of the
light of true religion those who of old in their minds were blind 3 to the
truth. The prophecy before us shews it to be essential that Christ Himself
should be the originator and leader of the Gospel activity, and the same prophet
foretells that after Him His own disciples should be ministers of the same
system: (89)

"How beautiful are the feet of them that bring good [[Isa. lii. 7; Rom. x.]]
tidings of good things, and of those that bring good tidings of peace."

Here he says very particularly that it is the feet of those who publish the good
news of Christ that are beautiful. For how could they not be beautiful, which in
so small, so short a time have run over the whole earth, and filled every place
with the holy teaching about the Saviour of the world?

(b) And that they did not use human words to persuade their hearers, but that it
was the power of God that worked with them in the Gospel preaching, again
another prophet says:

"The Lord will give a word to those that bring good [[Ps. lxviii.11.]] tidings
with much power." |103 And again Isaiah:

"9. Go up to the high mountain, thou that bringest good tidings in Zion, lift up
thy voice with strength thou that bringest good tidings to Jerusalem; lift it
up, be not afraid, Say to the cities of Juda, Behold your God, 10. Behold the
Lord comes with strength,4 and his arm with power. Behold his reward is with
him, (c) and his work before him. 11. As a shepherd feeds his flock, and gathers
the lambs in his arms, and comforts those that are great with young." [[Isa. xl.
9.]]

We shall know in what sense this is to be taken, when we have reached a further
point on the road of Gospel teaching. But at least it is established that the
voices of the prophets witnessed to the Gospel, and even to the name of the
Gospel, and you have clear and definite proofs from whom the Gospel will take
its origin, that is to say from Christ Himself, and by whom it will be preached,
that it will be through His Apostles. At least (we are told) by what power it
will gain the mastery, that it will not be (d) human: since this is established
by the words: "The Lord will give a word to those that bring good tidings with
much power." So then it only remains to quote a few out of the many other
ancient Hebrew prophecies concerning Christ, that you may know what the good
tidings were that would be preached in after days, and may realize the wonderful
foreknowledge of future events in the prophets, and the fulfilments of their
predictions, how they stand fulfilled in our Lord and Saviour, Jesus the Christ
of God.

CHAPTER 2 That the Hebrew Prophets prophesied of Christ.

MOSES was the first of the prophets to tell the good news (90) that another
prophet like unto himself would arise. For since his legislation was only
applicable to the Jewish race, and only to that part of it resident in the land
of Judaea or its neighbourhood, and not to those living far away abroad |104 (as
has been seen in my previous book); and as it was surely necessary that He Who
was not only the God of the Jews, but also of the Gentiles, should provide
helpful means for all the Gentiles to know Him and to become holy in their
lives, He makes known by the oracle accordingly (b) that another prophet will
arise from the Jewish race, no whit inferior to His own dispensation. And God
Himself names him in this manner:

"A prophet will I raise up to them from their brethren like unto thee, and I
will put my word in his mouth, and he shall speak to them according to what I
command him. And whatsoever man shall not hear that prophet['s words],
whatsoever he shall speak in [[Deut.xviii.18]] my name, I will take vengeance on
him."

And Moses speaks similar words when interpreting the oracle of God to the
people:

(c) "A prophet shall the Lord thy God raise up of your brethren like unto me.
Him shall ye hear according to all things that ye asked of the Lord God in Horeb
[[Deut.xviii.15]] in the day of the assembly."

Was then any of the prophets after Moses, Isaiah, say, or Jeremiah, or Ezekiel,
or Daniel, or any of the twelve, like Moses in being a lawgiver? Not one. Did
any of them behave like Moses? One cannot affirm it. For each of (d) them from
the first to the last referred their hearers to Moses, and based their rebukes
of the people on their breaches of the Mosaic law, and did nothing but exhort
them to hold fast to the Mosaic enactments. You could not say that any of them
was like him: and yet Moses speaks definitely of one who should be. Whom then
does the oracle prophesy will be a prophet like unto Moses, but our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, and none other?

We must consider thoroughly why this was said. Moses was the first leader of the
Jewish race. He found them attached to the deceitful polytheism of Egypt, and
was the first to turn them from it, by enacting the severest punishment (91) for
idolatry. He was the first also to publish the theology of the one God, bidding
them worship only the Creator and Maker of all things. He was the first to draw
up for the same hearers a scheme of religious life, and is acknowledged to have
been the first and only lawgiver of their religious polity. But Jesus Christ
too, like Moses, |105 only on a grander stage, was the first to originate the
teaching according to holiness for the other nations, and first accomplished the
rout of the idolatry that embraced (b) the whole world. He was the first to
introduce to all men the knowledge and religion of the one Almighty God. And He
is proved to be the first Author and Lawgiver of a new life and of a system
adapted to the holy. And with regard to the other teaching on the genesis of the
world, and the immortality of the soul, and other doctrines of philosophy which
Moses was the first to teach (c) the Jewish race, Jesus Christ has been the
first to publish them to the other nations by His disciples in a far diviner
form. So that Moses may properly be called the first and only lawgiver of
religion to the Jews, and Jesus Christ the same to all nations, according to the
prophecy which says of Him:

"Set, O Lord, a lawgiver over them: that the Gentiles may know themselves to be
but men." 5 [[Ps. ix. 20.]]

Moses again by wonderful works and miracles authenticated (d) the religion that
he proclaimed: Christ likewise, using His recorded miracles to inspire faith in
those who saw them, established the new discipline of the Gospel teaching. Moses
again transferred the Jewish race from the bitterness of Egyptian slavery to
freedom: while Jesus Christ summoned the whole human race to freedom from their
impious Egyptian idolatry under evil daemons. Moses, too, promised a holy land
and a holy life therein under a blessing to those who kept his laws: while Jesus
Christ says likewise: "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth,"
promising a far better land in truth, and a holy and godly, not the land of
Judaea, which in no way excels the rest (of the earth), but the heavenly country
which suits souls that (92) love God, to those who follow out the life
proclaimed by Him. And that He might make it plainer still, He proclaimed the
kingdom of heaven to those blessed by Him. And you will find other works done by
our Saviour with greater power than those of Moses, and yet resembling the works
which Moses did. As, for example, Moses fasted forty days continuously, as
Scripture witnesses, saying: "And (Moses) was there with the Lord forty days and
(b) |106 [[Exod. xxxiv. 28.]] forty nights; he did neither eat bread nor drink
water." And Christ likewise: For it is written: "And he was led by the Spirit
into the wilderness, being forty days tempted of the devil; and in those days he
did eat nothing." [[Luke iv. 1.]]

Moses again fed the people in the wilderness: for Scripture says: Behold, I give
6 you bread from heaven." [[Exod. xvi.4.]] And after a little:

"It came to pass as the dew ceased round about the camp, and behold on the face
of the wilderness a small (c) thing, like white coriander seed, as frost upon
the ground." [[Exod. xvi.14.]]

And our Lord and Saviour likewise says to.His disciples:

" 8. O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have
brought no bread? 9. Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves
of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? 10. Neither the seven
loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?" [[Matt. xvi.8.]]

Moses again went through the midst of the sea, and led the people; for Scripture
says:

(d) "And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the Lord carried back
the sea with a strong south wind all the night, and the water was divided. And
the children of Israel passed through the midst of the sea on the dry land, and
the water was a wall to them on the right and a wall on the left."
[[Exod.xiv.21-22]]

In the same way, only more divinely, Jesus the Christ of God walked on the sea,
and caused Peter to walk on it. For it is written:

"25. And in the fourth watch of the night he went unto them, walking on the sea.
26. And when they saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled." [[Matt. xiv.
25.]]

And shortly after:

"28. And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee
on the water. 29. And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the
ship, he walked on the water."

Moses again made the sea dry with a strong south wind. (93) For Scripture says:
"Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the Lord drave back the sea
with a strong |107 south wind," and he adds: "The waves were congealed in the
midst of the sea." In like manner, only much more grandly, our Saviour "rebuked
the winds and the sea, and there was a great calm." Again when Moses descended
from the Mount, his face was seen full of glory: for it is written:

"And Moses descending from the Mount did not know that the appearance of the
skin of his face was (b) glorified while He spake to him. And Aaron and all the
elders [of the children] of Israel saw Moses, and the appearance of the skin of
his face was glorified." [[Exod. xxxiv. 29.]]

In the same way only more grandly our Saviour led His disciples "to a very high
mountain,7 and he was transfigured before them, and his face did shine as the
sun, and his garments were white like the light." [[Matt. xvii.2.]]

Again Moses cleansed a leper: for it is written: " And behold Miriam (was)
leprous (as white) as snow." [[Num. xii.10.]] And a little further on: "And
Moses cried to the Lord: O God, I pray thee to heal her." And in the same way,
but with more superb power, the (c) Christ of God, when a leper came to him,
saying: "If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean; answered: I will; be thou
clean. And his leprosy was cleansed." [[Matt. viii.2.]] Moses, again, said that
the law was written with the finger of God: for it is written:

"And he gave to Moses, when he ceased speaking to him in Mount Sinai, the two
tables of witness, stone tables written with the finger of God."
[[Exod.xxxi.18.]]

And in Exodus: "The magicians therefore said to Pharaoh, (d) It is the finger of
God." [[Exod. viii.19.]] In like manner Jesus, the Christ of God, said to the
Pharisees: "If I by the finger of God 8 cast out devils." [[Matt. xii.27]]
Moreover, Moses changed the name of Nave to Jesus, and likewise the Saviour
changed that of Simon to Peter. And Moses set up seventy men as leaders to the
people. For Scripture says:

"16. Bring together to me seventy men of the elders of Israel, 9 17. and I will
take of the spirit that is upon |108 thee, and I will put it upon them. ... 24.
And he brought together seventy men." 10 [[Num. xi.16]]

Likewise our Saviour "chose out His seventy disciples,11 and sent them 12 two
and two before his face." [[Luke x.1.]] Moses (94) again sent out twelve men to
spy out the land, and likewise, only with far higher aims, our Saviour sent out
twelve Apostles to visit all the Gentiles. Moses again legislates saying:

[[Deut. v. 17]] "Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt
not steal, Thou shalt not forswear thyself." 13

But our Saviour, extending the law, not only forbids to kill, but also to be
angry: instead of "Thou shalt not commit adultery," He forbids to look on a
woman with unbridled lust. Instead of "Thou shalt not steal," He enjoins that we
should give what is our own to the needy. And transcending the law against false
swearing, He lays down the rule of not swearing at all. But why need I seek
further (b) for proof that Moses and Jesus our Lord and Saviour acted in closely
similar ways, since it is possible for any one who likes to gather instances at
his leisure? Even when they say that no man knew the death of Moses, or his
sepulchre, so (none saw) our Saviour's change after His Resurrection into the
divine. If then no one but our Saviour can be shewn to have resembled Moses in
so many ways, surely it only remains for us to apply to Him, and to none other,
the prophecy of Moses, in which he foretold that God (c) would raise up one like
unto himself, saying:

"18. I will raise a prophet to them of their brethren like thee; and I will put
my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them, as I shall bid him. 19. And
[[Deut.xviii.18]] whatever man will not hear whatsoever words that prophet
saith, I will take vengeance on him."

And Moses himself, interpreting the words to the people, said:

(d) "15. A prophet shall the Lord thy God raise up to |109 thee of thy brethren,
like me; him ye shall hear; 16. according to all things which you desired of the
Lord your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly." [[Deut.xviii 15.]]

But the Old Testament 14 clearly teaches that, of the prophets after Moses, no
one before our Saviour was raised up like unto Moses, when it says:

"And there has not arisen yet a prophet like Moses whom the Lord knew face to
face in all his signs and wonders." [[Deut.xxxiv. 10.]]

I have then proved that the Divine Spirit prophesied through Moses of our
Saviour, if He alone and none other has been shewn to fulfil the requirements of
Moses' words. But note another recorded prophecy. We know that many (95)
multitudes among all the nations call our Lord and Saviour Lord, though He was
born according to the flesh of the seed of Israel, confessing Him as Lord
because of His divine power. And this also Moses knew by the Divine Spirit, and
proclaimed in this manner in writing:

"There shall come a man from his seed" (He means Israel's), "and he shall be
Lord over the Gentiles, and his kingdom shall be exalted." [[Num.xxiv.7.]]

Now if none other of the kings and rulers of those of the Circumcision has ever at any period been Lord of many Gentiles (and no record suggests it) while truth cries and (b) shouts of our Saviour's unique rule, that many multitudes from all nations confess Him to be Lord not only with their lips but with the most genuine affection,15 what can hinder us from saying that He is.the one foretold by the prophet? That Moses' prediction was not indefinite, and that he did not see his prophecy in the shadows of illimitable and unmeasured time, but circumscribed the fulfilment of his predictions with the greatest accuracy by temporal limits, hear how he speaks prophetically about Him: (c) "There shall not fail a prince from Juda, and a
leader from his loins until he come in whom it is laid up,16 and he is the expectation of the Gentiles"---- [[Gen. xlix.10.]] which means that the order and succession of rulers and leaders of the Jewish race will not fail until the coming of the Prophesied, but that when there is a failure of their
|110 rulers the Prophesied will come. By Judah here he does (d) not mean the tribe of Judah, but since in later days the whole race of the Jews came to be called after the kingly tribe, as even now we call them Jews, in a very wonderful and prophetic way he named the whole Jewish race, just as we do when we call them Jews.

Next he says that the rulers and heads of their race will not fail, before the
Prophesied appear: and that on his arrival the Jewish state will be at once
dissolved, and that he will be no longer the expectation of the Jews, but of the
Gentiles. Now you could not apply this prophecy (96) to any of the prophets, but
only to our Lord and Saviour. For immediately on his appearance the kingdom of
the Jews was taken away. For at once their king in the direct line failed, who
ruled them according to their own laws, Augustus then being the first Roman
Emperor, and Herod, who was of an alien race, becoming their king.17 And while
they failed, the expectation of the Gentiles throughout the whole world appeared
according to the divine prophecy, (b) so that even now all men of all nations
who believe in Him place the hope of godly expectation in Him.

All these good tidings, and many others besides these, does Moses give us
concerning the Christ. And Isaiah definitely foretells in words akin to his of
one who shall rise from the seed and line of King David:

"A rod shall come forth from the root of Jesse, and a flower shall spring forth
from his root, and the spirit of God shall rest on him, the spirit of wisdom and
understanding." [[Isa. xi. 1.]]

And then he proceeds in prophetic style to paint the (c) change that will
transform all races of men, both Greek and barbarian, from savagery and
barbarism to gentleness and mildness. For he says:

"And the wolf shall feed with the lamb, and the |111 leopard shall lie down with
the goat, and the calf and the bull and lion shall feed together." [[Isa. xi.
6.]]

And similar things, which he at once makes clear by interpretation, saying:

"And he that arises to rule the Gentiles, on him shall the Gentiles trust."

Thus he has made it clear that the unreasoning animals, (d) and the wild beasts
mentioned in the passage, represent the Gentiles, by reason of their being by
nature like wild beasts; and he says that one arising from the seed of Jesse,
from whom the genealogy of our Lord and Saviour runs, will rule over the
Gentiles; on Him the nations that now believe in Him fix their hope, agreeably
to the prediction, "And it shall be that he who shall rise to reign over the
Gentiles, in him shall the Gentiles trust." And the words "In him shall the
Gentiles trust" are the same as "And he will be the expectation of the
Gentiles." For there is (97) no difference between saying "In him shall the
Gentiles trust" and "He shall be the expectation of the Gentiles." And the same
Isaiah, continuing, prophesies these things about Christ:

"Behold my servant, whom I have chosen, my beloved in whom my soul is well
pleased, he shall bring judgment to the nations." [[Isa. xlii. 1.]]

And he adds: "Till he place judgment upon the earth, and in his name shall the
Gentiles trust."

Here, then, the second time the prophet states that the Gentiles will hope in
Christ, having said above "In Him shall the Gentiles trust." Though here it is
"In His name shall the Gentiles trust." And it was said also to David, that "of
the fruit of thy body shall one be raised (b) up," about Whom God says further
on: " He shall call on me, Thou art my father; and I will make him my
first-born." [[Ps. cxxxii.11]] And about Him he says again, "And he shall rule
from the one sea to the other, and from the rivers even unto the ends of the
world." [[Ps.lxxxviii.26.]] And once more, "All the Gentiles shall serve him,
and all the tribes of the earth shall be blessed in him." [[Ps. lxxi.8.]] And
moreover, the definite place of His prophesied birth is foretold by Micah,
saying: [[Ps. lxxi.11 and 17.]] "And thou, Bethlehem, House of Ephratha, art the
least that can be among the thousands of Judah. Out of thee shall come a leader,
who shall feed my people Israel. And (c) |112 his goings forth are from the
beginning from the days of eternity." [[Micah v.2; Matt.ii.6.]]

Now all agree that Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem,18 and a cave 19 is shewn
there by the inhabitants to those who come from abroad to see it. The place of
His birth then was foretold. And the miracle of His birth Isaiah teaches
sometimes mysteriously, and sometimes more plainly: mysteriously, when he says:

"Lord, who hath believed our report? And the arm of the Lord to whom hath it
been revealed? we (d) proclaimed him before as a child, as a root in a thirsty
soil." [[Isa. liii. 1.]]

Instead of which Aquila interpreted thus: "And he shall be proclaimed as a
suckling before his face, and as a root from an untrodden ground." And
Theodotion: "And he shall go up as a suckling before him, and as a root in a
thirsty land." For in this passage, the prophet having mentioned "the Arm of the
Lord," which was the Word of God, says: "In his sight we have proclaimed (him)
as a sucking child, and one nurtured at the breast, and as a root from untrodden
ground." The child that is "a suckling and nurtured at the breast" exactly
therefore shews forth the (98) birth of Christ, and "the thirsty and untrodden
land" the Virgin that bare Him, whom no man had known, from whom albeit
untrodden sprang up "the blessed root," and "the sucking child that was nurtured
by the breast." But this prophecy was darkly and obscurely given: the same
prophet explains his meaning more plainly, when he says: "Behold a Virgin shall
be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name God
with us," [[Isa. vii. 14.]] for Emmanuel signifies this.

(b) Such were the thoughts of Hebrews long ago about the birth of Christ among
men. Do they, then, describe in |113 their prophecy some famous prince or
tyrant, or some one in any other class of those who have great power in earthly
things? One cannot say so, for no such man appeared. But as He was in His life,
so they prophesied that He would be, in no way failing in truth. For Isaiah
said: "We proclaimed him before, as a child, as a root in thirsty soil.'' [[Is.
liii. 2.]] And then he proceeds saying:

"2. He hath no form or glory, and we saw him, and he had no form or beauty, 3.
And his form was dishonourable and slight even compared with the sons of (c)
men, a man in suffering, and knowing to bear sickness 1 he was dishonoured, and
not esteemed." What remains for him to say?

Surely, if they predicted His tribe and race and manner of birth, and the
miracle of the Virgin, and His manner of life, it was impossible for them to
pass over in silence that which followed, namely His Death: and what does Isaiah
prophesy about it?

"3. A man" he says "in suffering, and knowing to bear sickness,20 he was
dishonoured and not esteemed. 4. This man bears our sins, and is pained for our
sake. And we thought him to be in trouble, in suffering, and in evil; 5. He was
wounded for our sins, and bruised (cl) for our iniquities. The chastisement of
our peace was upon him, and by his stripe we are healed. 6. All we as sheep have
gone astray,21 and the Lord delivered him for our sins, and he because of his
affliction opens not his mouth. He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a
lamb dumb before her shearers, so he opens not his mouth.22 8. Who shall declare
his generation? for his life is taken from the earth." [[Isa. liii. 3-8.]]

In this he shews that Christ, being apart from all sin, will receive the sins of
men on Himself. And therefore (99) He will suffer the penalty of sinners, and
will be pained on their behalf; and not on His own. And if He shall be wounded
by the strokes of blasphemous words, this also will be the result of our sins.
For He is weakened through our sins, so that we, when He had taken on Him our
faults and the wounds of our wickedness, might be |114 healed by His stripes.
And this is the cause why the Sinless shall suffer among men: and the wonderful
prophet, (b) in no way shrinking, clearly rebukes the Jews who plotted his
death; and complaining bitterly of this very thing he says: "For the
transgressions of my people he was led to death." And then because total
destruction overtook them immediately, and not a long time after their evil deed
to Christ, when they were besieged by the Romans, he does not pass this over
either, but adds: "And I will give the wicked for his tomb, and the rich for his
death."

It would have sufficed for him to have concluded the prophecy at this point, if
he had not seen that something (c) else would happen after the death of Christ.
But as He after His death and entombment is to return and rise again almost at
once, he adds this also concerning Him, saying next:

"The Lord also is pleased to purify him from his stroke----if ye can give an offering for sin, your soul shall see a life-long seed. And the Lord wills to take away from the travail of his soul, to shew him light." [[Isa. liii. 10.]]

He said above: "A man stricken, and knowing to bear weakness"; and now after his
death and burial, he says: "The Lord wishes to cleanse him from his strokes."
And (d) how will this be done? "If ye offer," he says, "for sin, your soul shall
see a seed that prolongs its days." For it is not allowed to all to see the seed
of Christ that prolongs its days, but to those only who confess and bring the
offerings for sins to God. For the soul of these only shall see the seed of
Christ prolonging its days, be it His eternal life after death, or the word sown
by Him through the whole world, which will prolong its days and endure for ever.
And as he said above: "And we reckoned him to be in trouble," so, now, after His
slaughter and death, he says: "And the Lord wills to take his life away from its
(100) trouble, and to give it light." Since then the Lord, the Almighty God,
willed to cleanse Him from this stroke, and to show Him light, if He willed He
would most certainly do what He willed; for there is nothing that He wills which
is not brought to pass: but He willed to cleanse Him and to give Him light;
therefore he accomplished it, He cleansed Him and gave Him light. And since He
willed |115 it, and being willing took away the travail of His soul, and shewed
Him light, the prophet rightly proceeds with the words: "Therefore he shall
inherit from many, and shall divide the spoil of the strong." [[Isa. liii.12.]]

Here it remained for him to mention the heritage of (b) Christ, in agreement
with the Second Psalm, in which the prophetic word foretells the plot that was
hatched against Him, giving His name:

"2. The kings of the earth stood up, And the rulers were gathered together
Against the Lord and against his Christ." [[Ps. ii. 2.]]

And it adds next:

"3. The Lord said to me, Thou art my son, To-day I have begotten thee;

Ask of me and I shall give thee the Gentiles for thine inheritance

And the bounds of the earth for thy possession." It was to these Gentiles that
the Prophet darkly referred, (c) saying: "He shall inherit from many, and shall
divide the spoil of the strong." [[Isa. liii. 12.]] For he rescued the subject
souls from the opposing powers, which of old ruled over the Gentiles, and
divided them as spoils among his disciples. Wherefore Isaiah says of them: "And
they shall rejoice before thee, as they who divide the spoils."[[Isa. ix. 3.]]
And the Psalmist:

"12. The Lord will give a word to the preachers with much power.

13. The king of the powers of the beloved, in the beauty of his house divideth
the spoils." [[Ps. lxvii.12.]]

He rightly, therefore, says this also of Christ: "Therefore (d) he shall have
the inheritance of many, and divide the spoils of the strong." And shortly after
he tells us why, saying:

"Because his soul was delivered to death, and he was reckoned among the
transgressors, and he himself bare the sins of many, and was delivered for their
iniquities."

For it was as a meet return for all this, because of His obedience and
long-suffering, that the Father gave Him what we have seen, for He was obedient
to the Father even unto death. Wherefore it is prophesied that He should receive
the inheritance of many, and should be |116 reckoned with the transgressors not
before but after His being delivered to death. For therefore He is said "to
receive the inheritance of many, and to share the spoil of the strong." And I
consider that it is beyond doubt that in these words the resurrection from the
dead of the (101) subject of the prophecy is shewn. For how else can we regard
Him as led as a sheep to the slaughter, and delivered to death for the sins of
the Jewish people, numbered with transgressors, and delivered to burial, then
cleansed by the Lord, and seeing light with Him, and receiving the inheritance
of many, and dividing the spoils with his friends? David, too, prophesying in
the Person of Christ says somewhere of His Resurrection after death:

(b) "10. Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, Neither wilt thou give thine Holy
one to see corruption." [[Ps.xvi. 10.]]

And also:

"4. Lord, Thou hast brought my soul out of Hades, Thou hast kept my life from
them that go down into the pit." [[Ps. xxx. 4.]]

And also:

"14. Thou that liftest me up from the gates of death. 15. That I may tell all
thy praises." [[Ps. ix. 14.]]

I consider that not even the most obtuse can look these things in the face 23
(and disregard them). And the conclusion of the prophecy of Isaiah, tells of the
soul once sterile and empty of God, or perhaps of the Church of the (c)
Gentiles, agreeably to the view I have taken. For since Christ has borne all for
its sake, he rightly goes on after the predictions about them, to say:

"Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that
travailest not; for more are the children of the desolate, than of her that hath
a husband,24 for the Lord has said, Enlarge the place of thy tent, and the skins
of thy hangings 25 peg down, do not spare. Widen thy cords, and strengthen thy
pins: spread out still more to the right and left, and thy seed shall inherit
the heathen." [[Is. liv. 1.]] |117

This is the good news the Word gives the Church (d) gathered from the Gentiles
scattered throughout the world and stretching from sunrise to sunset, shewn
forth very clearly when it says: "And thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles." And
now, though this part of my subject needs more elaboration, I will conclude it,
as I have said sufficient for the present. You yourself will be able at your
leisure to make selections relating to the subject, and this present work on the
Proof of the Gospel will adduce and interpret individual details in their place.
Meantime, for the present what has been said will suffice, on the predictions
(and foreknowledge) of the prophets about our Saviour, and that it was they who
proclaimed the good news that the good things of the future were coming for all
men. (102) They foretold the coming of a prophet and the religion of a lawgiver
like Moses, his race, his tribe, and the place he should come from, and they
prophesied the time of his appearance, his birth, and death, and resurrection,
as well as his rule over all the Gentiles, and all those things have been
accomplished, and will continue to be accomplished in the sequence of events,
since they find their completion in our Lord and Saviour alone. But such
arguments from the sacred oracles are only (b) intended for the faithful.
Unbelievers in the prophetic writings I must meet with special arguments. So
that I must now argue about Christ as about an ordinary man and one like other
men,26 in order that when He has been shewn to be far greater and more excellent
in solitary preeminence than all the most lauded of all time, I may then take
the opportunity to treat of His diviner nature, and shew from clear proofs, that
the power in Him was not (c) of mere humanity. And after that I will deal with
the theology of His Person, so far as I can envisage it.

Since then many unbelievers call Him a wizard and a deceiver, and use many other
blasphemous terms, and cease not yet to do so, I will reply to them, drawing my
|118 arguments, not from any source of my own, but from His own words and
teaching.

CHAPTER 3 Addressed to those that suppose that the Christ of God was a Deceiver.

(d) THE questions I would ask them are these: whether any other deceiver, such
as He is supposed to have been, is ever reported to have become as a teacher the
cause of meekness, "sweet reasonableness," 27 purity, and every virtue in those
that he deceived? Whether it is right to call by these names one that did not
permit men to gaze on women with unbridled lust, whether He was a deceiver Who
taught philosophy in its highest form in that He trained His disciples to share
their goods with the needy, and set (103) industry and benevolence in the front
rank? Whether He was a deceiver Who wakened 28 (men) from common, vulgar, and
noisy company, and taught them to enjoy only the study of holy oracles?

He dissuaded from everything false, and exhorted men to honour truth before all,
so that so far from swearing false oaths, they should abstain even from true
ones. "For let your Yea be yea, and your Nay, nay." How could He be justly
called a deceiver? And why need I say more, since it may be known from what I
have already said what kind of ideal of conduct He has shed forth (b) on life,
from which all lovers of (ruth would agree that He was no deceiver, but in truth
something divine, and the author of a holy and divine philosophy, and not one of
the common vulgar type?

He has been proved in the first book of this work to have been the only one to
revive the life of the old Hebrew saints, long perished from amongst men, and to
have spread it not among a paltry few but through the (c) whole world: from
which it is possible to shew that men 29 |119 in crowds 30 through all the world
(are following the way) of those holy men of Abraham's day, and that there are
innumerable lovers of their godly manner of life from Barbarians as well as
Greeks.

Such then is the more ethical side of His teaching. But let us also examine
whether the word deceiver applies to Him in relation to His most central
doctrines. Is it not a fact that He is recorded Himself to have been devoted to
the One Almighty God, the Creator of Heaven and earth and the whole Universe,
and to have led His disciples to Him, and that even now the words of His
teaching lead up the (d) minds of every Greek and Barbarian to the Highest God,
outsoaring all visible Nature? But surely He was not a deceiver in not allowing
the real deceiver, fallen headlong 31 from the loftiest and the only true
theology, to worship many gods? Remember that this was no novel doctrine or one
peculiar to Him, but one dear to the Hebrew saints of long ago, as I have shewn
in the Preparation, from whom lately the sons 32 of our modern philosophers have
derived great benefit, expressing approval of their teaching. Yes, and the most
erudite of the Greeks pride themselves, forsooth, on the fact that the oracles
of their own gods mention the Hebrews in terms like these. 33 (104)

"The Chaldeans alone possess wisdom, and the Hebrews, Who worship in holy wise,
God their King, self-born."

Here the writer called them Chaldeans because of Abraham, who it is recorded was by race a Chaldean. If, then, in the ancient days the sons of the Hebrews, to whose (b) eminent wisdom even the oracles bear witness, directed men's worship only towards the One God, Creator of all things, why should we class Him as a deceiver and not as a |120 wonderful teacher of religion Who, with invisible and inspired power, pressed forward and circulated among all men the very truths which in days of old were only known to the godly Hebrews, so that no longer as in ancient days some few men easily numbered hold true opinions about God, but many multitudes of barbarians who were once like (c) wild beasts, as well as learned Greeks, are taught simply by His power a like religion to that of the prophets and just men of old? But let me now examine the third point----whether this is the reason why they call Him a deceiver, viz. that He has not ordained that God should be honoured with sacrifices of bulls or the slaughter of unreasoning beasts, or by blood, or fire, or by incense made of earthly things. That He thought these things low and earthly and quite unworthy of the immortal nature, and judged the most (d) acceptable and sweetest sacrifice to God to be the keeping of His own commandments. That He taught that men purified by them in body and soul, and adorned with a pure mind and holy doctrines would best reproduce the likeness of God, saying expressly: "Be ye perfect, as your Father is perfect."

Now if any Greek is the accuser, let him realize that his accusations would not please his own teachers, who, it may be, assisted by us, for they have come after us in time, I mean after the gifts to us of our Saviour's teaching, have expressed such sentiments as these in their writings---- listen. That we ought not to burn as Incense, or offer in Sacrifice, any of the Things of Earth to the. Supreme God.

(105) From Porphyry 34 On Vegetarianism [II. 34. Cf. Praep. Evan. IV. p. 149 B.] To the supreme God, as a certain wise man has said, we must neither offer by fire, nor dedicate any of the things |121 known by sense. (For everything material is perforce impure to the immaterial.) Wherefore not even speech is germane to Him, whether of the speaking voice, or of the voice within when defiled by the passion of the soul. By (b) pure silence and pure thoughts of Him we will worship Him. United therefore with Him and made like Him, we must offer our own "self-discipline" 35 as a holy sacrifice to God. That worship is at once a hymn of praise and our salvation in the passionless state of the virtue of the soul. And in the contemplation of God this sacrifice is perfected. From the Theology of Apollonius of Tyana 36 (Praep. Ev. p. 150). In this way then, I think, one would best shew the the proper regard for the deity, and thereby beyond all other men secure His favour and good will, if to Him, Whom we called the First God, and Who is One and separate (c) from all others, and to Whom the rest must be acknowledged |122 inferior, he should sacrifice nothing at all, neither kindle fire nor dedicate anything whatever that is an object of sense----for He needs nothing even from beings that are greater than we are; nor is there any plant at all, which the earth sends up, nor animal which it, or the air, sustains, to which there is not some defilement attached----but should ever employ towards Him only that better speech: I mean (d) the speech which passes not through the lips, and should ask good things from the noblest of beings by what is noblest in ourselves, and this is the mind, which needs no instrument. According to this, therefore, we ought not to offer sacrifice to the great God, that is over all.37

If then these are the conclusions of eminent Greek philosophers and theologians,
how could he be a deceiver who delivers to his pupils not words only but acts,
which are far more important than words, to perform, by which they may serve God
according . to right reason? The manner and words of the recorded sacrifices of
the (106) ancient Hebrews have been already dealt with in the first Book of the
present work, and with that we will be satisfied. And now, since besides what I
have so far examined, we know that Christ taught that the world was created,38
and that the heaven itself, the sun, moon, and stars, are the work of God, and
that we must not worship them but their Maker, we must inquire if we are
deceived, in accepting this way of thinking from Him.

It was certainly the doctrine of the Hebrews, and the (b) most famous philosophers agreed with them, in teaching that the heaven itself, the sun, moon, and stars, indeed the whole universe, came into being through the Maker of all things. And Christ also taught us to expect a consummation and transformation of the whole into something better, in agreement with the Hebrew Scriptures. And what of that? Did not Plato 39 know the heaven itself, the sun, moon, and other stars to be of a dissoluble and corruptible nature, and if he did not say they would actually be |123 dissolved, it was only because (he thought that) the One Who put them together did not will it? And though He willed us to be part of such a natural (c) order, yet He taught us to think that we have a soul immortal and quite unlike the unreasoning brutes, bearing a resemblance to the powers of God; and He instructed every barbarian and common man to be assured, and to think that this is so. Has He not made those, who hold His views through the whole world wiser than the philosophers with their eyebrows raised,40 who claim that in essence the human soul is identical with that of the flea, the worm, and the fly; yea, that the soul of their most philosophic brethren, so far as essence and nature go, differs not at all from the soul of a serpent, or a viper, or a bear, or a leopard, or a pig? And if moreover He persisted in reminding men of a (d) divine judgment, and described the punishments and inevitable penalties of the wicked, and God's promises of eternal life to the good, the kingdom of heaven, and a blessed life with God, whom did He deceive?----nay, rather, whom did He not impel to follow virtue keenly, because of the prizes looked for by the holy, and whom did He not divert from all manner of sin through the punishment prepared for the wicked? In His doctrinal teaching, we learn that below the Highest: God there are Powers, by nature unembodied and spiritual, (107) possessing reason and every virtue, a choir around the Almighty, many of whom are sent by the will of the Father even unto men on missions of salvation. We are taught to recognize and honour them according to the measure of their worth, but to render the honour of worship to Almighty God alone. In addition to this He has taught us to believe that there are enemies of our race flying in the air (hat surrounds the earth, and that there dwell with the wicked powers of daemons, evil spirits and their rulers, whom we are taught (b) to flee from with all our strength, even if they usurp for themselves without limit God's Name and prerogatives. |124 And that they are to be shunned even more because of their warfare and enmity against God, according to the proofs I have given at great length in the Praeparatio.41 Whatever teaching of this kind is found in the doctrine of our Saviour is exactly the same religious instruction as the godly men and prophets of the Hebrews gave.

If, then, these doctrines are holy, useful, philosophic and full of virtue, on what fair ground can the name of deceiver (c) be fastened on their teacher? But the above inquiry has had to do with Christ as if He only possessed ordinary human nature, and has shewn forth His teaching as weighty and useful----let us proceed and examine its diviner side.

CHAPTER 4 Of the Diviner Works of Christ.

WE must now proceed to review the number and character of the marvellous works
He performed while living among men: how He cleansed by His divine power those
leprous (d) in body, how He drove demons out of men by His word of command, and
how again He cured ungrudgingly those who were sick and labouring under all
kinds of infirmity. As, for instance, one day He said to a paralytic, "Arise,
take up thy bed, and walk," [[Matt iv.10]] and he did what he was told. Or
[[Mark ii. 11.]] as again bestowed on the blind the boon of seeing the light;
and once, too, a woman with an issue of blood, worn down for many long years by
suffering, when she saw great crowds surrounding Him, which altogether prevented
her approaching Him in order to kneel and beg from Him the cure of her
suffering, taking it into her head that if she could (108) only touch the hem of
His garment she would recover, she stole through, and taking hold of His
garment, at the same moment took hold of the cure of her illness. She became
whole that instant, and exhibited the greatest example of our Saviour's power.
And another, a man 42 of courtly |125 rank, who had a sick son, besought Jesus,
and at once John v. received him safe and well.

Another, again, had a sick daughter, and he was a chief ruler of a Synagogue of the Jews, and He (restored her) though she was even now dead. Why need I tell how (b) a man four days dead was raised up by the power of Jesus? Or how He took His way upon the sea, as upon the earth we tread, while His disciples were sailing? ---- and how when they were overtaken by the storm He rebuked the sea, and the waves, and the winds, and they all were still at once, as fearing their Master's voice? When He filled to satisfaction five thousand men in addition to another great crowd of women and children, with loaves five in number, and had so much over that there was enough to (c) fill twelve baskets to take away, whom would He not astonish, and whom would He not impel to an inquiry of the true source of His unheard-of power? But in order not to extend my present argument to too great length, to sum all up I will consider His Death, which was not the common death of all men. For. He was not destroyed by disease, nor by the cord,43 nor by fire, nor even on the trophy 44 of the Cross were His legs cut with steel like those of the others who were evil-doers; neither, in a word, did He reach His end by suffering from any man any of the usual forms of violence which destroy life. But as if He were only handing His (d) life over willingly to those who plotted against His body, as soon as He was raised from the earth He gave a cry upon the tree, and commended His Spirit to His Father, saying these words: "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit"; thus uncompelled and of His own free will He departed from the body. And His body having then been taken by His friends, and laid in the fitting tomb,45 on the third day He again took back again the body which He had willingly resigned before when He departed. And He shewed Himself again in flesh and blood, the very self He was before, to His own disciples, after staying a brief while with whom, and completing a short time, He returned where He was before, beginning His way to the (109) |126 heavens before their eyes. And giving them instructions on what was to be done, He proclaimed them teachers of the highest religion to all the nations. Such were the far-famed wonders of (our Saviour's) power. Such were the proofs of His divinity. And we ourselves have marvelled at them with reverent reasoning, and received them after subjecting them to the tests and inquiries of a critical judgment. We have inquired into and tested them not only by other plain facts which make the whole subject clear, by which our Lord is still wont to shew to those, whom He thinks worthy, some slight evidences of His power,46 but also by the more logical (b) method which we are accustomed to use in arguing with those who do not accept what we have said, and either completely disbelieve in it, and deny that such things were done by Him at all, or hold that if they were done, they were done by wizardry for the leading astray of the spectators, as deceivers often do. And if I must be brief in dealing with these opponents, at least I will be earnest, and refute them in some way or other.

CHAPTER 5 Against those that disbelieve the Account of Our Saviour's Miracles
given by His Disciples.

(c) Now if they say that our Saviour worked no miracle at all, nor any of the
marvels to which His friends bore witness, let us see if what they say will be
credible, if they have no rational explanation why the disciples and the Master
were associated. For a teacher always promises some special form of instruction,
and pupils always, in pursuit of that instruction, come and commit themselves to
the teacher. |127

What cause then shall we assign to the union of the (d) disciples with Christ
and of Christ with them, what lay at the root of their earnestness, and of what
instruction did they rank Him as Master? Is not the answer clear? It was only
and altogether the instruction which they carried to other men, when they had
learned it from Him. And His precepts were those of a philosopher's life, which
He outlined when He said to them: "Provide neither gold nor silver 47 in your
girdles, nor a staff for the road," [[Matt. x. 9.]] and similar words, that they
should commit themselves to all-governing Providence, and take no care for their
needs, and bade them to aim higher than the Jews under Moses' commandments, to
whom he gave a law as to men prone to murder. "Do (110) not kill," and likewise,
"Thou shalt not commit adultery" as to men who were lascivious and lecherous,
and again, "Thou shalt not steal," as to men of the type of slaves; but our
Saviour taught that they must regard such laws as not applying to them, and aim
above all at a soul free from passion, cutting away from the depths of their
minds as from the roots the shoots of sin: they must try to (b) master anger and
every base lust, and more, they must never ruffle the sublime calm of the soul
with anger: they must not look upon a woman with unbridled lust, and so far from
stealing they must lavish their own property on the needy: they must not be
proud of not defrauding one another, but consider rather that they must bear no
malice against those who defrauded them. But why should I collect everything
that He taught and that they learned? (c) He commanded them besides all this to
hold so fast to truth, that so far from swearing falsely they should not need to
swear at all, and to contrive to exhibit a life more faithful than any oath,
going so far only as Yea and Nay, and using the words with truth.

I would ask, then, where would be the sense in suspecting that hearers of such teaching, who were themselves masters in such instruction, invented their account of their Master's work? How is it possible to think that they were all in (d) agreement to lie, being twelve in number especially chosen, and seventy besides, whom He is said to have sent two |128 and two before His face into every place and country into which He Himself would come? But no argument can prove that so large a body of men were untrustworthy, who embraced a holy and godly life, regarded their own affairs as of no account, and instead of their dearest ones ----I mean their wives, children, and all their family----chose a life of poverty, and carried to all men as from one mouth a consistent account of their Master. Such would be the right and obvious and true argument; let us examine that which opposes it. Imagine the teacher and his disciples. Then admit the fanciful hypothesis that he teaches not the aforesaid things, hut doctrines opposed to them, that is to say, to transgress, to be unholy, to be unjust, to be covetous and fraudulent, and anything else that is evil; that he recommends them to endeavour so to do without being found out, and to hide their disposition quite cleverly with a screen of holy teaching and a novel profession of godliness. Let the pupils pursue these, and more vicious ideals still, with the eagerness and (b) inventiveness of evil: let them exalt their teacher with lying words, and spare no falsity: let them record in fictitious narrative his miracles and works of wonder, so that they may gain admiration and felicitation for being the pupils of such a master. Come, tell me, if such an enterprise engineered by such men would hold together? (c) You know the saying, "The rogue is neither dear to rogue nor saint."1 Whence came, among a crew of so many, a harmony of rogues? Whence their general and consistent evidence about everything, and their agreement even unto death? Who, in the first place, would give heed to a wizard giving such teaching and commands? Perhaps you will say that the rest were wizards no less than their guide. Yes----but surely they had all seen the end of their (d) teacher, and the death to which He came. Why then after seeing His miserable end did they stand their ground? Why did they construct a theology about Him when He was dead? Did they desire to share His fate? No one surely on any reasonable ground would choose such a punishment with his eyes open. And if it be supposed that they honoured Him, while |129 He was still their comrade and companion, and as some might say their deceitful cozener, yet why was it that after His death they honoured Him far more than before? For while He was still with men they are said to have once deserted Him and denied Him, when the plot was engineered against Him, yet after He had departed from men, they chose willingly to die, rather than to depart from their good witness about Him. Surely if they (112) recognized nothing that was good in their Master, in His life, or His teaching, or His actions----no praiseworthy deed, nothing in which He had benefited them, but only wickedness and the leading astray of men, they could not possibly have witnessed eagerly by their deaths to His glory and holiness, when it was open to them all to live on untroubled, and to pass a life of safety by their own hearths with their dear ones. How could deceitful and shifty men have thought it desirable to die for some one else, especially, if one may say so, for a man who they knew had been of no service to them, but their teacher in all evil? For (b) while a reasonable and honourable man for the sake of some good object may with good reason sometimes undergo a glorious death, yet surely men of vicious nature, slaves to passion and pleasure, pursuing only the life of the moment and the satisfactions which belong to it, are not the people to undergo punishment even for friends and relations, far less for those who have been condemned for crime. How then could His disciples, if He was really a deceiver and a wizard, recognized by them as such, with their own minds enthralled by still worse viciousness, (c) undergo at the hands of their fellow-countrymen every insult and every form of punishment on account of the witness they delivered about Him?----this is all quite foreign to the nature of scoundrels. And once more consider this. Granted that they were deceitful cozeners, you must add that they were uneducated, and quite common men, and Barbarians to boot, with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian----how, then, did they go into all the world? Where was the intellect to sketch out 48 so daring a scheme? What was the power that |130 enabled them to succeed in their adventure? For I will admit that if they confined their energies 49 to their own (d) country, men of no education might deceive and be deceived, and not allow a matter to rest.50 But to preach to all the Name of Jesus, to teach about His marvellous deeds in country and town, that some of them should take possession of the Roman Empire, and the Queen of Cities itself, and others the Persian, others the Armenian, that others should go to the Parthian race, and yet others to the Scythian, that some already should have reached the very ends of the world, should have reached the land of the Indians, and some have crossed the Ocean and reached the Isles of Britain, all this I for my part will not admit (113) to be the work of mere men, far less of poor and ignorant men, certainly not of deceivers and wizards.51

I ask you how these pupils of a base and shifty master, who had seen His end, discussed with one another how they should invent a story about Him which would hang together? For they all with one voice bore witness that He cleansed lepers, drove out demons, raised the dead (b) to life, caused the blind to see, and worked many other
|131 cures on the sick----and to crown all they agreed in saying that He had been seen alive after His death first by them. If these events had not taken place in their time, and if the tale had not yet been told, how could they have witnessed to them unanimously, and guaranteed their evidence by their death, unless at some time or other they had met together, made a conspiracy with the same intent, and come to an agreement with one another with regard to their lies and inventions about what had never taken place? What speech shall we suppose was made at their covenant? Perhaps it was something like this:

"Dear friends, you and I are of all men the best-informed with regard to the
character of him, the deceiver and master of deceit of yesterday, whom we have
all seen undergo the extreme penalty, inasmuch as we were initiated into his
mysteries.52 He appeared a holy man to the people, and yet his aims were selfish
beyond those of the people, and he has done nothing great, or worth a
resurrection, if one leaves out of account the craft and guile of his
disposition, and the crooked teaching he gave us and its vain deceit. In return
for which, come, let us join hands, and all together make a compact to carry to
all men a tale of deceit in which we all agree, and let us say that we have seen
him bestow sight on the blind, which none of us ever heard he did, and giving
hearing to the deaf, which none of us ever heard tell of: (let us say) he cured
lepers, and raised the dead. To put it in a word, we must insist that he really
did and said what we never saw him do, or heard him say. But since his last end
was a notorious and well-known death, as we cannot disguise the fact, yet we can
slip out even of this difficulty by determination, if quite shamelessly we bear
witness that he joined us after his resurrection from the dead, and shared our
usual home and food. Let us all be impudent and determined, and let us see that
our freak lasts even to death. There is nothing ridiculous in dying for nothing
at all. And why should we dislike for no good reason undergoing scourging and
bodily |132 torture, and if need be to experience imprisonment, dishonour, and
insult for what is untrue? Let us now (b) make this our business. We will tell
the same falsehoods, and invent stories that will benefit nobody, neither
ourselves, nor those we deceive, nor him who is deified53 by our lies. And we
will extend our lies not only to men of our own race, but go forth to all men,
and fill the whole world with our fabrications about him. And then let us lay
down laws for all the nations in direct opposition to the opinions they have
held for ages about their ancestral gods. Let us bid the Romans first of all not
to worship the gods (c) their forefathers recognized. Let us pass over into
Greece, and oppose the teaching of their wise men. Let us not neglect the
Egyptians, but declare war on their gods, not going back to Moses' deeds against
them of old time for our weapons, but arraying against them our Master's death,
to scare them;54 so we will destroy the faith in the gods which from immemorial
time has gone forth to all men, not by words and argument, but by the power of
our Master Crucified.

Let us go to other foreign lands, and overturn all their (d) institutions. None of us must fail in zeal; for it is no petty contest that we dare, and no common prizes lie before
us----but most likely the punishments inflicted according to the laws of each land: bonds, of course, torture, imprisonment, fire and sword, and wild beasts. We must greet them all with enthusiasm, and meet evil bravely, having our Master as our model. For what (115) could be finer than to make both gods and men our enemies for no reason at all, and to have no enjoyment of any kind, to have no profit of our dear ones, to make no money, to have no hope of anything gocd at all, but just to be deceived and to deceive without aim or object? This is our prize, to go straight in the teeth of all the nations, to war on the gods that have been acknowledged by them all for ages, to say that our Master, who (was crucified)
55 before our very eyes was God, and to represent Him as God's Son, for Whom we are ready to
|133 die, though we know we have learned from Him nothing either true or useful. Yes, that is the reason we must (b) honour Him the
more----His utter uselessness to us----we must strain every nerve to glorify His name, undergo all insults and punishments, and welcome every form of death for the sake of a lie. Perhaps truth is the same thing as evil, and falsehood must then be the opposite of evil. So let us say that He raised the dead, cleansed lepers, drove out daemons, and did many other marvellous works, knowing all the time that He did nothing of the kind, while we invent everything for ourselves, and deceive those we can. And suppose we convince nobody, at any rate we shall have the satisfaction of (c) drawing down upon ourselves, in return for our inventions, the retribution for our deceit."

Now is all this plausible? Does such an account have the ring of truth? Can any
one persuade himself that poor and unlettered men could make up such stories,
and form a conspiracy to invade the Roman Empire? Or that human nature, whose
characteristic clement is self-preservation, would ever be able for the sake of
nothing at all to undergo a voluntary death? (or) that our Saviour's (d)
disciples reached such a pitch of madness, that, though they had never seen Him
work miracles, they with one consent invented many, and having heaped together a
mass of lying words about Him were ready to suffer death to uphold them? What is
that you suggest? That they never looked forward to or expected to suffer
anything unpleasant because of their witness 56 to Jesus, and so they had no
fear in going forth to preach about Him? What, you think it unlikely, that men
who announced to Romans, Greeks, and Barbarians the total rout of their gods,
would expect to undergo extreme sufferings on behalf of their (116) Master? At
least the record about them is clear in shewing, that after the Master's death
they were taken by plotters, who first imprisoned them, and afterwards released
them, bidding them speak to none about the Name of Jesus. And discovering that
after this they had publicly discussed the questions about Him before the
multitude, they took them in charge and scourged them as a punishment |134 for
their teaching. It was then Peter answered them, and said: "It is right to obey
God rather than men." [[Acts v. 29.]] And after this Stephen was stoned to death
for boldly addressing the Jewish populace, and an extraordinary (b) persecution
arose against those who preached in Jesus' Name.

Herod again later on, the King of the Jews, killed James the brother of John
with the sword, and cast Peter into prison, as is written in the Acts of the
Apostles. [[Acts xii.1-3]] And yet, though they had suffered thus, the rest of
the disciples held tenaciously to Jesus, and were still more diligent in
preaching to all of Him and His miracles.

Afterwards James, the Lord's brother, whom of old the people of Jerusalem called
"the Just" for his extraordinary (c) virtue, being asked by the chief priests,
and teachers of the Jews what he thought about Christ, and answering that He was
the Son of God, was also stoned by them.57 Peter was crucified head downwards at
Rome,58 Paul beheaded,59 and John exiled to an island. Yet though they suffered
thus, not one of the others gave up his intention, (d) but they made their
prayer to God that they themselves might suffer a like fate for their religion,
and continued to bear witness to Jesus and His marvellous works with yet more
boldness. And even supposing that they combined together to invent falsehoods,
it is surely wonderful that so large a number of conspirators should continue to
agree about their inventions even to death, and that not one of them in alarm at
what happened to those who had been already killed ever severed himself from the
association, or preached against the others, and brought to light their
conspiracy; nay, the very one who dared to betray his Master while He lived,
dying by his own hand, at once paid the penalty for his treachery.

(117) And would it not be a most inexplicable thing that shifty and unlettered
men, unable to speak or understand any other language but their own, should not
only take it into their heads to dare to go forth to the whole circle60 of the
nations, but that having gone forth they should |135 succeed in their
undertaking. And note, what a remarkable thing it is that they all agreed in
every point in their account of the acts of Jesus. For if it is true that in all
matters of dispute, either in legal tribunals or in ordinary (b) disagreements,
the agreement is decisive (in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word is
established), 61 [[Deut. xiv.15; 2 Cor.xiii.1]] surely the truth must be
established in their case, there being twelve apostles and seventy disciples,
and a large number apart from them, who all shewed an extraordinary agreement,
and gave witness to the deeds of Jesus, not without labour, and by bearing
torture, all kinds of outrage and death, and were in all things borne witness to
by God, Who even now empowers the Word they preached, and will do so for ever.

I have thus concluded the working out of what would (c) follow if for the sake of argument a ridiculous hypothesis were supposed. This hypothesis was, to make suppositions contrary to the records, and to argue that Jesus was a teacher of impure words, injustice, covetousness, and all kinds of intemperance, that the disciples, profiting by such instruction from Him, surpassed all men in cupidity and wickedness. It was, indeed, the height of absurdity, equivalent to saying that when Moses said in his laws: "Thou shall not kill, Thou shall not commit adultery, Thou shall not steal, Thou shall not bear false witness," he should be calumniated and accused falsely of speaking in irony and pretence, and of really desiring that (d) his hearers should kill and commit adultery, and do the opposite to what his laws commanded, and of merely putting on the appearance and disguise of a holy life for a pretence. In this way, too, any one might slander the records of all the Greek philosophers, their strenuous life and sayings, with the calumny that their disposition and mode of life was contrary to their writings, and that their choice of a philosopher's life was but a hypocritical pretence. And in this way, to speak generally, (118) one might slander all the records of the ancients, annul |136 their truth, and turn them upside down. But just as no one who had any sense would not scruple to set down one who acted thus as a madman, so also (should it be) with regard to our Saviour's words and teaching, when people try to pervert the truth, and suggest that He really believed the opposite to what He taught. But my argument has been, of course, purely hypothetical, with the object of shewing the inconsistency of the contrary, by proving too much would follow from granting for the moment an absurd supposition. This line of argument, then, being refuted, let me recur to the truth of the sacred writings, and consider the character of the disciples of Jesus. From the men as they stand, surely any sensible person would be inclined to consider them worthy of all confidence; they were admittedly poor men without eloquence, they fell in love with holy and philosophic instruction, they embraced and persevered in a strenuous and a laborious life, with fasting and abstinence from wine and meat, and much bodily restriction besides, with prayers and intercessions to God, (c) and, last but not least, excessive purity, and devotion botli of body and soul. And who would not admire them, cut off by their divine philosophy even from lawful nuptials, not dragged in the train of sensual pleasure, not enslaved by the desire of children and descendants, since they did not yearn for mortal but immortal progeny? And who would not be astonished at their indifference to money, certified by their not turning from but welcoming a Master, Who forbade the possession of gold and silver, Whose law did not even allow the acquisition of a second coat? Why, any one only hearing such a law might reject it as too heavy, but these men are shewn to have carried out the words in fact. For once, when a lame man was begging from Peter's companions (it was a man in extreme need who begged for food), Peter, not having anything to give him, confessed that he had no belongings in silver or gold, and said: (119) "Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have, give I unto thee: In the Name of Jesus Christ,62 arise and walk." [[Acts iii. 6.]] When the Master gave them gloomy prophecies, if they |137 gave heed to the things He said to them: "Ye shall have tribulation," [[John xvi. 33.]] and again: "Ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice" [[John xvi. 20]]----the strength and depth of their nature is surely plain, since they did not fear the discipline of the body, nor run after pleasures. And the Master also, as One Who would not soothe them by deceit Himself, was like them in renouncing His property, and in His prophecy of the future, so open and so true, fixed in their minds the choice of His way of life. These were (b) the prophecies of what would happen to them for His Name's sake----in which He bore witness, saying that they should be brought before rulers, and come even unto kings, and undergo all sorts of punishments, not for any fault, nor on any reasonable charge, but solely for this----His Name's sake. And we who see it now fulfilled ought to be struck by the prediction; for the confession of the Name of Jesus ever inflames the minds of rulers. And (c) though he who confesses Christ has done no evil, yet they punish him with every contumely "for His Name's sake," as the worst of evil-doers, while if a man swears away the Name, and denies that he is one of Christ's disciples, he is let off scot-free, though he be convicted of many crimes.63 But why need I attempt to describe further the character of our Saviour's disciples? Let what I have said suffice to prove my contention. I will add a few words (d) more, and then pass to another class of slanderers. The Apostle Matthew, if you consider his former life, did not leave a holy occupation, but came from those occupied in tax-gathering and over-reaching one another. [[Luke v. 27: Mark]] None of the evangelists has made this clear, neither his fellow-apostle John, nor Luke, nor Mark, but [[Matthew ii. 14.]] himself,64 who brands his own life, and becomes his own accuser. Listen how he dwells emphatically on his own name in the Gospel written by him,65 when he speaks in this way: |138

(120) "9. And as Jesus passed by from thence, he saw a man, called Matthew,
sitting at the place of toll, and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose,
and followed him. 10. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat in the house,
behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his
disciples." [[Matt.ix.9.]]

And again further on, when he gives a list of the disciples, he adds the name
"Publican" to his own. For he says:

(b) "Of the twelve apostles the names are these: First, Simon, called Peter, and
Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip and
Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican." [[Matt. x.2-3.]]

Thus Matthew, in excess of modesty, reveals the nature of his own old life, and
calls himself a publican, he does not conceal his former mode of life, and in
addition to this he places himself second after his yoke-fellow. For he is
paired with Thomas, Peter with Andrew, James with John, and Philip with
Bartholomew, and he puts Thomas before himself, preferring his fellow-apostle to
himself, while the (c) other evangelists have done the reverse. If you listen to
Luke, you will not hear him calling Matthew a publican, nor subordinating him to
Thomas, for he knows him to be the greater, and puts him first and Thomas
second. Mark has done the same. Luke's words are as follows:

"And when it was day, he called his disciples unto him, and chose twelve whom he
also named apostles, Simon whom he also called Peter, and Andrew his brother,
James and John, and Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas." [[Luke vi.13]]

(d) So Luke honoured Matthew, according to what they delivered, who from the
beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word. And you would find John
like Matthew. For in his epistles he never mentions his own |139 name, or call
himself the Elder, or Apostle, or Evangelist; and in the Gospel, though he
declares himself as the one whom Jesus loved, he does not reveal himself by
name. Neither did Peter permit himself to write a Gospel through (121) his
excessive reverence.66 Mark, being his friend and companion, is said to have
recorded the accounts of Peter about the acts of Jesus, and when he comes to
that part of the story where Jesus asked whom men said that He was, and what
opinion His disciples had of Him, and Peter had replied that they regarded Him
as (the) Christ, he writes that Jesus answered nothing, and said naught to him,
except that He charged them to say nothing to any one about Him. For Mark was
not present when Jesus spoke those words; and Peter did not think it right to
bring forward on his own testimony what was said to him and concerning him by
Jesus. But Matthew tells us what was actually said to him, in these words:

"15. But whom say ye that I am? 16. And Simon (b) Peter answered and said, Thou
art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17. And Jesus answered and said unto
him, Blessed art thou, Simon bar-Jonah: for flesh and blood have not revealed it
unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18. And I also say unto thee. That
thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. 19. And I will give unto thee the keys of the
Kingdom of Heaven: and whatsoever things 67 thou shall bind on earth shall be
bound in heaven: and whatsoever things thou shall loose on earth shall be
[[Matt. xvi.15]] loosed in heaven."

Though all this was said to Peter by Jesus, Mark does not record it, because, most likely, Peter did not include it in his
teaching----see what he says in answer to Jesus' question: (c) "Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ. And [[Mark viii.29.]] he straitly charged them that they should tell no man." About this event Peter for good reasons thought it best to keep silence. And so Mark also omitted it, though he made known to all men Peter's denial, and how he wept
|140 about it bitterly. You will find Mark gives this account of him:

"66. And as Peter was in the court,68 there cometh one of the maids of the high
priest; 67. and when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him and
said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. 68. But he denied saying (I
know not) 69 neither understand what thou sayest; and he went into the outside
porch, and the cock crew. 69. And the maid saw him again, and began to say to
them that stood by, This is one of them. 70. And he denied it again. And a
little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of
them: for thou art a Galilaean. 71. But he began to curse and to swear, saying,
I know not this man of whom ye speak. 72. And the second time the cock crew."
[[Mark xiv.66.]]

(122) Mark writes thus, and Peter through him bears witness about himself. For
the whole of Mark's Gospel is said to be the record of Peter's teaching. Surely,
then, men who refused (to record) what seemed to them to spread their good fame,
and handed down in writing slanders against themselves to unforgetting ages, and
accusations of sins, which no one in after years would ever have known of unless
he had heard it from their own voice, by thus placarding themselves, may justly
be considered to have (b) been void of all egoism and false speaking, and to
have given plain and clear proof of their truth-loving disposition. And as for
such people who think they invented and lied, and try to slander them as
deceivers, ought they not to become a laughing-stock, being convicted as friends
of envy and malice, and foes of truth itself, who take men that have exhibited
in their own words good proof of their integrity, and their really
straightforward and sincere (c) character, and suggest that they are rascals and
clever sophists, who invent what never took place, and ascribe gratuitously to
their own Master what He never did?

I think then it has been well said: "One must put complete confidence in the
disciples of Jesus, or none at all." And if we are to distrust these men, we
must distrust |141 all writers, who at any time have compiled, either in Greece
or other lands, lives and histories and records of men of their own times,
celebrated for noble achievements,70 or else we should be considering it
reasonable to believe others, (d) and to disbelieve them only.71 And this would
be clearly invidious. What! Did these liars about their Master, who handed down
in writing the deeds He never did, also falsify the account of His Passion? I
mean His betrayal by one of His disciples, the accusation of the false
witnesses, the insults and the blows on His face, the scourging of His back, and
the crown of acanthus set on His head in contumely, the soldier's purple coat
thrown round Him like a cloak, and finally His bearing72 the very trophy of the
Cross, His being nailed to it, His hands and feet pierced, His being given
vinegar to drink, struck on the cheek with a reed, and reviled by those who
looked on. Were these things and everything like them in the Gospels, (123) also
invented by the disciples, or must we disbelieve in the glorious and more
dignified parts, and yet believe in these as in truth itself? And how can the
opposite opinion be supported? For to say that the same men both speak the
truth, and at the same time lie, is nothing else but predicating contraries
about the same people at the same time.

What, then, is the disproof? That if it was their aim to deceive, and to adorn
their Master with false words, they would never have written the above accounts,
neither would they have revealed to posterity that He was pained and (b)
troubled and disturbed in spirit, that they forsook Him and fled, or that Peter,
the apostle and disciple who was chief of them all, denied Him thrice though
untortured and |142 unthreatened by rulers. For surely if their aim was solely
to present the more dignified side of their Master they would have had to deny
the truth of such things, even when stated by others. And if their good faith is
evident in (c) their gloomier passages about Him, it is far more so in the more
glorious. For they who had once adopted the policy of lying would have the more
shunned the painful side, and either passed it over in silence, or denied it,
for no man in an after age would be able to prove that they had omitted them.

Why, then, did they not lie, and say that Judas who betrayed Him with a kiss,
when he dared to give the sign of treachery, was at once turned into a stone? 73
and that the man who dared to strike Him had his right hand at once dried up;
and that the high priest Caiaphas, as he conspired with the false witnesses
against Him, lost the (d) sight of his eyes? And why did they not all tell the
lie that nothing disastrous happened to Him at all, but that He vanished
laughing at them from the court, and that they who plotted against Him, the
victims of an hallucination divinely sent, thought they were proceeding against
Him still though He was no longer present? 74 But what? Would it not have been
more impressive, instead of making up these inventions of His miraculous deeds,
to have written that He experienced nothing of the lot of human beings or
mortals, but that after having settled all things with power (124) divine He
returned to heaven with diviner glory? For, of course, those who believed their
other accounts would have believed this. And surely they who have set no false
stamp 75 on anything that is true in the incidents of shame and gloom, ought to
be regarded as above suspicion in other accounts wherein they have attributed
miracles to Him. Their evidence then may be considered sufficient about our (b)
Saviour. And here it will not be inappropriate for me to make use of the
evidence of the Hebrew Josephus 76 as |143 well, who in the eighteenth chapter
of The Archaeology of the Jews, in his record of the times of Pilate, mentions
our Saviour in these words:

"And Jesus arises at that time, a wise man, if it is befitting to call him a
man. For he was a doer of no common works, a teacher of men who reverence truth.
And he gathered many of the Jewish and many of the Greek race. This was
Christus; and when Pilate (c) condemned him to the Cross on the information of
our rulers, his first followers did not cease to revere him. For he appeared to
them the third day alive again, the divine prophets having foretold this, and
very many other things about him. And from that time to this the tribe of the
Christians has not failed." 77

If, then, even the historian's evidence shews that He attracted to Himself not
only the twelve Apostles, nor the seventy disciples, but had in addition many
Jews and Greeks, He must evidently have had some extraordinary power beyond that
of other men. For how otherwise could (d) He have attracted many Jews and
Greeks, except by wonderful miracles and unheard-of teaching? And the evidence
of the Acts of the Apostles goes to shew that there were many myriads of Jews
who believed Him to be the Christ of God foretold by the prophets. And history
also assures us that there was a very important Christian Church in Jerusalem,
composed of Jews, which existed until the siege of the city under Hadrian.78 The
bishops, too, who stand first in the line of succession there are said to have
been Jews, whose names are still remembered by |144 (125) the inhabitants.79 So
that thus the whole slander against His disciples is destroyed, when by their
evidence, and apart also from their evidence, it has to be confessed that many
myriads of Jews and Greeks were brought under His yoke by Jesus the Christ of
God through the miracles that He performed.

Such being my answer to the first division of the unbelievers, now let us
address ourselves to the second body, (b) This consists of those, who while they
admit that Jesus worked miracles, say that it was by a species of sorcery that
deceived those who looked on, like a magician or enchanter. He impressed them
with wonder.

CHAPTER 6 Against Those who think that the Christ of God was a Sorcerer. OF
course, such opponents must first of all be asked how they would reply to what
has been already said. The question is about the possibility of a teacher of a
noble and virtuous way of life, and of sane and reasonable doctrines, such as I
have described, being a mere sorcerer in character. And supposing He was a
magician and (c) enchanter, a charlatan and a sorcerer, how could He have become
the source to all the nations of such teaching, as we ourselves see with our
eyes, and hear even now with our ears? What sort of a person was He Who
undertook to unite things which have never before been united? For a sorcerer
being truly unholy and vile in his nature, dealing with things forbidden and
unholy, always acts for the sake of base and sordid gain. Our Lord and Saviour
Jesus, the Christ of God, was surely not open to such a charge. In (d) what
sense could such a thing be said of One Who said to His disciples, according to
their written record: " Provide neither gold nor silver in your girdles, nor a
staff for the Matt.x.10. road, nor shoes"? How could they have heeded His
sayings, and thought fit to hand them down recorded in |145 writing, if they had
seen their Master bent on making money, and Himself doing the opposite of what
He taught others? They would soon have ridiculed Him and His words and left
their discipleship in natural disgust, if they had seen Him laying down such
noble laws for them, and Himself the Lawgiver in no way following His own words.
Once more, sorcerers and real charlatans devote themselves (126) to the
forbidden and the unholy in order to pursue vile and unlawful pleasures, with
the object of ruining women by magic, and seducing them to their own desires.
But our Lord and Saviour is devoted to purity beyond the power of words to say,
for His disciples record that He forbade them to look on a woman with unbridled
lust, saying:

" It was said to them of old time, Thou shall not commit adultery: but I say
unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath
committed adultery with her already in his heart." [[Matt. v.27]]

And on one occasion when they saw Him conversing with (b) a woman of Samaria
when it was the only possible way to aid and save many, they wondered that He
spoke with the woman, thinking they saw something marvellous, such as they had
never before seen. And surely our Saviour's words commend a serious and severe
tone of behaviour: while of His purity the great evidence is that teaching of
His, in which He taught men to attain purity by cutting away from the depth of
the heart the lustful desires:

"There are some eunuchs who so were born, and there are eunuchs who we're made
eunuchs of men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven's sake." [[Matt, xii.19.]]

The sorcerer again and the true charlatan courts notoriety (c) and ostentation
in all his enterprises and actions, and always makes a boast of knowing more and
having more than other people. But that our Lord and Saviour was not thirsty for
notoriety, or a braggart or ostentatious, is shewn by His bidding those He cured
to tell no one, and not to reveal Him to the crowd, so that He might escape
notice, and also from His seeking periods of retirement in |146 (d) the
mountains, and shunning the vicious society of the crowd in cities. If then He
neither devoted Himself to teaching for glory, nor money, nor pleasure, what
ground of suspicion remains for considering Him a charlatan and a sorcerer? But
once more think of this point. A sorcerer, when he shares the fruits of his
wickedness with others, makes men resemble himself: how can he help making
sorcerers and charlatans and enchanters in all ways like himself? But who has
ever so far found the whole body of Christians from His teaching given to
sorcery or enchantment? (127) No one would suggest that, but rather that it has
been concerned with philosophic words, as we have shewn. What, then, could you
rightly call One Who was the source to others of a noble and pure life and of
the highest holiness, but the prince of philosophers and the teacher of holy
men? And I suppose so far as every master is better than his pupils, our Lord
and Saviour must be considered, so far from being a charlatan and a sorcerer,
but philosophic and truly holy (b) If, then, He was such, He could only have
attempted His miracles by divine and unspeakable power and by the highest piety
towards the Supreme God, Whom He is proved to have honoured and worshipped as
His Father in the highest degree, from the accounts of Him. And the disciples,
who were with Him from the beginning, with those who inherited their mode of
life afterwards, are to such an incalculable extent removed from base and evil
suspicion (of sorcery), that they will not allow their sick (c) even to do what
is exceedingly common with non-Christians, to make use of charms written on
leaves or amulets, or to pay attention to those promising to soothe them with
songs of enchantment, or to procure ease for their pains by burning incense made
of roots and herbs, or anything else of the kind. |147

All these things at any rate are forbidden by Christian teaching, neither is it
ever possible to see a Christian using an amulet, or incantations, or charms
written on curious leaves, or other things which the crowd consider quite
permissible. What argument, then, can rank the disciples of such a Master with
the disciples of a sorcerer and charlatan? And yet the one great proof of the
worth of any one who (d) promises to effect anything is found in the circle of
his pupils. In the arts and sciences it is so, men always claim him who was the
source of their skill to be greater than themselves; so medical students would
witness to the excellence of their instructor in their own subject,
geometricians will not regard any other as their master but a geometrician, and
arithmeticians any but one skilled in arithmetic. In the same way, also, the
best witnesses to a sorcerer are his pupils, who it may be presumed will
themselves share in the character of their master. And yet through all these
(128) years no disciple of Jesus has been proved a sorcerer, although rulers and
kings from time to time have attempted by means of torture to extract the
exactest information about our religion. No, in spite of all, none has admitted
himself to be a sorcerer, though had he done so he might have gone free, and
without any danger, only being compelled by them to offer sacrifice. And if not
one of our own people has ever been convicted of sorcery, nor any of those
ancient disciples of Jesus, it follows that their Master could not have been a
sorcerer. But that my argument may not be based solely on the (b) unwritten,
hear the proofs also that I draw from the written record. The first disciples of
Jesus in the Book of their own Acts, describe without doubt how the Gentiles
thronging to their teaching (were so impressed), that many of those |148 with a
bad reputation for sorcery, changed their ways to such an extent that they had
the courage to bring the forbidden books into the midst, and commit them to the
fire in the sight of all. Hear how the Scripture describes it:

"And many of those who used curious arts, brought their books, and burned them
before all, and they reckoned the price of the books, and found it fifty
thousand pieces of silver." [[Acts xix 19]]

It shews what our Saviour's disciples were, it shews the extraordinary influence
of their words when they addressed their audience, that they so touched the
depths of their souls, caught hold of and pierced the individual conscience,
that men no longer hid anything away in concealment, but brought their forbidden
things to light, and (d) themselves completed the indictment of themselves and
their own former wickedness. It shews what their pupils were like, how pure and
honourable in disposition, determined that nothing evil in them should lurk
below the surface, and how boldly they prided themselves on their change from
the worse to the better. Yes, they who gave their magic books to the flames, and
voted for their complete destruction, left no one in any doubt that they would
never again have anything to do with sorcery, and from that day forth were pure
from the slightest suspicion of it.

If, then, our Saviour's disciples are seen to have been like this, must not
their Master have been so long before them?

(129) And if in the widest sense you wish to deduce from the character of His
followers the character of their Head, you have to-day a myriad disciples of the
teaching of Jesus, great numbers of whom have declared war against the natural
pleasures of the body, and guard their minds from the stroke of every base
passion, and when they grow old in temperance provide bright evidence of the
nurture of His words. And not men only live the life of wisdom in this wise for
His sake, but innumerable myriads of women, too, throughout the world, like
priestesses of the Supreme God, embracing the highest wisdom, enraptured with
the love of (b) heavenly wisdom, have lost all joy of bodily progeny, and
spending all their care on the soul, have devoted themselves entirely body and
soul alike to the King of kings, the Supreme God, practising complete purity and
virginity. |149 Of one shepherd, we know, who left his own country for the sake
of philosophy the sons of Greece are ever carrying the story hither and thither.
This was their Democritus. And Krates is the second man who is a miracle among
(b) them, because, forsooth! he resigned his property to the citizens, and
boasted that "Krates himself had freed himself." But the zealots of the teaching
of Jesus are myriads in number, not one or two, who have sold their goods and
given them to the poor and needy, a fact to which I can witness, as I am
specially concerned in such matters, and can see the results of the discipleship
of Jesus not only in their words, but in their works as well. But why need I
tell how many myriads of actual barbarians, and not Greeks only, learning from
the teaching of Jesus to despise every form of polytheistic error, have borne
witness to their knowledge of the one God as Saviour and Creator of the
Universe? Whom long ago, Plato was the only philosopher who knew, but confessed
that he dare not carry His Name to all, saying in so many words: "To discover
the Father and Creator of the Universe is a hard matter, and when He is found it
is impossible to tell of Him to all." [[Timaeus p. 28]] Yes, to him the
discovery seemed a |150 hard matter, for it is indeed the greatest thing of all,
and it seemed to him impossible to speak of Him to all, because he did not
possess so great a power of holiness as the (130) disciples of Jesus, to whom it
has become easy by the cooperation of their Master to discover and to know the
Father and Creator of all, and having discovered Him to bear forth that
knowledge, to unveil it, to supply it, and to preach it to all men among all
races of the world, with the result that even now at the present time owing to
the instruction given by these men there are among all the nations of the earth
many multitudes not only of men, but of women and children, slaves and
country-folk, who are so far away from fulfilling Plato's dictum, that they know
(b) the One God to be the Maker and Creator of the Universe, worship Him only,
and base their whole theology on Christ. This, then, is the success of the new
modern sorcerer; such are the sorcerers who spring from Him Who is reckoned a
charlatan; and such are the disciples of Jesus, from whose character we may
deduce that of their Master. But once more, let us follow the argument in this
direction: You say, my friend, that He was a sorcerer, and dub Him a clever
enchanter and deceiver. Would . you say, then, that He was the first and only
discoverer of the (c) business, or that we must not, as would be done in similar
cases, look for the original source of His work directly in His own teaching?
For if nobody taught Him, and He was Himself the first and only discoverer of
the enterprise, if He had no benefit at all from the teaching of others, if he
did not share in the feast of the ancients, we ought surely to ascribe divinity
to Him, as One Who (d) without books, or education, or teachers, self-taught,
self-educated, is assumed to have discovered such a new world. We know that it
is impossible to acquire the knowledge of a lower-class trade, or of the art of
reasoning, or indeed of the elements of knowledge without the help of a guide or
teacher, unless the learner transcends the powers of ordinary people. I am sure
we have not yet had a teacher of literature who was self-taught, nor an orator
who had not been to school, nor a physician "born and not made," nor a
carpenter, nor any other kind of craftsman; and these |151 things are relatively
insignificant and human; what does it mean, then, to suggest that the Teacher of
true religion to men, Who worked such miracles in the period of His earthly
life, and did the extraordinary prodigies which I have lately described, was
born actually endowed with (131) such power, and had not to share the feast of
the ancients, nor to take advantage of the instruction of modern teachers, who
had done like things before Him? What is it but to witness and confess that He
was indeed divine, and that He altogether transcended humanity? And supposing
you say that He had foregathered with masters of deceit, and was acquainted with
the wisdom of the Egyptians, and the secret knowledge of their ancient teachers,
and that collecting His equipment from them, He appeared in the character that
His story exhibits. (b) How is it, then, I reply, that no others have appeared
greater than He, and no teachers antecedent to Him in time, either in Egypt, or
anywhere else? Why has not their fame among all men preceded this accusation of
Him, and why is not their glory even now celebrated in strains like ours? And
what enchanter from the remotest age, either Greek or Barbarian, has ever been
the Master of so many pupils, the prime mover of such laws and (c) teaching, as
the power of our Saviour has shewn forth, or is recorded to have worked such
cures, and bestowed such marvellous blessings, as our Saviour is reported to
have done? Who has had friends and eye-witnesses of his deeds, ready to
guarantee by the proof of fire and sword the truth of their witness, like the
disciples of our Saviour, who have borne all insults, submitted to all forms of
torture, and at last have sealed their witness about Him with their very blood?

Then, moreover, let him who supports the contention opposed to mine, inform me
if any enchanter that ever existed has ever even taken it into his head to
institute a new nation called after his own name? To go beyond the (d) mere
conception, and to succeed in effecting it, is surely beyond the power of
humanity.

What sorcerer has ever thought of establishing laws against idolatry in direct
opposition to the decrees of kings, |152 ancient legislators, poets,
philosophers, and theologians, and of giving them power, and of promulgating
them so that they should last on unconquered and invincible for long ages? But
our Lord and Saviour did not conceive and not dare to attempt, neither did he
attempt and not succeed.

(132) With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all the nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you," [[Matt. xxviii. 19.]] and He joined the effect to His Word; and in a little while every race of the Greeks and Barbarians was being brought into discipleship, and laws were spread among all nations opposed to the superstition of the ancients, laws inimical to daemons, and to all the deceits of polytheism, laws that have made Scythians, Persians, and the other barbarians temperate, and revolutionized every lawless and uncivilized custom, laws that have overturned the immemorial habits of the Greeks themselves, (b) and heralded a new and real religion. What similar daring has been shewn by the ancient sorcerers before the time of Jesus, or even after Him, which would make it plausible that He was assisted in His sorcery by others? And if the only answer to this is that no one has ever been like Him, for no one was the source of His virtue, surely it is time to confess that a strange and divine Being has sojourned in our humanity, by Whom alone, and for the first time in (c) man's history, things unrecorded before in human annals have been effected. In such wise I will conclude this part of the subject. But I must again attack my opposer, and inquire if he has ever seen or heard of sorcerers and enchanters doing their sorcery without libations, incense, and the invocation and presence of daemons. But no one surely could venture to cast this aspersion on our Saviour, or on His teaching, or on those even now imitating His life. It must be clear even to the blind that we who follow Jesus arc totally opposed to such agencies, and would sooner dare to sacrifice our (d) soul to death than an offering to the dremons, yea, would |153 sooner depart from life than remain alive under the tyranny of evil daemons. Who does not know how we love by the mere Name of Jesus and the purest prayers to drive away all the work of the daemons? The mere word of Jesus and His teaching has made us all far stronger than this invisible Power, and has trained us to be enemies and foes of daemons, not their friends or associates, and certainly not their slaves and tributaries. And how could He Who (133) has led us on to this, Himself be the slave of the daemons? How could He sacrifice to evil spirits? Or how could He have invoked the daemons to aid Him in His Miracles, when even to-day every daemon and unclean spirit shudders at the Name of Jesus as at something that is likely to punish and torment its own nature, and so departs and yields to the power of His Name alone? So was it of old in the days when He sojourned in this life: they could not bear His Presence, but cried, one from, one side and one from another: "Come, what have we to do with thee, Jesus, (b) Son of God? Art thou come to torment us before the time?" [[Matt. viii.29.]] And a man whose mind was wholly devoted to sorcery, and in every way involved in the quest of the forbidden, would surely be (would he not?) unholy in his ways; scandalous, base, atheistic, unjust, irreligious. And if He were such, from what source, or by what means, could He teach others about religion, or temperance, or the knowledge of God, or about the tribunal and judgment of Almighty God? Would He not rather commend the (c) opposites of these, and act according to His own wickedness, deny God and God's Providence, and God's Judgment, and revile teaching about virtue and the immortality of the soul? And if one could see such a character in our Lord and Saviour, there would be no more to say. But (d) if instead we see Him calling on God the Father, the Creator of all things, in every act and word, and training His pupils to resemble Him, if He being pure Himself teaches purity, if He is a maker and herald of justice, truth, philanthropy, and every virtue, and the introducer of the worship of God the King of kings, surely it follows from this that He cannot be suspected of working His |154 miracles by sorcery, and that we must admit that they were the result of unspeakable and truly inspired power. (134) But if you are so far gone in folly as not to pay any heed to temperate argument and logical consistency of thought, and are not impressed by probable proofs, because you suspect me perhaps to be a special pleader----at least you will hear your own daemons, the gods I mean who give the oracles, hear them bearing witness to our Saviour, not like you of His sorcery, but of His holiness, His wisdom, and His Ascension into Heaven. What could be a more persuasive testimony than that written by our enemy 80 in the third chapter of his book, Concerning Philosophy from Oracles, where he thus speaks in so many words.

CHAPTER 7 Oracles about Christ.

"WHAT I am about to say may seem surprising to some. It is that the gods have
pronounced Christ to have been most holy and immortal, and they speak of Him
reverently." And lower down he adds:

"To those asking the question, 'Is Christ a God?' the oracle replied:

That the soul goes forth immortal after (its severance from) the body.

Thou knowest, severed from wisdom it ever roams. That soul is the soul of a man
signal in holiness." |155

He certainly says here that He was most holy, and that His soul, which the
Christians ignorantly worship, like the souls of others, was made immortal after
death. And when asked, "Why did He suffer?" the oracle replied:

The body of the weak has ever been exposed to torments, But the soul of holy men
takes its place in heaven."

And he adds after the oracle:

"Christ, then, was holy, and like the holy, went to the (d) heaven. Wherefore
you will say no evil about Him, but pity the folly of men."

So says Porphyry even now. Was He then a charlatan, my friend? Perhaps the friendly words of one of your kidney may put you out of countenance. For you have our Saviour Jesus, the Christ of God, admitted by your own teachers to be, not an enchanter or a sorcerer, but holy, wise, the justest of the just, and dwelling in the vaults of heaven. He, then, being such, could only have done |156 His miracles by a divine power, which also the holy writings bear witness that He had, saying that the Word of God and the highest Power of God dwelt in man's shape and form, nay, even in actual flesh and body therein, and performed all the functions of human nature. (135) And you yourself may realize the divine elements of this power, if you reflect on the nature and grandeur of a Being who could associate with Himself poor men of the lowly fisherman's class, and use them as agents in carrying through a work that transcends all reason. For having conceived the intention, which no one ever before had done, of spreading His own laws and a new teaching among all nations, and of revealing Himself as the teacher of the religion of One Almighty God to all the races of men, He (b) thought good to use the most rustic and common men as ministers of His own design, because maybe He had in mind to do the most unlikely things. For how could men unable even to open their mouths be able to teach, even if they were appointed teachers to only one person, far less to a multitude of men? How should they instruct the people, who were themselves without any education? But this was surely the manifestation of the divine will and of the divine power working in them. For when He called them, the first thing He said to them was: " Come, follow me, and I will make you fishers of men." [[Mark i. 17.]] And (c) when He had thus acquired them as His followers, He breathed into them His divine power, He filled them with strength and bravery, and like a true Word of God and as God Himself, the doer of such great wonders, He made them hunters of rational and thinking souls, adding power to His words: "Come, follow me, and I will make you fishers of men," and sent them forth fitted already to be workers and teachers of holiness to all the nations, declaring (d) them heralds of His own teaching. And who would not be amazed and naturally inclined to disbelieve a thing so extraordinary, for none of those who have ever won fame among men----no king, no legislator, no philosopher, no Greek, no barbarian----are recorded to have ever conceived such a design, or dreamed of anything at all resembling it? For each one of them has been satisfied, if he could establish his own system over his own land only, and if he were able to enforce desirable laws within the limits of his own race. |157 Whereas He, who conceived nothing human or mortal, see (136) how truly He speaks with the voice of God, saying in these very words to those disciples of His, the poorest of the poor: "Go forth, and make disciples of all the nations." [[Matt.xxviii. 19.]] "But how," the disciples might reasonably have answered the Master, "can we do it? How, pray, can we preach to Romans? How can we argue with Egyptians? We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue only, what language shall we speak to Greeks? How shall we persuade Persians, Armenians, Chaldrearis, Scythians, Indians, and other (b) barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods, and worship the Creator of all? What sufficiency of speech have we to trust to in attempting such work as this? And what hope of success can we have if we dare to proclaim laws directly opposed to the laws about their own gods that have been established for ages among all nations? By what power shall we ever survive our daring attempt?" But while the disciples of Jesus were most likely either saying thus, or thinking thus, the Master solved their difficulties, by the addition of one phrase, saying they should (c) triumph "In MY NAME." For He did not bid them simply and indefinitely make disciples of all nations, but with the necessary addition of " In my Name." And the power of His Name being so great, that the apostle says: "God has given him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth," [[Phil. ii. 9.]] He shewed the virtue of the power in His Name concealed (d) from the crowd when He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in my Name." He also most accurately forecasts the future when He says: "For this gospel must first be preached to all the world, for a witness to all nations." [[Matt.xxiv.14.]]

These words were said in a corner of the earth then, and only those present
heard it. How, I ask, did they credit them, unless from other divine works that
He had done they had experienced the truth in His words? Not one of them
disobeyed His command: but in obedience to (137) His Will according to their
orders they began to make disciples of every race of men, going from their own
country to all races, and in a short time it was possible to see His words
realized. |158 The Gospel, then, in a short time was preached in the whole
world, for a witness to the heathen, and Barbarians and Greeks alike possessed
the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language. And yet who
would not quite reasonably be at a loss to explain how the disciples of Jesus
gave this teaching? Did they go into the (b) middle of the city, and stand there
in the Agora, and call on the passers-by with a loud voice, and then address the
populace? And what were the arguments in their address, which would have any
chance of persuading such an audience? How could untrained speakers, quite
deficient in education, give addresses at all?

Perhaps you suggest they did not speak in public, but in private to those they met. If so, with what arguments could they have persuaded their hearers?----for they had (c) a most difficult task, unless they were ready to deny the shameful death of Him they preached. And suppose they concealed it, and passing over the nature and number of His sufferings at the hands of the Jews, retailed simply the noble and the glorious incidents (I mean His miracles and mighty works, and His philosophic teaching), they had even so no light problem to solve in gaining easily the adherence of listeners, who spoke strange tongues, and then for the first time heard novelties talked of by men who brought with them nothing sufficient to authenticate |159 what they said. Yet such a Gospel would, perhaps, have (d) seemed more plausible. But in fact they preached, first, that God came on an embassy in a man's body, and was actually the Word of God by nature, and had wrought the wonders He did as God. And next----a tale opposed to this, that He had undergone insult and contumely, and at last the Cross, the most shameful punishment and the one reserved for the most criminal of mankind; who would not have had ground for despising them as preaching an inconsistent message? And who could be so simple, as to believe them easily when they said that they had seen Him after His death risen to life from the dead, One Who was unable to defend Himself when alive? Who would have believed common and uneducated men who told them they must (138) despise their fathers' gods, condemn the folly of all who lived in the ages past, and put their sole belief in them and the commands of the Crucified----because He was the only-beloved and only-begotten Son of the One Supreme God? I myself, when I frankly turn the account over in my own mind, have to confess that I find in it no power to persuade, no dignity, no credibility, not even enough plausibility, to convince iust one of the most simple, (b) But when I turn my eyes away to the evidence of the power of the Word, what multitudes it has won, and what enormous churches have been founded by those unlettered and mean disciples of Jesus, not in obscure and unknown places, but in the most noble cities----I mean in Royal Rome, in Alexandria, and Antioch, throughout the whole of Egypt and Libya, Europe and Asia, and in villages and (c) country places and among the nations----I am irresistibly forced to retrace my steps, and search for their cause, and to confess that they could only have succeeded in their daring venture, by a power more divine, and more strong than man's, and by the co-operation of Him Who said to them: "Make disciples of all the nations in my Name." And when He said this He appended a promise, that would ensure their courage and readiness to devote themselves to carrying out His commands. For He said to |160 them: "And lo! I am with you all the days, even unto the end of the world." Moreover, He is said to have breathed into them a holy Spirit, yea to have given them divine and miraculous power----first saying: "Receive ye Holy Spirit," [[John xx.22]] and then: "Heal the sick, cleanse lepers, cast out demons; freely ye have received, freely give.'' [[Matt. x. 8.]]

You yourself will recognize what power their word has had, for the Book of the
Acts agrees with their having these powers, and gives consistent evidence, where
these men are reported by their power of working miracles by (139) the Name of
Jesus to have astonished the spectators present.

They amazed the spectators first most probably by the miracles themselves; they
then found men bent on inquiring Who He was, Whose power and Name had caused the
wonder; then they taught them and found that their faith had preceded the
teaching. For without persuasion by words, being first convinced by works, they
were easily brought into the state that the words required. For some are said to
have been about to offer sacrifices and libations to the disciples of Jesus, as
if they had been gods. [[Acts xiv. 12.]] And the exhibition of their miracles so
struck their minds, that they called one (b) Hermes and the other Zeus. And, of
course, whatever they told about Jesus to men in such a state, was naturally
after that considered the truth, and thus their evidence for His Resurrection
after death was not given by simple or unproven words, but came with the
persuasion of the very working, since they could shew forth the works of One
living still. And if they preached that He was God, and the Son of God, being
with the Father before He came to earth, to this truth they were equally open,
and would certainly have (c) thought anything opposed to it incredible and
impossible, reckoning it impossible to think that what was done was the work of
a human being, but ascribing it to God without any one telling them.

Here, then, in this and nothing else is the answer to our question, by what
power the disciples of Jesus convinced |161 their first hearers, and how they
persuaded Greeks as well as barbarians to think of Him as of the Word of God,
and how in the midst of cities, as well as in the country, they (d) instituted
places of instruction in the religion of the One Supreme God. And yet all must
wonder, if they consider and reflect, that it was not by mere human accident,
that the greater part of the nations of the world were never before under the
one empire of Rome, but only from the times of Jesus. For His wonderful sojourn
among men synchronized with Rome's attainment of the acme of power, Augustus
then first being supreme ruler over most of the nations, in whose time,
Cleopatra being captured, the succession of the Ptolemies was dissolved in
Egypt. And from that day (140) to this, the kingdom of Egypt has been destroyed,
which had lasted from immemorial time, and so to say from the very beginnings of
humanity. Since that day the Jewish people have become subject to the Romans,
the Syrians likewise, the Cappadocians and Macedonians, the Bithynians and
Greeks, and in a word all the other nations who are under Roman rule. And no one
could deny that the synchronizing of this with the beginning of the teaching
about our Saviour is of God's arrangement, if he considered the difficulty of
the disciples taking their journey, had the (b) nations been at variance one
with another, and not mixing together because of varieties of government. But
when these were abolished, they could accomplish their projects quite fearlessly
and safely, since the Supreme God had smoothed the way before them, and subdued
the spirit of the more superstitious citizens under the fear of a strong central
government. For consider, how if there had been no force available to hinder
those who in the power of polytheistic error were contending with Christian
education, that you would have long ago seen civil revolutions, and
extraordinarily bitter persecutions and wars, if the superstitious had had (c)
the power to do as they willed with them.

Now this must have been the work of God Almighty, this subordination of the
enemies of His own Word to a |162 greater fear of a supreme ruler. For He wills
it daily to advance, and to spread among all men. And, moreover, that it might
not be thought to prosper through the leniency of rulers, if some of them under
the sway of evil designed (d) to oppose the Word of Christ, He allowed them to
do what was in their hearts, both that his athletes might display their
holiness, and also that it might be made evident to all that the triumph of the
Word was not of the counsel of men, but of the power of God. Who would not
wonder at what ordinarily happened in times like those? For the athletes of
holiness of old shone forth clear and glorious to the eyes of all, and were
thought worthy of the prizes of God; while the enemies of holiness paid their
meet penalty, driven mad with divine scourges, afflicted with (141) terrible and
vile diseases in their whole body, so that at last they were forced to confess
their impiety against Christ. And all the rest who were worthy of the Divine
Name, and gloried in their Christian profession, passing through a short
discipline of trial, exhibited the nobility and sincerity of their hearts,
received back again once more their own liberty, while through them the word of
salvation shone out daily more brightly, and ruled even in the midst of foes.
And not only did they struggle against visible enemies, (b) but against the
invisible, such evil daemons and their rulers as haunt the nebulous air around
the earth, whom also Christ's true disciples by purity of life and prayer to God
and by His Divine Name drove off, giving proofs of the miraculous signs, which
of old were said to have been done by Him, and also, to eyes that could see, of
His divine power still active. And now that these preliminary topics are
concluded, in their right order, I must proceed to handle the more mystical
theology about Him, and consider Who He was that performed miracles through the
visible humanity (of Jesus).

[Footnotes up to p.145 renumbered and placed here at the end. Footnotes after
that omitted as tedious to transcribe and of limited value to the general
reader.]

1. 1 Books I. and II. are the "prolegomena." The Demonstratio itself begins
here. Eusebius claims by his arguments to have established the Christian use of
the O.T., since Christianity is its real fulfilment. The way is now clear for
the work itself, ἡ αὐτὴ ὑπόθεσις, which is an examination of the prophetic
witness to Christ, and of the correspondence of Jesus Christ with that witness,
as described in the Gospels, and as evident in the effects of His coming on the
world of heathenism.

2. 2 παρέλαβον = state concisely.

3. 1 Following Gaisford, who for ἀναβλέπουσι suggests
ἀμβλυώττουσι. Diodatus had evidently
read----ἀναπήροις οὖσι.

4. 1 LXX: ἰδοὺ κύριος. κύριος μετὰ ἰσχύος ἔρχεται.

5. 1 S.: οἱ ἄνθρωποι. Prayer Book Version: " Put them in fear."

6. 1 S. reads for δίδωμι ("give"),
ὕω----"rain down."

7. 1 W.H. add κατ' ἰδίαν.

8. 2 E.: ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεου~. W.H.: ἐν πνεύματι Θεοῦ.

9. 3 S. adds: "whom you yourself know to be elders of the people and their
scribes, and thou shall bring them to the tabernacle of witness, and they shall
stand there with thee. And I will descend and speak there with thee."

10. 1 S. "He brought the seventy men" follows in verse 24.

11. 2 E.: μαθητάς. W.H.: ἑτέρους.

12. 3 E. omits αυτούς.

13. 4 S. reads: "Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shall
not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness (ψευδομαρτυρύσεις for ἐπιορκήσεις)
against thy neighbour."

14. 1 ἡ παλαιὰ γραφη&, or "ancient records."

15. 2 διαθέσει γνησιωτάτη.

16. 3 See note, page 21.

17. 1 The ancestor of the Herods was Antipater, governor of Judaea under
Alexander Jannaeus (104-78 B.C.). Nicolaus of Damascus, Herod's minister,
represented him as a Jew, but Josephus states that he was an Idumaean of high
birth. (Jos., B.J. i. 6. 2; Ant. xiv. 8. 1.) The stories of his servile and
Philistine origin, common among Jews and Christians, have no foundation: e.g.
Just. Mart., Tryph. 52: Ἡρώδην Ἀσκαλωίττην: Julius Africanus ap Eus., H.E. i. 7.
11. See Schürer, History of the Jewish People, i. 314 n.

18. 1 Cf. I. i.

19. 2 ὀλιγοστὸς εἶ τοῦ εἶναι; cf. Origen, contra Celsum, l. i. §51. "The cave is
shewn where He was born, and the manger in which He was swaddled; and that which
is widely spoken of in those places, even among aliens from the faith, viz. that
Jesus . . . was born in that cave.' Earlier Apologists, e.g. Justin, do not
mention the cave. Helena, A.D. 326, "left a fruit of her piety to posterity" in
two churches which she built, "one at the cave of the nativity." Eus., Vita
Const, cc. 42, 43; cf. Dem. p. 1.

20. 1 E. omits: ὅτι ἀπέστραπται τό πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ.

21. 2 E. omits: ἄνθρωπος τῇ ὁδῷ αὐτοῦ ἐπλανήθη.

22. 3 E. omits: Ἐν τῇ ταπεινώσει ἡ κρίσις αὐτοῦ ἠρθη.

23. 1 ἀντιβλέψαι. Cf. P.E. 289 B, from Orig., Tom. iii. in Gen.
ἀντιβλέπειν ἡδονῇ
---- to resist pleasure.

24. 2 LXX: καὶ τῶν αὐλαίων σου.

25. 3 E.: καὶ τὰς δέρρεις τῶν αὐλαίων.

26. 1 Unbelievers in the prophecies must be approached by another method. To
them E. must speak of Christ, ὡς περὶ ἀνδρὸς κοινοῦ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς
παραπλησίου. The uniqueness of His Humanity will point the way to the revelation
of His Divinity, as foretold by the prophets. Of what nature then was His power?
Was it wizardry?

27. 1 ἐπιεικείας.

28. 2 Or "reassembled."

29. 3 Reading ἀνθρώπους αὐτοὺς καθ (Paris ed.), and supplying, "are following
the way of": "Plura mihi videnter emendationis egere" (Gaisford).

30. 1 ἐπὶ σπείρας· σπεῖρα, equivalent of Roman "manipulus" (Polyb. xi. 23. 1).
In Acts x. 1 a larger body, probably "a cohort."

31. 2 τραχηλισθέντα. Cp. Heb. iv. 13. The spirit of Heathenism was the true
deceiver which had deluded an originally monotheistic world into polytheism.

32. 3 i.e. followers of Porphyry.

33. 4 Cf. Sib. Or. iii. 218 seq. for an eulogy of the Jews: "There is on earth a
city, Ur of the Chaldees, from which springs a race of upright men, ever given
to wise counsel and good works." See Bate, The Sibylline Oracles, S.P.C.K., pp.
31-36, for an account of the Sibyl in early Christian literature.

34. 1 Porphyry (Malchus, Vit. Plot. vii. 107) "the soberest of the Neoplatonic
philosophers" (Cheetham), succeeded Plotinus. He was born A. D. 232 at Batanea,
probably of a Tyrian family, Vit. Plot. 8; Jerome, Praef. in Gal.; Chrysost.
Hom. on 1 Cor. vi. p. 58. He met Origen (Vincent Lerin. Commonit. i. 23) and
afterwards ridiculed his method (Eus., HE. vi. 19). He was a pupil of Longinus
at Athens (Eus., P. E. x. 3. 1). He joined Plotinus at Rome, and earlier in
Eusebius' life lived in Sicily. He died about 305. His philosophy was intensely
ethical, and emphasized personal access to God, in faith, truth, love, and hope.
He was hostile to Christianity, though he reverenced Christ as a man, and wrote
a work called To the Christians, His chief remaining works are De Abstinentia,
Lives of Plotinus and Pythagoras, Letters to Marcellus, Anebo and Sententiae.
See also note p. 155.

35. 1 ἀγωγήν.

36. 2 Philostratus' Life of Apollonius. See Praep. Evan. p. 150, where G. quotes from Ritter and Preller "a brief summary of Suidas of the life of this notorious philosopher and imposter." He flourished in the reigns of Caius, Claudius, and Nero, and until the time of Nerva, in whose reign he died. After the example of Pythagoras he kept silence five years: then he sailed away to Egypt, afterwards to Babylon to visit the Magi, and thence to the Arabians: and from all those he collected the innumerable juggleries ascribed to him. He composed Rites, or concerning Sacrifice, A Testament, Oracles, Epistles, Life of Pythagoras. The life by Philostratus, written at the request of the wife of the Emperor Septimius Severus, is accessible in Phillimore's edition and in the Loeb Series. (See Dill, Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius, pp. 40, 399, 472, 518.) "As against unmodified Judaism the Christians could find support for some of their own positions in the appeal to religious reformers like Apollonius of Tyana; who condemning blood-offerings as he did on more radical grounds than themselves was yet put forward by the apologists of paganism as a half-divine personage."----T.
WHITTAKER, The Neo-Platonists, p. 138.

37. 1 Gifford's translation.

38. 2 γενητὸς ὁ κόσμος, cf. note by Gifford in P. E. 18 c. 3 on distinction
between ἀγένητος (uncreated) and ἀγέννητος (unbegotten).

39. 3 E. quotes Phaedo, 96 A. (P. E. 26) on the research into the natural laws
of growth and decay; cf. Republ. viii. 546.

40. 1 τας ὀφρῦς ἀνασπακότων, cf. P. E. 135 d of theosophical philosophers, 224 a from Oenomaus
---- to draw up the eyebrows, and so put on a grave important air. Ar. Ach. 1069, Dem. 442, 11, etc. (L. and S.) This satirical account echoes the irony of Plato.

41. 1 See chiefly, P. E., Books iv. v. and vi.

42. 2 Βασιλικὸς ἀνὴρ.

43. 1 Or "choked by a cord."

44. 2 τὸ τρόπαιον: the other reading is τὸν τρόπον which hardly yields sense.

45. 3 Or "buried in the fitting way."

46. 1 l. c. The Lord's miracles have been tested both by their agreement with
what the Christian recognizes as miraculous in a minor degree still, and also by
a logical method that should appeal to the unbeliever. (There seems to be
something corrupt in the text.) For the continuance of miraculous powers in the
third century, cf. Origen c. Cels. i. 13, also i. 9 (pp. 411, 405).

47. 1 W.H. add μηδὲ χαλκόν.

48. 1 ἐφαντάσθησαν, cf: P.E. 17 c, of learning God's greatness from His works:
here it has the Aristotelian sense of something imagined.

49. 1 Καλινδουμένοι; cf. ἐκαλινδοῦντο, P. E. 511, a, 1. Lit.: "rolling about,"
so in common idiom "busied.'' So Dem. 403, 9; Xen. Cyr. I. 4, 5; Isoc. 295 B.

50. 2 ἐφ' ἡσυχίας. Cf. Arist. Vesp. 1517.

51. 3 Cf. H.E. iii. i, which gives the tradition that the apostles evangelized
the whole world: Thomas receiving Parthia, Andrew Scythia, John Asia, Peter the
Jews of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia and Asia; Paul,
preaching from Jerusalem to Illyricum, and ii. 16 makes Mark the apostle of
Egypt, and v. 10 tells how Pantaenus (circa 160) went to India, and found a
Church that had been founded by Bartholomew.

Harnack regards all traditions of apostolic missions as legendary, except those
of Paul, Peter, and "perhaps John of Ephesus," but accepts the Mission of
Pantaenus (Expansion of Christianity, I. pp. 439-441). For earlier statements of
the diffusion of Christianity cf. Justin, Trypho, c. cxvii.; Tertullian Apol.
xxxvii., adv. Jud. 7: "The haunts of the Britons inaccessible to the Romans
subjugated to Christ." About A.D. 150 the Church of Edessa counted the king
among its members (see F. C. Burkitt, Early Christianity outside the Roman
Empire, p. 11, Cambridge, 1899) and Persia, Media, Parthia and Bactria were
evangelized. Origen (185-254) visited the Arabian Churches more than once. In
Africa, Egypt, Cyrene, and Carthage were evangelized before 200. In Gaul there
were strong Churches, e. g. Lyons and Vienne. (G. P. Fisher, History of the
Church, pp. 46, 47. London, 1892.) 52. 1 οἷα μύσται τῶν ἀπορρήτων αὐτοῦ
γεγενημένοι.

53. 1 ἐκθειαζόμενον; cf. P. E. 41 a, 780 b.

54. 2 ὥσπέρ τι φόβητρον.

55. 3 σταυρωθέντα supplied by Gaisford.

56. 1 ὑπ' αὐτοῦ (P.). Amended to ὑπέρ by Gaisford.

57. 1 See Eus., H.E. ii. 23.

58. 2 Ibid. ii. 25.

59. 3 Ibid. iii. 23.

60. 4 περίδος. Cf. HE. 72b.

61. 1 S. (Deut. xix. 15): ἐπὶ στόματος δύο μαρτύρων, καὶ ἐπὶ στόματος τριῶν
μαρτύρων στήσεται πᾶν ῥῆμα. W.H. (2 Cor. xiii. 1): ἐπι στόματος δύο μαρτύρων καὶ
τριῶν σταθήσεται πᾶν ῥῆμα. E.: ἐπὶ στόματος δ̕ οὖν δύο καὶ τριῶν μαρτύρων
συνίσταται πᾶν ῥῆμα.

62. 1 W.H. add τοῦ Ναζωραίου.

63. 1 Cf. Tertull., Apol. c. 2: "Illud solum expectatur quod odio publico
necessarium est, confessio nominis, non examinatio criminis."

64. 2 W.H.: λεγόμενον. E.: ὀνόματι.

65. 3 That Matthew "wrote in Hebrew the Gospel that hears his name'' is stated
by Eus., H.E. iii. 24. And the words of Papias that "Matthew compiled the Logia
in Hebrew, while they were interpreted by each man according to his ability,"
are quoted, H.E. iii. 39. It is agreed that E. was wrong in thinking our Matthew
a translation of the Hebrew Logia. But there is no doubt a strong Matthaean
element in the non-Marcan, and even in some of the Marcan, constituents of our
Matthew. See J. V. Bartlet (Hastings' D.B. vol. iii. p. 296 sq.), who postulates
Palestinian catechetical Matthaean Logia, earlier than the matter used by Mark
in its Petrine form, taking written form as the main constituent in our Gospel,
which was composed either before or after A.D. 70, as the basis of them and the
Marcan memoirs of Peter (ib. p. 304). If this be so, the argument of E. as to
Matthew's modesty would to a slight extent hold good.

66. 1 εὐλάβεια: cf. Hebrews xii. 29, μετὰ εὐλαβείας καὶ δέους.

67. 2 W.H.: ὅ ἐάν and singular participles. E.: ὅσα ἄν and pl.

68. 1 E. changes order of words: Verses 67 and 69 read εἰς τὴν ἔξω πρόαυλιν, for
ἔξω εἰς τὸ προαύλιον (68). W.H. add κάτω (66).

69. 2 Paris Text adds οὔτε οἶδα.

70. 1 It is certainly true that modern Criticism has judged the Gospels by
canons that would be considered unduly rigorous in other fields of history. But
the enormous importance of the issues has made this inevitable, and the Church
has not shrunk from the minutest examination of her documents. I do not know the
author of the saying: " One must .... at all."

71. 2 The χλαμύς was the short military cloak. It is used by Plutarch (Peric 35,
Lysander 13) for the "paludamentum," or general's cloak, and also for the royal
cloak. The χιτών was the soldier's frock worn under the outer garment. E. says
the "frock" was used in mockery for a (royal) cloak.

72. 3 ἐπικομίζοντα. usually "carry to " There seems no force here in the ἐπί.

73. 1 Possibly E. is condemning by implication some absurd tales in the
Apocryphal Gospels.

74. 2 As the Docetists taught.

75. 3 Παραχαράξαντες cf. P.E. 495 a. A word used both literally and
metaphorically of "marking with a false stamp," "falsifying."

76. 4 Josephus, Ant. XVIII. iii. 3. The passage is also quoted, H.E. I. 11. 6,
7. It is found in all MSS. of Josephus, none being earlier than the eleventh
century. But it is not quoted by Origen (contra Celsum, i. 47, and the extant
part of Comm. in Matt. Tom. x. 17), and his use of Ant. xx. 9, for Josephus'
evidence to Christ seems to count against his knowledge of this passage. W. E.
Barnes' recent reexamination of the question makes out a strong case for its
authenticity. (See H. St. J. Thackeray in Hastings' D.B. extra vol., p. 471,
and, on the other side, W. E. Barnes, The Testimony of Josephus to Christ, 1920,
S.P.C. K.)

77. 1 E. has e0kei=non
for τοῦτον. σεβομένων
for δεχομένων. τοῦ Ἰουδαίκοι
for Ἰουδαίους. τῶν παρ' ἡμῖν ἀρχόντων
for τῶν πρώτων ἀνδρῶν παρ' ἡμῖν.
δ'θεν εἰς ἔτι
for εἰσἐτι δε----and
ἀπὸ τοῦδε τῶν χρ:
οὐκ ἐπίλιπε for
τῶν χρ:ἀπὸ τοῦδε ώνομασμένον οὐκ ἐπέλιπε.

78. 2 A.D. 130. Cf. H.E. iv. 6, "eighteenth year of Hadrian." In his Chronicon
Eusebius puts the rebellion in Hadrian's sixteenth year. Hadrian reigned from
A.D. 117 to A.D. 138.

79. 1 See Eus., H.E. iv. 5.

[Note to the online text: From p.145 onwards I have omitted all but one of the
footnotes as having very little value to the vast majority of the readers]

80. 2 Porphyry: see notes, pp. 120 and 155. "The Neoplatonists praised Christ
while they disparaged Christianity" (Aug., De Consensu Evang. i. 15), D.C.B. iv.
442. ... Augustine (De Civ. Dei, XIX. c. 23, 2). This text was transcribed by
Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy
freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 46: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 4
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 4

BOOK IV

CHAPTER 1 Of the Mystical Dispensation of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus, (144) the
Christ of God. As I have treated at sufficient length the topics connected with
the Incarnation of our Saviour in the preceding Book, (b) the third Book of the
Proof of the Gospel, it is now the place to approach more recondite doctrine, I
mean the more mystical theology of His Person.

Now common to all men is the doctrine of God, the First and the Eternal, Alone,
Unbegotten and Supreme Cause of the Universe, Lord of lords, and King of kings.
But the doctrine of Christ is peculiar and common to the Hebrews and ourselves,
and, though following their (c) own scriptures, they confess it equally with us.
yet they fall far asunder from us, in not recognizing His Divinity, nor knowing
the cause of His coming, nor grasping at what period of time it was predicted
that He should come. For while they look forward to His Coming even now, we
preach that He has come once already, and believing the predictions and teaching
of the inspired prophets, pray that we may behold His second Coming in divine
glory. The account of our Lord is of two kinds: the one may (d) be called the
later, brought but recently before mankind, the other is older than all time and
all eternity. For since God, Who is alone good and the Source and Spring of
everything good, had willed to make many partakers of His own treasures, He
purposed to create the whole reasoning creation, (comprising) unembodied,
intelligent and divine powers, angels and archangels, spirits immaterial and in
all ways pure, and souls of men as well endued with undetermined liberty of
Free-willed Choice |164 between right and wrong, and to give them whatever
bodily organs they were to possess, suitable to the variety of their lives, with
countries and places natural to them all. (For to those who had remained good He
gave the best places, and to those who did not He gave fit abodes, places of
discipline for their perverse inclinations.)

He, foreseeing the future in His foreknowledge, as God must, and aware that as
in a vast body all these things about to be would need a head, thought that He
ought to subordinate them all to One Governor of the Whole Creation, ruler and
king of the Universe, as also the holy oracles of the earliest Hebrew
theologians and prophets mystically teach. From which it is to be learned, that
there is one principle of the Universe, nay more, one even before the principle,
and born before the first, and of earlier being than the Monad, and greater than
every Name, Who cannot be named, nor explained, nor sought out, the good, the
cause of all, the Creator, the Beneficent, the Prescient, the Saving, Himself
the One and Only God, from Whom are all things, and for Whom are all things:
"For in him we live and move, and have our being." And the fact that He wills
it, is the sole cause of all things that exist coming into being and continuing
to be. For it comes of His will, and He wills it, because He happens to be good
by nature. For nothing else is essential by nature to a good person except to
will what is good. And what He wills, He can effect. Wherefore, having both the
will and the power, He has ordained for Himself, without let or hindrance,
everything beautiful and useful both in the visible and invisible world, making
His own Will and Power as it were a kind of material and substratum of the
genesis and constitution of the Universe, so that it is no longer reasonable to
say that anything that exists must have come from the non-existent, for that
which came from the non-existent would not be anything. For how could that which
is non-existent cause something else to exist? Everything that has ever existed
or now exists derives its being from the One, the only existent and pre-existent
Being, Who also said: "I am the existent," because, you will see, as the Only
Being, and the Eternal |165 Being, He is Himself the cause of existence to all
those to whom He has imparted existence from Himself by His Will and His Power,
and gives existence to all things, and their powers and forms, richly and
ungrudgingly from Himself.

CHAPTER 2 That we hold that the Son of God was before the Whole Creation. AND
then He makes first of all existences next to Himself (146) His child, the
first-born Wisdom, altogether formed of Mind and Reason and Wisdom, or rather
Mind itself, Reason itself, and Wisdom itself, and if it be right to conceive
anything else among things that have come into being (b) that is Beauty itself,
and Good itself, taking it from Himself, He lays it Himself as the first
foundation of what is to come into being afterwards, lie is the perfect creation
of a perfect Creator, the wise edifice of a wise Builder, the good Child of a
good Father, and assuredly to them that afterwards should receive existence
through Him, friend and guardian, saviour and physician, and helmsman holding
the rudder-lines of the creation of the universe. In agreement with which the
oracles in theological phrase call Him, "God-begotten," as alone bearing (c) in
Himself the image of the Godhead, that cannot be explained in word, or conceived
in thought, through which image (they say that) He is God, and that lie is
called so, because of this primary likeness, and also for this reason, too, that
He was appointed by the Father His good Minister, in order that as if by one
all-wise and living instrument, and rule of art and knowledge, the universe
might be guided by Him, bodies and things without body, things living and things
lifeless, the reasoning with the irrational, mortal with immortal, and whatever
else coexists and is woven in with them, and as if by one force running (d)
through the whole, all things might be harmonized together, |166 by one living
active law and reason existing in all and extending through all things, in one
all-wise bond—yea, by the very Word of God and His law, united and bound in one.

CHAPTER 3 That we rightly teach that there are not many sons of the Supreme God,
but One only, God of God.

(147) AND as the Father is One, it follows that there must be (b) one Son and
not many sons, and that there can be only one perfect God begotten of God, and
not several. For in multiplicity will arise otherness and difference and the
introduction of the worse. And so it must be that the One God is the Father of
one perfect and only-begotten Son, and not of more Gods or sons. Even so, light
being of one essence, we are absolutely obliged to regard the perfect thing that
is begotten of light to be one also. For what other thing would it be possible
to conceive of as begotten of light, but the ray only, which proceeds from it,
and fills and enlightens all things? Everything surely (c) that is foreign to
this would be darkness and not light. And analogously to this there can be
nothing like unto, nor a true copy of, the Supreme Father, Who is unspeakable
light, except as regards this one thing only, Whom we are able to call the Son.
For He is the radiance of the eternal light, and the unblurred mirror of the
activity of God, and the image of His goodness. Wherefore it was said: " Who
being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person." [[Heb.
i. 3.]] Except that the radiance is inseparable from the light of sense, while
the Son exists in Himself in His own essence apart from the Father. And the ray
has its range of activity solely from the light, whereas (d) the Son is
something different from a channel of energy, having His Being in Himself. And,
moreover, the ray is coexistent with the light, being a kind of complement
thereof; (for there could be no light without a ray:) they exist together and
simultaneously. But the Father precedes |167 the Son, and has preceded Him in
existence, inasmuch as He alone is unbegotten. The One, perfect in Himself and
first in order as Father, and the cause of the Son's existence, receives nothing
towards the completeness of His Godhead from the Son: the Other, as a Son
begotten of Him that caused His being, came second to Him, Whose Son He is,
receiving from the Father both His Being, and the character of His Being. And,
moreover, the ray does (148) not shine forth from the light by its deliberate
choice, but because of something which is an inseparable accident of its
essence: but the Son is the image of the Father by intention and deliberate
choice. For God willed to beget a Son, and established a second light, in all
things made like unto Himself. Since, then, the unbegotten and eternal light is
one, how could there be any other image of it, except the ray, which itself is
light, preserving in all respects its likeness to its prototype? And how could
(b) there be an image of the One itself, unless it were the same as it in being
one? So that a likeness is implied not only of the essence of the first, but
also one of numerical quantity, for one perfect Being comes of the one eternal
light, and the first and only-begotten Issue was not different or many, and it
is this very Being to Which, after that Being which had no origin or beginning,
we give the names of God, the Perfect, the Good: for the Son of a Father who is
One must be also One. For we should (c) have to agree that from the one
fragrance of any particular object that breathes it forth, the sweet odour shed
forth on all is one and the same, not diverse and many. So it is right to
suppose that from the first and only Good, Which is Almighty God, is supplied an
odour divine and life-giving, perceptible by mind and understanding, which is
one and not many. For what variation could there be from this complete likeness
to the Father, except one that was a declension and an inferiority; a
supposition that we must not admit into our theology of the Son: for He is (d) a
breath of the power of God, and a pure effluence of the glory of the Creator.
For a fragrant breath is poured forth from any sweet-scented substance, say from
myrrh or any of the flowers and odorous plants that spring from the earth,
beyond the original substance into the surrounding atmosphere, and fills the air
far and wide as it is shed |168 forth, without any deprivation, or lessening, or
scission, or division of the said substance. For it still remains in its own
place, and preserves its own identity, and though begetting this fragrant force
it is no worse than it was before, while the sweet odour that is begotten,
possessing its own character, imitates in the highest degree possible the nature
(149) of that which produced it by its own [fragrance]. But these are all
earthly images and touched with mortality, parts of this lower corrupt and
earthly constitution, whereas the scope of the theology we are considering far
transcends all illustrations, and is not connected with anything physical, but
imagines with the acutest thought a Son Begotten, not at one time non-existent,
and existent at another afterwards, but existent before eternal time, and
pre-existent, and ever with the Father as His Son, and yet not Unbegotten, but
(b) begotten from the Father Unbegotten, being the Only-begotten, the Word, and
God of God, Who teaches that He was not cast forth from the being of the Father
by separation, or scission, or division, but unspeakably and unthinkably to us
brought into being from all time, nay rather before all times, by the Father's
transcendent and inconceivable Will and Power. "For who shall describe his
generation?" he says, and "As no one knoweth the Father save the Son, so no one
knoweth the Son save the Father that begat Him."

CHAPTER 4 That the Only-begotten Son of God must be considered necessarily
Anterior to the Whole Universe. BUT it seemed good to the Father, source of all
goodness, that (His) One only-begotten and beloved Son should be the Head of the
Creation cf all things begotten, when He (d) was about to create One Universe,
like a body one and vast consisting of many limbs and parts. . . . And that He
should not govern it from above, as merely |169 depending on the greater
Headship of the Divinity of the Father (for the Head of Christ is the Father),
but as leader of and antecedent to all things after Him, being verily all the
while the lasting agent of His Father's commands, and of the creation that was
yet to be. And therefore it is we say that He first before all things was made
by the Father, as something one in form, the instrument of every existence and
nature, alive and living, nay divine, lifegiving and all-wise, begetting good,
Choregus of Light, Creator of the Heaven, Architect of the Universe, (150) Maker
of Angels, Ruler of Spirits, Instrument of the Salvation of Souls, Source of
Growth to bodies, all things foreseeing, guiding, healing, ruling, judging,
proclaiming the religion of the Father.

CHAPTER 5 That we hold that there are Numberless Divine Created Powers but One
Alone of the Son, whereby We describe Him as the Image of God the. Father.

WHEREFORE we must recognize with awe throughout the whole of the sphere of
creation generally one divine Power, and not suppose there to be many. For the
general creative Power is One, and One is the Word, Creator of the Universe, in
the beginning with God: Whom it truly behoves us not to ignore, but to worship
and honour worthily, because not only at the beginning of the Creation did all
things exist through Him, but since then for ever and now as well, and without
Him nothing was made. For if there is life in things that exist, that life was
what was begotten in Him. (For from Him and through Him is the life-power and
the soul-power of all things.) Be it rhythm, beauty, harmony, order, blending of
qualities, substance, quality, quantity, the one Word of the Universe holds all
in union and order, and One Creative power of God is at the Head of all. And as
in our own bodies there are great and various differences in |170 the parts, but
one creative power in the whole (for the nature of the head is not dependent on
one power of God, that of the eyes on another, and that of ears and feet on
other distinct powers), so also there is one general identical divine power
governing the whole Universe, creative of the (151) heaven and the stars, the
living things in earth and air and sea, the elements generally and individually,
and all kinds of natural things in their genera and species. So there is not one
force productive of fire, another of water, another again of earth and of air.
But one and the same wisdom is craftsman of the whole, I mean this very creative
Word of God of our theology, Who is the Maker of the Universe. The friendship of
the elements for one another bears witness to this, proving the constitution of
the Universe to be kindred and related and as it were the work of one Architect
by the (b) mixing of blended qualities. Earth, for instance, the heavy element,
floats on water, and is not drawn down below by its natural solidity, but always
remaining on the surface and not immersed, bears witness to the Word of God and
the Will and Power of God. The union of wet with dry, again, without producing
corruption, and without completely swamping everything, being hindered by the
awful will of God, shews the power of the Word of God, Who is One and the same.
And what of fire? Although its nature is burning and (c) destructive, it lurks
in logs, and is mingled in all living bodies; it is combined elementarily with
earth and air and water, and thus supplying by proportion and measure to all
things what they need in so far as it can aid each sister element, and
forgetting its own proper power, does it not seem another instance of
subservience to the Word of God and His Power? When you behold the regular
succession of day and night, the waxing and waning of hours and seasons, the
circles of the years and the cycles of time, the wheelings of the (d) stars, the
courses of the sun and the changes of the moon, the sympathy and antipathy of
all things, and the one Cosmos formed of all, would you think it right to say
that Unreason, and Chance, and random forces were the cause of all, or rather
the Word which is truly God's Word and God's Wisdom and God's Power, and would
you not hymn Its praise as one and not many? Then, again, in a man one |171 soul
and one power of reason may be creative of many things, since one and the same
faculty by concentration can be applied to agriculture, to ship-building, to
steering and to house-building. And the one mind and reasoning faculty in a man
can acquaint him with many different spheres of knowledge, for the same man will
know geometry and astronomy, and will lecture on grammar and medicine, and will
excel in intellectual pursuits and handicraft as well. And yet no one has ever
yet supposed that there are more souls than one in one body, or has thought it
strange that man should have many faculties, through his interest in many
studies. And again, if one should find a shapeless piece of clay, and then
softening it in his hands give it the shape of an animal, moulding with plastic
art the head into one form, the hands and feet differently, the eyes again
otherwise, and the cheeks as well, ears and mouth, nose, chest and shoulders,
would you say, when many forms and limbs and parts have been framed in the one
body, that one must reckon there to have been the same number of makers, or
rather praise the craftsman of the whole complete figure, who worked out the
whole thing with one reasoning faculty and one power? Why, then, in the case of
the Universe, which consists of a unity in many parts, must we suppose many
creative powers, and name many gods, and not confess that that which is truly
"the power of God and the wisdom of God" in one power and goodness supports and
gives life to all things at the same time, and gives to all from itself their
various supplies? So also the light of the sun is one, and the same rays at one
and the same time irradiate the air, enlighten the eyes, warm the touch, enrich
the earth, cause plants to grow, are the foundation of time, the guide of the
stars, the patrol of the heavens, the joy of the Cosmos, shew the clear power of
God in the whole Universe, and fulfil all those effects with one pulse of their
being.

Fire, again, by its nature purifies gold, and melts lead: wax it dissolves, clay
it hardens, wood it dries, by one burning force accomplishing so many changes.
And thus, too, the heavenly Word of God, the Creator of sun and heaven and of
the whole Cosmos, present in all things with effective power, and reaching
through all things, showers light on sun and moon and stars from Its own eternal
force, |172 and having first formed the heaven to be the meetest likeness of Its
own greatness rules over it for ever, and fills the powers of angels and spirits
beyond the heaven and the Cosmos, and the beings who have mind and reason, at
once (153) with life, and light, and wisdom, and all virtue, and every good
thing from Its own treasures, with one and the same creative art. And It never
ceases to bestow their special being to the elements, their mixings,
combinations, forms, shapes and fashions, and their many qualities, in the
animal and vegetable world, and in souls, and in bodies rational and irrational,
varying Its gifts now in one way now in another, and supplying all things to all
together at the same time, and dowering all mankind with self-conscious mind
able to (b) contemplate Its wisdom, standing close by all and shewing beyond all
doubt that the one Cosmos is the work of the one Cosmos-making Word.

Such, then, was the Son, sole-begotten of His will, Master of fair crafts and
Creator of all things, Whom the Highest God, God and Father of the Creator
Himself first before all begat, setting in Him and through Him the creative
proportions of things about to be, and casting in Him the seeds of (c) the
constitution and the government of the Universe. Do you not see with your eyes
the whole Cosmos, which one heaven encircles, and the myriad dances and
circlings of the stars around it? One sun again, and not many suns, veils the
flashings of all things with excess of light. So, then, since the Father is one,
the Son must be one also. And if one should find fault because there are not
many, let such an one see that he find not fault because He made not more suns
than one, or moons, or universes, or anything else, like a maniac attempting to
turn what is right and good in nature out of its course. |173

CHAPTER 6 That from the First Constitution of the Universe the Christ of God has
been the Invisible Guardian of Godly Souls.

THUS, then, as the one sun among things visible lights the whole Cosmos of
sense, so also among the things of thought the one perfect Word of God gives
light to the immortal and unembodied powers, the myriad existences of mind and
reason, like stars and founts of light. And since it behoved that the law over
all through the Universe, and the Word of God in all and reaching through all,
should be one, so that in Him the likeness to the Father even in all respects
might be preserved, in virtue, in power, in essence, in the number of the Monad
and the Unit, since the essence of things about to be begotten would be of many
forms and many kinds, subject through weakness of nature to many changes and
variations, one at one time, another at another, and would fail of the highest
power of the Father through the exceeding greatness of His nature inexpressible
and infinitely vast to all, and fated for ever being itself but a begotten thing
to be unable to mingle with the unbegotten and incomprehensible Godhead, or to
look up and gaze upon the unspeakable flashings pouring out from the eternal
light, it was above all necessary that the Father all-good and the Saviour of
the Universe, that the nature of things soon to be might not in exile from His
fellowship be deprived of the greatest good, should interpose the divine,
all-strong, and all-virtuous power of His only-begotten and first-born Son. For
though He was in the most certain and the closest association with the Father,
and equally with Him rejoiced in that which is unspeakable, yet He could descend
with all gentleness, and conform Himself in such ways as were possible, to those
who were far distant from His own height, and through their weakness crave
amelioration and aid |174 (d) from a secondary Being, that they might behold the
flashings of the sun falling quietly and gently on them, though they are not
able to delight in the fierce might of the sun because of their bodily weakness.

Suppose, as the hypothesis of an argument, that the sun all-glowing came down
from heaven and lived among men, it would be impossible for anything on earth to
remain uhdestroyed, for everything alive and dead would be destroyed together by
the rushing stroke of light, swiftly enough would he make blind the eyes of
those that see, being far more the source of harm and destruction than of (155)
usefulness to all, not that it is his nature so to be, but that he would become
such to those who would be unable from their own weakness to support his
surpassing glare.

Why, then, are you surprised to learn the like about God (Whose work is the sun,
and the whole heaven, and the Cosmos)? That it is impossible for any that exist
to have fellowship in His unspeakable and inexplicable Power and Essence save
for One alone, Whom the Father Himself in His Foreknowledge of the Universe
established before all things, so that the nature of begotten things might not
altogether through their own lack of energy and strength fall away, being
severed from the Father's (b) unbegotten and incomprehensible Essence, but might
endure and increase and be nourished, enjoying that mediated supply, which the
Only-begotten Word of God ceases not to provide to all, and passing everywhere
and through all provides for the salvation of all equally, whether they have
reason or not, whether they be mortal or immortal, of heaven or of earth, both
divine and invisible powers, and, in a word, of all things whatsoever that
shared in being through His agency, and far more peculiarly still of those who
possess reason and thought, for which things' sake (c) He does not at all
despise the human race, but rather honours and cares for it, for the sake of the
kinship and connection of their reason with Himself, inasmuch as it was said in
the holy oracles that they were formed after His likeness. Yea, He, as being the
Word of God, made |175 His own image, all that is of thought and reason, the
foundation of His own creation from the beginning, and set man, therefore, in a
kingly and ruling relation to all living things on earth, and sent him forth
free and with the power of undetermined choice between his good and evil
inclinations. But man using his free-will badly, turning (d) from the right
road, went wrong, caring neither for God nor Lord, nor distinguished between
holy and unholy, with all manner of rude and dissolute actions, living the life
of the irrational beasts. Then surely the All-Good, the King of kings, the
Supreme, God Almighty, that the men on earth might not be like brute beasts
without rulers and guardians, set over them the holy angels to be their leaders
and governors like herdsmen and shepherds, and set over all, and made the head
of all His Only-begotten and Firstborn Word. He gave Him for His own portion the
angels (156) and archangels, and the divine powers, and the immaterial and
transcendent spirits, yea, verily, of things on earth as well the souls among
men beloved by God, called by the names of the Hebrews, Jacob and Israel.

CHAPTER 7 That to the Hebrews alone of Old was the Knowledge of the True God
revealed, being known by the Manifestation of the Christ.

INTO this truth Moses, the first mystic theologian, initiated the Hebrews of
old, saying:

"7. Ask thy father, and he shall announce to thee, thine elders, and they shall
tell thee. 8. When the Most High divided the nations, when he distributed the
sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the
angels of God. 9. His people Israel became the portion of the Lord: Israel was
the line of his inheritance." |176

In these words surely he names first the Most High God, the Supreme God of the
Universe, and then as Lord His Word, Whom we call Lord in the second degree
after the God of the Universe. And their import is that all the nations and the
sons of men, here called sons of Adam, were distributed among the invisible
guardians of the nations, that is the angels, by the decision of the Most (d)
High God, and His secret counsel unknown to us. Whereas to One beyond comparison
with them, the Head and King of the Universe, I mean to Christ Himself, as being
the Only-begotten Son, was handed over that part of humanity denominated Jacob
and Israel, that is to say, the whole division which has vision and piety. For
the one engaged in the contest of the practice of virtue, even now struggling
and contending in the gymnasium of holiness, was called in Hebrew nomenclature
Jacob: while he that has won victory and the prize of God is called Israel, one
like that actual famed forefather of the whole race of the Hebrews, and his true
sons and their descendants, (157) and their forefathers, all prophets and men of
God. Do not suppose, I beg you, that the multitude of the Jews are thus referred
to, but only those of the distant past, who were made perfect in virtue and
piety.

These, then, it was, whom the Word of God, the Head and Leader of all, called to
the worship of the Father alone, Who is the Most High, far above all things that
are seen, beyond the heaven and the whole begotten essence, calling them quietly
and gently, and delivering to them the worship of God Most High alone, the
Unbegotten and the Creator of the Universe.

CHAPTER 8 That the Other Nations, assigned to Certain Angels, worshipped only
the Stars of Heaven.

(c) BUT the angel-guardians and shepherds of the other races allowed them,
inasmuch as they were not able with their mind to see the invisible, nor to
ascend so high through |177 their own weakness, to worship things seen in the
heavens, the sun and moon and stars. For these, indeed, being the most wonderful
of the things of the phenomenal world, invited upwards the eyes of those who
see, and as near as possible to heaven, being as it were in the precincts of the
King's court, manifesting the glory of Him that is the Source of all by the
analogy of the vastness and beauty of created visible things. "For his invisible
things," as the divine Apostle says, "from the creation of the world are clearly
seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and
Godhead." And this again the great Moses mystically says. For in exhorting the
portion of the Lord to grasp with clear mind and pure soul that which is known
to the mind only and unembodied, he prohibits all terror of the things seen in
heaven, adding that "The Lord thy God has divided them for all the nations." And
it is worth realizing why he says that they were divided. Since unseen by us
they that bear the earthy and daemonic nature are everywhere wanderers, flying
through the air around the earth unknown and undistinguished by men, and the
good spirits and powers and, indeed, the divine angels themselves are ever at
variance with the worse, there was but one way for those who failed of the
highest religion of the Almighty to prosper, namely to choose the best of things
visible in heaven. For there was no slight danger, lest seeking after God, and
busy with the unseen world, they should turn towards the opposing daemonic
powers amid the stress of things obscure and dark. So all the most beautiful
visible created things were delivered to them who yearned for nothing better,
since to some extent the vision of the unseen shone in them, reflected as in a
mirror. |178

CHAPTER 9 Of the Hostile Power opposed to God, and of its Ruler, and how the
Whole Race of Mankind was in Subjection thereto.

SUCH was their position. While those on the side of the opposing rebel power
were either daemons, or vile spirits immersed more or less in wickedness, with
the cunning ruler of them all the mighty daemon, who first failed of their
reverence of the Divinity and fell from their own portion, when envy of man's
salvation drew them the (d) contrary way, plotting with all sorts of evil
devices against all the nations, and even against the Lord's portion in their
jealousy of the good. It is this godless and unholy scheme of the great Daemon,
which the prophetic spirit in Isaiah reproves in this way, saying:

"13. I will act in strength, and in the wisdom of understanding I will take away
the boundaries of the nations, and will diminish their strength, 14. and I will
shake inhabited cities. And the whole inhabited world I will take in my hand as
a nest, and I will take them even as eggs that have been left; and none shall
escape me or say me nay."

These are the words of God's antagonist, boasting in the strength of his
wickedness, as he threatens to steal and obliterate the divisions of the nations
delivered by the Most High to the angels, and loudly cries that he will spoil
the earth, and shake the whole race of men, and change them from their former
good order. But hear the same prophecy speak about him again, how he thought
about himself and (b) how he bragged:

"How has Lucifer that rose at morn fallen from heaven: He is crushed to earth
that sent to all the nations. But thou saidst in thy heart, 'I will go up to
heaven, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven. ... I will ascend above
the clouds, I will be |179 like the Most High.' But now thou shalt go down to
hell, and to the foundations of the earth."

Truly Scripture shews many things at once in this, the madness of the said
spirit, his fall from the better to the worse, and the end of his fall. And
having uttered terrible threats against all mankind, he discovered that men
could be caught otherwise by his weapons, since they possessed in their power of
free choice the ever-ready possibility of falling into evil from their own
thoughts. Then he turned the conditions of states from the better to the worse,
and drew away the souls of the multitude by the bait of pleasure to every form
of wickedness, and left no sort of device untried, and with base myths of the
gods and impure stories he tempted his victims with what they loved and with
what gave them pleasure, using the artful deceit of the daemons. And in this way
he took the whole world and held it captive, and obliterated the boundaries of
the nations, as he had threatened to do when he said: "I will remove the
boundaries of the nations, and I will diminish their strength, and I will take
the whole world in my hand as a nest." And from that day forward he ruled all
men with deceit, and the evil demons were arrayed under their king in every
place and city and land. And thus the whole of human life was enslaved by
earthly powers and evil spirits instead of the earlier ministers of God, and all
gave themselves over in throngs and swiftly to the snares of pleasure; so that
they soon overleapt the bounds even of nature, in unnatural offences of one kind
or another, and they not only did things of which it is wrong even to think, but
connected them with their conceptions of their own gods, and worked their lust
with all the more freedom as a thing supposed to please the gods. Hence soon,
according to the holy Apostle, they took no heed of the works of God still
bright in heaven. |180

" They became vain in their reasonings: and their senseless heart was darkened.
22. Professing themselves (b) to be wise, they became fools. 23. And changed the
glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and
of birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things." [[Rom. i. 21.]]

And that in the earliest age those upon earth worshipped only the lights of
heaven, and knew no image, nor were concerned with the error of the daemons,
there is satisfactory proof to be found in the evidence of those, who are
strangers to my argument, which I drew upon in the first book of the Preparatio
(which I wrote) before the present treatise; (c) they clearly prove that the
earliest men did not serve idols fashioned by hand from lifeless matter, nor
even invisible daemons, but only those beings, which are said in Holy Scripture
to have been distributed among the nations. It is time for the Greeks
themselves, therefore, whose statements I have arranged in the work mentioned,
to agree that the superstition connected with idols was something more recent
and novel, being introduced subsequently to the worship of the ancients, as well
as the devotion to unseen spirits. All this was the work of the said antagonist
of God, who plotted against all those on earth. And all (d) the tribe of unclean
spirits co-operated with him. Yea, he surely, the prince of evil himself, worked
this result, fulfilling in very deed, in the madness of strange pride, the
threats he had uttered against all men, raising the godless cry, "I will be like
the Most High," and with the aid of impure and evil daemons offering oracles and
cures and such like in response to human sorcery.

CHAPTER 10 That the Only-begotten Son of God made His Entry among Mankind of
Necessity.

(161) THEY that were their guardian angels before were unable to defend in any
way the subject nations now involved in |181 such a flood of evil. They took
care of the rest of the created world. They guarded the other parts of the
Cosmos, (b) and served according to their wont the will of God the Creator of
all. But they did not realize the fall of mortal men through the undetermined
human choice of evil. Wherefore a sickness great and hard to heal overcame all
on the face of the earth, the nations being driven now one way now another by
the evil spirits, and falling into a depthless abyss of evil. Yea, now some
thought it good to feast on the bodies of their dearest, like wild beasts that
devour the raw flesh of men, and to lie shamelessly with (c) mothers, sisters
and daughters, to strangle their old men, and cast their bodies to the dogs and
birds. Why should I recall the cruel and terrible human sacrifices of the
"gods," I mean the evil daemons, into which they maddened the human race? I have
dealt sufficiently with them previously in the Prolegomena to the present
treatise. But it was when evils of such magnitude had fallen on the (d) whole
world from the wicked and vile spirits and their king, and none of the guardian
angels was able to defend them from the evils, that He, God the Word, the
Saviour of the Universe, by the good will of His Father's love to man, that the
human race so dear to Him might not be seethed in the gulf of sin, sent forth at
last some few and watery rays of His own light to shine through the prophet
Moses and the godly men before and after him, providing a cure for the evil in
man by the holy Law. It is exactly this that the Word says to the race of the
Hebrews when giving the law by Moses:

"Ye shall not do according to the devices of Egypt, (162) in which ye dwelt, and
according to the devices of the land of Canaan, into which I bring you shall ye
not do, and ye shall not walk in their ordinances, ye shall observe my
judgments, and ye shall keep my ordinances. I am the Lord your God." [[Lev.
xviii. 2.]]

Then, having forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the
union of women with women and men with men, he adds:

"Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; (b) |182 for in all these
things the nations were defiled, which I will drive out before you. And the land
was polluted, and I have recompensed (their) iniquity upon it, and the land is
aggrieved with them that dwell upon it."

And again, he says:

"And when thou shalt have entered into the land which the Lord thy God gives
thee, thou shalt by no means learn to do according to the abominations of those
nations. There shall not be found in thee one who purges his son or his daughter
in the fire, one who uses divination, and who deals in the omens, a sorcerer
using incantations, a divining spirit, an observer of auguries, a questioner of
the dead. For every one that doeth these things is an abomination to the Lord
thy God. For because of these abominations the Lord will destroy them from
before thy face. Thou shalt be perfect before the Lord thy God."

These and many other holy teachings and commands God the Word gave to them of
old by Moses, as delivering the elementary truths at the entry of the life of
holiness, by means of symbols, and worship of a shadowy and external character,
in bodily circumcision, and other things of that kind, which were completed on
the earth. But since as time went on none of the prophets who succeeded Moses
had the power to cure the evils of life owing to excess of wickedness, and the
activity of the daemons daily waxed greater, so that even the Hebrew race was
hurried along in the destruction of the godless, at last the Saviour and
Physician of the Universe comes down Himself to men, bringing reinforcement to
His angels for the salvation of men, since the Father had promised Him that He
would give Him this boon, as He therefore teaches in the Psalms, when He says:

" 7. The Lord said to me, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee, 8.
Desire of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, And
utmost parts of the earth for thy possession." |183

And thus He no longer claimed as under His own authority just and clear-sighted
Israel, nor His own proper portion only, but all the nations on the earth, which
before were allotted to many angels, and were involved in all sorts of
wickedness, and He came announcing to all the knowledge and love of His Father,
and promising the remission and forgiveness of their former ignorance and sins,
which He also announced clearly when He said: "The strong have no need of a
physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners
to repentance." And He came, too, as overseer of His own angels, who were first
set over the nations: and they at once very distinctly recognized their helper
and Lord, and came gladly and ministered to Him, as the Holy Scripture teaches,
saying: "And angels came and ministered to him," and when, too, "a multitude of
the heavenly host praising God said, 'Glory to God in the highest, and on earth
peace, goodwill among men.' " These, then, as being His own angels He thus
received, since they were in need of His help, but those that of old had flown
around the pursuits of men, the malicious daemons who both visibly and invisibly
had tyrannized over those on earth, and the tribes of wild and merciless
spirits, with their leader in all evil, that cunning and baneful one He put to
flight and subdued with mighty and divine power, as certain of them that
recognized Him said: "What have we to do with thee, Son of God? Hast thou come
to torment us before the time?" And these by His deeds and words He mightily
plagued, while He healed and cured the whole human race with the gentle and kind
medicines of His words, and with the tonic of His teaching. He freed them from
all sorts of sicknesses and suffering of body as well as soul, He set all that
came to Him free from age-long superstition, and the fears of polytheistic
error, and from a low and dissolute life. He converted and changed those who
listened to Him from lust to purity, from impiety to piety, from injustice to
justice, yea, verily from the power of the malicious daemons to the divine
acceptance of true holiness. In addition to all this He threw open the gates of
|184 heavenly life and of His holy teaching to all the nations of the world, and
so greatly condescended, as not only to extend His saving hand to the sick and
grievously afflicted, but also to save the half-dead from the very gates of
death, and to loose from the bonds of death those who had been a long time dead
and buried. And for this reason especially there was need for Him to be active,
even as far as the resting-places of the dead, that He might be Lord not only of
the living but of the dead as well. So long, then, as He is with the Father, and
steers the Providence of the Universe with divine power, the Divine Word and
Wisdom and Power oversees and protects the heaven itself and the earth likewise,
and the things by nature included in them, as well as the divine and unembodied
essences beyond the heaven. He is their Ruler and Head and King, and is already
hymned as God and Lord in the sacred oracles, and He gives light to the
unembodied and purely rational natures. And He is called Sun of Righteousness,
and the True Light, carrying out and co-operating in His leather's commands,
wherefore He is also styled minister of the Father and Creator, but since He
alone in His ordained rank knows how to serve God, and stands midway between the
unbegotten God and the things after Him begotten, and has received the care of
the Universe, and is Priest to the Father on behalf of all who are obedient, and
alone shews Himself favourable and merciful to all, He is called as well Eternal
High Priest, and also the Anointed (Christ) of the Father, for so among the
Hebrews they were called Christs, who long ago symbolically presented a copy of
the first (Christ). And when as Captain of the Angels He heads them, He is
called: "The Angel of Great Counsel," and as Leader of the Armies of Heaven:
"Captain of the Host of the Lord." But now descending to our world, receiving
our rational nature, for the sake of His own likeness to it by the goodwill of
the Father, as He is like to rule over infants and as it were over the flocks,
He is named Shepherd of the Sheep, while as promising to care for sick souls, He
would rightly be called Saviour and Physician. And this of course is the meaning
of the name "Jesus" in Hebrew. |185 And since He needed a human organism, so
that He could show Himself to men, and give true teaching of the knowledge of
the Father and of holiness, He did not even refuse the way of the Incarnation;
but assuming our nature in a moment He came among men, shewing the great Miracle
to all of God in Man. So that He did not take command (b) imperceptibly and
obscurely as a being without flesh or body, but seen by the very eyes of flesh,
and allowing the eyes of men to see miracles even beyond the power of man, and
moreover giving His teaching by tongue and articulate sound to the bodily ears,
He manifested Himself—and truly it was a divine and miraculous thing, such as
never before or since is recorded to have happened—the Saviour and the
Benefactor, too, of all. So, then, God the Word was called the Son of Man, and
was named Jesus, because He made His approach to us to cure and to heal the
souls of men. And therefore in Hebrew the name Jesus is (c) interpreted Saviour.
And He led the life which we lead, in no way forsaking the being that He had
before, and ever in the Manhood retaining the Divinity.

Immediately, therefore, at the first moment of His descent among men, He mingles
with God the divine glory of our human birth, for while He is born like us, and
arrayed like men with mortality, yet as One Who is not man, but God, He is born
into the phenomenal world from an undefiled and umvedded maiden, and not of
sexual union and corruption.

CHAPTER 11 That He passed through the Life of Men. (d) AND He lived His whole
life through in the same manner, now revealing His nature as like our own, and
now that of God the Word, doing great works and miracles as God, |186 (166) and
announcing beforehand predictions of the future, and shewing clearly by His
deeds God the Word Who was not seen by the multitude, and He made the end of His
life, when He departed from men, in tune with and similar to its beginning.

CHAPTER 12 That the Laws of Loving-kindness called Him even to them that had
been long dead.

Now the laws of love summoned Him even as far as Death and the dead themselves,
so that He might summon the souls of those who were long time dead. And so
because He cared for the salvation of all for ages past, and that "He might
bring to naught him that hath the power of death," as Scripture teaches, here
again he underwent the dispensation in His mingled Natures: as Man, he left His
Body to the usual burial, while as God He departed from it. For He cried with a
loud cry, and said to the Father: "I commend my spirit," and departed from the
body free, in no wise waiting for death, who was lagging as it were in fear to
come to Him; nay, rather, He pursued him from behind and drove him on, trodden
under His feet and fleeing, and He burst the eternal gates of his dark realms,
and made a road of return back again to life for the dead there bound with the
bonds of death. Thus, too, His own body was raised up, and many bodies of the
sleeping saints arose, and came together with Him into the holy and real City of
Heaven, as rightly is said by the holy words: "Death has prevailed and swallowed
men up"; and again: "The Lord God has taken away every tear from every face."
And the Saviour of the Universe, our Lord, the Christ of God, called Victor, is
represented in the prophetic predictions as reviling death, and releasing the
souls that are bound there, by whom He raises the hymn of victory, and He says
these words: |187

"From the hand of Hades I will save them, and from death I will ransom their
souls. O Death, where is thy victory? O Death, where is thy sting? The sting of
death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law."

Such was the dispensation that brought Him even unto death, of which one that
wishes to seek for the cause, can find not one reason but many. For firstly, the
Word teaches by His death that He is Lord both of dead and living; and secondly,
that He will wash away our sins, being slain, and becoming a curse for us;
thirdly, that a victim of God and a great sacrifice for the whole world might be
offered to Almighty God; fourthly, that thus He might work out the destruction
of the deceitful powers of the daemons by unspeakable words; and fifthly also,
that shewing the hope of life with God after death to His friends and disciples
not by words only by deeds as well, and affording ocular proof of His message,
He might make them of good courage and more eager to preach both to Greeks and
Barbarians the holy polity which He had established. And so at once He filled
with His own divine power those very friends and followers, whom He had selected
for Himself on account of their surpassing all, and had chosen as His apostles
and disciples, that they might teach all races of men His message of the
knowledge of God, and lay down one way of religion for all the Greeks and
Barbarians; a way which announced the defeat and rout of the daemons, and the
check of polytheistic error, and the true knowledge of the one Almighty God, and
which promised forgiveness of sins before committed, if men no longer continued
therein, and one hope of salvation to all by the all-wise and all-good polity
that He had instituted. |188

CHAPTER 13 That even when He was made Man, He remained in the Nature that cannot
suffer, or be harmed, or embodied. AND since this is so, there is no need to be
disturbed in mind on hearing of the Birth, human Body, Sufferings and Death of
the immaterial and unembodied Word of God. For just as the rays of the sun's
light undergo no suffering, though they fill all things, and touch dead and
unclean bodies, much less could the unembodied Power of God suffer in its
essence, or be harmed, or ever become worse than itself, when it touches a body
without being really embodied. For what of this? Did He not ever and everywhere
reach through the matter of the elements and of bodies themselves, as being the
creative Word of God, and imprint the words of His own wisdom upon them,
impressing life on the lifeless, form on that which is formless and shapeless by
nature, stamping His own beauty and unembodied ideas on the qualities of matter,
moving things by their own nature lifeless and immovable, earth, air, fire, in a
wise and harmonious motion, ordering all things out of disorder, increasing and
perfecting them, pervading all things with the divine power of reason, extending
through all places and touching all, but yet receiving hurt from naught, nor
defiled in His own nature. And the same is true of His relation to men (as well
as nature). Of old He appeared to a few easily numbered, only the prophets who
are recorded and the just men, now to one, now to another, but finally to us
all, to the evil and unholy, to the Greeks as well as the Hebrews, He has
offered Himself as Benefactor and Saviour through the surpassing goodness and
love of the Father, Who is all-good, distinctly announcing it thus: "They that
are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick: I have not come
to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Yea, the Saviour of all cried
unto all, saying: " Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, |189
and I will refresh you." He called and healed ungrudgingly through the human
organism which He had assumed, like a musician showing his skill by means of a
lyre, and exhibited Himself as an example of a life wholly wise, virtuous, and
good, unto the souls diseased in human bodies, just as the most clever
physicians heal men with (169) remedies akin to and resembling them. For, now,
He taught them truths not shared by others, but laid down as laws by Him or by
the Father in far distant periods of time for the ancient and pre-Mosaic Hebrew
men of God. And now He cared as kindly for their bodies as for their souls,
allowing them to see with eyes of physical sight the things done by Him in the
flesh, and giving His teaching to their physical ears again with a tongue of
flesh. He fulfilled all things by the Humanity that He had taken, (b) for those
who only in that way were able to appreciate His Divinity. In all this, then,
for the advantage and profit of us all the all-loving Word of God ministered to
His Father's Counsels, remaining Himself immaterial and unembodied, as He was
before with the Father, not changing His essence, not dissolved from His own
nature, not bound with the bonds of the flesh, not falling from divinity, and
neither losing the characteristic power of the Word, nor (c) hindered from being
in the other parts of the Universe, while He passed His life where His earthly
vessel was. For it is the fact that during the time in which He lived as a man,
He continued to fill all things, and was with the Father, and was in Him too,
and had care of all things collectively even then, of things in heaven and on
earth, not being like ourselves debarred from ubiquity, nor hindered from divine
action by His human nature. But He shared His own gifts with man, and received
nothing from mortality in return . He supplied something of His (d) divine power
to mortals, not taking anything in return for His association with mortals. He
was, therefore, not defiled by being born of a human body, being apart from
body, neither did He suffer in His essence from the mortal, being untouched by
suffering. As when a lyre is struck, or its strings torn asunder, if so it
chance, it is unlikely that he who played it suffers, so we could not say truly
that, when some wise man is punished in his body, that the wisdom in him, or the
soul in his body, is struck or burned. |190 (170) Much less is it reasonable to
say that the nature or power of the Word received any hurt from the sufferings
of the body. For it was granted in our illustration of light that the rays of
the sun sent down to earth from heaven are not defiled by touching all the mud
and filth and garbage. We are not even debarred from saying that these things
are illuminated by the rays of light. Whereas it is impossible to say that the
sun is defiled or rendered muddy (b) by contact with these materials. And these
things could not be said to be foreign to one another. Whereas the immaterial
and unembodied Word of God, having His life and reason and everything we have
said in Himself, if He touch aught with divine and unembodied power, the thing
touched must necessarily live and exist with the light of reason. Thus
therefore, also, whatever body He touches, that body is made holy and
illuminated at once, and all disease and weakness and all such things depart.
Its emptiness is exchanged for the fullness of the Word. And (c) this was why a
dead body, though but a small part of it came in contact with the power of the
Word, was raised up to life, and death fled from life, and darkness was
dissolved by light, the corruptible put on incorruption, and the mortal
immortality.

CHAPTER 14 That renewing Humanity He afforded to us all the Hope of Eternal
Good.

(d) Now it was actually the case that the whole Humanity was absorbed by the
Divinity, and moreover the Word of God was God as He had previously been man,
and He deified humanity with Himself, being the firstfruits of our |191 hope,
since He thought actual manhood worthy of eternal life with Him, and of
fellowship in the blessed Godhead, and afforded to us all equally this mighty
proof of an immortality and kingdom with Him.

CHAPTER 15

What the Advent of Christ is meant to shew forth, and that (171) He is called
God and Lord and High Priest of the God of the Universe by the Hebrew Prophets.
THIS then was the object of His coming to men, to bring back (b) that which had
of old wandered away from the knowledge of the Father to its own way, and to
crown that which was thought worthy of being made in His own image as a relation
and a friend with the joy of His own life, and to show that the humanity was
beloved by and belonged to the Father, since for its sake the Word of God
Himself consented to become man. And now to speak briefly, the doctrine
connected with our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in its wonderful dispensation,
shall be supported from the Hebrew prophecies, as presently their evidence will
(c) shew; the new Scriptures shall prove the old, and the Gospels set their seal
on the prophetic evidence. But if this is so, it is now time to discuss His
Name, why He is called Jesus and Christ, and saluted beforehand by name by so
many prophecies. And first, let us inquire the meaning of the name Christ,
before we begin a detailed collection of the prophetic passages connected with
the present question I think it convenient to consider first the name "Christ,"
and to distinguish the conception it (d) conveys, so that we may be well
acquainted with all the questions usually associated with the subject. |192

Another writer, you will remember, whose ideas spring from modern times and our
own day, has said that Moses was the first of all lawgivers to appoint that
those who were to act as priests to God must be anointed with prepared myrrh,
since he thought that their bodies ought to smell sweet and have a good odour:
for as everything ill-smelling is dear to vile and impure powers, so
contrariwise the sweet-smelling is dear to the powers that love good. And he
therefore made the law as well that the priests should use every day in the
Temple prepared incense, (172) that sweet smells might abound. So that while the
air was mingled with it, and dispersed evil smells, a kind of divine effluence
might mingle with those who prayed. And that for the same reason flagrant
anointing oil was made by the perfumer's art, for all to use who were going to
take the leading place in the State on public occasions, and that Moses first
gave the name of "Christ'' to those thus anointed. And that this chrism was not
only conferred on chief priests, but afterwards on prophets and kings, (b) who
alone were allowed to be anointed with the sacred unguent. This account seems,
no doubt, very obvious, but it is far removed from the actual intention of the
divine and sublime prophet. For we may be sure that that wonderful man, and
truly great Hierophant, knowing that the whole of earthy and material being was
distinguished in its qualities alone, in no sense honoured one form above
another, for he knew that all things were the product of one matter, never
stable, having no firmness in its nature, which is (c) ever in flux, and
hastening to its own destruction. He, therefore, made no choice of bodies for
their sweetness, nor preferred the pleasure of the senses for its own sake. For
this would be the condition of a soul fallen to the ground and under the power
of bodily pleasure. There are, we know, many men effeminate in body, and in
other ways vicious and lustful, who make use of superfluous unguents and a
variety of things, but carry souls full of every horrible and offensive stench,
while on the other hand the men of God, breathing out virtue, send forth a (d)
fragrance that comes from purity, justice, and all holiness |193 far better than
the scents of earth, and hold the smell of material bodies of no account. And
the prophet, well understanding this, had none of these ideas that have been
suggested about unguents or incense, but presented the images of greater and
divine things, so far as he could, in an outward way to those who could learn
the divine in that way only and no other. And that is exactly what the divine
oracle is reported to have expressed, when it said: "See thou make (all) things
according to the type shewn in the Mount.": Therefore, when completing the
symbols of the other things, which it is usual to call types, it appointed the
anointing with the unguent. The account of it loftily and mysteriously expressed
as it is, so far as I can explain it, had this meaning, that the only good and
only truly sweet and noble, the cause of all life, and the gift bestowed on all
in their being and their well-being, that this One Being was believed by the
Hebrew reason to be the first cause of all, and Itself the highest and the
All-Ruling and the All-Creating God.

It is thus the power of this Being, the all strong, the all-good, the source of
all beauty in the highest unbegotten Godhead, the Divine Spirit (which by the
use of a proper and natural analogy) it culls the (Oil of God), and therefore it
calls one who partakes of it Christ and Anointed. Do not think of oil as. pity
in this connection, nor as sympathy for the unfortunate, but as that which the
fruit of the tree affords, something unmixed with any damp matter, nourisher of
light, healer of toilers, disperser of weariness, that which makes those who use
it of a cheerful countenance, streaming with rays like light, making bright and
shining the face of him who uses it, as holy Scripture says: "That he may
rejoice my face with oil."

Therefore the prophetic word by this analogy referring to the highest power of
God, the King of kings and Lord of lords, calls Him the Christ and the Anointed,
Who is the first and only one to be anointed with this oil in its fullness, and
is the sharer of the Father's divine fragrance communicable to none other, and
is God the Word sole-begotten of Him, and is declared to be God of God by His
communion |194 with the Unbegotten that begat Him, both the First and the
Greater. Wherefore in the Psalms the oracle says thus to this same Being
anointed of the Father: (d)

"7. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: A sceptre of righteousness is the
sceptre of thy kingdom:

8. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated injustice:

Wherefore God, thy God, Hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy
fellows."[[Ps. xliv. 7.]]

But the nature of the oil of olive is one, whereas the nature of the unguent
shews a union of many in one. And so the original and unbegotten power of
Almighty God, insofar as it is conceived of as simple, uncompounded, and
unmingled with any other essence, is metaphorically compared with the simple
essence of the olive oil. But insofar as it is inclusive of many ideas in the
same, i. e. the (174) creative or kingly, the conceptions of providence,
judgment, and countless others, such power as inclusive of many good qualities
is more suitably likened to the unguent, which the holy Scriptures teach us that
the true and only High Priest of God uses. And Moses himself having first been
thought worthy to view the divine (realities) in secret, and the mysteries
concerning the first and only Anointed High Priest of God, which were celebrated
before him in His Theophanies, is (b) ordered to establish figures and symbols
on earth of what he had seen with his mind in visions, so that they who were
worthy might have the symbols to occupy them, previously to the full vision of
the truth. And when afterwards he set apart from all men on earth one man who
was fit to act as priest to God Himself, he from the first called him Christ,
transferring the name from its spiritual meaning, and shewed that He was greater
than (c) the rest of mankind by the sweet-smelling unction, clearly and
emphatically proclaiming that the whole nature of the begotten, much more human
nature, lacks the power of the Unbegotten, and craves the fragrance of the
better. But it is allowed to no man to reach the Highest and the First; this
prize is given to the Only-begotten and the Firstborn |195 only. For those after
Him there is only one way of grasping good, through the mediation of a second
principle. So the symbol of Moses was of the Holy Spirit. "And there are
diversities of gifts, hut the same spirit": of which Spirit he thought that
prophets and kings before all others ought to be ambitious to partake, as being
consecrated to God not for themselves only, but for all the people. But now let
us inquire somewhat more exactly about the symbols of Moses being symbols of the
more divine(realities), and about the possibility of those who were endued with
the Holy Spirit without the unction of earth being called Christs.

David in Ps. civ. when touching the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the
very men who were his godly ancestors, who lived before Moses' day, calls them
Christs, for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, in which they shared, and for
that alone. And when he tells how they were hospitably received by foreigners,
and bow they found God was their Saviour when plots were laid against them,
following Moses' account, he names them prophets also and Christs, although
Moses had then not yet appeared among men, nor was his law about the prepared
unguent laid down. Hear what the Psalm says:

"5. Remember the wonderful works, that he hath done, His wonders and the
judgments of his mouth 6. Ye seed of Abraham, his servants, Ye children of
Jacob, his chosen, 7. The Lord himself is your God, His wonders are in all the
world.

8. He remembered his covenant for ever The law which he gave to a thousand
generations, 9. Which he commanded to Abraham, And the oath which he sware unto
Isaac, 10. And established it to Jacob for a law, And to Israel for an
everlasting covenant.

11. Saying ' To you I will give the land of Canaan, The lot of your
inheritance.'— 13. And they went from one nation to another, From one kingdom to
another people.

14. He suffered no man to do them wrong, And reproved kings for their sake: |196
15. 'Touch not my Christs, And do my prophets no harm.' "

So David wrote. And Moses informs us what kings He reproved, saying:

"And God afflicted Pharaoh with great plagues because of Sarra, Abraham's wife."

And again he writes about the King of Gerar:

"And God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said, Behold thou diest for
the woman thou hast taken; for she is the wife of Abraham."

Of whom he says further on:

"And now give back the woman to her husband, for he is a prophet, and will pray
for you."

You see from these instances how David, or rather the Holy Spirit Who spoke
through him, called the godly men of old and the prophets Christs, though they
were not anointed with the earthly unguent. For how could they have been, since
it was in after years that Moses commanded the unction of the High Priest?

Now listen to Isaiah prophesying in the clearest words thus about Christ, as one
to be sent by God to men as their Redeemer and Saviour, and coming to preach
forgiveness to those in bondage of spirit, and recovery of sight to the blind.
For here again the prophet teaches that the Christ has been anointed not with a
prepared unguent, but with the spiritual and divine anointing of His Father's
Divinity, conferred not by man but by the Father. He says then in the person of
Christ:

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me. He has sent me
to preach glad tidings to the poor, to proclaim liberty to the captives, to heal
the broken in heart, and recovery of sight to the blind."

Let this point then be regarded as certain, that Isaiah, equally with David,
prophesies that He that should come to mankind to preach liberty to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind would not be anointed with a prepared
unguent, but with an anointing of the power of His Father Unbegotten and
Perfect. And according to the manner of |197 prophecy the prophet speaks of the
future as past, and as one predicting about himself. So far, then, we have
learned that they who are called "Christs" in the highest sense of the term are
anointed by God, not by men, and with the Holy Spirit, not with a prepared
unguent.

It is now time to see how the teaching of the Hebrews shews that the true Christ
of God possesses a divine nature higher than humanity. Hear, therefore, David
again, where he says that he knows an Eternal Priest of God, and calls (c) Him
his own Lord, and confesses that He shares the throne of God Most High in the
109th Psalm, in which he says as follows—

"The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, | till I make thine
enemies the footstool of thy feet. | 2. The Lord shall send the rod of power for
thee out of Zion, | and thou shalt rule in the midst of thine enemies. | 3. With
thee is dominion in the day of thy power, | in the brightness of thy saints. | I
begat thee from my womb before the Morning Star. 4. The Lord sware and will not
repent, | Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek." | [[Ps.
cix. i.]]

And note that David in this passage, being king of the (d) whole Hebrew race,
and in addition to his kingdom adorned with the Holy Spirit, recognized that the
Being of Whom he speaks Who was revealed to him in the spirit, was so great and
surpassingly glorious, that he called Him his own Lord. For he said "The Lord
said to my Lord." Yea: for he knows Him as eternal High Priest, and Priest of
the Most High God, and throned beside Almighty God, and His Offspring. Now it
was impossible for Jewish priests to be consecrated to the service of God
without anointing, wherefore it was usual to call them Christs. The Christ,
then, mentioned in the Psalm will also be a priest. For how (177) could He have
been witnessed to as priest unless He had previously been anointed? And it is
also said that He is made a priest forever. Now this would transcend human
nature. For it is not in man to last for ever,3 since our race is mortal and
frail. Therefore the Priest of God, spoken of in this passage, Who by the
confirmation of an oath received a perpetual and limitless priesthood from God,
was |198 greater than man. "For the Lord sware," he said, "and will not repent,
Thou art a priest after the order of Melchizedek." For as Moses relates that
this Melchizedek was priest of the Most High God, not anointed with a prepared
unguent, since he was priest of the Most High God long before the Institution of
the Law, and far above the famous Abraham in virtue—for he says, "And
Melchizedek, King of Salem, Priest of the Most High God, blessed Abraham." "And
without any contradiction," says the apostle, "the less is blessed by the
greater." As therefore, Melchizedek, whoever he was, is introduced as one who
acts as priest to the Most High God, without having been anointed with a
prepared unguent, He that is prophesied of by David as of the order of
Melchizedek. is also spoken of as a great Being surpassing everyone in nature,
as being Priest of the supreme God, and sharing the throne of His unbegotten
power, and as the Lord of the prophet; and He is not simply "priest," but
"eternal priest of the Father." And the divine apostle also says, examining the
implications of these passages:

"17. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew to the heirs of promise the
immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: 18. That of two immutable
things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong
consolation."

And again:

"21. For those priests were made without an oath: but this with an oath by him
that said unto him: 'The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for
ever after the order of Melchizedek.'"

And:

"23. They truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by
reason of death. 24. But this man because he continueth ever hath an
unchangeable priesthood. 25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the
uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession
for them."

In this a divine Power is represented as being in existing things, and
underlying things that are only grasped by the mind, Which according to the
Hebrew oracles is Priest to the God of the Universe, and is established in the
office of |199 priesthood to the Most High, not by earthy and human unguent, but
by holy and divine virtue and power. The Object of the Psalmist's prophecy
therefore is presented distinctly as an eternal Priest, and Son of the Most High
God, as begotten by the Most High God, and sharing the throne of His Kingdom.
And the Christ foretold by Isaiah has been shewn not to have been begotten by
man but by the Father, and to have been anointed by the Divine Spirit, and to
have been sent to deliver men from captivity. This Being, then, it was that
Moses had seen by the help of the Divine Spirit, when he established figures and
symbols of Him, as suitable for men, anointing and hallowing the priest selected
from among men with prepared unguents as yet, and not with the Holy Spirit, and
calling him Christ and anointed, as a representation of the true. And who could
give better evidence of this than Moses himself? In his own writings he
distinctly says that the God and Lord Who answered him bade him establish a more
material worship on earth according to the spiritual and heavenly vision that
had been shewn him, which should form an image of the spiritual and immaterial
worship. And so he is said to have sketched a kind of copy of the order of the
angels of heaven and the powers divine, since the oracle said to him, "Thou
shalt make all things according to the pattern shewed thee in the Mount." So
then he introduces the High Priest, as he did all the other elements, and
anointed him with earth-born unguents, working out a Christ and a High Priest of
shadow and symbol, a copy of the Heavenly Christ and High Priest.

Thus I think I have clearly proved that the essential Christ was not man, but
Son of God, honoured with a scat on the right hand of His Father's Godhead, far
greater not only than human and mortal nature, but greater also than every
spiritual existence among things begotten. But moreover, according to what was
previously said, the same David in Ps. xliv., using as inscription the words
"Concerning the beloved, and those to be changed," |200 speaks of one and the
same Being as God and King and Christ, writing thus:

" 1. My heart has uttered a good matter: I declare my works to the King: My
tongue is the pen of a ready writer, 2. Thou art more beautiful than the sons of
men."

To which he adds:

" 6. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, a sceptre of righteousness is the
sceptre of thy kingdom: 7. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity,
wherefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above
thy fellows."

Now look a little more carefully, and see how in the inscription of the Psalm he
prefaces that the subject is " concerning the beloved," adding the words "for
instruction" to prepare the hearers for what he is about to say. He shews also
the reason of the Incarnation of the Word, with the words:

" For the end, for the changed, with a view to understanding, for the beloved."

And whom could you better regard as "those to be changed," for whom the Psalm is
spoken, than those who are going to be changed from their former life and
conversation, to be transformed and altered by Him Whom the prophecy concerns?
And this was the beloved of God, on whose behalf the Psalm's preface advises us
to have understanding with regard to the prophecy. And if you were at a loss
about the Person of this Beloved One, with whom the prophecy in the Psalm is
concerned, the word that faces you at the very beginning will inform you, which
says: "My heart hath produced a good word." It may surely be said that by this
is meant the Word that was in the beginning with God, Whom the great Evangelist
John shewed forth as God, saying: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God." And the words, "My heart hath produced a
good word," if it be spoken in the person of the Supreme God and Father, would
suggest the Only-begotten Word of God, as being the Son of the Father, not by
projection, nor by division, or scission, or |201 diminution, or any conceivable
mode of bodily birth; for such ideas are blasphemous, and very remote from the
ineffable generation. And we must understand this according to our previous
interpretation; as when it was said that He was born from the womb of God before
the Morning Star, and we understood it figuratively, so we must understand this
similar statement only in a spiritual sense. For in the words "My heart has
produced a good word," the (180) Holy Spirit inspires this saying also as purely
spiritual. To which it seems right forme to add what I am accustomed to quote in
every question that is debated about His Godhead, that reverent saying: "Who
shall declare his generation?" even if the holy Scriptures are wont in our human
and earthly language to speak of His Birth, and use the word "womb." For such
expressions are connected with mental imagery alone, and are accordingly subject
to the laws of metaphor. And so the words, "My heart hast produced a good word,"
(b) may be explained as referring to the constitution and coming into being of
the primal Word, since it would not be right to suppose any heart, save one that
we can understand to be spiritual, to exist in the case of the Supreme God.

One might also say that the Psalmist referred to "the Word that was in the
beginning with God, "a Word rightly named "good" as being the offspring of a
Father All-Good. And if we read a little further on in the Psalm we shall find
that the subject of the prophecy, this very "beloved of God," is anointed, once
more not as by Moses, nor as by any human being, but by the Most High and
Supreme God and (c) Father Himself. As he says further on, "Wherefore God, even
thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." And by
what name else could one call Him that is here acknowledged to have been
anointed by the Supreme God Himself, but Christ? So we have here in this passage
two names of the subject of the prophecy, Christ and the Beloved, the author of
this (d) anointing being one and the same: and it shews the reason why |202 He
is said to be anointed with the oil of gladness, which will be plain to you,
when we proceed a little further, and still more if you take into account the
whole intention of the passage. For the Psalm addresses the subject of the
prophecy, Christ the Beloved of God, in the words quoted a little before, in
which it was said: "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of
righteousness is the sceptre of thy Kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and
hated injustice: therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of
gladness above thy fellows." See, then, if these words are not addressed
directly to God: He says,

"For thou, ὁ Θεός," instead of ὦ Θεέ. "Thy throne is for ever and ever, and a
sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy Kingdom." And then, "Thou, O God,
hast loved righteousness and hated injustice; therefore God, even Thy God, hath
anointed thee," and established Thee as Christ above all. The Hebrew shews it
even more clearly, which Aquila most accurately translating has rendered thus:
"Thy throne, God, is for ever and still, a sceptre of righteousness is the
sceptre of thy Kingdom. Thou hast loved justice and hated impiety: wherefore
God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness apart from thy
fellows." Instead therefore of "God, thy God" the actual Hebrew is, "O God, thy
God." So that the whole verse runs: "Thou hast, O God, loved justice and hated
impiety: therefore in return, O God, the highest and greater God, Who is also
thy God"—so that the Anointer, being the Supreme God, is far above the Anointed,
He being God in a different sense. And this would be clear to any one who knew
Hebrew. For in the place of the first name, where Aquila has "Thy throne, O
God," clearly replacing ὁ Θεός by Θεέ, the Hebrew has Elohim. And also for
"Therefore, O God, he has anointed thee" the Hebrew has Elohim, which Aquila
shewed by the vocative ὦ Θεέ.

Instead of the nominative case of the noun, which would be "Therefore God, even
thy God, hath anointed thee—" the Hebrew with extreme accuracy has Eloach, which
is the vocative case of Elohim, meaning "O God," whereas the |203 nominative
Elohim means "God." So that the interpretation which says "Therefore, O God, thy
God hath anointed," is accurate. And so the oracle in this passage is clearly
addressing God, and says that He has been anointed with the oil of gladness
beyond any of those who have ever borne the same name as He. Therefore in these
words you have it clearly stated that God was anointed and became the Christ,
not with prepared unguent nor at the hands of man, but in a way different from
other men. And this is He Who was the Beloved of the Father, and His Offspring,
and the eternal Priest, and the Being called the Sharer of the Father's Throne.
And Who else could He be but the Firstborn Word of God, He that in the beginning
was God with God, (182) reckoned as God through all the inspired Scriptures, as
my argument as it proceeds further will abundantly prove?

Now after this preliminary study of the coming into being and the appellation of
the Christ, it remains for us to take up our previous subject, and consider in
what a number of prophetic predictions the Christ was foretold by name.

CHAPTER 16 From Psalm ii.

In which Scriptures the Christ is foretold by Name as plotted against by Kings
and Rulers, Nations and Peoples, being begotten of God Himself, and called the
Son of Man, receiving the Inheritance of the Nations and of the Ends of the
Earth from His Father.

[Passages quoted, Ps. ii. 1, 2, 7, 8 ]

IN these words the Holy Spirit very clearly addresses (d) Christ, and calls Him
the Son of God, as has been said before, and at the same time indicates that
there will be a plot against Him, and foretells the calling of the Gentiles as
brought about through Him. And all this the course of events has shewn to be
exactly fulfilled by the actual |204 facts in our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
For even now nations, rulers, peoples and kings have not yet ceased their
combined attack on Him and His teaching. And if the Jews prefer to refer these
predictions to some time yet to come, they ought to agree that their expected
Christ will again be plotted against, according to the present (183) oracle:
"The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against
the Lord and against his Christ." Which they would never grant, inasmuch as they
expect the coming Christ to be a great Ruler, and an eternal King, and their
Ransomer. But supposing their Christ should indeed come and suffer the same as
He Who has already come, why ought we to believe or disbelieve in theirs rather
than ours? And if they cannot give an answer to this, but proceed (b) to refer
the oracle to David or some one of the Jewish kings of his stock, even then we
can shew, that neither David nor any other celebrated Hebrew is recorded to have
been proclaimed as Son of God by the oracle, nor as begotten of God, as was the
subject of the prophecy in the Psalm, nor to have ruled over nations, kings,
rulers and people while involved in plots. Wherefore if none of them (c) is
found so to have done, whereas all this agrees in actual fact in His case, both
in His patience long ago, and in the attack made on Him to-day as the Christ of
God by kings and rulers, nations and peoples, what hinders Him from being the
subject of the prophecy in the words which said, "The kings of the earth stood
up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his
Christ"? And what follows in the Psalm would agree with Him alone, where it
says: "The Lord said to me, Thou art my Son. To-day have I begotten thee. Desire
of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and (d) the
utmost parts of the earth for thy possession." For surely only in Him has this
part of the prophecy received an indubitable fulfilment, since the voice of His
disciples has gone forth into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the
world. And the passage distinctly names Christ, saying as in His own person,
that He is the Son of God, when it says: "The Lord said unto me, Thou art my
Son. To-day I have begotten thee." With which you may |205 compare the words in
the Proverbs, also spoken in His own Person: "Before the mountains were
established, before all the hills he brings me forth." And also the address by
the Father to Him in Psalm cix.: "I begat thee from my womb before the Morning
Star." Understand then how the holy Scriptures prophesy that one and the same
Being, Christ by name, Who is also Son of God, is to be plotted against by men,
to receive the nations for His inheritance, and to rule over the ends of the
earth, shewing His dispensation among men by two proofs: the one being the
attacks upon Him, and the other the subjection of the nations to Him.

Psalm xix.

Christ named, receiving all His Requests from His Father.

"5. The Lord fulfil all thy requests. | 6. Now I know (b) that the Lord has
saved His Christ, | and will hear him from his holy heaven. | "

Since it is now my object to shew in how many places the Christ is mentioned by
name in the prophecies, I naturally set before you those which plainly foretell
the Christ. And all this Psalm voices a prayer as spoken by holy men to the
Person of Christ. For since for our sakes (c) and on our behalf He received
insult when He had become man, we are taught to join our prayers with His as He
prays and supplicates the Father on our behalf, as one who repels attacks
against us both visible and invisible. And so we speak to Him as such in the
Psalm.

"1. The Lord hear thee in the day of affliction |, the name of the God of Jacob
shield thee. 2. May he send thee help from his holy (place) |, and strengthen
thee from Zion. |"

And then, since it is fitting for Him, as being our great High Priest, to offer
the spiritual sacrifices of praise and (d) words to God on our behalf, and since
as a priest He offered both Himself, and the Humanity which He assumed on earth
as a whole burnt-offering for us, to God and the Father, we therefore say to
Him:

" 4. May he remember all thy sacrifice, | and fatten thy burnt sacrifice. | "
|206

And since all that He plans is saving and useful to the world, we rightly call
on Him:

"5. The Lord give thee thy heart's desire,"

saying:

"And fulfil all thy mind."

And afterwards remembering His Resurrection from the dead, we say:

(185) "6. We will exult in thy salvation."

For what else could the salvation of Christ be, but His Resurrection from the
dead, by which also He raises all the fallen? Next we say:

"8b. And we will triumph in the name of our God: and the Lord fulfil all thy
requests."

And to crown all we are taught to say:

"7. Now I know that the Lord has saved his Christ."

As if we had not known it before, we understand His Salvation in perceiving the
power of His Resurrection.

Psalm xxvii.

Christ named as having the Father as His Lord and Shield.

(b) "8. The Lord is the strength of his people, | and is the shield of salvation
of his Christ."

The Psalm we are considering also is referred to Christ, including the prayer of
Christ which He prayed at the time of His Passion, and therefore in the opening
of the Psalm He says:

"1. To thee, O Lord, have I cried: My God, | be not silent before me, | Lest I
be like unto them that go down into the pit. |"

(c) And at the end He prophesies His Resurrection, saying:

"6. Blessed be the Lord, for He hath hearkened to the voice of my prayer. | 7.
The Lord is my helper and my defender; | my heart hoped in him, and I was
helped: | and my flesh has revived, | and I will gladly give him praise: |"

To which the divine and prophetic Spirit adds:

" 8. The Lord is the strength of his people, and the shield | of his Christ."

Teaching us that all the wonders of Christ written in the |207 holy Scriptures,
done for man's salvation, whether teachings (d) or writings, or the mysteries of
His Resurrection now referred to, were all done by the will and power of the
Father defending His own Christ as with a shield in all His marvellous and
saving words and works.

Psalm lxxxiv.

Christ described by Name as God the Overseer, and the One Day of His
Resurrection, and the One House of God, His Church.

"9. Behold, O God, our defender, | and look upon (186) the face of thy Christ. |
10. For one day in thy courts is better than a thousand. | I have chosen to
abase myself in the house of rny God, rather than to dwell in the tabernacles of
sinners | ."

They who know the Christ of God to be the Word, the Wisdom, the True Light and
the Life, and then realize that He became man, are struck by the miracle of His
Will, so that they exclaim:

"And we saw him, | and he had no form nor beauty. [Isa. liii. 2.] 3. But his
form was ignoble, and inferior to that of the sons of men. He was a man in
suffering, and (b) knowing the bearing of affliction, because he turned away his
face, he was dishonoured."

They rightly call on God to look upon the Face of the Christ, dishonoured and
insulted for our sake, and to be merciful to us for His sake. "For He bore our
sins, and on our behalf is pained." Thus they beseech, altogether desiring and
expressing in their prayer the desire to see the face of the glory of Christ,
and to behold the day of His light. And this was the day of His Resurrection
from the dead, which they say, as being the one and only truly Holy Day and the
Lord's Day, is better than any number (c) of days as we ordinarily understand
them, and better than the days set apart by the Mosaic Law for Feasts, New Moons
and Sabbaths, which the Apostle teaches are the shadow of days and not days in
reality. And this Lord's Day of our Saviour is alone said to shew its light not
in |208 every place but only in the courts of the Lord. And these must mean the
Churches of Christ throughout the world, which are courts of the one House of
God, in which he (d) who knows these things loves and chooses to be abased,
prizing far more the time spent in them than that spent in the tabernacles of
sinners. Unless we are to understand that everyone who chooses the synagogues of
the Jews, which deny the Christ of God, or those of godless sectaries and other
unbelieving heathen, professes them to be better than the Churches of Christ.

Psalm lxxxviii.

Christ named as made of None Account, and suffering shamefully, and His People
reviled by the Enemy in Exchange for Him.

(187) "39. But thou hast cast off and made of no account, | thou hast rejected
thy Christ, | 40. and overthrown the covenant of thy servant, | Thou hast
desecrated his sanctuary even to the ground. | "

And the context. To which he adds:

"51. Remember, Lord, the reproach of thy servants, | which I have borne in my
bosom, even (the reproach) of many nations, | 52. wherewith thine enemies, O
Lord, have reviled, | wherewith they have reviled those who suffer in exchange
for thy Christ."

Christ is here clearly mentioned by name, and the circumstances attending His
Passion predicted. If I had time (b) I could shew by examining the whole Psalm
that what is expressed can only apply to our Lord and Saviour, and no one else.
But when Christ is named the second time here it refers to some one else than
Him, in exchange for whom He is the one taken, and the Church is plainly meant,
and indeed those who are called Christ's enemies have reviled it, and even now
revile it. Yea, every one opposed to Christ's teaching is wont to revile us
about the Sufferings of our Saviour, which He underwent for us, and especially
about His Cross and Passion. |209

Psalm cxxxi.

Christ named as rising from the Seed of David, called the (c) Horn of David,
bringing to Shame the Jews His Enemies, restoring the Sanctuary of the Father.

"11. The Lord sware to David the truth, and he will never set him at naught, |
of the fruit of thy body I will set upon thy seat."

And lower down,

"17. There will I lift up the horn of David, | I have prepared a lantern for my
Christ: | 18. As for his enemies I will clothe them with shame, j but upon
himself shall blossom my holiness. | "

Now here the Lord swears about one of the seed of David, (d) Whom He calls His
seed and horn. And again addressing Christ by name, He says that He has prepared
a lantern for Him, which seems to refer to the prophetic word, which shewed the
coming of Christ before, Who alone, like the light of the sun, has now risen on
all men through the whole world. And David Himself was prepared as a lantern for
the Christ, taking the place of a lantern in comparison with the perfect light
of the sun. And then He says: "I will lift up the horn," shewing the place where
He means Christ to be born. For when David is praying that he may behold before
in spirit the place of Christ's birth, and saying: (188)

"3. I will not go into the tabernacle of my house, | I will not climb to the
couch of my bed. | 4. I will not give sleep to my eyes, nor slumber to my
eyelids, | nor rest to my temples, | 5. until I find a place for the Lord, a
tabernacle for the God of Jacob. |"

—the Holy Spirit reveals the place as Bethlehem. Therefore he proceeds:

"6. Behold we heard of it in Ephralha | (that is, Bethlehem), and we found it in
the fields of the wood. | 7. We will go into his tabernacle, we will worship (b)
in the place, where his feet stood. | " |210

And suitably after this revelation He adds:

"There will I lift up the horn of David, I have prepared a lantern for my
Christ."

(c) Maybe also the Body assumed by Christ at Bethlehem may be meant, since the
Divine Power inhabiting it through His body as through an earthen vessel, like a
lamp, shot forth to all men the rays of the Divine Light of the Word. From Amos.

Christ announced by Name by God, and made known to All Men as liberating the
Jewish Race.

[Passage quoted, Amos. iv. 12—v. 2.]

God now proclaiming the Christ by name the seventh time is said to "strengthen
the thunder" and "to create the wind," the proclamation of the Gospel being
called thunder from its being heard by all men, and similarly the spirit that
Christ breathed on His apostles is meant; and also the Saviour's sojourn among
men has clearly fulfilled the prophecy in which God is said to make "morning"
and "mist" together, morning for those that receive salvation, but for the Jews
that disbelieve in Him the contrary. On (189) whom also Scripture foretells an
extreme curse, adding a lamentation for the Jewish race, which actually overtook
them immediately after their impiety against our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
For of a truth from that day to this the House of Israel has fallen, and the
vision once shewn by God and the rejection have been brought to pass, concerning
the falling of their house in Jerusalem, and against their whole state, that it
should not be possible for any one to lift them up, who will never more be
lifted up. (b) "There is," he says, "therefore no one to lift her up." For since
they did not accept the Christ of God when He came, perforce He left them and
turned to all the Gentiles, telling the cause of his turning, when He said with
tears, as if almost apologizing:

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killeth the prophets, and stonest them which are
sent unto her, how often |211 would I have gathered thy children together, even
as a bird gathereth her nestlings under her wings, and ye would not: behold,
your house is left unto you desolate." From Habakkuk.

Christ is named as preserved by His Father and saving His Own Christs.

"Thou wentest forth for the safety of thy people to save thy Christs: Thou hast
brought death on the heads of transgressors."

Aquila: "Thou wentest forth for the safety of thy people, for the safety of thy
people with thy Christ." As Aquila renders by the singular instead of the
plural, saying that the Supreme God has made salvation for the people "with
Christ," I have rightly set down the passage, which clearly supports my
position. But there would be according to the Septuagint version more persons
who are called Christs from Him and for the sake of Whom it is said: "Touch not
my Christs, and do my prophets no harm," who believed on Him, and were thought
worthy of the holy anointing of regeneration in Christ, and who were able to pay
with the holy apostle: "We are become partakers of Christ." From the
Lamentations of Jeremiah.

Christ is named as plotted against by the Jews, and made known to the Gentiles.

"20. The breath of our countenance, the Lord Christ was taken in their
destructions, of whom we said, In his shadow we shall live among the Gentiles."

The inspired prophets of God, knowing the future by the Holy Spirit, foretold
that they themselves would live, and that their words would work among the
Gentiles as the words of living men, but not in Israel. They said again that the
Christ (Whom they named) as being He from Whom the prophetic spirit was supplied
to them, would be taken in their snares. The snares of whom? Plainly of the Jews
who plotted against Him. And notice here that the prophecy says that the Christ
will be taken, |212 which would not correspond with the second Coming of Christ,
which the prophecies predict will be glorious and bring in the Divine Kingdom.
Wherefore it seems that (c) the Jews are wrong in taking the sayings about His
second Appearance, as if they were about His first Coming, which the sense will
in no way allow. Since it is impossible to regard Him as at one and the same
time glorious and without glory, honoured and kingly, and then without form or
beauty, but dishonoured more than the sons of men; and again, as the Saviour and
Redeemer of Israel, while plotted against by them, and led as a sheep to the (d)
slaughter, delivered to death by their sins. The prophecies about the Christ
should be divided, as our investigation of the facts shews, into two classes:
the first which are the more human and gloomy will be agreed to have been
fulfilled at His first Coming, the second the more glorious and divine even now
await His second Coming for their fulfilment. And a clear proof of the former is
the actual progress of the knowledge of God through Him in all nations, which
many prophetic voices foretell in various strains, like the one before us, in
which it is said: "Of whom we said, In his shadow we will live among the
Gentiles." From the 1st Book of Kings [ 1 Samuel].

Christ is named as exalted by the Lord and Father.

"The Lord has ascended to the heavens and has thundered: he will judge the
extremities of the earth, and he gives strength to our kings, and will exalt the
horn of his Christ."

The words mean the return of Christ (Who is named) or of God to heaven, and His
Teaching heard like thunder by all, and Holy Scripture foretells His future
Judgment of all afterwards. And after this it is said that the Lord will give
strength to our kings. And these would be the apostles of Christ, of Whom it is
written in Ps. lxvii.: "The Lord will give a word to the preachers of the Gospel
with much power." Here, also, he mentions Christ by name, humanly known as our
Saviour, Whose horn he says shall be exalted, meaning His invisible Power and
Kingdom. For it is usual for Scripture to call a kingdom a "horn," |213 It is
found also in Ps. lxxxviii.: "And in my Name shall his horn be exalted." From
the 1st Book of Kings [1 Samuel].

Christ is named as receiving a faithful House from His Father, that is the
Church, and as a Faithful High Priest for All Time leading His Church.

"Behold, the days come when I will destroy thy seed, and the seed of thy
father's house. And thou shalt not have an old man in thy house for ever."

The oracle speaks these words to Eli, but adds these others:

"And I will raise up to myself a faithful priest, who shall do all that is in my
heart and in my soul; and I will build him a sure house, and he shall dwell
before my Christ for ever" (v. 35).

The divine Word after threatening doom and rejection on those who do not worship
in the right way, promises that He will raise up another priest of another
tribe, who He also says will come before His Christ, or "will walk in the person
of my anointed," as Aquila has translated it, or as Symmachus, "will continue
before his Christ." And who could this be? Surely every one who is enrolled in
holiness in the priesthood of the Christ of God, to Whom the Supreme God
promises that He will build the House of His Church, as a wise Architect and
Builder, not meaning any house but the Church established in Christ's Name
throughout the whole world, wherein every one who is consecrated priest of the
Christ of God is said in the spiritual worship to offer things acceptable and
well-pleasing to God: the sacrifices of the blood of bulls and goats offered in
the old religion of types, being admitted by the prophecy of Isaiah to be
hateful to God.

Such are the many instances of the prediction of the Christ by name; but, as in
most cases, the Sufferings of Christ are conjoined to His Name, we must return
to what was said before about His Divinity, which I have showed previously to be
touched on in the 45th Psalm, entitled FOR THE BELOVED, where Scripture, after
first describing Him as King, proceeds to say other things about the Divinity of
Christ: |214

"Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the
sceptre of thy kingdom: Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated injustice:
therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above
thy fellows."

For, as I have already shewn, these words clearly imply that the God referred to
is one and the same Being, Who loved righteousness and hated iniquity; and that
because of this He was anointed by another greater God, His Father, with a
better and more excellent unction than that foreshadowed by the types, which is
called "the oil of gladness." And what else could He be properly named but
Christ, Who is anointed with this oil, not by man but by God Most High? The same
Person, therefore, is shewn to be called God, as indeed I have already shewn in
the proper places. And we should here again remember Isaiah, who said:

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for whose sake he hath anointed me. He has
sent me to preach the gospel to the poor, to heal the broken-hearted, to
proclaim liberty to the captives, and sight to the blind."

And we have already shewn that the priests from among men, who in long distant
times were consecrated to the service of God, were anointed with a prepared
unguent. But he that is spoken of in the prophecy is said to have been anointed
with the Divine Spirit. And this passage in its entirety was referred to Jesus
the only true Christ of God, Who one day took the prophecy in the Jewish
synagogue, and after reading the selected portion, said that what He had read
was fulfilled in Himself. For it is written, that having read it:

"And closing the book, and giving it to the minister, he sat down. And the eyes
of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened upon him, 21. And he began
to say unto them, This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."

With all this we should again compare the records of Moses, who when he
established his own brother as High Priest, according to the pattern that had
been shewn to him, agreeably to the oracle which said to him: "Thou |215 shalt
make all things according to the pattern shewn to thee in the Mount," plainly
shews that he had perceived with the eyes of the mind and by the Divine Spirit
the great High Priest of the Universe, the true Christ of God, Whose image he
represented together with the rest of the material and figurative worship, and
honoured the person named with the name of the real Christ. And this has the
support of the inspired apostle, who says when treating of the law of Moses:
"Who serve under the example and shadow of heavenly things." And again: "For the
law having a shadow of good things to come." And again: "16. Let no man,
therefore, judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the
new moon, or of the Sabbath days, 17. which are a shadow of things to come." For
if the enactments relating to the difference of foods, and the holy days and the
Sabbath, like shadowy things, preserved a copy of other things, that were
mystically true, you will say not without reason that the High Priest also
represented the symbol of another High Priest, and that he was called Christ, as
the pattern of that other, the only real Christ: and so far was he from being
the real one, that the real Christ hears from the Supreme God: "Sit thou on my
right hand, until I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet." And: "Be thou
ruler in the midst of thine enemies." And: "The Lord sware, and will not repent.
Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." By which He was
revealed clearly as eternal Priest, existing as Offspring and Son of God before
the Morning Star and before the whole creation. And the Christ of Moses, like
one who has acted the character in a drama for a short time, retires as one
reckoned among mortals, and hands on the reality to the only true and real.
While the real Christ needing not the Mosaic unction, nor prepared oil, nor
earthly material, yet has filled the world with His goodness and His name,
establishing the race of Christians, named after Him, among all nations. But
Moses' Christ, not that he was ever plainly so called among men, except through
the writings of Moses—he, I say, some time long |216 after the Exodus from Egypt
purified with certain lustrations and sacrifices of blood was anointed with
prepared oil, Moses anointing him. But the Christ, archetypal, and real from the
beginning, and for infinite ages whole through the whole, and Himself ever like
Himself in all ways, and changing not at all, was ever anointed by the Supreme
God, with His unbegotten Divinity, both before His sojourn among men, and after
it likewise, not by man or by any material substance existing among men. And as
we are examining His Name, the seal of all we have said may be found in the
oracle of Solomon the wisest of the wise, where he says in the Song of Songs:
"Thy name is as ointment poured forth." Yea, he being supplied with divine
wisdom, and thought worthy of more mystic revelations about Christ and His
Church, and speaking of Him as Heavenly Bridegroom, and her as Bride, speaks as
if to Him, and says, "Thy name, O Bridegroom, is ointment," and not simply
ointment, but "ointment poured forth.'' And what name could be more suggestive
of. ointment poured forth than the Name of Christ? For there could be no Christ,
and no Name of Christ, unless ointment had been poured forth. And in what has
gone before I have shewn of what nature the ointment was with which Christ was
anointed. So now that we have completed our examination of the Name Christ, let
us proceed to consider the Name of Jesus.

CHAPTER 17 That the Name of Jesus was also honoured among the Ancient Friends of
God.

MOSES was also the first to use the Name Jesus, when he changed the name of his
successor and altered it to Jesus. For it is written: "These are the names of
the men whom Moses sent to spy out the land, and Moses called Nauses, the son of
Nave, Jesus, and sent them." And notice how the prophet, who was deeply versed
in the significance of |217 names, and had gone to the roots of the philosophy
of the changed names of the inspired men in his record, and the reasons why
their names were changed, introduces Abraham as receiving as a reward of virtue
from God a complete change of name from that of his father, the meaning of which
it is now the time to explain at length. And so, also, in naming Sara Sarra, and
Isaac called before his birth "the laugh," and Jacob given as a reward of his
struggle the name of Israel, and in exhibiting in many other cases connected
with the power and significance of names superhuman insight in his inspired
wisdom and knowledge, when no one of those before him had ever used the name
Jesus, he first of all, impelled by the Holy Spirit, gives the name of Jesus to
him whom he is about to constitute the successor of his rule over the people,
changing the other name he had used before. He did not consider the name of his
forefather given him when he was born sufficient (for his parents called him
Nauses). But being the prophet of God he changed the name received by birth, and
called the man Jesus at the bidding of the Holy Spirit; that he might lead the
whole people after his own death, (with the knowledge that) when the law laid
down by Moses some day should be changed and have an end, and should pass away
like Moses himself, that no one else but Jesus the Christ of God would lead that
other polity, which would be better than the former. And so Moses, the most
wonderful of all the prophets, understanding by the Holy Spirit both the names
of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, honoured the choicest of all his rulers by
bestowing them as kingly crowns, naming worthily the two leaders and rulers of
the people the high priest and his own successor, Christ and Jesus, calling
Aaron Christ, and Nauses Jesus, as his successor after his death. In this
manner, then, the writings of Moses himself are adorned with the names of our
Saviour Jesus Christ. |218 From Exodus.

How Jesus, the Successor of Moses, called the Angel, and about to be the Leader
of the People, is said to bear the Name of Christ.

"20. And behold, I send my angel before thy face, that he may keep thee in the
way, that he may bring thee into the land which I have prepared for thee. Take
heed to thyself and hearken unto him and disobey him not; for he will not give
way to thee, for my name is upon him."

"With my Name, who teach you these things," says the Lord Himself, is he
inscribed, who is to lead the people into the land of promise. And if He was
Jesus and none other, it is plain how He says that His name is set on Him. Nor
is it strange that he calls him Angel, since it is said of John also, who was
but a man: "Behold, I send my angel before thy face, who shall prepare thy way
before thee." From Zechariah. That Jesus, the Son of Josedek the High Priest,
was a Figure and Type of Our Saviour. Who turned to God the Slavery that of Old
ruled the Souls of Men

[Passages quoted, Zech. iii. i—6, 9; vi. 9-13.]

In this passage too the prophet-high-priest called Jesus presents, I think, a
very clear picture and plain symbol of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, being
honoured by bearing His Name, and made the leader of the return of the people
from the Babylonian captivity. Since, also, our Saviour Jesus Christ is said by
the Prophet Isaiah to have been sent to preach liberty to the captives and
recovery of sight to the blind, to comfort all that mourn, and to give to all
that mourn in Zion glory for dust, the ointment of gladness. You have,
therefore, her two great High Priests, first the Christ in Moses, and second the
Jesus of whom I am speaking, both bearing in themselves the signs of the truth
concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. But Aaron, the "Christ" in Moses'
writings, having freed the people from slavery in Egypt, and led them in |219
freedom and with all carefulness in their journey from Egypt, seems to present a
picture of the real Lord, Who has redeemed us, who are of all nations, from
Egyptian idolatry; while the Jesus in the prophet, the High Priest who was at
the head of the return from Babylon to Jerusalem, also presents a figure of
Jesus our Saviour, Whom we have as a great High Priest, that has passed through
the heavens, through Whom also we ourselves, redeemed as it were in this present
life from Babylon, that is from confusion and slavery, are taught to hasten to
the heavenly city, the true Jerusalem.

Jesus too, since he bore in himself the image of the true, was naturally clad in
filthy garments, and the devil is said to stand at his right hand and to oppose
him, since also Jesus, truly our Saviour and Lord, descending into our state of
slavery took away our sins, and washed away the stains of humanity, and
underwent the shame of the Passion, through His love for us. Wherefore, Isaiah
says:

"He bears our sins, and is pained for us, and we thought him to be in labour,
and smitten, and afflicted: He was wounded for our sins, and weakened for our
iniquities."

And John the Baptist also, seeing the Lord, said: "Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sins, of the world." Paul also, writing in the same way about
Him, says: "Him that knew no sin made sin for us, that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him," and "Christ has ransomed us from the curse of the
law, being made a curse for us." All these things the inspired prophet referred
to when he said, "And Jesus was clad in filthy garments." But He put them from
Him by His Ascension into the heavens, and the return from our condition of
slavery to His own glory, and He is crowned with the diadem of His Father's
Divinity, and is girt with the bright robe of His Father's light, and is
glorified with the divine Mitre, and the other high priestly adornments. Nor is
it difficult to explain the part about the devil, who even now is opposed to the
teaching of Christ, and to His Church established throughout the whole world,
and has ever been opposed to our Saviour, and marched |220 against Him before,
when He came to save us from our slavery to himself. He tempted Him also the
first time, and the second time again, when by the Passion he arranged a plot
against Him. But in all battles He triumphed over the devil, and all the unseen
enemies and foes led by him, and made us who were slaves His own people, and
built of us, as of living stones, the house of God, and the state of holiness,
so that He exactly agrees with the oracle, which says:

"Behold a man, whose name is the Branch. And he shall spring up from below, and
shall build the house of the Lord. And he shall receive virtue, and shall sit
and rule upon his throne."

Note, therefore, with care, in what manner in speaking mystically of the Jesus
of days of old, who bears the image of the true, he says: "Behold a man, whose
name is the Branch." And a little later, it is said to Jesus himself then
present, as if concerning some one else who was the Branch: "Hear, Jesus, the
High Priest, thou and thy neighbour, for the men are diviners. Behold, I bring
my servant the Branch."

If, then, the speech related to some one yet to come, who was more truly called
the Branch than he that bore the name then, he must have been only an image of
him that was yet to come, as he is not only called Jesus in figure, but the
Branch as well, if this was said to him when present: "Behold a man, whose name
is the Branch." He was, therefore, naturally because he was the image thought
worthy of the name of the Saviour, as well as of the Branch: for the name of
Jesus translated into Creek means "Salvation of God." For in Hebrew "Isoua" is
"salvation," and the son of Nave is called by the Hebrews Joshua, Joshua being
"Salvation of Jab," that is, Salvation of God. It follows that wherever the
Salvation of God is named in the Greek versions, you are to understand that
nothing but Jesus is meant. Having now brought to this point what I had to say
concerning the Name of our Saviour, I will take up the argument from another
starting-point, and pass on to the more important prophetic proofs about Him.
This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in
the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 47: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 5
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 5

BOOK V

INTRODUCTION

Two ways of considering our Saviour Jesus Christ have (202) been illustrated in
the previous book of the Proof of the Gospel: the first takes us above nature
and beyond it: on its road we defined Him to be the Only-begotten Son of (b)
God, or the Word Who is of the essence of God, the secondary cause of the
Universe, or a spiritual substance, and the firstborn nature of God all-perfect,
His holy and perfect Power before things created, or the spiritual image of the
Unbegotten nature. The second was akin and more familiar to ourselves; on its
road we defined Christ as the Word of God, proclaiming in human nature the
holiness of the Father, according as He appeared in human form long before to
those with Abraham, that famous ruler of the men of God, and was predicted to
(c) appear again among men by human birth, and with flesh like ours, and to
suffer the extremest shame. This being so, the argument will proceed in its
natural order, if I proceed to display the prophetic evidence about Him, if,
that is to say, we make our chief aim to discover what was essential in the
promises made, and justify the Divinity ascribed to Him in the Gospels from the
ancient prophetic evidence. And it will be necessary (d) first to discuss the
nature of prophetic inspiration among the Hebrews, from whom we learned
beforehand what they proclaimed.

Greeks and Barbarians alike testify to the existence of oracles and oracular
responses in all parts of the earth, and they say that they were revealed by the
foresight of the Creator for the use and profit of men, so that there need be no
essential difference between Hebrew prophecy (203) |222 and the oracles of the
other nations. For as the Supreme God gave oracles to the Hebrews through their
prophets, and suggested what was to their advantage, so also He gave them to the
other nations through their local oracles. For He was not only the God of the
Jews, but of the rest of mankind as well; and He cared not more for these than
those, but His Providence was over all alike, just as He has given the sun
ungrudgingly for all, and not for the Hebrews only, and the supply of needs
according to the seasons, and a like bodily constitution for all, and one (b)
mode of birth, and one kind of rational soul. And, thus, they say he provided
ungrudgingly for all men the science of foretelling the future, to some by
prophets, to some by oracles, to some by the flight of birds, or by inspecting
entrails, or by dreams, or omens contained in word or sound, or by some other
sign. For these they say were bestowed on all men by the Providence of God, so
that the prophets of the Hebrews should not seem to have an advantage over the
rest of the world.

(c) This, then, is their contention. Mine will meet it in this manner. If any
argument could prove that the gods, or divine powers, or good daemons really
presided over the oracles named, or over the omens from birds, or any of those
referred to, I should have to yield to what was stated, that the Supreme God had
given these things as well as the Hebrew prophecy to those who used them, for
their good. But if by complete demonstration, and by the |223 confessions of the
Greeks themselves already given, that (d) they were daemons, and not good ones
but the source of all harm and vice, how can they be the prophets of God? And my
argument in The Preparation for the Gospel has convicted them of worthlessness,
from the human sacrifices connected with their rites from ancient days in every
place and city and country, from their deceiving their questioners through
ignorance of the future, through the many falsehoods in which they have been
convicted, sometimes directly, sometimes through the ambiguity of the oracles
given, by which they have been proved over and over again to have involved their
suppliants in a host of evils. And they have been before shewn to be a vile and
unclean crowd from their delight in the low and lustful odes sung about them,
the hymns, and recitals of myths, the improper (204 ) and harmful stories, which
they were convicted of having stamped as the truth, though they knew that they
told against them. And the final proof of their weak nature is shewn by their
extinction and ceasing to give responses as of old: an extinction which can only
be dated from the appearance of our Saviour Jesus Christ. For from the time when
the word of Gospel teaching began to pervade all nations, from (b) that time the
oracles began to fail, and the deaths of daemons are recorded. All these reasons
and many others like them were used then in that part of The Preparation of the
Gospel, which is concerned in proving the wickedness of the daemons. And if they
are so wicked, what possible ground can there be for thinking that the oracles
of the daemons are prophecies of the Supreme God, or for comparing their
position with that of God's prophets; of what sort (c) were the predictions they
gave to their questioners, those even which seemed to have some foundation? Were
they not about low and common men, boxers for instance, and such people, whom
they ordered to be honoured with sacrifices? What was their position about human
sacrifice? For this question is the touchstone of the whole matter. What evil
thing could surpass in absurdity the idea that the Gods, the very Saviours of
men, and the good daemons, could command their suppliants and holy inquirers to
slaughter their dearest, as if they were mere animals, actually (d) thirsting
for human blood more than any wild beasts, and, |224 could be convicted of being
neither more nor less than drinkers of blood, cannibals, and friends of
destruction. Or let him speak who will, if he has anything holy or worthy of the
name of virtue to tell about them, any prophecies or predictions affecting
mankind as a whole, any laws or enactments for the State, laying down general
rules for human life, any philosophical doctrines and instruction provided by
the gods for the lovers of philosophy. But it would be impossible to say that
any such advantage ever accrued to human life from the famous oracles. (205) For
if this had been the case, men having their laws laid down for them by the gods
would not have used different and irreconcileable systems of law. For if the
gods existed and were good they must surely have inspired the same enactments:
they must have inspired pure and most just legal systems: and where would have
been the need of Solon or Draco or any of the other Greek or barbarian
legislators, if the gods were present and gave all necessary commands through
the oracles? And if it should be said (b) that they alone are meant, who
established laws for each separate race of men, I should ask who that god was,
and what was his character, who, for instance, ordered the Scythians to devour
human beings, or laid down laws to others that they should lie with their
mothers and daughters, or enacted as, a good thing that they should throw their
aged people to the dogs, or allowed men to marry their sisters and to defile one
another. But why should I enumerate the lawless stones of Greeks and Barbarians,
in order to prove that they were not gods, but (c) vicious and evil daemons,
these famous oracle-mongers of theirs, driving the thrice-wretched race of men
to incredible depths of unnatural crime, whereas the famous Greek gods and
oracles are not proved to have brought any advantage or profit whatever for
their souls' health to those who sought their aid? And if it was open to them to
use their own gods for teachers, why did the Greeks ever leave what did them
good at home and make for foreign lands, as if they wanted to enjoy the
merchandise of learning from (d) somewhere else? |225 And if it had been the
gods or the good daemons, who gave the answers, sometimes shewing their own
power by foreknowledge or in some other unexpected way, sometimes teaching true
wisdom by the infallible truth of their instruction, what could have prevented
the sons of the philosophers being instructed by them, and why did various
schools of philosophy arise from the deep oppositions of those who procured
conceptions of teaching, one from one source, one from another? And even if the
multitude had given them no heed, yet surely religious and godly men would have
procured infallible truth from the gift of the gods. Who, then, were they?
Whoever (206) you say they were, those who take the other view will expose them
as deceivers. But it seems probable that the oracles were given by daemons, and
were genuine up to the point of discovering a thief, or the loss of property,
and things of that kind, which it was not unlikely that beings who passed their
time in the air should have knowledge of: but they were never responsible for a
good and wise philosophic saying, or for a state, or for a law laid down by
right reason; nay, more, (b) if I may speak quite frankly, one ought to consider
them all instigators of evil; for when they listened either to the odes and
hymns and recitals of men, or to the secret rites of the mysteries, retailing
their own Adulteries and unnatural crimes, their marriage of mothers and lawless
union with sisters, and the many contests of the gods, enmities and wars of gods
against gods, not one of them has ever, so far (c) as I know, been angry at what
was said, as if it were only suitable for lustful, and not for pure, minds to
think and say such things. And why need I enlarge, when from one most
significant example I can crowd into one view their cruelty, inhumanity and real
viciousness? I refer to the human sacrifices. Surely to delight not only in the
slaughter of irrational beasts, but also in the destruction of men, overshot the
highest limit of cruelty. |226

For, as I said in the Preparation, my evidence is drawn (d) from the Greek
philosophers and writers themselves, who conclusively prove that the evil
daemons perverted the human race by their involved intrigues, now by oracles,
now by omens from birds, or signs or sacrifices or things of the kind. Wherefore
it is altogether to be denied that the oracles came from the Supreme God. And so
it is not allowable to class them with the Hebrew Prophets, whose first
Hierophant and divine teacher was Moses. See, what (207) a wealth of good he
brought to human life. First he produced a sacred writing of evangelical and
true doctrines about God the Maker and Creator of all things, and about the
secondary Cause of the rational and spiritual essences after Him, and about the
creation of the world and of man; and then he moved the obedient spirits of good
men to ambition, by outlining like figures of virtue the stories of (b) the holy
and godly Hebrews of long ago; he began the teaching of a legislation divine and
suitable to the light they then had, and introduced a godly worship, and
revealed predictions of all that was to take place in after years, as I hope
presently to shew. Such was Moses. And following his steps the prophets who
succeeded him foretold some things incidentally to inquirers if anything was
asked relating to their daily life; but their prophecy in its main purpose (c)
was concerned with great issues. For they did not reckon it worthy of their
divine duty to deal with those who sought oracles about daily matters or that
actual time, or about slight and trivial things, but the illumination of the
Holy Spirit in them including in its vast scope the whole race of mankind,
promised no prediction about any particular man who was sick, nor about this
present life so open to accidents and sufferings, nor about any one dead, nor,
in a word, about ordinary and common (d) things, which when present make the
soul no better, and when absent cause it no harm or loss. And, as I said, when
their predictions referred to such things, it was not in the line of their main
meaning, but as accompanying a greater conception. And the causes which were at
the root of their prophetic inspiration involved a greater scheme than the
things instanced. |227

If, then, one were to explore carefully the whole circuit of the writings of
Moses and his successors, one would find it included exhortation and teaching of
duty to the God of the Universe, Who is the Creator of all things, and the
knowledge and divine teaching relating to the highest secondary Cause, and
prohibition of all polytheistic error, (208) and then the memorial of the godly
men of old days who began the said religion, and predictions and proclamations
of those who would live in after days, as they themselves had lived, through the
appearance and presence of God among men, I mean of the secondary Lord and God
after the Supreme Father, Who Himself would become the Teacher of the same
religion, and be revealed as Saviour (b) of the life of men, through Whom they
foretold that the ideals of the ancient godly Hebrews would be handed on to all
nations. This was the Gospel that Moses foretold, as well as the sons of the
other prophets, who all spake as with one mouth. And this was the reason of the
descent of the Holy Spirit to men, to teach men the knowledge of God, and the
loftiest theology of the Father and the Son, to train them in every form of true
religion, to give a record of those who lived well long ago, and those who
afterwards fell away from the religion of their forefathers, and to exhibit the
case against them at great length: and then (c) to prophesy the coming of the
Saviour and Teacher of the whole race of mankind, and to herald the sharing of
the religion of the ancient Hebrews by all nations.

These were the unanimous proclamations of the prophets of old clays inscribed on
table's and in sacred books: yea, these very things, which we see even now after
long ages in process of fulfilment; they all in the power of the Holy (d) Spirit
with one voice foretold would come to all men a light of true religion, purity
of mind and body, a complete purging of the heart, which having first gained
themselves by discipline, they urged upon the obedient, prohibiting their
converts from every lustful action, and teaching them not to imitate the lawless
ways of polytheistic error, and to avoid with one consent all intercourse with
daemons, the popular human sacrifices of days gone by, and the base and secret
tales about the gods. Against these they warned |228 them and counselled them to
set their hearts only on God (209) the Creator of all things, Who is as it were
the Overseer and Judge of all human doings, and to remember the future Coming
among men of the Christ of God, the Saviour of the whole human race, established
to be the Teacher of the true religion to Greeks and Barbarians alike. This was
the vast difference between those who were possessed by the Holy Spirit and
those who pretended to prophesy under the influence of daemons.

Then, too, the evil daemon, being akin to darkness, (b) involved the soul in
darkness and mist by its visitation, and stretched out him who was under its
power like a corpse, divorced from his natural faculties of reason, not
following his own words or actions, completely insensible and demented, in
accordance with which perhaps they, may have called such a condition "Manteia,"
as being a form of "Mania," whereas the truly divine Spirit, Which is of the
nature of light, or rather light itself, brings at once a new and bright
daylight to every soul on whom It comes, (c) revealing it as far more clear and
thoughtful than ever it was before, so that it is sober and wide awake, and
above all can understand and interpret prophecies. Wherefore we seem rightly and
truly to call such men prophets, because the Holy Spirit gives them a sure
knowledge and light on the present, as well as a true and accurate knowledge of
the future. See, then, if it is not a far better and truer argument, which says
that the Holy Spirit visits souls purified and prepared with rational and clear
minds to (d) receive the divine, than that of those who shut up the |229 divine
in lifeless matter and dusky caves, and in the impure souls of men and women;
yea, and rest it on crows and hawks and other birds, on goats and other beasts,
ay, even on the movements of water, the inspection of entrails, the blood of
hateful and ugly monsters, and in the bodies of poisonous creeping things, like
snakes and weasels, and such things, by the help of which these strange people
understood that the Supreme God revealed a knowledge of (210) future events. But
this was the way of men who had no conception of the nature of God, and no idea
of the power of the Holy Spirit, Who does not delight in lurking in lifeless
things, or irrational beasts, nor even in rational beings, except ... in such
virtuous souls, as my argument just now described the Hebrew prophets as
possessing, whom we reckon worthy of the Holy Spirit, because of their great
contribution to the progress of humanity throughout the world. And if sometimes
the knowledge of contemporaneous (b) events, unimportant and of no moment,
followed them like a shadow, and the foretelling of the unknown opportunely to
inquirers, it was because they were obliged to give such help to their
neighbours of old time, to prevent those who were hungry for predictions having
an excuse for turning to the oracles of foreign races through a lack of prophets
at home. But I will close here my vindication of the divine power of the Hebrew
Prophets. For it is right for us to obey (c) them, if they teach us, as men
inspired and wise, not according to humanity but by the breath of the Holy
Spirit, and to submit to the discipline of their doctrine, and holy and
infallible theology, which no longer involves any suspicion, that they include
any elements alien to virtue and truth.

So, then, it now remains for me to take up the thread of my argument from the
beginning, and rest the theology of our Saviour Jesus Christ on the prophetic
evidence. The Gospel evidence gives this theology of Christ: "In (d) the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All
things were made by him, |230 and without him was not anything made." It calls
Him also "Rational Light," and it calls Him Lord, as if He were also God. And
the prophetic Paul, as a disciple and apostle of Christ, agrees with this
theology when he says this about Him: "Who is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn of every creature, because in him were created all things, things
in heaven and things in earth, whether thrones or dominions, or principalities,
or powers. All things were created by him and for him, and he is before all
things, and by him all things consist."

He is also called "Power of God" and "Wisdom of God." It is our present task,
therefore, to collect these same expressions from the prophetic writings of the
Hebrews, so that by their agreement in each separate part the demonstration of
the truth may be established. And we must recognize that the sacred oracles
include in the Hebrew much that is obscure both in expression and in meaning,
and are capable of various interpretations in Greek because of their difficulty.
The Seventy Hebrews in concert have translated them together, and I shall pay
the greatest attention to them, because it is the custom of the Christian Church
to use their work. But wherever necessary, I shall call in the help of the
editions of the later translators, which the Jews are accustomed to use to-day,
so that my proof may have stronger support from all sources. With this
introduction, it now remains for me to treat of the inspired words. |231

CHAPTER 1 That the Most Wise Solomon in the Proverbs knew of a Firstborn Power
of God, which He calls the Wisdom and Offspring of God: just as we glorify It.

Passage quoted, Prov. viii. 12-31.]

THE divine and perfect essence existing before things begotten, the rational and
Firstborn image of the Unbegotten nature, the true and Only-begotten Son of the
God of the Universe, being One with many names, and One called God by many
titles, is honoured in this passage under the style and name of Wisdom, and we
have learned to call Him Word of God, Light, Life, Truth, and, to crown all,
"Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." Now, therefore, in the passage
before us, He passes through the words of the wise Solomon, speaking of Himself
as the living Wisdom of God and self-existent, saying: "I, Wisdom, have dwelt
with counsel and knowledge, and I have called upon understanding," and that
which follows. He also adds, as who has undertaken the government and providence
of the Universe: "By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. By me princes
become great." Then saying that He will record the things of ages past, He goes
on to say: "The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works, he
established me before time was." By which He teaches both that He Himself is
begotten, and not the same as the Unbegotten, one called into being before all
ages, set forth as a kind of foundation for all begotten things. And it is
probable that the divine apostle started from this when he said of Him: "Who is
the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature, for all things
were created in him, of things in heaven and things in earth." For He is called
"Firstborn of every creature," in accordance with the words: "The Lord created
me as the beginning of his road to his works." And He would naturally be
considered the image of God, as being That which was begotten of the nature of
the Unbegotten. And, therefore, the passage before |232 us agrees, when it says:
"Before the mountains were established, and before all the hills, he begets me."

Hence we call Him Only-begotten Son, and the Firstborn Word of God, Who is the
same as this Wisdom. In what sense we say that He is the Begotten of God would
require a special study, for we do not understand this unspeakable generation of
His as involving a projection, a separation, a division, a diminution, a
scission, or anything (c) at all which is involved in human generation. For it
is not lawful to compare His unspeakable and unnameable generation and coming
into being with these things in the world of begotten things, nor to liken Him
to anything transitory and mortal, since it is impious to say that in the way in
which animals are produced on earth, as an essence coming from an essence by
change and division, divided and separated, the Son came forth out of the
Father. For the Divine is without parts, and indivisible, not to be cut, or (d)
divided, or extended, or diminished, or contracted, It cannot become greater, or
worse or better than Itself, nor has it within Itself anything different from
Itself that it could send forth. For everything that is in anything is either in
it as (1) accident, as white is in a body, or (2) as a thing in something
different from it, as a child is in the womb of its mother, or (3) as the part
is in the whole, as the hand, foot and finger exist in the body, being parts of
the whole body, and if either of them undergo any maiming or cutting or
division, the whole of the body is rendered useless and mutilated, as a part of
it has been cut off. But surely it (214) would be very impious to employ a
figure and comparison of this kind in the case of the Unbegotten nature of the
God of the Universe, and of the generation of His Only-begotten and Firstborn
(Son). For the Son was certainly not Unbegotten for ages infinite and without
beginning within the Father, as one thing within another that differs from
itself, being a part of Him which afterwards was changed and cast out from Him;
for such a being would be subject to change; and there would also be according
to this two Unbegotten Beings, He that cast forth and He that was cast forth.
And which condition would be the better? Would not that before the change which
caused a division by the (b) sending forth? It is, then, impossible to conceive
of the |233 Son coming from the Father as a part or a limb that had always
previously been united to Him, afterwards separating and coming apart from the
whole. For these are unspeakable and quite impious ideas, proper enough to the
relations of material bodies, but foreign to a nature without body or matter.
And, therefore, here again we had best say: Who shall declare His generation?

It is equally perilous to take the opposite road, and say thus without
qualification that the Son was begotten of things that were not, similarly to
the other begotten beings; for the generation of the Son differs from the
Creation (c) through the Son. But yet as Holy Scripture first says that He is
the Firstborn of every creature, speaking in His Person, "The Lord created me as
the beginning of his ways," and then says that He is the Begotten of the Father
in the words: "Before all the hills he begets me"; here we, too, may reasonably
follow and confess that He is before all ages the Creative Word of God, One with
the Father, (d) Only-begotten Son of the God of the Universe, and Minister and
Fellow-worker with the Father, in the calling into being and constitution of the
Universe. For if there is anything in the nature of the Universe left
unexplained and inconceivable for us, and we know that there are many, such
things as are promised to the godly — which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
neither hath entered into the heart of man—according to the holy apostle, much
further beyond our conception, unexplained and unnamed, inconceivable and
unimaginable must be that which concerned the generation of the Only-begotten of
God, since we have nothing else to say or to think of Him, except, "Who shall
declare his generation?" And if one, greatly (215) daring, were led to compare
things in all ways inconceivable with visible and physical likenesses, one
perchance might say that, like a fragrance or a ray of light, the Son underlay
from infinite ages or rather before all ages the Father's Unbegotten Nature and
ineffable Essence, and was one with Him, and was always united to the Father, as
fragrance to an ointment and the ray to the light, but not (b) analogously in
all senses to such likenesses, as was said before. For lifeless bodies hold
their accidents in qualities; and the ray being of one origin with the nature of
light, and being in essence the same as light, could not exist |234 outside that
in which it is. Whereas the Word of God has Its own essence and existence in
Itself, and is not identical with the Father in being Unbegotten, but was
begotten of the Father as His Only-begotten Son before all ages; while the
fragrance being a kind of physical effluence of that from which it comes, and
not filling the air around it by itself apart from its primary cause, is seen to
be itself also a physical thing. We will not, then, conceive thus about the
theory of our Saviour's coming-into-being. For neither was He brought into being
from the Unbegotten Being by way of any event, or by division, nor was He
eternally coexistent with the Father, since the One is Unbegotten and the other
Begotten, and one is Father and the other Son. And all would agree that a father
must exist before and precede his son. Thus also would the image of God be a
kind of living image of the living God, in a mode once more that is beyond our
words and reasoning, and existing in Itself immaterially and unembodied, and
unmixed with anything opposite to Itself, but not such an image as we connote by
the term, which differs in its essential substance and its species, but one
which itself contains the whole of its species, and is like in its own essence
to the Father, and so is seen to be the liveliest fragrance of the Father, in a
mode once again beyond our words and reasoning. For everything that is true
about Him could not be spoken in human words, and could not be reasoned with the
reasoning of men according to strict logic. But the Scriptures give us such
instruction as it is good for us to hear. Has not the holy apostle described
himself and those like him as "a fragrance of Christ," by their participation in
the Spirit of Christ; and is not the heavenly Bridegroom in the Canticles
addressed as "Ointment poured forth"? Wherefore all things visible and
invisible, embodied and unembodied, rational and irrational participating in
that outpouring of Him in due proportion are thought worthy of His presence, and
have their lot in the communion of the divine Word. Yes, the whole universe
imparts a share of His divine breath to those whose rational perception is not
|235 maimed, so that bodies by nature earthy and corruptible give forth an
immaterial and uncorrupted fragrance; for as the God of the Universe wells down
from above, Who, being Father of the Only-begotten Word, Himself must be the
first and chief and only true good begetting good, so taking the second place
the Son draws His supplies from the primary and original Essence, Who also is
alone called the fragrance of His Father's Essence by us who use the Scripture
that teaches us concerning Him, that He is "a breath of the power of God, and a
pure effluence of the glory of the Almighty, and a radiance of the everlasting
light, and an unsullied mirror of the action of God, and an image of his
goodness." But with regard to these questions, let men decide them as they will.
It is enough for me to repeat again that true and blessed saying, and so
conclude my quest, the saying which I have often repeated: "Who shall describe
His generation? "For of a truth the generation of the Only-begotten of God is
seen to be beyond the reach not only of men, but of the powers that are beyond
every being, as also our Lord and Saviour Himself says in mystic language this
very thing to His own disciples. "No one knows the Father save the Son." To
which he adds "and no one knows the Son save the Father." Since then the
theology both of the Father and of the Son is equally unknown to all but
Themselves, let us heed Wisdom speaking as it were in secrets in the passage of
Solomon set before us: "Before the mountains were established, and the earth
formed, and before all the hills he begets me." And also He says that He was
present with the Father when He formed the Heaven. "For when he formed the
heaven, I was present with him." And He reveals the eternity from endless ages
of His presence with the Father, where He adds: "I was by him in harmony, I was
that in which he delighted, and I daily delighted in his presence." And we must
either understand the abysses and founts of waters, the mountains and hills, and
the other things which in this place are designated by common words, to refer to
the constitution of the Universe, referring to the whole by |236 its part, or
interpreting more metaphorically, we must transfer the meaning to spiritual
essences and divine powers, all of whom the Firstborn Wisdom and the
Only-begotten and First-begotten Word of the Father, Whom we call Christ,
preceded; so the apostle teaches us, who says, "Christ the power of God and the
wisdom of God." And He is called hero probably by the Name of Wisdom, as He Who
—— the all-wise and prudent plans of the only wise Father . . . .

[There is a long lacuna at the end of this chapter, noted in the Paris MS.,
"ἐλλείπει πολλά"]

CHAPTER 2 [From Psalm xliv.]

. . . And in the second place he honours Him with the kingly sceptre. In the
third he witnesses to the perfection of His virtue. And then in addition he
teaches that He, this same Person, was anointed as God and King by the Highest
God, and so that He was Christ. For what else could one be called, who was
anointed not by men, but by Almighty God Himself? Of Him therefore he says, "O
God (addressing the anointed one), thou hast loved righteousness and hated
injustice; wherefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee." As if he were to say,
"The Almighty God has anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows,"
So that this ointment mentioned was nothing common or earthy, nothing resembling
that ordained by the Mosaic Law, fashioned of corruptible matter, with which it
was the custom to anoint Hebrew priests and kings. Hence we call him properly
both Christ and God, being the only one anointed with the immaterial and divine
ointment of holy joy and gladness not by men nor by human agencies but by the
Creator of the Universe Himself. Wherefore He only has a just, an indefeasible,
a good and peculiar right to the title of Christ beyond those who are called His
fellows. And who could His "fellows" be but those who are able to say: "We are
partakers of Christ," |237 of whom it is said, "Touch not my Christs, and do my
prophets no harm." So then as Christ by this is clearly revealed as Beloved, and
as God, and as King, it is time to inquire, how so great a Being can be said to
have enemies, and who they are, and for what cause He sharpened his arrows and
sword against them, so that He subjected many peoples to Himself not by array of
soldiers, but by truth, gentleness and righteousness. A careful inquirer would
do well to refer this to our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ of God, and to
turn back again to the record, relating to His Presence among men, by which He
routed the hostile invisible powers of evil and corrupt daemons and of wicked
and impure spirits, and won very many peoples for Himself out of all nations.
Whom also it were fitting to call for this reason the true Christ of God, as one
not anointed with common oil like the priests of old days, for we have no record
of anything of the kind about Him, but with a better divine unction, in
reference to which Isaiah says: "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because
he hath anointed me." Wherefore also this one Christ is more famous among all,
through all the world, than all those who ever were anointed with material
ointment among the Hebrews; and has filled the whole world with those who are
called Christians after Him. Now in the preceding book I have dealt sufficiently
with the questions why we say He was anointed, what the unction was, and the
mode of His anointing. Such grace was poured on His lips and on His teaching
that in a short time it filled every place with the religion proclaimed by Him;
so that now among all nations among those who receive His teaching, agreeably to
the prophecy before us, He is clad with the glory of a king and of God, and is
called Christ by all men. And it is clear who are His enemies, not only those
who were such of old, but those who are ever fighting against His word, whether
they be men, or invisible powers, whom everywhere He has cleared away with
unseen and hidden power, and has made all sorts of people from all nations
subject to Him. And that which follows in the Psalm, "Myrrh, aloes and |238
cassia from his garments," and the other words besides, which speak as of a
princess leaving her father's house, and being wedded to Him who has been
foreshewn to be Christ and King and God, and calling Him her Lord, (b) might be
referred to the Church of the nations, forsaking ancestral daemonic error, and
purified and brought into the communion of the divine Word, if time allowed them
to have their true interpretation.

CHAPTER 3

(d) That the same Prophet also plainly confesses Two Lords in Ps. cix.: the One,
the First and Highest God; the Other, Whom He calls His Own Lord, and that He
was begotten by God before the Foundation of the World, and He knows the Second
God, and that He is the High Priest Eternal of the Father, shares the Throne of
the God of the Universe, holding the same Faith as We about Christ.

[Passage quoted, Ps. cix. 1-5.]

THE Lord upon thy right hand! The Psalmist here calls "Lord," our Lord and
Saviour, the Word of God, "firstborn of every creature," the Wisdom before the
ages, the Beginning of the Ways of God, the Firstborn and Only-begotten
Offspring of the Father, Him Who is honoured with the Name of Christ, teaching
that He both shares the seat (220) and is the Son of the Almighty God and
Universal Lord, and the Eternal High-Priest of the Father. First, then,
understand that here this Second Being, the Offspring of God, is addressed. And
since prophecy is believed by us to be spoken by the Spirit of God, see if it is
not the case that the Holy Spirit in the prophet names as His own Lord (b) a
Second Being after the Lord of the Universe, for he says, "The Lord said to my
Lord, Sit thou on my right hand." The Hebrews named the First Person Lord, as
being universally the Lord of all, by the unspeakable Name expressed in the four
letters. They did not call the Second Person Lord in a like sense, but only used
the word as a special title. Naturally, then, our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ
Himself, |239 the Son of God, when He inquired of the Pharisees, "What think ye
of Christ? Whose son is he?" on their saying, "The son of David," asked, "How
then can David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit
thou on my right hand"? practically interpreting the text as not only calling
Him the Lord of David, but the Lord also of the Spirit in the prophet. And if
the prophetic Spirit, which we believe to be the Holy Spirit, confesses Him to
be Lord, Who He teaches shares the Father's Throne, and not generally but as
"His own Lord," how incomparably more certain is it that the rational powers,
who corne after the Holy Spirit, must say the same, and the whole visible
creation, embodied and unembodied, of which of course the only Sharer of the
Father's Throne would be marked out as Lord, by Whose agency all things came
into being, as the holy apostle says: "In him all things were created, of things
in heaven, and things in earth, visible and invisible." For He alone would have
the authority of likeness to the Father, as being the only Person shewn to be
throned with Him.

It is therefore plain that it would be wrong to allot to any among begotten
beings the sitting at the right hand of the Almighty's rule and kingdom, except
to Him alone Whom I have shewn in many ways, by what I have laid before you, to
be God. Understand then, that the Highest and Almighty Lord bestows on one and
the same being the words, "Sit thou on my right hand," and also, "Before the
morning-star I have begotten thee," and He delivers with an oath of confirmation
the honour unshakeable and immutable of the continuous priesthood for ever and
ever, "The Lord swore and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever." And who
could be supposed—leaving human beings out of account — even of those of the
nature of |240 angels, to have been begotten of God, and made a priest for ever,
but He alone Who also said in the former (b) prophecy, "The Lord created me as
the beginning of the way for his works, before the ages he established me, in
the beginning before the mountains were established, before all the hills he
begets me." Give your careful attention to understanding the relations of the
present Psalm to the words quoted in the previous passage; in this one the Most
High God establishes to share His own throne the Second Lord, who is our Lord,
saying, "Sit thou on my right hand," while in the preceding one the Scripture
said that (c) His throne would remain for ever and ever, calling Him at the same
time God when it says, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." Again, in the
passage before us, it says, "The Lord shall send the rod of thy power out of
Sion," and in the other, "The sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy
kingdom"; and once more this passage says, "Sit thou on my right hand, until I
make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet, and thou shalt rule in the midst
of thine enemies," and the former one, "Thy arrows are sharp, O mighty one, in
the heart of the (d) king's enemies." So that what is said about His enemies in
both is in agreement. Who, then, seeing with his eyes in the midst of cities,
villages and countries throughout the world the Churches of our Saviour, the
peoples ruled by Him, and the vast multitudes of those sanctified by Him
encircled on all sides by enemies and foes of the teaching of Christ, some
visible among men, some invisible and beyond the power of sight, would not
wonder at this oracie addressed to the person of the subject of the prophecy,
which says, "Rule in the (222) midst of thine enemies"? And while in the
previous passage we read, "Anointed with the oil of gladness above thy
fellows"—it being the Hebrew custom to anoint priests —the passage before us now
pronounces Him priest in clearer terms, adding more teaching about Him, by which
we learn that He unlike all previous priests is the Eternal Priest, an idea
which cannot be associated with mere (b) humanity. He says that He is made a
priest after the order of Melchizedek, in contradistinction to the ordinance of
|241 the Mosaic priesthood, held either by Aaron or any of his descendants, none
of whom were priests until they had been anointed with a prepared ointment, and
so became, as by type and symbol, a kind of shadowy and symbolical Christ. He
was one of course that because of his mortality could not extend his priesthood
long, and moreover was only consecrated for Jewish people, not for the other
nations. He did not enter on his priestly duty under an oath of God, but was
only honoured by the judgment of men, so that it was sometimes the case that
something unworthy of God's service was found in them, as is recorded of Eli.
And moreover besides all this, that ancient priest of the Mosaic order could
only be selected from the tribe of Levi. It was obligatory without exception
that he should be of the family descending from Aaron, and do service to God in
outward worship with the sacrifices and blood of irrational animals. But he that
is named Melchizedek, which in Greek is translated "king of righteousness," who
was king of Salem, which would mean "king of peace," without father, without
mother, without line of descent, not having, according to the account,
"beginning of years, nor end of life," had no characteristics shared by the
Aaronic priesthood. For he was not chosen by men, he was not anointed with
prepared oil, he was not of the tribe of those who had not yet been born; and
strangest of all, he was not even circumcised in his flesh, and yet he blesses
Abraham, as if he were far better than he; he did not act as priest to the Most
High God with sacrifices and libations, nor did he minister at the Temple in
Jerusalem. How could he? it did not yet exist. And he was such of course because
there was going to be no similarity between our Saviour Christ and Aaron, for He
was neither to be designated priest after a period when He was not priest, nor
was He to become priest, but be it. For we should notice carefully in the words,
"Thou art a priest for ever," He does not say, "Thou shalt be what thou wert not
before," any more than, "Thou wert that before, which thou art not now"—but by
Him Who said, "I am that I am," it is said, "Thou art, and remainest, a priest
for ever."

Since, then, Christ neither entered on His priesthood in time, nor sprang from
the priestly tribe, nor was anointed with prepared and outward oil, nor will
ever reach the |242 end of His priesthood, nor will be established only for the
Jews but for all nations, for all these reasons He is rightly said to have
forsaken the priesthood after Aaron's type, and to be a priest after the order
of Melchizedek. And the fulfilment of the oracle is truly wondrous, to one who
recognizes how our Saviour Jesus the Christ of God even now performs through His
ministers even to-day i sacrifices after the manner of Melchizedek's. For just
as he, who was priest of the Gentiles, is not represented as offering outward
sacrifices, but as blessing Abraham only with wine and bread, in exactly the
same way our Lord and Saviour Himself first, and then all His priests among all
nations, perform the spiritual sacrifice according to the customs of the Church,
and with wine and bread darkly express the mysteries of His Body and saving
Blood. This by the Holy Spirit Melchizedek foresaw, and used the figures of what
was to come, as the Scripture of Moses witnesses, when it says:

"And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought out bread and wine: and he was priest
of the Most High God, and he blessed Abraham."

And thus it followed that only to Him with the addition of an oath:

"The Lord God sware, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the
order of Melchizedek."

Hear, too, what the apostle also says about this:

"17. Wherein God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of the kingdom
the immutability of his counsel mediated it by an oath: 18. That by two
immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a
strong encouragement, who have fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set
before us."

And he adds:

"23. And they indeed have been made priests many in number, because that by
death they were hindered from continuing. 24. But he, because he abideth, hath
an unchangeable priesthood. 25. Wherein he is able to save to the uttermost them
that come unto (b) God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession |243
for them. 26. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, guileless,
undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens."

And he adds:

"1. Now in the things which we are saying the chief point is this: We have such
an high priest, who sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, 2.
a minister of the holy things, and of the true tabernacle, which God has
pitched, and not man."

So says the apostle. The Psalm too, continuing, shews in veiled phrase even the
Passion of the Subject of the prophecy, saying: "He shall drink of the brook in
the way, therefore shall he lift up his head." And another Psalm shews "the
brook" to mean the time of temptations: "Our soul hath passed through the brook,
yea, our soul has passed through the deep waters." He drinks, then, in the
brook, it says, that cup, evidently, of which He darkly spoke at the time of His
Passion, when He said: "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me."
And also, "If it be not possible for it to pass from me, except I drink it, thy
will be done."

It was, then, by drinking this cup that He lifted up His head, as the apostle
also says, for when he was "Obedient to the Father unto death, even the death of
the cross, therefore," he says, "God hath highly exalted him," raising Him from
the dead, and setting Him at His right hand, far above all rule and authority
and power and dominion, and every name which is named, not only in this world,
but in that which is to come. And He hath put all things in subjection under his
feet, according to the promise made to Him, which He expresses through the
Psalmist, saying, "Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies the
footstool of thy feel. Be thou ruler in the midst of thine enemies."

It is plain to all that to-day the power of our Saviour and the word of His
teaching rule over all them that have believed in Him, in the midst of His
enemies and foes. |244

CHAPTER 4 That Isaiah also the Greatest of the Prophets dearly knew Him to be
God in God, agreeing in His Words with Us Who glorify the Father in the Son, and
the Son in the Father.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlv. 12-13.]

IN these words God the Creator of the Universe first foretells by the prophet a
King and Saviour who will come to build up a holy constitution, and ransom all
men who are enslaved by the errors of daemons. And next in order the prophetic
Spirit darkly tells of the subjection of the different nations, which shall be
subject to the One of Whom he prophesies, and how they will worship Him as God,
how they will pray in His name, because of the greater God dwelling in Him, that
is to say the Most High Father and God of the Universe. And this is how it is
expressed.

"14. Thus saith the Lord: Egypt hath laboured for thee, and the merchandise of
the Ethiopians, and the Sabeans, great in stature, shall pass over to thee, and
shall be thy servants; and they shall follow thee bound in fetters, and shall
worship thee anew, and shall pray in thy name, because God is in thee, and there
is no God but thee. 15. For thou art God, and we knew it not, God of Israel,
Saviour. 16. All that are opposed to Him shall be ashamed and confounded, and
shall walk in shame."

This is the prophecy. And I do not think that any one, however deficient in
judgment he may be, can fail to see how clearly and plainly the words evidently
refer to God, Israel's Saviour, and another God in Him. "The just," he says,
"shall worship thee, and make their prayers in thee. Because God is in thee, and
there is no God but thee. For thou art God, and we knew it not, the God of
Israel, the Saviour." And the words "we knew it not" spoken in the person of
those of old who did not know Him, only |245 occur in the Septuagint, for the
Hebrew is different, and translated by Aquila, "God then is strong and hidden,
God that saves Israel," and by Theodotion, "Therefore a strong secret God
preserves Israel." It is remarkable how he calls Christ a hidden God, and gives
the reason clearly, why he calls Him God alone among the ones begotten after the
First and Unbegotten, viz. the dwelling of the Father in Him.

"For in him" according to the holy apostle "it pleased that all the fullness of
the godhead should dwell." This the passage plainly expresses when it says "God
is in thee, and there is no God but thee." Instead of, "But thee" Theodotion has
"But him," translating: "There is no God but him," that is to say, "But the God
that is in thee, by whom thou also art God."

According to Aquila it runs thus: "But a strong one is in thee, and there is
none beside thee: God the strong and the one that hides himself preserving
Israel." And Symmachus, "God is in thee alone, and there is no other and exists
no other God, verily thou art a hidden God, God preserving Israel," in which the
words clearly shew the reason of the Christ of God being God. It is where he
says, "God is in thee and therefore thou art a strong and hidden God." According
to this, then, the true and only God must be One, and alone owning the Name in
full right. While the Second, by sharing in the being of the True God, is
thought worthy to share His Name, not being God in Himself, nor existing apart
from the Father Who gives Him Divinity, not called God apart from the Father,
but altogether being, living and existing as God, through the presence of the
Father in Him, and one in being with the Father, and constituted God from Him
and through Him, and holding His being as well as His Divinity not from Himself
but from the Father. Wherefore we are |246 taught to honour Him as God after the
Father, through the Father dwelling in Him, as we see these prophecies before us
intend. For as the image of a king would be honoured for the sake of him whose
lineaments and likeness it bears (and though both the image and the king
received honour, one person would be honoured, and not two; for there would not
be two kings, the first the true one, and the one represented by the image, but
one in both forms, not only conceived of, but named and honoured), so I say the
Only-begotten Son, being the only image of the Unseen (227) God, is rightly
called the image of the Unseen God, through bearing His likeness, and is
constituted God by the Father Himself: thus He is, with regard to essence, and
gives an image of the Father that grows from His nature and is not something
added to Him, because of the actual source of His existence. Wherefore He is by
nature both God and Only-begotten Son, not being made such by adoption like
those who were without, who only acquire an accidental right to the Name of God.
But He (b) is celebrated as Only-begotten Son by nature and as our God, but not
as the first God, but as the first Only-Begotten Son of God, and therefore God.
And the general cause also of His being God, would be the fact that He alone is
Son of God by nature, and is called Only-begotten, and that He completely
preserves the living and vivid spiritual image of the One God, being made in all
things like the leather, and bearing the likeness of His actual Divinity. Thus
therefore Him also, as being the only Son and the only image of God, endued with
the powers of the Father's Unbegotten and eternal essence (c) according to the
example of likeness, and fashioned to the extremest accuracy of likeness by the
Father Himself, Who is the most skilled and the wisest delineator and maker of
life conceivable, the holy Scriptures salute as God, as One worthy of receiving
this Name of the Father with His other (names), but as one Who receives it, and
does not |247 possess it in His own right. For the One gives, and the Other
receives; so that strictly the First is to be reckoned God, alone being God by
nature, and not receiving (divinity) from another. And the Other is to be
thought of as secondary, and as holding a Divinity received from the Father, as
an image of God, the Divinity in both being conceived of as one in type, God in
Himself being one without beginning and unbegotten, but He is seen through the
Son as by a mirror and image. And this is exactly the teaching of the prophetic
oracle, which says that He is only to be worshipped as God, because the Father
dwells in Him. For it says, "In thee shall they pray, because God is in thee,
and Thou thyself art God, the Saviour of Israel, and therefore Thou art a strong
and a hidden God. Since God is in Thee, and there is none beside Him."

Instead of "Egypt laboured," the Hebrew has, and the other translators render,
"Labour of Egypt,'' so that the passage runs: "The Labour of Egypt and the
merchandise of the Aethiopians shall worship Thee and be Thy slaves, and the
Sabeans," by which I understand to be meant barbarous and obscure nations, in
fact all those that long ago were a prey to daemonic superstition. For as the
Egyptians seemed to be the most superstitious of all nations, and to have begun
the errors of idolatry, it is natural that they should be represented as first
coming under the yoke of Christ, and should represent all the rest of idolatry.
And this was fulfilled in our Lord and Saviour, by the worship and service
rendered to Him in all nations by many multitudes of nations throughout the
world. And I understand that the Ethiopians and Sabeans here foretold as
worshipping Christ are also meant in Ps. lxxi., where it is said: "The
Ethiopians shall fall down before him, and the kings of Arabia and Saba shall
bring gifts, and shall worship him." And it is plain from the context that it is
Christ Who it is there predicted will also be the Object of their worship. |248

CHAPTER 5

Psalm xxxii.

How David equally with Us knows the Word of God, Who is of His Essence, to be by
the Command of the Father Creator of All Things; and how the Same Prophet
witnesses that the Same Word of God was sent by the Father for the Saving of
Men, and how He prophesies that in a Short Time the Whole World would be filled
by His Teaching.

"By the word of the Lord the heavens were made firm, and all the power of them
by the spirit of his mouth."

And in Ps. cvi. it is said:

"He sent his word and healed them, and saved them from their destruction."

And again in Ps. cxlvii.:

"He sendeth his oracle upon earth, his word runneth swiftly."

Now it is evident that with the Psalm before us which says, "By the word of the
Lord the heavens were made firm," (229) the holy gospel exactly agrees when it
says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word
was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him,
and without him was not anything made." The Gospel rightly calls Him God: for
this same being who is now regarded as God, has been called in our previous
quotations, the Word, the Wisdom and the Offspring of God, and the Priest, the
Christ, King, Lord, God, and the Image of God. And (b) that He is other than the
Father, and His Minister, so that He as the greater can bid Him to create, is
added in the Psalm before us:

"8. Let all the earth fear the Lord, | and let all the dwellers on earth be
moved by him. | 9. For he spake, and they were created, | he commanded and they
were made. | "

For it is plain that a speaker must speak to some one else, and one who issues a
command must issue it to another beside himself. And clearly since our Saviour's
Incarnation |249 many multitudes from all the earth, that is to say from all the
nations of the earth, have ceased to fear daemons as before, and have feared the
Lord Jesus, and all the inhabitants of the world have been moved at the Name of
Christ, agreeably to the oracle which here says, "Let the earth fear the Lord:
By him shall be moved all the inhabitants of the world." These, then, come from
Ps. ii. and xxx. And you would find similar prophecies also in Ps. cxlviii.,
which teaches that not only things in earth, but also things in heaven, the
whole creation in a word, came into being by the command of God. For it says:

"1. Praise the Lord from the heavens, | praise him in the height; | 2. Praise
him all ye angels of his, | praise him all his powers, | 3. Praise him sun and
moon, | Praise him all ye stars and light, | . . . 5. For he spake, and they
were made, | he commanded, and they were created."

For if He commanded, Who was great enough to receive such a command, but the
Word of God, who in many ways has been proved to be God in this treatise, and
naturally called the Word of God, because the Almighty has set in Him the words
that make and create all things, delivering to Him the task of governing all
things and steering them by reason and in order? For of course no one should
imagine that the Word of God is like to articulate and spoken speech, which
among men consists of syllables, and is compounded of nouns and verbs: for we
know that our speech consists essentially of sounds and syllables and their
significations, and is produced by the tongue and the organs of the throat and
mouth, whereas that of the eternal and unembodied nature, totally divorced from
all our conditions, could not possibly involve anything human: It uses the name
of speech and nothing more. Since we must not in the case of the God of the
Universe postulate a voice that depends on the movements of the air, nor words,
nor syllables, nor tongue, nor mouth, nor anything indeed that is human and
mortal. |250 For His must be a Word of the soul, and quite incapable of
existence or being apart from the soul. For human speech is in itself without
essence and substance, and regarded generally is a self-movement and activity of
thought. But the Word of God is other than this: It has its own substance (c) in
Itself altogether divine and spiritual, It exists in Itself, It is active also
in Itself, and being divorced from matter and body, and made like to the nature
of the first Unbegotten and Only God, It carries in Itself the meaning of all
begotten things, and the ideas of things visible, being Itself without body and
invisible. Wherefore the divine oracles call It Wisdom and the Word of God.

(d) CHAPTER 6 That Isaiah, as well as David, acknowledges Two Lords, and the
(231) Second, as in David, is the Creator, as We also confess.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlviii. 12-15.]

(b) SEE now how He that says, "I am the first, and I am the last. He that
established the earth and the heaven," clearly confesses that He was sent by
"the Lord, the Lord," calling the Father Lord twice, and you will have
undeniable evidence of what we seek. And He says that He is first among beings
begotten in all reverence, since He allots Being, original, unbegotten, and
beyond the first, to the Father. For the customary meaning of first in the sense
of "first of a greater number," superior in honour and order, (c) would not be
applicable to the Father. For the Almighty God of course is not the first of
created things, since the idea of Him does not admit of a beginning. He must be
beyond and above the first, as Himself generating and establishing the First,
and the Divine Word alone is to be called the First of all begotten things. So
if we ask with reference to the words, "He spake and they were made, he
commanded and they were created," to which of the begotten beings He gave the
command to create, we see now clearly that it was given to Him, Who said, "My
hand has laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand has |251 made the
heaven strong": Who also confesses that He was sent by One greater than Himself,
when He says: "Now (d) the Lord, the Lord has sent me, and his Spirit." And it
must be the Word of God Who said also, "By the word of the Lord were the heavens
made firm," if we compare the Psalm. And yet though the Word of God is Himself
proclaimed divine by the word "Lord," He still calls One Higher and Greater His
Father and Lord, using with beautiful reverence the word Lord twice in speaking
of Him, so as to differentiate His title. For He says here, "The Lord, the Lord
has sent me," as if the Almighty God were in a special sense first and true Lord
both of His Only- (232) begotten Word and of all begotten things after Him, in
relation to which the Word of God has received dominion and power from the
Father, as His true and Only-begotten Son, and therefore Himself holds the title
of Lord in a secondary sense.

CHAPTER 7 From Genesis. That Moses, God's Greatest Servant, knows the Father and
God of the Universe to have been associated with Another in the Creation of Man:
And that. We have learned already that this Being was the Divine Word.

"AND God said, Let us make man in our image, and likeness." And also: "And God
said, It is not good for man to be alone, let us make a helper for him." And he
at once shews that the Being addressed is not an angel of God, so that it may
not be thought that this was said to angels, with the words: "And God made man,
in the image of God he made him." |252

CHAPTER 8 From the same. That Moses clearly without Veil reveals God to be Two
Lords,

"THE sun arose on the earth, and Lot entered Segor, and the Lord rained upon
Sodom brimstone and fire from the Lord."

It is clear here that the second "Lord'' refers to him that was sent by the
greater Lord to punish the ungodly. Yet if we unreservedly confess two Lords, we
do not regard them both as God in the same sense. We are taught in all reverence
to admit an order, that One is the Most High Father and God and Lord, and God
and Lord of the Second: but that the Word of God is the Second Lord, Lord of
those below Him, and yet not equally with the greater. For the Word of God is
not Lord of the Father, nor God of the Father, but His Image, and Word, and
Wisdom, and Power, and Lord and God of those that come after Him; whereas the
Father is Father and Lord and God even of the Son. Wherefore a reverent theology
in our opinion rightly recurs to one Source of being and to one God.

CHAPTER 9 From the same. That the Same Servant of God shews a Second Being
called God and Lord, and relates that He was seen in Human Shape and Form and
answered Them of Old Time.

[Passages quoted, Gen. xii. 7; xvii. 1; xviii. 1, 17.]

AND again he adds to this, as if speaking of Another:

"For I knew that he will establish his children, and his house after him, and
they will keep the ways of the Lord, to do righteousness and judgment, so that
the |253 Lord will bring on Abraham what things he spake to him."

The Lord Who answers, Who is recorded to have said this to Abraham, is
represented as clearly confessing another Lord to be his Father and the Maker of
all things. At least Abraham, who as a prophet has a clear conception of the
speaker, prophetically continues with the words:

"Wilt thou destroy the righteous man with the wicked, and shall the righteous be
as the wicked? If there be fifty righteous in the city, wilt thou destroy them?
Wilt thou not spare [all] the place, because of the fifty righteous? Be it far
from thee to fulfil this word, and destroy the righteous with the wicked, and
that the righteous should be as the wicked. In no way let him, that judgeth all
the earth, not do judgment."

I hardly think that this could have been said suitably to angels or to any of
God's ministering spirits. For it could not be regarded as a minor duty to judge
all the earth. And he is no angel who is named in the previous passage, but One
greater than an angel, the God and Lord who was seen beside the before-mentioned
oak with the two angels in human form. Nor can it be thought that Almighty God
Himself is meant. For it is impious to suggest that the Divine changes and puts
on the shape and form of a man. And so it remains for us to own that it is the
Word of God who in the preceding passage is regarded as divine: whence the place
is even to-day honoured by those who live in the neighbourhood as a sacred place
in honour of those who appeared to Abraham, and the terebinth can still be seen
|254 there. For they who were entertained by Abraham, as represented in the
picture, sit one on each side, and he in the midst surpasses them in honour.
This would be our Lord and Saviour, Whom though men knew Him not they
worshipped, confirming the Holy Scriptures. He then thus in person from that
time sowed the seeds of holiness among men, putting on a human form and shape,
and revealed to the godly ancestor Abraham Who He was, and shewed him the mind
of His Father.

CHAPTER 10 From the same. That the same Prophet shews more clearly in the Matter
of Jacob the said Person to be Lord, Whom also He calls God, and an Angel of God
Most High, in addressing Him.

[Passage quoted, Gen. xxviii. 10-19.]

THIS Being who here answers him at such length, you will find, if you read on,
to be Lord and God, and the Angel of God, from the words Jacob himself says to
his wives:

"And the angel of the Lord said to me in sleep, Jacob. And I said, Here am I."

And also:

"I have seen, he says, all that Laban doeth to thee. I am the God, that was seen
of thee in the place where thou anointedst the pillar for me, and offeredst
prayer to me."

Therefore He that said before, I am the Lord God of Abraham thy Father, and the
God of Isaac, to whom godly |255 Jacob raises the pillar, was indeed God and
Lord: for we must believe that which He Himself says. Not of course the
Almighty, but the Second to Him, Who ministers for His Father among men, and
brings His Word. Wherefore Jacob here calls Him an Angel: "The Angel of God said
to me, speaking in my sleep, ' I am the God who was seen by thee in this place.'
" So the same Being is clearly called the Angel of the Lord, and God and Lord in
this place. And by Isaiah the Prophet he is called "Angel of Great Counsel," as
well as God and Ruler and Potentate, where His Incarnation is prophesied in the
words:

"For unto us a child is born, and to us a son is given, on whose shoulder shall
be the rule, and his name shall be called the Angel of Great Counsel, Prince of
Peace, the Mighty God, the Potentate, the Father of the Age to Come."

CHAPTER 11 That Jacob also beholds the Before-named as Both God and Lord, and
also as an Angel in Human Form in Common with Abraham, in the Course of the
History that so tells.

[Passage quoted, Gen. xxxii. 22-31.]

IT was said to Moses, No one shall see My face and live. ( But here Jacob saw
God not indefinitely but face to face. ( And being preserved, not only in body
but in soul, he was thought worthy of the name of Israel, which is a name borne
by souls, if the name Israel is rightly interpreted "Seeing God." Yet he did not
see the Almighty God. For He is invisible, and unalterable, and the Highest of
all Being could not possibly change into man. But he saw Another, Whose name it
was not yet the time to reveal to curious Jacob. And if we were to suppose that
he saw an angel, or that one of the divine spirits in heaven whose duty it is to
bring oracles to the holy, we should |256 clearly be wrong; firstly, because He
is called Lord and God, for certainly Holy Scripture calls him God in distinct
terms, and names Him Lord, honouring Him with the name signified by the
Tetragram, which the Hebrews only apply to the unspeakable and secret name of
God: and secondly, because when Scripture desires to speak of angels, it clearly
distinguishes them as such, as when the God and Lord Who replies to Abraham no
longer thinks the sinners of Sodom worthy of His presence, and Holy Scripture
says:

"And the Lord departed, and ceased speaking with Abraham. And the two angels
departed to Sodom at evening."

And to Jacob:

" There came two angels of God: and he saw them, and said, It is the camp of
God. And he called the name of that place, Encampments."

Here, then, the godly man clearly distinguished the nature of the visions, since
he now called the name of the place Encampments, from his seeing the encampments
of the angels. Whereas when he communes with God, he calls the name of the
place, Sight of God, adding, "For I have seen God face to face." And when an
angel appears to Moses, Holy Scripture also makes it plain, saying: "The angel
of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire in a bush." But when it refers to
the actual being who replies, it calls him God and Lord, and no longer an angel.
It is equally clear in its distinction between the angel and the Lord in the
account of what happened at the Red Sea, where it says:

"And the angel of the Lord that went before the children of Israel, removed and
went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud also removed from before them."

And as in the former passage the Lord is introduced as answering the men of the
old time in human form, so also is He here by the cloud. For it is said
afterwards:

"And it came to pass in the morning-watch, that the Lord looked upon the camp of
the Egyptians in a pillar of fire and cloud. And God answered Moses in the
pillar of the cloud through the whole of the wanderings in the wilderness."

So Scripture is quite exact when the nature of an angel is meant, for it calls
him neither God nor Lord, |257 but simply Angel. But when it knows that He that
appears was Lord and God, it clearly uses those terms. And that by Lord and God
they do not mean the First Cause, the passages of Holy Scripture clearly shew
which call Him the Angel of God, Who had previously been called Lord and God in
the part concerning Jacob. It only remains for Him then to be God and Lord among
beings, after the Almighty God of the Universe. And He would thus be the Word of
God before the ages, greater than all angels, but less than the First Cause.

CHAPTER 12 (d) Thai again in the Story of Jacob the Story supposes a Secondary
God.

[Passage quoted, Gen. xxxv. 1-3.]

HERE the very God of the Universe, the only Unbegotten (239) and Most High (not
seen, for He answers Jacob invisibly, and moving him by His unspeakable power),
speaks clearly of Another than Himself. God then said to him, "Make an altar to
the God that appeared to thee." I have already shewn Who this was that was
described before as appearing to him, and proved that it was the Word of God.

CHAPTER 13 From Exodus. That the Almighty God, being He that answered Moses by
an Angel, teaches that He was seen by the Fathers, not by means of an Angel, but
by His Son.

[Passages quoted, Exod. iii. 1, 2, 4, 5, 14; vi. 2-4.]

IN the case of the Prophets, Isaiah, say, or Jeremiah, or those like them, a man
was seen, and God prophesied |258 through him that was seen, as by an
instrument; and now the Person of Christ, now that of the Holy Spirit, and now
that of Almighty God, answered through the prophet. So we must suppose the Most
High and Almighty God now prophesies the things before us to Moses who is under
(240) instruction by the angel that appeared to him. The intention of which must
have been of this nature: "To you, O prophet, as one being instructed and not
fit for aught but angelic visions, hitherto I have willed to send my angel; and
I make my Name clear to thee alone, teaching thee that I am what I am, and that
my Name is the Lord; but I not only showed this to thy fathers, but I gave them
a greater gift, I appeared to them." I have already shewn Who it was that
appeared to the fathers, when I shewed that (b) the angel of God was called God
and Lord. It will naturally be asked how He that is beyond the universe, Himself
the only Almighty God, appeared to the fathers. And the answer will be found if
we realize the accuracy of Holy Scripture. For the Septuagint rendering, "I was
seen of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, being their God." Aquila says, "And I was
seen by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as a sufficient God," clearly shewing that the
Almighty God Himself, Who is One, was not seen in His own Person; (c) and that
He did not give answers to the fathers, as He did to Moses by an angel, or a
fire, or a bush, but "as a sufficient God": so that the Father was seen by the
fathers through the Son, according to His saying in the Gospels, "He that hath
seen me, hath seen the Father." For the knowledge of the Father was revealed in
Him and by Him. But in cases when He appeared to save men, He was seen in the
human form of the Son, giving an earnest before the time to the godly of that
salvation which should come (d) through Him to all men; whereas when He was
going to be the avenger and chastiser of the wicked Egyptians, He appeared no
longer as a sufficient God, but as an angel ministering punishment, and in form
of fire and flame, ready at once to devour them like wild and thorny
undergrowth. So they say that the bush darkly refers to the |259 wild, savage,
and cruel character of the Egyptians, and the fire to the avenging power of the
chastisement that overtook them. (241)

CHAPTER 14 (b) That God the Word appeared in the Form of a Cloud to Moses and
All the People, as in Human Form to the Patriarchs.

[Passages quoted, Exod. xix. 9; xxxiii. 9; Num.xii. 5.]

The people then beheld the pillar of cloud, and it spoke (c) to Moses. But who
was the speaker? Obviously the pillar of cloud, which before appeared to the
fathers in a human form. And I have already shewn that this was not the Almighty
God, but another Being Whom we name, as the Word of God, the Christ Who was seen
for the sake of the multitude of Moses and the people in a pillar of cloud,
because it was not possible for them to see Him like their (d) fathers in human
shape. For, surely, it was reserved for the Perfect to be able to see beforehand
His future Incarnate appearance among men, and since it was impossible then for
the whole people to bear it, He was seen now in fire in order to inspire fear
and wonder, and now in a cloud, as it were in a shadowy and veiled form ruling
them, as He was also seen, by Moses for their sake.

CHAPTER 15 (242) That it was not an Angel, who gave Answers to Moses, but Some
One More Excellent than an Angel.

[Passages quoted, Exod. xxiii. 20, 21; xxxii. 34; xxxiii. i.]

IT will be plain to all that these could not be the words of a mere angel of
God. But of what God could they (c) be, but of the One seen by the forefathers,
whom Jacob |260 clearly called the Angel of God? And He we know was the Word of
God, being called both the Servant of God, and God Himself and Lord.

CHAPTER 16 (d) That the same Lord teaches of another Lord, namely, His Son.
(243)

[Passage quoted, Exod. xx. 2, 5, 7.]

From the Decalogue.

HERE, too, the Lord Himself teaches in the passage before us about another Lord.
For He says: "I am the Lord thy God," and adds: "Thou shalt not take the name of
the Lord thy God." The second Lord is here mystically instructing His Servant
about the Father, that is to say, the God of the Universe. And you could find
many other similar instances occurring in Holy Scripture, in which God gave
answers as if about another God, and the Lord Himself as if about another Lord.

CHAPTER 17 That this Lord again Who gave Answers to Moses, knowing another Lord
Greater than Himself as Father, called Him the True God.

(d) [Passages quoted, Exod. xxxiii. 17-18; xxxiv. 5-8.]

NOTICE, then, here how the Lord that descended in the cloud, and stood by Moses
in the name of the Lord, called Another beside Himself, Who is twice called
Lord, in a common form of reduplication, as one reckoned as God to be His own
Master and Master of all others, and His Own Father, and that here it is not
Moses, as might be supposed, but the Lord Himself Who calls another Lord His
Father; for He speaks first, and say to Moses: "I |261 will pass before thee in
my glory, and will call upon the name of the Lord." And when He has so said,
Scripture goes on in narrative form: "And the Lord descended in a cloud, and
stood beside him there, and called on the name of the Lord."

Thus the Lord Himself in fulfilment of His promise descends and passes before
the face of Moses. And the Lord Himself calls and says: "O Lord, the God of pity
and mercy," and that which follows, clearly teaching His servant Who He was, and
teaching mystically the knowledge of a Lord greater than Himself. And Moses
implies this, when in his prayer for the people he records the words of the Lord
before us, that the Lord spoke them, and not he himself, when he says:

"And now let the hand of the Lord be exalted, as thou saidst, The Lord is
long-suffering and very pitiful and true, taking away sins and injustice, and
iniquity, and will not clear the guilty with purification, avenging the sins of
fathers upon their children to the third and fourth generation."

Notice the way in which the Lord Himself addressing the Father in these words as
"long-suffering and of tender mercy," calls Him also "true," agreeing with the
words: "That they may know thee the only true God," spoken in the Gospels by the
same Being, our Saviour. Yea, with exceeding reverence He calls the Father the
only true God, given meet honour to the Unbegotten Nature, of which Holy
Scripture teaches us He is Himself the Image and the Offspring.

CHAPTER 18 From Numbers. That Holy Scripture teaches that God was seen by
Israel, darkly meaning the Word of God. IN the Book of Numbers Moses prays,
saying: "Since thou art the Lord of this people that art seen of them face to
face." |262 For which Aquila substitutes: "Since thou art the Lord in the hearts
of this people, which sees thee, O Lord, face to face." And Symmachus: "Since
thou art, O Lord." And it is said in Exodus: "And Moses, and Aaron, and Nadab,
and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, and saw the place where
the God of Israel stood." Instead of which Aquila says: "And they saw the God of
Israel." And Symmachus: "And they saw in a vision the God of Israel." From the
text: "No man has seen God at any time," perhaps it might be thought that the
above quotation contradicts the Saviour's words, as implying that the invisible
is visible. But if they be understood, like our former quotations, of the Word
of God, Who was seen by the fathers "in many ways and in sundry manners," no
contradiction is involved. The God of Israel here seen is shewn to be the same
Being Who was seen by Israel, when a man wrestled with Him, Who first changed
his name from Jacob to Israel, saying: "Thou hast power with God," and when,
also, Jacob appreciating His divine power called the place of the struggle the
Sight of God, saying: "I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
I showed in the proper place that this was no other than the Word of God.

CHAPTER 19 (246) From Joshua, the son of Nave. That God the Word, Who answered
Moses, appeared also to the Forefathers of Old Time, and to Joshua, Moses'
Successor, in Human Form.

[Passage quoted, Josh. v. 13-15.]

THE same words, you will remember, were said by the same Lord to Moses at the
beginning of the vision of the Bush, for Scripture says: |263

"4. And when the Lord saw that he drew nigh to see, He called him from the midst
of the Bush, saying, Moses, Moses, come not near here; loose thy shoes from off
thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground."

So, then, the command that was given shews that the God Who answered on both
occasions was one and the same. Though here He prophesies through the Chief and
Captain of His power, and to Moses by the vision of the angel. And of the
heavenly armies, celestial powers and invisible spirits, holy angels and
archangels ministering to God the King of kings and the Lord of lords (as Daniel
says: "Thousand thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand
stood before him"), what other could be highest of all but the Word of God, His
Firstborn Wisdom, His Divine Offspring? Rightly, then, He is here called Chief
Captain of the Power of the Lord, as also elsewhere "Angel of Great Counsel,"
"Throned with the Father," "Eternal and Great High Priest." And it has been
proved that the same Being is both Lord and God, and Christ anointed by the
Father with the oil of gladness. Thus, appearing to Abraham by the oak in human
form, He reveals Himself in a calm and peaceful guise, foreshowing by it His
future Coming to save mankind; He appeared to Jacob, as to an athlete and a
champion destined to wrestle with enemies, in the form of a man, and to Moses
and the people in the form of cloud and fire, and led them, shewing Himself
terrible and shadowy. And as Joshua, the successor of Moses, was about to fight
against the former possessors of Palestine his enemies, foreign and most ungodly
races, He rightly appears to him with a sword drawn and pointed against the
enemy, shewing by the vision that He Himself is about to attack the ungodly with
an unseen sword and with divine power, the fellow-soldier and the
fellow-combatant of His people. Wherefore He gives Himself the name of Chief and
Captain of the Lord to suit the occasion. |264

CHAPTER 20

How the Creator of the Universe, the Word of God, answered Job, and is said to
have appeared to Him, just as He (b) did to the Fathers.

[Passages quoted, Job xxxviii. 1, 4, 7, 8, 14-17; xlii. 4-6.]

IT is easy to distinguish that the words before us are the Words of the Lord the
Creator, not only from what has previously been considered but from the
impression they make on you. And, moreover, that the passages: "Hast thou gone
to the source of the sea, and trodden in the footprints of the deep?" and: "Do
the gates of death open to thee for fear, and did the fortress of hell quake
when they saw thee?" prophesy our Saviour's descent into Hades I will prove in
the proper place, only now . remarking that it is more reasonable to refer this
passage to God the Word than to the God of the Universe.

(248) Job certainly afterwards bears witness that he has seen with his own eyes,
as the fathers did the Lord Who spoke to him through the whirlwind and the
clouds, saying:

"Hear me, Lord, that I also may speak: and I will ask thee, and teach thou me. I
have heard of thee by the report of the ear, but now mine eye seeth thee;
wherefore I have humiliated myself and have melted, and I reckon myself dust and
ashes."

But how could a soul clothed in flesh and mortal eyes (b) behold the Most High
God, the Being beyond the Universe, the Unchangeable and Unbegotten Essence,
unless we could say that here also God the Word proved to be Lord in varying
instances shews Himself as passing from His own proper majesty? This we may
learn to be so from the oracles themselves, in which the Lord again narrating
the story of the devil, under the name of the Dragon, to Job, insisted, Do not
you fear because he is prepared for me? For what Lord ought we to think that the
Dragon (c) was prepared, but our Saviour the Divine Word? He it was that
destroyed the Prince of this world, who of old besieged the human race, loosing
the pains of death, as |265 He Himself also shews, saying: "Didst thou come to
the spring of the sea, and troddest thou the traces of the depth? Did the doors
of death open to thee in fear, and the warders of hell seeing thee tremble?" and
He naturally gave this answer to Job after the great trial and contest through
which He had gone, teaching him that though he has struggled more than his
share, a greater and sterner (d) battle and contest is reserved for the Lord
Himself against the time of His Coming to earth to die.

CHAPTER 21 From Psalm xc. That this Psalm knows Two Lords.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xc. 9-13.]

THESE are the words that the devil uses in the Temptation (249) of our Saviour.
Notice, then, how the Psalm says to the Lord Himself: "For thou, O Lord my hope,
hast made the Most High thy refuge.'' For Thou Thyself, he says, my hope, O
Lord, hast made thy refuge One greater than Thyself, God Himself the Most
Highest over all and Thine own Father; wherefore evils shall not come upon Thee,
(b) and no scourge shall come nigh Thy dwelling. And although wicked men attempt
to scourge Thee, when Thou shalt become man, and to put Thee to death, yet for
all that the scourge of God shall not come nigh Thy dwelling, that is Thy body,
which Thou shalt wear for our sakes having become man. In the same way you will
refer to Him all the remainder of the Psalm, which I will consider also in its
fit place. |266

CHAPTER 22 From Hosea.

About the Word of God and about the Father, as about a Lord.

[Passage quoted, Hos. xi. 9.]

IN these words God the Word says when He has become man to those who confess Him
to be a holy man, but not God: "I am God and not a holy man among you." And,
then, having called Himself God, He shews the Almighty Lord and God, His Father,
adding: "I will go behind the Lord." And the words: "I will not enter into the
city," are of one who refuses to take part in the common and vulgar life of men,
from which also He dissuades his own disciples: "Go not on a road of the
Gentiles, and enter not into a city of the Samaritans."

CHAPTER 23 (250) From Amos.

(b) Of Our Saviour as of a Lord, and of His Father as of God, and. of the
Destruction of the Jewish People.

[Passage quoted, Amos iv. ii.]

AND here the Lord Himself says that some God has caused the destruction of
Sodom, since He Himself must plainly be a different Being from the One of Whom
He speaks. Therefore two Lords stands out in the destruction (c) of Sodom and
Gomorrah, when the Lord rained the fire of the Lord on them. You also, he says,
will suffer a destruction such as Sodom underwent for its unnatural wickedness,
and even so did not turn to Me. Scripture generally regards the future as past,
so that we must understand the past to be meant in spite of the tense. The
future "I will overthrow" must be understood for the past "I overthrew," and "ye
will not turn," for "ye did turn." |267 This is levelled at the Jewish race, and
only received its fulfilment in their case, after their plot against our
Saviour, (d) Their ancient holy place, at any rate, and their Temple are to this
day as much destroyed as Sodom. Yet though they have suffered in accordance with
the prediction, they have not hitherto turned to Christ, on Whose account they
have suffered so much. And so the prophecy before us is justly inspired to say:
"And neither so have ye returned to me, saith the Lord."

CHAPTER 24 (251) From Obadiah. Of the Two Lords, Father and Son, and of the Call
(b) of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Obad. 1.]

THE Lord God has heard a report from the Lord. And this report was about the
call of the Gentiles.

CHAPTER 25 From Zechariah. That God the Word being Lord confesses that He was
sent (c) by a Greater Lord.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ii. 8.]

IF, then, the Lord that sent (Him) is Lord Almighty, and He that says He was
sent is so also, surely there are Two; And He that was sent as Almighty Lord of
the nations says clearly, "He sent me." |268

CHAPTER 26 The same, and concerning the Call of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ii. 10, 11.]

AND this prophecy is like the former one, telling of the coming of the Christ to
men, and the call of the Gentiles to salvation through Him.

"For I the Lord myself will come," He says, "and at My coming no longer Israel
of old, nor one single nation of the earth alone, but many nations shall take
refuge in the greater and high Lord, the God of Me Myself and of the Universe,
to Whom fleeing the nations shall reap the great harvest of being called and
actually becoming the people of God, and of dwelling in the midst of her that is
called the daughter of Zion."

So it is common in Holy Scripture to call the Church of God on earth, as being
as it were a daughter of the heavenly Zion. And this good news is told in the
oracle which says:

"Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Zion, because I come, and I will dwell in
the midst of thee." For we believe that God the Word dwells in the midst of the
Church. As indeed He promised when He said, " Lo, I am with you all the days,
until the end of the world''—and, "Where two or three are gathered together in
my name, there am I in the midst of them." And when, He says:

"I the Lord Myself, do come and dwell in the midst of you; thou shalt receive a
greater knowledge of God, for I the Lord will refer the cause of My being sent
to men to My Father who sent Me. Thou shalt know that the Lord Almighty has sent
Me unto you."

And then in such words as these the Lord Himself speaks about another Lord and
God, "And I will strengthen them in the Lord their God, and in my name shall
they boast, saith the Lord." Who then are those who boast in the Lord? |269

CHAPTER 27 How again the Lord narrates concerning another Lord, and this is
clearly His Father. (253)

[Passage quoted, Zech. iii. 1.]

AND here again the Lord says that another Lord will rebuke the devil. The Lord
that is speaking with Him is not himself the rebuker, but tells of another Lord.
Wherein I consider there is clear proof of the existence of two Lords, the
Father and God of the Universe, and One after the Father, Who has received the
lordship and dominion of all things begotten.

CHAPTER 28 (b) From Malachi. That the Almighty God calls the Angel of the
Covenant Christ, and the same Being Lord.

[Passage quoted, Mal. iii. 1-2.]

THIS, too, is like the former prophecies. For the Lord God (c) Himself, the
Almighty, says that a Lord will come in His own temple, speaking of another: And
He surely means God the Word. And after this also He names Him "the Angel of the
Covenant" of Whom, too, Almighty God teaches that He will Him send forth before
His face, saying, "Behold, I send forth my angel before my face." And this same
Being, Whom He has called "My angel," He calls Lord directly after, and adds,
"The Lord shall suddenly come, and the Angel of the Covenant." Thus having (d)
referred to one and the same Being, He proceeds, "Behold he comes, and who will
abide the day of his coming?" meaning His Second and Glorious Coming. And the
Lord who makes this prophecy is God, the Sovereign of the Universe. |270

CHAPTER 29 That the God of the Universe names Christ the Sun of Righteousness.

[Passage quoted, Mal. iv. 2.]

HE that has often been named Lord, and God, and Angel, and Chief Captain, Christ
and Priest, and Word and Wisdom of God, and Image, this same Being is now called
Sun of Righteousness. And we see that the Father that begat Him proclaims that
He will rise not on all, but only on those that fear His Name, giving them the
light of the Sun of Righteousness as a reward for their fear. He, then, must be
God the Word, Who said, "I am the Light of the world"; for He was "the light
that lighteth every man coming into the world." He of course, and not the sun of
nature, perceptible to all alike whether they have reason or not, He that is
divine and spiritual, and the cause of all virtue and justice, God says in this
passage, will rise only on those that fear Him, hiding Himself from the
unworthy. Concerning which He says somewhere else, "And the sun shall set upon
the prophets that deceive my people."

CHAPTER 30 From Jeremiah. That God the Word, being Lord, prays to His Father,
prophesying the Conversion of the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Jer. xvi. 19-21.]

THE Lord prays to another Lord, clearly His Father and the God of the Universe,
and says in the opening of His prayer, "O Lord, thou art my strength," and that
which follows. And He clearly prophesies the conversion of the Gentiles from
idolatrous error to godly religion. And this prophecy, moreover, has been shewn
most clearly to have been fulfilled after the Coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ
to men. But now that we have, by thirty prophetic quotations in all, learned
that our Lord and Saviour the Word of God is (b) God, a Second God after the
Most High and Supreme, we will pass to another topic in connection with the
theology of His Person, and prove from the holy books of the Hebrews that it was
necessary for this same God to come to men.

END OF VOL. I.

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY RICHARD CLAY & SONS, LIMITED, BRUNSWICK ST.,
STAMFORD ST., S.E. I, AND BUNGAY, SUFFOLK. This text was transcribed by Roger
Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 48: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 6
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 6

BOOK VI

(237) IN my fifth book of the Proof of the Gospel the doctrine of the Father and
the Son has been clearly defined in the confession of one Almighty God, and in
the proof of a Second Being coming after Him as Head of all begotten things,
Whom the Holy Scriptures named of old the Firstborn Wisdom of God, the
Only-begotten Son, God of God, the Angel of Great Counsel, the Leader of the
Host of Heaven, the Minister of the Father, yea, even Lord of the Universe, Word
of God and Power of God, and if now the witness of the prophets should shew that
they foretold that God intended to come to men, it will be abundantly evident to
whom we must apply this prediction, especially as according to what I have said
already, the Word of God, under the Name of Lord and God, appeared to human
eyes, to the pious men of Abraham's day, made in the form and likeness of man.
So let us now examine any such predictions of the Hebrew oracles, that now the
Ford, now God, would descend to men and again ascend in their sight, and the
causes of His descent: and you will note that some prophecies are veiled and
some clearly expressed. I hold that the secret prophecies were delivered in a
disguised form because of the Jews, as the predictions concerning them were
unfavourable; because they would most probably have destroyed the writing, if it
had plainly foretold their final ruin; just as history shows that they attacked
the prophets, because they rebuked them. But the prophecies that are clear
include beyond all doubt |2 the call of the Gentiles, and announce the promises
of the reward of holiness not only to the Jewish race, but to all men throughout
the world. As this is so, we must now hear the divine oracles.

CHAPTER 1 (238) Of the Sojourn of the Word of God with Men. From Psalm xvii. The
Shewing forth of the Coming of God to Men, and the Consequent Call of the
Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xvii. 9-11.]

I CONSIDER that we have here an express prophecy of God's Descent from heaven.
For after telling many divine truths he adds the above. In saying "He bowed the
heavens and came down," he notes that humiliation of the Divine Glory, which the
divine apostle expressed, when he said:

"Who being in the form of God, did not consider it a prize to be equal with God,
but emptied himself, and took the form of a servant." And by the words, "He rode
upon Cherubim and flew," I believe he presents darkly the return to Divine
Glory, which He made surrounded by troops of angelic and divine powers. And this
also seems to be intended by, "He flew upon the wings of the wind." And by
"making darkness his secret-place, and darkness under his feet," is signified
the hidden and secret dispensation, under which He accomplished all this. What
shall we understand by "round about him was his tabernacle" but His Holy
Catholic Church, either the earthly, or the heavenly? And afterwards at the end
of the same Psalm, there is a prophecy of the rejection of the former people
coincident with the call of the Gentiles:

" 43. Save me from the gainsayings of the people, thou wilt make me the head of
the Gentiles. A people whom I have not known shall serve me.

"44. At the hearing of the ear they obeyed me: the strange children lied to me.
|3 "45. The strange children waxed old: and grew lame from their paths."

I will examine in the proper place what meaning is to be attributed to this.

CHAPTER 2

Psalm xlvi. The Ascent of God Who had First descended, and the Calling of all
the Gentiles thereafter, to know the One and Only God.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xlvi. 1-9.]

WHAT can the Ascension of the Lord God here mentioned imply, but a Descent
previous to His Ascension, after which the calling of all the Gentiles is again
prophesied, and good news of joy and gladness announced to all nations in their
future knowledge of God, when the Lord Himself, He that is the one Most High God
and King of all the earth, is said to subdue the peoples under us. And who are
meant by "us"? Surely those who give the prophecy: which will be clearly seen to
be fulfilled, when all the nations that believe in Christ are subdued to the
teaching of the prophets. Or they might be spoken in the person of our Saviour's
apostles, who also could say, "He has chosen out an inheritance for us." And
what else could be understood by "his inheritance," but the calling of all
nations, which the Christ of God shewed forth Himself, when He said: "The Lord
said unto me, Thou art my Son: to-day have I begotten thee . . . Desire of me
and I shall give the heathen for thine inheritance, and the bounds of the earth
for thy possession? "This inheritance, then, that was given Him by the Father He
subordinated to His apostles and prophets, by subduing those that believed on
Him to their words agreeably to the above prophecies. And the Word of God, of
Whom I have discoursed so much, after accomplishing all things in His appearance
among men, "ascended with a shout." This is interpreted by the apostle, who
says: "That he ascended, what is it but |4 that he also descended first to the
lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same as He Who ascended far
above all heavens." And he says that He ascended with a shout, because of the
companies of angels proclaiming His Divinity as He went up, who also said: "Open
your gates, ye rulers, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of
glory shall come in." And you would not err in identifying the sound of the
trumpet with the preaching of the Gospel heard in all the world. For as the
trumpet is the loudest of all musical instruments, it seems a fit symbol to shew
forth that the teaching given to all men about Christ is proclaimed in stronger
and louder tones than any other teaching has ever been, by which as by a trumpet
for the hearing of all men the Holy Spirit shouts and cries what follows in this
Psalm, "Sing to the Lord, sing, sing to our King, sing, That God is King "not
only of the Jewish race in the future, he says, but "of all the earth, sing with
understanding." No more the daemons of old, he says, no more the earth-bound and
weak spirits, but God Himself rules over all the nations, God Himself, Who sits
upon His holy seat.

I have already in the preceding book treated of the throne of God the Word, on
which the Father bade Him sit, "Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine
enemies the footstool of thy feet." And we can still more clearly refer the
words, "The princes of the peoples were gathered together with the God of
Abraham," to the Gentile rulers of the Christian Church coming into the
inheritance of God's pious prophets of old, who, waxing strong by the power of
the Saviour, have been lifted up, no man being able to cast them down or humble
them because of the right hand of God that raises them and gives them power. But
of this I will give fuller treatment when I have leisure. |5

CHAPTER 3 From Psalm xlix.

How it is said that God will come dearly to Men, and will call all Races of Men
io Himself.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xlix. 1-14.]

HERE the divine prediction clearly prophesies that God will come manifestly,
meaning none other but the Word of God. And it shews the reason of His coming,
again emphasizing the calling of all nations of the world. For it says, "He (d)
has called the earth from the rising of the sun to the setting"; and it teaches
that the rejection of the outward worship according to the Mosaic Law will
follow hard after His Manifestation and the calling of the Gentiles, a worship
which actually ceased after the manifestation of the Word of God to all men. For
from that day to this all men throughout all the world have been called, and all
the nations of the east and west. And the Jewish worship has ceased (262) and
been abolished, all men being called to worship according to the new Covenant of
the preaching of the Gospel, and not according to the Law of Moses. We might
also apply these prophecies to our Saviour's second and glorious Coming.

CHAPTER 4 From Psalm lxxxiii. That God is said to be about to be seen on Earth
through the Manifestation of the Christ to Men.

[Passage quoted, Ps. Ixxxiii. 7.]

AFTER saying that the God of gods shall be seen, he prays that His Manifestation
may take place quickly, teaching in what manner He will be seen in the words,
"Look on the lace of thy Christ," as if he said more clearly, "Manifest thyself
to us in the person of Christ." For since "He that hath seen me hath seen the
Father that sent me," He naturally promises that the God of God who dwells in
Christ will manifest Himself in the Person of Christ. |6

CHAPTER 5 From Psalm xcv. The Coining of Christ on Earth, and His Kingdom over
the Gentiles, and the New Song which shall be given, not to Israel but to the
Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xcv. 1-13.]

(b) HERE again the Coming of the Lord to men is foretold, and that a new song
shall be sung at His Coming, by which is meant the new Covenant, by the whole
earth, not by the Jewish race; and that the good news will be no longer for
Israel, but for all the nations, since it says that the Lord Who is to come will
be their King. But who could this be but God the Word, Who, intending to judge
the world in righteousness and the human race in truth, reckons all men in the
world equally worthy of His call, and of the salvation of God consequent
thereon?

(c) CHAPTER 6 From Psalm xcvii. The New Song, the Knowledge of the Heathen of
the Lord's Righteousness and His Own Coming as Judge of the Universe.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xcvii. 1-8.]

IT is prophesied here that the Coming of the Lord will be the cause of great
benefits to the nations, which have been proved to have actually accrued to
them, through the manifestation of our Saviour. For of a truth from then and not
before the new song of the new Covenant has been sung among all men, and His
wonders have been known (264) and heard by all men through the written gospels.
Yea, and salvation also, by the Resurrection of the Lord from the dead, has been
revealed to all nations, and the true righteousness, by which it has been
clearly proved, that God is not the God of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles.
"Since there is one God," in the words of the holy apostle, |7 "who will judge
the circumcision from their faith, and the uncircumcision through faith." And
the words, "for he cometh to judge the earth," might refer also to His second
Coming."

CHAPTER 7 From Psalm cvii. The Word of God sent forth for the Healing and
Salvation of Souls Long Time afflicted with Evil.

[Passages quoted, Ps. cvii. 15-19, 32-36.] THIS clearly gives the good news of
the Descent of God the Word from heaven, Who is named, and of the result of His
Coming. For it says, "He sent his Word and healed them." And we say distinctly
that the Word of God was He that was sent as the Saviour of all men, Whom we are
taught by the Holy Scriptures to reckon divine. And it (265) darkly suggests
that He came down even unto death for the sake of those who had died before Him,
and in revealing the redemption of those to be saved by Him it shews the reason
of His Coming. For He saved without aid from any one those that had gone before
Him even to the gates of death, healed them and rescued them from their
destruction. And this He did simply by breaking what are called the gates of
death, and crushing the bars of iron. And (b) then the prophecy proceeds to
predict the state of desolation of those who rejected Him when He came. For it
says, "He turned rivers into a wilderness, and rivers of waters into thirst, a
fruitful land into saltness for the wickedness of them that dwell therein":
which you will understand if you behold Jerusalem of old, the famous city of the
Jewish race, her glory and her fruitfulness, despoiled now of her holy citizens
and pious men. For (c) after the coming of Christ she became as the prophet
truly says without fruit or water, and quite deserted, "saltness for the
wickedness of them that dwell therein." |8 To this is added quite in the
prophetic manner a veiled prediction of the change of the long-time desert and
thirsty land, referring either to the individual soul, or to the turning of the
Gentile Church to holiness, and of its fertility in divine words. This is
clearly predicted in a veiled way, when it says, "He made the desert into pools
of water," and that which follows. But to understand this one must have wisdom
from God; according to the monition at the end of the Psalm, which says, "Who is
wise, and he will (d) keep this? "and that which follows.

CHAPTER 8 From Psalms cxvii. and cxviii. The Calling of the Gentiles, God
Manifested, and Pressed is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord.

[Passages quoted, Pss. cxvii. 1 and cxviii. 25.]

(266) HOLY Scripture records that this prophecy was fulfilled when our Lord and
Saviour Christ entered Jerusalem, and a great multitude of men and children went
before Him (b) crying with joy, "Hosanna to the Son of David, Blessed be he that
cometh in the name of the Lord, Hosanna in the highest." For instead of, "O
Lord, save us," as expressed in the Psalm, they cried out the Hebrew "Hosanna,"
which is translated by "save." And the words, "Blessed is he that cometh in the
name of the Lord," explain the words that follow, "The Lord is God and hath
appeared to us." It was, then, one and the same Lord God that appeared to them,
that is to say the Word of God, as He Who is therefore blessed, because He came
among men in the name of the Lord His Father that sent Him. It was therefore in
reproof of the Jews that disbelieved in Him, that He said: "I came in the name
of my Father, and ye received me not. But if one come in his own name, him will
ye receive." So the Holy Spirit suitably addresses the opening verses of the
Psalm not to the Jewish people, but to all the nations. |9

CHAPTER 9 From Psalm cxliii. The Descent of the Lord from Heaven for Men's
Salvation, (d) and the New Song sung thereafter, which is the Song of the New
Covenant.

[Passages quoted, Ps. cxliii. 3, 5, 9.]

I CONSIDER this to be connected with my present subject. (267) For in his wonder
at the knowledge of God the Word coming to men, the Psalmist is astonished above
measure at the love by which He descends from His Divinity, and lessens His
natural Majesty, and reckons the human race worthy of bearing Him. So here he
prays, saying, "Lord, bow the heavens and descend." While in the Seventeenth
Psalm it is written, "And he bowed the heavens, and descended, and it was dark
under his feet. And he rode upon Cherubim, and flew, he flew upon the wings of
the winds," wherein there is a prophecy of His Ascension (b) from earth to
heaven. And when there is a fit opportunity I will shew that we must understand
the Descent and Ascension of God the Word not as of one moving locally, but in
the metaphorical sense which Scripture intends in the use of such conventional
terms. But we should also note here the new Covenant, into which the Coming of
Christ was about to invite men. And the new Covenant is that which succeeds the
old and is given to all nations. And so the oracle before us says, "O God, I
will sing a new song to thee." The words, (c) "Touch the mountains and they
shall smoke," I think are a veiled prophecy of the burning and abolition of all
forms of idolatry, which had its chief seats among the ancients in mountains, it
being a common charge against the Jews themselves, that they worshipped idols on
every high mountain in imitation of foreign nations. |10

CHAPTER 10 (d) From Psalm cxlvii. The Word of God sent on Earth, and in a Short
Time running through All Nations.

[Passage quoted, Ps. cxlvii. 12, 15.]

"HE that sendeth his word on earth, until his word runs swiftly." He that sends
is evidently distinct from Him that (268) is sent. You have then, here, both the
Sender, the Almighty God, and also the Word that was sent, Who having many names
is called by the holy oracles now Wisdom, now Word, now God, and also Lord. And
as you know how in a very short time the word of His teaching has filled the
whole world, I am sure you will wonder at the fulfilment of the prophecy, "Till
his word runs swiftly."

CHAPTER 11 From the Second Book of Kings [= 2 Samuel].

(c) The Lord descending from Heaven, Leader of the Nations that before knew Him
not, and about to cast off the Jewish Nation.

[Passages quoted, 2 Sam. xxii. 1, 10-12, 44-46.]

(d) THE God that bowed the heavens and came down, Who mounted upon the man whom
He had chosen, called here Cherubim by Scripture, flew up with Him making His
Ascension with the divine spirits as His bodyguard, and these are called the
wings of the winds. And it suggests that this was done darkly and in obscurity
by some secret and hidden words, when it says, "And he made darkness his secret
place." What follows agrees with the Incarnation of Christ and shews the
opposition of the Jewish people to Him, and the obedience of the Gentiles to His
teaching. |11 You will find similar sayings in the Seventeenth Psalm, about
which I have already given my views.

CHAPTER 12 From the Third Book of Kings [ = First Book of Kings].

God descending from Heaven, and dwelling with Men on Earth.

[Passage quoted, 1 Kings viii. 26, 27.] THIS is also found in the same words in
Chronicles. God then promised David He would raise up a king from His body, and
would be His father, so that the offspring of the seed of David should be called
the Son of God, and should have His throne in an eternal kingdom. This was
prophesied to David by Nathan in the Second Book of Kings as follows:

"And it shall come to pass when thy days shall have been fulfilled, and thou
shalt sleep with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, who
shall come from thy body, and I will prepare his kingdom. He shall build a house
to my name, and I will establish his throne for ever. I will be to him a father,
and he shall be to me a son." The same is also said in Chronicles. And in the
88th Psalm it is written:

"27. He shall call on me, Thou art my Father, my God and the helper of my
salvation. | 28. And I will will make him my firstborn, | high among the kings
of the earth. | 29. I will keep my mercy for him for ever, | and my covenant
shall stand fast with him, | 30. and I will make his seed last for ever and
ever, | and his: throne as the days of heaven." | And again:

"4. I have sworn | to David my servant, | 5. I will prepare thy seed for ever, |
and I will build thy throne from generation to generation." | |12 And once more:

"36. I have sworn once by my holiness that I will not lie to David. | 37. His
seed shall remain for ever, | and his throne is as the sun before me, | 38. and
as the moon that is established for ever." | And Psalm 131, too, when it records
this, refers the matter to Christ. Hear what it says:

"1. Remember, Lord, David and all his gentleness; | 2. how he sware to the Lord
and vowed a vow unto the God of Jacob." | To which he adds afterwards:

"11. The Lord sware the truth to David, and he will not abolish him. | Of the
fruit of thy body will I set upon thy seat." | And a little lower down he names
more definitely Him that is to arise of the fruit of David's body, as follows:

"17. There will I raise up the horn of David, I have prepared a lantern for my
Christ. | 18. His enemies I will clothe with shame; | but on him shall his glory
flower." | And so Solomon being unique in wisdom, understanding this oracle
given to his father, and perceiving it to be no slight thing, but something
beyond human nature, and more suitable to God than to himself, son of David
though he was, and knowing who was meant by God by the Firstborn, and who was
clearly foretold as the Son of God, was overjoyed at the message, and prayed
that the words of the prophecy might be confirmed, and that He that was foretold
might come, calling Him Firstborn and Son of God. So he says, "And now, O God of
Israel, let thy word be confirmed which thou spakest to thy servant David my
father: Shall God truly dwell with men on earth, if the heaven and the heaven of
heavens will not suffice thee? " |13

CHAPTER 13 From Micah.

Concerning the Descent from Heaven to Men, and concerning the Fall of the Jewish
Nation at His Coming, and the Incorporation of All the Other Nations.

[Passage quoted, Micah i. 2-5.] (271)

HERE, too, in this passage the Descent of the Lord coming forth from His place
is proclaimed plainly. This must mean (b) the Word of God, Whom I have proved in
the previous books to be alone God and Lord after the Supreme and Almighty God.
His place you would rightly understand to be the kingdom of heaven, and the
glorious throne of His Divinity, of which the prophet sang in praise of God,
saying, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever,'' on which the Father bade Him
sit as being His Only-begotten Son, saying, "Sit thou on my right hand." For I
have already shewn (c) that these words can only be referred to our Saviour, God
the Word. So, then, the prophecy before us says that He conies forth from His
place, and will descend upon the high-places of the earth. How are we to
understand this? Shall we take it literally of the hills and mountains of
Israel, which are the subjects of so many prophecies, Jerusalem itself and Mount
Sion, in which our Lord and Saviour spent so much time? If so, their destruction
and ruin at (d) the descent of Christ would be prophesied. And it is the fact
that after the Saviour's coming and the treatment He received all the hills
mentioned were besieged, and utterly desolated. But the rulers of the Jewish
people as well, and their kingdom that existed previously, their sacrificial
system and the seats of their teachers, here called Mountains metaphorically,
are said to be shaken by the Descent of the Lord from heaven. And who could deny
that this was fulfilled after the time of our Saviour Jesus Christ, when he sees
all these things not only shaken, but abolished? And the valleys even now
melting are the Jewish synagogues established in all cities instead of Jerusalem
and Mount (272) Sion, which are full of lamentation and wailing, and melting as
wax at the fire with grief and extreme sorrow for the |14 desolation of their
homes and their long and lasting slavery. And the coming of the Word of God
regarded in another light took place not in chasms and valleys, nor in lowly and
earth-bound thoughts, but in exalted souls. And so the Lord Himself is said in a
wider metaphor to be about to descend on the high-places of earth. Then the
mountains shaken under Him will be those very heights whither He "was led by the
spirit to be tempted of the devil," "when the devil leadeth him to an exceeding
high mountain, and he was with the wild beasts." Or the mountains again might
represent in metaphor the idolatry practised formerly on mountains, and the
principalities and powers working there invisibly, which our Saviour's teaching
was to shake and overthrow in no small degree. For His inspired word and His
miraculous and wondrous strength have insensibly destroyed the powers which from
far ages have attacked mankind. In like manner also the hills melting like wax
from the presence of the fire would be the infernal and earth-bound daemons,
against whom He sent forth fire to consume their lust, saying, "I came to cast
fire upon the earth, and what will I if it be already kindled?" Burned by which
fire, and unable to bear the torture of its unseen flame, they withdrew from the
bodies of men, and acknowledged that which controlled them and drove them out,
crying, "Let us alone, what have we to do with thee, Son of God? Hast thou come
to torment us before the time? We know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God."
And these He chiefly chastised, and destroyed their princes, because not content
with the corruption of the other nations, whereby they had cast them all into
the errors of polytheism, they had also plotted against God's ancient people,
those of the Circumcision, and had endeavoured to seduce even them from their
God to all manner of impiety. And this was the chief reason why the Lord
descended from heaven. Wherefore He says next, "For the iniquity of Jacob is all
this done, and for the transgression of my people Israel." And then He gives an
additional reason for the Descent of the Word, recounting the impiety of the
Jews, and the destruction falling upon them, and heralding the calling of all
nations throughout the world. For these things' sake the Word of God came down
from heaven to earth. Hear this passage: |15

"5. For the impiety of the House of Jacob is all this done, and for the
transgression of the House of Israel. What is the impiety of the House of Jacob?
Is it not Samaria? And what is the sin of Judah? Is it not Jerusalem? 6. And I
will make Samaria a lodge of the field, and a plantation of a vineyard, and I
will draw down to chaos the stones thereof, and will hide the foundations
thereof." And He adds:

"12. Evil hath descended from the Lord on the gates of Jerusalem, the noise of
chariots and horsemen." And again:

"15. O glory of the daughter of Jerusalem, shave and cut off thy choice
children. Enlarge thy widowhood, as an eagle, when thy captives are led from
thee." And moreover:

"Sion shall be ploughed as a field, and Jerusalem shall be as a granary, and the
mount of the house as a grove of the wood."

Sion and Jerusalem and the so-called "mount of the house" are what were
represented before in, "And the mountains shall be shaken from beneath him, and
the valleys shall be melted as wax before the fire for the iniquity of Jacob."
For the mountains and the dwellers thereon were besieged for the iniquity they
had wrought against Him soon and not long after Mount Sion was burned and left
utterly desolate, and the Mount of the House of God became as a grove of the
wood.

If our own observation has any value, we have seen in our own time Sion once so
famous ploughed with yokes of oxen by the Romans and utterly devastated, and
Jerusalem, as the oracle says, deserted like a lodge. And this has come to pass
precisely because of their impieties, for the |16 sake of which the Heavenly
Word has come forth from His own place. And I have already said that the Word of
God came down from heaven and descended on the high places of the earth for
other reasons, both that the mountains which of old lifted themselves up and
exalted themselves against the knowledge of God might be shaken beneath Him
(that is to say the opposing powers, which before His coming enslaved the Hebrew
race as well as the rest of mankind in the practice of impiety and idolatry),
and also that the evil daemons called valleys (through their living in gloomy
chasms, and in the recesses of the body) might melt as wax before the fire and
flee away from men by the power of the divine Word. And there was another
additional reason by no means fortuitous for the descent of the Lord from
heaven, which this prophecy recognizes, namely that all the nations on earth,
the daemons being banished and the ruling spirits shaken, recovering from the
cruel and ceaseless tyranny which had long afflicted them, might attain the
knowledge of Almighty God. And the voice of the same prophet proclaims the same
things further on as follows, uniting them in the same manner under one head:

"And in the last days the Mount of the Lord shall be glorious, prepared upon the
tops of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills, and peoples
shall haste unto it, and many nations shall come and say, Come, let us go up to
the Mount of the Lord, and the house of the God of Jacob, and they will shew us
his way, and we will walk in his paths. For out of Sion shall come forth a law,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, and he will judge in the midst of the
nations."

One can learn at one's leisure in what sense such prophecies of the Call of the
Gentiles are to be understood, and that they were only fulfilled after the
coining of our Saviour. And the opening of the prophecy is in full agreement
with I the truth that the Lord descended not only for the salvation of the
Jewish race, but for that of all nations, in proclaiming to all peoples and all
the inhabitants of the earth, saying, "Hear all peoples, and let the earth
attend, and all that are |17 therein." And it darkly foretold the witness of the
Passion of our Lord, adding, "And the Lord our God shall be for a witness." And
after this the same prophet, having prepared the way by telling of what related
to the fact of the Descent of God the Word from heaven, and foretold what should
be the causes of His coining, proceeds to relate His birth among men, and to
name the place where He should be born, in the following words:

"2. And thou, Bethlehem, house of Ephratha, art the least to be among the
thousands of Judah, out of thee shall come forth for me a leader, to be for a
ruler in Israel, and his goings-forth are from the beginning from the days of
eternity."

Note with care how he says that the goings forth of Him that shall appear at
Bethlehem are from above and from eternity, by which he shews the pre-existence
and essential origin of Him that is to come forth from Bethlehem. Now if any
person can apply the oracle to any one but Jesus, let him shew who it is; but if
it is impossible to find any one but our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the only
Person after the date of this prophecy Who came forth thence and attained to
fame, what should hinder us from acknowledging the truth of the prophecy, which
directs its prediction on Him only? For He alone of all men is known to have
come forth from the before-named Bethlehem after the date of the prophecy,
putting on a human shape, and what had been foretold was fulfilled at His
coming. For at once and not after a long time the woes that were foretold fell
on the Jewish nation, and blessings in accordance with the prophecies on the
nations as well, and He Himself, our Lord and Saviour Who came from Bethlehem,
was shewn to be the ruler of the spiritual Israel, such being the name of all
people of vision and piety. Note too that it is said that the goings-forth of
His Divine Pre-existence are from the beginning and from the days of eternity,
which would not agree with mere humanity.

Then the word of the prophet, a little further on, suggests again the curtailing
and abolition of the ancient ritual of the Law, speaking in the person of the
people: |18

"6. Wherewithal shall I reach the Lord, and lay hold of my God most high?. Shall
I reach him by whole burnt-offerings, by calves a year old? 7. Should I give my
firstborn for my ungodliness, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" And
he makes this answer to them in the person of God:

"8. Has it not been told thee, O man, what is good? And what does the Lord
require of thee, but to do judgment, and to love mercy, and to be ready to walk
after thy God? "

You have then in this prophecy of the Descent of the Lord among men from heaven,
many other things foretold at the same time, the rejection of the Jews, the
judgment on their impiety, the destruction of their royal city, the abolition of
the worship practised by them of old according to the Law of Moses; and on the
other hand, promises of good for the nations, the knowledge of God, a new ideal
of holiness, a new law and teaching coming forth from the land of the Jews. I
leave you to see, how wonderful a fulfilment, how wonderful a completion, the
prophecy has reached after the Coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ.

CHAPTER 14 From Habakkuk. That it was prophesied that the Word of God that
cometh will come and will not tarry.

[Passage quoted, Hab. ii. 2.] AND here it is clearly foretold that the subject
of the prophecy who is coming will come. Who could this be but he who is
referred to above in the words, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the
Lord, the Lord God also has shone upon us"? With which also Zechariah agrees,
when he says: "Behold a man, the Dawn is his name, and |19 he shall rise from
below." The same prophet, too, noting the time adds, "At eventide it shall be
light. If he delays, wait for him." Instead of which Aquila reads, "If he tarry
expect him, for he that cometh will come, and will not tarry." And the Epistle
to the Hebrews has this in mind when it says:

"Cast not away then your confidence, which has great recompense of reward. For
ye have need of patience, that, doing the will of God, ye may receive the
promise. For yet a little while, and he that cometh will come, and will not
tarry. And the just shall live by my faith. And if he draw back, my soul hath no
pleasure in him." And note how clearly the Epistle arranges what was obscure in
the prophetic writing, because of the inversion of the clauses. For the prophecy
says," He that cometh will come and will not tarry, and adds, "If he draw back,
my soul hath no pleasure in him," and this addition would seem to refer to him
that cometh and doth not tarry, which is absurd. For how could it be said of him
that God takes no pleasure in him? But the placing side by side of the divided
clauses by a change in the arrangement of them preserves the sense. For after,
"Yet a little while and he that cometh will come and shall not tarry," it adds
next, "The just shall live by my faith. Then what was first in the prophecy it
places second in, "And if he draw back my soul taketh no pleasure in him." For
as Scripture has already once foretold through the prophecy, that the light
promised, to all nations by Christ's Coming "shall rise late and in the evening,
and shall not deceive" (for so Aquila interprets instead of "come to nothing,")
it next exhorts to patience, because the coming of the subject of the prophecy
is to be late and in the evening, in the words, "If he tarry await him, or if he
delay expect him, for he that cometh |20 will come and will not tarry," and
encourages the hearer to trust the prediction, saying, that he that trusts it,
shewn by his very faith to he just, shall live the life according to God, as on
the other hand he that does not trust, drawing back through lack of boldness,
and putting no faith in the words, "My soul hath no pleasure in him." So, then,
if we follow this course and place the first clause last, and the last first, we
shall preserve the sense of the passage, putting, "The just shall live by my
faith," after, "For he that cometh will come and will not tarry," by transposing
the clauses, and (278) adding to this, "If he draw back my soul taketh no
pleasure in him." And Aquila agrees with this interpretation saying, "If he
delay, expect him, for he that cometh will come, and will not tarry. Lo, if he
be sluggish, my soul is not true in him, and the just shall live by his faith."

CHAPTER 15 From the same. That the Heating about the Descent of the Lord from
Heaven is Terrible, and His Works Wonderful, and at His Coming the Whole Earth
shall be filed with His Praise, when the Word of His New Covenant shall pervade
all Men.

[Passage quoted, Hab. iii. 2-5.]

(d) LISTENING to himself, or rather to the divine prophetic spirit within him,
which said of the subject of the prophecy, "He that cometh will come, and will
not tarry, and the just shall live by my faith," and believing as a just man in
the oracle, the holy prophet says in the passage before us, "O Lord, I have
heard thy report, and I was afraid," and the words that follow in which he
clearly announces that God will come to men. And who could this be who was known
of old, and was to be known afterwards when the time drew near, and (279) was to
be shewn forth at the date predicted, but that same Being before shewn to be the
second Lord of the Universe, who agreeably to the prophecy at the end of the
ages has |21 been proclaimed for all to hear? It was surely His works that are
written in the Holy Gospels, and it was clearly His Birth from the Virgin
Tabernacle whence he sprang, and how "being in the form of God, he thought it
not a thing to be grasped at to be equal with God, but emptied himself, taking
the form of a slave," and it was the miracles He performed among men, and the
insults offered to Him by the Jewish race that the prophet anticipated with the
eyes of his soul; and learning of the Holy Spirit his Teacher what would accrue
to minds purified from sin, he confessed that he was astonished and afraid at
what he heard, and said, "Lord, I have heard thy report, and I was afraid, I
understood thy works, and was astonished." Our Lord and Saviour, too, the Word
of God Himself, "was known between two lives." The word ζωῶν is plural and
accented with circumflex on the last syllable as the plural of the singular noun
ζωή (life). It is not ζώων accented acute on the penultimate from ζῶον (a living
creature), but with circumflex on the last syllable (ζωῶν) from nominative
plural ζωαί (lives). He says, therefore, He was known between two lives. One
life is that according to God, the other that according to man; the one mortal,
the other eternal. And the Lord having experienced both, is rightly said to have
been made known between two lives in the LXX translation. Aquila translates
differently: "In the nearing of the years, cause it to live." What does "it"
mean here but "thy work"? And Theodotion says: "In the midst of the years, cause
him to live," and Symmachus renders: "Within the years, revive him." They all by
the use of ζώωσον (cause to live) shew clearly that the word in the original
does not refer to irrational or rational animals. And so following the rendering
of the Septuagint, "He was made known between two lives," and not the
commentators who have preceded me, I understand that the two lives of the
Subject of the prophecy are referred to, the Divine and the Human. |22 To this
the prophet adds: "When my soul is troubled thou wilt in wrath remember mercy,"
teaching that when he foresaw the time of the Passion of the Subject of the
prophecy he was troubled in spirit. Yet at that very time, he says, in which I
was troubled in spirit, though at no other time such anger ever threatened men
for the impiety dared against their Lord, the Lord of Love Himself in place of
wrath remembered mercy, as the Son of the good Father. For His Passion became to
all the world the ground of God's salvation and mercy. To this is added: "God
will come from Thaeman." And Thaeman translated into Greek is "consummation," so
that it means simply, "God will come at the consummation." For at the
consummation of the age and in these last days the kindness of the God of the
Universe has been made evident to us through our Saviour. But perhaps he
foretells also His Second Coming in glory, in which case a fresh beginning is
made at' "God will come from Thaeman," as shewing that at the consummation of
the age He will come from the southern part of the heaven. For Thaeman is
translated "south." Wherefore Theodotion translates thus: "God will come from
the south." And you will understand the sentence that follows if you compare
with it these words in Zechariah:

"8. I saw the night, and behold a man sitting on a bay horse, and he stood in
the midst of the shady mountains."

I believe this rider on the bay horse who stands in the midst of the shady
mountains to be the same person mentioned in the prophecy before us, which says
that the Holy One will come from a thick and shady mountain. |23 In each passage
shady mountains are mentioned, and I believe they refer to the Paradise of God,
which He planted eastward in Eden, or perhaps to the Heavenly Jerusalem. For
"there are mountains around it, and the Lord is in the midst of his people." And
these mountains are said to be shady, because they are full of divine powers and
holy spirits, as of trees planted there and far-spreading. But in Zechariah
clearly the vision was of a man riding on a bay horse, by which the Incarnation
of our Saviour was meant, and the flesh in which He rode: while here "God a Holy
One" is named. For to mark that it was from God that He made His approach to
men, and that He arrived from diviner regions, it is said, "God came from
Thaeman, and the Holy One from a thick and shady mountain." And then it adds:
"His glory covered the heavens, and the earth is full of his praise, and his ray
shall be as light." In which both the glory of His Heavenly Kingdom is shewn,
and also the increase of the praise of the teaching about Him that will be
spread through all the earth. And the expression, "horns in his hands," shews
the symbols of His rule, wherewith He drives away the invisible and opposing
powers by pushing and butting them. And agreeing with this he adds: "He made the
love of his power strong": and the greatest sign of His strong affection and
love to men was "that his Word should go before his face," meaning the Gospel of
Salvation, which should come forth and scour the plains, so that soon all the
world should be filled with the salvation offered by Him to all men according to
the prophecy which said, "Before his face shall his Word go forth, and shall go
out into the plains." His Word will bring a further and more exact fulfilment to
this prophecy and its context at His Second Coming, which it is not now the
place to expound. |24

CHAPTER 16 From Zechariah. That the Almighty Lord states that He is sent by
Another Almighty Lord for the Destruction of the Wicked.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ii. 8.] IN these words the Almighty Lord Himself says
that He has been sent, and teaches who it was that sent Him, saying, "And ye
shall know that the Almighty Lord has sent me." Here, then, you have clearly two
Persons using one Name, the Almighty Lord that sent, and Him that is sent having
the same Name as the Sender. And whom else could you suppose Him that is sent to
be, but Him that we have so often called God the Word, Who states that He is
sent by the Father, and says clearly, "After his glory he has sent me," shewing
that though pre-existing in the glory of the Father He was sent afterwards unto
the nations that spoiled you? For the Word of God was sent unto the nations, who
before were hostile to the people of God, and subjected them to Himself, making
a spoil of them by His disciples, who belonged to the Jewish nation, which the
Gentiles had long spoiled enslaving it to their own idolatry. This, then, He
says that the nations will suffer, as He ordained. For as they perverted the
people of God from their ancestral religion, and made them a spoil for their own
daemons, so some day shall they be made spoils from their fathers' idolatry to
them who of old have served them, and be brought under the yoke of the Jewish
religion. And the Lord says that this will be done by Himself, as He will be
sent by His Father to accomplish it. It might also be said that certain
invisible spiritual powers are meant by the nations which spoiled and enslaved
the souls of men, which the Word of God here says He loves as the apple of His
eye. And the proof of His great love to the human race is that He did not draw
back, though He was the Word of God and in the glory of the Father, but agreed
to live with men and govern them. |25

CHAPTER 17 From the same.

How the Lord foretells that He will come from Heaven and dwell among Men, and
that the Nations will flee to Him, and He states that the was sent by Another
Almighty Lord stronger than Himself.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ii. 10.] As it is now my object to unfold from the
prophets the second cause of our Lord's living our life on earth, the prophecy
before us appears to state it so clearly that it hardly needs any elaboration.
You will notice that He gives the cause of His coming, where He says, "And many
nations shall flee unto the Lord in that day, and they shall be to me for a
people." And the Word announces this to the daughter of Sion, calling the Church
of God by this name, through her seeming to be the daughter of the heavenly
Jerusalem, she that is the mother of the Saints, according to the holy apostle.
Or the Church of God might be called the daughter of Sion for another reason as
one separated from the former congregation of the Jews by the apostles and
evangelists, who also were the children of a mother divorced for her own
impiety, and a widow because she had driven away her Husband, Who rebuked her by
the prophets and said, "Hast thou not called me as a husband, and father, and
leader of thy virginity?" And accusing their mothers ways also to them that were
born of her He says: "Where is the bill of thy mother's divorcement, by which I
rejected her?" And again: "Judge the cause of your mother, judge it, because she
is not my wife, and I am not her husband."

So, then, this prophecy rightly announces the presence of the Lord to those who
had rejected their mother (calling them) the daughter of the Lord. And it is the
Church of the Gentiles that is reckoned by the apostles of our Saviour to have
taken the place of her that before was daughter. |26

CHAPTER 18 From the same. Of the Coming of the Lord, and of the Events of His
Passion.

[Passage quoted, Zech. xiv. 1-10.]

AFTER the first siege of Jerusalem, and its total destruction and desolation by
the Babylonians, and after the Return of the Jews from their enemies' land to
their own, which came to pass in the time of Cyrus king of Persia, when
Jerusalem has just been restored, and the Temple and its Altar renewed by Darius
the Persian, the present prophecy foretells a second siege of Jerusalem which is
to take place afterwards, which it suffered from the Romans, after its
inhabitants had carried through their outrage on our Saviour Jesus Christ. Thus
the coming of our Saviour and the events connected therewith are very clearly
shewn in this passage—I mean what was done at the time of His Passion, and the
siege that came on the Hebrew race directly after, the taking of Jerusalem, the
call of the Gentiles also, and the knowledge attained by all nations of the one
and only God. But the inspired prophet pathetically bewails the woes of the Jews
as those of his own people, and begins his prophecy with a cry against them. He
means by "days of the Lord," here as well as in other places, the time of our
Lord's presence among men. And he clearly shews how the Lord Himself, as being
the true Light, will become some day the maker of His own days, and will shine
on all men in the world, all the nations receiving Him and the rays of His
light, when all nations are enlightened, according to the words, "I have set
Thee for a light to the Gentiles, for a covenant of my race," and the Jewish
nation through their unbelief will fall into great trouble. For such is the
meaning of "Behold the days of the Lord come, and thy spoils shall be divided
within thee, and I will gather all the Gentiles to Jerusalem to war. And the
city shall be taken, the houses plundered, and the women ravished, and half of
the city shall go into captivity." |27 And after the siege of Jerusalem, and the
captivity of the Jews which succeeds it, he next adds a prophecy of good things
for all: "And the Lord shall be King over all the earth." And again: "There
shall be one Lord, and his name one, encircling all the earth and the
wilderness." But who would not be surprised at the fulfilment of a prophecy
which revealed that the Jewish people would undergo these sufferings in the days
of the Lord? For as soon as Jesus our Lord and Saviour had come and the Jews had
outraged Him, everything that had been predicted was fulfilled against them
without exception 500 years after the prediction: from the time of Pontius
Pilate to the sieges under Nero, Titus and Vespasian they were never free from
all kinds of successive calamities, as you may gather from the history of
Flavius Josephus. It is probable that half the city at that time perished in the
siege, as the prophecy says. And not long after, in the reign of Hadrian, there
was another Jewish revolution, and the remaining half of the city was again
besieged and driven out, so that from that day to this the whole place has not
been trodden by them.

Now if any one supposes that this was fulfilled in the time of Antiochus
Epiphanes, let him inquire if the rest of the prophecy can be referred to the
times of Antiochus —I mean the captivity undergone by the people, the standing
of the Lord's feet on the Mount of Olives, and whether the Lord became King of
all the earth in that day, and whether the name of the Lord encircled the whole
earth and the desert during the reign of Antiochus. And how can the fulfilment
of the remainder of the prophecy in the days of Antiochus be asserted? But,
according to my interpretation, they are fulfilled both literally and also in
another sense. For after the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ, their city,
Jerusalem itself, and the whole system and institutions of the Mosaic worship
were destroyed; and at once they underwent captivity in mind as well as body, in
refusing to accept the Saviour and Ransomer of the souls of men, Him Who came to
preach release to those enslaved by evil daemons, and giving of sight to those
blind in mind. And while they suffered through their unbelief, those of |28 them
who recognized their Ransomer became His own disciples, apostles and
evangelists, and many others of the Jews believed on Him, of whom the apostle
says, "So also now there is a remnant according to the election of grace." And
"If the Lord of Sabaoth had not left unto us a seed we should have been as
Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorra." They were preserved safe from
the metaphorical siege, and also from the siege literally understood. For the
apostles and disciples of our Saviour, and all the Jews that believed on Him,
being far from the land of Judaea, and scattered among the other nations, were
enabled at that time to escape the ruin of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And the
prophecy anticipated and foretold this where it said, "And the remnant of my
people shall not be utterly destroyed." To which it adds afterwards, "And the
Lord shall go forth, and shall fight for those nations, as a day of his battle
in the day of war." For which nations will the Lord fight, but for those that
shall besiege Jerusalem? The passage shews that the Lord Himself will fight for
the besiegers, being among them and drawn up with them, like their general and
commander warring against Jerusalem. For it does not say that the Lord will
fight against the nations. With whom and against whom, then, will He fight?
Surely against Jerusalem and her inhabitants, concerning whom it is spoken. And
the words, "And his feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives, which
is before Jerusalem to the eastward," what else can they mean than that the Lord
God, that is to say the Word of God Himself, will stand, and stand firm, upon
His Church, which is here metaphorically called the Mount of Olives? For as "My
Beloved had a vineyard," and "There was a vineyard of the Lord of Sabaoth," are
used in a figurative sense of "the house of Israel and the plant of Judah His
beloved vine," so also we may say in the same sense that the Church of the (d)
Gentiles has become an olive-garden to the Master, which of old He planted with
wild olives, and grafted them on the apostolic roots of the good olive after
cutting away the old branches, as the apostle teaches. And the Lord planted it
for Himself, saying as much in the prophecy: "The Lord hath called thy name a
beautiful and shady olive." For when the first vineyard should have brought
forth |29 grapes it brought forth thorns, and not justice but a cry, God rightly
withdrew from it as unfruitful, its mound and its wall, and gave it to its
enemies, "to rob and to tread down," according to the prophecy of Isaiah, but
established another field for Himself, here named "the olive-garden," as that
which had obtained God's mercy, and been planted by Christ with ever-flourishing
plants, that is with souls that are holy and nourish the light, which can say,
"I am like a fruitful olive-tree in the house of God." And this Mount of Olives
is said to be over against Jerusalem, because it was established by God after
the fall of Jerusalem, instead of the old earthly Jerusalem and its worship. For
as Scripture said above with reference to Jerusalem: "The city shall be taken,
and the nations that are her enemies and foes shall be gathered together against
her, and her spoils shall be divided," it could not say that the feet of the
Lord should stand upon Jerusalem. How could that be, once it were destroyed? But
it says that they will stand with them that depart from it to the mount opposite
the city called the Mount of Olives. And this, too, the prophet Ezekiel
anticipates by the Holy Spirit and foretells. For he says:

"22. And the Cherubim lifted their wings, and the wheels beside them, 23. and
the glory of the God of Israel was on them above them, and he stood on the mount
which was opposite to the city." Which it is possible for us to see literally
fulfilled in another way even to-day, since believers in Christ all congregate
from all parts of the world, not as of old time because of the glory of
Jerusalem, nor that they may worship in the ancient Temple at Jerusalem, but
they rest there that they may learn both about the city being taken and
devastated as the prophets foretold, and that they may worship at the Mount of
Olives opposite to the city, whither the glory of the Lord migrated when it left
the former city. There |30 stood in truth according to the common and received
account the feet of our Lord and Saviour, Himself the Word of God, through that
tabernacle of humanity He had borne up the Mount of Olives to the cave that is
shewn there; there He prayed and delivered to His disciples on the summit of the
Mount of Olives the mysteries of His end, and thence He made His Ascension into
heaven, as Luke tells us in the Acts of the Apostles, saying that while the
apostles were with Him on the Mount of Olives:

"While they beheld he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sight.
And as they gazed steadfastly into heaven while he went up, behold two men stood
by them in white apparel, who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing
into heaven? This same Jesus that is taken up from you into heaven shall so come
in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." To which he adds: "Then they
returned from the mount called the Mount of Olives, which is opposite to
Jerusalem." The Mount of Olives is therefore literally opposite to Jerusalem and
to the east of it, but also the Holy Church of God, and the mount upon which it
is founded, of which the Saviour teaches: "A city set on a hill cannot be hid,"
raised up in place of Jerusalem that is fallen never to rise again, and thought
worthy of the feet of the Lord, is figuratively not only opposite to Jerusalem,
but east of it as well, receiving the rays of the divine light, and become |31
much before Jerusalem, and near to the Sun of Righteousness Himself, of Whom it
is said: "And on them that fear me shall the sun of righteousness arise." And if
it says next: "That the Mount of Olives shall be divided, half of it to the east
and towards the sea, a very great chasm, and half of it shall lean towards the
north, and half of it towards the south," it possibly shews the expansion1 of
the Church throughout the whole inhabited world, for it has filled the east, and
the western and eastern nations; it stretches to the western sea, and the isles
therein; yea, it has reached to west and south, and to north and north-east. On
all sides and everywhere the Church figuratively called the Olive of the Lord is
planted. And it is possible that by its division is figuratively meant the
schisms and heresies and moral declensions in everyday life that have taken
place in the Church of Christ, and are even now taking place; for it says, the
mountain shall be divided, half of it towards the east and the sea, a very great
chasm, and half of it shall lean towards the north, and half of it towards the
south, as being divided into four parts, two of which are worthier and better,
and two the reverse. And note in this passage how the part to the east and the
part to the south may refer to two sections of those who have made progress in
the things of God, the first those who are perfected in knowledge and reason and
the other graces of the Holy Spirit; and the second, those who live a good life
but pass their time in ways self-chosen. And the other two parts separated from
the first, one to the sea and one towards the north, both signify tendency to
evil. For "from the face of the north," he says, "shall be burned the evil of
all the inhabitants of the earth," while the Dragon is said to have his home in
the sea. So that, probably, two kinds of character in those that fall away from
the Church, the morally sinful, and the one who slips away from healthy and
orthodox knowledge, are here |32 figuratively represented by the prophecy as
divisions in the Mount of Olives. To this he adds afterwards: "And the valley of
my mountains shall be closed up, and the cleft of my mountains shall be joined
unto Asael, and shall be closed up as it was blocked up in the days of the
earthquake in the days of Ozias king of Judah."

What can God's "valley of mountains" mean here, but the outward Jewish worship
according to the Mosaic Law practised for long ages before in Jerusalem, which
the present prophecy foretells is to be cut off, as if it were closed up,
saying: "And the valley of my mountains shall be closed up, and the cleft of
mountains shall be joined unto Asael, and shall be closed up"? Instead of which
Symmachus translated: "And the valley of my mountains shall be closed up, and
also the cleft of mountains shall approach that which is beside it, and shall be
closed up," shewing the cause of the closing up of the valley. And what was
this', but that it came near and approached what was beside it? And this mount
of the Lord was the before-named Mount of Olives, which is called Asael in the
Septuagint. And this word means in Hebrew "Work of God." And so, he says, the
ancient valley coming near to the mountains, and to the Christian Church, and to
the work of God, will be closed up and shut off, as it was closed up before the
earthquake in the days of Ozias king of Judah. Though I have set myself to the
task of inquiring, and gone through the Holy Scripture to discover if the valley
mentioned here was "closed up before the earthquake" in the days of Ozias, I
have found nothing in the Books of Kings, for there was no physical earthquake
in his time, nor is anything recorded in those books such as is here told about
the valley. But Ozias is described as at first having been righteous, and then
it is related that he was lifted up in mind, and dared to offer sacrifice to God
Himself, and that his face (b) became leprous in consequence. This is what the
Book |33 of Kings establishes. But Josephus carefully studied the additional
comments of the expounders as well, and a Hebrew of the Hebrews as he was, hear
his description of the events of those times. He tells how:

"Though the priests urged Ozias to go out of the Temple and not to break the law
of God, he angrily threatened them with death, unless they held their peace. And
meanwhile an earthquake shook the earth, and a bright light shone through a
breach in the Temple, and struck the king's face, so that at once it became
leprous. And before the city at the place called Eroga, the western half of the
Mount was split asunder, and rolling four stadia stopped at the eastern
mountain, so as to block up the royal approach and gardens. [Jos., Ant. ix. 10,
4.] This I take from the work of Josephus on Jewish Antiquities. And I found in
the beginning of the Prophet Amos the statement that he began to prophesy "in
the days of Ozias, king of Judah, two years before the earthquake." What
earthquake he does not clearly say. But I think the same prophet further on
suggests this earthquake, when he says: "I saw the Lord standing on the altar.
And He said, Strike the altar, and the doors shall be shaken, and strike the
heads of all, and the remnant I will slay with the sword."

Here I understand a prediction of the earthquake, and of the destruction of the
ancient solemnities of the Jewish race, and of the worship practised by them in
Jerusalem, the ruin that should overtake them after the coming of our Saviour,
when, since they rejected the Christ of God, the true High Priest, leprosy
infected their souls, as in the days of Ozias, when the Lord Himself standing on
the altar gave leave to him that struck, saying: "Strike the altar." For He
shewed this in effect, when He said: "Your house |34 is left unto you desolate."
Concurrently, too, with His Passion "The veil of the Temple was rent from the
top to the bottom," as Josephus records as happening also in the time of Ozias.
Then, first the courts were shaken, when the earth was shaken at the time of His
Passion, and not long after, they underwent their final ruin, the striker
received authority and struck upon the heads of all. And so we see how at this
time the valley of the mountains of God was closed up, as was done in the days
of Ozias. Actually and literally in the siege by the Romans, in the course of
which I believe such things happened, and figuratively, also, when the outward
and lower worship of the Mosaic Law was prevented any longer from activity by
the earthquake which according to his prophecy came upon the Jewish race, and by
the other causes recorded.

After this the prophecy recurring to the Coming of the Lord announces it more
clearly, saying: "And the Lord my God shall come, and all His holy ones with
Him," referring either to His apostles and disciples as holy ones, or certain
invisible powers and ministering spirits, of whom it was said: "And angels came
and ministered to him." And then of the Corning of the Lord, he says: "It shall
be day, and it shall not be light, and cold and frost shall I be for one day."
Instead of which Symmachus translated:

"And in that day there shall be no light, but frost and cold shall be for one
day, which is known to the Lord, not day nor night, but at eventide it shall be
light."

See how clearly this description of the day of our Saviour's Passion, a day in
which "there shall be no light," was fulfilled, since "from the sixth hour to
the ninth hour there was darkness over all the earth." And also the "frost and
cold," since according to Luke:

"They led Jesus to the palace of the high priest. And Peter followed afar off.
And while they kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, he sat clown, according
to Mark, with the others to warm himself. And John, too, especially mentions the
cold, saying, The servants and the ministers stood, having made a fire of coals,
for it was cold, and they warmed themselves.'' And this day, he says, was known
to the Lord, and was not |35 night. It was not day, because, as has been said
already, "there shall be no light"; which was fulfilled, when "from the sixth
hour there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour." Nor was it
night, because "at eventide it shall be light" was added, which also was
fulfilled when the day regained its natural light after the ninth hour. And this
was fulfilled figuratively as well, generally in the Jewish race, darkness,
cold, and frost coming on them after their outrage on the Christ, their
understanding being darkened, so that the light of the Gospel should not shine
in their hearts, and their love to God waxing cold, and then at eventide the
light of the knowledge of the Christ arose, so that they who sat of old in
darkness and the shadow of death saw a great light, in the words of the prophet
Isaiah. And in that day it says: "Living water shall come forth out of
Jerusalem." This is that spiritual, sweet, life-giving and saving drink of the
teaching of Christ, of which He speaks in the Gospel according to John, when
instructing the Samaritan woman:

"If thou knewest who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldst
have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water." This was the
living water, then, that came forth from Jerusalem? For it was thence that its
Gospel went forth, and its heralds filled the world, which is meant by the
words: "The living water shall go forth to the first sea and the last sea," by
which is meant the bounds of the whole world, that toward the Eastern Ocean
being called "the first sea," that toward the West being meant by "the last
sea," which, indeed, the living water of saving Gospel teaching has filled. Of
which He also taught, when He said: "Whosoever shall drink of the water, which I
shall give him, shall never thirst." And again He says: "Rivers of living water
shall flow out of his belly, springing |36 up into everlasting life." And again:
"If any thirst, let him come unto me and drink."

Then after the refreshing saving spiritual blood has fallen on every race of
mankind from Jerusalem, which is more clearly described in another place in the
words: "A law shall go forth from Sion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem,
and it shall judge in the midst of the nations," it says: "The Lord shall be
King." He shall not be King in Jerusalem, nor of the Jewish race; but, over all
the earth in that day. And this agrees with what I have quoted from the Psalms,
where it was said: "The Lord reigneth over the nations," and also: "Tell it
among the nations, the Lord reigneth." The prophecy is that this will be
fulfilled in the days of the Lord. For the whole prophecy opens with: "Behold,
the days of the Lord come, and these things shall come to pass." And what is
meant by "these things," but the siege of Jerusalem, and the passing of the Lord
to the Mount of Olives, according to the words, "The Lord shall come," and the
events of the day of His Passion, and the living water, flowing in all the
world, and to crown all, the Kingdom of the Lord ruling over all the nations,
and His One Name, filling all the earth—in short, what I have briefly shown to
be fulfilled?

It is also quite clear that the name "Christian," derived from the name of the
Christ of God, has filled the whole world. This, too, the prophecy foretells,
when it says: "And his name shall be one, encircling all the earth,, and the
wilderness." And you can test each expression at leisure for yourself, and carry
the interpretation still further. |37

CHAPTER 19 From Baruch.

It is prophesied that the God of the Prophets, having laid down the Complete Way
of Knowledge by the Mosaic Law to the Jews, will some Day afterwards be seen on
Earth, and mingle among Men.

[Passage quoted, Baruch iii. 29-37.] I NEED add nothing to these inspired words,
which so (295) clearly support my argument. (c)

CHAPTER 20 From Isaiah.

It is prophesied that the Christ will come into Egypt, and What Things will come
to pass at His Coming. (d) [Passage quoted, Isa. xix. 1-4 and the context.]

HERE the prophecy before us states that the Second after (296) the God and Lord
of the Universe, I mean the Word of God, will come into Egypt, and will come not
imperceptibly nor invisibly, nor without any bodily vesture, but riding on a
light cloud, or better "on light thickness": for such is said to be the meaning
of the Hebrew word. Let the sons of the Hebrews tell us, then, on what occasion
after Isaiah's time the Lord visited Egypt, and what Lord he was. For . the
Supreme God is one: let them say how He is said to ride on "light thickness,"
and to alight locally on any part of the earth. And let them interpret "light
thickness," and (b) explain why the Lord is said not to visit Egypt without it.
And also when the words of the prophecy are recorded to have been fulfilled, the
shaking of the idols of Egypt made by hand, I mean, and the warring of Egyptians
with Egyptians through the Coming of the Lord. And their gods, that is to say
the daemons, that were so mighty of old, when did they have power no more, and
refrain from answering their (c) |38 inquirers through fear of the Lord? And
into the hands of what cruel lord, let them say, and of what kings was Egypt
delivered after the coming of the Lord that was foretold, and why when the Lord
came they were delivered to evil rulers? And let him, who likes, interpret the
rest of the prophecy in the same way. But I contend that it can only be
understood consistently, of the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ to men.
For He, being Word of God and (d) Power of God, fulfilled the aforesaid
prediction both literally and metaphorically, visiting the land of the Egyptians
on a light cloud. The name, "light cloud," is allegorically given to the
visitation He made by means of the Body, which He took of the Virgin and the
Holy Spirit, as the Hebrew original and Aquila clearly suggests, when he says,
"Behold the Lord rides on light thickness, and conies to Egypt," naming the body
that came from the Holy Spirit, "light thickness." And surely this part of the
prophecy was literally fulfilled, when the Angel of the Lord appeared in a dream
to Joseph and said: "Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee
into Egypt, and stay there (297) until I tell thee." For then, the Lord God the
Word, uniting with the child's growth, and present in the Flesh that had been
furnished Him of the Holy Virgin, visited the land of the Egyptians. (His flesh
was "thick" as representing bodily substance, "light" again through its being
better than ours, and it is called "a light cloud "because it was not formed of
the sensuous passions of corruption, but of the Holy Spirit.) But the cause of
His journey thither is as follows. When it is remembered that the first origin
of idolatrous error was in Egypt, and the Egyptians seemed to (b) be the most
superstitious of men, and bitter enemies of the people of God, and as far
removed from the prophets as possible, we can see why the Power of God came to
them first of all. And therefore the word of Gospel teaching has waxed stronger
among the Egyptians than among any other men. Hence this prophecy foretells that
the Lord will |39 sojourn among them. But it does not say that the Egyptians
will come to the land of the Jews, nor worship him at Jerusalem, nor become
Jewish proselytes there according to the enactments of Moses, nor sacrifice at
the altar in Jerusalem. It says naught of this, but that the Lord will (c)
Himself visit the Egyptians, and will think these men worthy of His Presence,
and will be the occasion of great blessings to them. For His sojourn would
accomplish those very things, which we see to have been actually fulfilled after
the appearance of our Saviour Jesus Christ. Let us see what these were. The evil
and noxious daemons who infested Egypt before, inhabiting images for long ages,
and enslaving (d) the souls of the Egyptians with all manner of deceitful
superstition, when they became aware of a strange divine power sojourning among
them, were all at once disturbed and tossed to and fro, and their heart and
power of thought was minished within them, yielding to and conquered by the
invisible power that drave on them and consumed them with its sacred word as
with fire. Yea, the daemons suffered thus invisibly when our Saviour Jesus
Christ sojourned in Egypt in flesh and blood; and, again, when afterwards His
|40 (298) Gospel was preached openly to the Egyptians as well as to the other
nations, for His unseen power was with His Apostles imperceptibly working with
them, co-operating, announcing by their tongues His holy teaching, exhorting men
to worship only the one and true God, and rescuing the victims from the daemons
that of old had been deceived by them. Hence, soon among the Egyptians as among
(b) other nations, revolution and civil war arose, between those who gave up
polytheistic error and turned to the Word of Christ, and those who warred with
them, urged on by their own daemons, so that brothers were parted one from the
other, and the dearest fought together because of the Gospel of Christ, for the
oracle says, "And Egyptians shall rise against Egyptians, and a man shall fight
with his brother, and a (c) man with his neighbour." And our Saviour Himself
confirms the prophet's prediction, saying in the Gospels:

"Brother shall deliver brother to death, and father child, and children shall
rise up against their parents and slay them." And again:

"Think not that I came to give peace on earth. I say not so unto you, but
division. For there shall be from this time five in one house divided, three
against two and two against three: For the father shall be divided from his son,
and the son from his father, the mother against her daughter, and the daughter
against her mother, the mother-in-law against the bride, and the bride against
her mother-in-law."

(d) How do those words differ from the prophet's cry concerning the coming of
the Lord to Egypt: "Egyptians shall rise against Egyptians, and man shall war
against his brother"? And the law of the new Covenant of Christ was raised
against the law of polytheistic superstition, when the law of idolatrous nations
warred against the teaching of Christ, and the city and polity of the Church of
Christ took the |41 place of the polities of the heathen nations. And this
explains "city against city, and law against law." It is the fact also that all
the Egyptian idolaters, and the spirit of idolatry working in them, are even now
conscious of their confusion, and though they make many plans against the
teaching of Christ, to quench it, and abolish it from among (299) men, yet they
are ever scattered by God, as it is said in the prophecy, "And the spirit of the
Egyptians shall be disturbed within them, and I will scatter their counsel." And
they who make many inquiries and ask endless questions against us of the oracles
and diviners of their gods, and of the daemons that haunt the idols, and the
familiar spirits who were of old so powerful among them, get no more profit of
them. For Scripture says:

"And they will inquire of their gods, and their idols, (b) and the familiar
spirits." But when they flee, it says, to them that falsely appear to be gods,
they will receive no help, for then will God chiefly deliver them to cruel kings
and rulers, when under the influence of their daemons, and in their power, they
arouse persecutions against the Churches of Christ. And, please, notice the
fact, that until the appearance of our Saviour Jesus Christ all Egypt had its
own kings, as a separate (c) and responsible state, and the Egyptians were
autonomous and free, and their dynasty was great and famous through long ages,
and it was after that date, when Augustus, in whose time our Lord was born,
being the first Roman to subjugate Egypt, captured Cleopatra the last of the
Ptolemies, that they came under the Roman power, laws, and enactments, losing
their former autonomy and freedom. So that here also the prophecy is true,
regarding first the governors (d) and rulers sent out to those places, and the
other officials in their several positions, saying, "And I will deliver Egypt
into the hand of cruel rulers," and also in what follows regarding the general
conduct of the government.

Instead of which Aquila says, "And a mighty king shall reign over them." And
Symmachus, "And a strong king shall reign over them." Thus the kingdom of Rome
seems to be meant, which has bound with bridle and bond not only the Egyptians,
the most superstitious of men, but all other men as well, so that they dare no
longer to blaspheme against the Church of our Saviour Jesus Christ. And after
(300) |42 this the prophecy proceeds to darker and disguised sayings, which
require longer and more profound allegorical interpretation, which in the proper
place shall receive their proper exposition at leisure when with God's help I
treat of the promises.

CHAPTER 21 From the same. A Promise of Good Things to the Church of the
Gentiles, that before was deserted, and to Sick Souls the Manifest (c) Presence
of God, and Marvellous Saving Acts.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xxxv. 1-7.]

HERE also the Coming of God for salvation, bringing many blessings, is precisely
foretold. The prophet says that there will be a cure for the deaf, sight for the
blind, yea, even healing for the lame and tongue-tied, and this was only
fulfilled at the Coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ, by Whom the eyes of the
blind were opened, and the deaf regained their hearing; why need I say, how many
palsied and deaf and lame also received physical cure by the hands of His (301)
disciples? And how many others, afflicted with various diseases and maladies,
received of Him healing and salvation, according to the inspired prediction of
prophecy, and according to the unimpeachable testimony of the Holy Gospels? And
the prophecy here disguises under the name of "desert" the Church of the
Gentiles, which for long years deserted of God is being evangelized by those of
whom we are speaking, and it says that besides other blessings the glory of
Libanus will be given to the desert. Now it is customary to call (b) Jerusalem
Lebanon allegorically, as I will show, when I have time, by proofs from Holy
Scripture. This prophecy before us, therefore, teaches that by God's presence
with men the glory of Libanus will be given to that which is called "desert,"
that is to say, the Church of the Gentiles. And for, "And the honour of Carmel,"
Aquila says, "the |43 beauty of Carmel, and of Sharon, they shall see the glory
of (c) the Lord." Symmachus, "The grace of Carmel and of the plain, those shall
see the glory of the Lord." And Theodotion, "The beauty of Carmel and of Sharon,
they shall see the glory of the Lord." In which I think the prophet means,
figuratively, not that Jerusalem, nor Judaea, but the land of the Gentiles will
be counted worthy of divine knowledge. For Carmel, and that which is called
Sharon were places that belonged to foreign races. That would be the literal
meaning: but figuratively, even to-day, they that were before so blinded in
soul, as to bow down to wood and stone and other lifeless substances,
earth-bound daemons, (d) and evil spirits instead of the God of the Universe,
and they that were deaf in the ears of their mind, and lame, and palsied in all
their life, are even now being released from all these and many other sufferings
and weaknesses by the teaching of our Saviour Jesus Christ, receiving far better
healing and benefit than that of the body, and shewing forth clearly the divine
and superhuman power of the presence of the Word of God among men.

CHAPTER 22 From the same.

How the First and Everlasting Word of God, the Creator of (302) the Universe,
confesses that He is even now sent by the (b) Lord His Father.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlviii. 12 and 16.]

You have here the Lord sent and the Lord sending, that is to say the Father and
God of the Universe, entitled Lord twice as was usual. |44

CHAPTER 23 From the same.

How the Lord rebukes the Jewish People, because They will not receive Him when
He comes, nor hear His Call, and what He will suffer at Their Hands.

[Passages quoted, Isa. 1. 1, 2 a, b.]

HERE the Lord Himself recording plainly His Coming among (303) men rebukes the
Jewish people, because they will not receive Him when He comes, nor hear Him
when He calls. And He teaches, as if by way of apology, that this is the cause
of their own rejection. "For when I came," He says, "I was not among you as a
man: I called, and there was none that heard: therefore," He says, "ye were sold
for your sins, inasmuch as ye were of yourselves divorced from my call, not that
I had given you a bill of divorcement." This is clearly (b) addressed to the
Jews, and at the same time reveals their outrages on Him at His Passion, when it
says: "I gave my back to scourges, and my cheeks to blows," and that which
follows. But these words shall be properly interpreted at leisure.

CHAPTER 24 From the same.

How the Same Lord that spake in the Prophets will come Among Men and be seen by
Their Eyes, and be known to the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Isa. lii. 5-10.] THE prophecy of Christ's Passion immediately
succeeds this in one and the same passage, which I shall expound at leisure. One
and the same Lord, who said in the previous (304) quotation to the Jewish
people, "You were sold for your sins, and for your iniquities I sent away your
mother, because I came, and there was no man: I called and there was none |45 to
hear," says in the passage before us to the Jews again: "Because of you my name
is blasphemed among the Gentiles."

Then, as though having another people besides them, he adds, "Therefore my
people shall know my name," and teaches that not another, but the same Lord that
spoke in the prophets, will sojourn some day in our life, saying, "I am he that
speak; I will come." And the words, "As a season upon the mountains, as the feet
of one preaching a message of peace, as one preaching good things, I will make
thy salvation known, saying, Sion, thy God reigneth," the other translators make
it clearer. For Aquila says: "How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of
Him that preacheth the gospel, who publisheth peace, who preacheth the gospel of
good things, publishing salvation, saying to Sion, Thy God reigneth." And
Symmachus says, "How lovely on the mountains are the feet of him that preacheth
the gospel, making peace known, publishing good things, making salvation known,
saying to Sion, Thy God reigneth": and instead of "The voice of thy guards is
lifted, and they shall rejoice with the voice together, because they shall see
eye to eye." Symmachus translates thus: "The voice of thy guards; they have
raised their voice. Together, will they praise: For they will see openly." By
"guards" would here be meant the holy apostles of our Saviour, who also saw
openly Him that was foretold, and raised their voice preaching to all the world.
Sion and Jerusalem that here have the good news told them the apostle knew to be
heavenly, when he said, "But Jerusalem that is above is free, that is the mother
of us," and, "Ye have come to Mount Sion, and the city of the: living God,
heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels." Sion might also
mean the Church established by Christ in every part of the world, and Jerusalem
the holy constitution which, once established of old time among the ancient Jews
alone, was driven into the wilderness by their impiety, and then again was
restored far better than before through the coming of our Saviour. Therefore the
prophecy says, "Let the waste places of (305) |46 Jerusalem break forth into joy
together, for the Lord has pitied her, and saved Jerusalem." Nor would you be
wrong in calling Sion the soul of every holy and godly man, so far as it is
lifted above this life, having its city in heaven, seeing the things beyond the
world. For it means "a watch-tower." And in so far as (b) such a man remains
calm and free from passion, you could call him Jerusalem—for Jerusalem means
"Vision of Peace."

After this the call of the Gentiles to the worship of God is very clearly shown
in the words, "And the Lord God will reveal His holy arm before all nations; and
the high places of the earth shall see the salvation of our God." And consider
that the arm of the Lord is nothing else but the Word and Wisdom, and the Lord
Himself, Who is the Christ of God.

It is easy to shew this from many instances. In the Exodus you have Israel saved
by the arm of God from (c) slavery to the Egyptians. While the prophecy before
us says that that same arm of the Lord, which of old appeared to save His people
will be revealed to all nations, as if it formerly were hidden from them. And
"the salvation, which "he says "all the high places of the earth shall see," and
which he mentioned before when he said, "I will make my salvation known," know
that it is the Hebrew for the name of Jesus.

CHAPTER 25 From the same.

How, again, the Coming of God the Word and the Gathering of All Nations is
foretold.

[Passage quoted, Isa. lxvi. 18, 19.]

HERE also the Coming of the Lord to men is exactly foretold. And as it said, "He
will come as fire," our Saviour rightly says, "I came to cast fire on the earth,
and what will I, if it be already kindled?" You may say His "chariots" are His
attendant divine powers, and the holy angels chosen |47 to minister to Him, of
whom it is said, "and angels came and ministered to Him," and His holy apostles
and disciples, borne up by whom, the Word of God with divine invisible power ran
through all the world. One might also literally in another way connect fire and
chariots with His coming, through the siege that attacked Jerusalem after our
Saviour's Advent, for the Temple was burned with fire not long after, and was
reduced to extreme desolation, and the city was encircled by the chariots and
camps of the enemy, after which too the promises to the Gentiles were fulfilled
in harmony with the prophecy. Who would not wonder hearing the Lord say by the
prophet, "I come to bring together all nations and tongues," and then seeing
throughout the whole inhabited world the congregations welded together in the
Name of Christ through the Coming and the Call of our Saviour Jesus Christ, with
the tongues of all nations in varying dialects calling on one God and Lord? To
crown all, who beholding all them that believe in Christ using as a seal the
sign of salvation, would not rightly be astounded hearing the Lord saying in
days of old, "And they shall come and see my glory, and I will leave my sign
upon them"?

We see in part, indeed, now with our own eyes the fulfilment of the holy oracles
as to the first Epiphany of our Saviour to man. May it be seen completely as
well in His second glorious Advent, when all nations shall see His glory, and
when He comes in the heavens with power and great glory. To that day the
remainder of the prophecy must be referred, as I shall show in my own argument.
As I have in this Book collected so many passages concerning the prophecies of
the coming of God, my next task should be to connect with them an account of
what was foretold as to the nature of His entry into human life.

[Note to the online text: volume 2 commences with book 6, so the page numbering
starts again at 1] This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material
on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 49: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 7
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 7

BOOK VII

(308) WE have learned in the preceding Book from the words of the prophets that
God would come to men and would live among men on earth, and that the two chief
signs of His presence would be the calling of the nations of the world to
receive the true knowledge of God, and the ruin and desolation of the Jews
through their unbelief in Him ; and we have investigated how the prophecies were
fulfilled. (309) We will now attempt in this Seventh Book of The Proof of the
Gospel to treat in due order of the way in which He says that He is to make His
entrance into humanity. So then our present object is to see what kind of
prophecies were made of God's coming among men, where it was predicted He should
be horn, and from what race it was proclaimed that He should come.

CHAPTER 1 (b) From Isaiah. The Manner of the Lord's Stay among Men. A prediction
of the Jews' unbelief in Christ, and the sign (c) that was given them by the
Lord. It was this : A Virgin giving birth to God, at Whose Birth the complete
destruction of the Jewish race was foretold, the subjection of their land to
foreign enemies, and the flourishing of that, which before was desert, under
divine cultivation. Thus the Church of the Gentiles was shewn forth. As the
great Evangelist St. John, teaching of our Lord and Saviour as the very Word of
God full of supernatural power, begins his holy Gospel, by setting side by side
His Divinity and His |49 Humanity in His presence among men, saying, "In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was
in the beginning with God. All things were made by him," and adding after this,
"and the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us"; so in the same strain the
inspired prophet, about to proclaim God born of a Virgin, tells first the vision
of His Divine glory, when he thus describes the Being of God:

"1. I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and exalted. And the house was
full of his glory. 2. And Seraphim stood round about him: each one had six
wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with
two he did fly. 3. And they (310) cried one to another and said, Holy, Holy,
Holy, the Lord of Sabaoth, the whole earth is full of his glory."

And he adds also:

"8. And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go
to this people? And I said, Behold, Here am I. Send me. 9. And he said, Go and
say to this people, Ye shall hear indeed, but shall not understand; and ye shall
see indeed, but not perceive. 10. For this people's heart has become gross, and
their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they
should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their
heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. 11. And I said, How long, O
Lord? And He said, Until the cities be deserted, by reason of their being
uninhabited, and the houses by reason of there being no man."

What Lord may we say the prophet saw but Him Whom we have proved to have been
seen and known by the fathers with Abraham in previous days? He, we have already
learned, was both God and Lord, and Angel and Captain of the Lord's power as
well. So then in approaching the account of His Coming to men the prophecy
before us tells first of His divine kingdom, in which it says that the prophet
saw Him sitting on a throne high and exalted. This is that throne which is
mentioned in the Psalm of the Beloved, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and
ever," on which the Most High Creator of the Universe, His God and Father, bade
his Only-begotten sit, saying, "Sit thou on my right hand, until I |50 make
thine enemies thy footstool." John the Evangelist supports my interpretation of
this passage, when he quotes the words of Isaiah, where it is said, "For this
people's heart is become gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their
eyes have they closed," referring them to Christ, saying, "This said Isaiah,
when he saw his glory, and bare witness of him." The prophet then seeing our
Saviour sitting on His Father's throne in the divine and glorious kingdom, and
moved by the Holy Spirit, and being about to describe next His coming among men
and His Birth of a Virgin, foretells that His knowledge and praise would be over
all the earth, by introducing the song of the Seraphim (311) round His throne:
Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of Sabaoth, the whole earth is full of his glory. And who
are the Seraphim around the Christ of God? Perhaps the choirs of angels and
divine powers, perhaps the prophets and apostles. For the translation of
Seraphim is "Rule of His Mouth." The prophets and apostles would bear this name,
because from their mouth were the firstfruits of the preaching of salvation. So
also the powers of the Holy Spirit are called (b) "Wings," as hiding the
beginning and the end of the knowledge of God, as being secret and inconceivable
in nature, but they reveal the central parts of his dispensation, since these
alone are knowable by men; that which is beyond and that which comes after them
is left unsaid. And the divine and heavenly powers are signified by the
Seraphim, according to another rendering of the word, as (c) "fires." As it is
said, "He maketh his angels spirits and his ministers a flame of fire." These
cry and shout one to another according to their power, shewing forth the
holiness of the Being acclaimed as God, and, strangest of all, they do not
acclaim His Godhead because heaven and the things of heaven alone are full of
His glory, but because all the earth also shares in His power by His Coming from
heaven to men as prophesied, in the prediction which follows, announcing His
Birth of a Virgin and His glory spread through all the earth.

Lord of Sabaoth is translated "Lord of Powers." And He is the Captain of the
Powers of the Lord, Whom also the divine powers salute as Lord of Sabaoth in the
23rd Psalm, |51 foretelling His return from earth to heaven: "Lift up your
gates, ye princes, and be lifted up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory
shall come in. Who is the King of glory? The Lord of Powers, He is the King of
glory." In the Hebrew He is here again called Lord of Sabaoth. (312) And since
He is the King of glory, and by His sojourn here the whole earth would be filled
with His glory, both in the psalm and in the prophecy the fulfilment is rightly
placed in the present: in the prophecy in the words, "The whole earth is full of
his glory," in the psalm at the beginning where it says, "The earth is the
Lord's and the fullness thereof, the world and all that dwell therein." After
this prophecy, the prophet next proceeds to bear witness, that though the whole
earth shall be full of His glory, yet the Jewish race shall not participate,
where he says, "And the Lord said (that is to say, the Lord of Sabaoth in the
vision), Whom shall I send, and who will go to this people? And I said, Behold,
here am I. Send me. And He said, Go and say to this people, Ye shall hear, and
shall not understand. And ye shall see and not perceive: For this people's heart
is become gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they
closed, lest they should hear with their ears, and see with their eyes, and
understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." Here he
expressly foretells the opposition of the Jews to Him, and how they will see
Him, and not understand Who He is; how they will hear Him, speaking and teaching
them, but will be quite unable to grasp Who it is that speaks with them, or the
new teaching He offers them. And John the Evangelist witnesses to the fulfilment
of these words referring to Our Saviour, where he says, "Though he had done so
many signs before them, yet they believed not on Him, that Isaiah the prophet's
words might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report,
and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?

"Therefore they were not able to believe, because again Isaiah said, He hath
blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, so that they should not see with
their eyes, and understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal
them. These things said Isaiah, when he saw His glory, and bare witness of Him."
Thus the Evangelist |52 most certainly referred the Theophany in Isaiah to
Christ, and to the Jews who did not receive the Lord that was seen by (313) the
prophet according to the prediction about Him. To the prophet, then, who had
seen the Lord of Sabaoth the oracle says that he is to tell the Jewish race,
that they shall see Him at some future time, but shall not understand Who He is,
and shall hear Him speak and teach among them, but shall not know Him, because
of the hardening of their hearts. Then Isaiah, after the prophecy here quoted,
describes in the course of his record the enemy's attack on Ahaz, who at that
time held the kingdom of the Jewish people, and declares that the destruction of
their visible (b) enemies will be at no distant date. And he shews that the
defeat of their spiritual and unseen foes will be as complete, those daemons and
unseen powers, of whom I treated at the beginning of this work, for having
involved not only the Jewish race but the whole of mankind in every form of
evil, and especially in godless idolatry; and that could only be achieved by the
sojourn of the Word of God among men as prophesied, and His receiving His
earthly tabernacle (c) from a pure Virgin. Why this was necessary, it is now the
time to explain.

Concerning the Sojourn of Our Saviour.

Since the apostle said, "By man death entered into the world," it was surely
essential that the victory over death should be achieved by man as well, and the
body of death be shewn to be the body of life, and the reign of sin that before
ruled in the mortal body be destroyed, so that it should no longer serve sin but
righteousness. And since long ago man fell through the sins of the flesh, the
standard of victory over his enemies was rightly upraised again by one that was
sinless and undefiled of all evil. And who were these enemies, but they who of
old had overcome the human race by the pleasures of the flesh? And moreover men
required that the Word of God coming to dwell with |53 them, and to give holy
teaching to their earthly ears, and to shew the power of God clearly to their
eyes by signs and (314) wonders, should accomplish His work through our natural
equipment, for it is only possible for men to see bodily things with their eyes,
and to hear that which is spoken by the tongue. It was then in order that we
might receive the knowledge of spiritual and unembodied things by our bodily
senses that God the Word employed a speech that was akin and familiar to us, and
shewed forth all the salvation given through Him to those who themselves could
(b) hear and see His divine words and works. And this He did, not being like
ourselves bound down by the limitations of the body, nor experiencing aught
below or above His Divinity, nor hampered as a human soul is by the body so as
to be unable to act as God, or to be omnipresent as the Word of God, and to fill
all things and to extend through all: but He incurred no stain or corruption or
pollution from the body He had taken, because, as the Word of God, He remained
by nature without body, or substance, or flesh, and went through the whole
dispensation of His Incarnation with divine power and in ways unknown to us,
sharing (c) what belonged to Him, but not receiving what belonged to others.
What, then, was there to fear in the dispensation of the Incarnation, since the
undefiled was incapable of defilement, and the pure of being soiled by the
flesh, and the passionless Word of God of corruption by the proper nature of the
body, any more than the rays of the sun are harmed by touching corpses and all
sorts of bodily things? Nay, on the contrary, the corruptible was transformed by
the divine Word, and was made holy and immortal, even (d) as He willed: yea, and
so it ministered to the divine purpose and works of the Spirit. And all this was
done by a loving God and by the Word of God for the curing and salvation of all
men, in accordance with the words of the prophets who had foretold from ancient
days His wondrous Birth of a Virgin. And quite necessarily the prophet prefaces
Christ's Birth of a Virgin by an exhortation to attention, crying aloud to his
hearers, "If ye will not believe, neither (315) shall ye understand." And then
he adds the following words: |54

"10. And the Lord added to speak unto Ahaz saying, 11. Ask for thyself a sign
from the Lord thy God in the depth or in the height. 12. And Ahaz said, I will
not ask, neither will I tempt God. 13. And he said, Hear now, house of David; is
it a small thing to you to strive with man, and how do ye strive with the Lord?
14. Therefore the Lord shall give you a sign: Behold a virgin shall conceive,
and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel: 15. Butter and honey
shall he eat, before he knows to choose the good and refuse the evil. 16.
Wherefore before the child know good or evil, he does not obey wickedness, that
he should choose the good. And the earth shall be forsaken, on account of that
which thou fearest, of her two kings."

Such is the prophecy. But the opening of the prophecy (c) is worthy of our
study, which bears witness to those that read it, "If ye do not believe, neither
will ye understand." And it is above all necessary to note that the words shew
that its readers need not only intellect but faith, and not only faith but
intellect. Hence the Jews who do not believe in Christ, though they are even now
hearers of these words, have not even yet understood Him of Whom the prophecy
was given, so that in their case the prediction has its primary fulfilment. For
though they hear daily with their ears the prophecies about Christ, they hear
them not (d) with the ears of their mind. And the sole cause of their ignorance
is unbelief, as the prophecy truly reveals of them and to them. For it says, "If
ye will not believe, neither shall ye understand." And if they say that she who
conceived is called not a virgin but a young woman in Scripture (for so it is
said it is explained among them) what worthy sign of the promise of God, we
answer, would this be, if like all women after union with a man a young woman
were naturally to conceive? And how could he that were born of her be God? And
not simply God, but "God with us"? For that is the meaning of Emmanuel, which
name it says the child is to be called. "For behold a virgin," it says, "shall
conceive (316) and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel, which is
interpreted God with us." Where would be |55 God's struggle, where His labour
and difficulty, if a woman were to bring forth in the accustomed manner? For in
our versions translated by the Seventy, men of Hebrew race, experts in the
accuracy of their knowledge of their national language, we find: "Is it a small
thing for you to contend with man? And how will ye contend with God also?
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive
and bear a son, who (b) shall be called God with us." (For as I said this is the
meaning of Emmanuel.) And in the versions of the Jews according to the
transcript of Aquila [Aquila was a proselyte, and not a Jew by birth] we have a
rendering to the same effect, "Hear then, house of David; is it a small thing
with you to weary men that ye would weary my God also? Therefore He will give
you this sign: Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and thou
shalt call His name Emmanuel." In Symmachus it stands thus— [Symmachus is said
to have been an Ebionite. There was a sect of the Jews so designated said to
have believed in Christ, to which Symmachus belonged, and his rendering is as
follows]—"Hear, house of David, is it not enough for you to weary men, that ye
weary my God? "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you this sign: "Behold a
young woman conceives and bears a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel."
For since the hardness of the Jewish (d) character and their disinclination for
holiness caused sweat and toil, and no common labour and struggle to the
prophets of old time, therefore he says, "Is it not enough for you to weary the
prophets of God, and to contend with men: but now will ye even weary my God, and
contend even with my God also?" Such is Theodotion's translation. Thus the
prophet calls the God, Who is like to be wearied |56 and challenged to contend,
his own God, and not the God of those whom he addresses, which he could hardly
do if he referred to the Supreme God of the Jews, among whom it had been handed
down from their Fathers that they must (317) preserve the worship of God the
Creator of all things. And what could the contest and labour or the toil of this
God in the prophecy refer to but His entry by human birth, as I and the
Septuagint interpret it, of a virgin, or even according to the current Jewish
rendering, of a young woman? For you will find in Moses the phrase "young woman
"used of one who is undoubtedly a virgin, at least he uses the word of one who
has been violated by one person after her betrothal to another.

(b) But also Emmanuel, the child of the Virgin, is to be endowed with more than
human power, He is to choose the good before He knows evil, and to refuse evil
in choosing the good: and this not in manhood but in childhood. Therefore it
runs, "Before the child knows good or evil, he shall refuse evil in choosing the
good," which shews that He is completely immune from evil. And He (c) bears a
greater than any human name, God with us. And this is why the sign connected
with Him is said to have depth, and also height: depth, by reason of His descent
to humanity, and His presence here even unto death: height, by reason of the
restitution of His divine glory from the depth, or because of the divine nature
of His pre-existence. Emmanuel can only be He Who has already |57 been proved to
be God the Lord, Who was seen by Abraham in human shape. And if the Jews refer
the prophecy to Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, saying that his birth was thus (d)
predicted to his father, we answer that Hezekiah was not God with us, nor was
any sign shewn forth in him of a divine nature. Nor was there any divine
struggle or labour attendant on his birth. Hezekiah, moreover, can be shewn to
be excluded by the date of the prophecy. For this prophecy was given about
future events when his father Ahaz was actually king, whereas Hezekiah is known
to have been born before Ahaz came to the throne. And if the prophecy we are
considering has no reference to him, it is still further from referring to any
other Jew who lived after its date, except to the birth of the true Emmanuel,
that is, (318) God born with us, and to the sojourn among men of our Saviour the
Word of God. For the land of the Jews was left desolate by the loss of its two
kings, as the oracle said would come to pass as follows: "The land shall be
deserted from the face of two kings"; and this actually and literally took
place. For in the time of King Ahaz and Isaiah son of Amos at the date of this
prophecy, the king of Syria in Damascus, and the king of Israel in Samaria, not
the king (b) who ruled at Jerusalem, but the king of the multitude of Jews who
revolted from the law of God, made a compact one with another, and besieged them
that were under the sovereignty of David's successors. The prophecy foretells
the destruction of both these kings, both the Jew and the one of foreign race,
who had combined together against the Lord's people, and says that they will
swiftly be severed and give up the war: and that their kingdom and succession
(c) will be completely destroyed and extinguished after the birth of Him who is
foretold as "God with us."

Now recognize at what date the kingdoms of Damascus and Judaea both ceased to
exist, and at what period the land of the Jews was left without a king, as well
as the land of the Damascenes, once so powerful, formerly the great overlord of
all Syria. For the probability is that at the time of their destruction Emmanuel
would be born, and He that was foretold would come. If we to-day could see the
(d) kingdoms referred to still in existence, it would be vain to inquire
further, we could only extend our hopes into the future; but if their
destruction is actually evident, so that |58 our time sees no kingdom either of
Damascus or of Judaea, it is clear that the prophecy has been fulfilled which
said, "And the land shall be deserted from the face of two kings, whom thou
fearest, from their face,"—kings being used for "kingdoms." For Symmachus says,
"The land shall be left, from which you suffer ill, by the face of her two
kings." And Aquila, "The land shall be left, which thou disdainest, from the
face of her two kings." And Theodotion translates thus, "The land shall be left,
which thou hatest, from the face of her two kings." Do you see how it is
prophesied that the land shall be left kingless? What land, but that of
Damascus, and that of Israel? For the kings to whom the prophecy refers ruled
these lands. It was their lands that Ahaz despised or hated, wearied and
suffering under their attacks. When then did they fall? For if this part of the
prophecy was fulfilled, the foregoing part must have also taken place, and this
was, that a Virgin should bear "God with us."

Now if we inquire of history it is abundantly clear that the line of kings of
Damascus was uninterrupted up to the date of the appearance of our Saviour Jesus
Christ. The holy apostle mentions Aretas, King of Damascus, and the kingship of
the Jews continued untouched even until then, though it was irregular: for Herod
and his successors in the time of our Saviour did not inherit the throne as
being of David's line. And it was after His Appearing, and the preaching of the
Gospel of the Virgin's Son to all mankind, that the land was "left of the face
of two kings." For from that date by the rule of the Roman Emperor over all
nations, all local dominion in city and state ceased, and the prophecy before us
in common with the others was fulfilled. |59

Such was the literal fulfilment. But the prophecy also shews figuratively the
stability, the calmness and peace of every soul, who receives the God that was
born, Emmanuel Himself. For now that the one Christ, and the Word (d) proclaimed
by Him, rule as kings over the souls of men, the old enemies have been put to
flight, the two forms of sin, the one that leads men into idolatry and into a
diversity of varied beliefs, the other that tempts them to moral ruin. Of these
I say the earthly kings of old above-named were symbols. Of these the king of
Damascus was the picture of the Gentile errors with regard to idols. And the
other, of those who had rebelled from Jerusalem, that is to say from the worship
of God according to the Law. That we should understand the passage figuratively
can (320) also be seen from what follows, where it is prophesied that in the
time of Emmanuel certain flies and bees will attack the Jews, some from Egypt,
some from Assyria, and that a man will shave their head and feet and beard, and
that a man will nourish a heifer and two sheep, and other things destined to
happen at one and the same time, which it is impossible to understand literally,
but only figuratively. (b)

This, then, is so. And the proof that the Scripture before us foretold the
manner of the Birth of our Saviour Jesus Christ, is supported by the Evangelist,
who wrote:

"18. The birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise. When his mother Mary was
espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the
Holy Ghost. 19. And Joseph her husband being a just man, and not willing to make
her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. 20. And while he thus
intended, behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him saying, Joseph, Son of
David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in
her is of the Holy Ghost. 21. And she shall bear a son, and thou shalt call his
name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins. 22. And all this was
done that the word of the Lord spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled, saying,
Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name
Emmanuel, which is being interpreted, God with us." |60

And thus according to our teaching the reality of the divine foreknowledge is
confirmed by the course of events, otherwise the truth of the prophecy could not
have been shewn. Let us now consider the important things which it is said in
the next part of the prophecy will happen in that day, that is to say at the
time of Christ's appearing.

(321 ) [Passage quoted, Isa. vii. 18-25.]

Such are the events included by this prophecy in its prediction of the day of
Emmanuel. I will now go through the revelations they give us, epitomizing their
meaning. "The Lord," it says, "will hiss for flies in that day, which shall rule
over part of the river of Egypt, and for the bee which is in the land of the
Assyrians." The souls of the men who before worshipped idols, or the impure and
horrid powers, I think, are called flies, and flies of Egypt, as delighting in
sacrifices and the blood of idols. And the bee is an animal armed with a sting,
that knows how to rule and to obey and to fight, and can defend itself and wound
its enemies. These two then combining together, the one from the land of the
Rulers (which is the meaning of "Assyrians") the other from the land of the
idolaters, will be bidden, it says, as by the hissing of the Lord God of the
Universe, to rule the whole of Judaea, because of their unbelief in Christ, in
the day of Emmanuel. And it means by this that a foreign military power will
occupy Jerusalem and Judaea. This too our Saviour foretold more definitely, when
He said, "And Jerusalem shall be trodden by the Gentiles." This was fulfilled
not long after our Saviour spoke, when the Romans took the city, and settled
strangers there, and established them on its site.

It is also said that the same Lord will shave with the razor of the Assyrian
king, that is to say with the discipline of the Prince of this world, the head
and the feet and the beard of what can only mean the Jewish race. That is to say
He will take away their order and beauty by the might (322) of some universal
Empire, He disguises the Romans in this way. For I believe that under the name
of Assyrians he means the rule of races, that gain Empire at each period |61 of
history, because Assyrians in Hebrew means Rulers. And the Romans are now such
Rulers. And in truth the God of the Universe has taken away all the glory of the
Jews, which was as their hair, and all their manhood, signified by their beard
and the hairs of their feet, by means of the Roman razor, that is to say their
(b) statecraft and military power. And it was only after the Birth of our
Saviour, Emmanuel Himself, that God took away all their glory through the Roman
rule.

Aquila translates, "By the kingdom of Assyria," for "of the king of Assyria,"
Theodotion and Symmachus, "By the king of the Assyrians," making it clear that
there is no threat to shave the head of the king of Assyria, but that by means
of his razor and by means of the king of Assyria the things prophesied will fall
on the Jewish nation. And the event (c) justified the prophecy. And one could
note carefully at leisure many other sayings in the prophecies apparently
directed against the Assyrians, which are quite inapplicable to them, since they
refer to the rule of the dominant nation at some particular period. We have thus
already seen the Persians called Assyrians by the Hebrews; and so we may
conclude that the prophecy here refers to the Roman Empire. For (d) we see them
as Rulers under the Rule of God in the period after our Saviour's coming. Yet no
one must understand me to say that every reference to the Assyrians in Holy
Scripture refers to the Romans; that would be foolish and absurd. But I will
shew in the proper place that there are certain prophecies concerned with the
witness to Christ, which are to be understood of the Romans under the name of
Assyrians, since the meaning of the word always implies the dominant Power of an
epoch. For my part, and I have thoroughly reasoned out the grounds of my
opinion, I am persuaded that the only (323) reason why the prophetic writings
abstain from naming the Romans is that the teaching of our Saviour Jesus Christ
was going to shine throughout the Roman Empire on all mankind, and that the
books of the prophets would be popular in Rome itself, and among all the nations
under Roman rule. It was therefore to prevent any offence being taken by the
rulers of the Empire from a too clear reference to them, that the prophecy was
cloaked in riddles, in many (b) other contexts, notably in the visions of
Daniel, just as in |62 the prophecy we are considering, in which it calls them
Assyrians, meaning Rulers.

It is then with their razor that it prophesies that after the birth of Emmanuel
the whole order of the Jews will be abolished. And also on that day, I mean the
day of Emmanuel, or of Christ's Appearing, "A man, it says, will rear a heifer,
and two sheep. And it shall come to pass from the abundance of milk, he that is
left on the land shall eat butter and honey." By this he suggests the hunger and
extreme penury of the Jews, not enjoying their natural food of corn, neither
ploughing, sowing, nor reaping, possessing no flocks of sheep nor herds of
cattle, but only possessing two sheep and a heifer to provide them with milk. Or
perhaps he means figuratively, that those Jews left in the land, the choir of
apostles and evangelists of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, each one of whom
was a remnant according to the election of grace, and therefore called "he that
is left" in the land, will rear a heifer and two sheep, three orders in each
church, one of rulers, two of subordinates, since the Church of Christ's people
is divided into two divisions, the faithful, and those not yet admitted to the
laver of regeneration, to whom the holy apostle says, "I have fed you with milk,
not with strong meat"; while he aptly calls those who are in a state of greater
perfection a heifer, because they are the offspring of the more perfect bulls,
like the apostle himself, who says of his own labour and that of his
fellow-workers, "Does God take care for oxen, or is this said altogether for our
sakes?" Thus the whole order of the leaders of the Church is called a heifer,
for they are occupied in ploughing and sowing the souls of men, being the
offspring of the ways and teaching of the apostles, who are said so to abound in
virtue, that they provide of their fruitfulness fruitful and spiritual milk in
elementary teaching, and nourish many besides themselves. And it predicts also
of those that shall be left in the land, that something else will happen in that
day, that is to say at the time of Emmanuel's presence. What is it? Every place,
it says, of the people of the Circumcision, where there were 1000 vines for 1000
shekels, shall be dry and thorny. For with arrow and bow they shall come there
|63 (obviously the enemy) and the land shall be dry and thorny. And note that
everything the prophecy predicts will fall on the Jewish race in the day of
Emmanuel, I mean at the time when the spiritual light of our Saviour's gifts
shines on all men. He says that unclean and hostile powers which worked of old
among the Gentiles, in Egypt and the land of the Assyrians, when the Lord
hisses, and as it were urges them on and encourages them, will come upon their
land, because they deserved the visitation. And it says that these powers will
rest in valleys, and in caves of the rocks, in caverns, and in all their clefts,
both figuratively understood of their souls, their bodily senses, their reason,
and their divided minds, and directly in a literal sense of the whole country.
Who would not wonder, when he sees how enemies have taken possession of every
part of Judaea, and how foreigners and idolaters rest in all their cities and
country? And the prophecy says that He will not only treat them thus, but will
shave their head, the hairs of their feet and their beard, that is to say the
whole order that of old was theirs, with the razor of the king of the Assyrians,
as I have interpreted him. At the same day and at the same time he threatens
that he will plunge them into an extreme poverty of godly riches, so that they
are devoid of rational bread, and of solid spiritual food, and are all content
to be nourished with the milk of infants, and with elementary teaching. And to
crown all, their vines will be dry. For when, as the same prophet says, their
farmer and master expected them to bring forth a bunch of grapes, and they
brought forth thorns, and not justice, but a cry, it is said that he will take
away his mound and destroy the wall, and turn the vineyard into a dry place, and
will deliver it to enemies, who, he says, will come there with arrow and bow,
receiving their authority from God, Who delivers it to them not unjustly, but
most justly, because all their land is become dry and thorny. Therefore, then,
since they have made themselves dry and thorny, men will come, he says, with
arrow and bow, with authority against them. Wonder not if this is expressed in
dark and riddling figures. For I have already attributed the cause of such
economy of Scripture to the desire to hide the final destruction of the |64
Jewish race, so that they might preserve the Scriptures for our benefit and use.
For if the prophets had openly predicted destruction for them, and prosperity
for the Gentiles, none of the Jews would have loved them, but they would have
destroyed their writings as hostile and opposed to them, and it would have been
impossible for us Gentiles to have made use of the prophetic evidence about our
Saviour and ourselves. But yet when all this shall have happened to the Jewish
race in Emmanuel's day, according to my interpretation of the prophecy, a scanty
remnant of them is said to be left, of which the apostle says: "There was a
remnant according to the election of grace." This it is surely, which shall rear
a red heifer and two sheep, and from the abundance of their milk feed on butter
and honey. And I have shewed according to my second interpretation that this
describes the whole apostolic choir of the disciples of our Saviour Jesus
Christ. But as those who are left behind are thus described in the prophecy, so
also when the whole land of the Jewish nation and their vineyard has been
transformed into sand and thorns, and therefore delivered to the enemy, it is
prophesied in direct opposition to this that every arable (326) mountain shall
be ploughed. And I think that the Church of our Saviour Jesus Christ is thus
suggested, of which He also says: "A city set on a hill cannot be hid." For I
think that the exalted, high, and lofty constitution of the Church is here
called a mountain. It is, then, this arable mountain that it says shall be
ploughed, so that no fear may attack it, and that it shall be so far changed
from its former desolation, aridity, and thorns, as to be fit for "a pasture for
sheep, and a place for cattle to tread."

(b) And we can remember, that the Church of Christ which of old was dry and
thorny, has undergone by His grace such a transformation, that it grows such a
crop of the grass and fodder of spiritual harvest, that the sheeplike and
simpler souls can delight in it, and that those who have reached a more perfect
development, here called bulls, can plough and till it, as I shewed that the
holy apostle taught, when he said:

"Doth God take care for oxen, or doth he say it altogether for your sakes? For
your sakes was it |65 written, that he that plougheth should plough in hope, (c)
and he that harroweth in hope to share therein."

Thus the land that was before desert and dry has been transformed after the
coming of Christ, so that it is fit for those, whom I understand as the bulls,
to cultivate suitably. And notice how the Virgin Birth is prophesied under the
same figure, by which at the same time the prophecy says that the land that of
old bore fruit worth a thousand shekels will be dry and thorny, and all the land
because it is so dry and thorny will be delivered to those that attack it with
(d) arrow and bow; while to every mountain the opposite will happen. They will
be transformed from their previous dry and thorny state into a pasture of flocks
and a place for cattle to tread, and no fear shall enter there. Whereby I think
our Saviour's Virgin Birth is clearly meant, and all that happened after it both
to the whole Jewish community and to the other nations. The prophecy plainly
foretells the change of each of these divisions to the opposite of what they
were before, the change of the Jewish nations from better to worse, and the
change of the Gentile Church from its old desolation to a divine fruit-fulness,
both of which are to be brought to pass according to the prophecy at the same
time, that of the appearance of (327) Emmanuel, and are shewn to have actually
been fulfilled after our Saviour's birth, and at no other time, both by the
events in Jewish history which have been clearly told, and by the existence of
the Gentile Church. For if after the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ Himself
the kingdoms of Damascus and Judaea had not come to an end, and if we could not
see with our own eyes their lands released from them, and given over to foreign
idolaters to inhabit; and, moreover, if the old (b) stately beauty of their very
Temple had not become sand and thorns, and if no impure idolaters had come as
their enemies to attack them with bow and arrow, urged on by the Lord Himself
from abroad, and stayed in their country making every place and every city their
own; and on the other side, if by the teaching of our Saviour no nations brought
to believe in Him had changed from the sands |66 and thorns of their ancient
barrenness and brought forth a holy and godly spiritual harvest; and again, if
they who saw Christ with their eyes had not rejected Him, if they who heard Him
speak had not turned a deaf ear to Him, and if the rest of the prophecy could
not be proved to have been most exactly fulfilled from the days of Jesus our
Saviour—then He would not be the subject of the prophecy. But if the fulfilment
of the prophecies is. as the saying is, clear to a blind man, as only brought to
pass from the period of His coming, why need we any longer be in doubt about the
Virgin Birth, or refuse by wise reasoning to base our belief in that which was
the beginning of this matter, on the evidence of what we can even now see? And
what do we even now see, but the Jews' disbelief in Him, so clearly fulfilling
the oracle, which said: "Hearing ye shall hear and not understand, and seeing ye
shall see and not perceive, for the heart of this people is waxed hard," and the
siege of Jerusalem, and the total desolation of their ancient Temple, and the
settling of foreign races on their land, enslaving them with stings, that is to
say with harsh enactments—for this is meant by the figures of the flies and
bees—and above all the transformation of the heathen world from its former
desolation into the field of God. Who would not be struck with astonishment at
these spectacles? And who would not agree that the prediction is truly inspired,
when he heard that these words were consigned to books and taken care of by our
ancestors a thousand years ago, and only brought to a fulfilment after our
Saviour's coming? If, then, the prediction was wonderful, and the result of the
prediction yet more wonderful, and beyond all reason, why should we disbelieve
that the actual entrance of Him that was foretold was allotted a miraculous and
superhuman kind of birth, especially as the clear evidence of the other
miracles, as marvellous (as the Birth itself) in their sequence from that Birth
compels us to accept the evidence of the other wonders connected with Him. |67
But following this, after, For a pasture of flocks, and a place for cattle to
tread, a second prediction is attached, to the foregoing: "And the Lord said to
me, Take a book (c) for thyself," which we will consider, when I have quoted it.
From the same.

Concerning a New Writing, that is to say the New Covenant; a Prophetess is said
to conceive of the Holy Spirit and bear a Son, Who, conquering Foes and Enemies,
shall be rejected by the Jews, and will be a Saviour to the Gentiles. And what
the Nation of the Jews will suffer after their Disbelief in Him, is shewn at the
Same Time.

[Passage quoted, Isa. viii. 1-4.]

This prophecy is connected with the preceding. For she that was there called a
Virgin, and was said to bear God with us, is here called a Prophetess. And if it
be asked whence she should conceive being unmarried, the prophecy now gives
teaching on this point, for it says: "And I went in to the prophetess; and she
conceived and bare a son." This must be understood of the Holy Spirit, under
Whose Divine influence the prophet spoke. The Holy Spirit then Himself confesses
that He went in to the prophetess: and this is clearly fulfilled in the birth of
our Saviour Jesus Christ, when:

"The angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a
virgin betrothed to a man, whose name was Joseph, of the house and lineage of
David. And he said to her, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with
thee, blessed art thou among women."

And again:

"Fear not, for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive
in thy womb, and bear a son, and shall call his name Jesus. And Mary said, How
shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" He answered, "The Holy Spirit shall
come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. Wherefore
the holy thing that is born shall be called Son of God." |68

(d) And in the preceding prophecy, coincident with the birth of Emmanuel, before
the Child knows good or evil, it is said that the land is forsaken by the two
kings that are attacking it, namely the kings of Samaria and Damascus; while in
this prophecy it says that before the Child calls on His father or mother, He
shall take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria, whose kings He
previously prophesied would be destroyed at the birth of Emmanuel.

I have already pointed out that actually in the time of Ahaz two kings made a
covenant and attacked those ruled by David's successors; the one, ruler of the
idolatrous Gentiles of Damascus; the other, king of the Jewish people in the
city of Palestine called Samaria, which we (330) call Sebaste. Concerning whom
God said to Ahaz: "Fear not, let thy heart not be sick, for these two smoking
firebrands." And he foretells that the destruction of these men will be
immediate, and proceeds to prophesy that on the birth of God with us, both their
kingdoms will be utterly extinguished and destroyed. And we know from history
that until the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ (b) the kingdoms of Judaea and
Damascus continued, but that after His appearance to all men, they ceased in
accordance with the prophecy, for the Roman Empire absorbed them concurrently
with the preaching of our Saviour. And after this literal prediction the
prophecy passes to a figurative and generally more spiritual form of revelation,
and it understands two ranks of invisible enemies and hostile daemons, warring
in different ways against humanity, one active always and everywhere in
promoting idolatry and false beliefs among mankind, the other occasioning the
(c) corruption of morals. And taking the type of idolatrous error in the king of
Damascus, and of the decline of the pure and healthy life in the king of
Samaria, it says that the earth, meaning thereby the men who inhabit it, will
only be released from their power, when God appears on earth as Emmanuel. When
He has shone forth and ruled over the soul of man, none of the old tyrants will
be left. Thus, then, you will understand that here it refers to the (d) same
beings, when it says: "He will take the power of Damascus and the spoils of
Samaria," for our Saviour Jesus Christ's power conquers completely all our
unseen |69 enemies, who for long ages besieged all men with their aforesaid
godless and harmful activities. And in the literal sense as well you may see the
power of Damascus destroyed concurrently with the Birth and appearance of our
Saviour, and the spoils of Samaria taken, that is to say their kingdoms, which
continued up to the time stated, but in the fulfilment of the divine prediction
have ceased from then till now. (331)

Some say, interpreting otherwise, that the Magi, who came from the East to
worship Christ, the young Child, are meant by the "power of Damascus": and you
might say more universally that all who have rejected godless, polytheistic
idolatry, and obeyed the word of Christ, especially if they be furnished with
this world's reason and wisdom, are those meant by the "power of Damascus." And
by the "spoils of Samaria" you will in this case understand our Saviour's Jewish
apostles and disciples, (b) whom as it were He took as His spoils from the
hostile Jews who attacked Him, and armed for the conflict with the king of the
Assyrians, by whom again the Prince of this world is figuratively meant. But as
Aquila has translated more clearly: "The adversary of the king of the Assyrians"
by "In the face of the king of the Assyrians,'' it is worth considering whether
here the Roman Empire is not meant, if the translation given a little before of
"Assyrians" as "rulers or ruled" be correct. As then (c) here, also, the king of
the Assyrians is connected with the appearing of our Saviour, it is probable
that here also the Roman Empire is intended, through their being directed by God
to subject the nations to themselves. It is therefore prophesied that the child
that is born will take the power of Damascus, and the spoils of Samaria, and
will deliver them against the face of the Assyrians, and before the eyes of
those ruled by God, and that He will do this at the time of His Birth, directing
the fate of humanity with secret divine power, while physically still a babe.
(d) The prophet commands all this to be delivered in a new and great book in the
writing of a man, by which is meant the new Covenant. And he adds as witnesses
of his sayings a priest and a prophet: his word thus teaching us, of the
necessity of using in Christian evidences the witness of the sacrificial system
in the law, and of the prophets who |70 succeeded it; and he desires, for other
reasons, that there should be eye-witnesses of the Child's birth, that we might
be able to understand what is prophesied of Him. For it was said above: "For if
ye will not believe, neither will ye understand," and (he writes) that the one
should have (332) "the Light of God" (this is the meaning of Uriah), and that
the other being "the Son of Blessing" should bear the "memory of God in himself"
(this is the meaning of Zachariah son of Barachiah).

Such is my exposition of the passages, and if any of the Jews does not agree
with me, let him point out to me who at any time was born in this nation as
Emmanuel, and how the prophet, came in to the prophetess, and who she was, and
how she conceived immediately, and who was the child that was born of the
prophetess, whom the Lord (b) Himself named: "Take the spoil speedily, keenly
rob," and why the child was so called. They must shew, too, that the child,
before he called on his father and mother, took the power of Damascus, and the
spoils of Samaria against the king of the Assyrians. For we, understanding these
sayings both literally and figuratively, hold that they were fulfilled in our
Saviour's Birth, shewing that you must deal with the prophecies first in their
literal and (c) obvious sense, and next allegorically. Immediately after the
aforesaid words another prophecy follows in disguised language.

[Passage quoted, Isa. viii. 5-8.]

It is clear that the only way to preserve the sense of this passage is to
explain it figuratively. Thus it means by the water of Siloam that goes softly,
the Gospel teaching of the word of salvation. For Siloam means "sent." And this
would be God the Word, sent by the Father, of Whom Moses also says, A ruler
shall not fail from Juda, nor a prince from his loins, until he come for whom it
is stored up, and he is the expectation of nations. For instead for whom it is
stored up, the Hebrew has "Siloam," the word (333) of prophecy using the same
word Siloam there and here, which means "the one that is sent." And Raashim
again was king of the idolatrous Gentiles in Damascus, as was also the son of
Romelias of the Jews |71 in Samaria who deserted the Jewish worship of their
ancestors. And so God threatens that on those who will not accept Siloam, that
is to say Emmanuel, who is sent to them, and the Son born of the prophetess, and
His pleasant and fruitful Word, but reject it, though it flows softly and (b)
gently, and choose for their own selves the prince of idolatrous Gentiles or the
leaders of the apostasy of God's people, He will bring the strong and full flood
of the river, which the word of the prophecy interprets for us to be the king of
the Assyrians: meaning here again either figuratively the Prince of this world,
or the power of Rome actually dominant, to which they were delivered who
rejected the said water of Siloam that went softly, and (c) embraced beliefs
utterly hostile to good teaching. At once surely and without delay on those who
rejected the Gospel of our Saviour, and refused the water of Siloam that went
softly, the Roman army came under God's direction through all their valleys,
trod down all their walls, took away from Judaea every man who could raise his
head, or was able to do anything at all, and so great was their camp that it
filled the whole breadth of Judrea. (d) So the prophecy was literally fulfilled
against them. Learn why it was if you desire to know. Because Emmanuel, God with
us, the Child of the Virgin, was not with them, for if they had had Him, they
would not have suffered thus. Wherefore the prophet next cries to the Gentiles,
saying, "Emmanuel, God with us: know ye nations and yield." And this I have
interpreted, so as to shew that most prophecies can be explained either
literally or figuratively. Hence we must proceed to consider the remainder of
the prophecy before us in both ways. And if the Jews say that even now (334) we
are to expect the fulfilment in the future, expecting these things to be
accomplished actually and literally by the Christ they look for, let us ask
them, how he that is to come will take the power of Damascus and the spoils of
Samaria against the king of the Assyrians, inasmuch as Samaria at the present
time is destroyed, and no longer exists, and the power that bore the name of
Damascus is abolished, and so is the Assyrian Empire, which the Medes (b) and
Persians destroyed and superseded between them? And as none of these people hold
empire, how is it possible to look for their destruction in the future? |72

Neither is it possible to claim that they were fulfilled at any other time in
the distant past. No Hebrew sprung from the union of a prophetess with the
prophet Isaiah ever (c) took the spoils of Samaria and the power of Damascus
warring against the king of Assyria, as the literal sense would imply. So that
everything compels us to agree that the fulfilment has only been in the way I
have described, and at no other time than that of the appearance of Jesus our
Saviour, in Whose day I have proved that the things aforesaid were fulfilled.
And there was therefore written according to the prophecy on His appearing a new
book, the word of the new Covenant containing the birth of the Son of the
prophetess, (d) Who also has literally by secret and divine power delivered the
kingly power of both Damascus and Samaria and their spoils as explained by me
into the hands of the Roman Empire: and figuratively of course as well, He has
drawn up His Jewish disciples, claiming them as it were for His spoils, girding
them with arms of spiritual strength, against the face of the said king of the
Assyrians, and made them into heavy-armed soldiers, as His own soldiers. But
those who refused the fruitful and life-giving water of His own teaching, which
goes softly, and preferred what is hostile and opposed to God, He has handed
over to the king of (335) the Assyrians, by whom they are even now enslaved. For
verily He has gone up all their valleys, and all their walls, and taken away
from Judaea every ruler and king, denominated "head," and every one capable of
doing anything, with the result that from that time to this they have possessed
no head, no able man of God, as were their ancient saints, whether eminent for
prophecy, or even for righteousness and godliness. And it is evident that their
whole country is even now (b) subject to their enemies, and that this was all
completed when Emmanuel came. Thus, then, the Hebrew Scriptures contain the
double message that Emmanuel would be rejected by the Jews and cause their great
miseries, and that He would be accepted by us Gentiles and prove Himself our
source of salvation and of the knowledge of God. Wherefore the next saying is,
"God is with us: know ye Gentiles and yield." How truly do we yield, we Gentiles
that believe on Him, vanquished by the truth and power of Him |73 Who is God
with us, and conquered we obey Him (c) everywhere alike, even though we dwell in
the very ends of the earth, according to the prophecy which says, "Obey even at
the ends of the earth." Yet though we obey Him and hear His call, the prophecy
as it proceeds must refer to those nations that do not yet believe, saying, "Ye
that were strong be vanquished. For if ye again be strong, ye shall again be
vanquished, and whatever word ye take, shall not remain among you, for God is
with us. Thus saith the Lord to them that disbelieve with strong hand." (d) In
which words the prophecy says clearly to them that are restive under and rebel
against Christ's teaching and put no trust in His strong hand, that they will
have no strength if they attempt to war with the God with us, and that whatever
counsel they take against Him shall not abide with them, because Emmanuel is
with us, and it is easy for us who see the threats directed against us and the
attacks of rulers in these days, to realize the truth of the conclusion, and
that they can never carry out their threats because God is with us. (336) From
the same.

That tlie Son to be Born of the Virgin prophesied of, or Prophetess, is Called
God, Angel of Great Counsel, and by Other Strange Names, and that His Birth is
the Occasion of the Light of Holiness to the Gentiles.

[Passage quoted, Isa. ix. 1-7.]

This is the third prophecy of the Child, making known the same thing in
different ways. As our present object is to exhibit the manner of God's coming
to men, note the number of ways in which He is shewn forth. First, He was set
before us under the name of Emmanuel, God born of a Virgin; secondly, as the
Child of the prophetess and the Holy Spirit, being none other than the
before-named; thirdly, in the present passage, being one and the same as in the
former, wherein His Name is said to be, according to the Septuagint, Angel of
Great Counsel, and as some of |74 the copies have, "Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty
God, (337) Potentate, Prince of Peace, Father of the World to Come." In the
Hebrew, as Aquila says:

"For unto us a child is born, to us a son is given, and a measure was upon his
shoulders. And his name was called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty, Powerful,
Father, even Prince of Peace, and of his peace there is no end."

And as Symmachus:

"For a youth is given to us, a son is given us; and his instructions shall be
upon his shoulders, and his name shall be called Miraculous, Counselling,
Strong, Powerful, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace, and of his (b) peace there is
no end."

In the Septuagint it is not simply Angel, but that he should be born as Angel of
Great Counsel, and Wonderful Counsellor, and Mighty God, and Potentate, and
Prince of Peace, and Father of the World to Come, and it was there prophesied
that He should be a Child. He is referred to that was previously called
differently the Word of God, and God and Lord, and also named the Angel of His
Father, and the Captain of the Lord's Host. But who can this be who, in Aquila's
version and those even now current among (c) the Hebrews, is "begotten among
men, and become a child, Wonderful and Strong, Counsellor, Powerful, and Father,
yea even Prince of peace, Whose peace, he says, will never end?" or in that of
Symmachus, "Miraculous, Counselling, Strong, Powerful, Eternal Father, Prince of
peace, and that endless and infinite"; or in Theodotion's "Counselling
wonderfully, Strong, Powerful, Father, Prince of peace, for increasing
instruction, of Whose peace there is no end." And that which follows I leave you
to consider by yourself, only remarking that this Being Who is called Eternal
Father, (d) and Prince of Endless Peace, and Angel of Great Counsel is
prophesied of as being begotten and becoming a child, and on His birth among men
wills that they shall be burnt with fire who grudge the salvation He wins for
the Gentiles, be they evil daemons, or be they wicked men, of whom He says,
"That every garment and raiment wrought by guile, they will repay with
interest." And who can these be, but |75 those of whom it was elsewhere spoken
in the person of our Saviour, "They parted my garments among them, and upon my
vesture did they cast lots "? And they who are partakers of their sin, who will
also desire, when they shall see their own judgment at some future time, that
they had been burnt with fire before they sinned, before the Angel of Great
Counsel had been sinned against by them?

Now consider yourself whether it does not overstep the limits of human nature
that His peace should be said to be endless, and that He should be called
Eternal Father; and also that He should be called not simply Angel, but Angel of
Great Counsel, and Mighty God, and the other names in the list. And it says too
that the kingdom of David will be restored by Him, which you will understand
thus: there were many promises given to David, in which it was said:

"And I will set his hand in the sea, and his right hand in the rivers: he shall
call upon me, Thou art my father, my God, and the helper of my salvation, And I
will make him my firstborn, high above the kings of the earth. For ever I will
keep my mercy for him, and my covenant shall stand firm with him, and I will
make his seed for ever and ever, and his throne as the days of heaven."

And again:

"Once have I sworn by my holiness, I will not fail David, his seed shall remain
for ever, and his throne is as the sun before me, and as- the moon established
for ever."

God promised all this to David in the Psalms, but through the sins of his
successors the opposite actually happened— for the kings of David's seed lasted
until Jeremiah, and ceased on the siege of the holy city by the Babylonians, so
that from that date neither the throne of David nor his seed ruled the Jewish
nation. And the Holy Spirit thus foretells the failure of the promises made to
David in the same passage of the Psalm:

"But thou hast rejected, and made of no account, thou hast cast down thy Christ:
Thou hast destroyed the covenant of thy servant, and cast his glory to the
ground, thou hast broken down all his strongholds." |76

And a few verses later:

"Thou hast broken down his throne to the ground, thou hast lessened the days of
his time, thou hast proved dishonour upon him";

a course of events which has been begun and carried to its conclusion from the
Babylonian captivity of the Jews up to (339) the Roman Empire and Tiberius. For
no one of the seed of David appears to have sat on the throne of the Hebrews in
the intervening period up to the coining of Christ. But when our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, Who was of David's seed, was proclaimed King of all the
world, that very throne of David, as though renewed from its degradation and
fall, was restored in the divine kingdom of our (b) Saviour, and will last for
ever; and even now, like the sun in God's Presence, is lighting the whole world
with the rays of His teaching, according to the witness of the Psalm and the
prophecy before us, which says concerning the Child that should be born, on the
throne of David (that is to say, the eternal and lasting throne promised to
David), He should sit in His kingdom, to guide it, and uphold it in (c) justice
and judgment from now even for ever. The Angel Gabriel should be a sufficient
teacher that this was fulfilled, when he said in his sacred words to the Virgin:

"Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour with God; and behold thou shalt
conceive in thy womb, and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He
shall be great, and shall be called Son of the Highest, and the Lord God shall
give unto him the throne of his father David, and he shall reign over the house
of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end." [[Luke.i. 30.]]

(d) And the prophet expecting this birth of Christ in the aforesaid Psalm, and
regarding its postponement and delay as if it were the cause of the fall of
David's throne, cries in disgust, "But thou hast refused, and made of no
account, and cast off thy Christ." And he prays as though doubting the Divine
Being, that the promise may be somehow swiftly fulfilled: "Where is thine
ancient pity, Lord, which thou swarest unto David in thy truth? "which same
things his prophecy most clearly says will be fulfilled at the birth of the
Angel of Great Counsel. "Wherefore they will wish," he says, "to have been burnt
with fire, those before named |77 for unto us a child is born, and to us a son
is given, the Angel of Great Counsel." To us, that is, who in Galilee of the
Gentiles have believed on Him, to whom He has brought light and joy, and the new
and fresh drink of the mystery of the new Covenant: according to the prophecy
which says:

"First drink this, drink quickly—land of Zabulon, (340) and land of Nephthalim,
and the rest who dwell by the coast, across Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles: O
people that sat in darkness, behold a great light, and to them that sat in
darkness and the shadow of death a light is risen."

These are they who from the Gentiles believed in the Christ of God, and the
disciples and apostles of our Saviour, whom He called from the land of Zabulon
and Nephthalim, and chose for the preachers of His Gospel. To them therefore who
believed, the Angel of Great Counsel is given as a son to bring them salvation,
but to them who disbelieved (b) fire and burning.

He says that the ground of this whole dispensation is the zeal of the Lord, "The
zeal of the Lord of Sabaoth will do this." What is the character of this zeal?
Is it not that recorded by Moses, where he says:

"They have provoked me to jealousy, but not according to God. They have angered
me with their idols. And I will provoke them to jealousy by a nation which is
not. By a foolish nation I will anger them "? [[Deut.xxxii. 21.]]

But as I have by God's help solved the problems of the (c) sojourn on earth of
Him that was prophesied, and also the character of His coming from prophetic
evidence, it is now the time to investigate the place where He should be born,
His race, and the Hebrew tribe from which it was predicted He should come.
These, then, shall be our next subjects. |78

CHAPTER 2 From Micah.

(341) Of the Place of the Birth of the God fore-announced, and how He will come
forth from Bethlehem, a Town of Palestine, being from Eternity, as Governor of
the Race of the Holy, and how it is foretold that the Lord will feed them that
have believed in Him unto the Ends of the Earth.

[Passage quoted, Micah v. 2-6.]

EMMANUEL, which is interpreted God with us, has been clearly shewn in the
passages quoted to have been born of (b) the Virgin, and the Angel of Great
Counsel to have become a child. But the place of His Birth had also to be
pointed out. It was therefore prophesied that a ruler would come forth from
Bethlehem, whose goings forth were from eternity. And this could not be referred
to a human being, but only to the nature of Emmanuel and the Angel of Great
Counsel. For eternal existence can be assumed only of God. A person who exists
from eternity, then, is predicted as about to come forth from Bethlehem, a
Jewish town not far from (c) Jerusalem. And we find that the only famous man who
was born there was David, and then later our Lord and Saviour, Jesus the Christ
of God, and besides them no other. But David, who came before the date of the
prophecy, was dead many years before the prediction: nor were his goings forth
from the days of eternity. It only remains that the words were fulfilled in Him
that was born afterwards from Bethlehem, the true Emmanuel, God the Word going
forth before the whole creation, and called (d) "God with us," especially as His
Birth at Bethlehem undoubtedly shewed God's Presence, by the wonders connected
with it: for St. Luke writes its record thus:

[Passage quoted, Luke ii. 1-18.]

So Luke writes. And Matthew tells the story of our Saviour's birth as follows:

[Matt. ii. 1-12.] |79

I have quoted these passages in full to shew that what happened at Bethlehem at
the Birth of our Saviour furnishes adequate evidence that He was the Person
meant by the prophecy. And to this day the inhabitants of the place, who have
received the tradition from their fathers, confirm the truth of the story by
shewing to those who visit Bethlehem because of its history the cave in which
the (c) Virgin bare and laid her infant, as the prophecy says:

"Therefore he shall give them until the time of her that brings forth: She shall
bring forth, and the rest of their brethren shall turn to them."

And by "her that brings forth "he means accordingly her that in the former
prophecies was called a Virgin, and the prophetess who was delivered of Emmanuel
and the Angel of Great Counsel. For until her day and that of Him she bare the
old conditions of the nation were unaltered, the prescription being laid down
until the time of "her that (d) brings forth, "that is, until the miraculous
Birth of Him that was born of the Virgin; but after His day their kingdom was
taken away, and the remnant of their brethren, those, that is to say, who
believed in the Christ of God, became apostles and disciples and evangelists of
our Saviour, whom, when they turn to Him, the Lord Himself is said to feed, not
as before by angels or men that served him, but by Himself personally, so that
thus they might be glorified to the ends of the earth. For they were glorified
when "their voice went into all the earth, and their words to the end of the
world." It is clear what a great flock of spiritual human sheep has been won for
the Lord throughout the whole world by the apostles: and this flock the Lord
Himself is (314) said personally to look after and feed with His strength, being
both Shepherd and Lord of the flock, so that the sheep are protected by the
strong hand and mighty arm of their Master and Shepherd, from danger of attack
from wild and savage beasts.

Such is the character of the events at Bethlehem, and of the Coming of the God
that was fore-announced. But the account of the Coming from Heaven to men of the
Lord and (b) |80 Shepherd Himself I have already quoted from the prophecy we
have before us, in which it is said:

"Hear all peoples, and let the earth attend, and all that are therein, and the
Lord shall he a witness to you, the Lord from his holy house. Wherefore behold
the Lord, the Lord comes forth from his place, and shall descend,"

(and that which follows); to which he adds, "For the sin of Jacob is all this
done, and for the transgression of the house of Israel." But it is clear, from
what the same prophet goes (c) on to say, that it was not only because of the
sin of the Jews, that the Lord came down, but also for the salvation and calling
of all nations. For he proceeds to say:

"And the mountain of the Lord shall be visible to the end of the days, and many
peoples shall haste to it, and many nations shall come and say, Come, let us go
up to the Mount of the Lord."

And therefore, after the proclamation that the Eternal shall come forth from
Bethlehem, he says that he will no more rule only over Israel, but over all men
together even unto the ends of the earth; for he says:

(d) "And he shall stand and see, and shall feed his flock with the strength of
the Lord, and they shall live in the glory of the name of the Lord God:
wherefore now they shall be glorified even unto the ends of the earth, and this
shall be peace."

Who shall have this peace, but the earth, in which the flocks of the Lord shall
be glorified? And it is plain to all that this was fulfilled after the coming of
our Saviour Jesus Christ. For before Him there was great variety of government,
all nations being under tyrannical or democratic constitutions, as for instance,
Egypt was ruled by its own king, (345) and so were the Arabs, the Idumueans, the
Phoenicians, the Syrians and the other nations; there were risings of nations
against nations and cities against cities, there were countless sieges and
enslavements carried through in every place and country, until the Lord and
Saviour came, and concurrently with His coming, the first Roman Emperor, (b)
Augustus, conquered the nations, variety of government was almost completely
ended, and peace was spread through all the world, according to the prophecy
before us which |81 expressly says of Christ's disciples: "Wherefore they shall
be glorified to the ends of the earth, and this shall be peace." And the oracle
in the Psalms, which says about Christ, "There shall rise in his days justice
and peace," is in agreement with this. And I think that is why He is called
"Prince of Peace" in the prophecy that I quoted before this. And I would ask you
to notice that the prophet we are considering says at the outset that the Lord
will come from heaven, and that the subject of the prophecy will only pasture
his flock after His birth at Bethlehem. And (c) the Evangelist, whose words I
have cited, furnishes the evidence that this was the case with regard to our
Lord and Saviour. The Christ is called the governor and shepherd of Israel, in
accord with the custom of Holy Scripture to give the name of the true Israel
figuratively to all who see God and live according to His Will: just as
contrariwise it calls the Jews, when they sin, by names that suit their ways,
Canaanites, and seed of Canaan not Judah, Rulers of Sodom, and people of
Gomorrah. Though, of course, (d) also, all our Saviour's life was literally
passed with the Jewish race, and He was the Leader of many gathered out of
Israel, as many of the Jews as knew Him and believed in Him.

Such, then, was the fulfilment of the prophecy quoted. But one must start fresh
in considering that which succeeds it, which runs thus:

"When the Assyrian shall attack your land, and come against your country, there
shall be raised up against him seven shepherds, and eight 'bites' of men,"

with that which follows, whose meaning we are not now called upon to unfold.

Now it might be said that after the expedition of the Assyrians into Judaea,
when they overcame the Jews, the number of rebellions against them is shewn by
the seven shepherds and the eight "bites": and that historians of (346) Assyria
would know this, and at the end of their rule the one foretold was born at
Bethlehem, after the seven shepherds and the eight "bites" had happened to the
|82 Assyrians in the period after their expedition against Judaea. But we must
not now devote more time to what would entail a long inquiry. From Psalm cxxxi.
To David, inquiring where should be the Birthplace of the Predicted God,
Ephratha, which is Bethlehem, is made known by the Holy Spirit.

(c) [Passages quoted, Ps. cxxxi. 1-7, 10, 11, 17.]

This prophecy agrees with the preceding in stating that the God about whom the
prophecy is made will come forth from Bethlehem. And it is about this place that
David first prays God to teach him, since he does not know it, (347) and then
after his prayer he is taught. For when he has received the oracle addressed to
him in the Psalm which said: "Of the fruit of thy body I will set upon thy
seat," and, "There will I raise up a horn for David, I have prepared a lantern
for my Christ," he rightly falls down before God, and there fallen to the earth
worships, and with yet greater intensity of prayer swears that he will not enter
the tabernacle of his house, nor allow his eyes to sleep, nor his eyelids to
slumber, nor ascend the couch of his bed, (b) but will lie on the ground
worshipping and adoring, until he finds a place for the Lord, and a tabernacle
for the God of Jacob—that is, until he learns by the Lord's revelation to him
the birthplace of the Christ. So having prayed and desired to learn it, not long
after he beholds by the Holy Spirit what will be in the future; for God has
promised to His people that he will hear them even while they speak. So his
prayer being heard he (c) is favoured with an oracle which cries "Bethlehem,"
that being the place of the Lord, and the tabernacle of the God of Jacob. And so
when the Holy Spirit prophesied that this was within him, he, listening to his
inner voice, adds: "Lo, we heard of it in Ephratha." And Ephratha is the same as
Bethlehem, as is clear from Genesis, where it is said of Rachel, "And they
buried her in the Hippodrome of Ephratha,'' and this is Bethlehem. And the
previous prophecy ran: "And thou, Bethlehem, house of Ephratha." |83 "Behold,"
he says, "we have heard it! "—evidently (d) meaning the birth of Christ and the
entering of the God of Jacob into His tabernacle. For what else could the
tabernacle of the God of Jacob be but the Body of Christ, which was born at
Bethlehem, in which, as in a tabernacle, the divinity of the Only-begotten
dwelt? And the habitation is not said to be simply of God, but is qualified as
of the God of Jacob, that we may know that it is the God that dwells therein,
Who was seen by Jacob in human form and shape, wherefore he was deemed worthy of
the name, Seer of God, f6r such is the translation of his name. And I have
established in the early part of this work that He that was seen by Jacob was
none other than the Word of God. Bethlehem was therefore revealed to David when
he prayed and desired to know the place and the habitation of the Lord and God
of Jacob, wherefore he said: "Behold, we heard it at Ephiatha," and added: "Let
us worship at (348) the place where his feet stood." Therefore in these words
the Lord God of Jacob Himself foretold that His own place and habitation would
be in Ephratha, which is Bethlehem, agreeing with the prophecy of Micah, which
said: "And thou, Bethlehem, house of Ephratha, out of thee shall come a
governor, and his goings forth are from eternity," which, when we lately
examined, we found could only apply to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who
was born at Bethlehem according to the predictions. For (b) it is certain that
no one else can be shewn to have come forth from there with glory after the date
of the prophecy: there was no king, or prophet, or any other Hebrew saint who
can be shewn to have been of David's seed, and also born at Bethlehem, except
our Lord and Saviour, the Christ of God. We must, therefore, own that He, and no
one else, is the subject of this prophecy, and (c) for the additional reason
that further on the same Psalm proves it, calling Him Christ by name, where it
says: "For the sake of David thy servant, turn not away the face of thy Christ."
And again: "There will I raise up a horn for David, I have prepared a lantern
for my Christ, his enemies I will clothe with shame, but upon him my holiness
shall flower." Where else does he say: "I will raise up a horn for David," but
in Bethlehem—Ephratha? (d) For it was there the horn of David, the Christ
according |84 to the flesh, arose like a great light, and there the God of the
Universe prepared the lantern of the Christ. And the human tabernacle was the
lantern as it were of his spiritual light, through which, like an earthen
vessel, as if through a lantern, He poured forth the rays of His own light on
all who were oppressed by ignorance of God and thick darkness.

Yes, indeed, I think that it was clearly revealed here that the God of Jacob,
from the beginning the Eternal, would dwell among men, and that He would be born
nowhere else but in the place at Bethlehem, near Jerusalem, in the spot that is
even now pointed out, for there no one is witnessed to by all the inhabitants as
having been (349) born there in accordance with the Gospel story, no one
remarkable or famous among all men, except Jesus Christ. And Bethlehem is
translated, "House of Bread," bearing the name of Him Who came forth from it,
our Saviour, the true Word of God, and nourisher of spiritual souls, which He
Himself shews by saying: "I am the Bread that came down from heaven." And since
it was David's mother-town as well, the Son of David according to the (b) flesh
rightly made His entrance from it according to the predictions of the prophets,
so that the reason is clear why He chose Bethlehem for His mother-town. But He
is said to have been brought up at Nazara, and also to have been called a
Nazarene We know that the Hebrew word "Naziraion" occurs in Leviticus in
connection with the ointment which they used for unction. And the ruler there
was a kind of image of the great and (c) true High Priest, the Christ of God,
being a shadowy type of Christ. So there it is said about the High Priest
according to the Septuagint: "And he shall not defile him that is sanctified to
his God, because the holy oil of his God hath anointed him": where the Hebrew
has nazer for oil. And Aquila reads: "Because the separation, the oil of God's
unction, is on him"; and Symmachus: "Because the pure oil of his God's anointing
is on him ": and Theodotion: "Because the oil nazer anointed by his God is upon
him." So that nazer according to the Septuagint is "holy," according to Aquila
"separation," according to Symmachus "pure," and the name Nazarene will
therefore mean either holy, or separate, or pure. But the ancient |85 priests,
who were anointed with prepared oil, which Moses (d) called Nazer, were called
for that reason Nazarenes; while our Lord and Saviour having naturally holiness,
purity, and separation from sin, needed no human unguent, yet received the name
of Nazarene among men, not because He was a Nazarene in the sense of being
anointed with the oil called Nazer, but because He naturally had the qualities
it symbolized, and also because He was called Nazarene from Nazara, where He was
brought up by His parents according to the flesh and passed His childhood. And
so it is said (350) in Matthew:

"Being warned of God in a dream [Joseph is referred to] he departed into the
regions of Galilee, and came and lived in a city called Nazara, that the saying
of the prophets might be fulfilled, He shall be called a Nazarene."

For it was altogether necessary that He Who was a Nazarene naturally and truly,
that is holy, and pure and separate from men, should be called by the name. But
since, needing no human unction, He did not receive the name from the oil nazer,
He acquired it from the place named (b) Nazara. This proof being thus complete,
let us now investigate from what race, and from which Hebrew tribe, it was
foretold that the Saviour of our souls, the Christ of God, should come. And I
will first quote the Gospel passages about it, and then add the prophets'
evidence to theirs, like seals that agree together. Matthew thus gives the
genealogy of Christ according to the flesh: |86

"The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of
Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob begat Juda," and
that which follows.

And the apostle agrees with this, when he says:

"Separated to the gospel of God, which he had before promised by his prophets in
the holy scriptures concerning his son, who was born of the seed of David
according to the flesh."

These words would agree with the corresponding predictions.

CHAPTER 3 From the Second Book of Chronicles. From what Race and from what
Hebrew Tribe it was foretold that the Christ should come.

[Passages quoted, 1 Chron. xvii. 11-13; Ps. lxxxviii. 26; verses 4, 35, 29; and
cxxxi. 11.]

THERE is no doubt that Solomon was the son of David and his successor in the
kingdom. And he first built the Temple of God at Jerusalem, and perhaps the Jews
understand him to be the subject of the prophecy. But we may fairly ask them
whether the oracle applies to Solomon, which says, "And I will set up his throne
for ever," and also where God sware with the affirmation of an oath by his holy
one, "The throne of him that is foretold, shall be as the sun, and the days of
heaven." For if the years of the reign of Solomon are reckoned, they will be
found to be forty and no more. Even if the reigns of all his successors be added
up, they do not altogether come to 500 years. And even if we suppose that their
line continued down to the final attack on the Jewish nation by the Romans, how
can they fulfil a prophecy which says, "Thy throne shall |87 remain for ever,
and be as the sun and the days of heaven "? And the words, "I will be to him a
father, and he shall be to me a son," how can they refer to Solomon, for his
history tells us much about him that is foreign and opposed to the adoption of
God? Nay, hear the indictment against him:

"And Solomon loved women, and took many strange wives, even the daughter of
Pharaoh, Moabites, Ammonites, and Idumaeans, Syrians and Chatteans, and
Amorites, from the nations of whom the Lord said to the children of Israel, that
they should not go in to them."

And in addition to this:

"And his heart was not right with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David
his father; and Solomon went after Astarte, the abomination of the Sidonians,
and after their king, the idol of the sons of Ammon. And Solomon did evil before
the Lord."

And again further on he adds:

"And the Lord raised Satan against Solomon, Ader the Idumaean."

Now who would venture to call God his father, who, lay under such grievous
charges, and to call himself the firstborn son of the God of the Universe? Or
how could these sayings apply first to David, and then to his seed? But they do
not even apply to David, if you reflect. Therefore we require some one else,
here revealed, to arise from the seed of David. But there was no other born of
him, as is recorded, save only our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ of God, Who
alone of the kings of David's line is called through the whole world the Son of
David according to His earthly birth, and Whose Kingdom continues and will
continue, lasting for endless time. It is attacked by many, but always by its
divine superhuman power proves itself inspired and invincible as the prophecy
foretold. And if you hear God swear by His holy one, hear Him swear as Father by
the Word of God, existing before all ages, His Holy and Only-begotten Son, of
Whose divinity the passages I have quoted have spoken in many ways, by Whom His
God and Father swears as by His dearly beloved, that He would glorify Him that
was of the seed of David for ever. |88 And this came to pass when the Word
became flesh, and took and made divine Him that was of David's seed. Wherefore
he calls him Son, saying, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a
son." And again, "And 1 will make him my firstborn." From this it is then
clearly explained that the firstborn Son of God will be of the seed of David, so
that the Son of David is one and the same as the Son of God, and the Son of God
one and the same as the Son of David. And thus it was prophesied that the
Firstborn of the whole creation, Himself the Son of God, was to become Son of
man. The Scripture of the Gospel sets its seal on this oracle, where it says
that the Angel Gabriel, standing by the holy Virgin, spake thus concerning our
Saviour:

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God
shall give to him the throne of his father David, and he shall rule over the
house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."

And after a little, Zacharias the father of John, prophesies thus concerning
Christ in the same gospel:

"Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he hath visited and wrought redemption
for his people, and hath raised a horn of salvation for us in the house of David
his son, as he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets from ages past."

The fact that our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ of God, and none other, has
received the throne promised for ever to David, has then been adequately proved
by the prophecies quoted, and by the words of Gabriel and Zachariah, in which He
is regarded as of the seed of David according to the flesh. But the reason why
the holy evangelists give the genealogy of Joseph, although our Saviour was not
His son, but the son of the Holy Ghost and the holy Virgin, and how the mother
of our Lord herself is proved to be of the race and seed of David, I have
treated fully in the First Book of my Questions and Answers concerning the
genealogy of our Saviour, and must refer those interested to that book, as the
present subject is now occupying me. |89 From Psalm lxxii. Of Solomon and of His
Seed that is to come.

[Passages quoted, Ps. lxxii., i, 5-8, 16b.] As this Psalm is addressed to
Solomon, the first verse of (354) the Psalm must be referred to him, and all the
rest to the son of Solomon, not Rehoboam, who was king of Israel after him, but
Him that was of his seed according to the flesh, the Christ of God: for all who
are acquainted with the Holy Scriptures will agree that it is impossible to
connect (c) what is said in this Psalm with him or his successors, because of
what they reveal about him. Nay, how is it possible to apply to Solomon, or his
son Rehoboam, the burden of the whole Psalm?—for instance, "He shall rule from
sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth." And "He shall remain
as long as the sun, and before the moon for ever," and other similar statements.
Yet the words at the beginning of the Psalm are at once seen to apply to
Solomon, which say, "O God, thou wilt give judgment to the king." And the
addition, "And thy justice to the king's son," to the Son of Solomon, not his
(d) firstborn who succeeded him in the kingdom (for he only ruled the Jewish
nation seventeen years, being a wicked king), nor any of the successors of
Rehoboam, but only to one of the seed of David, who could thus be called the son
both of David and Solomon. And this is our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. For
His Kingdom and its throne will stand as long as the sun. And He alone of men,
as the Word of God, existed before the moon and the creation of (355) the world,
and He alone came down like dew from heaven on all the earth: and it was said in
our quotation a little above, that He had risen on all men and that His justice
would remain even until the consummation of life, which is called the removal of
the moon. And our Saviour's power is supreme from the eastern sea to the west,
beginning its |90 (b) activity at the river, which is either the Sacrament of
Baptism, or from Jordan, where He first appeared to benefit mankind. Yea, from
that time His kingdom has spread and extended through the whole world. And
Jerusalem being meant by Libanus, as is made clear by many prophecies, because
of its ancient altar and temple, and the offerings thereon to the honour of God
like Libanus, the Church of the Gentiles the fruit of Christ is said to be (c)
about to be exalted above Libanus. And if the studious consider this Psalm in
its literal sense at leisure, they will find that its contents only apply to our
Lord, and not to Solomon of old, or any of his successors on the throne of
Judaea, who reigned but a few years, and only over the Jewish land.

(d) From Isaiah. Of Jesse, and the Seed to be born of Him.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xi. 1-10.]

(356) This Jesse was David's father. As, then, in the preceding prophecies it
was foretold that one should come forth of the fruit and seed of David, and also
of the seed of Solomon, in the same way here it is prophesied that one will come
forth of the seed of Jesse, that is to say of David, many years after the death
of both David and Solomon. And this (b) passage decides the quibble of the Jews
already noticed with regard to Solomon. For Isaiah writes this prophecy about
some one other than him many years after the death of Solomon, who should arise
from the stem of Jesse, and the seed of David. And I do not think it can be
doubted that the words apply only to our Saviour, the Christ of God, considering
the promise in the prediction, which says, "And (c) there shall be a root of
Jesse, and he that riseth to rule the nations, in him shall the nations trust,"
and the way in which our Saviour fulfils them. For He alone, after His
Resurrection from the dead, intended here I think by the word "Arise," ruled not
only the Jews but all nations, so that the prophecy does not lack fulfilment, as
it is quite clear that the words, "In Him |91 shall the Gentiles trust," are
fulfilled in Him, as well as the other prophecies. And the references to the
animals and wild beasts becoming tame and laying aside their fierce and
untameable nature through His sojourn here will be allegorically understood of
men's rough and wild ways and fierce characters being changed by Christ's
teaching from irrational savagery. They must certainly be allegorically
understood, especially (d) if one understands the root of Jesse mentioned by the
prophet, and the rod, figuratively, and expounds in an intelligible way,
"Justice shall be the girdle of his loins, and truth the girdle of his reins."
For if one can only interpret this allegorically it follows that one must treat
the passages that refer to the animals necessarily in a figurative way as well.
From Jeremiah. (357) A Righteous Rising from the Seed of David upspringing, and
the same a King of Men, and a New Name to be given to those ruled by Him, and
the Forgiveness of their Former Sins.

[Passages quoted, Jer. xxiii. 6-8, xxx. 8, 9.]

Jeremiah prophesies thus long after the death of David and even the time of
Solomon concerning a king who is to arise from the seed of David, whom he first
calls "the rising," not simply but with the adjective "just," as though he were
to shine forth from the sun of righteousness, of whom I treated in my evidences
about the Second Cause, where I shewed that the pre-existent Word of God besides
(d) many other names was called Sun of Righteousness, quoting the prophecy which
said, "To them that fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise."
Therefore the prophecy in the present passage is that God will raise up "a
righteous rising" to David, in the sense of a sun of righteousness. And he calls
the same Being an understanding king, and one who does judgment and justice on
the earth. He gives him too the same name as David, who died very long before.
For you must note carefully how at the beginning |92 he says, "And I will raise
up to David a righteous rising," (358) and adds at the end, "And I will raise up
David to be his king." Whose, but David's?—for it was to him that he said He
would raise up a righteous rising. And Zechariah prophesying of the same Being
likewise calls Him "arising," saying, "Behold I will raise up my servant, the
rising," and also, "Behold a man whose name 8. is 'The Rising,' and beneath him
springs righteousness." But no one, it is certain, arose after the time of
Jeremiah among the Jews who could be called "a righteous rising" and "an
understanding king doing judgment and righteousness on the earth." For if it be
suggested that Jesus son of Josedec is meant, it must be answered that the ('-')
prophecy is inapplicable to him. For he was neither of David's seed nor did he
reign as king. How could this apply to him, "And I will raise up David to be his
king," when he was of the tribe of Levi, and of high-priestly rank, and of
another tribe than David, and is never recorded to have been king? We conclude
that, as no other can be discovered, we must agree that the subject of this
prophecy (c) can only be our Lord and Saviour, called in other places "the light
of the world," and "the light of the nations." He therefore must be the subject
of this prophecy, and the prediction is absolutely true. For He alone of David's
seed and figuratively named after his ancestor, for David means "strong-handed,"
preached judgment and justice by His teaching to all men on earth, and alone of
all that ever lived is king not of one land only, but of the whole world, and
alone has caused righteousness to arise over all the world, according to what is
said of Him in the Psalm: "Righteousness shall arise in his days, and abundance
of peace." And Judah and Israel were to be saved in His days, that (d) is to say
all the Jews who through Him reached holiness, His apostles, disciples and
evangelists, or perhaps all who represent the Jew mystically understood and the
true Israel which sees God spiritually.

"For he is not a Jew," the apostle says, "that is one outwardly, nor
circumcision the outward circumcision in the flesh, but he is a Jew which is one
in secret, and circumcision is of the heart in the spirit not the letter, whose
praise is not of men, but of God." |93

It is these, then, the secret Jew and the true Israel, that he says are through
Christ's calling to be named by a new name, neither Jew nor Israel, but one
quite different from these. For He says that the Lord will call them by the
(359) name of Josedekeim, which means, "The Lord's just ones." And I ask you to
consider whether this name Josedekeim, by which the disciples of Jesus are
called by God, be not formed from Joshua; they would thus be named by men from
the name of Christ which is Greek (i. e. Christians), and by the prophets, from
Jesus, in the Hebrew tongue, because they are saved by Him, Josedekeim. So it is
said, "And this is the name by which the Lord shall call them, (h) Josedekeim
among the prophets." So, then, we see that the people that are to become through
the subject of the prophecy the spiritual Jews and the true Israel, will be
called Josedekeim from Joshua, and they will be called by this name, he says,
not by men, but by God, and by His prophets. For you must note carefully the
passage that says, "And this is the name which the Lord shall call them,
Josedekeim by his prophets." And its translation in Greek is. as I said, "God's
just ones." And God promises that (c) He will break from those who are thus to
be saved the old heavy yoke of bitter daemons and shatter the bonds of the sins
by which they were held of old, so that they will no more serve strange gods,
but bear fruit and please Him only. Compare with this the oracle in the Second
Psalm concerning the Coming of Christ and the calling of the Gentiles, which
says: "Let us break their bonds asunder, and cast off their yoke from us." To
which, I think, this we are considering is akin when it says:

"In that day, saith the Lord, I will break the yoke from off their necks, and
shatter their bonds, and they (d) shall not serve other gods, but shall serve
the Lord their God."

But in proof that it was predicted that the Christ of God should be born of the
fruit of David's body, and of the seed of Solomon, as actually was the case,
since the Holy Scriptures call Him David as well as by many other names, I have
given sufficient confirmation. And it should raise no question, that He is said
to come from the tribe of Judah, for that was the tribe to which David belonged.
|94 But I will give the oracle of Moses that states this, though it is already
proved sufficiently. It runs thus: From Genesis.

How from the Tribe of Judah shall be born the Christ of God, and shall be
established as the Expectation of Nations.

[Passage quoted, Gen. xlix. 8-10.]

The whole Hebrew race consisted of twelve tribes, one of which had Judah for its
ancestor and head, to whom the above words were addressed, telling him that the
Christ should spring from him. And if you compare with this prophecy the other
prophecies I have quoted, you will find all through them that the same Being is
proclaimed by a sign common to all. For one said of Him that springs from the
root of Jesse, "And there shall be one arising to rule the nations, on him shall
the nations trust." Another said of the son of Solomon, "He shall rule from sea
to sea, and from the river to the ends of the world, and in him all nations
shall be blessed." And the one before us similarly says, "Until he come for whom
it is laid up, and he shall be the expectation of nations."

If, then, the predictions about the nations are in accord, and the previous ones
have been proved to refer to our Saviour, nothing prevents us referring this one
to Him as well, if these prophecies are agreed to be in harmony, especially with
regard to the fact that the kings and rulers of the Jewish nation continued in
the same line of succession until the period of Christ's appearing, but failed
directly He appeared, and by the prediction of Jacob the expectation of the
nations demanded a satisfaction.

Christ therefore is foretold here also, as destined to come from the tribe of
Judah, and since He has been shewn to have been born of David, Solomon, and the
root of Jesse, it is evident He came from the same tribe as they. For David was
son of Jesse, and Solomon of David, both of the tribe of Judah. Our Lord and
Saviour must therefore spring from it, as the wonderful evangelist Matthew
states |95 in his geneaology, "The Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son
of David, son of Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac, Isaac begat Jacob, Jacob begat
Judah." And now that I have adequately proved these points, it is time to
consider the period of the fulfilment of the prophecies. This text was
transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 50: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 8
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 8

BOOK VIII

INTRODUCTION

(362) I HAVE proved by how many prophecies the coming of the Word of God to men
was foretold, and that it was announced by the Hebrew prophets whence He should
(b) come, and where and how He should be seen by men on earth, and that He was
actually the Person, the eternal pre-existent Son of God, Whom we have learned
to recognize by the other names of God and Lord and Chief Captain, and Angel of
Great Counsel and High Priest. And I begin at this point, in continuance of the
preceding proof, to give the evidence with reference to the period of His
Appearing drawn again from prophetic predictions.

(363) The Holy Scriptures foretell that there will be unmistakable signs of the Coming of Christ. Now there were among the Hebrews three outstanding offices of dignity, which made the nation famous, firstly the kingship, secondly that of prophet, and lastly the high priesthood. The prophecies said that the abolition and complete destruction of all these three together would be the sign of the (b) presence of the Christ. And that the proofs that the times had come, would lie in the ceasing of the Mosaic worship, the desolation of Jerusalem and its Temple, and the subjection of the whole Jewish race to its enemies. They suggest other signs of the same times as well, an abundance of peace, the overturning in nation and city of immemorial local and national forms of government, the
|97 conquest of polytheistic and daemonic idolatry, the knowledge of the religion of God the one Supreme Creator. The holy oracles foretold that all these changes, which had (c) not been made in the days of the prophets of old, would take place at the coming of the Christ, which I will presently shew to have been fulfilled as never before in accordance with the predictions. I have already, you will remember, accounted for the Christ coming in these last times and not long ago, but I will here shortly repeat myself. In the old days the souls of men were tyrannized over by squalid folly and sin, and a strange godlessness ruled (d) over all human life, so that men were like wild and untamed beasts. They knew nothing of cities, or constitutions, or laws, nor anything honourable or progressive; they set no store on arts and sciences, they had no conception of virtue and philosophy, they lived in lonely deserts, in mountains, caves, and villages; they preyed on their neighbours like robbers, and gained their livelihood mostly by tyrannizing over those weaker than themselves. But though they did not know the Supreme God, nor the path of true religion, yet inspired by conceptions of natural religion they agreed in self-taught principles about the (364) existence of a divine power, regarded it as and called it God, and considered the name one of salvation and beneficence, but they were not yet able to realize anything beyond a Being transcending the world of visible nature. Wherefore some of
them----

25. "worshipped and served the creature rather than the creator; 21. and they
became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened; 23. and
they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like unto
corruptible man, and to birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things."

And so they made images of their kings and tyrants long dead, and paid them
divine honours, and by imputing divinity to them sanctified their wicked and
lustful deeds as works of the gods. |98

How could the wise and good word of Christ, instilling the (c) quintessence of
wisdom, be in harmony with men in that condition, and involved in such depths of
evil? So that holy and all-seeing Justice, pruning them like a wild and
dangerous wood, now afflicted them by floods, now by fire, now delivered them to
wars, butchery and sieges at one another's hands, urged on as they were to war
against (d) each other by those very daemons whom they regarded as their gods,
with the result that human life in those days admitted no neighbourly
intercourse, mutual association or union. Those were few, as might be expected
in such days, and easily numbered, who, as the Hebrew oracles tell us, were
found to be godly; with such, Justice met by the use of oracles and theophanies,
she took them by the hand and cared for them with the elementary but helpful
Mosaic legislation. But when at last by the legislation laid down for them, and
by the later teaching of the prophets poured out like a sweet smell upon all
men, the character of the people became civilized, and constitutions and legal
systems were (365) established among most nations, and the name of virtue and
philosophy became popularly honoured, as if their old savagery had ceased and
their wild and cruel life were transferred to something gentler: then at length,
at the fitting time, the perfect and heavenly teacher of perfect and heavenly
thoughts and teaching, the leader to the (b) true knowledge of God, God the
Word, revealed Himself, at the time announced for His Incarnation, preaching the
Gospel of the Father's love, the same for all nations, whether Greeks or
Barbarians, to every race of men, moving all to a common salvation in God,
promising the truth and light of true religion, the kingdom of Heaven, and
eternal life to all.

Such, then, is my account of the reasons why the Christ (c) of God shone forth
on all men now and not long ago. |99

We will now, retracing our steps, examine in detail the signs portending His
Coming, first noting what is said in the Gospels about the date of His Birth.
Matthew then records the date of His appearance in the flesh, thus: "When Jesus
was born in Bethlehem of Judrea, in the days of Herod the king"; and a little
later, he says: "Hearing that Archelaus reigned over Judaea, instead of Herod
his father." And Luke shewed the date of His teaching and (d) manifestation,
saying :

"In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being
governor of Judaea, Herod tctrarch of Galilee, and his brother, Philip, tetrarch
of Ituraea and the land of Trachonitis; and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, Annas
and Caiaphas being High Priests."

With these we shall do well to compare the prophecy of Jacob given by Moses to
this effect.

CHAPTER 1 (366) Of the Time of His Appearance among Men. How at the Time which
the Hebrews fail of their Kingdom, the Expectation of the Gentiles shall
approach, which also came to pass at Our Saviour's Appearing.

From Genesis.

1. "Jacob called his sons and said, Come together (b) and hear what shall befall
you at the end of the days. Come together and hear, ye sons of Jacob, hear your
father."

Then, after rebuking his elder sons, one for one thing, one for another, as
being unworthy because of their sins (c) of the prophecy about to be given, he
prophesies thus to his fourth son, as having shewn himself a better man than his
brothers:

8. " Judah, thy brethren shall praise the, | thy hands shall be on the back of
thy enemies, | the sons of thy father shall bow down to thee. | 9. Judah is a
lion's |100 whelp, | Thou hast sprung up, my son, from a slip. | Lying down thou
didst sleep as a lion and a whelp, | Who shall arouse thee? | 10. A ruler shall
not fail from Judah, | nor a governor from his loins, | until the things laid up
for him come, | and he is the expectation of the nations."

First, consider what is meant by "the things laid up for him," and see if they
be not the prophecies about the calling of the Gentiles, that God gave to those
with Abraham. For it is written, that God said to Abraham :

"And thou shalt be blessed, and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse
them that curse thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be
blessed."

And again:

"Abraham," he says, "shall become a great and mighty nation, and in him shall
all the nations of the earth be blessed."

Similar oracles were spoken to Isaac in this wise :

"And I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and in thy seed shall all
nations of the world be blessed."

And also to Jacob this is said :

"I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac, fear not."

And then :

"And in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed."

And at another time God said to him :

"I am thy God, increase and multiply: nations and assemblies of nations shall
come out of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins."

Jacob, who knew the predictions of God concerning the calling of the nations,
having twelve sons, called them all together to his deathbed, to discover in the
line of which son God's predictions would be fulfilled. And, then, having laid
rebukes on the three first for their wrongdoings, he tells them also that the
fulfilment of the prophecies will not come about through them because of their
wicked deeds. But coming to the fourth, who was |101 Judah, he at once
prophesies to him that the oracle, which says, "kings shall come from thy
loins," will be fulfilled in his descendants. For it was plain that the kingly
family was established in the tribe of Judah: and (c) he shews at the same lime
at what period the prophecies of God and the promises to the Gentiles will fall
due, and he teaches that one will come forth from him who will cause all nations
and tribes to be admitted to the blessings of Abraham. All these things, then,
were "the things laid up for him," that is to say, the ancient prophecies
concerning the nations, and the words, "kings shall come (d) out of thee,"
whereby his tribe has precedence of those of his brethren, as royal and
pre-eminent.

Directly the whole nation was organized in the time of Moses God gave his tribe
the chief rank among the tribes. For it is written:

"And the Lord spake to Moses and Aaron, saying, Let the children of Israel
encamp fronting one another, every man keeping his own rank, according to their
standards, according to the houses of their families before the Lord, around the
tabernacle of witness; and they that encamp first towards the east, shall be the
order of the camp of Judah with their host."

And later in the part that refers to the renewing of the sanctuary:

"The Lord said to Moses, One prince each day shall offer their gifts. And he
that offered the first day was Naason, son of Aminadab, prince of the tribe of
Judah."

And in the Book of Joshua, son of Nave, when the land of promise was divided by
lot among the other tribes, the tribe of Judah took its own portion of the land
without casting lots, and first of all. And, moreover, "After the death of
Joshua the children of Israel inquired of the Lord, saying, Who shall go up for
us against the Canaanite, leading our fighting against him? And the Lord said,
Judah shall go up. Behold, I have given the land into his hands." These words,
then, make it clear that God (b) |102 ordained the tribe of Judah to be the head
of all Israel, and the account goes on: "And Judah went up, and the Lord
delivered the Canaanite and Perizzite into his hand." And also: "And the
children of Judah fought against Jerusalem and took it, and the sons of Judah
came down from fighting against the Canaanite." And again: "And Judah went up
with Symeon, his brother." And then: "And the Lord was with Judah, and gave him
the Mount as his portion." And after this: "And the sons of Joseph went up, they
also who were in Bethel, and Judah with (c) them." And in the Book of Judges,
when different men at different times were at the head of the people, though
individually the Judges were of different tribes, yet speaking generally the
tribe of Judah was head of the whole people, and much more so in the times of
David and his successors, who belonged to the tribe of Judah, and continued to
rule until the Babylonian Captivity, after which the leader of those who
returned from Babylon to their own land was Zerubbabel, the son of Salathiel, of
the tribe of Judah, who also built the Temple. Hence, too, the Book of
Chronicles, when giving the genealogies of the twelve tribes of Israel, (d)
begins with Judah. And you will see it follows from this that, in the days that
succeeded, the same tribe had the headship, although different individuals had
temporary leadership, whose tribes it is impossible to decide with accuracy,
because there is no sacred book handed down to give the history of the period
from then to the time of our Saviour. But it is true to say that the tribe of
Judah continued so long as the free and autonomous constitution of the whole
nation lasted under its own leaders and kings. And this was the case from the
beginning until the time of Augustus, (369) when, after our Saviour's appearance
among men, the whole nation became subject to Rome. And then instead of their
ancestral and constitutional rulers they were ruled first by Herod, a foreigner,
and next by the Emperor Augustus. And so long as there had not yet failed a
prince from Judah, nor a leader from his loins, the dates of the prophecies are
given from the reigns of the kings. Thus Isaiah prophesies in the reigns of
Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. As did Hosea. Amos, in the
days of Uzziah, king of Judah, and in the days of (b) Jeroboam, son of Joash,
king of Israel; and Zephaniah |103 in the days of Josiah, son of Amos, king of
Judah. And Jeremiah too. But when a prince failed from Judah, and a governor
from his loins, when the expectation of the Gentiles foretold in Christ was just
about to shine on human life, there were no longer any rulers styled kings in
Judah or governors in Israel. And since they had failed at the appointed time in
accordance with prophecy, Augustus first, and then Tiberius, was called king of
the Jewish nation, in common with the other nations, and under (c) them were
procurators and tetrarchs of Judaea, and Herod of course, who, as I have already
said, was not a Jew by birth, and received his authority over the Jews from
Rome.

After these observations, we will now attempt a consideration of the prophecy:
"Judah, thy brethren shall praise thee." Jacob had twelve sons, the fourth being
Judah, who as I have said already, was the one and only head of the Hebrew
tribes. But it will be evident, that (d) the words addressed to him by his
father did not refer to him as an individual man, if we consider the words of
Holy Scripture, and especially the speech of Jacob to his sons:

"And Jacob called his sons to him, Come together and I will tell you what shall
come to pass in the last days. Gather together and hear, ye sons of Jacob, hear
Israel your father."

For he clearly promises here to predict what will happen to them a long time
afterwards, or, in his own words, in the last days. And for other reasons what
Jacob said could not apply to the first individual who bore the name of Judah.
His brethren did not praise him: for what great deed of his could they have done
so? It would have been more applicable, if it had been addressed to Joseph, for
(370) we know that Judah himself with his other brethren bowed down to him,
except of course that this happened before the prophecy; but afterwards there is
no record of anything of the kind connected with Joseph, or Judah. And the
words, "Thou didst fall and sleep as a lion and a lion's whelp," seem to call
for a wider interpretation than one concerning Judah. The words that follow,
too: "There shall not fail a prince from Judah, nor a governor from his loins,
until that come which is laid up for him, and he is |104 (b) the expectation of
nations," seem to me to give in a disguised form the time of the coming of the
subject of the prophecy. For the one event, he says, will not take place, until
the other does. The kings and rulers of the Jewish nation, that is, will not
cease before the expectation of the nations shall come, and that which is laid
up for the subject of the prophecy. Theodotion agrees with this rendering of the
Septuagint, but Aquila thus translates:

"The sceptre shall not be removed from Judah, and he who knoweth exactly from
between his feet, until also there come to him a congregation of people."

(c) And this saying, "There shall not fail a prince from Judah," cannot be
referred to Judah as an individual man any more than, "Judah, thy brethren shall
praise thee." For there were rulers and governors of the Jewish nation at many
times who were not descended from him. Moses, for instance, its first ruler, was
not of the tribe of Judah but of Levi. Joshua was of the tribe of Ephraim; after
whom their ruler was Deborah, of the tribe of Ephraim, and Barak

(d).of the tribe of Naphthali, then Gedeon of Manasseh, then Gedeon's son, and after him Thola of the same tribe, then Esebon of Bethlehem, and then Ailon of Zabulon, Labclon of Ephraim, and Samson of Dan; then there being no regular ruler, Eli the priest, of the tribe of Levi, was their leader, All these Judges judged Israel, not in the line of succession from Judah, but one from one tribe and one from another. And they were followed by the first king, Saul, of the tribe of Benjamin. How, then, can the words,
"there shall not fail a prince from Judah, nor a governor (371) from his loins," be referred, as one would suppose they should be, to rulers and governors of the tribe of Judah, when from the time of Jacob's death, for nearly a thousand years, they do not appear to have been drawn from the tribe of Judah only, but some from one tribe, some from another, up to the time of David? And if it be true that David and his successors sprung from the tribe of Judah ruled the Jewish nation, after so many others, yet we must remember that they did not continue to rule the (b) whole people for the whole of those five hundred years, but only three tribes, and not the whole of them, for during their reigns other kings governed the larger part of the
nation---- that is to say, the whole of the other nine tribes. For after
|105 the death of Solomon, since the whole nation was divided from Judah, the successors of David, as I said, did not rule the whole Jewish nation up to the time of the Babylonian Captivity. And in their times the heads of Samaria, which was the name of the State held by the nine tribes, were not drawn from Judah, but now from one tribe, now from (c) another, the first being Jeroboam, of the tribe of Ephraim, and those immediately after him, so that in the period between David and the Babylonian Captivity, kings of the line of Judah never ruled the whole nation.

There is no need to add that after the return from Babylon for more than five hundred years again until the birth of Christ the Jewish constitution was aristocratic, the high priests, for the time being, acting as heads of the State, none of whom came from the tribe of Judah. So from all these reasons it is proved that there is no reference here to Judah the original individual, to his descendants, nor in the oracle that said: "A prince shall not fail from Judah, (d) nor a governor from his loins," but that the only consistent interpretation of the passage is the one I have already given, that we must understand it of the tribe as a whole. The tribe most certainly was leader of the whole nation from the very beginning, from Moses' own time. And in accordance with such headship, as being designed by God from the outset, the country is even now called Judaea after the tribe, and the whole race are known as Jews. We must, therefore, understand it to mean what would be expressed more clearly, if it were said that the tribe of Judah would never lose its headship of the whole nation. So Symmachus says: "The power shall not be taken away (372) from Judah," shewing of course the authority and the royal position of what was afterwards to be the tribe of Judah. From it neither "the sceptre," as Aquila says, this being the symbol of royal rule, nor "the power," according to Symmachus, shall be taken away, the prophecy affirms, "until he come," it says, "for whom it is laid up, and he shall be the expectation of the nations." What expectation was this, but that of which Abraham and those after him had received the prophecies? First, is it not very striking that (b) though there were twelve Hebrew tribes, the race even now |106 has its name from none but Judah? It can only be explained by the prophetic oracle, which attached the royal position to the tribe, of Judah. And it is for this same reason that their fatherland is called Judaea. For why was not the nation called after the eldest of the twelve, I mean (c) Reuben, according to the divine law of primogeniture? Why not from Levi, who was greater than Judah in order of birth, and also in receiving the priesthood? Why not, even more, was the race and the country not called after Joseph, from his acquiring rule not only over the whole of Egypt, but over his own relations, and because his descendants, long years after, were to rule as many as nine tribes of the nation, on whose account it was far more probable that the whole race and the country would have been named after their ancestor? And who would not agree (d) that they might reasonably have been called from Benjamin, since their famous mother-city and the all-holy Temple of of God was in the portion of his tribe? But yet, in spite of all, the name of the Lord and of the whole nation was . drawn from none of them but Judah, as the prophecy foretold. I have, therefore, referred the words, "A prince shall not fail from Judah," to the tribe, and only in that sense is the prediction true. For from the time of Moses there has not failed a continued line of rulers of part of the nation, drawn as I said from different tribes, but the tribe of Judah has all along stood forth as the head of the whole (373) nation. An illustration will make what I have said clear. Just as the procurators and governors appointed in the Roman Empire over nations, their praefects and military chiefs, and their highest kings, are not all drawn from |107 Rome nor from the seed of Remus and Romulus, but from many different races, and yet all their kings and the rulers and governors below them are all called Romans, and their power is named Roman, and the rule of them all generally has this appellation, in the same way we (b) should think of the Hebrew state, where you have the name of the tribe of Judah applied generally to the whole nation, though there be kings and governors of divisions from different tribes, but all honoured with the name of Judah. We understand then that the prophet's words: "Judah, thy brethren shall praise thee," were to be applied to the whole tribe. For he knew that being marked out for precedence it would be honoured more than the other tribes, and since it was best in warfare, and the sole leader of the whole nation in operations against the enemy, he rightly continues: "Thy hands shall be on the back of thy (c) enemies." Then for its ruling and royal position he calls it, "a lion's" whelp." And as ancestor and prophet, glorying in the reputation of the tribe, he adds: "From a seed, my son, thou hast ascended"; while the words: "Falling down thou hast slept as a lion, and as a lion's whelp," shew its character of terror and bravery, its utter fearlessness of external attack, and contempt of its foes. He being such, (d) or rather, his tribe being such, who, he says, shall arouse it? He suggests that the Person who is to remove the tribe in question from its throne, and move it from its royal position, will be some one great, wonderful, unusual, and hard to imagine. Then he tells us who it is to be, telling us that it is He Who is the Expectation of nations, of Whom it is predicted that He will only appear among men, when the ruler fails, and the governor is changed, and the tribe of Judah is removed from its position of power. Who is this, but our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ?----at Whose birth, as the prophecy before us (374) predicted, the rulers and governors set over their nation from the Jews themselves would fail, the tribe of Judah lose the dominant and royal position that it had held over the nation for so long, and be subject to the Romans, their rulers from that day to this, who overcame the Jewish |108 (b) nation together with the rest of the world, and under whom Herod, a man of alien birth apart from their race, was appointed king by Augustus and the Roman Senate. For Herod was son of Antipater, and Antipater belonged to Ascalon, and was son of some temple-server at the Temple of Apollo, who married a woman named Kuprine, of Arab race, and begat Herod. He, you will remember, being sprung from this family, got rid of and slew Hyrcanus, the last of the line of ruling high-priests, with (c) whom the government of the Jews by native rulers came to an end, Herod being, as I say, the first foreigner to be called the King of the Jews. In his time Jesus Christ was born, and at one and the same time the position of the tribe of Judah was taken away, the authority of the kingdom of the Jews destroyed, and the prophecy preceding this fulfilled: "There shall not fail a prince from Judah, nor a governor from his loins, until there come the things laid up for him," who, he says, will not only be the expectation of the Jews, but of the Gentiles. As, therefore, the expectation of the call of the Gentiles, prophesied long (d) before to Abraham, was "laid up," until the rulers and governors of the Jewish race should have ceased, and their independent government should have been changed to submission to Rome, and to the Gentile Herod, the Evangelist Luke, noting the date of the cessation of Jewish rulers, tells us that the teaching of Christ began in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judaea; and Matthew says the same |109 in a disguised form. For having described the birth of our Lord and Saviour, he adds: "And when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judrea, in the days of Herod the king, behold wise men came from the East to Jerusalem, saying, Where is that which is born king of the Jews?" wherein he shews clearly enough both that they were under (375) foreign rule, and also the calling of the foreign nations from the East by God. For foreigners ruled over the Jews, and foreigners coming from the East recognized and worshipped the Christ of God, Who had been prophesied of old. The prophecy of Jacob is thus seen clearly to have been fulfilled, being brought to pass at the end of the national existence of the Jews, even as he predicted to his sons, saying: "Come together, that I may announce to you, what shall happen to you at the end of the days." (b) For we must understand by the end of the days the end of the national existence of the Jews. What, then, did he say they must look for? The cessation of the rule of Judah, the destruction of their whole race, the failing and ceasing of their governors, and the abolition of the dominant kingly position of the tribe of Judah, and the rule and kingdom of Christ, not over Israel but over all nations, according to the words, "This is the expectation of the nations." And who would not agree that all this has been definitely (c) fulfilled in the coming of our Saviour, when they who of old before Christ's birth, with their native rulers and governors and wise hearers of the holy oracles, prided themselves in their own kings, high priests and prophets, and when the tribe of Judah, being the royal tribe, the conqueror of their enemies, the leader and ruler of the whole nation, with its men of old renown has from that day to this lain under the heel of Rome? For the Christ of God was definitely manifested, and from that day the said expectation of the Gentiles is preached to all nations, (d) Or who can deny, that concurrently with the appearance of our Saviour Jesus the solemnities of the Jews, their city with its Temple and the worship performed therein, have come to an end, together with their native rulers and governors, and that from that time the hope and expectation of the nations through all the world has been made known, since the things laid up in the Lord |110 have come. What are these things, but those set forth by Judah?----

"Thy brethren shall praise thee, thy hands shall be on the back of thine
enemies, lion of the tribe of Judah. O my son, thou hast ascended from a seed,
falling thou hast slept as a lion and as a lion's whelp: who shall awake thee?"

(376) But the words, "The things laid up for him," have another sense; let us
now consider them, only premising that the Holy Scriptures are accustomed to
give the Christ different names. Sometimes they call Him Jacob:

"Jacob, my son, I will help thee; Israel, my chosen, my soul hath received him,
he shall bring judgment unto the nations,"

and that which follows. To which is added, "Till he place judgment on the earth,
and in his name shall the Gentiles (b) hope." Sometimes they name Him Solomon or
David: Solomon as in the 71st Psalm, inscribed to Solomon, whose contents
evidently refer to Christ. For the words, "He shall rule from sea to sea, and
from the river to the world's end, and all the nations shall serve him," and the
contents of the Psalm that follow, can only apply to the Christ. Christ, again,
is called David in the 88th Psalm, for expressions therein are only applicable
to Him, and not to David, for instance:

"He shall call me, Thou art my father, and I will make him my firstborn, high
above the kings of the earth. I will keep my mercy for him for ever."

(c) And again:

"His seed shall remain for ever, and his throne is as the sun before me, and as
the moon fixed in the heaven."

So, then, besides the many other names given to Christ by the Holy Scriptures,
it is possible that He may be called Judah also in the passage before us,
especially as He sprang from the tribe of Judah. For the apostle certifies the
fact (d) that our Lord and Saviour sprang from the tribe of Judah. For Him,
then, were "the things laid up for Judah" figuratively intended in the prophecy.
And what were they? First, the praise of His brethren; second, to lay his hands
on the back of His enemies; third, to be worshipped by the sons of His Father.
And they came to pass, |111 for His performance of miracles and wondrous
prodigies aroused wonder, and He was praised and worshipped by His own disciples
and apostles, whom He shrank not from calling brethren, saying by the Psalm, "I
will declare thy name to my brethren, in the midst of the Church I will praise
thee," and also when He bids the women with Mary announce the news to them as
His brethren, for He says, "Make known to my brethren that I ascend to my
Father, (377) and your Father, and to my God, and your God." Thus then, His
brethren at first praised Him only as a remarkable man because of His miracles,
believing Him most likely to be one of the prophets; but when meanwhile they saw
His wonderful miracles, and how He destroyed the enemy and the avenger, and
death the prince of this world, together with the other unseen hostile powers,
thenceforth they (b) believed Him to be God and worshipped Him. And the hands of
our Saviour were upon the back of His enemies, when He directed all His deeds
and powers and miracles to the destruction of the daemons and evil spirits. Yea,
when too He spread out His hands on the Cross, even then His hands were on the
back of His enemies, since they fled and turned their backs on Him, and even
more, when yielding up His spirit to the Father, disembodied and (c) stripped of
that flesh, which He had assumed, He went to the place of His enemies, having
life in Himself, to loose death, and the powers arrayed against Him, which
perhaps at first conceived that He was an ordinary man and like all men, and so
encircled Him and attacked Him as they would any one else, but when they knew
that He was superhuman and divine, they turned their backs and fled from Him, so
that He laid His hands on them, and drave them on with His divine and sharpened
arrows, as is here said, "Thy hands shall be on the backs of thy enemies." |112
And if to-day many enemies of our Saviour attempt from (d) time to time to war
against His Church, these too He routs with invisible hand and divine power,
even as it is said of them, "His hands shall be on the back of his enemies." And
since also He has received the trophies of victory over His enemies, the words,
"The sons of thy father shall worship thee," are also fulfilled: that is to say,
all the angels of heaven, and the ministering spirits, and the divine powers,
and on earth the apostles and evangelists, and after them those of all nations
who through Him are enrolled under the one and only true God and Father, have
learned that Christ is God the Word, and have consented to worship (378) Him as
God. But as it was necessary for the mysteries of both His Birth and Death to be
included in the prophecy concerning Him, Jacob rightly proceeds to add to what
has gone before:

"Judah is a lion's whelp. From a seed, my son, thou hast ascended, falling down
thou hast slept as a lion and a lion's whelp: who shall arouse thee?"

He calls Him then a lion's whelp because of His being born of the royal tribe.
For He was of the seed of (b) David according to the flesh. "From a shoot thou
hast grown, my son," he says, because He was born of the seed and root of Jacob
who foretold it, being primarily God the Word, and becoming secondarily the Son
of man, through the dispensation He undertook for us. And the words, "Falling
down thou didst sleep as a lion and a whelp," are significant of His Death,
because Scripture is accustomed, |113 as is shewn in many other places, from the
conviction of their kinship to call death a sleep. And "Who shall awake him?" is
a wonderful reference to His Resurrection from the dead. For he who said, "Who
will awake him?" (c) knew quite well that He would be awaked. And it is
remarkable that he should add, "Who then shall do this and raise him up? "so as
to impel us to ask who it was that raised up our Lord Who died on our behalf.
For Who else was it, but the God of the Universe, His Father, to Whom the
Saviour's Resurrection is solely to be attributed, according to the Scripture
which says, "Whom the Father raised from the dead "?

Instead of, "Judah is a lion's whelp, from a shoot, my (d) son, thou hast
ascended, falling down thou hast slept," Aquila says more plainly, "Judah is a
lion's cub, from destruction, my son, hast thou ascended, bending thou hast laid
down." And Symmachus says, "Judah is a lion's whelp, from capture, my son, hast
thou ascended, having knelt thou hast been established.'' By which the
Resurrection of the dead is clearly meant, and the escape of our Saviour from
Hades, as from a trap for wild beasts. The kneeling and the being established
instead of falling, signify death by the kneeling, and not being dragged away
like the souls of other men by "being established." All this then was laid up
before for Christ. But while this remained unfulfilled, the Jewish nation
lasted, and their rulers and governors and they who were wise interpreters of
the sacred oracles about the Christ stood out among them; but when (379) that
which had been laid up for Judah had come, and He appeared on earth of Whom it
was foretold that He should spring from the seed and shoot of the prophet
himself, after falling down and sleeping, or "kneeling," according to Symmachus,
He was established and raised up, laying His hands on the back of His unseen
spiritual enemies; and His brothers and disciples first praising Him and
wondering, afterwards were convinced that He was God, and worshipped Him as God;
then were fulfilled the things laid up for Him, for because of this the answer
was given, "Until there come the things laid up for him." For (b) from that day
to this, the things laid up for Him being come, the rulers and governors of the
Jewish nation have ceased, the rulers of the Gentiles have been placed at their
|114 head, and the nations on the other hand knowing the Christ of God have made
Him their Saviour and Hope. After all this there follows:

"Binding his foal to the vine, and the foal of the ass to the branch, he shall
wash his robe in wine, and his garment in the blood of the grape. His eyes shall
be cheering from wine, and his teeth white as milk."

Here I should understand by the foal, the choir of apostles and disciples of our Saviour, and by the vine to which the foal is bound, His divine and invisible power, as He Himself taught when He said, "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman." And the branch of the said vine is the teaching of the Word of God, by which He bound the foal of the
ass----that is to say, the new people of the Gentiles, (d) the offspring of His Apostles. And you may say that this was literally fulfilled, when, according to Matthew, the Lord said to His disciples:

"Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass
tied, and a colt with her; loose them and bring them to me."

And there is real food for wonder if one studies the account in the prediction
of the prophet, that he should have foreseen by the Holy Spirit, that the
subject of his prophecy would not come riding on chariots and horses like some
distinguished man, but on an ass and a foal, like a poor common man of the
people. And this raised another prophet's wonder, who said: (380)

"Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion, behold thy King cometh unto thee meek,
sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass."

And the words, "He will wash his garments in wine, and in the blood of the grape
his girdle," will shew you surely how as in a secret way He suggests His mystic
Passion, in which He washed His garment and vesture with the washing wherewith
He is revealed to wash away the old stains of them that believe in Him. For with
the wine which was indeed the symbol of His blood, He cleanses them that are
baptized into His death, and believe on His |115 blood, of their old sins,
washing them away and purifying (b) their old garments and vesture, so that
they, ransomed by the precious blood of the divine spiritual grapes, and with
the wine from this vine, "put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new
man which is renewed into knowledge in the image of Him that created him." The
words, "His eyes are cheerful from wine, and his teeth white as milk," again I
think secretly reveal the (c) mysteries of the new Covenant of our Saviour. "His
eyes are cheerful from wine," seems to me to shew the gladness of the mystic
wine which He gave to His disciples, when He said, "Take, drink; this is my
blood that is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do in remembrance of
me." And, "His teeth are white as milk," shew the brightness and purity of the
sacramental food. For again, He gave Himself (d) the symbols of His divine
dispensation to His disciples, when He bade them make the likeness of His own
Body. For since He no more was to take pleasure in bloody sacrifices, or those
ordained by Moses in the slaughter of animals of various kinds, and was to give
them bread to use as the symbol of His Body, He taught the purity and brightness
of such food by saying, "And his teeth are white as milk." This also another
prophet has recorded, where he says, "Sacrifice and offering hast thou not
required, but a body hast thou prepared for me." But these matters should be
examined at leisure, for they require deeper criticism and longer
interpretation. For the present I must refuse to enter on that great task, in
order that I may incorporate in this work the evidence that the time of the
Saviour's Coming from above was known to the (381) ancient prophets, and clearly
handed down in writing. |116

CHAPTER 2 From Daniel.

How after the Period of Seven Times Seventy Years, or 490 Years, the Christ
having appeared to Men, the Jewish Prophets and their surpassing Temple Worship
will be dissolved, and They Themselves will be taken by Mutual Sieges as by a
Flood, and their Holy Temple undergo its Final Desolation.

[Passage quoted, Dan. ix. 20-27.] (Given in full on account of wide divergence
from S.)

(c) "20. AND while I yet spake and prayed and confessed my sins and the sins of
my people Israel, and casting my misery before the holy Mount of my God, 21. and
while I yet spake in prayer, behold the man Gabriel, whom I had seen at the
beginning came flying, and he touched me about the time of the evening
sacrifice. 22. And he instructed me and spake with me, saying, O (d) Daniel, 23.
I am now come forth to impart to thee understanding. At the beginning of thy
supplication the word came forth, and I am come to tell thee, for thou art a man
greatly beloved: therefore consider the matter, understand the vision, for thou
art a man greatly beloved. 24. Seventy weeks have been decided on for thy
people, and for the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up
transgressions, and to blot out iniquities, and to make atonement for
iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision
and the prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy. 25. And |117 thou shalt know and
understand, that from the going forth of the command for the answer and for the
building of Jerusalem until Christ the Prince shall be seven (382) weeks, and
sixty-two weeks; and then it shall return, and the street shall be built, and
the wall, and the times shall be exhausted. 26. And after the sixty-two weeks,
the Anointing shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him, and he shall
destroy the city and the sanctuary together with the coming prince; they shall
be cut off in a flood, and, to the end of the war which is rapidly completed, in
desolations. 27. And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the
midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on
the temple shall be an (b) abomination of desolations: and at the end of time
shall an end be put to the desolation.

When the captivity of the Jewish people at Babylon was near its end, the
Archangel Gabriel, one of the holy ministers of God, appeared to Daniel as he
prayed, and told him that the restoration of Jerusalem was to follow without the
slightest delay, and he defines the period after the restoration by numbering
the years, and foretells that after the predetermined time it will again be
destroyed, and that after the second capture and siege it will no longer have
(c) God for its guardian, but will remain desolate, with the worship of the
Mosaic Law taken away from it, and another new Covenant with humanity introduced
in its place. This was what the Angel Gabriel revealed to the prophet as by
secret oracles. So then he says to Daniel:

"I am now come forth to impart to thee understanding, at the beginning of thy
supplication the word came forth, and I am come to tell thee, for thou art a man
greatly beloved. Consider the matter, understand the vision"; (d)

clearly urging him to a deeper consideration and understanding of the meaning of
his words. He calls it then a vision from its involving deeper consideration,
and more |118 than common understanding: wherefore we, too, if we call on Him
who gives understanding, and pray that the eyes of our understanding may be
enlightened, should trust confidently in the vision of this passage:

"Seven times seventy weeks," he says, "have been decided on for this people and
for thy holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgression, and to
blot out iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in
everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the people, and to anoint
the most holy."

(383) It is quite clear that seven times seventy weeks reckoned in years amounts
to 490. That was therefore the period determined for Daniel's people, which
limited the total length of the Jewish nation's existence. And he no longer
calls them here "God's people," but Daniel's, saying, "thy people." Just as when
they sinned and worshipped idols in the wilderness, God called them no more His
people, but Moses', saying, "Go, descend, for thy people has sinned." (b) In the
same way here too he explains why the definite limit of time is determined for
them. It was that they might know they were no longer worthy to be called the
people of God. And he adds, "And for thy holy city": where we hear again the
unusual "thy," for he says, "for thy people, and for thy holy city," as much as
to say, "the city you think to be holy." The original Hebrew and the other
translators (c) agree in the addition of "thy" both to the people and the city.
For Aquila has, "On thy people, and on thy sacred city"; and Symmachus, "Against
thy people, and thy holy city": wherefore in accurate codices of the Septuagint
"thy" is added with an asterisk. For since Daniel had often called the people
"the people of God "in the words of his prayer, and the place of the city "the
holy place of (d) God," the One who answers in contrast says that neither people
nor city are God's, but "thine," who hast prayed and spoken thus of the people
and the place and the city. Daniel's words run thus: "16. Let thy anger be
turned away, even thy anger from Jerusalem thy city, thy holy mountain." And,
"Thy people is a source of ridicule to all that are round about them." And
again, "17. Shew thy face upon the desolation of thy sanctuary." And once more,
"18. Behold the ruin of thy city, which is called by thy |119 name," followed
by, "19. That thy name may be named upon thy city, and upon thy people." After
this prayer he adds: "20. And while I was yet speaking and praying, behold
Gabriel, whom I saw in my vision, came flying, and touched me, and said what is
written above." (384) The prophet then clearly called the city not a city pure
and simple but "God's city," and the sanctuary, "God's sanctuary," and the
people "God's people," from his feeling for the people. But Gabriel does not
describe them in this way; on the contrary, he says, "for thy people," and "for
thy holy city," shewing in so many words that city, people, and sanctuary were
unworthy to be called God's.

So, then, he first defines the length of time determined (b) for the people, and
then for the city. And it is seen to be the period from the restoration of
Jerusalem, which was in the reign of Darius, King of Persia, until the reign of
Augustus, Emperor of Rome, and of Herod the foreign King of the Jews, in whose
times our Saviour's Birth is recorded, as the prophecy goes on to shew. And he
adds next:

"For sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out iniquities,
and to make atonement for (c) iniquities, and to bring in everlasting
righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the most
holy."

Instead of, "For sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions," Aquila
translated, "For ending disobedience, and for completing transgression." I think
that our Saviour's words to the Jews, "Ye have filled up the measure of your
fathers," are parallel to this. For the transgression of the Jewish nation
culminated in the plot they dared to make against Him, and what Aquila calls
their "disobedience "to God reached its end. For many times of old the
long-suffering of God had borne with their transgressions before the Saviour
came, as is shewn by the prophet's words: but just as in the case of the ancient
(d) foreign inhabitants of the land of promise it was said to Abraham, "The sins
of the Amorites are not yet fulfilled," and if they were not yet fulfilled they
could not yet be driven from their native land, but when they were fulfilled,
they were then destroyed by Joshua, the successor of Moses: so also you will
understand in the case of the |120 before-mentioned people. For while their sins
were not fulfilled, the patience and long-suffering of God bore with them,
calling them many times to repentance by the prophets. (385) But when, as our
Saviour said, they had filled up the measure of their fathers, then the whole
collected weight worked their destruction at one time, as our Lord taught again
when He said:

"All the blood poured forth from the foundation of the world, from the blood of
righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias, shall come upon this generation."

For presuming last of all to lay their hands on the Son of God they completed their disobedience and completed their sins, according to Aquila's translation, or according to the Septuagint, "Their sin was bound and sealed." But since He came not only for the falling but for the rising again of many in Israel, as is said of Him, "Behold, he is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel," Daniel rightly proceeds to add, "And for the blotting out of (c) transgressions and for making atonement for iniquities." For since it was impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins, and the whole race of mankind needed a living and true offering, of which the Mosaically designed propitiation was a type, and our Lord and Saviour was this Lamb of God, as it was said of Him, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world; and again, "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for those of the whole world "; He brings redemption (d) also, according to Paul's words, "Who is become wisdom to us from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption"----he naturally teaches that His coining is at once the fulfilment and the completion of the sin of those who have sinned against Him, at the same time as it is the blotting out and purification of sins, and the propitiation for the transgressions of them that believe in Him. And Aquila to the words, "For the fulfilling of their disobedience and the completion of their sin," added, "For the propitiation of their transgression," clearly suggesting that He would be the propitiation for all transgressions of old time done in ignorance. Next to this comes, "For the bringing in of everlasting righteousness." The Word of |121 God is in truth Himself eternal Righteousness, Who is made unto us by God Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Sanctification, and Redemption, in the words of the Apostle. But further by His own Presence also He shared Righteousness with all men, shewing by His works that God is not only the God of the Jews, but also of the Gentiles: for (386) there is one God, Who will judge the Circumcision from their faith, and the Uncircumcision by faith. Wherefore Peter wondering at those with Cornelius being thought worthy of receiving the Holy Spirit says, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness is accepted with him." And Paul also says that the Gospel is of righteousness, saying, "For it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. For the righteousness of God is revealed in it." And it is said of Christ in the Psalms: (b) "In His days shall arise righteousness, and abundance of peace." And His coming shewed clearly the righteousness of God, who reckoned the whole of mankind worthy of the calling of God. Such was not the Mosaic dispensation, which was given to the Jews only: wherefore having appeared for a time it has passed away. But the (c) righteousness proclaimed by our Saviour is fitly called eternal righteousness, as Gabriel said, "And to bring in eternal righteousness."

Instead of "Seal the vision and the prophet,'' Aquila gives, I think, a more
suitable rendering, viz. "And for fulfilling vision and prophet." For our Lord
Jesus Christ did not come as it were to seal up the visions of the prophets, for
He rather opened and explained those that were of old obscure and sealed,
tearing away so to say the seals impressed on them, and taught His disciples the
meaning of the Holy Scriptures. Hence He says, "Behold, (d) the lion of the
tribe of Judah hath prevailed, and he has opened the seals that were set on the
book," in John's Apocalypse. What are these seals but the obscurities of the
prophets? Isaiah knew them well and definitely says too: "And these words shall
be as the words of the sealed book." The Christ of God did not come then to shut
up the vision and the prophet, but rather to open them and bring them to the
light. Hence I prefer Aquila's rendering, |122 (387) "For fulfilling the vision
and the prophet." And it agrees also with our Saviour's words, "I have not come
to destroy the law or the prophets, I have not come to destroy but to fulfil."
"For the end of the law is Christ," and all the prophecies concerning Him we
know remained unfulfilled and uncompleted, until He came and brought fulfilment
to the prophecies about Himself. It is possible, too, for the version of the
Septuagint, "To seal up the vision and the prophet," to bear this meaning: "For
the Law and the prophets continued until John," and from his day the ancient
inspiration of the Jewish race has ceased, and its predictions of the Christ,
and they who in the Holy (b) Scriptures saw genuine visions have come to an end,
as if divine grace were shut up and bound with seals: and so it is the case that
from that day there has been no activity of prophet or seer among them; this has
altogether ceased from the time named till our own day.

He proceeds, "And to anoint the Most Holy"; and this also is plain for the same
reason, that until the time of our Saviour the Most Holy, the High Priests were
anointed (c) following the ritual performed according to the Mosaic Law, but
from that date they have ceased to be, as the prophecy foretells. So too the
words of Jacob to Judah foretold the cessation of the princes and rulers of the
Jewish nation, as I have already stated. Now since the prophets' and priests'
primacy of the people was very much later than that of the kings, the oracle in
the prophecy first quoted foretells the destruction of the princes and governors
of the Jewish nation, while the one we are considering predicts (d) the
cessation of the prophets and priests as well, who were of old their chief
ornament, which the Coming of our Saviour actually fulfilled. And as Aquila
translates, "For the anointing the most consecrated," it might be thought that
the ancient Jewish High Priest was meant, since many of the inferior priests
were called "holy," but only the High Priest "Most Holy." And this idea at first
sight is tempting. For up to the times of our Saviour the High Priests in
continuous line at the same time ruled the people, (388) as they continuously
performed the service of God according to the ritual ordained by Moses; but from
our Saviour's times their order was first thrown into confusion, and shortly
afterwards altogether abolished. But as I find |123 nowhere in the Holy
Scriptures the High Priest called "Most Holy," I am of opinion that in this
passage only the Only-begotten Word of God is meant, who is properly and truly
worthy of that name. For if men excel and reach all attainable virtue they
should be content to be called "holy," sharing and participating in the
character of Him Who said, "Be ye holy, for I the Lord am Holy." But what human
being could rightly be called "Most Holy," except the one Beloved Son of the
Father, called Holy of holies as also King of kings and Lord of lords? For to
Him only, as excelling whoever of Moses' ordaining that were anointed with
earthly and manufactured oil, was it said, "Thou hast loved righteousness, and
hated iniquity, therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of
gladness beyond thy fellows." Being anointed wherewith, He says in His own
Person in Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed
me." Since, then, it is evident that our Saviour was anointed uniquely beyond
all that ever were with the excellent spiritual, or rather divine unction, He is
rightly called "Holy of holies," as one might say, "High Priest of high
priests," and "Sanctified of the sanctified" according to the oracle of Gabriel.
(d) And all these things were fulfilled when the seventy weeks were completed at
the date of our Saviour's Coming. So when the aforesaid Angel had given this
summary prediction to the prophet, he again returns to the subject of the
seventy weeks, explaining accurately and in detail at what point the weeks must
begin to be counted, and what will happen at the time said. He therefore says:
"And thou shalt know and understand, that from the going forth of the command
for the answer and for the building of Jerusalem shall be seven weeks and
sixty-two weeks, and then it shall return, and the street and wall shall be
built." (389) And with regard to this I think it right not to leave unknown the
studies of a predecessor on this subject, but to quote from them as suitable to
my readers. For it is a good saying that "the goods of friends are common." 1
And as it is right to use what others have expressed well in a right spirit, and
not to deprive fathers of their children, |124 or the first begetters of their
own offspring, I will quote his exact words. This extract from Africanus is to
be found in the Fifth Book of his Chronography, and it runs as follows:

(b) "The section thus expressed gives much strange information. But here I will
make the necessary examination of the times and the matters connected with them.
It is clear, then, that the coming of the Christ is foretold as to occur after
seventy weeks. For in the time of our Saviour, or after His time, sins are done
away and transgressions ended. And by this remission iniquities are blotted out
(c) by a propitiation together with unrighteousness, eternal righteousness is
published beyond that of the law, visions and prophecies (last) until John, and
the Holy of holies is anointed. For these things existed in expectation only
before our Saviour's Coming. And the angel explains we must count the numbers,
that is to say the seventy weeks, which are 490 years, from the going forth of
the word of answer and from the building of Jerusalem. This took place in the
twentieth year of Artaxerxes, King of Persia. For Nehemiah his cup-bearer made
the request, (d) and received the answer that Jerusalem should be rebuilt, and
the order went forth to carry it out. For till that date the city lay desolate.
For when Cyrus after the seventieth year of the Captivity spontaneously allowed
every one who wished to return, those with Joshua the High Priest and Zerubbabel
went back, and those afterwards with Ezra, and were at first prevented from
building the Temple, and the wall of the City, as no order had been given for
it; and so |125 there was a delay until Nehemiah and the reign of Artaxerxes and
the one hundred and fifteenth year of the Persian Empire. And this was 185 years
from the taking of Jerusalem. It was then that King Artaxerxes gave the order
(390) for it to be built. And Nehemiah was sent to take charge of the work, and
the street and wall were built, as it had been prophesied. And from that date to
the coming of Christ is seventy weeks. For if we begin to count from any other
point but this, not only the dates will not agree, but many absurdities arise.
If, for instance, we begin counting the seventy weeks from Cyrus and the first
Mission, the period will be too long by more than a century, if from (b) the day
the angel prophesied to Daniel still longer, and longer still if we start from
the beginning of the Captivity. For we find the length of the Persian Empire to
be 230 years, and of the Macedonian 300, and from then to the sixteenth year of
Tiberius Caesar 60 years. And from Artaxerxes to the time of Christ seventy
weeks are (c) completed according to Jewish reckoning. For from Nehemiah, who
was sent by Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem, in the one hundred and fifteenth
year of the Persian Empire, and in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, and in the
fourth year of the eighty-third Olympiad up to that date, which was the second
year of the two hundred and second Olympiad, and the sixteenth year of the reign
of Tiberius Caesar, there are 475 years, or 490 according to Hebrew reckoning.
For they reckon years by the course of the moon, I ought to (d) tell you,
counting 354 days, while the course of the sun is 365 ¼ days, twelve lunar
revolutions, being exceeded by one solar by 11¼ days. Therefore the Greeks and
the Jews add three intercalary months to every eighth year. For eight times 11¼
days makes three months. So then 465 years, in eight-year cycles, makes
fifty-nine years and three months. Since adding the three intercalary months
every eighth year, we have a few days short of fifteen years. And these added
(391) to the 475 years complete the seventy weeks."

This, then, is from Africanus. And if I may make an apposite comment myself on
the passage, I would say that the prophecy does not make the division of the
seventy weeks without an object or haphazard. For having divided them into the
first seven, and another sixty-two, it adds the |126 last one after a quantity
of intermediate matter, and thus (b) determines the number of seventy weeks. And
so it says, "And thou shalt know and understand from the going out of the word
of answering and of building Jerusalem until Christ the governor there are seven
weeks and sixty-two weeks." Then having interposed other matter, it adds the
last saying, "And He shall make a covenant with many one week." I do not think
that any one who regards these as the words of God, can suppose that these
statements have no object, or are scattered without the divine intention. I
thought it was right first to draw attention to this, and then to give a more
(c) elaborate solution of the problem to my readers. And if I must reveal what
is in my mind, I would say that according to another meaning or interpretation,
he that is called in the preceding extract "Christ the governor" (viz. "From the
going forth of the word of answering and the building of Jerusalem until Christ
the governor"), is none other than the roll of the high priests who governed the
people after (d) the prophecy and the Return from Babylon, whom Scripture
commonly calls Christs. For I have shewn that they were the only governors of
the nation, beginning with Joshua, son of Josedec, the Great Priest, after the
return from Babylon, and up to the date of the Coming of our Saviour Jesus
Christ. For I think that the fact that the intermediate period of their primacy,
during which they governed, is meant, is shewn by the words, "From the going
forth of the answering and the building of Jerusalem, until Christ the governor,
is seven weeks and sixty-two weeks." And the weeks of years make 483 years added
together from the reign of Cyrus up to the Roman Empire, when Pompeius (392) the
Roman general attacked Jerusalem and took the city by siege, and the whole city
became subject to Rome, so that thenceforward it paid taxes, and obeyed the
Roman enactments. At this period, then, is concluded the 483 years, when they
came to an end who held, according to the Mosaic Law, the primacy of the nation,
and the priesthood, whom I understand the Holy Scriptures to call here "Christ
the governor." And if it be necessary to publish a roll of the succession of the
high priests who held office during this (b) intermediate period, I have no
objection so to do in |127 confirmation of my statements. First, then, after
Daniel's prophecy, in the reign of Cyrus, King of Persia, after the Return from
Babylon, came Joshua son of Josedec, called the Great Priest, with Zerubbabel
from captivity, and laid the foundations of the Temple, but since he was
hindered in the work by the neighbours, the first seven weeks of years named by
the prophet came to an end, during which the building of the Temple remained
unfinished. This is why (c) the divine word separates the first seven from the
remaining weeks, saying seven weeks, and then after an interval adding, and
sixty-two weeks. For from Cyrus to the completion of the building of the Temple
are seven weeks of years. Hence the Jews attacking our Saviour said, "Forty and
six years was this Temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three
days?'' These men, you say, said that the Temple was built in forty-six years.
So they reckoned (d) from the reign of Cyrus first, who first permitted those of
the Jews who wished to go up to their own land, to the sixth year of King
Darius, in whose reign the Temple was finally completed. But Josephus, a Jewish
author, says that three more years were spent in completing the surrounding
outside buildings, so that it seems probable that the seven first weeks were
divided in the prophet's words into nine years and forty years, and that the
remaining sixty-two were counted from the reign of Darius, in whose time Joshua,
son of Josedec, and Zerubbabel, son of Salathiel, who were still alive, were
both at the head of the rebuilding of the (393) Temple, when Haggai and
Zechariah were prophets, after whom Ezra and Nehemiah, who also came up from
Babylon, built the wall of the city, when Joiachim was high priest. He was son
of Joshua, son of Josedec, and Eliashib succeeded him in the high-priesthood,
then Joiada, after him Jonathan, and after him Jaddua. The books of Ezra record
them, saying, "And Jeshua begat Joiakim, Joiakim begat (b) Eliashib, and
Eliashib begat Joiada, and Joiada begat Jonathan, and Jonathan begat Jaddua." In
the time of this Jaddua, Alexander of Macedon conquered Alexandria, and, as
Josephus relates,2 came to Jerusalem and worshipped God. And Alexander died at
the beginning of the 114th Olympiad, 236 years after |128 (c) Cyrus, who began
to rule over the Persians in the first year of the fifty-fifth Olympiad.

Now after the death of Alexander of Macedon, and after the said High Priest,
Onias ruled the nation, also enjoying the high-priestly office: in whose day
Seleucus conquered Babylon and put on the crown of Asia, twelve years after
Alexander's death, and the whole period from him to Cyrus is 248 years From that
point the Book of Maccabees begins to count the years of the Hellenic Empire.
And after Onias, the High Priest Eleazar ruled the Jews, in whose time the
Seventy translated the Holy Scriptures and deposited (d) them in the Library of
Alexandria. And after him a second Onias, followed by Simon, in whose day
flourished Jesus, son of Sirach, who wrote the excellent book called Wisdom.
After him a third Onias ruled, in whose time Antiochus besieged the Jews and
compelled them to hellenize. After whom Judas, called the Maccabee, was at the
head of the State, and cleansed the land of the unholy, being succeeded by his
brother Jonathan. And then Simon, to whose death the First Book of Maccabees
reckons 177 years from the beginning of the Syrian rule, and ends its history at
that date. So that the period from (394) the first year of Cyrus and the Persian
Empire up to the end of the record of the Maccabees and the death of Simon is
425 years. And then Jonathan held the high-priesthood, according to Josephus,
for twenty-nine years.3 After him Aristobulus ruled for a year, who was the
first to assume the royal diadem 4 besides the high-priesthood after |129 the
return from Babylon. Alexander succeeded him, as both king and high priest, and
was at the head of the State for twenty-seven years. To whose date is comprised
in all, (b) from the first year of the reign of Cyrus and from the return of the
Jews from Babylon, 482 years, in which period the high priests ruled, who I
believe are called in the prophecy "Christs and governors." After whom, when the
last of them the High Priest Alexander died, the State of the Jews was left
without king or leader, so that the kingdom came to a woman. And when her two
sons, Aristobulus nnd Hyrcanus, were quarrelling with each other, Pompey, the
(c) Roman general, attacked Jerusalem, and took the city by siege, denied its
holy places, and even entered the Holiest of all. And this came to pass in the
first year of the 179th Olympiad, 495 years after the empire of Cyrus, who began
to rule in the fifty-fifth Olympiad. And Pompey, then, having taken Jerusalem by
force, sent the before-named Aristobulus a prisoner to Rome, bestowing the
High-Priesthood on his brother Hyrcanus, and the whole nation was from that date
subject to Rome. Then after this, Herod, (d) the son of Antipater, destroyed
Hyrcanus, and was entrusted with the Jewish kingdom by the Roman senate, being
the first ruler of a foreign stock, and he destroyed the order of the Mosaic
High-Priesthood. For the divine Law ordained that the most high high-priest
should hold office for life; but Herod preferred to the office men who were not
of the priestly tribe nor otherwise suitable, who were alien and strange to the
priestly line of succession, and he gave the position not even to them for life,
but only for a short and limited time, sometimes to one, sometimes to another;
so (395) that the first seven weeks must be reckoned from Cyrus to Darius, and
the remaining sixty-two from Darius to Pompey the Roman general. And if you
reckon the period of the seven and sixty-two weeks in another way a third time,
they will comprise 483 years, up to Augustus and Herod, the first king of
foreign (b) stock, in whose reign the Birth of our Saviour Jesus Christ is
recorded to have occurred, if you begin to reckon from Darius and the completion
of the Temple. For the prophet |130 Zechariah shews that the seventy years of
the Desolation of Jerusalem were completed in the second year of Darius, when he
says: "On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh (c) month (this is the Sabbath),
in the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came to Zechariah son of
Barachiah." And then he adds, "And the Angel of the Lord answered, and said, O
Almighty Lord, how long wilt thou not pity Jerusalem, and the cities of Judah,
which thou hast despised these seventy years past?"

This, then, was the very time that Daniel, inspired by the divine spirit, marked
when he said, "I Daniel understood in the books the number of the years, what
was the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the prophet, for the fulfilment of the
desolation of Jerusalem seventy years, and I turned my face to the Lord my God,
to present my prayer and petition." Then after his prayer the Angel prophesied
to (d) him of the seventy weeks, and told him at what point to begin to reckon
the time, saying, "And thou shalt know and understand from the going forth of
the word of answering and from the building of Jerusalem until Christ the
governor." The first answer allowing Jerusalem to be rebuilt was of course that
of Cyrus, but it did not take effect, because the neighbours interfered. But
when Darius gave his order afierwards, and the building of the Temple was also
completed in his reign, from that date began to be fulfilled the prophecy of
Daniel, which said, "From the going forth of the word of answering and from the
building (396) of Jerusalem," and that which said, "I Daniel understood in the
books the number of the years, which was the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the
prophet, for the fulfilment of the desolation of Jerusalem seventy years." The
completion of the period of seventy years is therefore shewn to have been
reached in the second year of Darius, so that we must anyway reckon the seventy
weeks from the sixty-sixth Olympiad, and from the second year of Darius, in
which the building was completed. And if you reckon the succeeding (b) period
from that date up to King Herod and the Roman Emperor Augustus, in whose times
our Saviour was born on earth, you will find it amounts to 483 years, which are
the seven and sixty-two weeks of the prophecy of Daniel. |131 From the
sixty-sixth Olympiad to the 186th Olympiad there are 121 Olympiads, or 484
years, an Olympiad consisting of four years, during which time Augustus the
Roman Emperor, in the fifteenth year of his reign, gained the (c) kingdom of
Egypt and of the whole world, under whom Herod was the first foreigner to ascend
the Jewish throne, and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was born, the time of
His birth synchronizing with the fulfilment of the seven and sixty-two weeks of
Daniel's prophecy. And afterwards comes the one remaining week, separated from
them and divided by a long interval, during which occurred all the other events
that are predicted in between, all of which being foretold in the middle of the
oracle were fulfilled; they run in the following way: "After the seven (d) and
sixty-two weeks the Unction shall be cast out, and there is no judgment in it.
And he will destroy the city and the Holy Place with the leader that cometh, and
they shall be cut off as by a flood, and until the end of the completion of the
war by destructions." And this was evidently fulfilled in the time of Augustus
and Herod, at whose day I say the seven weeks foretold were summed up. The
regular and orderly Unction of the High Priest continued uninterrupted until the
time of Herod and Augustus, and the ancient line of the High-Priesthood was
ended with Alexander, the Father of Hyr-canus; and Herod, after murdering
Hyrcanus, is said to (397) have conferred the office no longer on members of the
ancestral line, but on obscure and unknown men. This the oracle foresaw and
predicted, when it said, "And after the seven and sixty-two weeks, the Unction
shall be cast out, and judgment shall not be in it." And this is made clear by
the other translators: for Aquila says, "And after the seven weeks and the
sixty-two, he that is anointed shall be cast out, and there is no place for
him." And Sym-machus, "And after the weeks the seven and sixty-two the Christ
shall be cut off, and shall not belong to him:" which (b) seems strong
confirmation of my interpretation of "Christ the Governor."

It says then that Christ shall be cast out after the completion of the said
weeks. Who can this be but the |132 governor and ruler of the high-priestly
line? He remained therefore until the weeks were fulfilled; and when they came
to an end, the ruler of the nation in the line of succession (c) was cut off as
the prophecy foretold. And this was Hyrcanus, whom Herod murdered, and seized
the kingdom on which he had no special claim, and he was its first king of alien
stock. And moreover Hyrcanus was not only personally cut off as the last
anointed successor of the ancient high-priests, but the line as well which
descended from those ancient high-priests was itself cut off, and the Legal
Unction was no longer used according to judgment, but in a confused and
disorderly way not according to the Mosaic enactments. And these events happened
concurrently and fulfilled the prediction, "The Unction shall (d) be cast out,
and there is no judgment in it." Josephus, himself a Hebrew, is sufficient
evidence of this, giving the history of those times in the Eighteenth Book of
the Archaeology of the Jews:5

"Herod was then made king by the Romans, but did no longer appoint High-Priests
out of the family of Asamonaeus, and these were called Maccabeans, but made
certain men to be so that were of no eminent families, but only of the Hebrew
race, excepting that he gave that dignity to Aristobulus; for he made this
Aristobulus, the son of Hyrcanus, high priest, and took his sister Mariamne to
wife, aiming at winning the goodwill of the people through their memory of
Hyrcanus. Yet did he afterwards, out of his fear lest they should (398) all bend
their inclinations to Aristobulus, put him to death in Jericho, and that by
contriving to have him suffocated while swimming, as I have already related. But
after this man he never entrusted the High Priesthood to the descendants of
Hyrcanus. Archelaus also acted like his father Herod in the appointment of the
High-Priests, as did also the Romans, who took the government over the Jews into
their hands afterwards."6 |133 And again in another place he says of them: (b)

"But when Herod came to be king he rebuilt this tower, which was very
conveniently situated, in a magnificent manner, and called it Antonia, and he
took the high-priestly vestments, which he found lying there, and kept them,
believing that while he had them the people would not revolt against him. And
Herod's example was followed by Archelaus his son, who was made king after him,
after whom the Romans when they entered on the government took possession of the
high-priestly vestments, and had them laid up in a stone chamber under a seal."7

I think it must be clear to all that this was the fulfilment (c) of the oracle,
which said, "And after the seven and sixty-two weeks the Unction shall be cast
out, and there is no judgment in it." And you may see better the meaning of the
words, "And there is no judgment in it," if you consider the haphazard
appointments of the high-priests after Herod's time and in the time of our
Saviour. For whereas by the divine Law (d) it was ordained that a high-priest
should hold office all his life and be succeeded by his legitimate son, in the
period in question, when the Unction had been cast out as the prophecy foretold,
Herod first, and after him the Romans, appointed what high-priests they liked
haphazard or not according to the Law, bestowing the dignity on common and
unknown men, selling and peddling the office, giving it now to one now to
another for a year. And the Evangelist St. Luke seems to imply this, where he
says, "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate
being governor of Judaea, and Herod, Philip and Lysanias being tetrarchs, Annas
and Caiaphas being high-priests." For how could they both be high-priest at the
same time unless the rules of the high-priesthood were disregarded? "In witness
whereof Josephus writes: (399)

8 "Valerius Gratus the Roman General, after closing the high-priesthood of
Ananus, appointed Ismael the son of Pheba, and removing him shortly afterwards
appointed Eleazar son of Ananus the high-priest. A year later he removed him,
and gave the office to |134 Simon son of Gathimus. He did not remain high priest
more than a year, when Josephus, son of Caiaphas, took his place."9

(b) I was obliged to give this quotation because of the words "The Unction shall
be cast out, and there is no judgment in it,'' which seem to me proved by it
beyond any doubt.

After this the prophecy says, "And the city, and the holy place, he will
destroy, with the governor that cometh." Here again I understand the rulers of
foreign stock who succeeded him to be meant. For as above he named the
High-Priests, Christs and Governors, saying, "Until Christ the Governor," in the
same way after their time and after their abolition there was no other ruler to
come but the (c) same Herod of foreign stock, and the others ruled the nation in
order after them, in whose company and by whose aid, using them as his agents,
that hateful bane of good men is said to have destroyed the city and the Holy
Place. And indeed he destroyed of a truth the whole nation, now upsetting the
established order of the priesthood, now perverting the whole people, and
encouraging the city (which (d) stands metaphorically for its people) in
impiety. And Aquila agrees with my interpretation of the passage, translating
thus, "And the people of the governor that cometh will destroy the city and the
holy place." Meaning that the city and the Holy Place arc not only to be ruined
by the leader to come, whom I have identified in my interpretation, but also by
his people. And you would not be far wrong in saying, too, that the Roman
general and his army arc meant by the words before us, where I think the camps
of the Roman rulers are meant, who governed the nation from that time, and who
destroyed the city of Jerusalem itself, and its ancient venerable Temple. For
they were cut off by them as by a flood, and were at once involved in
destruction until the war was concluded, so that the prophecy was fulfilled and
they suffered utter desolation (400) after their plot against our Saviour, which
was followed by their extreme sufferings during the siege. You will find an
accurate account of it in the history of Josephus. But after the prophecy of the
events that happened to the Jewish nation in the intermediate period between the
|135 seven and sixty-two weeks, there follows the prophecy of the new Covenant
announced by our Saviour. So when all the intermediate matter between the seven
and the sixty-two weeks is finished, there is added, "And he will confirm (b) a
Covenant with many one week," and in half the week the sacrifice and the
libation shall be taken away, and on the Holy Place shall come the abomination
of desolation, and until the fullness of time fullness shall be given to the
desolation. Let us consider how this was fulfilled.

Now the whole period of our Saviour's Teaching and working of Miracles is said
to have been three-and-a-half years, which is half a week. John the Evangelist,
in his Gospel, makes this clear to the attentive. One week of years therefore
would be represented by the whole period of His association with the Apostles,
both the time before His Passion, and the time after His Resurrection. For it is
written that before His Passion He shewed Himself for the space of
three-and-a-half years to His disciples and also to those who were not His
disciples: while by teaching and miracles He revealed the powers of His Godhead
to all equally whether Greeks or Jews. But after His Resurrection He was most
likely with His disciples a period equal |136 to the years, being seen of them
forty days, and eating with them, and speaking of the things pertaining to the
Kingdom of God, as the Acts of the Apostles tells us. So that this would be the
prophet's week of years, during which He "confirmed a covenant with many,"
confirming that is to say the new Covenant of the Gospel Preaching. And who were
the many to whom He confirmed it, but His own disciples and Apostles, and such
of the Hebrews who believed in Him? And moreover, half through this week, during
which He confirmed the said Covenant with many, the (401) sacrifice and libation
was taken away, and the abomination of desolation began, for in the middle of
this week after the three-and-a-half days of His Teaching, at the time when He
suffered, the Veil of the Temple was torn asunder from the top to the bottom, so
that in effect from that time sacrifice and libation were taken away, and the
abomination of desolation stood in the holy place, inasmuch as the Being had
left them desolate, Who had been from time immemorial till (b) that day the
guardian and protector of the place. For it is fitting to believe that up to the
Saviour's Passion there was some Divine Power guarding the Temple and the Holy
of Holies. For He could not have attended with the multitude at the Temple to
keep the Feasts according to the laws, if He had not known that it still
remained a place worthy of God. Therefore there were in the Temple also some
that prophesied up to that time, as Anna the (c) Prophetess, daughter of
Phanuel, and Simeon, who took Him into his arms when He was an infant, whose
prophecies are handed down in Scripture. Nor could our Lord have said to the
leper, "Go, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift which Moses commanded
for a testimony unto thee," if He had not considered it right for the legal
observances to be carried out there as in a holy place worthy of God. Nor would
He have thrust out those who bought and sold, saying, "Take these things hence,
and make not |137 my Father's House a house of merchandise," if He had not
thought that the Temple was still to be reckoned sacred. But it was when the
hour of their extreme wickedness drew near, that He explained all when He said,
"Behold your house is left unto you desolate," which also was fulfilled, when at
his Passion the Veil of the Temple was wholly rent in twain, and from that
moment the sacrifice and libation well pleasing to God according to the
ordinance of the Law was in effect taken away, and when it was removed, the
abomination of desolation, as the prophecy before us says, appeared in its
place. And if it be said that the worship of the Sanctuary appeared to continue
for a time, yet it was not pleasing to God, being offered without judgment and
not according to the Law. For as before of (402) old when the Unction was
abolished, and the lawful line of High Priests ceased after the death of
Hyrcanus, they who held the office afterwards seemed to perform disordered and
illegal rites, since they were breaking the fitting Laws, of whom the prophecy
said, "The Unction shall be cast out, and there is no judgment in it," referring
to its illegality and lack of judgment; so here you will rightly say it has
happened to the offering and libation, which were rightly and (b) lawfully
offered before our Saviour's Passion, while the Power still guarded the Holy
Places, but which were taken away directly after the perfect and supreme
Sacrifice which He offered, when He offered Himself for our sins, being the Lamb
of God, that taketh away the sin of the world, which sacrifice having been
delivered to all men in the new Sacraments of the new Covenant, the Sacrifices
of the old are taken away. For concurrently with the fulfilment of the oracle
which says, "And he shall confirm a covenant (c) with many one week," all that
is connected with the old Covenant is abolished. And when was the new Covenant
confirmed, but when our Lord and Saviour, about to consummate the great Mystery
of His delivery to death, on the night in which He was betrayed, delivered to
His disciples the symbols of the unspeakable words of the new Covenant referring
to Him? For concurrently with this celebration, (d) the old Covenant of Moses
was abolished, which was shewn by the veil of the Temple being rent at the very
time. Sacrifice and libation being from that time abolished and ceasing in
effect and truth, any sacrifices that were |138 afterwards thought to be offered
there were celebrated in a profane place by profane and unhallowed men. Hear the
witness of Josephus about this:

"On the day of Pentecost, the priests going by night into the Temple, as was
their custom, for the services, said that they were first conscious of a quaking
and a sound, and afterwards of a sudden voice which said, Let us depart hence."

And he records this to have taken place after the Passion of our Saviour.10 And
the same writer says elsewhere: (403) "Pilate the Governor "(meaning the Pilate
of our Saviour's time) "brought the images of Caesar into the Temple by night,
which was unlawful, and caused a great outburst of tumult and disorder among the
Jews." 11 Which Philo 12 confirms, saying:

"Pilate laid up in the Temple by night the imperial emblems, and from that time
the Jews were involved in rebellion and mutual troubles."

And from that time a succession of all kinds of troubles afflicted the whole
nation and their city until the last war against them, and the final siege, in
which destruction (b) rushed on them like a flood with all kinds of misery of
famine, plague and sword, and all who had conspired against the Saviour in their
youth were cut off; then, too, the abomination of desolation stood in the
Temple, and it has remained there even till to-day, while they have daily
reached deeper depths of desolation. And perhaps this will be so until the end
of the world, according to the limit set by the prophet when he said, "And unto
the consummation of time a fulfilment shall be given to the desolation." (c)
These words our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ sealed, when He said, "When ye
shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet,
standing in the Holy Place, then ye shall know that her desolation draws near."
And if the Jews are hard to persuade of this, they must be convicted not only of
a shameless opposition to truth |139 and clear evidence, but also of
misrepresenting, so far as they can, the predictions as falsehoods, if it is to
be thought that in the seventy weeks of years some of them include all the time,
while they prophesy of what is to happen in the intermediate period, while
others, though we are now nearly a thousand years from the date of the prophecy,
admit no (d) sign of the fulfilment of what was written, although their Unction
has been abolished, as the divine prediction foretold, and their sanctuary, and
the former inhabitants destroyed and utterly brought to naught in the flood of
the completed war, and strangest thing of all even now to be seen, I mean, the
abomination of desolation still standing in the one holy place, concerning which
our Lord and Saviour said what I have quoted. As this is before our eyes even
now, it is extraordinary (404) that the Jews are not only so daring as to refuse
to see what is clear, but so blind and dark in their minds as well as not to be
able to see the clear and evident fulfilment of the Holy Scriptures. But they
are in the state now that Isaiah prophesied they should come to, and his words
are fulfilled:

"Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand, and seeing ye shall see and
not perceive. For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are
dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest at (b) any time they
should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their
heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."

But since it was said of old of the nations that believe in Christ, "To whom it
has not been announced concerning Him, they shall see, and they who have not
heard, shall understand," I also by His grace and that of the Father that sent
Him have given as full an interpretation as I could of this passage, and have
quoted also the critical conclusions of Africanus, my predecessor, as germane
and accurate, and therefore to be made use of as satisfactory. (c) |140

CHAPTER 3 From Micah. The Prophet foretells what will be the Signs of the Coming
of the Lord to Men, the Complete Destruction of the Sacred Customs of the Jews,
the Knowledge of the God that was announced by the Prophets, the Deepest Peace
of All Nations.

(405) [Passages quoted, Micah i. 2-4; iii. 9-12; iv. 1-4.]

(d) I HAVE already considered this prophecy among the passages. And I have
pointed out that only from the date of our Saviour Jesus Christ's Coming among
men have the objects of Jewish reverence, the hill called Zion and Jerusalem,
the buildings there, that is to say, the Temple, the Holy of Holies, the Altar,
and whatever else was there dedicated to the glory of God, been utterly removed
or shaken, in fulfilment of the Word which said:

"Behold the Lord, the Lord comes forth from his place, and he shall descend on
the high places of the earth, and the mountains shall be shaken under him."

And when those kings are shaken, the souls of the Jews, called "valleys,"
because of the contrast of their wretchedness with their former exaltation,
bewailing the passing of (406) the aforesaid glory, will melt like wax before
the fire, and be as water rushing down a chasm, through the multitude of those
that fall from bad to worse. And all this it says will come to pass because of
the sin of the house of Jacob, and the transgression of the house of Israel. And
it goes on to describe this sin and transgression, "They that defile judgment
and pervert all that is right, who build Sion with blood and Jerusalem with
unrighteousness." With blood! Yes, this was the cause of their final misery, for
that they pronounced the impious curse upon themselves, saying, (b) "His blood
be on us and on our children." Therefore, it says this, "Zion shall be plowed as
a field, and Jerusalem shall be as a storehouse of fruit," a prophecy which was
only actually fulfilled after the impious treatment of our Saviour. For from
that time to this utter desolation has possessed the land; their once famous
Mount Sion, instead |141 of being, as once it was, the centre of study and
education based on the divine prophecies, which the children of the (c) Hebrews
of old, their godly prophets, priests and national teachers loved to interpret,
is a Roman farm like the rest of the country, yea, with my own eyes I have seen
the bulls plowing there, and the sacred site sown with seed. And Jerusalem
itself is become but a storehouse of its fruit of old days now destroyed, or
better, as the Hebrew has it, a stone-quarry. So Aquila says, "Therefore for
your sake the land of Zion shall be ploughed, and Jerusalem shall be a quarry of
(d) stone," for being inhabited by men of foreign race it is even now like a
quarry, all the inhabitants of the city choosing stores from its ruins as they
will for private as well as public buildings. And it is sad for the eyes to see
stones from the Temple itself, and from its ancient sanctuary and holy place,
used for the building of idol temples, and of theatres for the populace. These
things are open for the eyes to see, and it should be clear as well that it is
hence that the new law and word of the new Covenant of our Saviour Jesus Christ
goes forth. For countless companies (407) of people, races of all kinds
deserting their fathers' gods and their old superstitions, call on the Supreme
God. And thus it is reckoned the deepest peace, there being no diversity of
government or national rule, that nation should not take up sword against
nation, and that they should not learn war any more, but that each farmer should
rest under his vine and under his fig tree, according to the prophecy, and that
none should make him afraid. (b) As this state of things was never achieved at
any other time but during the Roman Empire, from our Saviour's birth till now, I
consider the proof irrefutable that the prophet refers to the time of our
Saviour's coming among men. |142

CHAPTER 4 From Zechariah.

Signs of the Time of the Coming of the Word of God to Men, the Call of the
Gentiles, and Final Destruction of Jerusalem.

[Passages quoted, Zech. ii. 10, 11; ix. 9, 10.]

AFTER this prediction of our Saviour's Coming, the prophecy now goes on, after
interposing other matter, to speak of the final desolation of Jerusalem, partly
under figurative and disguised forms, and partly quite clearly. Figuratively,
for example, when it says:

(408) "1. Open thy doors, Libanus, and let the fire devour thy cedars; let the
pine howl, because the cedar has fallen: for the mighty men have been greatly
afflicted. 2. Howl, ye oaks of the land of Eashan, for the thickly planted
forest has been torn down. 3. The voice of shepherds mourning, for their
greatness is brought low: The voice of roaring lions, for the pride of Jordan is
brought low."

This is figurative. But the same prophet goes on to give a clear interpretation
of it.

(b) "2. Behold, I will make Jerusalem as shaking doorposts to all the nations
round about, and in Judaea there shall be a siege against Jerusalem. 3. And it
shall be in that day, I will make Jerusalem a stone trodden under foot by all
nations; every one that tramples on it shall utterly mock it, and all the
nations of the earth shall be gathered unto her."

And shortly after he adds:

(c) "10b. And they shall look on me, whom they pierced, because they have mocked
me, and shall make lamentation for him as for a beloved, and grief as for a
firstborn son. 11. In that day the lamentation of Jerusalem shall be increased,
as the mourning for Roon cut down in the plain. 12. And the land shall mourn
according to families. The family of the house of David by itself, and its women
by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and its women by
themselves; the |143 family of the house of Levi by itself, and its women by
themselves; the family of the house of Simeon by itself, and its women by
themselves. 14. All the families that are left, each family by itself and their
wives by themselves." And again, after other matter, he announces yet more (d)
clearly the siege of Jerusalem, saying:

"1. Behold the days of the Lord come, and thy spoils shall be divided in thee.
2. And I will bring up all nations unto Jerusalem unto war, and the city shall
be taken, and its houses plundered, and its women defiled, and half of the city
shall go into captivity, and the remnant of my people shall not be cast out of
the city. 3. And the Lord shall come forth; and shall fight with those nations,
as when he fought in the day of war. 4. And his feet shall stand in that day on
the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem."

Then, after an interval, he says:

"And there shall be one Lord, and his name one, encircling the earth and the
wilderness."

And again after other matter, concluding the book of His (409) prophecy, He
prophesies the calling of the Gentiles:

"And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall be left of all the nations that
came against Jerusalem shall even come up every year to worship the King the
Lord Almighty, and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. 17. And it shall come to
pass that whosoever of all the families of the earth shall not come up to
Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, even these shall be added to
the others. 18. And if the family of Egypt (b) shall not go up nor come thither,
then upon them shall come the fall, with which the Lord shall strike all
nations, as many as go not up to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. 19. This is the
transgression of Egypt, and the transgression of all the nations, as many as go
not up to keep the Feast of Tabernacles."

So prophesied Zechariah after the Return from Babylon, in the reign of Darius,
King of Persia, when Jerusalem was but just arisen from the desolation which it
suffered under the Babylonians. And the whole period from Darius the (c)
Persian, in whose time Zechariah prophesied, even to Augustus, Emperor of Rome,
amounts to the seven and |144 sixty-two weeks of years in Daniel, which are
equivalent to 483 years, as I have shewn in my recent investigations. And
neither in the time of the Macedonians from Alexander onwards, not even if you
include the reign of Augustus, was (d) anything similar to the words of the
prophet fulfilled. For when in those days did the Lord, Whom the prophet speaks
of as divine, come among men, and many nations know Him, and confess Him to the
only God, and take refuge in Him, and be to Him a people? Or when in the times
of the Macedonians or Persians did the king who was foretold come, sitting upon
an ass and a young colt? When did He come and utterly destroy the royal array of
the Jewish nation, here called Ephraim, and of Jerusalem itself, called chariots
and horses, and conquer the army of the Jews? For this is what the oracle
revealed, saying:

"Behold thy king cometh to thee, righteous and a saviour, himself meek, and
sitting upon an ass and a young colt, and he shall utterly destroy the warlike
bow." (410)

For so it was prophesied concerning the destruction of the royal glory of the
Jewish nation, at the same time, as, on the other hand, the prophecy of peace
for the Gentiles was repeated in agreement with those previously quoted, namely,
"And abundance of peace shall be from the Gentiles." In place of which Aquila
and the other translators render, "And he shall speak peace to the Gentiles,"
which stands specially and literally fulfilled from the reign of Augustus, since
from that date varieties of government ceased, and (b) peace enwrapped most of
the nations of the world. And before the Roman days under Persians or
Macedonians what King of the Jews was there, who "ruled from sea to sea, and
from the rivers to the ends of the earth?" And so the other translators have
shewn. Therefore Aquila says:

"And he shall speak peace to the Gentiles, and his power shall be from sea to to
sea, and from the river to the ends of the world."

With this agrees the passage in the 101st Psalm concerning the Christ that is to
be born of the seed of Solomon:

"In his days righteousness shall arise, and abundance of peace, so long as the
moon endureth, and he shall (c) rule from sea to sea, and from the river to the
ends of the world." |145

For these words about the son of Solomon are as exalted as those in the prophet.
When, then, this took place and in what way, and in what period, let him that
can, inform me. And when did Jerusalem after its siege by the Babylonians
undergo a second burning, and have its Temple thrown to the ground? And the
figure used by the prophet is also exceedingly (d) strange when he says, "O
Libanus, open thy gates, and let fire devour thy cedars." For he calls the
Temple here, as was not unusual, by the name of Libanus (it is so called in
other prophecies). To this the Jews themselves now assent, since Isaiah, too,
has a similar prophecy to the one before us, namely:

"Behold, the Lord of Sabaoth shall disturb the noble with might, and the lofty
shall be crushed in their pride." And Libanus shall fall with its lofty ones,
and there shall come forth a rod from the stem of Jesse, and a flower shall
spring up from his roots, and the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him."

To which he adds:

"And there shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall (411) rise to rule the
Gentiles, in him shall the Gentiles trust."

Here, too, the destruction of Libanus and the call of the Gentiles is connected
with the birth of Christ, of the seed of Jesse and David. And Ezekiel actually
calls Jerusalem Libanus when he says, "The great eagle, with great wings, that
hath the dominion, cometh to Libanus, and tore off the tender boughs of the
cedar." And he goes on to explain this himself, as happening when Nebuchadnezzar
shall come to Jerusalem and take her rulers, and that which follows. But
Ezekiel's prophecy is about the first siege, and Zechariah's about the second.
When, then, after the time of Zechariah in the time of the Macedonian Empire was
the Temple burnt? There was no such time. For after its burning by the
Babylonians, it was not burned again till in the time of Titus and Vespasian,
the Roman Emperors, it was utterly destroyed by fire, and it is in relation to
this that the prophet summons the ancient rulers of the nation in a figure to
mourn and weep, when he says: "Let the (c) |146 pine weep because the cedar is
fallen, because the great ones are in great misery. Let the oaks of Bashan weep,
because the wood that is planted is torn down: a voice of shepherds that lament,
because their greatness is in misery." Then truly Jerusalem was as a portico
shaken by all nations around it, and there was a force encircling Judaea, and
their venerated Temple and its Holy Place is even to-day a stone trodden under
the feet of all nations, and all that mock are mocked according to the prophecy.

(d) Yea, in return for their insults to the Lord who thus prophesied, there has
not failed for them lamentation, mourning and wailing. And it was only after our
Saviour came, and even until our own time, that all the families of the Jewish
nation have suffered pain worthy of wailing and lamentation because God's hand
has struck them, delivering their mother-city over to strange nations, laying
their Temple low, and driving them from their country, to serve their enemies in
a hostile land; wherefore even now every house and every soul is a prey to
lamentation. And so the prophecy says, "And family shall mourn by family, the
(412) family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves, and
all that follows this." And which were the days after the age of Zechariah, when
the spoils of Jerusalem were divided, and all nations were gathered against them
in battle, and the city was taken, their houses looted, their women defiled, and
they themselves led into captivity, while the Lord was at the same time aiding
the nations warring against Jerusalem and drawn up against them? Or when did His
feet stand (b) on the Mount of Olives? Or when was the Lord King of all the
earth, when was there one Lord over all men, when did His Name encircle the
whole earth and the wilderness? It is impossible to argue that this was
fulfilled previously to the period of the Romans, in whose time the Jewish
Temple was burnt for the second time after its destruction by the Babylonians,
and their city from then till now has been inhabited by foreign nations. And it
was when our Lord Jesus, the Christ of God, had (c) visited the olive-grove over
against Jerusalem, since the words of the prophecy were fulfilled which said,
"His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives opposite to Jerusalem," that is,
the life of holiness having been established |147 throughout all the world, that
all the nations, according to the prophecy, kept the Feast of Tabernacles
together in every place to the God of the prophets, and the Egyptians from that
time recognizing God erected tents in every town and country place, which mean
the local Christian Churches. For the power of our Saviour Jesus Christ has
pegged them (d) far better than Moses' tents through the whole world, so that
every race of men and all the Gentiles may keep their Feast of Tabernacles to
Almighty God.

When, then, we see what was of old foretold for the nations fulfilled in our own
day, and when the lamentation and wailing that was predicted for the Jews, and
the burning of the Temple and its utter desolation, can also be seen even now to
have occurred according to the prediction, surely we must also agree that the
King who was prophesied, (413) the Christ of God, has come, since the signs of
His coming have been shewn in each instance I have treated to have been clearly
fulfilled.

CHAPTER 5 From Isaiah. The Signs of the Times of the Lord's Coming, and the
Egyptians' Acknowledgment of the God of the Prophets.

[Passages quoted, Isa. xix. 1-3; xix. 19-21.]

THIS is a passage that I have already partly expounded. Now if the Egyptians are not seen in our own time deserting their ancestral gods and calling upon the God of the prophets; if throughout Egypt in every locality, town and country there are not altars erected to the God that was formerly acknowledged only by the Hebrews; if the idols of (414) Egypt have not been shaken, for that the power of the daemons that hung about them is gone, and the ancient superstition driven from the soul of the Egyptians; and once more, if there is not intestine war arisen through all the households of Egypt, between them that receive the Lord and worship the God of the prophets and reject their |148 immemorial polytheistic error, and them that oppose the (b) converts of the Lord in their adherence to the evil of their fathers; if they do not even now in their efforts to question their own gods and the idols and them that speak out of the ground and the diviners by familiar spirits, make a vain and useless appeal to them because the daemons are no longer able to work in them as they did of old----if all these things are not seen to have been actually fulfilled, why (c) then, you may consider that the prophetic oracle is unfulfilled, and that the Lord that was prophesied has not yet visited our human life. But if, on the other hand, we can see the people of Egypt far more patently in actual fact than in mere description, some of them acknowledging the God of the prophets, and for His sake renouncing their ancestral gods, some of them raising political dissension against the converts, some of them even now calling upon their gods and images and them that speak from the ground, who no longer can effect aught, and some throughout all Egypt raising an altar to the Lord of the prophets for each local Church, calling no (d) longer in their troubles and persecutions on beasts or reptiles as their gods, nor on wild animals and unreasoning brutes as their fathers did, but on the Supreme God, retaining Him only and the fear of Him in their minds, praying to Him, and not to the daemons, and promising what men should promise God----how can we deny that the prophecies of long ago have at last been fulfilled? And these foretold that the Lord would come to Egypt not in an unembodied state, but in a light cloud, or better "in light thickness," for such is the meaning of the Hebrew, shewing figuratively His Incarnate state. Therefore the prophecy |149 goes on to call Him a man that is a Saviour, saying, "And (415) the Lord shall send to them a man that is a Saviour." Here again the Hebrew is, "And He shall send to them a Saviour, who shall save them." As the proof is now so clear from this, I consider that there is no question of the time at which the prophecies foretold the Lord's Coming.

I have here only briefly collected the evidence for the time of the Advent of
our Lord. If the other Scriptures were searched at leisure much more could be
discovered. But as I am well satisfied with what I have brought before (b) you,
I will now address myself to the other prophecies. And our next task will be to
collect from inspired prophecy the predictions about the earthly dispensation of
the Incarnation.

[A few footnotes renumbered and placed at the end] 1. 1 Cf. Plato, Republic, 543
A.

2. 1 Jos., Ant. XI. 5. 8.

3. 2 "Thirty years."----Jos., Ant. XX. 10. 3.

4. 3 Jos., Ant. XIII. 11. 1.

5. 2 The reference is to Jos., Ant. Jud. XX. (not XVIII.) cap. viii. (x.), 6. 3
Jos., Ant. Jud. XX. 10. 5.

7. 1 Jos., Ant. Jud. XVIII. 4. 3.

8. 2 See Eus., H.E. I. 10.

9. 1 Jos., Ant. Jud. XVIII. 2. 2.

10. 1 Jos., B.J. VI. 5,3.

11. 2 Jos., Ant. XVIII. 3, and B.J. II. 9. 2.

12. 3 Philo Jud., cf. leg. ad Caium 38, pp. 589, 590. This text was transcribed
by Roger Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy
freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 51: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - BOOK 9
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Book 9

BOOK IX

(416) IT remains for me now to redeem my promise to go on to expound the
dispensation connected with the Incarnation of the very Word of God. My previous
labours in the eight books already completed have been concerned (417) with Him.
I have now devoted myself to tracing the Theology of His Person, now to
considering His Descent to us from heaven, now His Character, His Name, and the
time of His Advent. As the treatment of these subjects is complete, it is now
time to consider the matters connected with His Coming, and to shew how these
also were predicted among the Hebrews. And the fulfilment of the predictions
shall be confirmed by the witness of (b) the Holy Evangelists, and their
historical account of the actual events.

Let us then begin, as the proof about His Birth, tribe, and family is complete,
by considering the star which appeared at His Birth, which was new and a
stranger among the usual lights of heaven. For this, too, was proclaimed by
Moses long before in times far distant in the following words.

CHAPTER 1 Of the Things that happened at the Incarnation, and of the Star that
appeared at Our Saviour's Birth.

MOSES, in the Book of Numbers, says of the star that appeared at the Birth of
our Saviour, as follows.

[Passage quoted, Num. xxiv. 15-19.]

We are told that Balaam's successors moved by this (for the prediction was
preserved most likely among them), when they noticed in the heavens a strange
star besides the usual ones, fixed above the head, so to say, and, |151
vertically above Judaea, hastened to arrive at Palestine, to (418) inquire about
the King announced by the star's appearance. Matthew the Evangelist witnesses to
this as follows:

1. "And when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, in the days of Herod the
king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem saying, 2. Where is he
that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east and are
come to worship him."

And when they had been sent on their way they reached Bethlehem.

9. "And, behold, again, the (same) star, which they saw before in the east, went
before them, until it came and stood over where the young child was. 10. And
when they saw the star, they rejoiced with (b) exceeding great joy, and going
into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and fell down and
worshipped him."

This is the account in the Holy Gospel. But the word of the prophecy says that
striking events will be heralded by the rising of the star and the birth of our
Saviour Jesus Christ, viz., the crushing of the leaders of Moab, and the raid on
the sons of Seth, and the inheriting by the Jewish nation of its other enemies,
these being Edom and Esau. What could be thus figuratively described by the
leaders (c) of Moab, but the destruction of the invisible rulers, I mean the
daemons whom the Moabites had of old considered gods? But others were not
mentioned, because of Israel's idolatry in the wilderness, when "the people were
initiated into the rites of Belphegor." (This daemon was honoured as a god by
Balak, King of Moab.)

As, therefore, Israel was conquered on this occasion by the invisible powers of
Moab, I mean by those regarded as gods by the Moabites (for they committed
idolatry and worshipped idols, as Scripture says, and were initiated into the
cult of Belphegor, a Moabitish daemon, and committed |152 adultery with the
women of Moab), Balaam in his prophecy appositely paints the picture of a
complete reversal and change in days to come: "A star shall rise out of Jacob,
and a man shall spring from Israel, and he shall crush the leaders of Moab." As
if he had said, more plainly, that the daemons of Moab who once triumphed over
Israel would suffer a crushing defeat on the birth of the subject (419) of the
prophecy, and that when these were crushed, the sons of Seth, Edom and Esau, and
the other nations, by whom, I think, are meant those that had long been the
slaves of daemonic error, would be converted from their superstition to the
service of Him that was foretold. For it says: "And Edom shall be an
inheritance, and Esau his enemy shall be an inheritance." So it says that those
who were once enemies of God and of Israel will become the inheritance of Him
that was prophesied. For He it was to Whom it was said by God and His Father:
"Desire of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance." And
while they enter into the inheritance of the (b) saints, the reverse is
prophesied for Israel—for it says: "Israel hath wrought in strength." And it
wrought in strength the worst sin of all; wherefore He will be aroused by them,
and will drive them out. Who is this but the Word of God that was foretold, Who
also "destroyed him that was saved from the city"? And I think that this refers
figuratively to Jerusalem, in which all that were saved perished, or perhaps to
the whole constitution of the Jewish nation. I need not describe at greater
length (c) how this was fulfilled, how, when our Saviour shone forth on mankind,
the nations that before were idolaters were converted and became His portion, at
the same time that the Jewish nation and their mother-city underwent unexampled
sufferings. Thus, I will conclude what I have to say of the agreement of
prophetic prediction with Gospel fulfilment. Let us now learn the reason why the
star appeared. Now Moses says, that all the stars were set in the firmament by
God "for signs and for seasons." But this was a strange and unusual star, not
(d) one of the many known stars, but being new and fresh by its appearance here
it portended a new luminary that should shine on all the Universe, the Christ of
God, a great and a new Star, whose likeness the star that appeared |153 to the
wise men symbolically shewed. For since in all the holy and inspired Scriptures
the leading object of the meaning is to give mystic and divine instruction,
while preserving as well the obvious meaning in its own sphere of historical
facts, so the prediction before us was properly and literally fulfilled in the
matter of the star that was prophesied to appear at our Saviour's Birth.1 In the
case of other remarkable and famous men we (420) know that strange stars have
appeared, what some call comets, or meteors, or tails of fire, or similar
phenomena that are seen in connection with great unusual events. But what event
could be greater or more important for the whole Universe than the spiritual
light coming to all (b) men through the Saviour's Advent, bringing to human
souls the gift of holiness and true knowledge of God? Wherefore the herald star
gave the great sign, telling in symbol that the Christ of God would shine as a
great new light on all the world. And the prophecy foretells a man as well as a
star, for it says: "A star shall rise out of Jacob, and a man shall spring from
Israel," naming first the heavenly light, the Word of God, and next the
Humanity. And He is called, as I have shewn in my former books, in other places
by the varying names of Rising, Light, and Sun of (c) Righteousness. And here,
by applying to Him the verb from "Rising," "a star shall rise out of Jacob," it
shews His Diviner aspect, as "giving light to every man that cometh into the
world"; while it shews the Humanity, by the suffering that comes to Him, where
it foretells that He will fall to rise again, in words like what Isaiah says of
Him: "And there shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to rule the
Gentiles; in Him shall the Gentiles |154 trust." And we see how true it is that
the light of our (d) Saviour, which rose from Jacob, that is from the Jews, has
shone on all nations but Jacob, from whence it came forth. And while this can be
found in many prophecies, which say as it were to Christ Himself: "Behold, I
have set thee for a light to the Gentiles, for a covenant of thy race," it is
especially obvious in the words of Balaam, when he says: "A man shall come from
his seed, and shall rule many nations." Whose seed but Israel's, as the context
shews? And thus our Saviour, the Word, as the prophecy foretold, ruling over the
nations threw down the invisible noxious powers which had governed them so long,
the spirits of evil, and the band of daemons, called figuratively here the
princes of Moab, Seth, Edom, and (421) Esau. The words: "I will point to him,
but not now, I bless him but he draws not near," which are obscure in the
Septuagint, are more clearly rendered by Aquila: "I shall see him, but not now;
I expect him, but he is not near." And Symmachus more plainly still says: "I see
him but not near." Balaam would speak thus of things revealed to him that would
be accomplished a very long time after (b) his own days. And so at the
conclusion of two thousand years after his prediction they were fulfilled in our
Saviour's Coming among men.

CHAPTER 2 From Isaiah.

How the Lord resting in the Sacred Body which He took from the Virgin will come
to Egypt, is both Literally and Figuratively foretold, and that all the
Superstition of the Heathen will be destroyed at His Advent.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xix. 1.]

I SUPPOSE that the reason why it is foretold that the Lord (d) would come to
Egypt is this: The Egyptians are said to have been the first to practise the
errors of polytheism |155 and the daemons, and to have introduced superstition
to the rest of mankind, and to have been concerned more than others with the
activities and meddling of the daemons. And Holy Scripture witnesses that they
were the enemies of God's people from the very beginning, for it is written that
their ancient king confessed that he did not know the Lord, when he said: "I do
not know the Lord, and I will not let Israel go." So, then, it is because
Scripture wishes to shew the great marvel of the divine power of Christ that it
foretells His going to Egypt, in (422) predicting that the Egyptians will
undergo an extraordinary conversion, when it goes on to say: "And the Egyptians
shall know the Lord, who before knew Him not, and shall pray to the Lord," and
so on. Above in the previous chapter Edom and Esau are called the inheritance of
the subject of the prophecy, these names being used for strangers to Israel.
Here it is predicted of Egypt and its people that they will not acknowledge
idols any more, (b) but the Lord revealed by the Jewish prophets. Now if we
cannot see this actually fulfilled before our eyes, we must not say that the
Lord's coming to Egypt has taken place; but if beyond all need of argument the
truth is shewn by facts, and reveals clearly to the most unobservant the
Egyptians rescued from hereditary superstition, and followers of the God of the
prophets who foretold that this would take place, serving Him only, and greeting
every (c) form of death for their duty to Him, to what else can we attribute it,
but to the Lord coming to Egypt, as the prophecy before us predicted?

It is, of course, possible that the prophecy from another point of view teaches
in a figurative and disguised way about the earthly universe, into which it
prophesies that the Lord will come on a light cloud, a figure of the Humanity
that He took of the Virgin and the Holy Spirit. And that the idols of Egypt to
be shaken, are the idols of (all) nations, while the vanquished Egyptians are
all those (d) who were of old distracted by idolatry. This may be so, yet when
our Lord in bodily form was carried into Egypt, when Joseph arose in obedience
to the oracle, and took Mary and the young Child, and went into Egypt, it is
probable that the evil daemons who dwelt there of old were greatly moved by His
unspeakable power and might; and |156 most of all when, through His teaching, so
many of Egypt's inhabitants afterwards rejected the errors of the daemons, and
even now profess to know the God of the Universe alone.

(423) That which immediately follows I will interpret when I have more leisure,
for it is figuratively expressed, and would need considerable labour.

CHAPTER 3 From Numbers.

It is foretold that Christ would come into Egypt, and would return from thence
again.

[Passage quoted, Num. xxiv. 3-9.]

THE oracle in the previously-quoted prophecy, in saying (d) that the Lord would
come into Egypt, foretold the journey of our Lord Jesus Christ, when He went
into Egypt with His parents. Here we have the prophecy of His return from Egypt
in its natural order, when He came back with His parents into the land of
Israel, in the words: "God led him out of Egypt." For our Lord and Saviour
Jesus, the Christ of God, was the only one of the seed of Israel and of the
Jewish race, Who has ruled over many nations, so that it is indisputable that He
is the fulfilment of the prophecy which says, literally, "that a man will come
from (424) the Jewish race, and rule over many nations." If He be not, let him
who will suggest some other famous man among the Hebrews, who has ruled over
many nations. But this he cannot do, for such a man never existed. But with
regard to our Saviour, truth itself will shout and cry aloud, even if we say
nothing, shewing plainly that His Divine Power through the human body He took of
the seed of Israel according to the flesh has ruled, yea, and even now will rule
many nations.

He it was, then, and none other, Whom the prophecy foretold, in Whose time the
kingdom of Gog should be exalted concurrently with the growth of Christ's power.
(b) It is said that by this figure the Hebrews disguised the |157 Roman Empire,
which grew concurrently with the teaching of Christ. And the Prophet Ezekiel
also mentions Gog, naming him Ruler of Ros, Mosoeh, and Thobel, probably
disguising the city of Rome under the name of Ros, because empire and power are
signified in Hebrew by that word; by Mosoeh, he meant Mysia and the (c) adjacent
nations, which are now subject to Rome; and by Thobel Josephus means Iberia,
saying that the Thobelian Iberians sprang from Thobel. He says that Gog, the
ruler of all of them, will be exalted at the coming of the Christ prophesied,
Whom God led out of Egypt, when, as Matthew records, Herod laid a plot against
Him when He was a Child, and Joseph informed by God took the young Child and His
mother, and afterwards returned into the land (d) of Israel. And Christ
possessed "the glory of an Unicorn," because in Him was pleased "to dwell all
the fullness of the Godhead," in the words of the Holy Apostle. And, therefore,
as accounting the God of the Universe and His Father to be His Horn, He was
called "Unicorn" also in other Scriptures. And He, the Word of God, defeated
with shafts of mind and spirit His enemy and opponent the devil, and all the
invisible and evil powers around Him with greater invincible might, and even now
rules over many nations whose gross fleshly instincts He fines down and makes
them fit to tread the narrow way of eternal life. (425) And moreover He too, the
Man who came from Israel, Who ruleth many nations, having lain down, "rested as
a lion," he says, plainly indicating the dispensation He had accepted, according
to which like a kingly and terrible wild beast He rested, for none were able to
remove His rule and His Kingdom, and all who blessed the Christ, glorifying the
greatness of their teaching by word and deed, received in return the blessing of
God, increasing and multiplying daily, according to the divine commandment,
"Increase and multiply and replenish the earth," which in them is fulfilled more
truly and divinely. While in contrast (b) to them, they who since their original
plot against Him |158 even until now curse Him in their synagogues, have drawn
down the curse of God on their heads from that day to this. Wherefore they do
not cease to behold the utter desolation and destruction of their kingdom and of
their Temple of old so venerable. And it is worth comparing with this prophecy
that of Jacob to Judah, which I have already shewn to be most clearly applicable
to our Saviour, and to recognize (c) the agreement of the two. For as we have
here, "A man shall come forth from his seed," i. e. Jacob's, so we had there,
"From a slip, my son, thou hast ascended," said by Jacob to the subject of the
prophecy. As we read too in this prophecy, "And he shall rule many nations," in
the other we have similarly, "And he (d) shall be the expectation of nations."
Again this one says, "He shall eat the Gentiles his enemies, and with his darts
he shall shoot his enemies," just as the other, "Thy hands shall be on the back
of thine enemies"; while, "The whelp of the lion of Judah," and, "Falling down
thou didst couch as a lion, and as a young lion who shall arouse thee? "in the
other prophecy are, I think, identical with the words in the one before us,
"Lying down he couched as a lion, and as a lion's whelp, who shall raise him up?
"I have set these passages side by side, so that the proof concerning our
Saviour may rest on a firmer foundation, established on the agreement "of the
mouth of two witnesses."

All therefore that I have deduced from the prediction (426) of Jacob would apply
to that of Balaam, because of the similarity of their sayings. And if it was
then established by a lengthy demonstration that the former were fulfilled in
our Saviour, it follows that this is also true of the latter. |159

CHAPTER 4 From Hosea.

Again concerns the Words, Out of Egypt have I Called My Son, and King Herod, and
the Destruction of the Kingdom of the Jews.

[Passages quoted, Hos. x. 14; xi. 1.]

FOLLOWING the Hebrew slavishly, Aquila translates, "Out (c) of Egypt have I
called my son." But I have noted the exact words, because Matthew quoted the
prophecy, when he recorded that Jesus was carried into Egypt, and returned
thence to the land of Israel. And if any one objects to the idea of our
Saviour's going into Egypt, let him know that He went for good reasons. For
neither was it fitting for (d) Him to restrain Herod from his self-chosen
wickedness, nor that our Saviour while still an infant should begin to shew His
Divine Power by working miracles before the time, which would have been the
case, if He had punished Herod miraculously for plotting against Him, and had
not submitted to go down to Egypt with His parents. For it was surely the note
of a better dispensation that He should wait till the fitting time to begin the
miracles of His Divinity, Whose whole life is known to have been gentle and
patient, ready to do good deeds and acts of kindly service, and not to defend
Himself from them that would not hear Him, even when "He was led as a Lamb to
the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers was dumb." Where then is the
(427) improbability that one like Him when a child should give way before
Herod's wickedness, Who we know when a man yielded and submitted to evil men,
hid Himself and shrank from the glory of His miraculous works? For He used to
bid those He had healed tell no one. And if any prefer to apply the prophecy to
the people, regarding it as spoken concerning the people of Israel, let him
consider the sequence of the argument, which implies that this will take place
after the saying addressed as to Jerusalem itself, "And destruction shall be
raised up in thy (b) |160 people, and all thy strong places shall depart." And
those things, it says, which such and such a king suffered in a war in which he
was involved, when they dashed the mother to the ground on her children, the
like will I do unto you because of your wickedness. He must mean by "you" them
that are called Israelites, who also were cast away with their king, by whom he
implies Herod. "And you have suffered all this," it says, "because Israel is a
child, (c) and I loved him, and out of Egypt have I called my son." But how can
he praise and blame the same people at the same time? The real meaning supplies
the explanation. The Christ is called "Israel," in other prophecies, as He is in
this. Since then, it says, being obedient to Me, He took the form of a servant,
and became My beloved Son, fulfilling all My will, therefore I called Him back
as My (d) true and beloved Son from the Egypt whither He descended when He
became man, meaning by Egypt this earthly sphere, or possibly Egypt itself. But
you, to whom the prophecy is spoken, shall suffer ruin and destruction, together
with your king. Such is the prophecy. And we can see that from our Saviour's
time by the siege of Jerusalem the independence and national power of the Jewish
race that existed up till then was destroyed and utterly cast away. This is the
third prophecy concerning Egypt, and His sojourn there. But if any one say that
it does not apply to our Saviour, yet let him not deny that the words quoted by
Matthew were taken by him from the witness of Moses, which I have lately
expounded, when explaining the words, '' God led (428) him out of Egypt," and as
the evangelist himself never says that the oracle was quoted from the prophecy
of Hosea, he can seek for it and find it laid up in any place, whence it is
probable that the evangelist quoted it. |161

CHAPTER 5 From Isaiah. Of the Preaching of John in the Wilderness.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xl. 3.]

THIS prophecy too was necessarily to be fulfilled in the (c) times of our
Saviour. And according to the Evangelist Luke, in the fifteenth year of Tiberius
Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judaea, and those numbered with him,
the Word of God came to John, the son of Zachariah, in the wilderness, "And he
went into all the country around Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for
the remission of sins." To this the evangelist adds the witness, saying, "As it
is written in the books of the words of Isaiah the prophet, 'The Voice of One
crying in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord,'" and that which follows.
What then did John's voice shout in its preaching in the (d) wilderness, but an
invitation to the crowds that came out to be baptized by him, as to reptiles of
the wilderness, akin to his "generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee
from the wrath to come? "And he changed too the crooked souls into straight, and
the rough roads into smooth by saying to them, "Bring forth therefore fruits
meet for repentance." And this was fulfilled when John had prepared them to
behold the glory of the Lord, and what is called "the salvation of our God,"
which is the Christ, as he bore witness, saying:

"I indeed baptize you with water, but there cometh (429) one after me that is
mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with
the Holy Ghost and with fire."

Who also seeing Jesus coming cried:

"Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world: This is he of
whom I spake, a man cometh after me, who was before me."

And Symeon also bare witness that the same Jesus was "the salvation of God," who
took Him in his arms when He was still an infant, and said:

"Now thou art letting thy servant, O Lord, depart in peace, according to thy
word: For mine eyes have seen |162 thy salvation, which thou hast prepared
before the face (b) of all people, a light to lighten the Gentiles."

With which the prophet agrees, saying, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of
God." For "all flesh" stands for "all the nations." And I need not say this was
fulfilled, and that all nations knew the Christ of God. Such was the literal
fulfilment of the prophecy.

(c) But why did John go forth to preach in the wilderness, and not in cities, or
in Jerusalem itself? It might be answered that he did so in fulfilment of the
prophecy. But a critical questioner will at once inquire, what this prophecy
meant to teach when it spoke of the wilderness and the things to do with it. And
I should reply to him that it is a symbol of the destruction of Jerusalem, and
the Altar there, and of the Mosaic worship, because the forgiveness of sins was
no longer extended to them by the legal (d) sacrifices, but by the cleansing and
washing delivered to her that was before thirsty and deserted; I mean the
Gentile Church, in which also the prophetic voice bids to prepare the way of the
Lord, foretelling that the souls which are lying deep in sin as in a valley will
be raised up, and that the old heights of Jerusalem, and of her rulers and
kings, called "mountains and hills," shall be laid low, which being completed,
he says, "All flesh shall see the salvation of God," meaning every soul united
with a body, both Greek and Barbarian, of every nation without exception, and
this is seen to have been fulfilled according to the prophecy.

(430) Now let me ask myself what it was in John that struck the multitude with
fear, so that they marvelled at him and put trust in his baptism of repentance,
and all from every side left their homes, and flowed in one stream into the
wilderness, having regard to the fact that the records give no account of
anything he did; for we are not told that he raised the dead, or worked other
miracles.

What then was it that struck the multitude? Surely it was his manner of life so
strange and different to that of the people; for he came forth from the desert
clad in a strange (b) garment, refusing all social human intercourse, he went
not into village or city or the human haunts of men, he did not even share their
common food; for it is written that from childhood he was in the deserts, until
the day of his shewing |163 forth, to Israel, yes, and his raiment was made of
camels' hair, and his food locusts and wild honey.

How, then, should they not have been naturally alarmed, when they saw a man,
with the hair of a Nazarite of God, (c) and a divine face, suddenly appearing
from the lonely wilderness clothed in a strange kind of dress, and after
preaching to them going back again into the wilderness, without eating or
drinking or mingling with the people, and must they not have suspected that he
was more than human? For how could a man not need food? And so they understood
him to be an angel, the very angel foretold by the prophet, in the words,
"Behold, I send my angel before (d) thy face, who shall prepare thy way before
thee," a passage of Scripture which is quoted by the Evangelist Mark. And the
Saviour also bears witness in the words, "John came neither eating nor drinking,
and you say, He hath a devil." For it was just as natural that unbelievers, with
minds hardened and shut against the truth, should thus blaspheme John because of
his living as he did, as that those who were in accord with his noble character
should reckon him an angel. Such, then, I understand to be the reasons why John
was a marvel to those who saw him; and therefore they hastened from all sides to
the cleansing of the soul, of which he preached.

Josephus, too, records his story in the Eighteenth Book (431) of the Jewish
Archeology, writing as follows:

"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army 1 came from
God, and that very justly as a punishment of what he did against John, that was
called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the
Jews to exercise righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and
so to come to baptism. For so the washing would be (b) acceptable to Him."2 |164

CHAPTER 6 From the same.

Still concerning the Wilderness, and the River called Jordan, by which John
baptized.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xxxv. 3-6.]

THIS, too, was fulfilled, was clearly fulfilled, by our Saviour's miraculous
works after John's preaching. Notice therefore how He bears good tidings to the
desert, not generally, or to any desert, but to one particular desert by the
bank of Jordan. This was because John lived there and baptized there, as
Scripture says:

"John was in the desert baptizing, and there went out unto him all the land of
Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem, and were baptized of him in Jordan."

I think the desert here is a symbol of that which of old was void of all God's
good things, I mean the Church of the (432) Gentiles, and the river by the
desert that cleanses all that are bathed therein is a figure of some cleansing
spiritual power, of which the Scriptures speak, saying, "The movements of the
river make glad the city of God." And this means the ever-flowing stream of the
Holy Spirit welling from above and watering the city of God, which is the (b)
name for life according to God. This river of God, then, has reached even unto
the desert, that is the Gentile Church, and even now supplies it with the living
water that it bears.

Moreover, it is said in this prophecy that the glory of Lebanon and the honour
of Carmel shall be given to this wilderness. What is the glory of Lebanon, but
the worship performed through the sacrifices of the Mosaic Law, which God
refused in the prophecy which says, "Why do you bring me Libanus from Saba? And
of what service to me is the multitude of your sacrifices?" He has transferred
(c) the glory of Jerusalem to the desert of Jordan, since, from the times of
John, the ritual of holiness began to be performed not at Jerusalem but in the
desert. In like manner, too, the honour of the Law and of its more external
ordinances, was transferred to the wilderness of Jordan for the same reason,
viz. that they who need the healing of their |165 souls no longer hastened to
Jerusalem but to that which was called the wilderness, because there the
forgiveness of (d) sins was preached. And I think our Saviour's own Presence at
the Baptism is meant by, "And my people shall see the glory of the Lord, and the
majesty of God." For then it was that the glory of our Saviour was seen, when:

"Being baptized he went up from the water, and the heavens were opened to him,
and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and staying upon him.":

When also there was heard "A voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved son,
in whom I am well-pleased." Yea, and every one that rightly approaches the
Sacrament of Baptism, and accepts the teaching of Christ's Divinity, shall see
His glory, and shall say with Paul, "Even we have known Christ after the flesh,
yet now we know him not."

CHAPTER 7 From Psalm xc. (433) Of the Temptation of Our Lord After His Baptism.

[Passage quoted, Ps. xc. 1-13.]

Our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ, so far as He is (d) regarded as Man, is
said "to dwell under the succour of the Most High, and to rest under the shelter
of his God and Father." We know that, by making His Father His only refuge in
the time of His Temptation by the devil, He was saved from the nets of the
powers opposed to Him, here called "hunters," when, like an ordinary human
being, He was driven into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil, and was in
the wilderness forty days and forty nights tempted of Satan, and was, as the
evangelist tells us, "with the wild beasts." These were the same, as those this
Psalm mentions, when it says to Him that dwells under the |166 protection of the
Most High, "Thou shalt go upon the asp and the basilisk, and shalt trample on
the lion and dragon." And it not only says that He shall be saved from them, but
(434) from "the troubling word" also. What can this mean, but the words which
according to the Holy Gospel were directed against Him by the tempter?

It is worth our consideration why our Saviour, being what He was, should undergo
temptation. He came to expel from man every disease and sickness, and the
spirits that hampered him, and the unclean daemons which had ruled all men on
earth from immemorial time by means of polytheistic superstition. He did not
attack them secretly as one who hides himself, but He marched against their
leaders who (b) surrounded Him and were before invisible, in the Humanity that
He had assumed, He charged into the midst of the devil and his array of daemons,
trod upon asp and basilisk, trampled on lion and dragon, and destroyed the
thousands and ten thousands of enemies that had ruled so long, some fighting on
His right hand, some on His left, rulers and powers, and those too who are
called "World-rulers of this darkness," and spiritual powers of (c) evil; He
proved thus, that they were quite powerless, and finally frightened away, far
from Him, with the word of His mouth the devil himself, their instigator to
evil. He went through and trampled on every power opposed to Him, He offered
Himself as a target to those who wished to attack and tempt Him, and as none
were able to resist Him, He won salvation for mankind. Wherefore, when the (d)
daemons saw Him, they recognized Him, because of the aforesaid sojourn in the
wilderness, and said to Him, "What have we to do with thee, Jesus, Son of God?
"Let this suffice on this matter. What follows in the Psalm is an address to the
Christ, beginning at—

"With his shoulders he [that is the highest] shall overshadow thee, and under
his wings shalt thou hope, and his truth shall surround thee with a shield."

And whereas His Temptation lasted forty days, and as many nights, it is said of
those that attacked Him by night, "Thou shalt not fear the terror by night"; and
of those |167 that warred against Him by day, "From the arrow that flieth by
day." And also of the foe of night, "From the thing that vvalketh in darkness,"
and of those of daytime, "From the attack and the demon of mid-day." Then, as in
(435) the Temptation, the evil powers encircled Him, some on His right side, and
some on His left; the right being the stronger side, it is naturally said to
Him, "A thousand shall fall at Thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand, but
they shall not come near Thee." "At thy side" is used for "on thy left hand," in
order, perhaps, not to utter the word "left," because nothing ill omened or
left-handed was found in Him. And since a myriad and a thousand are (b) said to
fall at His side and on His right hand, the next sentence comes naturally, "Yea,
with thine eyes shalt thou behold, and see the reward of sinners." And this
shall take place, it says, "About thee, the Christ of God," for, "Thou Thyself O
Lord, who art my hope, hast made the Highest thy refuge." Here, too, you will
observe how the prophet, in saying to the Lord Himself, "Thou, Lord, art my
hope, thou hast made the Highest Thy refuge," discriminates carefully between
One who is Lord in a special sense, and His Father, God Most High. And,
therefore, as Christ (c) has made His Father, God Most High, His refuge, it is
said to Him:

" Evil shall not attack thee, and no scourge shall approach thy dwelling, for he
shall charge his angels concerning thee, to keep thee in all thy ways: They
shall bear thee in their hands, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a
stone."

And note, carefully, how in, "For thou, Lord, art my hope, Thou hast made the
Highest thy refuge," the equivalent for "Lord" in Hebrew is the Tetragram, which
the sons of the Hebrews say must not be spoken and reserve for God alone; but I
have previously shewn that it is also used for (d) the Godhead of the Word in
many places of Scripture, as in this Psalm which says, as speaking to the person
of the Lord Himself, "For Thou, Lord, art my hope, thou hast set the Most High
for thy refuge "; as much as to say:

"For thou thyself, O Lord, who art the hope of me that utter this prophecy,
knowest a greater than thyself, God Most High, and thou hast made Him thy
refuge."

So in the opening of the Psalm it was said of Him: |168

(436) "He that dwelleth under the protection of the Most High, shall abide under
the shadow of the Almighty. He shall say to the Lord, Thou art my helper and my
refuge, my God, my Succour, and I will trust on him."

"Since then, thou, O Lord, hast made the Most High thy refuge."

the Psalmist therefore says:

"He shall save thee from the snares of the hunters, and from the troubling word
and with his shoulders he shall overshadow thee. Therefore, having such fatherly
succour from the Highest, Thou shalt not fear the terror by night, nor any of
the evils that are mentioned before, (b) or added after. For thou, O Lord, hast
made the highest thy refuge, therefore evil shall not attack thee, and no
scourge shall come nigh thy dwelling."

You will find the activities of the daemons, also called scourges, in the
Gospels, which the Psalmist says are incapable of daring to approach Christ's
dwelling, that is His Body. How could they, when He could drive them out of men
by a mere word? Of this dwelling, David also once sware an oath to the Lord, and
prayed to the God of Jacob, saying:

(c) "I will not climb up into my bed, I will not suffer mine eyes to sleep, or
my eyelids to slumber, nor the temples of my head to take any rest, until I find
out a place for the Lord, an habitation for the God of Jacob."

And it was on account of this tabernacle that it was said:

"Thou shalt not fear any terror by night, and He shall save thee from the snares
of the hunters, and from the troubling word, and evils shall not attack thee,
and a scourge shall not come nigh thy dwelling."

And other things that regard Him more from the side of His Humanity, such as:

"He shall charge his angels concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear
thee, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone."

For such words would not apply to God, but only to the tabernacle, which He
assumed for our sake, when the Word became flesh and tabernacled amongst us.
Here I think it will be well to quote the words of the other translators, to put
what I have said on an exact foundation. Of whom, Aquila said: |169

"For thou, Lord, my hope, hast set thy dwelling (437) very high. Evils shall not
affect thee, and no touch shall come near to thy shelter: for he gave command to
his angels to guard thee in all thy ways.''

And Symmachus has:

"Thou, Lord, art my security, thou hast set thy dwelling very high. Evil shall
have no power over thee, and no touch shall draw near thy tent. For he gave
charge to his angels concerning thee to keep thee in all thy ways."

The Lord, then, is here addressed about some one greater than Himself, Who

"has charged his angels concerning thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. In their
hands they shall bear thee (i.e., The Lord) lest at any time thou, O Lord, dash
thy foot against a stone."

And the devil used these words in his Temptation of our (b) Saviour, when he
took Him into the holy city, and set Him upon the wing of the Temple and said to
Him:

"If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down hence, for it is written, he shall
give his angels charge over thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up,
lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone,"

To whom the Lord answered and said:

"It is written, Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God."

Then, though the evangelist tells that, during the Temptation, He was with the
wild beasts, we are not told what they were, but the prophecy in the Psalm tells
us more clearly in a disguised way the kinds of beasts, viz.: "Thou shalt (c)
step on the asp and the basilisk, and shalt trample on the lion and dragon." It
is thus said that he will trample on the kingliest of the wild beasts of the
spirit, the lion and dragon, as well as the asp and the basilisk, that is to
say, the devil himself, and the ruling evil powers that follow him. And He
bestows the power on His disciples and apostles who possess goodness like His
own of walking upon serpents and scorpions, not allowing them to be tempted
above that (d) they are able; for it was for Him alone to destroy the most evil
powers, and the chief of them all, the prince of this world, by His Divine
Power. |170

CHAPTER 8 From Isaiah. Of Galilee of the Gentiles, where our Saviour worked most
of His Miracles, and of the Call of His Apostles.

(438) [Passage quoted, Isa. ix. 1-6.]

(c) THIS also was fulfilled in our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ besides all the
other prophecies, when according to the wondrous Evangelist—

(439) [Passage quoted, Matt. iv. 12-25.]

I have quoted this passage in its entirety, because the (b) prophecy promised
that there would be a great light in Galilee, or in the land of Zabulon and
Nephthalim, which are the same as Galilee. Now why did He pass most of His life
in Galilee of the Gentiles? Surely that He might make a beginning of the calling
of the Gentiles, for He called His disciples from thence. Wherefore, shortly
after, in the same Gospel you will find that Matthew was called from Galilee,
and in another Gospel, Levi also. And Philip, according to John, came from
Bethsaida, the city of Andrew (c) and Peter, which was in Galilee. The marriage
too, in the same Gospel, was in Cana of Galilee, when the Lord miraculously
transformed the water into wine. "There he made a beginning of signs, when also
he manifested his glory, and his disciples believed on him." Consider whether
this first miracle of our Saviour that took place in Cana of Galilee, of the
transformation of the water into wine, is not foretold in the beginning of this
prophecy, where it says: "Drink this first. Act quickly, land of Zabulon and (d)
Nephthalim, Galilee of the Gentiles." And if this miracle were a sign of the
mystic wine, that wine of the faith of the new Covenant that is transformed from
bodily joy to a joy of mind and spirit, consider whether this too was not
suggested in what follows about Galilee, in the prophecy that the inhabitants of
Zabulon and Nephthalim would be the first to come into the presence of Christ,
to partake of the draught of Gospel preaching. It says, too, that the spring of
their joy will be the shining of a great light, for them who before His Coming
sat continually in darkness and the shadow of |171 death. But that when the
light of salvation has sprung up, they will rejoice as men rejoice in harvest,
and as they who (440) divide the spoils. And this was actually fulfilled, when
our Lord and Saviour, calling His Apostles from Galilee, shewed forth to them
His miracles and His teaching. The prophecy says that they will rejoice before
Him, "as men rejoice in harvest." In what harvest, 1 ask, but that of which He
spake in His teaching, "Lift up your eyes and behold the lands, that they are
already white unto harvest"? By this He meant the gathering in of the Gentiles:
of whom it is also said, "They shall rejoice, as they who divide the spoils."
(b) Therefore the disciples and evangelists of our Saviour, dividing between
them the lands of the nations, and all the earth under heaven, despoiled the
countless princes of this world, who were before rulers of the nations. And we
should also recognize that He says there will be another reason for their joy,
viz.: their relief from the external yoke of the law, that of old was laid on
them, which neither they nor their fathers were able to bear. And not only was
this (c) yoke removed from them, but the rod of the exactors which before
pressed on their neck. He shews who the exactors are in another passage, where
He says: "My people, your factors take your corn, and the exactors rule over
you." But these men of Zabulon and Nephthalim will rejoice having seen the great
light for these reasons, and they who exacted of them of old will be required to
repay even to the last farthing, and repaying every garment and vestment they
will be burned with fire in the day of retribution. And all this, (d) He says,
they will suffer, because "Unto us a child is born, a son is given to us, the
Angel of Great Counsel.'' Who are meant by "us," but we who have believed in
Him, and all Galilee of the Gentiles, on whom the great light is sprung up? And
what is this light but the Child that was born, and the Son that was given us by
God, Who is named the Angel of Great Counsel, and the Prince of Peace, the
Potentate, the Mighty God, and the Father of the world to come? But I have
already shewn in its right place that these words can only be referred to our
Lord and Saviour. |172

CHAPTER 9 From Psalm lxvii. Of the Calling of the Apostles. (441)

[Passage quoted, Ps. Ixvii. 24-27.]

I THINK that here none but the Apostles can be meant by the rulers of Nephthali.
For thence our Lord and Saviour called them according to the quotation from
Matthew. The Scripture is prophesying the Coming of the Word of God to men, and
His Incarnate sojourn here, (c) when it says, "Thy goings, O God, have been
seen," and that which follows. And the prophets of old were like heralds of His
Epiphany, and arrived before Him with proclamation and chant, with music of
psaltery and choir and all kinds of spiritual instruments, in the midst of
damsels playing on timbrels." For the inspired prophets going in every way into
the midst of the Jewish synagogues, heralded the coming of the Christ, and by
the Holy Spirit (d) addressed the Apostles of our Saviour saying, "Praise the
Lord God in the congregations from the fountains of Israel." And the "fountains
of Israel" must be the words delivered to Israel. "For they first trusted the
oracles of God," whence it will be necessary for us to draw and water the
churches of Christ. By "maidens playing on timbrels" he suggested the souls that
lived of old by the more external Law of Moses, calling them "maidens" because
of their youth and imperfectly developed minds, and "timbrel-players "because of
their devotion to external worship.

(442) CHAPTER 10 From Isaiah. Of the Reading from the Prophecy by Our Lord in
the Jewish Synagogue.

[Passage quoted, Isa. lxi. 1.]

Now this prediction our Lord Himself claims to be fulfilled in Himself, when He
came to Nazareth, where He was brought up: |173

"He entered, as his custom was on the Sabbath day, into the synagogue, and stood
up to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And
when he had opened the book he found the place where it was written, The Spirit
of the Lord is upon (c) me, because he hath anointed me, to preach the gospel to
the poor: he hath sent me to proclaim deliverance to the captives, and giving of
sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to proclaim the
acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the
minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were
fastened upon him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this Scripture
fulfilled in your ears."

Our Lord and Saviour is clearly shewn in this passage to (d) have been anointed
with another and a better unction than the priests of old days, who were
externally anointed, not with oil manufactured, nor by men, as were those
others, but with the Divine Spirit of His God and Father, whereby as sharing in
His unbegotten Godhead He is called God and Lord by the Holy Scriptures. And in
harmony with the prophecy before us He is introduced by Matthew preaching the
Gospel to the poor when—

"Seeing the multitudes he went up into a mountain, and when he had sat down, his
disciples came unto him, and he opened his mouth and taught them, saying,
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

And it is recorded that He gave sight to many that were (443) blind, not only
enlightening them that were deprived of bodily vision, but also causing them
that were before blind in soul to receive spiritual vision and the knowledge of
God. And, moreover, He preached freedom and release from their bonds to the
prisoners bound and constrained by the unseen daemonic powers, and hampered by
the chains of sin, if they, too, would believe His preaching, and run to Him as
their Ransom and Saviour, and trust His promises. The remainder of this oracle I
will expound in its place (b) in the section concerning the promises.3 |174

CHAPTER 11 From Deuteronomy.

(c) Of the Lawgiving according to the Gospel of Christ.

[Passage quoted, Deut. xviii. 15-19.]

IT must be noticed that no prophet like Moses has ever arisen among the Hebrews,
who was a lawgiver and a teacher of religion to men, except our Saviour, the
Christ of God. Therefore at the end of Deuteronomy it is said: "There has not
arisen a prophet in Israel like unto Moses," though, of course, many prophets
succeeded him, but none were like him. And the promise of God recognizes the
whole future, that one only, and not many, should arise and be like him. And it
implies that he will be a lawgiver and a teacher of religion to men, such as
none but our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has been proved to be, being lawgiver
and prophet of the God of the Universe (444) His Father at the same time. But
Moses was leader of but one nation, and his legislation has been proved to be
only applicable to that one nation; whereas the Christ of God, receiving the
promise from His Father, "Desire of me, and I will give thee the nations for
thine inheritance," as being established by His (b) Father the Giver of the new
law of holiness not to the Jews only, but to the whole human race, in calling
all nations set before them a legislation that they could obey and that suited
them. Thus by a diviner power than that of Moses He ordained through all the
world His holy laws by His evangelists, legislating with more than human
authority, saying, "Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou
shalt not kill: but I say unto you that ye must not be angry without a cause,"
and that which follows this saying, as it is preserved in His written teaching,
with regard to which the Evangelist says, "They were astonished at his teaching,
for he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes." As I have
treated of the manner of our Saviour's teaching and legislation in the beginning
of this work, when I |175 explained what Christianity is, I will now refer my
readers to that exposition. But it is worthy of notice why the Lord promises
that a prophet shall arise. For when He had commanded Moses to sanctify the
whole people for three days, that they might see and hear His Divine Appearing,
and they were too weak for the favour of God: wherefore when they were at the
beginning of the vision they refused and said to Moses: "Speak thou to us, and
let not God speak to us, that we die not," and the Lord, as was meet, was
pleased by their caution, and says, "They have rightly spoken all that they have
spoken. A prophet will I raise up to them from the midst of their brethren, like
unto thee." Then it was that He gave the reason of His own future Coming to men
like a prophet. It was man's weakness, and his refusal of the greater vision of
the greater. You see, too, the reason why the prophet that was foretold should
become Incarnate. And so it was natural for the Jews, who expected Him, to
inquire of John the Baptist, and say, "Art thou the prophet? and he said, No."
And John spoke the truth, he did not deny that he was a prophet, for he was, but
he denied that he was the prophet meant by Moses, because he taught that he was
sent before that prophet. And since the Word predicted that the prophet would be
raised up for them of the Circumcision, our Lord and Saviour, being Himself the
One foretold, rightly said:

"I am not come but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." "And He commanded
His apostles saying, Go not into the road of the Gentiles, and into any city of
the Samaritans enter ye not, but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel";

shewing clearly that He was primarily sent to them as the prophecy required. But
when they would not receive His grace, He reproves them elsewhere, saying, "For
I came, and there was no man, I called and there was none that heard." And He
says to them, "The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be
given to a nation bearing the fruits of it." And He bids His own disciples after
their rejection, "Go ye and make disciples of all nations in my name.'' So,
then, we that are the |176 Gentiles know and receive the prophet that was
foretold, and sent by His Father, as being Lawgiver to all men of the religion
of the God of the Universe, through His saving Gospel teaching, that other
prediction being fulfilled at the same time which says, "Set, Lord, a Lawgiver
over them, let the Gentiles know themselves to be men," while the Jewish nation,
not receiving Him that was foretold, has paid the fit penalty according to the
divine prediction which said, "And the man who will not hear all things
whatsoever the prophet shall speak in My Name, I will exact vengeance on him."
Surely He has avenged on that people all the blood poured out on the earth, from
the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, yea, even to crown all to the
Christ Himself, Whose blood they called down not only on themselves but on their
children, and even now they pay the penalty of their presumptuous sin.

(446) CHAPTER 12 From Job. Of Christ walking on the Sea.

[Passage quoted, Job ix. 7.]

(b) THESE words also can only apply to our Lord and Saviour, as the Creator of
the Universe, God's Word. For He is the only One ever said to have walked on the
sea, which He did when Incarnate, having taken the body and form of man, when
He—

"22. constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the
other side, while he sent the multitudes away. 23. And when he had sent the
multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening
was come he was there alone. 24. But the ship was now in the midst of the (c)
sea. ... 26. And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea they were
troubled, saying, It is a spirit; |177 and they cried out for fear. 27. But
straightway he spake unto them saying, Be of good cheer: It is I; be not
afraid."

Now it would not appear to agree with orthodox theology to understand the oracle
as referring to God Most High and the Father of the Universe. For what reverence
or propriety is there in talking of the God of the Universe walking on the sea?
How could He be thought to walk on the sea Who includes all things, and fills
heaven and earth, and says, "The heaven is my throne and the earth my
footstool?" And "I fill heaven and earth, saith the Lord?" But our Lord and
Saviour "emptied himself and took the form of a slave, and being found in
fashion as a man," offering a proof to His disciples of His Divine Power which
eluded the multitude, is described as having walked on the waves of the sea, and
to have rebuked the storm and the winds, when they who saw Him were astonished
and said, "What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him?
"And this was a symbol of something greater, that other spiritual sea, in which
a dragon is said to have been made to be mocked by the angels of God, on which
also our Lord and Saviour walked and is said to have crushed the head of the
dragon (447) therein and of the other subject dragons, according to the words,
"Thou hast bruised the heads of the dragons in the water, and thou hast bruised
the heads of the dragon": clearly of another spiritual sea of which He says
again in the Psalms, "I went into the depths of the sea." And recounting to Job
the things concerning himself:

" Hast thou gone to the spring of the sea, and hast thou walked in the steps of
the depth? The gates of (b) death did they open to thee in fear, and did the
porters of Hades fear when they saw thee?"

Thus when He walked on the sea in our human life, and rebuked the winds and the
waves, He performed a natural symbolism of something unspeakable. |178

CHAPTER 13 From Isaiah. Of the Miracles He Performed.

[Passage quoted, Isa. xxxv. 3.]

Now we have this prophecy fulfilled in the Gospels, partly, when they brought to
our Lord and Saviour a paralytic lying on a bed, whom He made whole with a word;
and partly, when many that were blind and possessed with (d) daemons, yea,
labouring under various diseases and weaknesses, were released from their
sufferings by His saving power. Nor should we forget how even now throughout the
whole world multitudes bound by all forms of evil, full of ignorance of Almighty
God in their souls, are healed and cured miraculously and beyond all argument by
the medicine of His teaching. Except that now we call Him God as we should, as
One Who can work thus, as I have already shewn in the evidence of His Divinity.
Yea, surely (448) it is right now to acknowledge Him to be God, since He has
given proof of power divine and truly inspired. For it was specifically God's
work to give strength to the paralysed, to give life to the dead, to supply
health to the sick, to open the eyes of the blind, to restore the lame, and to
make the tongue-tied speak plain, all of which things were done by our Saviour
Jesus Christ, because He was God, and they have been witnessed to by many
throughout (b) all the world that preach Him—whose evidence unvarnished and
veritable is confirmed by trial of torture, and by persistence even unto death,
which they have shewn forth before kings and rulers and all nations, witnessing
to the truth of what they preach. And I think that the spirit of prophecy
addresses to these apostles and evangelists the words that begin with, "Lift up
the hands that hang down, and the palsied knees." For when they had grown weary
(c) in their hands and powers of action, in their feet and walking with the long
circuit of Mosaic observance, He awaked them to the life of the Gospel, and
said, "Be strong, ye hands that hang down, and feeble knees," to |179 prepare
them, that is to say, for the Gospel race. And be strong, too, to encourage
others, and to urge them to cling to the salvation of the Gospel, ye that before
were low in spirit, and let not any fear take you of them that oppose the Gospel
preaching, but against them be strong and of a good courage. For it is God and
the Word of God, not one like Moses or the prophets, that was not only the
Worker of the Miracles, but is also the Cause of your own strength. And the
strongest confirmation of the Divine Power of the Saviour here foretold, by
which He really used to cure the lame, the blind, the lepers and the palsied
with a word according to that which is written concerning Him, is the power even
now energizing through the whole world from His Godhead, by which is shewn to
them that can see what He was while on earth, since after so many years His
proclamation of the Word of God is seen to last on invincible and true,
overcoming all that have attempted from the beginning until now to withstand His
teaching; He attracts to Himself great multitudes from all the world, and
releases them that come to Him from all kinds of evil and diseases and troubles
of the spirit; He summons to His holy school all races, Greek and Barbarian; He
leads countless hosts to the knowledge of the one true God, and to a healthy and
pure life, as befits those who promise to worship Almighty God. And He our God,
since He is the Word of God, it says, "Gives judgment and will give, He will
come and save us." For, according to the Psalm which says, "Give the King thy
judgment, O God," and, according to the Gospel teaching, in which it is said,
"The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son,"
having received the authority to judge from the Father, judging in
righteousness, He repays justly to the Jewish people the fit penalty for their
presumptuous treatment of Him and His prophets, and ever saves in justice as
well those who come to Him, whose spiritual ears and eyes He has opened.
Wherefore the divine word calls the time of His Appearance the time of
retribution, saying elsewhere, "Call on the acceptable year of the Lord, and the
day of retribution." This was the time of retribution in which all |180 the
blood poured out from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, yea, even to
the precious Blood of Jesus, was required of the generation of them that had
sinned against Him, so that from that time they underwent utter destruction and
their final siege. And the judgment declared against them wrought this
retribution; wherefore the prophecy says, "Behold our God exacts judgment, and
will repay." And the judgment on them that shall be saved by Him is foretold
next in the words, "He will come and save us; then the eyes of the blind shall
be opened, and the ears of the deaf hear," and that which follows. And another
prophecy also promises that the Christ will bring this saving (450) judgment,
saying:

"Behold my Son, I will succour him, my chosen, my Spirit hath accepted him, he
shall bear judgment to the nations."

Wherefore it is also said concerning the Word of the new covenant:

"For out of Zion shall come forth a law, and the word of the Lord from
Jerusalem, and he shall judge in the midst of the nations."

For there is little doubt that He effects the calling of them that turn to Him
with divine justice and ineffable counsels. And, moreover, as teaching us of the
divine judgment, and instructing us always to act as under judgment, He is said
"to bear judgment to the nations."

CHAPTER 11 From the same. Of the Signs and Wonders which He worked.

[Passage quoted, Isa. viii. 16-20 a.]

IN the Epistle to the Hebrews, the apostle, quoting the (d) above passage,
"Behold, I and the children which God has given me," expounds it of the Christ,
saying, "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, |181
he also himself took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him
that had the power of death." And here the prophet calls God's children the
Apostles, through whom he teaches that the Lord of Sabaoth, Who dwells in Mount
Zion, will do signs and wonders in the house of Jacob, and that they will be
manifest if sealed, as is our custom, with the seal of Christ on their
foreheads, and taught no more to learn the Law of Moses, since it stands no
longer, and since that which is called the house of Jacob is deserted by God.
This is rendered obscurely in the Septuagint:

"Then they shall be manifest who seal up the law, so (451) as not to learn. And
he will say, I await God, who turns his face away from the house of Jacob, and I
will trust in him."

Symmachus translates more clearly, thus:

"Bind the testimony, seal the law in my ordinances. And I will expect the Lord
that hides his face from the house of Jacob, and I will await him."

And Aquila also translates in this way:

"Bind up the witness, seal the law in my teachings. And I will expect God that
hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will await him."

This, then, the apostles of our Saviour are taught to do. (b) And He proceeds to
say to them:

"Behold, I and the children, which God has given me. And they shall be for signs
and wonders in Israel from the Lord of Sabaoth who dwells in Mount Sion."

And the Lord of Sabaoth, the Word of God dwelling in the Humanity He has taken,
and sojourning in Mount Zion, working signs and wonders, commands both His
disciples and all those that believe on Him, sprung from all those who before
were idolaters, to fear idolatrous error no longer: (c) therefore if idolaters
of the Gentiles would sap their foundations and induce them to inquire of
pythons and the daemon oracles, as if they were equal to the prophetic
inspiration of inspired and godly men, they ought to answer and say, "Wherefore
do they inquire of the dead concerning the living? For he has given a law for
succour," and the |182 rest of the passage. For they that have once taken the
law and the commandments of salvation for succour and help (d) in their
individual life have little need to trouble themselves about the prophecy that
springs from daemonic deceit.

CHAPTER 15 From the same.

Concerning Christs Reticence about His Miracles. (452)

[Passage quoted, Isa. xlii. 1-7.]

THE Evangelist alludes to this passage, when the Pharisees went out and took
counsel against our Saviour to put Him (c) to death, when He healed the sick on
the Sabbath day. But Jesus, knowing, as He says, this conspiracy against Him,
departed thence, and great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them all, and
He straitly charged them that they should not make Him known. And lie adds to
this the words, "All this was done" (that is to say His departure, and His
yielding to those that plotted, and His effort to escape notice in the miracles
that He did, and His pledging those that were healed not to make Him known), in
order that what was said by the prophet might be fulfilled, when He said:

"Behold, my son, in whom I am well pleased, my beloved in whom my soul
delighteth; I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall bear forth judgment to
the Gentiles; he shall not strive nor cry, neither shall his (d) voice be heard
in the streets. A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not
quench, until he bring forth judgment to victory, and on his name shall the
Gentiles trust."

Notice carefully how Matthew, when he says, "Behold my son, in whom I am well
pleased, my beloved in whom my soul delighteth," mentions neither Jacob nor
Israel. He does not say, "Jacob my son and Israel my beloved," but simply
"Behold, my son and my beloved." Hence the |183 names of Jacob and Israel are
obelized in the Septuagint, as if the prophecy were not in the Hebrew. And it is
silently omitted by the other translators, as it is not found in the Hebrew. And
thus it is not inserted by the Evangelist, (453) who was a Hebrew, and followed
the Hebrew text in his quotation. Therefore the prophecy does not apply either
actually or figuratively to the Jews, but only to the Christ of God, to Whom the
clear evidence and the results bear witness. For He alone prophesied the future
judgment to the Gentiles, quietly sojourning in human life, and setting judgment
on the earth. And not only did He not break the bruised (b) reed, but so to say
bound it up, setting up and strengthening the weak and the bruised in heart. And
just as He did not neglect the sick and corrupt, who needed His medicine, nor
bruise the repentant with hard judgment, so He did not quench them that
continued in evil, and were smoking under the fire of passion, by preventing
their following their own choice, nor did He punish any of (c) them before the
time, reserving the time of their due chastisement for the general Judgment:
therefore it is said, "And the smoking flax He shall not quench." The words,
"And in his name shall the Gentiles trust," have also been exactly fulfilled.
For the nations of Christians trust only in the Name of our Saviour Jesus
Christ, and are marked with His Name as that of the Father of the religion with
which they are associated. For it was foretold that He should be given for a
Light to none but the Gentiles. And by Him in accordance with the prediction,
the eyes of the blind—those that had long been impaired in understanding, and
not only of these but of (d) those who had lost their very bodies, and those who
before were involved, bound and chained in sin, in darkness and ignorance of
true religion, by Him freed from their sins— were accounted worthy of the light
of knowledge and of the freedom of God. And if you at your leisure test the rest
of the passage, as I have so far done, you will find each one of its predictions
fulfilled in our Lord and Saviour, and in Him alone. |184

CHAPTER 16 (454) From the same. Of the Disbelief of the Jewish People in Him.

[Passages quoted, Isa. vi. i; 8-10.]

THIS, too, is fulfilled in our Saviour, according to John, when he says:

"37. But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not
on him: 38. That the (c) saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which
he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the
Lord been revealed?" 39. Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias
said again, 40. He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they
should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be
converted, and I should heal them. 41. These things said Esaias, when he saw his
glory, and spake of him."

Or according to Matthew:

"10. And the disciples came and said to him, Why (d) speaketh thou unto them in
parables? 11. He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to
know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given ... 13.
Therefore speak I unto them in parables, because they seeing see not, and
hearing they hear not, neither do they understand . . . 15. lest they should be
converted, and I should heal them."

Then was fulfilled in them the prophecy of Isaiah which said, "Go and say to
this people, Hearing ye shall hear, and not understand," and that which follows.
Notice how S. John proceeds saying, "These things said Esaias, when he saw his
glory, and spake of him." As the prophet had seen the Christ and the glory of
Christ in the vision in (455) which he said, "I saw the Lord of Sabaoth sitting
upon a throne, high and lifted up," and that which follows. And who would not be
struck by the prophecy, seeing so clearly |185 even now the unbelief of the
Jews? Even so of old, when they saw Him Incarnate and working miracles among
them, they did not behold Him with the eyes of their soul and with understanding
vision, nor had they any vision of spiritual inspiration, so as to understand
what power it was that worked so wondrously and so prodigally among them. Yes,
they who were counted worthy to receive with (b) their eyes the words of eternal
life, and listened to the voice of divine wisdom, did not hear with the ears of
their understanding, and so made themselves an evident fulfilment of the
prophecy. And even until now, though the power of Christ, by which every race of
mankind, divorced from its ancestral superstition, is being led to the Christian
religion, is so obvious to them, yet they do not regard it with their
understanding, nor consider that what neither Moses nor his successors among the
prophets achieved has been brought to pass by these alone, namely, to give up
idolatry and pay no heed to polytheistic error, which has (c) been accomplished
among all nations by the power of our Saviour. And so when they read the witness
of the prophets concerning Him, they hear with their ears and do not understand,
and the prophecy before us is literally even now fulfilled against them.

CHAPTER 17 From Zechariah.

How it is foretold that He should ride into Jerusalem on a Colt.

[Passage quoted, Zech. ix. 9, 10]

As Zechariah prophesied thus after the Return from Babylon towards the
conclusion of prophecy, there is no record of a Jewish king, such as the
prophecy predicts, (456) except our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in Whom this
prediction was fulfilled, when He literally said to His disciples:

"Go ye into the village over against you, and ye shall find an ass tied and a
colt with her; loose them |186 (b) and bring them unto me. And if any man say,
What do ye? ye shall say to him, The Lord hath need of them. And they went and
did as he commanded them."

Such, then, was the prophecy and such the fulfilment. But what was His riding on
an ass meant to shew forth but the lowly and humble manner which marked His
first Coming? For the second Coming shall be glorious, that of which Daniel
speaks unfolding and revealing his vision:

"9. I saw until the thrones were set, and the Ancient (c) of Days did sit.
Thousand thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood
before him. 13. And, behold, one as a son of man coming with the clouds of
heaven. And he came even to the Ancient of Days, 14. and there was given to him
rule and honour and a kingdom, and all peoples, tribes, and tongues serve him.
His power is an everlasting power, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom
shall not be destroyed."

(d) But the first Coming of His Incarnation and humiliation has this great
symbol and sign among others, the prophecy that He should be called meek and
gentle, and that He should come sitting upon an ass. For this is a proof of His
sharing our humanity. Whereas the glory of His second divine Coming is shewn by
His being borne on the clouds of heaven, and His eternal rule over all nations.
And it is reasonable to quote them both to the Jews, and to ask them to explain
how they can save the credit of the prophecies, if they confine them to a
reference to a single Coming of Christ: for if they both refer to Christ, as
they agree, they are bound to tell us when we ask them, how it is possible for
the same person at the same coming to be (457) borne upon the clouds of heaven,
and also to ride on an ass and a young colt: for these two things are very
different. And if you collect the many similar prophecies concerning Christ, and
compare their differences side by side, you will decide that some of them refer
to His first Coming, being fulfilled at His first Epiphany, while others apply
to His second Coming in glory. For He utterly destroyed by His Divine Power the
chariots and horses and weapons of war at His first Coming from |187 the
material Jerusalem and the people of Ephraim: (b) where-fore from that day to
this their kingdom has never existed, nor their ancient powerful military array
or warlike power. And all the Jewish people are here well called Ephraim, not
Israel or Judah, so as not to bring into dishonour names of more dignity. And
you will find that other prophets call the whole people Ephraim, when charging
and accusing them of great crimes, as here. For after the return from (c)
Babylon, when the former division of the people had ceased, who are more likely
to be meant by Ephraim than the actual inhabitants of Jerusalem? And it was
their warlike and military power, that had lasted until Roman times, that our
Saviour's Coming destroyed with divine secret power, as the prophecy foretold.
The oracle also calls here on the Church of the Gentiles, not simply to rejoice,
But to rejoice greatly, in its message of good news, because of the coming of
the Word of God (d) to her; and it calls her the daughter of the heavenly Zion
and of the former congregation, because all we that are Gentiles, who believe in
Christ, are the offspring and children of Christ and His Apostles, as they whose
mother is the Jewish synagogue: and that which follows was also fulfilled at our
Saviour's Coming. For unexampled peace has filled all nations from the time of
His coming: no longer do states war with states as before, nor nations contend
with nations, nor is human life as of old in a state of constant disturbance;
Athenians do not attack (458) Lacedaemonians, Syrians Phoenicians, Arabians the
inhabitants of Palestine, nor the Egyptians their neighbours. All have been
united from that time by God's help, and it is true that there has been
"abundance of peace" among the nations from that day to this, according to the
prophecy. Jesus alone, and the word of Gospel teaching preached by Him, have
ruled men from sea to sea, from the east to the setting sun. and from the rivers
to the bounds of the earth, (b) as the prophecy foretold.

Aquila's rendering of this is as follows:

"He shall speak peace among the nations, and his power shall be from sea to sea,
and from the rivers to the ends of the earth." |188

Compare with this what occurs in the Psalm, inscribed "To Solomon, of the King's
Son," that is to say, of Him that will spring from Solomon's seed, of Whom the
Psalm (c) says, "And he shall rule from sea to sea, and from the rivers to the
ends of the world." And the same Psalm refers to the peace here described, when
it says, "In his days righteousness shall arise, and abundance of peace."
Isaiah, too, agrees with this when he says, "And they shall beat their swords
into ploughshares, and their lances into (d) pruning-hooks; nation shall not
take up sword against nation, and they shall not learn war any more." You will
find Micah in agreement with this, and many other prophets. And if you note, as
I said, the dates, you will be able to appreciate that from the time of
Augustus, and of the Epiphany of our Saviour that shone forth in his day, during
the period of the Roman Empire the old dissensions and varieties of national
government have ceased, and thus from that date the peace of the prophecy began.
Just as it then began, a day will come when the prophecy will be fulfilled in
all its fullness, when, as the apostle says, "the fullness of the Gentiles shall
come in."

(459)

CHAPTER 18 From Psalm cxvii. Of the Cry, Hosanna to the Son of David.

[Passage quoted, Ps. cxvii. 22-27.]

WHEN our Saviour Jesus Christ entered Jerusalem, riding on an ass according to
the previous prophecy, He fulfilled the prediction of Zechariah, for as the Holy
Evangelist tells us, the crowds that went before and followed Him cried, saying,
"Hosanna to the Son of David, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord,
Hosanna in the highest." (c) And when He entered Jerusalem, "All the city was
moved, saying, Who is this? And the multitudes said, This is the prophet Jesus,
from Nazareth of Galilee." As, therefore, Hosanna is said in the Psalm we are
considering, which is translated "Save us now," and the Hebrew has "Lord, save
|189 us," and the words, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord,"
are taken from the same Psalm, and these words can only refer to the Christ of
God, we naturally apply the rest of the prediction to Him. For He is blessed,
(d) Who is named by another prophet, "He that cometh," in the passage, "Yet a
little while, and he that cometh will come, and will not tarry," Who also came
in the Name of the Lord God His Father. And He is the Lord God that appeared for
us. For He insists that He has come in the Name of His Father when He says to
the Jews, "I have come in my Father's Name, and ye receive me not. If another
come in his own name, him ye will receive." He, then, that appeared for us, the
Lord God, the Blessed, He that cometh in the Name of the Lord, was also the
stone, (460) which they who of old built up the people on the foundation of the
Mosaic teaching, set at naught, and which, set at naught by them, is become the
head of the corner of the Church of the Gentiles, which the oracle says is
wonderful, not to all that look on it, but only to the eyes of prophets, when it
says, "And it is wonderful in our eyes." And it calls His Epiphany also "the day
which the Lord hath made," for He was the true Light, and the Sun of
Righteousness, and the Day of God, in which we may also (b) say, "This is the
day which the Lord hath made, we will rejoice and be glad in it."

Now that this part is thus concluded, I will proceed to consider the prophecies
concerning the Passion.

[A few of the footnotes have been renumbered and placed here] 1. 3 Cf.: Euseb.,
H.E. I. 11.

2. 4 Jos., Ant. XVIII. 5. 2.

3. 1 A section in one of the lost books. This text was transcribed by Roger
Pearse, 2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 52: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - INTRODUCTION
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) --
Introduction

INTRODUCTION § I. OBJECT AND OCCASION The Demonstratio Evangelica (Ευαγγελικης
Αποδειξεως δεκα λογοι) originally consisted of twenty books, of which only ten
remain. It was the concluding portion of the complete work, which included the
Praeparatio. At the beginning of the latter Eusebius stated his object to be "to
shew the nature of Christianity to those who know not what it means"1 the
purpose of its pages was to give an answer to all reasonable questions both from
Jewish or Greek inquirers about Christianity, and its relation to other
religions. Thus the Praeparatio was intended to be "a guide, by occupying the
place of elementary instruction and introduction, and suiting itself to our
recent converts from among the heathen."2 The Demonstratio, Eusebius promises in
the same passage, will go further. It will adapt itself "to those who have
passed beyond this, and are already in a state prepared for the reception of the
higher truths." It will "convey the exact knowledge of the most stringent proofs
of God's mysterious dispensation in regard to our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ."3 All apologetics, no doubt, have a double object, to convince the
unbeliever and to strengthen the faithful. And it would certainly be an error to
discriminate the stress on either of these objects too sharply in the case of
any particular work. It is true from Justin to Butler that evidential works
circulate as widely (or indeed more widely) in the Church as manuals of teaching
than in the world as weapons of defence. But we can recognize a difference of |x
emphasis in the tone and scope of apologetic works, dependent on the
circumstances and environment of the age of their production, which inclines the
balance perceptibly either in the direction of apology proper, or in that of
dogmatic instruction. The Demonstratio then would seem to be of the latter
class, rather than of the former. It is a manual of instruction for the
faithful, rather than a challenge to the unbelieving. This impression, however,
must be balanced by the fact that certain sections of the argument seem to be
deliberately planned to convince the unbeliever, notably where Eusebius
restricts himself to unfolding the unique beauty of our Lord's Humanity in His
Life and Work; and while reserving his "prophetic" arguments for the edification
of the faithful, speaks of Him from the human and historic level, ως περι ανδρος
κοινου, και τοις λοιποις παραπλησιου (102 b). Or when in the same book he
constructs his powerful reductio ad absurdum of the suggestion that Christ was a
wizard or a charlatan. The studied statements at the opening of the whole work
give then the impression that the central object of Eusebius, in relation to the
circumstances of his time, differed materially from that of the earlier
Apologists like Justin and Aristides. They provided a reasoned defence of
Christianity for the consideration of the rulers of the heathen world, and
endeavoured to meet the. subtle criticism of pagan philosophers with convincing
force. He aims primarily at strengthening the convictions of those already
convinced. He desires to provide a completer enlightenment for those who are
already members of the Church of Christ.

Though certain passages both in the Praeparatio and the Demonstratio speak of
pagan persecution in the present tense (Praep. Ev. 584 a, b, Dem. 82 c), and if
the tense is pressed must have been written before the close of the Diocletian
and Galerian Terror by the Edict of Milan, A.D. 312 (Eus., H.E. x. 5), other
passages present the picture, frequent in the earlier apologies, of a Church at
peace and developing in all parts of the Empire (Praep. Ev. 9 d, Dem. 103 c, 138
b). This discrepancy we will examine below. But assuming that the work appeared
after the persecution it will be recognized that the moment was |xi opportune
for the publication of a book, "shewing what Christianity is to them that do not
know," and for offering a deep and sound foundation for the faith of the
half-convinced. For years the martyrs had been prominent in the world's eyes.
The Church as a whole had been super naturally loyal. The future seemed to be
with the no longer despised Christians. There must have been many thoughtful
people ready to examine their claims, and to inquire into the secret of their
constancy. Many again, conquered by the bright spectacle of their endurance, had
already entered the Church's gate led chiefly by faith and hope, and were now
ripe to sit at the feet of teachers who could philosophically unveil her
heavenly knowledge. Nor should we suppose that, though the Imperial Government
had decided that the coercion of so powerful a mass of conviction was
impossible, the prejudice of pagan priest hoods and of the leaders of philosophy
was inclined to yield without every effort that criticism, ridicule, and
conservative tradition could exert. Celsus had been followed as protagonist
against Christianity by Porphyry, and it was against him that the polemical
weapons of the Demonstratio were forged. Porphyry had a very intimate knowledge
of the Christian faith. He had possibly been a convert (Soc., H.E. iii. 23) and
a pupil of Origen (Eus., H.E. vi. 19). He had written a book, Contra
Christianos, full of acute criticisms, some of which the mind of the later
Church has justified and accepted. There are quotations from this work in Praep.
Ev. 28 c, 29 b, 179 d, 237 a to 241 b; and allusions to Porphyry in Praep. Ev.
143 c, 144 b, 190 a; Dem. Ev. 134. The high level of the attack would account
for the comprehensiveness, the massive learning, and the dignity of the
rejoinder, which gathers together and sums up the labours of previous
Apologists. But, as we shall see, Eusebius did not set out to refute the
arguments of Porphyry point by point, as Origen dealt with Celsus, or Justin
with the Jew Trypho. He preferred to confront followers of the acute critic with
the fact of Christianity as a blessed and growing power. He aimed at showing the
supernatural agreement of its Founder's life and death with the prophecies. He
felt that on the flowing tide of divine power he could afford to disregard the
eddying currents that ran impotently across it. Eusebius indeed wrote a |xii
definite rejoinder to Porphyry, the κατὰ Πορφορίου, a work in twenty-five books;
this in all probability was later in his life.4 In this book it is quite likely
that he attempted to meet the objections of Porphyry seriatim. His aim in the
Demonstraiio was of a more general character. To sum up, it was the cessation of
persecution, the profound impression made on the educated and uneducated alike
by the imperial change of front, the proud sense within the Church itself that
its patience had triumphed, combined with the presence of the opposing criticism
of the cultured, which may be said to have been the occasion for the great
literary effort, which is called by Lightfoot "probably the most important
apologetic work of the Early Church."5

§ 2. THE DATE This question is involved in conflicting internal evidence. Is the
Demonstratio earlier or later than the History, which is generally dated A.D.
325? The passage ει γουν τι δυναται η ημετερα ιστοπια (Dem. 273 d) proves
nothing, for we must translate with Lightfoot, not "my history," but "my
personal observation." Neither can the passage in the History (H.E. i. 2 ad
fin.) be safely regarded as referring to the Demonstratio. There is a direct
reference to the Quaestiones ad Stephanum in Dem. 353 c, but this does not prove
that the whole of the latter work was anterior to the Demonstratio, for the
Quaestiones have a cross-reference to the Demonstratio in col. 912 - ωσπερ ουν
συνεστησαμεν εν ταις ευαγγελικαις αποδειξεσιν. It is suggested by Lightfoot that
this part of the Quaestiones, the epitome or εκλογη εν συντομω, was added at a
later date, in which case the Demonstratio would come between the Quaestiones
and the Epitome.

Evidence from the mention of contemporary events is again conflicting, if we are
seeking the date of the work as a whole. There is an obvious contrast between
passages that speak of the Church as still undergoing persecution, e. g. Dem.
119 b, ο και εστιν εις δευρο θεωρουντας ενεργουμενον, ef. 182 d (εισετι και νυν)
and 82 c, and those which in the manner of the earlier Apologists represent it
as progressing and flourishing - e.g. Dem. 103 c and Praep. Ev. 9 d. The |xiii
usual explanation of these discrepancies is to suppose that different sections
of the work took shape at different times, the former towards the end of the
Terror, the latter after its conclusion. (Gifford, Praeparatio, Tom. iii. pars.
i. p. xii.) But there seems nothing unreasonable in supposing that an historical
writer, engaged in defending Christianity on the ground of its endurance and
success, while surveying in one coup d'oeil the three centuries of its past
struggle, might very naturally refer to a persecution, that had but recently
relaxed its pressure, as present. If this be thought probable we may consider
the whole work to have been written between A.D. 314 and A.D. 318. For the more
than probable allusion in Praep. Ev. 135 c to the punishment by Licinius of the
Antiochene theosophical impostors, described in H.E. ix. 11, would place the
date after A.D. 314, whereas the theological language would seem to be too
unguarded to allow it to be likely that it was penned near the time when the
decision of the Arian controversy was imminent. And Arius was already attracting
attention in A.D. 319. (Bright: Church of the Fathers, i. 56.)

§ 3. CONTENTS

Books I and II form an Introduction, for the opening of Book III regards them as
"prolegomena." They describe the simplicity of Christian teaching, challenge the
assumption that Christianity rests not on reason but on faith, and in claiming
to use the Jewish scriptures, while rejecting the Jewish religion, establish the
thesis that Christianity is a republication of the primitive religion of the
patriarchs, from which the Mosaic religion was a declension, allowed by God
because of the deterioration of the Jews under the assaults of the daemons
during their exile in Egypt. Abundant prophetic evidence is given in Book II,
that the coming of Messiah would synchronize with the downfall of the Jewish
state, and the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Book III treats of Christ's Humanity, and is perhaps the most modern part of the
argument. By an elaborate rc.ditdio ul. absitrdum the impossibility of Jesus
Christ being aught but Perfect Man and Divine also is dramatically and cogently
shown. |xiv

Books IV and V deal with the Divinity of Christ as Son and Logos, and it is in
them that passages of an Arian ring have roused the anger of orthodox
commentators.

Book VI and the following books deal with our Lord's Incarnate life as the
fulfilment of prophecy. Book X reaches the Passion and is especially occupied
with Judas and the Betrayal.

We may suppose with Lightfoot that the remainder of the work shewed the
agreement of the Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord, the gift of the Holy
Spirit, and the foundation and growth of the Church with the predictions of the
Jewish prophets. A fragment of Book XV relates to the four kingdoms of the Book
of Daniel, and suggests that that section of the work dealt with the doctrine of
the Holy Catholic Church.

§ 4. RELATION TO EARLIER APOLOGIES The Demonstratio comes at the end of a long
series of apologetical works, and embodies and codifies their results. It is the
work of a man of extraordinarily wide scholarship, which marshals and buttresses
with additional support the "loci communes" of his predecessors. Eusebius is no
adventurer breaking fresh ground. A comparison of the Demonstratio with the
Trypho or the contra Celsum reveals only a more systematic application of the
argument from prophecy used by Justin and Origen. In some cases the prophecies
are explained in almost identical language. We may instance the exegesis of
Psalm xxii. in Book X with that of Justin, in Trypho, cc. 98-106, the references
to Isaiah vii. 14, where he uses the language of Origen, contra Celsum, i. 35,
points out that Jesus Christ alone suits the passage, and quotes Deut. xxii. 23,
24 in support of the translation of νεανις. The question of the Christian's
rejection of the Jewish Law and his acceptance of the Jewish scriptures had been
handled by Justin, and the most striking portion of the Demonstratio, the
argument in Book III, that Christ was no sorcerer, may be said to have been
suggested by Origen, contra Celsum, ii. 48, and Justin, 1st Apol. c. 30. His
explanation of the Old Testament Theophanies is that of the earlier Apologists,
his insistence that Christianity rests on reason as well as |xv faith, and his
allegorical method, are plainly those of Origen and the Alexandrian school. It
could hardly have been otherwise. After two centuries of defensive warfare
against Jews and Greeks, the lines of controversy were clearly defined, and the
apologetic writer but reiterated in a new form against the critics of his own
day, what his predecessors hud said against a previous generation of critics.
His "loci communes" were well known to the Catechist, just as the ordinary
course of instruction to candidates for Confirmation follows a definite line
to-day. The most he could achieve was to present in a systematic form such a
codification of existing arguments as the circle around him required.

Yet the Praeparatio opens with a remarkable claim to originality of method.
Eusebius contrasts the "more logical" nature of his proofs with "refutations and
contradictions of opposing arguments, exegesis of scripture, and controversial
advocacy" (Praep. Ev. i. 3). Here alluding to a mass of evidential literature he
proposes to reject "all deceitful and sophistical plausibilities" in favour of
the evidence of the fulfilment of the Jewish prophecies in Christ, and the
developing life of His Church. But this is very much what the earlier Apologists
set out to do. In what sense can Eusebius say: "The purpose, however, which we
have in hand is to be worked out in a way of our own" (Praep. Ev. 7 a)?

Lightfoot argues that Eusebius is referring to the use of lengthy quotations, by
means of which religious ideals, that clash with Christianity, may be allowed to
speak for themselves, as is stated in Praep. Ev. 16 d. "I shall not set down my
own words, but those of the very persons who have taken the deepest interest in
the worship of them whom they call Gods." But he admits that there was little
originality in this method of controversy. It had been employed by the earlier
Apologists. The real claim of Eusebius seems to be made clear by the context. He
quotes 1 Cor. ii. 14; iii. 6; and 2 Cor. iii. 5 as guides for avoiding
"deceitful and sophistical plausibilities" and for the use of proofs free from
ambiguity. And he contrasts the value of "words" with that of the evidence of
"works" on which he prefers to rely. By "works" he means the power of Christ as
a living, moving |xvi energy in human life. The exact fulfilment of Christ's
anticipations, the triumph of His Church as foretold in Matt. xvi. 18, the fate
of the Jews, and the wonderful fulfilment of the predictions of the Hebrew
prophets are the "works" upon which Eusebius proposes to base his
"demonstration." But even so it can hardly be said that there was anything novel
in such an intention, looking back to the apologies of Justin, Athenagoras,
Aristides and Tatian. There is a series of chapters in Justin which reads almost
like an outline sketch of the Demonstratio. Eusebius, therefore, can hardly have
meant that the method which he adopted was new in the sense that it had not been
used before. What then did he mean? Surely he must have had in his mind the
methods or evidential writers of his own day. He must have been thinking of
dialectical encounters with literary opponents. He may only have intended to
stress his determination to abstain in the Demonstratio from meeting the
objections of Porphyry and his followers point by point, as Origen had dealt
with Celsus. If the method of Origen had made a deep impression on the educated
world, and if Eusebius was regarded in any sense as belonging to the school of
Origen, it was natural for him to state definitely that he proposed in his new
work to follow a different course from Origen's. Origen's method was to follow
every turn of the trail of a slippery foe: his opponent, so to say, made the
game. Eusebius wished it to be understood that he started with a well-ordered
programme of Scriptural exposition, and did not intend to be drawn aside into
detailed controversy on points that had been raised by individual
controversialists. This intention, however fitfully and diffusely it is carried
through, can never be said to be lost sight of in the Demonstratio. We have a
constant recurrence to the massive evidence of a growing and flourishing Church,
a changed society, a converted character. The heart of the argument is the
connection of this external evidence with the Divine and Human Person of Christ.
The lever that is intended to move the mind to realize the uniqueness of Christ
is the exposition of a series of prophecies, whose selection, systematic
arrangement and treatment confers on Eusebius, if not the crown of originality,
|xvii at least the praise of having carefully codified the work of his
predecessors. The Demonstratio then, like all the best apologetic work of the
early Church, is based on the continuous living evidence of the action of a
Divine Power. "The help," says Eusebius, "which comes down from the God of the
Universe supplies to the teaching and Name of our Saviour its irresistible and
invincible force, and its victorious power against its enemies" (Praep. Ev. 9
d).

Compared with the Octavius, the Trypho, or the contra Celsum the Demonstratio
may seem cold and academic, for it lacks the charm and interest of the
dialogue-form. Where they are redolent of the open air, and the marketplace, it
suggests the lecture-hall and the pulpit. Much of the warmth, directness, and
reality has evaporated from the appeal of Eusebius. These are obvious
criticisms. But it must be remembered that Eusebius wrote for the cultured
people of his own age. His method and manner are less perhaps the result of his
own temperament than the production of a stately and courtly entourage. As the
heir of the apologetic of the market-place, and of a struggling sect of
believers, he was called by the genius of his own time to reproduce in a
polished and rhetorical style, for an educated circle, the old arguments which
had welled forth from the lips of the infant Church in spontaneous freedom and
life. There can be no doubt that the world for which they were intended received
in the Praeparatio and the Demonstratio what was for it the most unanswerable
defence of the Christian Religion.

§ 5. THE ARGUMENT OF THE THIRD BOOK The Third Book of the Demonstratio seems to
claim special consideration. As a piece of apologetic it is extraordinarily full
and to the point. It seizes the real salients in the evidential controversy, and
is occupied with topics which must always come foremost in the defence of
Christianity. It is no argument in the air, it comes down to meet the ordinary
unbeliever in the crowd, and begins by speaking to him of Christ as "one bearing
ordinary humanity and like the rest." Upon the acknowledged basis of the beauty
of His human life, and the perfection of His ethical teaching |xviii better
understood and more universally acknowledged by non-Christians in the modern
world than they were then except by a few thinkers like Porphyry, the argument
passes to the Miracles, which are the evidence that Christ is something more
than human, to hypotheses which professed to account for them, viz. invention
and sorcery, and to the question of the credibility of the witnesses to our
Lord's abnormal acts. It is remarkable that one who could be so diffuse should,
in so short a space, have combined so many arguments in one connected scheme;
and still more that he should have made central the points that are central,
viz. the historical Person of Christ, His Ethics, His miraculous Power, and the
credibility of the Gospel-writers, treated as involving generally all belief in
witness to historical facts. The great mass of the Demonstratio is an elaborate
rechauffee of past apologetics, but in this book we feel the touch of something
fresh, free, original, something that springs from keen, personal interest, warm
perception, and ardent conviction. It is not sword-play, but actual warfare, and
there are rapier-strokes of satire, which the hand of Swift might have dealt. In
literary quality, as well as in appositeness to the subject discussed, the book
is remarkable. Its finish, completeness in itself, and contrast with the
Demonstratio as a whole might suggest that it was a separate essay, written in
actual controversy with an opponent who drew out Eusebius' keenest logic and
dialectical skill, and that this essay was eventually incorporated in the
greater but more academic work. Its argument may be summarized as follows:

[[87-102]] Jesus claimed in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke iv. 21) to be the
fulfilment of the prophecy of a Saviour (Isa. lxi. i). Moses' prophecy of a
successor "like himself" (Deut. xviii. 15), who should come at the fall of the
Jewish kingdom (Gen. xlix. 10), Isaiah's "Root of Jesse" (Isa. xi. 1), Micah's
prediction of Bethlehem (Micah v. 2), Isaiah's "suffering servant" (Isa. liii.
3-8), who died that He might rise to rule over the world through His Church, are
only fulfilled in Christ.

[[102-107c]] Reply to attacks upon Christ as (i) deceiver; (ii) wizard.- First
on the basis of mere humanity (ως περι κοινου και τοις λοιποις παραβλησιου)
Christ must be realized as the best |xix man who ever lived. Consider the
ethical outcome of His teaching, in purity, meekness, sanity of mind,
benevolence, love of truth. He called back the lost ideals of Abraham, and gave
them to the whole world; their value is admitted, for even the Greek oracles
praise Abraham's monotheism. He abjured a sacrificial worship, but so did
Porphyry (de Abst. ii. 34) and Apollonius of Tyana. He taught that the world was
created and would one day be destroyed, even as Plato did, and also the doctrine
of the Immortality of the Soul, and thus made His poor disciples wiser than
supercilious philosophers, who seem proud to claim identity with the flea, the
worm, and the fly. He stressed a divine judgment, punishment, and an eternal
life with God. He recognized angels and daemons, helpers and foes of the soul
just as the Hebrews did. All this is ethically sound.

[[107d-125b]] But there was a divine side to Christ, as is shown by His Miracles
of mercy and love; He died voluntarily, rose again, and ascended to heaven. The
miraculous in the life of Christ is in line with the miraculous in Christianity.
Those who deny it must either prove that it was invented, or the result of
sorcery. Now the type of teaching Christ gave His disciples is utterly opposed
to their inventing falsehoods. It was ascetic, and made truth and purity the
first essentials of conduct. If you admit the fanciful hypothesis that He really
taught them fraud and specious lying you are landed in absurdities. Deceit could
afford no corporate cohesion, κακω κακος ου φιλος, ουδε αγαθω: and again, what
had they to expect but a death like His? After His death, too, they only
honoured Him the more! They were even ready to die for Him. It is inconceivable
that they knew Him to be really vicious. And equally impossible that, if they
were, they should propose to convert the whole world, and actually do so, poor
and uneducated as they were. You must imagine them meeting secretly after the
Crucifixion, admitting Christ's deceit, and yet conspiring to propagate the
Gospel-story: "Let us see," they say, "that our freak lasts even to death. There
is nothing ridiculous in dying for nothing at all." "What could be finer than to
make both gods and men our enemies for no possible reason? . . . And suppose we
convince no one. we shall have the satisfaction of drawing |xx down upon
ourselves in return for our inventions the retribution for our deceit." Such
theories are ridiculous, for there is no doubt that persecution and death faced
the Apostles. Yet there was no traitor among them after the Ascension. And they
actually succeeded in their adventure. Now this hypothesis of a conspiracy to
deceive might be used with equal force with regard to Moses, or the Greek
philosophers, and indeed all those whose lives history records. The simplicity,
devotion, and ascetic lives of the Apostles guarantee their honesty. They faced
all for truth and the Name of Christ. The Gospels reveal their modesty and
straightforwardness in unexpected ways. It has been well said: "We must put
complete confidence in the disciples of Jesus, or none at all"; distrust of them
logically means distrust of all writers. Why allow invidious distinctions? The
Passion is the crowning crux, how could they have invented a story which would
handicap all their efforts? That they gave a true account of it really
authenticates their accounts of the Miracles, and glorious manifestations of
Christ. The evidence of Josephus, too, may be called in with good effect. (See
note on this passage.)

[[125b-141a]] Against the alternative view that Christ was a sorcerer.- The
suggestion is opposed to the whole trend of His teaching and manner of life. He
was unworldly, pure, and retiring; sorcerers are the reverse. If He had been one
His followers would have resembled Him, but the great mark of the whole
Christian Church is its abhorrence of magic. No Christian has ever admitted
himself to be a sorcerer even to escape death. And this argument may be
extended-in all ways the virtues of Christians vouch for the character of their
Master. They afford "clear evidence of the nurture of His words." The Greeks
boast of the self-sacrifice of Democritus and Krates, but Christian zealots can
be counted by the myriad. They know what Plato alone knew about God, but he was
confessedly unable to make God known, whereas it is the common task of the
Christians. But was Christ's sorcery self-taught, or learned from others ? If
the former then it showed something of the nature of supernatural power, if the
latter, meaning that He was taught it in Egypt, what a strange thing that Christ
|xxi should so utterly outstrip His teachers, and institute a new nation and new
laws, as He has done. Once more note that He paid no court to the daemons, and
that they even now shudder at His Name. Think of His union with the Father, His
purity, justice and truth, His perfect character, and you will laugh at the
suggestion. The very drumons hear witness to him in the Oracles quoted by
Porphyry as "a man signal in holiness." His grandeur is shown by His choice of
poor men for apostles, "because maybe he had in mind to do the most unlikely
things." And what a design it was-to rule the whole world! And His followers
were to do the work simply "in His Name." That alone explains their success.
They had to preach the paradox, that God came on an embassy in a human body, and
died on a Cross! The only explanation of their success is His co-operation with
them, for the Gospel in itself is not plausible. The Power He gave them to work
miracles amazed their hearers, and induced them to yield to the message: without
His Power they could never have succeeded. And you may add to this the
providential preparation of the world for the preaching of the Gospel through
the establishment of the Roman Empire, whose Heads both by their leniency and
severity have assisted the divine purpose of spreading the Gospel. [[141a]]

Such a summary as the above is but a sorry skeleton. It is void of all the life
and vividness, the subtle turns, the satirical touches of the argument. But it
reveals on what ground the writer really rested in his defence of Christianity.
His apology is seen to be not abstract and a priori, but almost modern in its
hold on historical fact. Let us consider the points that stand out.

(i) There is the argument from Prophecy. It is fashionable to say that the
Apologists were deluded in their persistent efforts to link the Gospel facts
with prophetic predictions. No doubt they were in a sense deluded, and the
greater part of the Demonstratio is a monument to the delusion. But yet, though
the method is changed, there is still an argument from prophecy. The lines of
optimistic hope for mankind that run through the Hebrew prophets |xxii do meet
at the feet of Christ. He alone satisfies their majestic anticipations.

"We may say," writes Prof. W. E. Barnes, in his essay On the Permanent Value of
the Old Testament,6 "that the prophets saw, each under a form suited to his own
age, a vision of God's presence with men, realised to a new degree, and
'specialised' (if the word may be used) in Israel through the instrumentality of
a visible leader of Israel. The ideas of a chosen people and of a chosen leader
upon whom the Spirit of God rests are found in those prophetic passages." The
prophecies to which he alludes are Micah iv. 8 to v. 6; Isa. ix. 1-7, xi. i-io,
Hi. 13 to liii. 12; Jer. xxiii. 15, 16. It is worthy of remark that in selecting
five passages of typical Messianic prophecy, the fourth-century and the
twentieth-century scholar choose three out of the five the same.

(ii) The historical Personality of Jesus as perfect Man stands out in a very
modern way. The εν ανθρωποις πολιτευσαμενον και παθοντα of the Creed of
Caesarea, upon which Eusebius had been brought up, had not failed of its effect;
neither had his patient study of the Gospels. Whatever his theory of the union
of the Divinity with the Humanity, he had a very clear and a very true
conception of the Humanity of our Lord. He speaks of the Man Christ Jesus almost
as One Whom he has known. Ho follows Him on His works of mercy. He catches the
spirit of His words. He feels their supreme truth, their unexampled beauty,
their divine audacity, their kingly authority. He imagines correctly Christ's
effect upon His followers, he argues back from the ideals of the followers to
the uniqueness of the Master.

It is quite remarkable that Eusebius should start with the human Christ, and
describe him as the best man that ever lived, before introducing the conception
forced upon him by the Miracles that He was divine as well. It was the method of
the Master Himself, and therefore the right one.

(iii) Eusebius' view of the value of the witness of the writers of the Gospels,
and of the first teachers of Christianity, has been a feature of many volumes of
evidences to |xxiii the days of Butler and Paley and our own time. But it may be
doubted whether the argument from the simplicity and transparent honesty of
these "unlearned and ignorant men" has ever been more cogently put, their
bravery, their persistence, their devotion, their facing the certainty of
"labours, dangers and sufferings," the magnificence of the design with which
they set out, the paradox they were called to preach, the divine power that made
them triumph. In the last fifty years of New Testament criticism how often has
it been evident that these books and their writers were being put to tests, from
which all other records were exempt. This, too, Eusebius deprecated. Criticism
should treat all alike, and to treat all as the Gospels have been treated would
leave history a mass of questionable documents and disputed statements.

(iv) There is an ethical stress of deep significance in the whole book. The
Humanity of Christ and His teaching are made to challenge the unbeliever first
of all by their moral value; it is claimed for them that they satisfy, and more
than satisfy, human aspirations after goodness. The Miracles are presented as
worked for moral ends. It is the ethical interest that gives the fire of
indignation and the sting of satire to the arguments that Christ is neither
charlatan nor sorcerer. Again and again the purity and self-control, the justice
and love of truth, the unselfishness and benevolence of the Christian teaching,
and of its result in countless lives that philosophy would have been powerless
to affect, are dwelt upon. As we have seen, Eusebius reads back from the lives
of Christians the character of Christ - that is to say, he finds in actual life
around him something of the moral ideal that he knows to be summed up in Christ
from Whom the life of men around receives it. He shews throughout a very real
appreciation of the bearing of faith on conduct. The life of the Christian is
the ultimate Court of Appeal for the reality of Christ. Ethical value
demonstrates a divine power as its spring and source. They that overcome the
world prove the truth of the Gospel. Eusebius is defending the Gospel of a
divine Christ; the merely human Christ is One Whose character implies the divine
as well; and He is the source and stay of moral progress. Eusebius realized
this; the |xxiv world of our day doubts it. But as has been well said: "There is
no proof that the ethical principles have existed effectively in the past except
in connection with Christian doctrine, so there is little probability that they
can ever exist in the future, for the mass of men at least, except in dependence
on a living Christ."7 § 6. THE CHRISTOLOGY OF EUSEBIUS

Eusebius was in his day the leading representative of ecclesiastical
conservatism. That is to say, his theology was, allowing for the difference of
period, almost precisely that of Origen. For as Dr. Bigg 8 has remarked : "What
struck later ages as the novelty and audacity of Origen's doctrine was in truth
its archaism and conservatism." This system of doctrine had captured the Eastern
Church, and men like Eusebius had absorbed it from the lips of those who had sat
at the feet of Origen himself. It was in accord with the general outlook of
cultured men. It appeared to be the logical development of orthodox thought. It
is true that elements that had been prominent in heretical teaching were
included in it, but they were the good elements, and their carefully limited
position in the system made them innocuous. It was the unfolding of the
Logos-doctrine on a basis loyal to Scripture and the Rule of Faith. The
Logos-theology was the natural way then to think about the immanence of God. It
had been appropriated for the Christian Religion long ago by the Apologists. The
theology based upon it stood not only for a fascinating idealistic faith, but
also for (the strongest bulwark against what orthodoxy dreaded most-the heresies
which tended to make the divine Persons but temporary manifestations of one
Godhead, viz. Modalism or Sabellianism. The Logos-theology stressed the
unchangeable-ness of the Father, and His distinction from the Son, one in
essence though They might be. For the moment the distinction of the Son from the
Father was more important to the Church than the question how far such a
distinction implied subordination and inferiority. Justin had not |xxv shirked
the phrase δευτερος θεος, neither did Origen. As Dr. Sanday has said: "The
reaction against Sabellianism (which became a general term including all forms
of Monarchianism) had not a little to do with the exaggerations on the other
side; and in particular the dread of this form of error contributed to the rapid
rise and spread of Arianism."9 The point where Arianism touched this established
and somewhat quiescent theology was exactly where Origen had discouraged
speculation. He had given to the Church the doctrine of the eternal generation,
but pronounced its comprehension beyond human reason. Arians claimed the right
to open a door that was shut. But the disciples of Origen were not perhaps so
much disposed to quarrel with adventurers into the uncharted realms "of the
ineffable relations of the Godhead before the remotest beginnings of time,"10
provided they held some form of the Logos-doctrine, as they were to withstand
those who rejected it altogether. And their own language is to a later age
sometimes indistinguishable from Arianism. Of such a theology the doctrinal
parts of the Demonstratio may be considered representative. Let us briefly
examine it. As Harnack says : "Eusebius was more convinced than Origen that the
idea of deity was completely exhausted in that of the strictly one and
unchangeable ον the πρωτη ουσια; he separated the δευτερος θεος much further
from God than the Apologists."11 We therefore find the utmost emphasis laid on
the Absolute Character of Cod the Unbegotten. He is "the One αρχη born before
the first, earlier than the Monad" (745 b). He precedes the Son in existence
(147), is "the greater God, and as such alone holds the name in His own right"
(κυριως) (226). He is as the Sun to the world, too mighty to mingle with created
things directly, requiring a Mediator, through whom to create and govern the
created world (154).

Therefore by His own will He begets the Logos, "the first-born Wisdom altogether
formed of Wisdom, and Reason and Mind, or rather Wisdom itself, Reason itself,
and Mind itself" (146,1). He "alone bears the inconceivable image in Himself
through which He is God, and also because of |xxvi His appointment to guide the
Universe" (146 c); i.e. He is divine by essence as well as by office.

Eusebius uses the well-worn similes of the Apologists: the relation of the
Father to the Son is as light to its ray, as myrrh to its scent, as a king to
his portrait. But there is the important difference sufficiently stressed, that
having been begotten the Son exists apart from the Father in His own essence
(147). Yet worship is due to Him as δευτερος θεος because the greater God dwells
in Him (226 d), as the image of a king is honoured not for its own sake, but for
the sake of the king. So the words, "They shall know Thee the only true God"
cannot be referred to the Logos or Holy Spirit, but only to the Unbegotten
(231). In the work of creation He stands "midway between the begotten and the
Unbegotten." As with Origen and the Neoplatonists He is the "idea of the world,"
the basis (θεμελιος) for all created things (213). And it is because of His
connection with the world that lower predicates are attached to Him - He is now
God's δημιουργημα (146 b) and υπουργος (257 b) ; the "second cause " (216 b); "a
second Lord" (227 d), and is said "to have attained secondary honours"
(δευτερειων ηξιωσθαι) (227 d). So the Father is "Lord and God" of the Son (233
a). In the Incarnation Eusebius teaches the distinctive doctrine of Origen that
the Logos associates Himself with a pure, unfallen human soul. "He remains
Himself immaterial and unembodied as He was before with the Father" (169 b). "No
evil deed can harm Him, because He is not really embodied" (168). "He shared His
own gifts with men, and received nothing in return" (ib.). His Body is hut the
earthen lamp through which His light shines (188). He comes to republish the
true doctrine, from which man has fallen away through the deceptions of the
dnemons, to establish a Church to preach it, and to bring man back to God. Once
Eusebius uses the word συναποθεοω, "to deify men with Himself" as the object of
the Incarnation (170). Five reasons are given for the Death on the Cross (167).
It is chiefly the decisive triumph over the daemons, but it is also an expiatory
sacrifice for the sins of men. "He offered Himself and the Humanity He assumed
to the higher and greater God." In His earthly life Christ now revealed the
Humanity and |xxvii now the Divinity (165); and it is possible for Eusebius,
leaving the Logos in the background, to devote part of a Book to meeting the
common man on his own ground, and to treat of the perfection of Christ's life
and teaching as merely human. The missing Books no doubt dealt with the Risen
and Ascended Christ, and the Holy Spirit. There are only hints on these topics
in the Books before us. He is "Priest of the obedient to the Father" (164 d).
There is a passage (220 a) which especially rouses the anger of de Billy, a
famous student of the Greek Fathers in the sixteenth century. It is the
interpretation of Ps. cix. : "The Lord said unto My Lord," where the first Lord
is said to mean the Father, and the second the Son, Who is thus confessed by the
Holy Spirit in David, to be his Lord: "Quod quidem credere quid aliud est quam
horrendae impietatis crimine se astringere!" (Billius, Obs. Sac. I. 29, p. 48).

It is clear that the theology of Origen is presented here either directly or by
implication: Origen taught that God is the only real essence, that by the
necessity of His Nature He reveals Himself; that by an act of will He eternally
begets the Logos, which is His Consciousness, and also the Idea of the World;
that the Logos being the Image of God is essentially God, not begotten in time
nor out of the nonexistent; that He is no impersonal Force, but a Second Person
in the Godhead. That as the Idea of the World He is subordinate, and in His
office to creation both κτισμα and δημιουργημα; that His Incarnation is a Union
(almost docetic) with an unfallen soul, with which He lives and which He draws
up to Himself by bonds of mutual love; that His work on earth is chiefly the
republication of truth to enlighten men blinded by daemons; that His Death was
complete Victory over them, and also sacrificial; that the Humanity was
gradually deified until at last the man Jesus passed into the Logos, and that
this deification is the destiny of all who share the Logos now.

Such is a bald summary of perhaps the greatest theological system of antiquity,
and it is obvious how it lies behind and beneath all that Eusebius says. Like
Origen, he rests on Biblical exegesis and is dominated by the Rule of Faith;
like Origen, he refrains from speculation on the mystery of the
coming-into-being (ουσιωσις) of the Logos. He expresses |xxviii the
point-of-view of a dominant theology in an assured tone. He speaks as one who
voices the opinion of the great mass of cultured believers; for Origen was in
possession, and Arius and the Homoousians were alike innovators. The Creed of
the Church of Caesarea, which Eusehius presented at Nicaea as an eirenicon to be
accepted by both parties, embodied this theology. "It bears," says Dr. Bright,
"a considerable resemblance to that which the Council ultimately framed: it was
emphatic on the personal distinctions in the Holy Trinity, asserting each Person
to be and to exist as truly Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; it recognizes "One
Lord Jesus Christ as 'the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from
Life, Only-begotten Son, First-born of all Creation, Begotten before all ages,
and through Whom all things come into being,' and it mentioned also His becoming
'incarnate for our salvation, His Life among men, His Passion, Resurrection on
the third day, Ascension to the Father, and future Coming in glory to judge
(the) quick and dead,' and concluded as then quoted, with 'We believe also in
one Holy Spirit'; yet it was not sufficiently explicit as to the main point at
stake, His eternal relation to the Father." 12 This deficiency was to be
supplied by the inclusion of the Homoousion. The Son must be defined as "of the
same essence" as the Father. No statement that He was begotten before time was
adequate. The Logos must be distinctly separated from the created Universe. And
this the Homoousion alone would effect for minds of that day. But it was
unfortunately a suspected term. It had been anathematized at the Council of
Antioch (A.D. 269) when employed by Paul of Samosata. Athanasius used it
sparingly in its hour of victory. Later on the Semi-Arians rejected it as
savouring of Sabellianism. No wonder it seemed to steady conservatives like
Eusebius, who did not wish to define the ineffable, to head straight for
Modalistic views. How could two "of the same essence" be aught but one under
different aspects? The doctrinal trend of Eusebius, as Harnack recognizes, was
to widen the gulf between the πρωτη αιτια and the Logos, rather than to lessen
it. The |xxix Homoousion seemed perilously like filling it up. But with the
necessary limitations he could conscientiously sign it. Safeguarded from
Sabellian implications it was harmless. The theology of the Demonstratio shows
quite clearly how and in what sense the word could be used credally by an
exponent of the Origenic theology without any violence to conscience. It makes
his attitude throughout the momentous days at Nicea intelligible and creditable
to him as a peacemaker. The letter 13 he wrote to his diocese becomes no mere
shuffling apology, but an honest statement. He makes it perfectly clear in what
sense he understands the Homoousion. He explains that he has signed on the
representation of the Emperor that "consubstantial" implied nothing physical,
but must be regarded as having "a divine and mysterious signification." Thus, he
says that it does not imply that the Son is "a part of the Father," nor does
"Begotten, not made," mean more than that the Son does not form part of the
created Universe, and "does not resemble in any respect the creatures which He
has made, but that to the Father alone, Who begat Him, He is in all points
perfectly like; for He is of the essence and of the substance of none save the
Father."

He also said that he agreed to the anathemas on those who said that the Son
"came out of the non-existent," or that "there was a time when He was not,"
because of the un-Scriptural nature of such expressions. Finally, he definitely
asserted that the new formula was in agreement with the Creed that he had
originally proposed.

Acquaintance with the Demonstratio guarantees the sincerity of the statement. If
the Homoousion was to be understood as explained by Constantine, signing it
involved no violent wrench with the past. It was capable of being transplanted
into the creed of Eusebius. Even Origen had used the word in the sense now
applied to it. If Eusebius signed with reluctance, he signed with sincerity.

There is a statement of Harnack's that the Logos-doctrine as held by Eusebius
"effaced the historical Christ." It would give the impression that theologians
of the school of Origen necessarily followed the Gnostics |xxx in all their
flights. If Hellenic speculation had been the only wing of their theology, they
might logically have held a faith of mere abstractions. But the school, like its
master, was marked by its devotion to Scriptural exegesis. It was Biblical to
the core. Hence such a statement as Harnack's in the face of the earlier part of
the Demonstratio appears grotesque and exaggerated. At any rate Eusebius' hold
on the Gospel history was firm and sure. No one can read the third Book without
realizing that Eusebius had an interest in the earthly life of our Lord that
effectually neutralized the dangers of Gnostic abstract speculation. He had an
evangelical sense of the value of all the words and deeds of the Incarnate
Christ. His picture of Jesus Christ is not a mass of high-sounding phrases and
Biblical images, it is the work of a pastor of souls, who, however abstract his
formal theology may be, understands quite well, that it is the concrete
historical facts that move men, not the philosophical theories that underlie
them, and that the Word took flesh and wrought the Creed of Creeds, that He
might enter in at the doors, not only of the lowly, but of all who are formed of
human elements.

§7. THE REFERENCES TO THE EUCHARIST IN THE DEMONSTRATIO

It will be useful, perhaps, to bring together here the passages in the
Demonstratio which allude to the Eucharist. They are all incidental to the
argument, and therefore doctrinally all the more interesting. They express the
common sense of the Eastern Church on the subject in a spontaneous way.

(i) 37 b. sqq.-Jesus the Lamb of God by His sacrifice frees us from the Mosaic
Law. "We are therefore right in celebrating daily His memory, and the Memorial
of His Body and Blood (την τουτου μνημην του τε σωματος αυτου και του αιματος
την υπομνησιν οσημεραι επιτελουντες)." "Thus we enter on a greater sacrifice and
priestly act (θυσια and ιερουργια) than that of the ancients." The earlier
sacrifices were "weak and beggarly elements," mere symbols and images (συμβολα
και εικονες), not embracing truth itself.

We notice here the use of the words μνημη, υπομνησις, θυσια and ιερουργια, and
the application of συμβολα και |xxxi εικονες in a depreciatory sense to the
Jewish sacrifices, as not "embracing the truth." The words are later on applied
to the Sacraments, in the sense that they do embrace truth. (See Note on
passage.) A little lower it proceeds -

"We have received through Christ's mystic dispensation the symbols that are
true, and archetypal of the images that preceded them" (τα αληθη και των εικονων
τα αρχετυπα). For Christ offered to the Father "a wonderful sacrifice and unique
victim" (θυμα και σφαγιον), and "delivered us a memory (μνημη) to offgr
continually to God in place of a sacrifice (προσφερειν αντι θυσιας)." This
(μνημη is "celebrated on a table by means of the symbols of His Body and His
saving Blood (επι τραπεζης δια συμβολων του τε σωματος αυτου και του σωτηριου
αιματος)." It fulfils Ps. xxiii. 5. "Thus in our rites we have been taught to
offer through our whole lives bloodless and reasonable and acceptable sacrifices
through His Supreme High Priest." (Cf. Pss. 1. 14, 15; cxli. 2; li. 17; Mal. i.
11.) It is our sacrifice of praise: "we sacrifice in a new way according to the
new covenant, the pure sacrifice." "A contrite heart" has been called a
sacrifice to God (Ps. li. 17). And we burn the incense, "the sweet-smelling
fruit of excellent theology, offering it by means of our prayers." "So we
sacrifice and burn incense, celebrating the memory of the great sacrifice in the
mysteries which He has delivered to us, and bringing to God our Thanksgiving for
our Salvation (την υπερ σωτηριας ημων ευχαριστιαν) by means of pious hymns and
prayers, dedicating ourselves wholly to Him and His High Priest, the Word
Himself, making our offering in body and soul (ανακειμενοι)."

Here we have συμβολον used in the sacramental sense; and the inner nature of the
sacrifice is stressed; the real sacrifice is the contrite heart offered through
the Great High Priest, and the incense (non-existent materially in the service
then) is the θεολογια of the worshipper. It is a choral, prayerful
self-dedication and Eucharist.

(ii) 223 b. - Christ fulfilled the priesthood of Melchizedek, not Aaron. "And
our Saviour Jesus, the Christ of God, after the manner of Melchizedek still even
now accomplishes by means of His ministers the rites of His |xxxii priestly work
amongst men." Like Melchizedek, Christ first and His priests after Him
"accomplishing their spiritual sacrificial work according to the laws of the
Church, represent with wine and bread the mysteries of His Body and saving
Blood" (οινω και αρτω του τε σωματος αυτου και του σωτηριου αιματος αινιττονται
τα μυστηρια).

(iii) 380 d. - The expressions in Zech. ix. 9 and 15, are allusions to the
Eucharist, and point to the joy given by the mystic wine, and the glory and
purity of the mystic food. "For He delivered the symbols (συμβολα) of His divine
dispensation to his disciples, bidding them make the image of His own Body (την
εικονα του ιδιου σωματος ποιεσθαι)." Rejecting the Mosaic sacrifices, He
delivered them bread to use as a symbol of His Body (αρτω χρησθαι συμβολω του
ιδιου σωματος). This further illustrates the use of συμβολον.

We gather from these passages: - (i) That the Mosaic Sacrifice, the Sacrifice on
the Cross, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice are intimately related. The latter is a
Memorial of the Sacrifice of the Cross in a far higher sense than the Jewish
sacrifices were foreshadowings uf it. They were but symbols that were unreal,
the Eucharist is a symbol but it "embraces reality," i.e. it includes what it
represents. It is the archetype of which they were symbols.

(ii) The Eucharist is nothing, if it is not inward. It is a means for the
offering of a contrite heart, and the incense of true knowledge of God. It is no
mere outward act; in and through the outward act is the inner oblation.

(iii) Though in line with the Mosaic system the Eucharist is far more in line
with the primeval offering of blessing made by Melehizedek with bread and wine,
not with animal victims.

(iv) The Eucharist we gather was celebrated daily, and with music.

[Cf. Darwell Stone, A History of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, London, 1909,
vol. i 109-111. A. Harnack, History of Dogma, iv. 291.]

§ 8. MSS., ETC. The earliest MS. of the Demonstratio is the Codex known as the
Medicean or "Parisinus 469," of the twelfth century, |xxxiii registered in the
Catalogue of the Library of Paris, vol. ii. p. 65. It is deficient at the
beginning and end, beginning with the words η παιδισκη σοι, p. 17, and ending at
της σωτηρος ημων παρακελευσεως, p. 688. These deficiencies were supplied by J.
A. Fabricius in his Delectus argumentorum et syllabus scriptorum, qui veritatem
religionis Christianae adversos atheos . . . asseruerunt, who used a copy that
had been made by Stephen Bergler, at Hamburg, in 1725, from a MS. in the
possession of Nicholas Mavrocordato, Prince of Wallachia, who collected many
Greek MSS. from Mount Athos and other monasteries. The MS. was unfortunately
lost at the death of the Prince. Bergler gave no information about its age or
condition. It was almost certain that it was either derived from Parisinus 469
before its mutilation, or from a MS. of the same family.

There are four other MSS. of the Demonstratio at Paris, parchments of the
sixteenth century numbered 470, 471, 472 and 473 in the Catalogue, vol. ii. pp.
65, 66. And there is at St. John's College, Oxford, a parchment MS. of the
fifteenth century (No. 41 in the Catalogue of O. Coxius, p. 12). As all these
have the same deficiencies, there is little doubt that they come from the common
source, Parisinus 469.

There is a sixth MS. in the Ambrosian Library, at Milan, of the fifteenth
century, of the same family (Montfaucon in Bibliothcca Bibliothecarum, vol. i.
p. 527). And a seventh was possessed by T. F. Mirandola, and was used by Donatus
of Verona for his Latin version, first published at Rome in 1498. Of the four
later Paris MSS., 473 bears the date 1543, and was written at Venice (or 1533
according to Montfaucon, Diario Italico, p. 408) by Valeriano of Forli. One of
the four was no doubt the foundation of Stephen's Paris edition of 1548. The
Oxford MS. was collated by Gaisford with this edition of Robert Stephen in 1548
with the minutest care. But in the opinion of Dindorf his work added little to
the elucidation of the text, beyond the correction of a few slight mistakes of
copying, the divergencies in the quotations from the LXX being probably changes
made by later scribes in order to bring the quotations into agreement with the
accepted text. |xxxiv

Dindorf's conclusion is that a satisfactory text is secured by the use of the
Parisinus 469, on which his own edition (Teubner series) is based. It is, he
says, comparatively free from the errors of transcribers, with the exception of
some lacunae; (pp. 195 d, 210 a, 217 b), and from the frequent interpolations of
the Praeparatio and the History, because the Demonstratio, having fewer readers,
was seldom copied. There is, therefore, little room in the study of the text for
conjectural emendation. The first Edition of the Greek was that of Robert
Stephen, 1548.

Viguier's Praeparatio was published at Paris in 1628, with the Demonstratio and
other works of Eusebius, and the Latin translation of Donatus.

Gaisford's edition (2 vols., Oxford) appeared in 1852 with critical apparatus
and the same Latin translation. The Demonstratio forms vol. xxii. of the Greek
Patrology of Migne (1857), who uses the Paris edition of 1628 with the same
translation. The most recent text is W. Dindorf's in the Teubner Series
(Leipzig, 1867), from whose Preface the data of the above are drawn. The Latin
version of Donatus (Rome, 1498) was reprinted at Basle in 1542, 1549, 1559 and
1570, and with the Scholia of J. J. Grynaeus at Paris in 1587. It is remarkable
for its omissions and alterations of passages doctrinally suspected. The present
translation is made from the text of Gaisford (Oxford, 1852), with reference to
Migne.

LIST OF CHAPTERS The Contents of the First Book of the Proof of the Gospel of
Our Saviour 1. The Object and Contents of the Work.

2. The Character of the Christian Religion.

3. That the System of Moses was not Suitable for All Nations.

4. Why is it we reject the Jews' Way of Life, though we accept their Writings?

5. The Character of the New Covenant of Christ. |xxxv 6. The Nature of the Life
according to the New Covenant proclaimed by Christ.

7. How Christ having first fulfilled the Law of Moses became the Introducer of a
New and Fresh System.

8. That the Christian Life is of Two Distinct Characters.

9. Why a Numerous Offspring is not as Great a Concern to us as it was to them of
Old Time.

10. Why we are not bidden to burn Incense and to sacrifice the Fruits of the
Earth to God, as were the Men of Old Time. The Contents of Book II 1. That we
have not embraced the Prophetic Hooks of the Hebrews without Aim and Object.

2. That their Prophets gave their Host Predictions for us of the Foreign
Nations.

1, 2, 3. From Genesis. 4. From Deuteronomy.

5. From Psalm xxi.

6. From Psalm xlvi.

7. From Psalm lxxxv.

8. From Psalm xcv.

9. From Zechariah.

10, 11. From Isaiah.

3. That the same Prophets foretold that at the Coming of Christ All Nations
would learn the Knowledge and Holiness of the God, Who formerly was only known
to the Hebrews.

12. From Psalm ii. 13. From Psalm lxxi.

14. From Psalm xcvii.

15. From Genesis.

16, 17. From Zephaniah.

18. From Zecheriah.

19, 20, 21, 22, 23. From Isaiah.

4. That the Call of the Gentiles coming to pass through Christ, there would be a
Decline in the Jewish Nation from its Godly Holiness.

24, 25. From Jeremiah. 26. From Amos.

27. From Mienh.

28. From Zecheriah. |xxxvi 29. From Malachi.

30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35. From Isaiah.

5. That the Divine Promises did not extend to the whole Jewish Nation, but only
to a few of them.

36, 37, 38, 39, 40,41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49. From Isaiah. 50, 51. From
Micah.

52. From Zephaniah.

53. From Zechariah.

54, 55. From Jeremiah.

56, 57, 58, 59, 60. From Ezekiel. The Contents of Book III 1. That the Prophets
made Mention of the Gospel of Christ.

2. That they prophesied of Christ.

3. How we should reply to those who suppose Him to have been a Deceiver.

4. Of His Diviner Works.

5. Against those that disbelieve the Account of our Saviour's Miracles, given by
His Disciples.

6. That He worked not His Miracles by Sorcery, but by Divine Virtue and Power.

7. That from this Working they who love Truth perceive also the Power of His
Divinity. The Contents of Book IV 1. Of the Mystical Dispensation of Our Lord
and Saviour Jesus the Son of God.

2. That we hold that the Son of God was before the Whole Creation.

3. That we rightly teach that there are not many Sons of the Supreme God, but
One only, God of God.

4. That the Only-begotten Son of God must be considered necessarily anterior to
the Whole Universe.

5. That we hold that there are Numberless Divine Created Powers, but One alone
of the Son, whereby we describe Him as the Image of God the Father.

6. That from the First Constitution of the Universe, the |xxxvii Christ of God
has been the Invisible Guardian of Godly Souls.

7. That to the Hebrews alone of Old was the Knowledge of the True God revealed,
being known by the Manifestation of Christ.

8. That the Other Nations assigned to Certain Angels, worshipped the Stars of
Heaven.

9. Of the Hostile Power opposed to God, and of its Ruler, and how the Whole Race
of Mankind was in Subjection thereto.

10. That the Only-Begotten Son of God of Necessity made His Entry among Mankind.

11. That He passed through the Life of Men.

12. That the Laws of Loving-kindness called Him even to them that had been long
Dead.

13. That even when He was made Man He continued in the Nature that cannot
suffer, nor be harmed, nor be embodied.

14. That renewing Humanity He afforded to us all the Hope of Eternal Good.

15. What the Advent of Christ is meant to shew forth, and that He is called God
and Lord, and High Priest of the God of the Universe by the Hebrew Prophets.

16. In which Prophetic Scriptures the Christ is foretold by Name.

From Psalm ii. From Psalm xix. From Psalm xxvii. From Psalm lxxxiii. From Psalm
lxxxviii. From Psalm cxxxi. From Amos. From Habakkuk. From the Lamentations of
Jeremiah. From the First Hook of Kings. From Psalm xlv.

17. That the Name of Jesus was also honoured among the Ancient Saints.

From Exodus. From Zechariah. |xxxviii The Contents of Book V

How the Hebrew Prophets predicted the Future, and shed the Light of True
Theology. And how many Prophetic Voices made Mention of the Divine Pre-existence
of the Saviour.

1. From the Proverbs. 2. From Psalm xlv.

3. Psalm cix.

4. Isaiah.

5. Psalm xxxii.

6. Isaiah.

7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. Genesis.

13, 14, 15, 16, 17. Exodus.

18. From Numbers.

19. Joshua, son of Nave.

20. Job.

21. Psalm xc.

22. Hosea.

23. Amos.

24. Obadiah.

25, 26, 27. Zechariah.

28, 29. Malachi.

Jeremiah

The Contents of Book VI Of His Sojourn among Men from the following Scriptures.

1. From Psalm xvii. 2. From Psalm xlvi.

3. From Psalm xlix.

4. From Psalm lxxxiii.

5. From Psalm xcv.

6. From Psalm xcvii.

7. From Psalm cvi.

8. From Psalms cxvi. and cxvii.

9. From Psalm cxliii.

10. From Psalm cxlvii.

11. From the Second Book of Kings.

12. From the Third Book of Kings.

13. From Micah.

14. From Habakkuk. |xxxix 15. From the same.

16, 17, 18. From Zechariah.

19. From Baruch.

20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. From Isaiah.

The Contents of Book VII 1. What the Character of God's Sojourn among Men was
from the following Scriptures.

1, 2, 3. From Isaiah. 2. Where it was prophesied that Christ should be horn.

4. From Micah. 5. From Psalm cxxxi.

3. From what Tribe it was announced that He should spring from the following
Scriptures.

6. From the Second Book of Chronicles. 7. From Psalm lxxi.

8. From Isaiah.

9. From Jeremiah.

10. From Genesis.

The Contents of Book VIII Of the Date of His appearing among Men from the
following Scriptures.

1. From Genesis. 2. From Daniel.

3. From Micah.

4. From Zechariah.

5. From Isaiah.

The Contents of Book IX Of the Things to be done in Connection with His
Incarnation from the following Scriptures.

1. From Numbers. 2. From Isaiah.

3. From Numbers.

4. From Hosea.

5, 6. From Isaiah.

7. From Psalm xc.

8. From Isaiah. |xl 9. From Psalm lxvii.

10. From Isaiah.

11. From Deuteronomy.

12. From Job.

13, 14, 15, 16. From Isaiah.

17. From Zechariah.

18. From Psalm cxvii.

The Contents of Book X Of the Conspiracy of Judas the Traitor and those with
Him. to be formed against Christ, from the following Scriptures.

1. From Psalm xl. 2. From Psalm liv.

3. From Psalm cviii.

4. From Zechariah.

5. From Jeremiah. Of the Events at the Time of His Passion.

6. From Amos. 7. From Zechariah.

8. From Psalm xxi.

The above list of chapters was given at the beginning of each book. It was lost
from the Paris Codex for Book I together with the first pages of that book, and
from the copies, one of which Robert Stephen used in his edition of 1545. In the
Paris edition of 1628, the editor composed the headings of the first three
chapters, and supplied the others from a second catalogue, which is given at the
head of each chapter throughout the work. Though no doubt the catalogue was
complete in the Mavrocordato Codex, Stephen Bergler omitted to give it in the
portion of the work which he supplied for the edition of Fabricius. The headings
of the separate chapters, which are in our translation given in their places and
form a second catalogue, are much fuller than the introductory list, being
enriched by outlines of the prophetic passages that are used.

[Footnotes have been renumbered and moved to the end] 1. [1] Gifford,
Praeparatio Evangelica, p. i. a, hereafter often cited as G.P.E.

2. [2] G.P.E., p. 3 b.

3. [3] G.P.E., p. 3 c.

4. [1] Lightfoot, D.C.B. ii. 329.

5. [2] Ibid. 331.

6. [1] Cambridge Theological Essays (London 1906), p. 350.

7. [1] J. F. Bethune-Baker, "Christian Doctrines and their Ethical
Significance," in Cambridge Theological Essays (London 1906), p. 571.

8. [2] C. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria.

9. [1] Christologies, Ancient and Modern, p. 40.

10. [2] Stanley, Eastern Church, iii. 80.

11. [3] History of Dogma, iii. 136 (note).

12. [1] W. Bright, Church of the Fathers, i. vi. 88. The creed is given.
Theodoret, H. E. i. 1.

13. [1] Theodoret, H.E. i. 12. This text was transcribed by Peter Kirby &
reformatted by Roger Pearse, 2002. All material on this page is in the public
domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 53: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - PREFACE TO THE ONLINE EDITION
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Preface
to the online edition THIS translation was published by SPCK in 1920 in two
hardback volumes. It was republished in 1981, and is currently in print in a
single volume paperback for $25, published by Wipf & Stock, March 2001, ISBN:
0927022494; available from various sites online, although not Amazon, e.g.
Pentecostal Publishing. This transcription is not as complete as it might be. In
particular, it omits the bible references, almost all the footnotes, and a
certain number of the references to the Greek text. This is because it has been
a struggle to transcribe.

Some months ago, a fellow-enthusiast for scanning patristic material, Peter
Kirby, mentioned online that he intended to scan the only English translation of
Eusebius' Demonstratio Evangelica. By coincidence, I had just obtained a
photocopy of the SPCK edition. As this was a work in which I was interested, I
contacted him and offered my help. He began work on the introduction, while I
scanned book 2 and sent it to him. Neither of us much enjoyed the experience.
The SPCK edition was hard to scan, and manual corrections of the interminable
footnotes, and manually incorporating the marginal scripture references and
Greek edition codes took forever. After these, Peter began work on Book 1, while
I started on Book 3. Neither of us ever finished. Instead, more pressing (and
achievable) tasks were undertaken. However the intention remained, and a 2-inch
deep pile of photocopies on the side kept looking at me. On New Year's Eve 2002,
I decided to try to place at least the English text online. This could be
scanned and proofed and formatted far more quickly, ignoring marginal material,
and all the footnotes. After all, I felt, it is better to have the text only,
than nothing. This I have proceeded to do, completing on the 3rd January 2003.

Naturally I haven't discarded the material done so far. I reformatted and
completed the material scanned by Peter into the standard format I use on these
pages. I found that the book 2 text had actually been lost, but fortunately a
proofed but unformatted copy was still on my hard disk. Likewise I used the
material already proofed for book 3. I scanned book 1 myself, and experimented
with marking up the Greek location numbers in Green. I quickly found this slowed
matters to a crawl, and desisted. Greek text was a problem -- Peter had done his
into HTML characters, while mine was a mix of Symbol and SPIonic. [Now converted
to unicode -- October 2005].

All these inconsistencies remain in the scanned text. I apologise for them. It
would have been possible, but tedious, to remove them. However, I felt that it
was better to include material from footnotes etc which was available, and put
up with the incomplete nature of it. The reader should be aware that, apart from
the intro and book 2, the selection of footnotes, scripture references, Greek
locations is sporadic, and its absence indicative of nothing but transcription
difficulties. The footnotes are primarily in Greek, and consist of variants in
the biblical text, with that of Westcott & Hort. Other footnotes consist of
quotations from Shakespeare, or common-place comments on the fathers. If you
want the extra material, either contact me with an offer of help, or else
support the reprint and buy a copy! The printed text is cheap, and much handier
than a pile of print-offs.

I have included the SPCK catalogue of publications for 1920. It is useful to see
a list of all this material, which is now in the public domain, and it probably
helps those looking for such things as English translations of the Fathers.

I am aware that the quality of transcription is probably not all that high.
However, I do not believe that this text will appear online in the foreseeable
future, unless these shortcuts are taken. I hope readers will be understanding;
and if you find errors, by all means send them in to me, Roger Pearse.

Roger PEARSE 1st-3rd January 2003 This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse,
2003. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 54: THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL - PREFACE, CONTENTS, ABBREVIATIONS
========================================================================

Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica. Tr. W.J. Ferrar (1920) -- Preface
TRANSLATIONS OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE GENERAL EDITORS : W. J. SPARROW-SIMPSON,
D.D., W. K. LOWTHER CLARKE, B.D.

SERIES I

GREEK TEXTS THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL

VOL. I

[Blank page] TRANSLATIONS OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. SERIES I. GREEK TEXTS THE
PROOF OF THE GOSPEL BEING THE DEMONSTRATIO EVANGELICA OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA

VOL. I By W.J. FERRAR SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. London. The
Macmillan Company. New York

1920

[Blank page]

|v

PREFACE

It is a high privilege to have been allowed to provide a translation of the
Demonstratio; for in default of a better it must for some time fill the vacant
place in English bookshelves beside the noble edition of the Praeparatio, which
was the work of Archdeacon Gifford's declining years.

Yet it is an appalling thought that this translation, continuing as it does the
work of Gifford, should in any sense be thought to seek comparison with it. The
writer has but endeavoured according to his powers, and amid other absorbing
duties, to fill a recognized gap, by giving a faithful rendering of the words of
Eusebius, so that it may be possible for the English student to become
acquainted with all that remains of the work to which the Praeparation was the
Introduction.

He has erred perhaps rather in the direction of literal exactness than of free
paraphrase, especially in doctrinal sections, thinking it primarily necessary to
make it clear what Eusebius actually said.

Limitations of space have made it impossible to reproduce the long passages from
the Old Testament upon which Eusebius based his arguments. To have retained them
in full would have been interesting because of their variations from the text of
the LXX : but this consideration was hardly important enough to make their
inclusion essential. The translator would gratefully record his indebtedness to
the Rev. W. K. Lowther Clarke, the Secretary of S.P.C.K., for his constant
interest, scholarly guidance, and invaluable suggestions during the progress of
the work: but for his help it would be far more imperfect than it is.

W. J. FERRAR.

East Finchley.

Easter, 1920.

[Blank page]

|vii

CONTENTS

PREFACE INTRODUCTION ---- § 1. OBJECT AND OCCASION

§ 2. THE DATE

§ 3. CONTENTS § 4. RELATION TO EARLIER APOLOGIES § 5. THE ARGUMENT OF THE THIRD
BOOK § 6. THE CHRISTOLOGY OF EUSEBIUS § 7. THE REFERENCES TO THE EUCHARIST

§ 8. MSS., ETC LIST OF CHAPTERS TRANSLATION AND NOTES INDEX OF QUOTATIONS FROM
HOLY SCRIPTURE INDEX OF OTHER QUOTATIONS INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

GENERAL INDEX

|viii

ABBREVIATIONS D.C.B. Smith and Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography,
1877-1887.

D.C.A. Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, 1875-1880.

D.A.C. Hastings' Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, 1915-1918.

H.D.B. Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, 1898-1906.

E.R.E. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics.

Enc. Bib. Encyclopedia Biblica.

S. Swete's Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, vols. i., ii.,
and iii. 4th edn. 1912.

W.H. Westcott and Hort's New Testament in Greek, 1882.

G.P.E. E. H. Gifford's edition of Praeparatio Evangelica. Text, Translation, and
Notes. (Oxford, 1903.) Eus., H.E. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius. This
text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 2002 & Peter Kirby. All material on this
page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 55: THEOPHANIA - BOOK 1
========================================================================

THEOPHANIA. THE FIRST BOOK OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA ON THE DIVINE MANIFESTATION.

1. THOSE who say on the constitution of the whole of this great and beautiful
world, and on the diversified subsistence and manifold structure of the heavens
and the earth, that it has neither beginning nor governour; and that there is no
Lord, and no Providential care (existing); but that it has arisen of itself,
casually, undesignedly, and by blind (lit. foolish) accident, however this may
have, happened, are altogether impious and godless1: on which account they are
excluded from the divine assemblies, and with propriety shut out from our holy
temples. Because, neither can they themselves possess a house without
contrivance and care; nor can a ship be well constructed with its appurtenances,
without a shipwright; nor a garment be woven, without the art of weaving; nor a
city |2 be built, when the science of the architect is wanting. And, as they
themselves confess these things, I know not by what estrangement of the
intellect it is, that they do not consider the courses of the sun (as being)
according to their manner; the changes of the moon, according to their
appointments; the (several) orders of the stars, as in their due course; and the
revolutions of the curvatures of the heavens, and the recurrence and changes of
times and seasons2. And again with these, that (they do not consider) the weight
of the mountains (as regulated) by the balance3; the equalization of days and
nights; the unimpeded production of the animals; the traditionary and unchanging
succession of life of long duration; the herbs of every sort of flower which
spring out of the earth; the provisions for all the animals, as suitable for
each; their several senses; the members of the body; their properties of
excellence, and as located in their (several) situations, so that (men) see with
their eyes, and feel with their hands: which they also say, is obvious to the
blind. So that with atheistical affirmations, and injurious wickedness of mind,
|3 (they assert) that there is no work either of wisdom, of the WORD OF GOD, or
of Providence (evinced in all this); but they imagine on the contrary, that
(all) is of blind fortune, and happens just as it may be, without object or end.
These same therefore are, as being atheistical, driven far away from the Divine
hearing (of the Word), and entirely from the society of those who fear God.

2. The company too of the Polytheists, on the other hand, set in order against the preceding, seems to me to be in extreme error;----that they err, as children in intellect, who change the worship of the Maker of the world, the Governour of all, the God who is over all, for (that) of the things which are of Him; and (hence) honour the sun, the moon, and the rest of the parts of the universe, the primary elements, the earth, water, air, and fire, with the name due to Him, who is their Maker and Creator; and call those Gods4 which never existed; nor had existed, nor had been (so) named, had not the Maker5 of the universe, THE WORD OF GOD, willed that they should exist. Nor do they appear to me better than those who leave the chief Architect, to admire the excellency of workmanship (visible) in the houses of kings; the wrought cielings7 and the walls; their many coloured and flowered pictures; their roofs variegated with gold and sculpture of precious stones; and attribute to these the praise and wisdom due to their Artificer; which they ought to ascribe, not to the things seen, but to Him alone who is their chief Architect; to confess Him to be the cause of their wonder, and of these many works
|4
of wisdom. For He alone is wise who supplied the cause, that these many things should thus be. These differ, therefore, in no respect from mere infants. Nor do those whose admiration is expended on the lyre with its seven strings,----the (mere) instrument of music,----but not on him who is the inventor of its structure, nor on him who knows its use, nor yet on his wisdom. Nor (again) do those who leave him who is eminent in war, to adorn his spear and shield with the crowns of victory. Nor do those who honour the streets, squares, buildings, temples, gymnasia----things inanimate----with the admiration due to the great king, who caused the erection of such chief city of his kingdom: when it was right they should admire, neither the pillars nor the stones, but the great maker and lawgiver6 of these instances of wisdom.

3. In7 conformity with these (considerations) also, we make this same (Being)
the (efficient) cause of all which we see with the eyes of the body; not the
sun, the moon, nor any other of the things in the heavens. It is becoming too,
that we should confess them all to be the works of wisdom: but not, that we
should honour or worship them by means of any similitude of Him, who is their
Maker and Creator. From the contemplation of these too, we both praise and
worship, with the whole affection of the soul, Him who again is known, not by
means of the bodily eyes, but only by the mind which is pure and enlightened; |5
Him (I say) who is the King of all, THE WORD OF GOD. For no one ever graced the
(mere) body of any wise and intelligent man, (or) his eyes8, head, hands, feet,
or the rest of his flesh, much less his external clothing, with the title of
wisdom; nor yet has termed the vessels in the houses, nor the service-vessels,
of the philosophers, wise; while every thinking person has expressed his wonder
at that concealed, and unseen, mind which is in man.

4. Thus, and more particularly,----before these visible ornaments which are (but) the bodies of this whole
universe, and which have been fabricated from one (species of) matter,----let us express our wonder at that unseen and invisible WORD, that Maker and Adorner of the exemplars9 of all things, who is the ONLY (begotten) WORD OF GOD: whom, the Maker of all, He who is beyond all, and above all being, generated of Himself as a ray of light from His own Godhead, and constituted Him both the Leader and Governour of this whole (world).
|6

5. For it was impossible that this perishable being of bodies, and this Nature of reasonable creatures (such) as it now is, could be brought near to God the Governour of all, on account of its exceedingly great imperfection. For He is an Essence beyond and above all, which can neither be described, comprehended, nor approached; and (which) dwells in the glorious light, to which nothing can be compared,----as the Divine words declare10. For this had no existence, and out of nothing did He send it forth. And (hence) it was greatly different, and very far removed, from the nature of (His) Essence. Well therefore did He, the fulness of all good, the God of all, first appoint a Mediator11, the Divine Power, His ONLY (begotten), who should be sufficient for all12; who could accurately, abundantly, and as present, hold converse with His Father4, receive of His inward and secret (nature), and be meekly lowered to the form and manner of those who were (so) far removed from His princely state. In no
|7
other way could it be either glorious or right, that He, who is beyond and above all, should be mixed up with matter that is perishable, and with a body. On this account, the DIVINE WORD entered by a (sort) of commixture into this whole, and bound together the bands (as it were) of all things, by means of the Divine power which is incorporeal: leading on and carrying forward, and governing (the whole) by every species of wisdom, as it seemed good to Him.

6. The proof then, of this conclusion is obvious. For, if those which we usually term the primary elements of all,----the earth, water, air, and fire, were themselves the constituent portions of the universe, and are constituted of a mixed nature, which we even see with our eyes is the case,----and, if the essence of all were one, and that comprehending the whole, and were (as) the Mother and Nurse (of all these things), as those who are subtle in these matters love to term it; and were without figure and visibility, and wholly destitute of soul and of reason;---- Whence, one may ask, was it, that this world was made to consist of that of which it now does? Whence also the distinction of the (several) elements? And whence the
|8 concordant course of those things which were adverse to agreement? And, Who commanded this heavy element of earth, to ride over that of humid matter?

7. And, Who is He that has caused water, the nature of which is to run
downwards, to take an opposite course, and to ascend to the clouds?

8. And, Who is He that has so constrained the power of fire, that it shall
insinuate itself into wood? and has made it to mix itself up with things which
are in their natures opposed to it?

9. And, Who has attempered this cold air with the power of heat; has released
these from their (natural) contentions with one another, and has reconciled them
(as it were) to love?

10. Who is He that has distinguished the race subject to mortality with the
character of extension, and drawn it out to the length of the life which is
immortal?

11. Who is He that has so formed the Male, fashioned the Female, and associated
them both as one compound, and (thus) discovered one source of generation for
all animal life?

12. Who is He that changes this fluent generating seed from its fluid,
perishing, and senseless state, and makes it (that) of the generation of animal
life?

13. Who is He that performs even to this time all these things, and innumerable
others beyond them, and which exceed all wonder and astonishment?

14. Who is He that daily and hourly, secretly and by a power that is invisible,
effects the generation and changes of these things?

15. But, the efficient Cause of all things is justly said to be that worker of
miracles, THE WORD OF GOD. For THE WORD OF GOD who is Almighty, has in truth |9
extended himself into every thing: above into the heights, and beneath into the
depths, has He drawn out His incorporeal soul. He also holds, as it were in His
hands, the breadth and length of all in (its) extent. This whole has He brought,
and bound up together; and has (thus) set up for himself this (immense) vessel
filled with every sort of compound. He too, by every species of wisdom, and by
means of the power which is rational, has made well to combine and to harmonize,
according to their several measures, this essence of bodies destitute of reason,
form, and visibility; governing by words unutterable, and directing for the
advantage of all13, the Sun, the Moon, and those (other) luminaries that are in
the heavens.

16. This selfsame WORD OF GOD too brought himself down also upon the earth, and
(there) set up all the various kinds of animals, and every beautiful form of
plant.

17. This selfsame WORD OF GOD also immerged even into the depths of the sea14,
and determined those swimming natures: and here again he made the myriads of
forms which are innumerable, with every various kind of living creature.

18. The selfsame also completes, by the effectuating art of nature, those
(beings) which are inwardly |10 conceived in the womb, and forms (them) into
animals. The same too makes to ascend to the heights as light, this humid,
heavy, and naturally descending, matter (of sea-water15), and thus, completing
the course of his government, changes it to sweetness, and brings it (again) in
due measure, and at determined seasons, upon the earth: and, like the excellent
husbandman who waters his land well, and attempers the wet with the dry, he
changes (things) into every sort of form: at one time, into beautiful flowers;
at another, into the forms peculiar to each species; at another, into delightful
scents; at another, into different and diversified sorts of fruits; at another,
into every kind of taste which gives pleasure.

19. But why need I take upon myself to discuss the powers of THE WORD OF GOD?
or, venture upon a thing, the doing of which is impossible, and, it is clear,
greatly surpasses all mortal mind?

20. Others indeed name this same (Being) Universal nature; others, the Universal
soul; others, Fate; and others say, that He is the God who is beyond all. But, I
know not how they confound together the things, which are so greatly and widely
different; and (thus) cast down to the earth, and mix up, that Governour of all,
that Power of (eternal) existence which is above all, with bodies, (and) |11
with perishable matter; affirm, that He is the medium both of irrational and
rational animals, and is comprehended both in those that are mortal, and
immortal. But these things they (do).

21. The Divine doctrine, however, declares that He who is above all that is
good, the same is the (efficient) Cause of all, and is beyond all comprehension;
and that on this account He cannot be described, enounced, or named: and, not
only that He is elevated above all verbal description, but also above all mental
apprehension; that He is neither contained in place, nor existing in body,
neither in the heavens, nor in the aether, nor in any one portion of this whole.
But that He is at once within, and independent of all, reserved in the unseen
depth of (His own) knowledge. The Divine declarations teach us to recognize Him
alone as the God of truth, who is far removed from all essence of body, and a
stranger to all service of government. It has, therefore, been delivered to us,
that all is of Him, but not that it is by (or through) Him16.

22. But He, as a king within the concealment and privacy in which He is
incomprehensible, sits in the elevation of His own splendour, governing and
ordering (all) solely by the power of His own will. For, by His will exists
whatsoever does exist; and, had He not (so) willed, neither had it (so) existed.
He wills, however, every good thing, because He is also good in His own
essential being. |12

23. He therefore, by whom are all things, THE WORD OF GOD, proceeded forth from above, from His good Father, as a river ever flowing from an unlimited fountain, and distilling as rain, in words unutterable, to those who were perishing, completely furnished for the common salvation of all. And, as in the case with ourselves, that secret and invisible mind which is within us, no man ever knew, either how, or why, it exists in its own essential character, but (which) sits as a king within the secrecy of its chambers, and considers of the things to be done; so the only word then proceeding from it, begotten as it were of a Father in the privacy of retirement, and being the primary angel (messenger) to all, of the mind of its Father, openly publishes those things which its father considered in secret; and, passing on into the hearing of all, brings to full effect the will (so made known). These (hearers) then receive the benefit of the word, while the secret and invisible mind, this father of (such) word, no one had ever seen with the eyes. So also,----that is, (in a manner) surpassing all examples and comparisons, that completing WORD OF GOD, the King of all,----was, as being the only (begotten) Son of His Father, established, not by any mere emanating virtue; nor constituted in his nature by the enunciation of names and words; nor designated by any sound produced by the percussion of the air: but THE WORD is living, and is the minister of God who is
|13
over all, and in His essence, He is "the Power of God, and the Wisdom of God." He proceeds moreover from the Godhead and rule of His Father; and is the17 good offspring of the good Father, and the common Saviour of all. He also waters all, pouring out from his own fulness upon all, life, and reason, and wisdom, and light, and every good thing. He waters too, not only the things that are before Him and near Him, but those also that are removed far away on the earth, and in the sea; and if there be any other creature, in any thing that exists. He too keeps in order, by His justice and the power of His rule, every border, place, law, and possession: to each and every thing does He distribute and give that which is suitable: apportioning (this) to some who are in the sphere above the world; to others, who reside in the heavens; to others, whose habitation is the aether; to others, that are in the air; and to others, on the earth. Then passing on from these, He again well distinguishes, in other quarters, the lives of all; carrying forward with due discrimination, their customs and various observances. He also provides the food for the animals, not only for those that are rational, but also for those that are not so: (and this) for the advantage of those that are.

24. To some he gives the comforts of a mortal and temporary life; to others, that they may partake of immortality: and of every thing, as THE WORD OF GOD, is He the Doer. And, being near to every thing, and
|14
pervading all with a power which is rational, and, looking up to His Father, He governs the things that are below according to His intimations, and after Him accordingly as the Saviour of all. And thus, mediating and bringing near to the (eternal) Being this essence of things, He constitutes the bond which cannot be severed. THE WORD OF GOD (I say), which is in the midst, which binds together those which are diverse, and suffers them not to fall off (and) away, He is the Providential care which is watchful over all, He is the Director of all: He is "the Power of God, and the wisdom of God": He is the only (begotten) Son of God; the God which is begotten of God, THE WORD. For, "In the beginning was THE WORD, and THE WORD was with God, and THE WORD was God. Every thing was by Him, and without Him was not any thing:"---- the glorious words of the divine men (so) teaching.

25. This is the common Saviour of all, on whose account this universal essence is productive, and rejoices that it ever drinks from his dewdrops; is always youthful in its stature, and ever presents the appearance of beauty. He therefore holds its reins, and, at the intimations of His Father, rightly guides the mighty ship of this universe,
|15
(and) with His own helm He governs it. This (Being) excellent of art, did He who is God above all, as a good Father beget as good Fruit, the ONLY (begotten) SON, and give (him) to this world (as) a most excellent gift; did cast as a Soul into a body destitute of soul, and into the nature of irrational bodies, His own rational WOHD: and (so), by virtue of the DIVINE WORD, did He both enlighten and enliven this (otherwise) shapeless, unsightly and colourless, being
----by Him, (I say) whom we ought, both to know and to worship, as being ever near to the matter and elements, of (all) bodies. Thus, that which was immaterial, bodiless, and unconscious (lit. unwise), became, as from others, endued with consciousness (lit. became wise). But He is THE LIFE, and He is THE LIGHT; the intelligent offspring of THE LIGHT which cannot be described. He too, is ONE in His Essence, even as He is
|16
from ONE Father. He possesses however many powers (virtues) within His own person. For, we should not suppose that, because the (constituent) parts of the world are many, they therefore constitute many powers1 (Demons): nor, because the operations are many, we ought therefore, to set up for ourselves many Gods.

26. Those therefore who follow many Gods, commit, as children in soul, a
grievous mistake when they make into Gods the (constituent) parts of the
Universe, and (virtually) divide the one world into many18. As if one should
take from the person of a man the eyes only, and then affirm that these were the
man; and again, that the ears were another; and so again, the head (another);
or, should gradually sever the neck, the breast, the shoulders, the feet, the
hands, or the rest of the members; or, that he should (so) divide the faculty of
sense by |17 process of reasoning, and then affirm on this one man, that these
(portions) really were many men: he would deserve nothing better of the wise,
than the ridicule due to folly. Such as this man would be, would he likewise be
who fabricated for himself many Gods out of the (constituent) parts of the one
Universe, and would sever into many sections those Bodies of all, whose nature
is fleeting and dispersive, and which are fabricated out of one primary
material; and then again, would by an effort of reason make these his Gods?.

27. Much worse than this would he be, who would also imagine that this entirely made world,----constituted as it is wholly and altogether of many parts,----is God: not considering that the Divine nature could never subsist of parts or be complex, or could stand in need of some other to compound it: nor again, that if it consisted of parts, could it be Divine. For, How can it consist of things different and dissimilar, faulty and excellent? Because that which is compounded, must also be dissoluble; and that which consists of many parts, is of necessity dissimilar19: while that which is equal in all and unchanging in all, is simple and incomplex. That too which is complex, is compounded of things dissimilar. And that which is dissimilar has in itself something faulty, opposed to that which is excellent. For if the whole were excellent, it would (then) be equal and similar. And, if it were so in the whole, it would in the whole be consistent with itself: and thus would it be in essence simple,
|18
and without parts. But this nature (of things) does not shew itself to be such, since this world is viewed as wholly subject to sense: for it is constituted of many parts, and is (therefore) compounded; it is too, in many of its parts, changing. And where it is thus, there is also the capability of a nature of an opposite description. And hence this world associates beings, at once both mortal and immortal, rational and irrational; in matter too, both cold and hot; wet and dry. From all which, God is (necessarily) free. For, if the nature of God be simple, it is also without parts, and is uncompounded; (placed) beyond, and far removed from, every ordinance of this visible world. On this account the Preacher of Truth thus openly says: "The Word of God proclaimed, He who is before all, is alone the Saviour of all rational beings.'' But God who is beyond all, is the head (source) of the generation of THE WORD. He alone is the Cause of all; and, of His ONLY (begotten) WORD, He is truly styled THE FATHER. Above Him therefore, no other Cause can be assigned. He therefore is God alone20; and from Him proceeded forth, by (virtue of) His own secret will which is unutterable, the ONLY (begotten), the Saviour of all, the one WORD of God, who (is) through all.

28. This sensible world is therefore, not unlike the lyre of many strings, consisting of many dissimilar portions:|19----of acute and grave, lax and intense; and of others between these, all well combined together by the art of the Musician.
Such then is also this (universe), collected (as it is) into one compound, consisting of many parts, and many compositions; of cold at once, and warm its opposite; and of matter, wet and dry. It is moreover a mighty vessel, and is the work of the God of all.

29. But the DIVINE WORD has not been constituted of parts, nor has it been
compounded of any opposing (nature), nor does it consist of (either) part or
compound; but both wisely and well does He in every thing resemble His Father;
and to the King of all does He give back the praise, which to Him is both
suitable and due. (And) as in one body there are many parts, members, viscera,
and bowels, collected together, and one invisible soul (only) is diffused
through all; and one is the mind which (consists) of neither body nor parts; so
also (we say) of this one world, which is constituted of many parts. So also the
WORD OF GOD, manifold in power and Almighty, is one extended into all things,
and is invisibly diffused throughout them: and of all, in which He (thus)
subsists, He is the (efficient) Cause.

30. Do you not see with your eyes, that one heaven surrounds the whole world?
and that many orders of stars revolve in this? And again, (that) there is one
sun, not many? and that this eclipses the splendour of them all by its superior
light? So likewise is there one Father, the WORD of whom also is one, who must
be the good |20 offspring of the good Father. If therefore any one complain,
that there are not many Sons; so should he also complain, that many suns, moons,
and worlds, are not established, and at many other things, after the manner of
madmen, who endeavour to subvert those of nature which are right and good. But,
as in things visible, one sun gives light to the whole sensible world; so also
in things intellectual, the one WORD OF GOD, filled with all power, secretly and
(in a manner) imperceptible to us, gives light to all. For Why should many suns
be required, when one is sufficient to effect every thing? And again, What need
can there be of many Sons of God, when the ONE, the only (begotten), is
sufficient to effect the will of His Father? For, if there were many, then would
they be either similar, or dissimilar21. And if they were similar, then would
their multiplicity be in vain; because one Effectuator, and this Almighty, would
be sufficient for the performance and due ordering of all. But the WORD OF GOD,
and the WISDOM OF GOD, which is ONE in its essence, brings along with it the
light, and the life, and (indeed) all the fulness of goodness. The multitude
(then) of those who were (thus) vainly, and not well joined together in a power
that were similar, could have no advantage. But, if it were necessary they
should be dissimilar, How then could that which were dissimilar, or incomplete
and defective in its nature, be on the |21 other hand an Effectuator, and that
sufficient for all? But nothing which is horn of God is incomplete. The only
(begotten) of God is therefore complete (the Efficient). Nor are there many
WORDS OF GOD. On the contrary, THE GOD who is OF GOD is sufficient for all, and
is Almighty; is the one Image of the light of His Essence, as the divine words
declare; who, for the convenience of governing and healing all existing beings,
was necessarily appointed; who is also in His essence one, but in His powers
manifold. And Him alone do we declare to he sufficient for the adorning of all
things.

31. Because too, there is in man (but) one Soul and one reasoning faculty, and this at the same time capable of comprehending many things; whether (for example), it cultivate the earth, or fit up a ship, or guide it, or build (a house), still it is one and the same: or, whether it learn and do many things, still there is but one mind and cogitative faculty in man. It is moreover capable at once of many sorts of knowledge: the same man will be the geometrician, or will be skilled in the courses of the stars, or be perfect in the precepts of the grammarians and rhetoricians; or, he will become a leader in the science of healing, or in its manual operations. Nor has any one ever yet imagined, that there are many souls in (any) one body: neither has it been made matter of wonder, that there exists many essences in man, because of his
|22 capability of many sorts of knowledge. For, should a man find a shapeless piece of clay, and afterwards so model it with his hands, as to impress upon it the forms of certain animals; on one figure, the head; on another, the hands, the feet, or the eyes (of a man); and again, that he otherwise imitate by the art of the modeller, the cheeks, ears, mouth, nostrils, breast, and shoulders, Would it be right also to suppose that, because many forms and members had been (so) wrought in this one body, many were therefore their makers? We ought rather to bestow the full meed of praise on the one artificer of the whole, who had by one train of thought, and the exertion of one executive power, (so) disposed the whole:----

32. So also, of this universal world which is one, consisting nevertheless of
many parts, it cannot be right to erect the many powers (visible within it) into
makers; nor again to call these many Gods: but rather, to bless the ONE who
abounds in every species of wisdom, and every sort of compounding (power): Him
(I say) who is in truth "THE POWER or GOD, and THE WISDOM OF GOD;" who, by means
of one (almighty) power and virtue, pervades, and remains in, the universal
whole; who also gives establishment and life to all: and who, for the whole and
singular of |23 these bodies and elements, in their several situations, produced
at once from himself, the several and various means of subsistence.

33. So also the light of the Sun is one; yet, by its one incidence, it at once
illuminates the air, affords light to the eyes, warmth to the touch, ripens the
(produce of) the earth, gives growth to the plant, and fixes the several periods
of time. It also precedes the stars (in its course), makes the circuit of the
heavens, rises upon the world, and clearly establishes the power of God with
respect to all things22. All these things it completes in a momentary period of
nature. Thus too, the nature of fire (is such) as to purify gold, to melt lead,
to dissolve wax, to dry (wet) clay, and to consume dense (bodies): by means of
one burning power, it effects all these things.

34. So likewise THE WORD OF GOD, the King of all, He who is extended throughout
all, is in and pervades all, that is both in the heavens and the earth; He is
the governour of the things which are invisible and visible, and He directs by
powers unspeakable", the Sun, the Heavens, |24 and the whole Universe. He is
present to all things in His effectuating power; and He remains throughout all.
He also makes to distil as rain, from His own resources, the never-failing light
to the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars. He has established, and perpetually holds
fast, the heavens (as) an image of his own greatness. He also fills from the
treasury that is with Him, those hosts of Angels and Powers of intelligent and
rational spirits, at once with life, light, wisdom, and all the abundance of
every species of beauty and of goodness. And by one and the same effectuating
art, He never fails to supply substance to the material elements, and to Bodies
(their) commixture and concurrence; (their) forms, appearances, and characters.
He otherwise varies also and time after time, (His) innumerable operations,
(whether) in the animals, the plants, or in the beings rational or irrational:
at once He provides every thing for all, by (His) one power; and clearly shews,
(that this) is not a mere Lyre (as it were) of seven or many strings, but is the
one universe of manifold composition, the workmanship of the ONE WORD, the Maker
of the world23.

35. Such therefore, is the common Saviour of all, THE WORD or the GOD of all, of
whom one discoursing on God24 thus mysteriously speaks: "He25 was in the world,
and the world was (made) by Him; and the world knew Him not" For, from ancient
times (and) hitherto, it knew Him not, until He manifested Himself, in the
latter times, to those who were holden in the darkness of vice. But He, the
Maker of the whole world, He, who is the common Saviour of all, has been
directly made known to us, as thus existing; and as affording to this whole, all
this assistance. But, as to this whole world which is |25 governed by one Ruler,
(and) which consists of the heavens, the earth, and of the things therein, it is
now necessary we should shew in a few words, what the nature of the being is
which He has assigned to it.

36. This (universe) then, partakes of two natures; of the essence which is more excellent and is allied to THE DIVINE WORD; which, being intellectual and rational, is perceived by the mind, and apprehended by the reason: and to this is possible all that is superior to (material) Bodies. (It partakes) also of that which was necessarily brought forth for the use of this; which is matter,----is the offspring of Bodies, and is understood by the sense of reason, both to exist and to be perishable: and which, as I think, has been well said never to have had any (independent) being26. But this, which is visible to the bodily sense, designates the one Universe. This same (too), the whole of which is visible, as well as that which is invisible, may thus be well said to constitute one family of rational beings; just as in the things that are visible, the nature of bodies is one; while of tin's, some are in the heavens and the aether27,----those among these being distinct, and different;----some in the air and on the earth; and of which, the things visible are the animals and plants. So also, in the essence which is intelligent and invisible, the common kind of them all is one. One also is the nature of the generation of the rational and intelligent faculties, while many and various are the distinctions existing in this28.

37. This same therefore, which has been fabricated out of matter, and (material) bodies; this, which we usually
|26
name the sensible world, which consists of the heavens the earth and of the things therein, may be likened to an imperial city in which there are many citizens, the houses of some of which have been distinguished (as) apartments of the state. Of these, the inner ones are neither entered into, nor trodden, by the many. Some again are for stations without, (set apart) for the keepers of the middle portions. Others again, are far distant from the court, and are left for the inhabitants (generally) and their various assemblies29. Many are (thus) the stations in the heavens, and many are those inferior to these in the sether, and in the air above the earth. The habitable
|27
part of the earth, (assigned) to those who walk upon it, is this broad space known to us all. Those (places) however which are beyond the heavens, are (exalted) above all mental apprehension, as are those also which are distinguished as inner apartments of the divine house of rule. But those (beings) who surround the King of all, and exult at the side of THE DIVINE WORD, are both enlightened and upholden by means of the rays which are drawn forth from Him, as from unfailing fountains of light; and are established in the fulness of light. (Thus) too all the enlightened, with the incorporeal assemblies of light, hold that rank of station which is beyond the heavens, and honour with the highest praises, (and) which are worthy of God, the God who is King of all.
30 In the midst moreover, has He cast (spread) forth the vast heavens, the curtains (as it were) of the azure threshold, which exclude those who are without from the mansion of rule; while the keepers of the intermediate part perform (their) rounds in this, as being without the gate, with those who in the heavens are
|28
invested with light and holding lamps, as the sun and the moon, honouring Him who is beyond all, the King of all. And, at his intimation and word, these supply light by means of lamps which cannot be extinguished, to those whose lot it is to be in the place of darkness, and without the heavens. Thus are brought near to Him the powers of the air, which are invisible to bodily eyes, as also the animals and other earthly things (which are visible): so is man also the chief of them all, whose race was no stranger to that intelligent and rational Essence which is invisible, and who was created on the earth to render praise to the Godhead and rule of Him who is the Cause of all things. Like as on earth therefore, there is spread over the whole world but one, and that the same human nature; and, as many nations have arisen out of this, and the manner of life of every race, its fashions, modes, and governments, are different, not only of the barbarians and wild, but also of the peaceable, fashionable, and wise; and, (as) there are among these both slaves and freemen, poor and rich; those also who differ in colour, as the Scythians, and those whose lot it is to dwell without, in the west; the Hindoos also, at the rising of the sun, and the Ethiopians at its setting; Greeks, too, and others whose destiny it is to reside among princes; and, among all these again, some bear rule over portions of the nations, and others are wholly subject: with the great king of all moreover, some are considered as in the place of friends, some are elevated to the greatest honours, others are more especially ennobled for their virtuous deeds: some, again, fill the rank of slaves; and others, bearing spears and shields, surround the sovereign: others again, are military officers in the cities, while others fill the situation of rule in these: others too, have met the fate of the
|29
vulgar; and others are considered as in the place of enemies and haters: still, the whole of these are men, and one is the common species of them all. Over them all too, is there one king, one only power, vested with his own authority which is all-supreme. And to this same, according to the law and edict of the state,----to him alone, the Father and Lawgiver,----is (the title of) great king ascribed: while He (the WORD) descending from above, and running (as it were) throughout the whole of the governours and governed, subjects to the one yoke of rule every race (placed) under his hand; elevating some
to the highest honour, and to others rendering that which is their due31.

38. As it is with these things, (so) one is the generating, intelligent, and rational Essence which is over all. And well might it be said, that one is the kind (genus) even of these, and that they all are nothing more than brethren (derived) from one, as made of Him who is the Father of THE WORD OF GOD32. There are then, multitudes of nations, and of kinds (of these); and there is a portion the more virtuous, and the contrary. The differences too of these, as to mind (opinion) are innumerable, as are the fashions, modes of life, constitutions, and the contrary; but not as to their natures, for the nature of them all is one, and the kind is one. It is of the variety of their wills, that they have found out many and different fashions and modes of life. Hence, are the companies of angels, of spirits, and of incorporeal and invisible powers; some of which are resplendent and glorious, as enlightened by the splendour of THE DIVINE WORD; others are dark, blacker than any Ethiopian, and
|30
destitute of all rational light. This kind is quite deserving of the middle place, as capable at once of both the excellent and the base. But the King is one, that ONLY power which is God above all, both of those who are in the heavens, and above the heavens. And He it is who holds by the law and edict of sovereign rule, the things that are in the air, on the earth, and under the earth, and which are of all, and in all. This law and edict is moreover one, (viz.) He who lives in all, THE WORD OF GOD, the minister, (lit. agent): not as that dying (utterance) which is sent forth from the mouth of mortals into the air33; but is,----as it has now been made known to us (by the Gospel)----of things (in their nature) possible, the Governour of all in all wisdom and power. He (I say) who, as THE WOED OF GOD, distributes fully and in justice to all, the things which are most suitable to them; and gives to each, and to every one of them, the stations which are suitable: to those which are near, (those) of happiness; but those of the contrary, to them who have fallen from virtue, as they may have (severally) deserved. He at once gives to all---- like those who are on the earth,----to reside in different localities; to some, to exult at the side of the heavenly sovereignty; to others, to keep watch without; toothers, to dwell beyond (these), and at a distance: while all with one mouth, and according to the doctrine and instruction of each, celebrate the praise of the King and God of all:
----(all I say) who bear this law in their hearts and in the mind of their nature, that they should confess that ONE, who is the likeness of the image of sovereign rule, who is the only (begotten) WORD,----Him " who is the Image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature34,"----as the divine words mysteriously teach.

39. And to the honouring of Him are all, whether the rulers or the ruled in
every house and city, at once devoted: not, with inanimate colours variously set
forth in pictures (or images,), but within, on the hearts of their |31
intellectual faculties as upon intelligent tablets, is the worship of His
Godhead inscribed. Thus do all those, who are subject to His power, tender their
worship, irrespective of those vicious Demons, and wicked Spirits, and "Rulers
of this world," who consider themselves as in the situation of enemies and
haters; those who have assimilated themselves to the image of fraudulent rule35,
and put forth various books in the place of others36; that is, innumerable false
scriptures (ascribed) to that fearful name, and to that expressed name, which
governs the Law. But far superior to the Law is the name (which) they have
surreptitiously assumed to themselves. Thus do they succeed in casting down to
the earth among bodies, elements, and the portions of the world, the (whole)
race of mortal men. Hence have men feared and served the creatures, more than
the Creator of these37.

40. And again, they named (as gods) for themselves, these very powers, contenders and rebels against God, which in their perverseness so became gods; these (I say) which never existed (as such). And well may those be considered as enemies and haters, from whom the law of truth has commanded us to flee, and to take refuge in Him alone who is the WORD, the Saviour of all;----Him, who has cast forth the seed which is of Himself, in order that it may produce, not only in the heavenly places, but also on the earth; and has assigned both to those that are in the heavens, and to those that are in the elements of
|32
the earth, one and the same portion of kind. So that the rational mind which is in man, (and) is of that incorporeal intelligent essence, and of the kind of the DIVINE WORD which pervades all that has hitherto been generated, is nourished on earth by its meditations on Him, and previously trained for its transition (conversion) to virtue. Hence too, is it previously instructed and taught, to provide for its passing to the children of its own kind. Wholly therefore is this alone, of those that are on the earth, through its participation with THE DIVINE WORD, worthy of the name of rational. He has then, necessarily assigned a place on earth (to) the mind and rational soul; so that a small image of the great City of God, mentioned in the example a little while ago (given), has been set up on earth: nor is there in the whole empire of God, nor even a place on the earth, exempt from this lot. And it was right, that praise should be ascribed in every part of the universe to THE WORD, the common Father of all, by those who had been generated of Himself. Hence, even the element of earth is not exempt from being entrusted with this rational portion. Not only by those who are beyond the world, and in the heavens, and the rational (beings) that are in the air; but also by those that dwell on the earth, is that just praise sent up to the Maker and Father of all: which indeed the Divine Word teaches, when it thus commands every man to sing the praise which is due to God38: " Praise ye God from the heavens; praise ye him in the heights. Praise him all ye his angels; praise him all ye his hosts. Praise him sun and moon; praise him all ye stars and light. Praise him ye heavens of heavens." After the things which are upon the earth, he (the Sacred Writer) reasons thus: "Praise ye God from the earth (all)" other things. He then also (reasons upon) this rational family of man,----this (I say) which divides itself from every thing else into various companies and orders of rank,----in this manner:----" Praise him, ye Icings of the earth, and all
|33 people: ye great, and all ye judges of the earth: young men and maidens: old men with children. Let them praise the name of the Lord; for great is his name alone; and his praise is in the earth, and in the
"heavens."39

41. With these (words) therefore, he leads over against and along with the companies that are in the heavens, those also that are on the earth, to the praise of the King of all. For to Him alone in truth, and to no other God,----(to) Him who is beyond all the heavens above,---- do the companies that are above the curvatures of the heavens ascribe honour and praise. To Him (as) their Father do the hosts of angels and spirits, the offspring of the light which is intelligent, render the praises which are unutterable. To Him also the sun, the moon, and the stars which are in the circuits of distant worlds, and run their lengthened courses in the spaces of aether, and form a crown (as it were) to Him;----the invisible powers also, which wing their way in the free expanse of air,----proclaim the meed of praise and blessing which is (both) due and becoming.

42. How then, after (the detail of) these things could it be becoming, that the element of earth alone should be wanting in the provision which (prevails) in all? Or, that this nature which is generative of all these fruits,
|34
should stand alone, in withholding its meed of praise? Or, that the life which is (passed) on the earth, bearing every sort of fruit, should be barren as to (that of) the intelligent creature? Would it not rather appear that this would seem good to Him,----who is the fulness of all wisdom, the Maker of all,----that He should for His own sake, sow this locality of earth with beings intelligent and rational? and should, for the use of these, provide the rest of the creatures, as also that which is generative of fruits and flowers? And that He should here also join the praise of men, to that which is rendered by the companies of all (else), to His own Father? And this was so done in former times:----this, that man, who had been made in the image of God40, honoured with hymns and songs THE WORD, his Father, together with the divine and rational assemblies, and with the several orders of angels. His mind had not then erred in the setting up of inanimate images under the phantasms of demoniacal deception, nor under the stories of error common to polytheism: for these things recently, and after a time, became known through the vain babblings of the poets. Those primitive chiefs of our race, who hitherto had not learned the arts of modelling, hewing, and carving, and had made no use of this extreme metal-working art of evil deeds, called upon the Maker of the whole universe and their Lord, in the simplicity of their souls, and in the mind of their (unsophisticated) nature: and Him alone did they confess, in their instruction which was mental41, to be the Lord and God of all. And as these did, so did the chief of our nature (Adam), as also did the Hebrew race, which was in ancient times beloved of God, and received,
|35
as a son from his father, the good inheritance of the observances of the fear of God. But these honoured nothing with purity of life, and with the observances of the fear of God, except the one God, the King who is above all, and His WORD who is the Saviour of all. On this account, they were considered worthy of the revelation of the Word of God, of prophecy, and of the doctrines of righteousness.

43. Thus therefore, THE WORD OF GOD, the Maker of all things, fills, with His seed of intelligent and rational being, all parts and places that are above the world, that are in the heavens, and on this element of earth. That seed then, which falls upon the earth, constituting the intelligent and rational plant, is itself the knowledge which belongs to man, (and) which is now contained in the multifarious stem and herbage (as it were) of an earthly and perishable body: many stars of the life which is mortal surrounding it. If then, an enlightened cultivation meet it, so that it be cleansed from the obstinacy of matter, and recognize the Sower, THE WORD, who is above the heavens, and henceforth render praise to Him, meditating as a child on His primitive teaching, and in due time rendering the corn-ears of its superiority, the complete fruit of its rational nature; it shall as in the time of harvest lay down, by the death of the life which is mortal, those luxuriances of the stem that are without, together with the earthly and corruptible clothing of the body, which it shall have now well employed for the growth and perfection of the fruit. And happily shall it put off this in due time. The same too, as he becomes more excellent, and collects the powers of his superiority into the treasury of things that are good, is preserved (as) the perfect, that with the perfect he may be led on. To Him also, who is the Sower and the Cultivator of all, he renders the perfect fruit of that praise which is due to God. And, because he has in this- life recognized Him alone as his Father, King, and Lord, and has, together with his relative and sister beings (already mentioned), confessed Him alone to be God, his Maker and Creator; He will,----that he also may (as) in the place of the society which is more excellent, exalt and honour Him with the
|36
honour that is becoming and just,----not name any other thing God, which it is not right should be called God, but Him alone to whom all things give (a similar) testimony; Him, whom all creation, visible and invisible,----even as He alone is the efficient Cause of all,----names its God, and whom it worships.

44. These things then being such, let us now again approach our subject afresh, as already laid down. These heavens then, and places in the heavens which are viewed by the bodily senses; this earth also, and air, as well as this whole constitution (of things) which is of them, (and) which may be likened to a great city, differ in no respect in their nature from those inanimate elements which are in its portions, the earth, the waters, the air, and fire. But it is not necessary, that the denizens of this great city should be considered as of the same material; nor is it, that we should affirm the seed of the rational soul, and of the perishable body, to be one and the same. For the mind, the reason, the rational soul, and the whole of the nature which is intelligent, may accurately and well be affirmed to be the seed of THE WORD OF GOD, the Creator of all. Nor were these any part of the earth, or of the air; nor, of any essence cold or hot; but, of those superior faculties, by which they were made worthy to partake in things most excellent. Because things prior in order, are the causes of those which succeed them. And the first things were those generated of THE WORD: after these, those that are irrational. After the primary essences therefore, were those latter ones, which followed (these as) causes. But these primitive ones,----the origin of production,----exist (only) in intelligent souls; on whose account it was, that the seed of passive bodies was also prepared. For it was necessary, that a sufficient house or residence should be prepared for these. Hence the primary heavens appeared to be a place suitable to the people of this city, who were both above it and in it; and the curvatures42 within the heavens, for those
|37 inhabitants who should be distinguished accordingly. But thou (reasonable soul), wouldest never designate as denizens of the city on earth, either the sensitive being of the fierce animals, or any kind of reptile refusing instruction; or indeed, any of all those that partake in the nature and name of irrational. For these are thy slaves, which have been subjected by the law of nature; and they necessarily render the service which is due to rational beings, as to their lords. For the agricultural ox places his neck willingly in the yoke, for the purposes of agriculture for man; the carrying ass too, confesses his own nature; the horse also, on which his lord rides, exults43; and the hunting dog fondles on him who feeds him.

45. The flocks too, and herds, (and) again, all sorts of possession (in
animals), are given to men; even the fierce beasts are (at his ready) service.
These same too, we kill and reduce to subjection. We also take, by means of
reason, the bird that flies in the heights. We also bring up those (beings)
which are beneath in the depths of the sea, and (otherwise) within it. And
nature plainly teaches, that all these things have been established for the sake
of man. Man is therefore the progeny of the DIVINE WORD; not for the sake of any
other thing, but |38 for that (only) of his Father, THE WORD; in order that he
might see, and by his knowledge distinguish, all the wisdom of his Father, which
(consists) in the workmanship visible throughout all creation; and that he
should assimilate himself to this same, while hitherto youthful, and should in
every thing emulate his Father, as to law, reason, knowledge, and wisdom; should
live as taught, (that he is) the image of excellence; and should learn that,
together with the companies that are in heaven, he should, as a prophet and
priest, send up from the earth those praises which are due to the King of all,
and to God who is the Cause of all.

46. In representations not unlike these therefore, does THE WORD, the instructor of all nature,----wondering at the various excellency of the nature that is in man,----cry out, and say in the divine praises, " What44 is man that Thou art mindful of him? and the son of man that Thou visitest him? Thou hast made him a little less than the Angels: with honour and glory hast Thou clothed him, and hast given him dominion over the work of thy hands, and hast placed all beneath his feet: all
flocks and herds; even the wild beasts of the desert, and the birds that are in the heavens, and the fishes of the sea, which dwell in the paths of the sea."

47. It is this rational species alone, beloved of God, of those that are on earth, respecting which another prophet speaking of God, teaches, thus plainly (but) mysteriously, that in his essence he is in the image of God: " And God said, Let us make man in our Image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fishes that are in the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the beasts, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." And to the word He also added the deed: " So God made man," and said that He made him in the image of God. And again more particularly, He established (the fact) that the image was in the likeness of God, from
|39
the Divine inbreathing, when He said, " And he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living soul45." He also teaches, that He gave to him the more excellent authority and rule, in these words when saying, Let them have dominion over all that is on the earth, over the beasts, the fowls, the creeping things, (and) the animals. And, to all these words does that nature give (its) testimony, which has put every thing under his hand, and has subjected all (things) to this rational creature. But, if the Divine words can obtain no hearing with thee, still, I cannot think that thy mind is so entirely darkened, that thou canst not think within thyself, How it is, that bodies and bodily substances,----or, whatever other divine thing it is which moves the body,----should consist of this possible excellence,----this, I say,----that (such body) should know how to avail itself of a discriminating reason, as to what its own essence is?----this, that it should deliver instruction by memory?----this, that it should extend itself to the contemplation of all things? But, be thyself and ask, whether the nature of the body can understand the constitution of the world; the operations of the primary elements; the beginning, the end, the middle portion, enumeration, and succession of the seasons; the changes of times; the revolutions of the year; the appointed order of the stars; and (I know not) how many other things, which men have by the experiments of geometry, computation, and enumeration, pointed out. For these (results) are incorporeal, and the contemplation of them is (purely) rational: that any one should make them adjuncts of the bones, the flesh, or the blood, would be folly infinitely great. And, well might they be asked, who thus think of these things, since these five senses comprehend all the faculties of the body, Which of them is it that can teach man the contemplation of any doctrine? Is it the sight of the eyes? But this distinguishes between colours and forms only. If you say, The hearing; you (only) name the recipient of sounds acute and grave, but not of any rational perception. And again, in like manner, the taste is the sense discriminative of sweetness, or of food, as it might
|40 be. The smell too, is the trier of scents, but not of doctrines. And again, this sense which is extended over the whole body, will touch (and discriminate) things cold and hot, hard and soft; but not virtue, nor (yet) that wisdom which is much more excellent. And, How is it with the irrational animals? Have they not eyes, ears, and nostrils? the sense of taste, and of touch? But nothing of these can be brought near to the efficiency of reason: because the doctrines, which philosophy alone can apprehend, are not of the body, nor of the sense that is irrational: they belong solely to that superiority which attends the rational soul; which is superior to the nature of the body, and which takes up its abode in mankind alone. If however, any one wish impudently to persist by way of reasoning, and affirm, That we possess nothing beyond these irrational animals; that like these we are born, and are subject to corruption; because the one provision of us all, is of the earth: the passive nature of the body is the same; the sense is in nothing superior; the labour again, and rest is, in the same manner, one; as is the blood of us all, the corruption of the body, and (its) dissolution into the primitive elements. Hitherto however, you do not say, that any one of these can, like the rational animal, be brought near to the contemplation of things incorporeal; can bear about it any rational instruction, or lay up learning in its memory; can consider discourses about virtue and vice; and, as to philosophy, that it ever even entered its mind. But all these things I might omit, because all men do not possess them. I (only) ask your reason these things: Was there a city ever (yet) constructed by beings destitute of reason? Or, is there in these the mind of the Artificer, of the Builder, of the Weaver, or, of the Agriculturist? Or, has a ship ever been fitted up by them? Or, has the astonishing art of governing (such vessel) so much as even entered their minds? When,
|41 behold! the things which are bodily (only) are with them, far more excellent than with us: because, of all animals, man is the most defective, and, as the Poets sing, "The human race is infirm46," Nor can we say how much he is inferior, in magnitude of body, to the Elephant; or, to be thought of, as to strength and abundance, with the Camel species. And, to many other animals must he cede the victory, both as to power, and swiftness of foot. What can they scent better than the tracing dogs, which are taught to course by the smell? or, be said to see better than any Antelope; which, because they see (well) are, in the Greek, named "the Seers?" And, is it necessary we should hence say, how much weaker the body of man naturally is, than that of the Bear, the Lion, the Panther, and of many other animals? or, how quickly or easily he is deceived and overcome by those that attack him? Nevertheless, this diminutive (creature) will, whenever he pleases, subdue any of those already mentioned; not by bodily or corporeal
|42
strength, for (in this respect) he is greatly the inferior, and is insufficient to fill the stomach of even one Bear. But there is a certain nature within him, more excellent than the body, the power of the mind, and of the intelligent soul. And it is by the superiority of wisdom that he effects these astonishing things. By means of these (things) hast thou, as a dear child, been honoured of God. Why (so) despisest thou thy greatness as to think, that this thy whole is (mere) flesh? and likenest this body, with the divine and rational knowledge which is within thee, to these irrational beings, the whole of which is perishable? Will then, neither the irrational nature of the animals, nor this common name irrational, nor (yet) the openly apparent useful servitude, under which these have never sought excuse from the bearing of burdens or of labour, suffice to persuade thee, (that all is thus) because God has given to thee the dominion and sovereignty over them all47?

48. Man alone therefore, of those that are on the earth,----he who is in the image of God, carries on and introduces (his matters) wherever he pleases: at one time, he trains the animals that are suited to the chace; at another, he pastures the flocks that are adapted to this: at another, he avails himself of the tame animals for (his) service; reducing (their) fierce nature to peaceable subjection: at another, having so reduced them, he brings them into peaceable proximity with himself: at another, having brought them together by the multifarious means of reason, be confines them to the house. And not (this) alone, but he will also take into his hands the injurious reptiles, and play with them: and of those that breathe out death, and reject instruction, will he make his sport.

49. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, is not to be persuaded to take up
his residence in the caves that are in the deserts, or in the heights. He
accordingly builds cities with walls, and adorns (these) with streets, palaces,
mansions, and other edifices.

50. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, considers not of (his) provision
after the unchangeable manner and |43 usages of the irrational animals. For
these, destitute (as they are) of knowledge, avail themselves of the aid of
nature alone, and receive their provision from the stem, unprepared by
agriculture, and uncleansed from the weed. He however, by his knowledge cleanses
(this); thus too does he pulverize, fully season, and make it well to pass the
fire. Of the wheat also he will, whenever he pleases, make bread. He is
moreover, careful so to provide, that a healthy provision of food may be
secured. And every profitable commodity, either of the vine, the olive, or of
the fruit tree of every flavour, does he appropriate; and these does he alone
apply to the sanative uses of the body.

51. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, has, by means of rule and reason, discovered that mode of life which is regular and orderly:----has become a leader of armies; has engaged in the public conflicts, and in the subsidiary arts: and these very many (things), pertaining to doctrine, has he, by his rational superiority, put forth.

52. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, preserving (in himself) the model of excellence, has determined the measure, the weights, the extents, and several sorts, of justice. He too, distinguishes,----governing (all) by reason,----the things which should, and should not, be done: and (hence) he knows, how to give to every one, as it shall be right. The fishes however, the birds, and the animals, will devour one another: because no law (prevails) among them. But to men has (God) given justice, which is their supreme excellence, as says one of the
poets48, (and) according to my opinion, extremely well.
|44

53. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, evincing within himself
the image of THE WORD OF GOD, erects on high a house of judgment; and, acting
after the manner of God's just Judge49, duly determines (the award) of life and
of death; apportioning life to some, and assigning death to others.

54. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, will confide his life to
the small section of a tree50. He has also discovered the science of
ship-building. He too will guide the ship on the back of the sea; will commit
his person to the depths of the humid element, and beat back the death that
stands at his side. He (alone) looks up to the heavens, and to that Governour of
all, who binds together all distances, as to the safety of those who navigate
(the seas).

55. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, has discovered the doctrines of
astronomy: has, while moving below in the body, and clothed with the weight of
mortality, ascended up in his mind on high; and, making the circuit of the sun,
the moon, and the stars, foretells1 what shall come to pass, as he also does the
eclipses of the moon, the vicissitudes of the seasons, and the changes of times.
|45

56. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, is viewed (as) the assistant of
nature; has discovered the means of healing; and has, by his understanding,
applied (to this) the powers of roots, and of drugs, with their combination and
mixture by weight and due proportion. He too has become skilful in the healing
of infirm bodies, and the helps of the life of man.

57. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, not having arrived at
the manner of life of the graminivorous (animals), has well applied (himself) to
(the requirements of his own) nature. In the winter season he accordingly casts
the seed into the earth; and, applying the sweat of his labour to agriculture,
is repaid in the autumn with the fruits consequent upon his toil.

58. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, collects together, by
(his) rational knowledge, the doctrines relating to all (things); the science
and composition of music, as well as (that of) investigation by discussion. He
also proceeds on to the manner of life, and to the fame attendant on philosophy;
and (thus) he hastens forward the love of that superiority, which is vested
within him: availing himself, not of the bodily sense, but of the faculty of
knowledge, and of the stimulating power of reason.

59. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, bears about him, by means of his memory, the histories of things done in former times; converses with those who are (now) no more, as with those who are at hand: examines the opinions of the wise who have existed at any period; and from these, rather than from those who are his contemporaries, does he receive profit. And (thus) by the faculty of reason,----cognate with that of thought,----does he exist with those who have long ceased to be.

60. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, duly regulates the voice
of the chant, by the divisions |46 of the chord. He also has divided the primary
letters (of the alphabet) by the grammatical art, and has discovered the powers
and province of reason. He too, has determined the combination of verbs and of
nouns, as well as the precepts of rhetoric and grammar. All these moreover, does
he bring together, preserve in his memory, and bring forward, as stores filled
with every sort of treasure. In one mind too, does he comprehend both the events
and histories of former times; and these will he bring forth whenever he
pleases, as a river from an unfailing source, and inundate (therewith) the
hearing of all present.

61. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, is, in his works, like unto God
who is over all. Any thing which he pleases will he form into animals; even this
inanimate matter will he change into the form, figure, and fashion, of every
sort of creature. By means of this instructive nature, (and) the reasoning
faculty, will he set about emulating (even) the Maker of all things; and man
will make man, at one time in stone; at another, in wood; at another, in flowers
of (many) colours; as well as in the forms that are impervious to change: and
(indeed) every sort of animal and of plant, will he, by the same means, imitate:
shewing forth fully, by his works, the power (vested within him) of the image of
God.

62. This (being) alone, of those that are on the earth, will imitate on the earth whereon he walks, the celestial sphere, and will engrave on the matter of brass the likeness of the very heavens, and on this will he impress a copy of the stars, both wandering and fixed. He will also appoint, by the modeller's art, the limits both of times and of seasons; and will surround the exterior (of his sphere) with the images of (various) animals. By the abundance of (his) knowledge moreover, and the means of (many) observations, will he imitate the heavenly sphere; and,----like God,----will allow the heavens whose revolutions
|47
are above the earth, and with the universal whole,---- and whose revolving is an unceasing miracle,----to revolve with the things that are on the earth, (in) the similitude which is of earthly material. The angel of the seasons too, will shout (as it were) with a loud voice, and all, at once and in a moment, are in motion; the doors, too, at the coming in of the seasons51, throw themselves open (as it were) of their own accord, and the inanimate images of the birds, placed round about it (the sphere), speak out in chirpings52. The moon also which is on the earth, runs its course with that in the heavens; and the (mere) brass of itself, changes its fashions, after the manner of the moon; shewing itself now dichotomized, now on the wane, and now in its full light. Thus the images of the seasons follow the analogy of those in nature, and the human-made world contends with (that of) the workmanship of THE WORD OF GOD!

63. Man alone, of those that are on the earth, can, by means of words not to be
uttered, of prayers acceptable to God, and by virtue of the fear of God,
(evinced) both in word and life, drive far away the invisible nature of
concealed demons53. But further, when he had even departed |48 from the right
way, he could effect all this by a power, such as would, by songs and
incantations, subject the kind of these which flies in the air; and, again,
would seize, by means of force, and the appetencies restrictive54 of nature,
those unembodied powers which fly over any part of the earth, just as they would
the flying sparrows. He would lead on, or bind, (these), whenever he chose: and,
sitting upon the images of fabricated gods, would shew by these his doings, that
his own power was far superior to that of the fabricated deity of such.

64. Man alone shews of what kind the superiority of (his) intellectual and
incorporeal being is, and establishes (the fact) that (this) his power is
impervious either to subjugation or deterioration by calamity. For, he will
prepare his body for the fire, the sword, the fierce beasts, (and) the depths of
the sea; and he will approach every species of torment. He knows too, this his
nature, that it is perishable and fleeting, transient and dissoluble. But that
which resides within, is unyielding; and, that this is different from that which
perishes, he proved who cried |49 out, "Bruise, bruise the form55; but me thou
wilt not bruise." And again another, proclaiming with freedom of speech: " Burn
or roast the body, and be satisfied with me when thou hast drunk my blackened
blood; but, before the stars descend to the earth, and the earth ascends to the
heavens, I will present to thee no one conciliating perturbed expression." One
of the friends of God moreover, when suffering evils, put forth these words: "
What shall separate me from the love of God? (shall) tribulation, or distress,
or persecution, or hunger, |50 or nakedness, or cold, or the sword 56?" I myself
too have seen, in these times, some whose eyes were digged out; others, who were
deprived of their legs by the cautery; and others who were crucified; their
whole bodies hastening to dissolution, and their mortal nature subject to
rebuke; while the conscious mind residing within them, attached to God, was
immoveable, impervious to subjection, and unyielding to these hardships3;
clearly proving to those of sound minds, that their faculty of excellence was a
thing altogether different from that which was perishable.

65. This alone, of the animals that are on the earth, partaking of the divine
inbreathing57, is worthy of the favour57 of the Deity. He too, will hold
converse with the Angels of God, and will apprehend the foreknowledge of things
to come to pass; at one time, by means of dreams; at another, when so invested
by the power of God with the Spirit, that he will even enounce the prophecy of
things future; and, by the manifestation of deeds such as these, he will confirm
(the fact of) his fellowship with Deity.

66. This (animal) alone recognizes in every thing, something greater and more excellent than any that is visible;----Him who is invisible to the eyes, and imperceptible to the touch, as well as to every faculty of bodily sense; but is visible to the mind and understanding alone. Him does he, by His (special) teaching, and the learning of which his nature is capable, confess; and Him does he call God: to Him also does he render praise; and shews, by means of this (his) knowledge, his relationship with the Deity.

67. This (being) alone has arisen (to be) the spectator of the great works of THE WORD OF
GOD, and is |51
fitted to worship his Father----Him (I say) who is higher than the heavens,----with the praises which are proper for the Deity; and to be assimilated to the company of the Angels in heaven. Because to him alone, of the animals that are on the earth, has this superiority been assigned. By means of this he recognizes, from the mind of his nature, Him who is the cause of every good; and is enjoined to render, as the return due to a Father, the praises of thanksgiving and blessing which are becoming.

68. The testimonies to all these things, does that word of the doctrine and
erudition which is divine, confirm: (viz.) that of this undying nature, and
equal of the citizens that are in heaven, is this (being) alone of those that
are on the earth; this intelligent and rational essence (I say) which is in man:
and, that he is the dear child of THE DIVINE WORD, the common Saviour of all;
and that in his nature, he agrees both as to image and form with (this) his
Father.

69. For if this rational animal,----this, who has become partaker in all this superiority; this, which alone of those that are on the earth, is in the image of God; this Brother of the divine hosts, and of the Angels, which are in heaven,----had been duly led by his nature, and had from ancient time adhered to the divine law; he would indeed have been freed from this earthly and corruptible (mode of) life4, and would have continued in his conversation on earth, as in a state of migration. Had he first (of all) studied divine things (only), he would indeed have effected his departure hence to those things which belonged to him; and would have been registered (as) among those that were perfect, apart from this his state of defect, and of infantine constitution. Thus therefore has man, of necessity, put on a corruptible and dissoluble body, (and this) through the mercy of his Father, that calamity may not be his permanent lot, and that he may not be tied interminably to corruption. Soon therefore, shall this corruptible be
|52  dissolved, and shall receive a participation with those who are incorruptible. For, just as that which is conceived in the womb, puts on the clothing of its locality; and the infant to be born, when the period of its destined months has arrived, casts this off, and accordingly comes forth into the light, inhales the purer air, and henceforward is considered as of the nature of man; so also is this perfectible species, (as) believed to be among men, (and as) opposed to the (still) superior one,----a mere infant, and as yet a foetus (only) conceived on earth,---- clothed in this corruptible skin; which, by the mercy of the great gift of God, it is necessary it should cast off, in order that it should not be for ever harassed with these defective things, but should, in due time, go forth into the light, and pass on to the life, which is impervious to corruption. On this account, well have the companies of the wise, the attached to God, pressed (as) they have been by a participation in these corruptible bodies, desired their change for the better, and followed after their equals, the children of their city which is above, even as he was (circumstanced) who said in the divine word, "Wretched58 man that I am! Who shall deliver me from this body of death?" And again, "Even59 if we live in the body, still we labour not in the flesh." He adduces his reason too, and says, "For our labour (of culture) is in heaven60; and we61 draw near to the city of the living God which is in heaven, and to the assembly of myriads of angels, and to the church of the firstborn who are written in heaven.''----These are the words of a notable man, and of (all) those who love God.

70. If however, many are so foolish as to be attached to the lusts that are
here, that they are to the present time but infants in intellect; What has this
to do with right reason? For, that which is conceived in the womb, exults in
this its usual locality, fears its departure from it, and lest it should be
extracted from internal |53 darkness, and weeps when it comes forth to the
light. Still even these, did but those things which happen to their natural
birth duly take place with them, would come forth from darkness to light, well
and elegantly born. Thus would they, at the due time and season, be brought
forth, (each) receive the natural air and breath, and bear about him the healthy
vigour of man. Thus would (each) be delighted with the provisions of the breast,
and of infancy; then be placed under the hands of a nurse, and be delivered over
to instructors, teachers, and doctors, until he came forth a man complete. Thus
too would he pass a virtuous and honourable life, great in wealth, in the
abundance of possessions, in power, rule, and the other stages (of distinction),
in the increase of (all) those things which result from a happy birth; of those
which multiply by means of instruction, and of those other innumerable things,
which conduce to the experience of a happy life.

71. But, if any unnatural contortion should happen to that which is conceived in the womb, so that it affect such an one at his coming forth in birth; What need can there be for my saying, that the infant was distorted within (the womb)? and refused to come forth to the light? and that it must suffer,----by the iron instruments prepared for parturition, which shall violently and painfully be placed upon it,----the revulsion which is also unnatural? Nor would it be worthy even of the one birth,----even of the life of man,----or of the things belonging to this: but, on the contrary, that it should go forth from darkness to darkness, and not only be deprived of the life of man, but also of the name.

72. As are these things, so is he who passes the life which is human on earth, differing in nothing from the irrational and ignorant infant, or, from that
|54
which is yet, but a foetus in the womb. Nor can he be compared with those bodies which are without, the Angels and Divine spirits. He is even (as) an ignorant child; and, because of the excess of his childishness, he exults in the clothing of the body which is about him; loves the womb his (place of concealment), and knows not the locality which surrounds him, where murder, darkness, and (all) the other species of mishap, feed, as it were, in the pastures of wickedness. One of the ancients says,----when shewing that the air, which is on the earth, is humid and unclear,----that "it consists of many compounds, (resulting) from the innumerable vapours which (arise) from the earth62."
One would think too that (man were such), although as an infant good. Nevertheless, if he pass the present life as it is becoming to his nature, and evince accordingly the conduct which is suitable to its law, " that he think not beyond the measure of his stature," nor spurn the nature which has borne him as a mother; nor again, remain ignorant of his Father, but recognize his Father who is in heaven, the common Saviour of all, and render to him the service of thanksgiving, because he has made him to partake in the things which are good;----be brought up in the instruction of righteousness, and previously study in his conversation which is on the earth, the life of heaven; well shall such an one, when he shall depart this mortal life, and shall put off the body, have the Angels of God for his obstetricators;----when he is to be born to the life to come, then shall both the good Powers receive him as the nurse, and the Divine assemblies teach him; that WORD OF GOD too, that teacher of the conversation which is in heaven, shall lead him on, as a dear child, to the completion of every thing that is good, and shall instruct him in the doctrine of the kingdom of heaven. And, when He shall have made him complete and wise, He shall give him up to His Father, the King of all: and shall clothe him, both in body and soul which are (now) incorruptible, with a vesture of light exceeding description.
|55
So that henceforth, he shall be even for the common advantage of all. Such is the last state of such an one.---- But he who exults against the course of his nature, participates in the perversion which is not good, and despises the earth, the mother that bore him; and again, impiously recognizes not THE WORD OF GOD, the common Saviour of all, but subscribes to a multitude of fathers who have no existence, instead of that one who is; and calls those gods which never had any being, instead of that one who alone is true; and again, wholly plunges in pursuit of the things of this moist, humid and corruptible being, into the filthy and lawless lusts; and this not as the infant, involuntarily; but willingly, and of his free counsel, chooses to himself these vices, and so acts; his latter state shall clearly be but the counterpart of that pointed out by the example (above given). For no happy countenance, or smiling of good Angels, shall greet him; nor, when he goes forth into light, shall the Divine Powers receive him as fosterfathers. On the contrary, endeavouring in his extreme state to escape egress, and to hide himself within, in the concealment of the body and members:----when the dissolution of the body draws near, and he would assume the perversion which is out of nature;----(then) shall those who are appointed to this, forcibly attach themselves to him, and drag him forth. Then too, after his departure hence,----his miserable soul being reduced to sighing and lamentation,----shall he not have the light and life which is good, for his receptacle; but, on the contrary, darkness and the place of corruption. The judgment of God moreover, shall consign him (thus) impure and unclean, as filthy and abominable to the purification63 and punishment which is by fire: because he would not be instructed by THE WORD (or Reason), nor
|56
adhere to the Divine law, when it was in his power to do so.

73. He therefore, who, in the example (above) was, as an infant conceived in the womb, in every thing so defective, and in every respect so destitute of power, that hitherto he could make no use either of the thoughts of his soul, or the senses of his body;----that mind, indeed, which is hitherto but (as) an infant in man;----may well be said, by way as it were, of experimental comparison with those incorporeal and Divine rational (beings) that are in heaven, to be altogether a child. Even, if (such) were the wisest of men, or even more perfect than those that are on the earth; still he would, when compared in himself, with his (future) perfect state, be nothing better than an infant. For, what his state of excellence shall be when he arrives at manhood, it will be easy thus to shew:---- For if, when hitherto (as) an infant, and confined within this unyielding wall of earthly and corruptible being, he bears about him such a faculty of excellence, that he knows, not only the things that are on earth, and fabricates them by art, but also anticipates the life which is in heaven,
|57
and becomes like to God himself; makes too, whenever he pleases, likenesses of the things in the heavens, and of those on the earth;----can do all these things, just as those which have already been recounted64:----these (I say), when immersed (as he is) in all this refuse of the body and blood; What then, ought we to suppose he will do, when he shall have proceeded to the perfect measure of man's estate, and shall have been liberated from these injurious bonds of corruption?----these humid and wasting properties of the body? and is made a partaker of the life which is incorruptible, and of a body which is impervious to death? For, if this seed alone of the reasoning faculty be thus all-able and powerful on earth, when as yet it is incapable of rendering the full return (of fruit), but has even been cast forth into the moist locality of the refuse of a corruptible body; it shall henceforth be able (fully) to know, of what sort the return of perfect fruit of this seed shall be as (sown) in the soul, when it shall have been made to partake of an adequate culture; shall have been removed hence, and have been planted in a superior locality, in land good and fertile; where that heavenly WORD, that Sower of all things, and Planter of every good thing, shall receive (back) his own seed, and shall, in the pastures of incorporeal and unembodied souls, as in the Paradise of them who love God, Himself water his own plant, shall nourish it to perfection, and make it arrive at the increase of goods innumerable.

74. You will perceive therefore, the greatness of the complete state of man's superiority, from his changes and increments here, if you will consider, that the infant just born is in no respect superior to the worm; that it cannot, after the manner of the irrational animal, even make use of the bodily senses. Nevertheless this defective, lame, infirm, and thoughtless being, will, when grown in his stature, arrive at all this change and variation in the course of time,
---- will receive all this superiority, power, and beauty both of body and soul,----so, that should those who begat him see him, they could not distinguish whether this
|58
were he, who was sown (by them) in the womb, and conceived in darkness:----whether this were he, who came forth out of (this) darkness, to be brought up with milk and the swaddling bands; this,----who is now the man, who in wisdom and knowledge contemplates the whole world;----this, who subjugates every thing that is on the earth. And should any one by comparison, as it were, of the Divine faculty and of the Angels, and of the child just now born, place the complete man in the midst; he would not find a perfect equality as to the child, with respect to the perfect man; and of the perfect man, with respect to the superior power; but, the inferiority of the person of the child to the man, to be much greater, than is the inferiority of the man to the faculty of the Angels. For, the human infant lately born, cannot be compared in its being even with those irrational animals, which may just now be brought forth. But he, who has come out the perfect man, and is contemplated as the friend of God, will henceforward become a partaker in the divine Spirit, and will hold converse with the Angels: will arrive at a love and attachment to the conversation which is in heaven, and will previously prepare himself by purity of life, and the fear of God,----not (placed) at any great distance of limit,----for an equality with the Angels, and will be made a partaker both of (their) life, and superiority: which the Divine Word also shewed, when it said, "What65
is man that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man that thou visitest him? Thou hast made him a little lower than the Angels: with honour and glory hast thou crowned him."
is man that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man that thou visitest him? Thou hast made him a little lower than the Angels: with honour and glory hast thou crowned him."

75. If then the child, when brought up to the (full) stature of his nature, and supplied with the provision and instruction proper for it, receives all this change and variety;----and no one can disbelieve (this) his change, on account of the openness of the experiment;---- Why need we wonder, if even this perfectible mind which is in man, such as it is when still in
|59 childhood, with respect to its more complete and perfect
growth, should, when it comes forth to the full growth
of its stature, be in dignity as the Angels? We do see
however, that the nature of man undergoes dissolution
by death. But, What of this? Is it not that we are
the more convinced by it, that the soul is immortal?
For if, when immersed in a corruptible and mortal body,
it evince all this force of superiority, which we have
already shewn; How shall it not, when it shall have
separated itself from its participation in corruption, and
shall have laid down mortality as a bandage, then act
in its own power, in a manner less impeded than it now
does? Do you not perceive, that so long as it entertains
an attachment to the body66, it thence acts basely?
But, if it refuse participation (with the body), it (then)
subsists within itself. And hence, is its essence clearly
known to be incorporeal. For, How can that which is
opposed to the body, be of (its) nature? The thoughts
too of the soul are healthy, so long as the bodily passions
are infirm, but the same will be dark and obscure when
the body labours under the lusts. Hence, so long as the
soul is infatuated, its whole attachment will be to the
body; and, when attached to the body, it will be shorn
of its excellence. When however, it becomes strong in
opposition to the body, and flies from tha lustful passions,
it (then) becomes wise; and, when it has become wise, it
turns away its face from a participation in mortality,
and forthwith gives up itself to the knowledge which is
pure, and, in a small degree, withdraws itself from the
stimulating nature of the body. When moreover, it is
powerful with respect to the riches which are its own,
it (then) happily becomes more abundantly enlightened,
directed, and stirred up. Then too, will it partake in
knowledge, wisdom, and every sort of excellence, when
it has ceased to countenance the motions of the bodily
passions. And, so long as it counts upon (this) |60
excellence, it deigns not to draw near with the eyes of the body; nor will it act by any other of its senses. When moreover, it (thus) vigorously shuts itself up, carries itself within, and withdraws to a distance from the things which affect the senses, and are visible; and (when) near only to the body, still turns with the eye of the soul to another quarter, and is itself united with itself; then again, will it avail itself of the mind that is enlightened, and of the recollection which is pure; and will put forth, and nourish for itself, the reason which is imperturbed: and (thus) will every reasoning power exert itself without contrbul. But, should any of the things which are hurtful suddenly happen to the body, so that a mote should injure the sight of the eyes67; immediately would the sight of the soul be disturbed: and, should remissness be given to the body, and the soul partake in the
drunkenness, gluttony, lusts, and the rest of its pleasures; (thus) reduced in itself to vice----the corruptible body too domineering over it like a wild and fierce beast, and itself remaining below (as it were) in the depths,----will be filled with error, folly, and every sort of infatuation. What necessity then is there, that we should fear death, which is (only) the determination of the freedom of the soul from the body68? And, for What (purpose) is the laying down of that which is faulty? Is it not for receiving the aid of that, which is more excellent? and, that we should confess the lives of those who loved God, then to be in truth, holy and happy, when nothing of an adverse nature shall controul them? If then, while this rational nature continues in this locality,----and resides in this vessel (as it were) on the earth, clothed with a dense and earthly body, not unlike some earthen69 vessel,
|61
(and) wholly compressed within this its vesture,----it be such that it will mount on high in thought, will mortify the members of the body together with their lusts, by means of patience, and the restraint of the desires; will be hastened, and hastening on, to the life of those that are incorporeal; will separate and deliver itself at all times, by the precepts of wisdom from an admixture with that which is vile; and will ever delight itself beforehand (with the thoughts) that it shall soon submit to death:----if indeed (such) be, at any time, released from the bonds and agitation of wing (common to) the cares and anxieties that are here, and thus fly away in his departure, and change the place on earth, and meet with that which he loved:---- how he will then be circumstanced, ask not. For, when he shall receive his body, and shall have changed his nature from corruption to incorruption; his shall be a conversation which is equal to that of the Angels in heaven: in the semblance of light, and of the sun-beam, shall he be; and of the form, in which even the Angels of God live; and, as reason with probability holds, he shall partake at once in their superiority and immortality70.

76. For, just as the form (assigned) to the seed which falls upon the earth, is given for many: the WORD, which is called the seed, now secretly exerting itself within the same seed, but silently after the manner of a spark confined within some dense body;----and (as) this same seed, when it shall fall to the earth, and its dense clothing which encircles
|62
it from without shall dissolve through corruption;----then will it shew itself to be lively (vigorous), put in motion the power that is vested within it, and take of the material which is beneath it: then too will it begin to act, and assume its lively (energetic) nature: its old dense clothing, which is without, will it also cast off, and put on the new, which is greatly its superior;----

77. So also is the nature of the rational faculty, which is in man, (circumstanced), that it is now bound up in a corruptible body, and of its own power acts but feebly. But, should it be freed from the corruption which surrounds it, and receive (as a possession) the locality which is in heaven, and henceforth be sown and planted (as it were) in the society which (is far) beyond it, and be fitted for the clothing of heaven and of the Angels;----of what sort it shall be, when it shall partake of the life that is pure, and shall be freed from a participation in mortality, it is neither becoming in me, nor necessary for me, to say: for this will be obvious to all who can see, from the example (given). For the whole of the wheat (seed) is not subject to corruption: it is only the part that is without which perishes, when it falls to the earth: while that concealed WORD and living power which is within it, lives and remains; and the excellence which is of this is such, that it will give forth vigorous corn-ears. Of plants too, the same is the WORD (invigorating cause), and so it is with every sort of seed. And, Shall man alone be wholly and in every thing subject to corruption, when released by death71? And, Shall the clothing which is without, at once and together with that WORD which resides within him, cede to corruption? And, as to the knowledge which is incorporeal,----that which partakes in all these powers; that, which on account of its superiority, is likened to God himself;----Shall it not be (considered) even as one of those seeds which fall to the earth? or: rather greatly (their) superior? for it is not the beard, nor yet the blade, but those mature and fat corn-ears of his superiority, which he shall give forth. Then, when he shall be taken away
|63
from the corruption which is of the earth, and shall have been delivered as from bonds, and shall not imprudently have bartered the conversation which is in heaven, for that on the earth; and, when he shall be at the side of God; (then) shall he in truth render as the Angels do, the fruits which are acceptable to God: those (I say), the seed and power of which he possessed from ancient times in a mortal body, and contained as it were in an oven72.

78. All these things having been said for the purpose of shewing, that the essence which is in man is intelligent and rational; let us now proceed in our discourse to those consequent upon them. Had man then, brought up as he is in the conversation that is on earth, (but) known his own greatness, and continued careful of the teaching which is of God; there could have no impediment happened to him, that when taken hence, he should not delight himself in a conversation like that of the Angels, and take part in the life which is in the kingdom of his Father who is in heaven. But, because it is not one man, nor two, nor is the multitude small;----on the contrary, it is the whole rational family on earth which has received the potwer to govern self----(and) because his nature, which has received the seed of the kingdom from the DIVINE WORD the King, is free; (nevertheless) he has not well availed himself of his power; but has, by means of the subsidiary arts, laboured in all vain glory,
|64
after those other things, which impel men to the bodily desires, and are advantageous to life; has become skilful in agriculture, in the building of ships, in merchandise, and in the purchasing of possessions: nor (this) only, but he has also become great from every quarter, in the abundant increase of the wealth which puts forth no zeal against any kind of lust. All these things however, which conduce to the salvation of the soul, and to that life of righteousness which is well-pleasing to God; all these, (I say,) has he annihilated in his mind from their very roots; has disregarded his own excellency, and that of the race of his brethren who are in heaven, and has honoured, through the freedom of his will, those abominable bodily lusts, more than (this) his own greatness: of the righteousness of his Father who is in heaven, and of His praise, he has also been unmindful. These irrational itchings and delusions of childhood has he chosen: these which the fools of childhood usually do, who fly from the instruction and careful training of those who would enlarge their minds; extravagantly to honour the things which are sweet for the present, but which corrupt at once both the body and soul; and to hunt out for themselves the error and foolish knowledge of that voluptuousness, which is too vain to be conceived. All mankind being then, thus (circumstanced), the Increment of wickedness, that envious (being), the hater of every good, and deceiver as to every thing lovely, in conjunction with the wicked Demons, became their waylayer: this same, in his wicked zeal, prepared the nets, and snares, and riches,----the abundant means of every sort (of sin,)----against the salvation of all; and so drove them down from above into the depths of evil, that none on earth could see, but transgressed the law of their nature: and (thus), the germ of wickedness, instead of the seed of excellence, sprung up within them; and he that was more peaceful, more wise, and more rational, than all that were on the earth, so fell into the last stage of brutality and irrationality, that one of those beloved of God
|65
wept over this overthrow of their fall, and cried out saying; "Man understood not his own honour; but was given up to be as the brute73, and became assimilated to it."

79. On these accounts therefore, a mighty Saviour, greater than any son of man,
was evidently needful to them. And such is He who anxiously undertook to provide
for all, THE WORD OF GOD: He who has, like a good and loving Father, shewn by
deeds His providential care over the rational souls that are on the earth; and
who hastened, in the mission of Himself, to the call, and for the healing, of
those who were thus fallen and perishing. The End of the First Discussion (Book)
of (Eusebius) of Caesarea.

[Selected footnotes. Notes concerned only with points of the Syriac have been
omitted]

1. 2 "Cujus sententiae," says Lactantius, de falsa religione, Lib. i. cap. ii., "auctor est Democritus, confirmator Epicurus, sed et antea Protagoras, qui Deos in dubium vocavit; et postea Diagoras, qui
exclusit," &c. These are the Atheists, a1qeoi, of the ancients, on whom some excellent remarks from Plato's xth Book of Laws will be found quoted, Pref. Evang. Lib. xii. cap. 1. p. 621. Edit. 1628.
---- But more on this subject when we come to our second Book. It does not appear that this exclusion took place, except at the celebration of the Lord's supper.

2. 1 This argument is also used by Athenagoras. Legat. pro Christ. p. 60. seq.
and by Theodoret in the place just cited.

3. 2 Alluding to Isai. xl. 12. Theodoret's comment on the place is, [Greek]: "nihil enim otiosum, nihil redundans, in lucem productum est." The Mohammedans----who borrowed most of their early notions from the Christians, (see my Persian Controversies, p. 124. seq.),----tell us, moreover, that the mountains are placed as studs on the earth, for the purpose of giving it stability, and of restraining one part from moving off to another. See M. de Sacy's Notes on the Pandnamah of Attar, p, 35. sen. Some beautiful remarks on this subject generally, will be found in Theophilus of Antioch, addressed to Autolycus, near the beginning. Among our own writers, Paley, Tucker on the Light of Nature, and the authors of the Bridgewater Treatises, will be read with interest.

4. 5 Not unlike this, our Author in his "Oratio de laudibus Constantini," cap.
vii. p. 512. D. Edit. 1695: and particularly cap. xi. p. 524. A. seq. which is
identical with it.

5. 6 It is common with our Author to consider Christ as the Maker of the World,
and Father of the intelligent creature man.

6. 1 Syr. [Syriac] which is an error, for [Syriac]. And here I may inform the
reader, that where I have supposed an error to exist in the Syriac text, I have
generally proposed its emendation in brackets thus [].

7. 2 See Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. p. 524. C. D. from which our text
slightly differs.

8.
3 Imitated apparently by Theodoret,----Graec. affect. curat. Edit. Gaisford, p. 183, &c.:----who, it may be remarked, is a very constant imitator of our Author.

9. 4 The Greek text (I.e.) of the Orat. de laudd. Constant, (p. 525. A.) has no
term corresponding to this. Syr. [Syriac].

10. 1 Alluding to 1 Tim. vi. 16.

11. 2 Our Author argues in his tract against Marcellus, pp. 8, 9, that even before the incarnation, Christ was a Mediator between God and the angels, and this he grounds on Gal. iii. 19,----"ordained by angels in the hand of a Mediator." His words are: "[Greek] ." He has misunderstood the Scripture here.

12. 3 This sentence is not found in the Greek, Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. p.
525. B. See the note of Valesius on this place. It is, however, in the Demonstr.
Evang. Lib. iv. cap. vi. p. 155.

13. 6 Alluding to Job xxxvii. 7. See my Translation and Notes.

14. 9 Alluding to Job xxxviii. 10.

15. 1 It is evident, from what follows here, that the sea-water is meant: for,
in no other case, can we suppose the water spoken of to be changed into
sweetness. Syr. [Syriac] This argument is also beautifully and powerfully urged
by Theodoret. Serm. de Provid. i. Tom. iv. p. 330. C.

16. 10 By this is meant, that all is OF the Father as the great source of
Divinity; but is BY the Son as the Creator, Upholder, and Governour of all
things.

17. 5 So Didymus on the Holy Spirit, as preserved in the works of Jerome: "
Bonus Dominus uoster Jesus Christus ex bono Patre generatus est."

18. 2 This place may be adduced to shew how literal our Syrian translator has endeavoured to be, and how very greatly he has distorted the order of his Syriac, in order to suit it to that of his Greek original. The Syriac stands thus: [Syriac].
Than which nothing can be more preposterous. The Greek is this: [Greek] Which is not a bad specimen of Eusebius's want of simplicity.
---- This argument is also given in the Demonst. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. v. p. 150. D. seq.

19. 5 Anaxagoras imagined that the origin of all things consisted of similar
parts. (Plutarch, p. 876. Vol. ii. Edit. 1620.). His theory is manifestly taken
from the Bible. He says, [Greek] All things were (confused) together: but MIND
divided and adorned them: i. e. the " Spirit" of the Bible. Zeno too, according
to Aristotle, argued thus, (cited at § 30. infra.)

20. 3 It may perhaps be supposed that our author shews his Arian propensity
here. But the same might be said of Justin Martyr, and, indeed, of the Fathers
generally, if this were allowed. See Whitby on Eph. iv. 6. and the note on Book
ii. sect. 3. below.

21. 1 There is much reasoning of this sort in Aristotle's Tract on Xenophanes, Zeno, and Gorgias; and which cannot but be read with interest here, particularly the part on Zeno. See also Diog. Laert. Life of Plato near the end. This same argument is also urged by Lac-tantius, Lib. i. cap. iii. A little lower down, cap. v., he shews how some of the greatest poets and philosophers taught, that ONE supreme God formed and governed all things. Among the poets, Orpheus, Virgil, Ovid, &c.: among the philosophers, Thales, Pythagoras, Anaxagoras, Antisthenes, &c. See also Prep. Evan. Lib. ix. capp. ix.----xiii. Ib. Lib. in. capp. ix. xii. xiii. &c.

22. 7 Alluding to Ps. xix. 4----6.

23. 2 Our Greek (Orat. de laudd. Constant.) leaves us here, and does not join us
again till we come to Book 11. Sect. 3.

24. 3 Syr. [Syriac], a paraphrase for Theologian: a title very applicable to St
John, who spoke much of the Lo&goj tou~ Qeou~.

25. 4 John i. 10. with the Peschito.

26. 6 Alluding to the reasoning of Plato, see Book ii. § 33. seq.

27. 7 See the Note to sect. 41. below.

28. 8 So also Aristotle, Lib. de Juventute et Senectute, cap. ii. "Necesse autem
est, ut anima vegetatrix in haben-tibus, actu simplex unaque sit, potentia
multiplex ac plures."

29. 2 Our Author knew how to accommodate his reasoning to the class of readers whom he was addressing, who were the classical scholars of his day.----Homer's councils of the Gods gave the first outline perhaps of the sketch given here: so Ovid----

Mac iter est superis ad magni tecta Tonantis, Regalemque domum; Dextra laevaque
Deorum Atria nobilium valvis celebrantur apertis.

Plebs habitant diversa locis: a fronte potentes Coelicolae, clarique suos
posuere Penates.

Hic locus est; quem, si verbis audacia detur, Haud timeam magni dixisse Palatia
coeli.

Metam. i. 1. 170. seq.

The Stoics in like manner affirm, that the world is a sort of city, consisting
both of Gods and men: the Gods being the rulers, men the subjects, &c. [Greek].
From the epitome of Arius Didymus. Prep. Evang. Lib. xv. cap. xv. so also Philo,
ib. Lib. xiii. cap. xviii. Ed. Viger. p. 704. making the heavenly bodies, the
sun, moon, &c. a sort of ministry to the whole. A passage similar to this is
also to be found in the Oration of our Author, "de laudibus Constantini," cap.
i. near the beginning. The most complete discussion on this subject is, perhaps,
cap. vi. of Aristotle's Liber de mundo. See also Plato's heavenly earth. Prep.
Evang. Lib. xi. cap. xxxvii.

30. 3 This passage has been introduced into the Oratio de laudd. Constant. cap.
i. p. 409. C. D. And, as it is extraordinary, and not very clear, I give both
the Syriac and Greek of it: [Syriac, Greek] Matt, xxvii. 51. &c. The place is
apparently an imitation of Job xxvi. 9. Sec my Translation and Notes, and the
Greek of the LXX.

31. 2 Much to the same effect though not so full, Clemens Alexand. Strom. Lib.
vii. p. 704. who compares the all-pervading power of Christ to that of a magnet
acting upon a series of iron rings, and affecting at once both the least and the
greatest.

32. 3 The Syriac is ambiguous here [Syriac] , which may mean, either as given in
the text, or, as being made by its Father, who is the Word of God: ascribing the
creation of all, as is frequently the case in this work, to Christ. I think the
former, however, more likely to be the true meaning.

33. 1 To the same effect, our Author in his work against Marcellus, Lib. i. cap.
i. p. 4. C. seq.

34. 2 Col. i. 15.

35. 3 Syr. lit. who have assimilated to themselves the Image of fraudulent rule.
[Syriac], which is only a peculiar way of making the comparison: the Person
meant is Satan, as opposed to Christ.

36. 4 The Syriac is peculiar here, and stands thus: [Syriac]: a practice common
to many of the early heretics.

37. 6 Alluding to Rom. i. 25.

38. 1 Cited from the cxlviiith Psalm, with a few variations from the text of the
Peschito.

39. 1 Syr. [Syriac], lit. In the Stadia: i. e. places appointed for racing. The
aether has been usually supposed to constitute that portion of the upper regions
which approximates to that of the fixed stars: by some it has been thought to
consist of fire, by others of a very subtile fluid. Aristotle's opinion may
perhaps, be taken here as the most authoritative. He says, then, (Lib. de Mundo,
cap. ii.), [Greek] "Coeli porro siderumque substantiam appellamus setherem: non
quidem ideo quod ignita flagret ipsa, ut aliqui censuerunt, plurimum utique
aberrantes circa potentiam illam maxime ab ignea natura abhorrentem: origine
vero hujus vocabuli inde ducta, quod semper aether currat motu circumductili:
cum sit illud elementum a quatuor illis diversum: tum divinum, tum interitus
expers."

40. 1 Gen. i. 27, 1 Cor. xi. 7. The argument shewing that revealed religion is
much more ancient than the vanities of idolatry is admirably prosecuted in the
Prep. Evang. Lib. x. cap. iv. Clemens Alexand. Strom. Lib. I. p. 302. A. seq.

41. 3 Syr. [Syriac], lit, in the doctrine of their mind: which, as it is
intended to be opposed to image worship, seems to me to imply doctrine mentally
received and applied.

42. 1 This expression will be understood, when it is considered that the
ancients supposed the heavens to consist of sphere upon sphere, encircling each
other, like the coats of an onion.

43. 3 " Shares with his lord the pleasure and the rifle."----POPE. This argument is similarly urged by Plutarch, (De Fortuna,) p. 98. Edit. 1620.) [Greek, Latin] 44. 1 Ps. viii. 5. varying in some respects from the text of the Peschito.

45. 3 Gen. ii. 7.

46. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. Similar, though not identical, sentiments will be found in
extracts given by Clemens Alexand. Strom. Lib. v. p. 492. Edit. 1029; by
Theodoret, Gr. Affect, curat. Serm, i. p. 477. Edit. 1642. Ib. Edit. Gaisford,
p. 193. The nearest is, perhaps, to be found in a Fragment of Menander preserved
by Plutarch, (De consolat. ad Apoll. p. 103. Edit. 1620.)

..... "a0sqene/staton ga_r o2n ( zw~|on )

Fu&sei."

......"cum sit infirmissimum (animal)

Natura."

Another not unlike it is (ib. p. 104) cited from Homer:

" Ou_de\n a0kidno&teron gai~a tre/fei a0nqrwpo&io ."

" Nil homine in terris infirmius aetheris aura vescitur."

47. 1 Matter, in some respects similar to this, will be found in the Orat. de
laudd. Constant. Cap. v. p. 509. B. seq. and Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. cap. xxviii.
p. 556. seq.

48. 3 There is a passage in Plutarch very nearly allied to this, who probably
has in view the same poet (Pindar), it is as follows: [Greek] "Medicinam enim
animae, quse Justitia cognominatur, omnium esse artium maximam, praeter
sexcentos alios etiam Pindarus testatur, principem et dominum omnium deum
appellans Aristotechnam, id est, artificum praestantissimum: quippe justitise
administratorem, quae jus habet determinandi quando, quomodo, et quatenus
quilibet malorum sit puniendus." It is not improbable, I think, that our author
had this place in his eye when he wrote the above paragraph. Clemens Alexand.
also cites the place in Pindar, Strom. Lib. v. p. 598. B. but in a different
sense. Plutarch, de his qui sero, &c. ib. p. 550. A.

49. 1 That is, considering Christ as appointed the final Judge of all, man here
acts like him.

50. 2 i. e. the section of a tree formed into a boat, as was much the case in
former times. See the Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. x. p. 35. A.

51. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. lit. hours, a literal translation, in all probability, of
the Greek w[rai, signifying seasons.

52. 3 One would think from this, that the ancient Astrolabes were furnished with
an apparatus for the purpose of exhibiting animated nature, while they presented
the places and groups of the stars; not unlike, perhaps, our modern Orreries,
supposing them accompanied by a sort of cuckoo-clock. Lactantius thus describes
the sphere of Archimedes, Lib. n. cap. v. p. 115. Ed. 1698. "An Archimedes
siculus concave sere similitudinem mundi ac figuram potuit machinari, in quo ita
solem, ac lunam composuit, ut inaequales motus et coelestibus similes,
conversionibus singulis quasi diebus efficerent: et non modo accessus solis, ct
recessus, vel incrementa, diminutionesque lunae, vel etiam stellarum, vel
inerrantium vel vagarum, dispares cursus, orbis ille dum vertitur exhiberet,"
&c. According to the Greeks the sphere was invented by Anaximander: Diog. Laert.
in the life of this philosopher.

53. 4 So Porphyry, Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xxii. [Greek] "Qui...nec oculis, nec alio quovis humano sensu attingi omnino possunt." Eusebius, perhaps, first alludes here to the practice of Exorcism, as had recourse to in
the primitive Church: see Suiceri Thesaurus, sub voce, Ecorkismo&j --There was moreover, a very general belief that a sort of magic virtue consisted in the pronunciation of certain words. Origen (contra Cels. Lib. v. pp. 261----2) tells us that any name, or word, having effect in incantations, if changed or translated into any other language, immediately lost its whole magical efficacy. His instances are, The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: the names Israel, Adonai, Sabaoth, &c. Nor does he restrict these usages to the professors of the true religion. See also ib. p. 374, and Spencer's very curious note on pp. 17. C. 41: notes, p. 16----19, where we have every thing we can require on this subject.

54. 1 This is perhaps, an instance of hypallage, as occasionally met with in the
Scriptures (see the note to §. 57 above.) So Rom. vii. 24. [Greek] Syr.
[Syriac]. Here, the [Syriac], by the desires of the bonds (the lusts) of nature.
Our author probably means, (by hypallage) the mortifications to which persons of
this sort usually submitted, just as it is the case with the devotees of
Hindustan at this day; all of whom generally hold, that they have power over
demoniacal agents. A belief however, in these things as expressed here, must be
classed among those, which more enlightened times have very properly rejected.
Our author might, however, have intended this as a sort of argumentum ad
hominem, it being religiously held by the heathen of his times, as may be seen
Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. C. xxii. seq. Where (p. 173. D.) he tells us that in this
ease he used not the testimony of Christians, but of the heathen Philosophers
themselves, [Greek]. See ib. cap. xxiii. on the means used for expelling and
opposing these Demons, from Porphyry. See also Sect. 12. Book ii. below.

55. 2 According to Celsus (Origen contra Cels. Lib. vii. p. 367,) Anaxarchus was
thrown into a mortar, and, when beaten there, uttered these remarkable words.
The tyrant who reduced him to this, was Aristocreon of Cyprus (ib. p. 368.).
Epictetus is here also celebrated for a similar act of fortitude. This account,
moreover, of Anaxarchus will be found at length in Diogenes Laertius, under his
life.

56. 1 Rom. viii. 35. differing considerably from the text of the Peschito and
Philoxenian Versions.

57. 3 See §. 47, above.

58. 1 Rom. vii. 24, as in the Peschito.

59. 2 2 Cor. x. 3, differing considerably from the Peschito.

60. 3 Phil. iii. 20, as before.

61. 4 Heb. xii. 22, cited from memory, apparently.

62. 1 Several passages similar to this, though not identical with it, are to be
found in Plutarch, and other writers.

63. 2 The views of some of the Fathers on this subject were extremely dark and
perplexed, out of which evidently grew the Purgatory of the Roman Catholics. How
far our author partook of this, I have not been able to ascertain. Origen tells
us in his 24th Hom, on Luke, that, as John baptized with water, so shall Christ
baptize in a river of fire all who shall pass to Paradise; but here, the baptism
by water must first have taken place. In this case all must submit to this
second purifying baptism. Again, near the end of his 8th book of ex planations
of the Epist. to the Romans, he says, that he who spurns the purifications of
the Word of God, and of the Gospel-teaching, will reserve himself to the sad and
penal purifications of the fire of hell: in conformity with the Scripture, "I
will purify thee with fire even to purification." (Is. i. 25. Sept.) He goes on
to tell us, that, how long this purifying by fire with sinners shall continue,
He only, to whom the Father hath delivered all judgment, can know: evidently
inclining to the notion that it is not eternal. This is however, according to
him, one of those things which the Apostle considered as a mystery, and to be
held as such by the faithful, secretly within themselves: and, for this he cites
"Mysterium Regis (ut ait Scriptura) celare bonum est." (Prov. xxv. 2?). But, who
does not see that all this is a miserable perversion of Scripture? See Spencer's
Notes on Origen contra Cels. pp. 47-50: it. p. 77. The Bishop of Lincoln's Eccl.
Hist, illustrated from Tertullian, p. 342. seq. Camb. 1826. Out of this also
grew the Mohammedan purgatory, styled [Arabic]. Elaraf. They have also a Bason
(pond), styled [Arabic] out of which all the faithful are to drink before they
enter Paradise. Our author however, does speak also of earthly plagues sent as
purifiers. See Book ii. §. 80, below: and so does Origen contra Cels. Lib. iv.
p. 173, where Plato is cited as using similar phraseology.

64. 1 See §. 62, seq. above.

65. 1 Ps. viii. 5, 6, differing slightly from the Peschito.

66. 2 Similar reasoning will be found in the Phaedo of Plato, Edit. Lond. p.
170; and in Plutarch de consolat. ad Apollonium. (p. 107. seq. Edit. 1620)
beginning with, [Greek]

67. 1 Alluding to Matt. vii. 3, 4, 5: and meaning apparently that, should light
be impeded by any means from passing through the natural inlets to the soul, so
far must the soul remain unenlightened, and in intellectual darkness.

68. 2 Plato's [Greek] Phaedo. Edit. Lond. p. 183. And so a Poet cited by
Plutarch, (de consolat. ad. Apoll. 108. E.) [Greek] 69. 3 Alluding to 2 Cor. iv.
7.

70. 4 Much to the same effect Plato, Phaedo. Edit. Lond. p. 178. seq. So also
Clemens Alexand. (Strom. Lib. v. p. 740.)... [Greek] ... "Quinetiam precatur cum
Angelis, ut qui jam sit etiam aequalis Angelis, neque est unquam extra sanctam
custodiam, et licet oret solus, habet chorum Angelorum una assistentem."

71. 1 It was one of the errors of Tatian, that he believed the soul partook of
the matter of the body: Orat. contra Graecos, p. 169. B. seq. Edit.

72. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. Ovens in the East are not unlike large stone jars, as may
be seen in Mr. Taylor's Fragments to his Edition of Calmet's Dictionary, No.
cix. Plate 38. fig. 5. Edit. 1838. The allusion, made to the spark of fire, in
the last section, is perhaps intended to be kept up here, with the notion of a
silent process going on, as in baking any thing in an oven.

73. 2 Ps. xlix. 21. according to the Peschito, except that we have [Syriac]
instead of [Syriac]: but differing slightly from the Septuagint, as it also does
from the sense of the Hebrew. This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 18th
July 2002. All material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press SPIonic font, free from here.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 56: THEOPHANIA - BOOK 2
========================================================================

BOOK II. THE SECOND BOOK AGAINST THE PHILOSOPHERS.

1. THE human race, O my friends, stood (thus) in need of God the Saviour : and God alone was the helper, who, could give abundance to those who had suffered loss, and life to them who had become subject to death. The advent therefore of God, and the divine manifestation of the common Saviour of all;----of him who arose (as the sun) upon mankind was necessary, because all that was upon the earth, had, through the insanity (inculcating) a plurality of gods, and the envy and solicitation of demons, become corrupted to the last stage of vice, and (immersed) in the depth of ungodly error.

2. But again, that the cause of the Divine manifestation of the common Saviour
of all among men, might the better be known, let us first of all speak on the
great fall of the human race, on their lawless wickedness and iniquity : and
then let us pass on to the hidden mysteries of the doctrine of this divine
Revelation.

3. For, it was not as some disease which (lay) on man, and was mighty as opposed to every other; but it was, that the evil
1Demon so led, and ruled over, the whole human race, like a pestilence that is mortal, (and) far surpassing every thing that is (generally) evil and hateful, that he drove him who was more peaceful than any other being, to the last stage of brutality; and him who was rational, to that of being the most irrational of all. Hence2 it was that men, in the blindness of their souls, recognized not the God who is over
|67 all; The Cause and Maker of all; The Reverend Name of that nature of the ONLY (Begotten) which had no beginning, Him who was before all3, THE WORD OF GOD; The Father of the essence which is intelligent and rational; Him who rules both in heaven and earth ; Him who is at all times present to this world, and is in it, and is the (efficient) Cause of every good to all; That providential care ; That Saviour; That Upholder; That Giver of rain, and Dispenser of light, and Prince of life; That Creator of this whole (they recognised not, I say), but gave that Reverend Name to the Sun, the Moon, the very Heavens, and the stars; nor did they confine themselves to these4,----

4. But also, to matter warm and cold, wet and dry, to the very waters, the earth, the air and fire;----things which we perceive with our eyes, have neither soul nor reason ;----and to the rest of the (constituent) portions of the world, they likewise gave the names of Neptune, Vulcan, Jupiter, Juno, and of others, and honoured them with the title of god: nor did they confine themselves to these,----
|68

5. But, they also made Gods of the earthy nature of the fruits of the earth, and of the provisions intended for the bodies of every kind (of animal, and named them) Ceres, Proserpine, Bacchus : and, of other things allied to these, they made Idols: nor did they confine themselves to these,----

6. But, they hesitated not to call the cogitative faculty of their minds, and their reason, which is the interpreter of of these, also Gods. Their faculty of thought they named Minerva, and their speech Mercury. The powers inventive of moral doctrines, they called Memory, and the Muses : nor did they confine themselves to these things,----

7. But, increasing in manifold impiety and the excess of wickedness, they made themselves Gods of their own passions; which it was becoming they should have put away, and have cured by the effort of pure reason :----of their lust, their baser infirmities and passions; of their grosser members also fitted for corrupt acts, and of the different parts of the body. And again , the appetency to the intemperate
|69 lusts, they named Cupid, Priapus, 5Venus, and other things allied to these: nor did they confine themselves to these,----

8. But, they also prostrated themselves to that which was born6 of the human body, and to the life which is subject to death; they made men into Gods; and published of these, after undergoing a common mortality, that they were Gods and Demigods; imagining that the divine and immortal essence moved about the sides of graves, and among the monuments of the dead: nor did they confine themselves to these things,----

9. But, they also honoured with the Reverend name, every species of irrational animal, and noxious reptile7! nor did they confine themselves to these ",----
|70

10. But, they also cut down trees8, and hewed the rocks: the metals too of the earth, brass, iron, and other matter, they sought out, and formed into the appearances of women, forms of men, and into the likenesses of wild beasts, and of reptiles; and to these again they gave the name of Gods! nor did they confine themselves to these,----

11. But, they also ministered, by means of libations and the fumes of sacrifices, to the evil demons which had insinuated themselves into these same images9, which had been set up in the innermost recesses of darkness; and to them they gave the name of Gods! nor did they confine themselves to these,----

12. But, they also drew over to themselves, by means of the ties10 of those who used abominable incantations, by
|71 songs and other forcible and lawless enchantments, tho se invisible Demons11 and Powers which fly in the air: and again, they availed themselves of these, as abettors of the error of the deities, which they had (so) fabricated. And thus did they set up mortal men, as the Gods of Others. For the Greeks honoured Bacchus, Hercules, Aesculapius, Apollo, and other men, with the names of Gods and Demigods ; while the Egyptians12 imagined of Horus, Isis, Osiris, and again of other men such as these, that they were Gods. Nor did their wise men, who are boasted of for their excessive wisdom, and the invention of Geometry, Astrology, and Arithmetic, know or understand how to weigh or to discriminate in their minds, between the distinguishing measure of the Divine power, and that of irrational mortal nature. On this account, they hesitated not to give the name of Gods, to every frightful image of the animals ; to every sort of untamed beast, and reptile; and to the fiercest animals. The
Phoenicians too, named 13 Malkuthrudun, |72
14 Ousurun, and other mortal men more contemptible than these, Gods ; while the Arabians did the same to
15 Dusarin, and 16Oubadon; the Getas (Goths), to
17 Zalmacusin : the Cilicians, to 18
Mopsus ; the Thebans, to 19 Amphiaraus. And with others, again, others,----who differed in no respect from mortals, but were in truth men only,----they also honoured with the name of Gods.
|73

13. The whole of the Egyptians, therefore, at once with the
Phoenicians and the Greeks, (thus) availed themselves, contrary to humanity, of every mortal species,----even as the rising of the sun illuminates (all) the portions of the universe,----of the very elements, of the fruits20 which grow out of the earth, even of their own passions21; and again, even of the madness of demons, and (other) delusions; and before these, of mortal men22! Nor did they set up, during their lifetimes, the doctrine which is excellent; nor did they point out to men, the instruction which attends purity of life; nor did they shew forth the requirements of (true) philosophy, or discover the practices favourable (to this) : nor did they leave behind themselves any disciples of their superiority, or deliver either precepts or writings conducing to happiness of life23. On the contrary, they busied themselves with women, and the baser lusts ; and, as it happened,----I know not by what error of the participation in the deeds of Demons,----they named (these) Gods and Demigods, and honoured (them) with sacrifices, and services (connected) with the error of enchanters! They also built Fanes and Temples (to these) both in the cities and villages: but Him who alone is beyond the universe,
THE WORD OF GOD in verity, the King of all, and Maker of all, they set at nought!
|74 These same multiplied all this, in the madness and corruption of (their) mind, to such an extent, that they forthwith called any men, with whom they happened to meet, Gods; and immediately attached themselves to these same passions of mortals! And to these did they ascribe lawless adulteries, abominable deeds, and perverse lives and deaths. Nor did these things come from others, so that they could say these were their calumniators; but they themselves are the witnesses of these things, confessing the error, the sorrows, the deaths; and prior to these, the adulteries, the corruptions, of men (with men), and the rapes of women24. Nevertheless, they filled all their cities, villages, and (other) places, with the Fanes, Images, and Temples (of these)!

14. Nor25 was it this only, but also, from the speeches which they made about
their Gods, they received every provision for the life which was lawless and
base; and, in the first place, corrupted by every sort of abomination, at once
both their souls and bodies. And, that such were the things which they did, when
assimilating themselves to their Deities, we can readily shew from this, that
the Phoenicians our neighbours, as we ourselves have seen, are busied with these
things, even now, in Baalbeck; the ancient injurious excesses and corrupting
paths of vice, being persevered in there, even to this time; so, that the women
there enter not into the bands of lawful marriage, until they have been first
corrupted in a way contrary to law, and have been made to partake in the lawless
services of the mysteries of Venus26. Now indeed, this city alone |75 remains in
this sickly state of folly, by way of proof of these ancient vices; when, from
ancient times, many thus suffered while the disease inflicted by Demons had more
abundant hold.

15. Nor was it this only, but also, the very men who rejected the gods mentioned
(above), preached up, by means of hymns, elegies, sacrifices, mysteries, books,
and votive offerings to Idols, that Father and Leader of all the Gods, who was
overcome by bodily lust, and fell in love with Ganymede27: and, as it were in
emulation of their Gods, they transgressed the bounds of nature, and remained in
this excess, at a distance not to be described, or (received) as real into the
hearing. They fearlessly abused each other, as the Divine declarations affirm :
"Man with man working that which was shameful, and receiving in themselves the
return of reward, which was due to their error28''.

16. Nor was it this alone, but they also subverted |76 the common mind of all,
placing under an irrational Fate, and natural necessity, the constitution and
essence of every thing. They led too, the lives of beasts, even the life which
was no life. Nor did they enquire into the essence of the soul, or think on the
righteous judgments of God. The victory attendant on virtue, they never called
to mind, nor again, the punishment due to a wicked life.

17. Nor was it this alone, but they also ran as herds into the midst of the
theatres, old and young together ; mothers with their sons and daughters; and,
conformably with the doings (there), they contracted every base and intemperate
disposition. Men and women too, being (thus) congregated together, became at
once filled with intoxication (as it were) and lasciviousness! How then, could
they do that which was good, when they stored not their hearing by listening to
words that were pure, inculcating the fear of God? and applied not their eyes
for the advantage of their souls? but (the hearing), to the instruction of
sentiments that were base; and the sight, to the representation of every (sort)
of lascivious-ness? For, things such as these, were those which (were presented)
to the sight; (and), on which whole multitudes so fixed their attention, that in
them (was evinced) the maddened excitement of the stallion, the vile pleasure
(felt) over those devoured by wild beasts; (the |77 excitement) of grains of
corn parched29 (by the fire); (or over) those killed in the lion-hunt; but not
(any feeling) belonging to human beings! And again, the impudent laugh (set up)
at the vilest things; the intense and foolish desire excited by the music; the
lascivious shows personating women; and the loud uproar set up at the songs! For
these, indeed, and such like things, were immense multitudes of the ignorant
inhabitants brought together, with those who were their Princes, their Generals,
and their Governours, and became saturated (as it were) with the corruptions
which debase the soul30.

18. Nor was it this only, but they also built seminaries of the precepts of ungodliness both among the (country) people, and in the cities31. Instead of the precepts of righteousness, and those which were advantageous to the world ; and, instead of the doctrine which was pure, and the love of God; they received into the memory,----through the impious babblings of the poets, in which there were
|78 corrupt recitations, and stories about their male and female deities,----passions filled with every thing shameful, as well as hard sufferings32, differing in nothing from (those of) mortal nature; (I say), through the instruction and study of the lying writings of the Dramatists, both tragic and comic, these things, corrupting and injurious (as they were) of life, they first sowed in their own souls, and afterwards in those of the young. And accordingly, (through) the iniquity, which was the first and last of every other,----which was, at once and entirely, that of all men, of Princes and Subjects, of the Sovereigns of nations, of Lawgivers, of Armies, of the Inhabitants both of villages and cities, among both Greeks and Barbarians;----the praise which was due, and was suitable to Him alone who is King of all, they perversely gave to that which was adverse (to Him), and called the demons that had corrupted them, (their) Gods! They sang hymns moreover, to earthly and wicked spirits, to the inanimate elements, and to the sensible portions of the universe! And (thus), the companies of the rational animals which were on the earth, rendered not the praise of the officiating priest; nor, with their brethren who are in heaven, the holy Angels and Divine Spirits,---- those who praise the King of all,----did they render praise, the praise (I say) which is proper for such : but, on the contrary, they sang, both in their feasts and festivals, that which was foreign to propriety, and was unsuitable, to those seducing Spirits which had led the world astray! To them, too they gave the honour of worship; insomuch,
|79 that henceforth, the whole element of the earth, uniformly with all nations throughout the whole of creation, became nothing better than the vessel in the storm, whose entire and violent wreck in the extreme depths of perdition, is momentarily threatened!

19. Much therefore, on account of all these things, was God the Saviour and (only) helper, needed by mankind. Had some societies only been led to this state of error, the evil would indeed have been (but) small. But now, the Princes of cities, the Leaders of the nations, the Kings of countries, the Heads of territories, and the Honourable of the nations, had at once become fully, and completely, diseased in this same error of Demons, and of a plurality of Gods. And behold! again, even those,---- who boasted themselves among the Greeks of (their) philosophy, and made the profession, that in them was knowledge superior to any that was in the many ; were pompous in the streets, swelling with pride, and casting their mantles loosely about them ; had wandered in the great and wide earth; had freely taken from other nations this magnificence of doctrine about things; from this place, geometry; from another quarter, arithmetic; and again from another place, music, the art of healing, and those other things, which have their being in rational experiment33: for, these things, and others like them, they
|80 got together from every place:----these fell (nevertheless), into a deadly and ungodly state of mind! By the mere discovery of persuasive words moreover, some of these set it up,----as if they would make no experiments even after the truth,----that indivisible34 bodies (atoms), having no extent, or having projecting parts, and infinite, were, forsooth, the origin of all things! These same too, determined
35Rest to be the extreme good : that which is, and
|81 evidently (so), a greater corruption than all the (other) vices. For, What could be more worthy of honour than Rest, with those who laid it down, that there is in this something which exists, neither Providence, nor God, nor soul that is immortal, nor intelligent essence, nor WORD OF GOD which is above all, nor (yet) beginning, nor end? and, that the things alone that are irrational and inanimate, which are indivisible and subtile bodies (atoms), and fall not, on account of their excessive smallness, under the (observation of the) senses;----that they should predetermine these very things, which are inanimate, irrational, as being without beginning, ungenerated, and in their multitude infinite, and as having, from times not to be comprehended, been dispersed just as it has happened?---- still, things being thus, have affirmed, that these were the cause of this universal order; and, that there was neither God, nor Providence, nor Reason which viewed, or which governed, the whole? But, even if there were, that He would not possess the being of any one thing; neither would He give it to others36! And, as my judgment is, the "Rest" which was (so) lovely to them, and which they also attributed to God
Himself37,----just as the doings |82
of those were who arose as Philosophers of the school of Epicurus and Democritus, and as was the whole traditionary (doctrine) of those amongst the Greeks,----was that of (this) life. And, being thus eminent, they approached the multitudes; at one time, walking to the temples with the inhabitants (generally) ; at another, shewing themselves to be those who feared the Gods; because of the fear of punishment (otherwise to be expected) from the law38. But such were these, who contended for Rest (as the extreme good).

20. Others too, fixed the limits of Providence as far off as the moon39; the company of those too, who were of the school of Aristotle, excluded it from every other portion of the world: which same also, determined the extreme good to be, neither Virtue, nor Philosophy, unless indeed, it happened to be attended by wealth of possession40, abundance of gold and of silver, Family, and and the glory which takes with the many! And, What could hinder such from boasting themselves in these things?
---- men, who had shut up, as with bolts and doors at the distance of the moon, the Providence which is over all? or, that they should affirm, that the intelligent and
|83 rational soul41 which is in man, is mortal; and, that it is nothing, but even as the body, or as its colour, or its form? They usually term it moreover, Entelechia42. Nor did they, by any means, place in apposition with the chief good, either the life of Philosophy, or the superiority of rule: on the contrary, they lapsed into the things of accident, riches, greatness, and family: (affirming), that with these existed the superiority that was worthy of reason ; and that, without these things, it was nothing! Nor had the wise man any thing superior, unless he were also rich : nor had he, who was careful about purity of life, any thing good about him, unless he were a person of family! nor, would justice itself, or the complete
|84 beauty of virtue in the person of any one, be sufficient for the life of happiness, unless he happened to have a complete symmetry of bodily limbs! These men then, considered these things as being apart, in a place (removed) from the things pertaining to men, (and) higher than the moon : that a Godhead existed; but affirmed, that the providence of God looked not to the things on earth. Nor did they recognize the common Saviour of all,
THE WORD OF GOD, the Preserver of all things; but drew near for the purpose of reverencing those Deities, that were in certain places, and in the cities43: professing themselves to be wise in some things, with those who knew them ; but performing others in their deeds. In their writings and common conversation, they made the oaths of their Gods: but, in their minds, no such thing existed. On the contrary, they submitted to this for the sake of the applause of the many44. So that hence these same were Demons, rather than men, (and) to be despised by every sort of sound Philosophy.

21. Others also, besides these who boasted themselves (as being) the best of Philosophers, dared with ungodly
|85 mouth to affirm, that God is a body; and, that His nature differs in no respect from fire. And this is the extreme error of the Stoics, who say of this sensible world, that it is God : and (so) set up a doctrine, which is impious and all-corrupting. For (they affirm), that the operative Cause, and the passiveness45 of matter, are of one and the same essence; and, that the maker and the made, are both bodies : and also, that the King of all, God who is above all, differs in nothing from sensible fire; but, that he mixes Himself up at once, with every thing,----just as fire does in (its) progress,----at the appointed times. But great is the
|86 sin (to affirm), that God is subject to change; and again, to combustion! This therefore, is the doctrine of the Stoic Philosophers, that all being, even the whole world, shall in time be mixed up with God46 in fire: and, (that) the whole shall effect a change, as in seed; and, that out of this, universal order shall again be produced, just as it was at the first: and that all these are Gods, as are all the portions of the world; and, because the whole consists of all its parts, the entire universe itself wholly constitutes the Deity47! These same again affirm, that this intelligent and reasonable soul which is in man, is corruptible, just as it is corporeal. What then, could hinder such from daring to speak against God, the King of all? or again, from determining, that these souls (consist) of matter, and body? and, that they are nothing else but the dense smoke, and fumes of bodies48? and again, that after the close of life, they
|87 shall continue, during the times destined for them? and (this) not of all, but only of the souls of the Philosophers

49? and, that at last, with the general conflagration, these also shall burn
together with God, and the whole universe? and, that at the same time, the souls
of the wicked and of the just shall be dissolved ; the thing's also of the just,
together with those of the atheists, shall be fused, as it were, by one and the
same fire? and again, that the worlds shall be reborn from this consumption of
universal fire, differing in nothing, but in every thing, similar to the former;
so that again, as from a beginning50, these (worlds) shall in those be
reproduced; as shall this same traditionary (life). Modes of life again, such as
shall in all respects be similar, and not differing: the same fashions too,
customs, regulations, and passions, shall exist within these. In the same manner
also, the same sorrows, honours, recreations, oppressions, shall subsist among
these, and happen to the same individuals. So that Helen51, and the calamities
of Ilium, (Troy) may again be expected: and again, |88 Anytus 52, and Melitus,
and the deadly poison of Socrates: again too, the contentions of the
Philosophers themselves: the same divisions on the same subjects; and, at last
again, shall the whole be consumed by fire ; and again, after it has been burnt,
again shall it be restored anew: and again shall consist of the same reducible
materials53. And indeed these, adhered thus violently to their error!

22. The descendants however, of the Philosophers, who were named the "primitive
(students of) Physics"54, (and) who preceded all (others), laid the origin of
all upon the inanimate Elements, and recognized neither God, nor Providence, nor
Creator, nor Maker of any thing; but vainly, emptily and falsely, arrogated to
themselves the name and show of Philosophers: some of them affirming the earth,
and dry substance, to be the origin of all; others the ocean55, the Parent of
all ; for thus they named the humid substance and waters : others, fire56;
others, the |89 air57; and others, a compound58 of these. They also introduced
many male, as they likewise did, female Deities. Marriage too, and the bringing
forth of children, they perverted by natural metaphors, and the specious diction
of the fictitious stories of the Poets, to the adorning of (this their) vain
glory59. So that these also, fell down again, as it were by perverseness, from
the heights above, upon the material elements and sensible portions of the
universe!

23. Others however, exclusive of these, determined the reverse of all those mentioned ;----that there was nothing divine in (all) this which exists; neither God that was over all; nor the (Deities) which were in certain places, nor that superior name, nor the imposition of (plastic) hand upon matter, were things really existing: so that they proceeded to the greatest extent of impiety60.

24. Plato alone, of all the Greeks, (as) it seems to me, adhered more eminently
to (the true) Philosophy ; and held correctly, respecting that good Being who is
the First, and Cause of all; and became truly wise, respecting the Second (61
Cause), who is the Creator of all. |90

25. He also established (it) justly and well, that the heavens, the sun, the
moon, the stars, and wholly and at once, the whole world, were made by the God
of all62. |91

26. He also affirmed of the essence of the soul, that it is incorporeal and foreign to corruption. He was also cognizant of the intelligent Essences; and confessed, that the mind which is over all, (and) which we call
THE WORD OF GOD, is King of all. To the same he gave the Rule over all, after the manner of a shipmaster, who well and duly provides for all: Him he also shewed was Governour63. This man alone, of all the Greeks, confessed----just as we do,----of
THE WORD OF GOD the Creator of the world. But, he is at hand, and we may hear (this) from himself, when discoursing of God thus :----

27. "64 Let us render honour, neither to that (heavenly body) which is of the
year, nor to that of the month. Nor let us cut off to these indeed, any portion
: neither the time in which it proceeds in its orbit, and completes the visible
world, which THE WORD OF GOD has set in order. Of all who are in it, he who is
happy will have wondered |92 (at Him), and afterwards acquired such love, as to
investigate (Him) as far as mortal nature is able.

28. This man moreover, now calls THE DIVINE WORD, the Father, the Lord of all, and also Governour of all, in the very same words, and names Him just as we do ; expressing himself thus :----

29. "This65 Epistle, all you who consist of three should read, particularly in society: but, if not, between
|93 two in common, as each may be able. As often as ye shall be able, avail yourselves of compact (together), and of the Law; and, by that Lord, who is justice (itself) swear ye, at once with care ;----not without wisdom,----and with erudition the sister of care; and, by that Governour of all, of the things that are, and of those that shall be; and, by the Father of the Governour and of the (efficient) Cause, the Lord, swear ye:----Him, whom, if we are truly Philosophers, we shall all clearly know, as our power (may be, being) of those who are happy men."

30. This (philosopher) also taught, that there was a just Judgment of God, and that He would render to every man as he should deserve: he very divinely shewed too, that the extreme good was this, that (men) be like to the Godhead66; be attached, and made (as it were) twin brothers, to virtue. Nevertheless, he also fell justly4, (and as it was) likely, more than they all under reprehension. Why? Because he knew God as He was; but honoured Him not as God. He concealed the truth too, and put forth falsehood to the many. To those whom he loved, he spoke openly and well, as a Philosopher, of the Father and Creator of this whole. But, with the inhabitants of Athens, he conducted himself as no Philosopher; and went down to the Pirasus to Socrates, at his word, to pray to the Goddess, and, at once, to complete the festival of Bendis67, together with all the inhabitants. And again,
|94 he himself said of his master, that, when the end of his life drew near, he commanded them to sacrifice a cock! Nor did the best of Philosophers blush;----nor was it concealed :----that, the Father of his philosophy commanded them to propitiate the Deity, by means of fabricated earthly matter, and a little blood ;----the body of a dead bird68! And again, he called those (Deities) that were honoured in the cities, Demons: and this he did well. But, he further confessed, that these same were, and that they were formerly known as being, mortal men. And (here) he spoke the truth. Nevertheless, he advised that (men) should worship these same as Gods! And, because he submitted himself, with the multitudes, to the error of these, he may well have been memorialized as (implicated) in their pretences, because he concealed the word of truth under the show of Philosophy, and attached himself to
|95 falsehood. Hear therefore, the things that he has said in the Timaeus:----

31. " To speak of the other Demons, and to know their power, is too great for
us. We assent however, to those who have said before us, that they were the sons
of the gods, even as they have affirmed : and they well knew their own fathers.
It is impossible therefore, we should not approve of the sons of the gods, when
behold, they advance neither probabilities nor strong proofs69. But, as they
affirmed, that they narrated respecting those who were their own (fathers) ;
(so) we, adhering to the law, believe. Thus therefore, as these affirmed a
generation respecting these gods, (so) let it be; and be affirmed, that the
Ocean and |96 Tethys were the sons of the Earth and the Heavens; and of these
same, Phorcys, Saturn, and Rhea (Ops): and of Saturn and Rhea, Jupiter and Juno:
and those others, whom we know were all of them brothers of those mentioned: and
others again, the children of these."

32. You (now) view the very Philosopher----who is from above70, and of the exemplars that are above the world, and of the intelligent essences which are incorporeal,----beneath on the earth and on the ocean, immerged as it were in the depths of error71! He has moreover, introduced a generation of the gods,----him who could himself alone, say with a mind, the voice of which was more elevated than that of man,----

"What is that which always is, but that it might |97 exist, has no being? And it
is this same which is apprehended by knowledge together with reason, and exists
in all time according to itself. But, that which is to be considered by the
sense that is irrational, and was, and is corruptible; that it might fully
exist, it never had even being."

34. This selfsame Combatant therefore, now honours this identical (something,)----this which was, and is corruptible, but never fully existed, on account of its elemental and dissoluble character,----with the name of gods! And again the very same, (virtually) reprehending the expositors of this story of the gods, says of them, that it was neither from probabilities nor from strong proofs, that they spoke and put forth the error of these Deities. And, having accused them in this manner, he afterwards says, "We give our assent to them, and approve ;" when, behold! they had said nothing truly! Besides, when he called them the sons of the gods,
|98 he clearly knew, that he was introducing their fathers who were, like all (other) men, subject to mortality! And again, he memorializes mortal gods, and mortal sons, who were like to their fathers, and who plainly said that they knew their own fathers. Nor does he conceal himself when he says, "It is impossible therefore, that we should not believe the sons of Gods;" still, he immediately accuses them, that they had advanced neither probabilities, nor strong proofs, and adds, "We approve of them, as saying that they narrated respecting their own" (fathers.) He says not----and (this) fully and carefully,----that they narrated; but, as "they said that they narrated;" and, we "assent to them as saying, that they were the sons of the gods." And, Whence had he learned this, that he should affirm just as they had said? For (says he) they said this: It was not I. That is; Still to them, when speaking of themselves, and unable to establish (the assertion) respecting themselves, either by probabilities or strong proofs, we nevertheless give our credence! He says too after this: " Thus therefore, as these affirmed the generation of the gods, (so) let it be;" necessarily, says he, just as these say! Not indeed as my opinion is, but as theirs (was,) let these things be affirmed72!

35. You perceive therefore, that he advises it as proper, that we should adhere to error! And, For what cause does he set this up? Not because of any other thing, except the Law : that is, because of the death that was suspended on the Law! And this he openly acknowledges when he says, " We, adhering to the Law, believe." The fear then of man, and of the Law, dismissed from the Philosophers, that Fear, and Law, which (were) of the truth! Where then, are those excellent and wise things,
|99 which the same elegant tongue,----(and) wholly for the sake of which,----said in astonishing language, and thus magnificently?----

36. " For73 there is neither law, nor any one ordinance superior to erudition;
nor is it just, that the mind be subservient or subjected to any thing: it is,
on the contrary, Prince of all, if indeed it be free in its nature." This same
too, is he who said, that "Wheresoever74 a man places himself, thinking it to be
best, there he ought, as I think, to remain, (even) in the storm; making no
account of any thing, neither of death, nor of any other thing, before things
hateful." He also said afterwards; "For75 this, that one should fear death, O
men, would be nothing else, but that we should suppose him to be wise when he is
not so."

37. How then can you, O Philosopher! be moved by death after these expressions? or, draw near to
|100 honour" mortal Gods, on account of the Law? And, How can you dignify these, as sons of the Gods, in order that we might approve, and give (our) assent to them? In your own words you both reproach, and chastise (them), as having said nothing soundly, or by way of proof, respecting (these) their own Fathers. How then, having thus accused them, can you now advise men to approve of them? But, of these their Fathers, let us make inquiry :----

38. Of the Earth, you say, and the Heavens, the Ocean and Tethys were the progeny: and again, Phorcys, Saturn, and Rhea. And so after all these, Jupiter and Juno! Jupiter, after the Earth and Heavens! Jupiter, after Saturn! and Rhea, after the whole of these! What say you, O Combatant?----Where is the great Jupiter, who drove the flying chariot in the Heavens? Or, Is not that a sentiment of thine, over which every body cries out and wonders, when thou thus sayest:----

39. " The same great Jupiter therefore, drove and guided the flying chariot in
the heavens, and to the same adhered the hosts (both) of the Gods and of the
Demons76?"

40. But, I know not whence Jupiter is to be viewed, after these (viz.) the
Earth, the Sea, the Ocean, Rhea, and |101 Saturn, mortals! or How, according to
this sentiment of thine, we can give our assent to that of those who said before
us, that " they are the sons of the Gods, just as they affirmed; as they clearly
knew their own Fathers. It is impossible therefore, we should not approve of the
sons of the Gods, when, behold! they advance neither probabilities nor strong
proofs." And he adds; "Thus therefore just as they affirmed a generation,
respecting these Gods (so) let it be, and be affirmed." After this he makes a
long story, which is that of the generation of the Gods, (as) related by the
Poets. And, upon this He assures us and says, that from Saturn and Rhea were
Jupiter and Juno, and all those whom we know ; and the brothers of these, are
they all said to be; and others again, who were the children of these.

41. Do you observe then, how this man goes on stating, ---- stating too not things that are not difficult, but impious, and those which are directly opposed to his own Philosophy? For this is he who in the Republics, drives
|102 away contemptuously (and) entirely from his commonwealth, those whom he here calls the sons of the Gods!
----those ancients (I say) who spoke of the Divinity of these; Homer himself, Hesiod, and prior to these, Orpheus! But now, the same Philosopher advises, that we give credence to these; calling them the sons of the Gods! He supplicates too,----subsequently to the earth and the heavens, and to that humid substance which he names the Ocean, (implicated) in generation and corruption!----that Father of all, both of men and Gods; and Juno, with those others succeeding them, who----as he affirms----are said to be their brothers; and confesses, that they are the sons of those who are of the Earth, and of the Ocean: and he afterwards advises, that we should worship these as Gods77! Where then is that multitude of intellectual Essences? And, Where that incorporeal Form which is beyond the world? or, that Divine story about the nature that has neither colour nor form78? And, if indeed every soul be immortal, Why dost thou subject to mortal beings, those that are immortal? And, to the bodies of Demons, that which is Incorporeal? The intelligent and rational Essence too, to those that are of sense, and subject to corruption? It seems right to me therefore, to consider this man more reprehensible than (all) the rest; since an attachment, on account of the kindred character of his doctrines, drew me to him. For, as it appears to me, this man alone of all the Greeks, attached himself to the outward portals of the truth, and shewed, in many (of his) sentiments, a relationship with us. Nevertheless, such cannot be honoured by the truth; because he is, as it appears to me, more reprehensible by it than all
|103 others. For he,----whose (main) desire was to live, while those things which attached themselves to his doctrine (virtually) effected his condemnation to death; and, while his opinion was that, (these) were no Gods;.----he did nevertheless submit himself (to them), as if he recognized no other life, but that only which was present.

42. The Peripatetics79 too, so attached,themselves to a belief, similar to that of the Originator of this Philosophy, that they supposed the soul which is in man to be mortal; and affirmed, that its form and body, was (what they termed) the Entelechia. For the sake of the present life,----which alone they acknowledged,----they submitted to the many. They believed too, that those were never Gods, which were (made) such by the law of the commonwealth: they submitted themselves (nevertheless to these) through the fear of death, and of the punishment of the Law.

43. The Stoics again, who taught that all was body, and that this sensible world alone was God, and that the (constituent) portions of this were Gods, persuaded themselves to do the things----although these might be odious,---- which were conformable to these their precepts! And, because they called the (constituent) portions of the world Gods, and worshipped the earthy substance, How could
|104 they escape severe reprehension? These too, as they determined that the Elements were the origin of all things, worshipped the Elements accordingly.

44. He however (i. e. Plato) determined, as by divine revelation, what that is "which exists in all time, but which could not be (of itself) ;" and what that is "which is apprehended by knowledge together with reason, and (is) in all time according to itself." He also said, in what way it exists; stating openly, well, and wisely, (and) in plain terms, the true account of the Deity, as (its) nature is, in these words: "God80 therefore, according to our former discourse, holds the beginning, middle, and end, of this all
which exists: and, proceeding according to nature, He rightly disposes (it). And to Him does justice ever adhere, awarding punishment to those who swerve from the Divine Law." But, How came he to swerve from the Divine Law, and to think defectively of the justice which is over all? and to put forth for us, these laws of mortal men? this Philosopher too,----this (I say), who could send the soul above the curvature of the heavens,----to fear Death? Besides, I cannot think that this same man held soundly of
|105 the immortality of the soul, because he made the notion of the vulgar his own. For, it was not (according to this) that the souls of men only were immortal; but also, (those) of dogs, hedgehogs, ants, horses, asses, and of the rest of the irrational animals ; and, that (these) differed in nothing, as to their essence, from the souls of the Philosophers! He (also) affirmed after the Egyptian manner81, that these same eiFected a change into every sort of body ; those of men being transfusable into the beastly nature. On these accounts, he is as worthy of reprobation in this case, as in that in which he gave his approval82, but lied on the other side! And, although this was (such) an astonishing man, that he could apprehend the Maker and Creator of this whole; nevertheless, as he put not forth the word of righteousness, he is particularly deserving of the reprehension of every man : because "
he knew God83, but honoured Him not as God; but worshipped and served the creature, exclusive of the Creator." He also named those Gods, and worshipped them (as such), which were (supposed to be) fixed in visible bodies; the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars, confessing at once, and at the same time, that they were made, were perishable, and compounded in their nature of fire, earth, and at the same time, of the rest of the elements! And these same he worshipped, he honoured, and called them Gods! And then again, he afterwards
|106 confessed that these very same (Deities) were both dissoluble, and subject to corruption! But we may hear him,----as the thing said is at hand,----saying in the Timaeus:----

45. "Gods84 of the Gods, of whom I am the Creator: every thing therefore, that
has been bound together, is dissoluble; hence, because you came into being, in
order to exist, you are not immortal: neither (are you) wholly indissoluble."
And again (speaking) on their being, whence this is, and how to be determined,
he says: "What fire is to air; such the air is to the water; and the water to
the earth : out of which He bound up and established the visible and sensible
heavens. And, by means of these things, and out of them, which are thus and |107
the number of which is four, the body of the world came into being." After this
he says : "And, as to the existence of time, in order that time might be, the
Sun, the Moon, and the five other Stars, which have the title of wandering
(planetary), came into existence; (and this) for its determination,
preservation, and calculation. So God made each one of these bodies, and placed
them (each) in (its) course." And again, he says of the heavens, how they
existed in all time; there being no beginning of the essence (of these) not even
one: or being, of what sort this was in its primitive commencement. He then
turns his discourse to his soul, and says, "it became existent, is visible, is
subject, to sense, and has a body: and, that all such things are thus subject to
sense, and, that those which are subject to sense, are apprehended by thought,
and (so) perceived to be existences".

46. Was it not therefore, lapsing far from soundness of mind, that he, who spoke so orderly and well of these things, should call them Gods? that he should confess also, that they were made out of the perishable and corporeal matter of fire, water, air, and earth? and affirm that they were subject to dissolution, and in their nature corruptible? and, again, should name these selfsame beings Gods to be honoured85? For, What participation can that Name and Honour have, which is the Cause of
|108 all things, with bodies that are subject to sense, and to dissolution? Or, What sort of companionship of the
WORD, inseparable from Him who is in all time, but cannot be86, (i. e. as we are, subject to corruption), with that which always was, but never had an existence (of its own), so that he should call these Deities God? For, if He is truly God, He who exists in all time, but has not that he might be (as we are) ; so far as He existed not thus, He was no God. But if he be God, who was at all times, but never existed (of himself): whatever he might otherwise be, he is no God. And, What sentiment can be more impious than this? For, the two things are opposed in their natures ;----this, which is apprehended by reason and knowledge; and that, which is to be considered by irrational sense:----this too, which is capable of action : and that, which is passive. How (I ask) can such opposites deserve one (and the same) name? For, this would be, as though a man should wonder at the science of the architect, but should attach the honour (due to him) to the work that was by him ; and (so) invert the order (of things)! And, should any one name the ship, the shipmaster; or the coachman, the chariot with its horses; so likewise, would he act most foolishly, who should dare to name the Creation of God, Gods; when behold! it had not escaped him,----but he had openly confessed,---- that they were bound up in the bands of God the Creator of all, and (affirmed, that they) were constituted out of the inanimate elements, fire, water, air, and earth! Nevertheless even this man thus (taught)!

47. But, What necessity can there now be, that I should bring to light, how the wise men collected themselves together in ranks, as it were, sectioned themselves off, separated, and mightily armed themselves against one another, just as in battle array, and met
|109 with shields, spears, and hosts,----as one of the Poets says, "Behold the abundance of the uproar thickened----of the destroying and the perishing?"----for Plato termed their warfare with one another, the conflict of Giants when he thus spoke,----

48. "And behold! the conflict between them might be assimilated to that of
Giants, because of the contention they had with one another about matter."

49. Nevertheless, Plato himself said these things either against the Philosophers who were before him, or against those who were his contemporaries: and, that these also,----(as) he also afterwards cries out,----were those who took up arms against him, the evidence is clear. For Aristotle, who arranged himself against Plato, went off with his whole school from his doctrines.
|110 Others again, the Juniors87 afterwards arose, who attacked the philosophical notions of Aristotle; and, on the other hand, animadverted on the Stoics. Others, the Sceptics, put forth Pyrrho88 and the reserve89: and, at once, ridiculed every body! For, they all fully equipped themselves for a mighty war of soul against one another: and (this) by means of words, fell moreover, but little short of arming themselves, fighting, and attacking one another, with spears and shields! Where it was any thing but right, they divided: but, where it was necessary they should contend with all their power,----I know not how it was,----they agreed; and particularly in the error of a multiplicity of Gods! They agreed (I say) in that, which before all men, and more than all men, they knew was a non-entity! That is to say, the Epicureans, (agreeing) with the Stoics: the followers of Aristotle, with those of Plato: the professors of Physics, with the Sceptics; (these) one and all, together with their wives, their daughters, and the ignorant crowd, going to the Temples, and presenting themselves for the purpose of worshipping with (their) vows, as Gods, the inanimate Idols, (formed)
|111 in the likeness of men: and these they honoured with libations, fumes, blood, and the sacrifices of irrational animals: shewing by this means,----and in this one thing only did they relax their enmity towards one another,---- that they all studiously gave their assent to this their error. And (again), when the truth was laid open to them, they opposed it! For it was right, that where their knowledge was correct, there should they have shewn their character to be firm: that they should have contended and warred for the truth; and, had it been necessary, they should have even died for it: (and) should have received it readily in the love (thereof), as men boasting themselves that they were Philosophers. These same persons were therefore, friendly to one another in this, that they brought themselves together for the sake of falsehood: and, about those things, on which it was unbecoming they should contend,----because of the hidden and unknown properties of these,----they contended as if it had been for the truth; readily too was their contention carried on about shadows, while they attacked and reproached one another, with innumerable wounding expressions. But, What need can there be, that (I should record) the contentions of the Philosophers against one another, their controversial expressions, and the common warfare which they set up, and in which they fell; since they availed themselves of human wisdom (only), and of the reasoning of the mortal mind: God the Teacher not having presented himself to them?
|112

50. How was it then?----How, that those who contended about these things, had no God; when, behold! there was a multitude of Deities among them?----since that of Delphos90, and that of Lebadia91, was (each) a Diviner?
----that of Colophon92 gave responses?----'that of Miletus93 was also a Diviner?----and another was crying out from another quarter? Nevertheless, not even one of these could so teach these wise men, that they could apprehend the truth! All of them too worshipped these, as did their Fathers; and all the Greeks confessed, that they were gods: yet, they were not the more assisted in the discovery of the doctrines which are divine; when, behold! there was nothing hindering them from being forthwith (so) instructed in the truth, (or) from availing themselves of the Gods, who were on the earth and at hand, as (their) Teachers. Nor should they have injured, and reviled one another ; but, should have ceased from dispute, and have enquired of the Gods about the matters of contention; and so have learned the truth, as it were from Physicians, and (thence) have received advantage. And first, it was
|113 the duty of the school of Epicurus to have learned not to be godless, and not to have subjected themselves to "Rest"94 (as the chief good) : nor so to have infatuated themselves with ridiculous (notions), as to ascribe to subtile and indivisible bodies95 the power of making the universe; but to have persuaded themselves from the Gods, when (so) taught of the things respecting them. It was also the duty of the school of Aristotle,----who saw with their own eyes the Temples, Fanes, and Idols (that were) on earth : not one (only) but myriads (of these), in every city and place,----to have examined them as to their power: and, from the fact, no more to have confined their discussions about Providence, either to the (regions) above the heavens, or even to (those) above the moon96; but, to have persuaded themselves, that there were Gods also on the earth, and that they exercised a providential care over the men among whom they resided. And, as it was in their power to learn from these same their own (Deities), they should no more have contended with those that were arrayed against them, as to whether the soul was mortal, or immortal. They should therefore, have asked the God who was at hand, and (so) have received, as from the Gods, the true decision (of this question). Thus also, (it was the duty) of the Stoics; and thus too, of the Platonists: thus also, of the Sceptics who are termed Pyrrhonists : and thus also, of those who were in former times styled the Philosophers of Physics, that they should not have desisted from inquiry as to the truth, nor have supposed, as those do who play at chess, that every thing coming into their mind was truth. They should, on the contrary, have asked the Gods who were residing among them about every thing that was unknown: but not even one of the Wise Men has done this, nor did it even
|114 enter his mind! Was it then, that they were godless, and evil-minded towards the Gods, that (the task) was unwelcome to them, and (that) they acted thus? But, thus were they all at once godless; and the Philosophers appear to have been particularly so, and much more wicked than those who were unintellectual: those (I say), who made it no unwelcome task to enquire of the Gods about the taking of wives; the taking of a journey; blindness, or the infirmity of the body :----these too, were readily heard: and to those, who so sought did (the Gods), not in.vidiously, give their divinations. But, behold! it was any thing but becoming in the wise, to have enquired of those Gods who were among them, and to whom they rendered worship and honour, respecting their bodies (only) ; but not about the healing of their souls. And, as not even one of these marvellous Philosophers did this ; it remains, that we assure ourselves of one of two things; (viz.) Either, that these men were no Philosophers; or, that those (Deities) were no Gods. For if, when (these) were really Gods, they set them at nought; they were no Philosophers, but were fools and ignorant men: but, if they had in truth made any approach to the love of wisdom, and abounded in knowledge more than the many; it is clear that they would, with pure conscience, have laughed at the folly of the many ; and it is likely (they did so).

51. But, if those who have been mentioned, were really Gods; Why was it, that the conversation which is on earth, happened to be that of their lives? Was it for the common advantage of all? If indeed this was the case; Why did they not give up those (their) vain stories, and preach to all men the things, that would aid in the acquirement of virtue? And, Why did they not give themselves to the enacting of laws for man, corrective of the common conduct? and (to the performance) of deeds, pointing out the life of virtue to all? And, Why was not their care more particularly exerted for healing the passions of the soul, than (the sufferings) of the body?----rather to deliver those who fled to them, from foolishness and ignorance, than from the loss of possessions, when they saw that men desired wisdom ; that they were labouring night and day
|115 for the discovery of the truth ; and were seeking (both) by labour and contention, for a decision as to the reverence due to these same Gods? And again, (these) went in among the Diviners, and offered sacrifices just as their Fathers had done; and honoured those (Gods) with the honours which they had by custom retained. Why then, did they not receive these with terms of affection? praise them for their labours? and, so delivering them from the contention which they had with one another, give them such aid from their labours, that they should become truly wise in God, and be (real) Philosophers?----and (thus) teach them the science of that true Philosophy, which is free from falsehood? But, as they did not this, they made it plain to every man's perception, that they were no Gods: and, that those who boasted that they were Philosophers, were unworthy of that name! For, had they been truly wise, they never could have supposed that these were Gods: inasmuch as they had afforded to them nothing worthy of Deity, nor had it in their power to teach those, who were anxiously careful about the knowledge respecting them, the things pertaining to
Deity.

52. Thus these (Philosophers) became in (appearance) what they (really) were not: besides, they presented themselves to the many, and called those Gods, which they knew more accurately than all (other) men, were no such things! What sort of name these deserve, it is not necessary for me further to say, except, that those who made their locks to flow down97, frequented the Temples together with
|116 tavern-keepers, with men the refuse (of society), and harlots! And, Did these wise men (then) ask of the Gods the things advantageous to the Philosophers? There is no one who will say this of them!----nor, in like manner, how it was, that no instructing Deity presented himself to afford the erudition which would aid them. But (the things asked) were,----as the Diviners (themselves) say,----the commodities and helps of life generally; the discovery of a slave, if one had happened to run away; of a broken vessel; the purchasing of an estate; merchandise; the taking of a wife; or, other things similar to these. About these it was,
|117 that their admiration and reverence were called forth to their Gods; (and this) in the little blood of a cock, the immolation of a ram or of a bull; the (offering of) cups and bowls, or of a little wheat flower, or of purchased crowns! And, Had they any truth----teaching Deity, as to the things (comporting) with virtue, or to those which respected the healing of the soul? No, not (even) one! On this account, these Philosophers appear to me, to have laboured insolently in (their) warfare against one another, greatly to have aggravated their mutual differences, and to have departed (willingly) from the real knowledge of God : and accordingly, one might hear from them in words, of the Gods, the sons of the Gods, of Demigods, and of good Demons : but in deeds, every thing was adverse: and in opposing, they boasted themselves of opposition! Just as if one should he willing to point out the sun, with the luminaries that are in the heavens; but be unwilling to lift up his eyes to Him who is above (these): should cast down both his hands and soul to the earth, and seek among the clay and mud, the Powers that are in the heavens! In this manner therefore, had the whole race of men persuaded themselves, together with their Philosophers, and Kings,----through an estrangement of the intellect, and the error of wicked Demons,----that the rational and Divine Essence which is above the heavens, and beyond the universe, existed in place, below, among material bodies, and subject to the passions of both mortals, and immortals! And, since this entire estrangement of mind had infected the whole human race, Have we not soundly affirmed that God the Saviour, a Divine Revelation, and a common Helper of all, was required for this our state of life?

53. And98 again, all had been led to such a state of insanity, that they even
sacrificed their friends to those who were thought to be Gods: nor did they
spare their own nature; on the contrary, they put to death, through |118 the
madness and bondage of their minds, even their only children99, and the friends
of their children! And, What madness can be greater than this, that (men) should
sacrifice human beings, and pollute all their cities and houses with their own
blood? And, behold! Do not all the Greeks bear testimony to these same things?
And, Is not the whole of their histories filled with the records of them100?

54. For, the Phoenicians annually sacrificed (some of) their friends, and their
only children to Saturn101! To the same again, was a man also sacrificed in
Rhodes on the sixth of the month Conun (March)102! This same custom too |119
greatly obtained, and was thus changed : They kept one of those, who had been
publicly condemned to death, until the feast of Saturn; and, when the feast
arrived, they brought the man out beyond the gate, over against the Image of
Aristobule (Diana): they then gave him wine, and put him to death.

55. In the (place) also which is now called Salamis103, but formerly Coronea, was a man sacrificed in the month named among the Cypriots Aphrodisius104, to Argaula the daughter of Cecrops and daughter-in-law of Argaulis! And this custom continued to the time of Diomedes; and was (then) so changed, that they sacrificed the man to Diomedes! And in one (and the same) inclosure was the Temple of Minerva, of Argaula, and of Diomedes. He then, who was to be sacrificed, was accordingly----when his equals in age had led him three times round the altar,
----stricken on the stomach with a lance by the priest. He was then wholly burnt on a fire that had been got together. This law however, Diphilus,----who was king of Cyprus in the times of Seleucus the Theologian105,----abrogated: He also changed this custom for that of sacrificing a bull.
|120

56. The law too, whereby men were sacrificed in Heliopolis (a city) of Egypt,
was abrogated by Amosis, as Manetho attests in what he wrote about primitive
justice106.

57. Men were also sacrificed to Juno, and were chosen just as immaculate calves
were sought after, and were slain! There were three moreover, sacrificed in one
day! But Amosis commanded that equivalents of wax, resembling these, should be
substituted for them107.

58. They also sacrificed a man to the Omadian Bacchus in Chios, when they had
torn him (to pieces)! and also in Tenedos, as Euelpis the Carystian affirms!
|121

59. The Lacedemonians also, as Apollodorus affirms, sacrificed a man to Mars! The Phoenicians too, in their greater calamities, whether wars, pestilences, or famines, sacrificed one of their friends, who was selected (for this purpose), to Saturn. The history too of the Phoenicians
----composed by Sanchoniatho in the language of the Phoenicians, and (which) Philo Biblius translated into the Greek, in Eight Books,----is full of this, (viz.) as to those who were (so) sacrificed.

60. Ister108 also says, in (the) collection of select sacrifices, that the
Curetes formerly sacrificed boys! And Pallas, who collected abundantly on the
mysteries of |122 Mithra109, affirms, that the sacrifices of men entirely ceased
every where, in the days of Hadrian the Emperour.

61. A Virgin was also annually sacrificed to Minerva, in Laodicea of Syria; but
now a hart is.

62. The Carthaginians also, who were of Libya, made the same sacrifice ; which
Iphicrates110 caused to cease. The Dumatians111 too, of Arabia, sacrificed a boy
annually: him they buried beneath the altar, and this they used as an Idol!

63. Philarchus too has left it on record, that all the Greeks commonly
sacrificed men, before they went out to battle!

64. But I omit the Thracians and Scythians; and also the Athenians, who put to
death the daughter of |123 Erectheus and Praxithia112. But, Whom has it escaped,
that even to this time, a man is sacrificed in the Great City113 (Megalopolis)
at the feast of Jupiter Latiaris? For even up to this time, it was not only to
Jupiter114 in Arcadia, nor to Saturn in Carthage, that they all commonly
sacrifice men ; but, through the remembrance of the law, they shed their own
blood upon the altars every year115! The most select Philosophers also attest,
that things were thus: for Diodorus116 who abridged the Bibliotheca has
affirmed, that the Libyans117 publicly sacrificed two hundred of the sons of the
nobles to Saturn! Nor did they add to the sacrifices, fewer than three hundred
others118! He |124 too, who wrote the history of the Romans, whose name is
Dionysius (of Halicarnassus) has said, that Jupiter and Apollo required upon a
time, human sacrifices from those in Italy who were called the Aborigines. These
however, had sacrificed to the Gods that select part (Tithes) both of their
fruits and flowers, which was required of them. But, as they had offered no
human sacrifices, they fell into every sort of calamity. Nor did they obtain any
relief from these evils, until they had decimated themselves119! Thus therefore,
having selected a tithe of the |125 men, and sacrificed them to Jupiter and
Apollo, they became the cause of (their) country's ruin! And, so far had this
entire corruption of soul destroyed human life, that no other hope of salvation
could be prescribed, except that which was from God the Saviour: this alone, and
no other, was wanting to the race that is mortal.

65. And thus, in these (distresses) of soul were all men, in every place : nor, was it enough for them, after these things, to act basely ; but, they were also harassed by innumerable other incurable calamities from without, in every place and city. For, all nations at once, throughout the whole creation, Barbarians and Greeks, were so inflamed by means of the maddening deeds of Demons,----
|126  were so stirred up by the grievous and calamitous disease (of these), that neither intercourse nor agreement existed among men,----that so far,----and farther,----was the great body of (our) common nature forcibly urged on, that, in every corner of the earth in which men lived, they were, both from their usages and laws, in a state of warfare with one another. Nor was it this only, but they were also so fierce in the commotions and wars, in which they opposed each other, that, always and throughout their whole lives, they so engaged themselves that no one who desired (this), could take a voyage for the purpose of merchandize to any place, unless he (first) armed himself as for war. In the villages and fields too, the Agriculturists put on swords, and furnished themselves with an excess of equipment, over and above that of the implements necessary for the cultivation of the earth. Men considered it (also) a virtue to rob, and steal from, their neighbours120: and, to our affirmation do all the writings, both of the Greeks and Barbarians, give testimony. The Books also, which are among the Jews, teach (us), that, from times prior to Augustus and Tiberius121,----in whose days our Saviour appeared,----there were in the world, in every city and village, kings and Toparchs fully (established) from the earliest times.

66. The Jews therefore, immediately after the egress from Egypt by Moses, when
they had come into Palestine, expelled the Kings, thirty122 in number, from
their cities. Those however, who were not extirpated, remained and availed
themselves of their population, local residences, and |127 kings: those (I say),
who resided apart in Gaza, Ashkelon, Joppa, and Azotus, again rebelled among
themselves. Scythopolis123 too, and the cities about it, were accordingly so
governed, that hence it happened, that their study was in contention and wars
with their neighbours. And also, when in Jerusalem the wonderful Temple was
built, (and) which Solomon erected, What necessity can there be for saying, how
many subsequent wars (happened) and dealt vengeance even on the Jews, on account
of their dissimulation in the worship of their God; and on which account, they
became divided from each other? They also arose against themselves, and availed
themselves of (the aid of) various Kings and enemies ; some of whom took the
metropolis formerly called Samaria, but now Sabastia124; others again, resided
in Jerusalem, and were always engaged in wars with their own people, and these
with them125.

67. Not unlike these too, did those suffer who resided in Arabia : for, among these also, there was a multitude of local Princes126. The same also was the case with the Syrians, who were in subjection to their (many) kings. The Phoenicians again, so guarded their territories, that no one could mix himself with them, or pass through them: while they were continually desolating the lands of those who resided on their borders, and were constantly engaged in the reduction of cities, and in making captives of one another. Nor was it this only, but also the
|128 whole of Libya and of Egypt, subjected themselves to all these Princes and Kings, as if they had been Gods! They had too, thousands of different Gods, both in the villages and cities, as they also had of kings, who enacted laws adverse to them, and were the inventors of every form of Deity. These were they, from whom many places in Egypt received their names, as well as laws; which they still retain. These Deities moreover, and Laws, so affected those who were subject to them, that they made them at once, both enemies and haters to those who were in their neighbourhood; and that hence, they gave up the whole period of their lives to contention! And they were as much excited against one another, as if they had employed the many princes of the vilest Demons! Hence also, the error of a multiplicity of Gods127
began and obtained dominion,----like some evil and destructive disease of soul,----over the rest of the countries of the heathen! The Egyptians were moreover, (occupied) more than all other men in the worship of the Gods; and more able were they than all others, scientifically to honour them. But, that such fruits were the recompence of their worship, Do not thou (now) enquire. For, the causes of peace and mutual agreement, now so visible to the eyes, had no existence in former times; on the contrary, every thing opposed to these. On this account they were, during the whole period of their lives, harassed with wars and contentions against one another; and (hence), they filled their lands with their own blood, and with the slaughter of themselves; these very Deities apportioning to them, as a recompence for their worship, these and similar doings!

68. If however, these things are not known to all; yet Who, of those that are fond of reading of the affairs of the Greeks, can be ignorant of them?----of the war (for
|129 example) of the Peloponnesians and Athenians, of which Thucydides is the writer?----how Greeks warred with Greeks?----how they subdued the Potidaeans?----how they trampled on the Thebans and Plataeans?----how the Thracians and Macedonians at one time assisted the Athenians, and at another became their enemies?----how the Athenians reduced Corinth, and desolated the country of the Epirotae and Traezenii?----how they wasted the Lacedemonians; and these again, suffered in like manner from the Lacedemonians when they invaded Attica, and depopulated the country of the Athenians? At another time, the Olynthians128
made war on the Athenians; and these again, on others: and these, on their neighbours! Every species of warfare moreover, abounded among them: fights in ships (by sea), fights by land, and fights with cavalry! All these innumerable things did the Gods,----as one may affirm,----fully bring to pass at that time among the Greeks! Nor was it (this) only, but they were also conversant among men; they were honoured, and they were served : not as is now the case; but,----as (all) affirm,
---- as their fathers worshipped those ancient (Deities), and gave themselves up to them, so as to be their friends and to converse with them, as being Gods (present) with them, and residing with them on the earth. And in many things, both by divinations and revelations, did these assist them. Nevertheless, the fruits of honouring these Gods were these; wars, contentions, desolations, and captivities!

69. But, if you wish to investigate things more ancient than these, contemplate with your mind him who was in
|130 Delphos, and held his seat (there) in the presence of the Greeks. I speak of the Pythian ; of him who was preached to all the Greeks, and who proclaimed to the Lydian (Croesus),----but was infirm when he did so,----129" I know the number of the sand, and the measure of the sea: the deaf I understand, and the dumb I hear." He therefore, sent to this same (as) a reward for this song, the bricks of gold of two talents (weight), the phials of gold, and bowls in like manner130. Nevertheless, Croesus was, with this his declaration, all infirmity : nor did this Deity in any way help those descendants of his house, so that they might live happily and soberly. On the contrary, Pisistratus131 became embittered against the Athenians, while this Pythian was seer among the Greeks, and the rest of the Gods had dominion over them, and were even partakers in (their) wars! The people of Argus accordingly, fought against the Corinthians; the Lacedemonians, against the Traezenians; the Locrians again, waged war with the other Greeks, and the Corcyreans with others. Messena too, was taken four times by the Lacedemonians; and the Arcadians were reduced! The walls of the Orchomenians132 were also
|131 rased to the foundations, and the Athenians: overcame the people of Aegina: and again, the Megarians, the Corinthians; the Lacedemonians, the Athenians; the Athenians, the Boeotians; and the Locrians, the people of Phocis! These things therefore, (did) all the Greeks to the Greeks; the Gods nevertheless, sitting at the side of Jupiter while all these came to pass! The Clarion Pythius; that of Dodona, which was in Epirus, did----since they were Demons filled with fumes,---- very gladly receive the sacrifices which were of Demons, both the sacrificial bestial hecatombs of bulls, and those human sacrifices, which were of their own friends! And, while they were inflamed with this vile delirium and love of war, and were (even) rabid against one another; these Grecian Gods,----behold! when with them; these friends, (I say) and provident beings, these lovers and guardians of the Greeks,----restrained them not! But, if we must speak truly, these were the friends of war; these the haters of mankind; these the contenders with God! For, they were the cause of all these things, because they delighted in the slaughter of mankind. And when they had it not in their power to delight in war, they forthwith did so in human sacrifices, and in the libations of human blood, with which they glutted themselves in every city!

70. One of two things is, therefore (the case) : Either, they were nothing; and
it was grievous error that had then so taken hold of mankind, as to induce them
to honour inanimate images as Gods, and vainly, emptily, and by a sort of
madness, to sacrifice their own friends |132 (to them) : or, if they were
possessed of power, it is likely that this would be fully effective, either of
good, or of evil. Now, if they were in their nature beneficent Deities,
remaining too on the earth, and occupying the middle part of the cities; they
would not have evinced this sufficiently, unless for the advantage and safety of
those among whom they lived. But, if they were wicked Demons, they would be
engaged in every thing opposed to goodness. What then, can constitute a surer
proof as to these things, than the fruits which (grew) out of their government;
for, "from its fruits is the tree known133."

71. It is time therefore, that we enquire whether the wars and contentions----not of enemies, nor yet of Barbarians who arose against the Greeks, but of the Greeks themselves, who subscribed to the Gods of their fathers, and were infuriated against one another;
---- were these fruits: the Gods too being within (their cities), and nearer than the (very) gates, and daily honoured by their citizens. What (then) did they give, worthy of this worship, to those who so worshipped them? Was it, first of all, peace? that they might live a life of ease and comfort?
---- and thence, laws that were efficient, arid preservative of every thing good? If indeed, the things just now said were of this sort; there is no necessity we should doubt of the existence of good governours. But, if the extreme of evils had taken hold of the whole family of the Greeks:----the Gods being more numerous than the inhabitants: nor was it, that they were honoured in every city only, but also in every house:----and, (if) when they were (so) honoured, they supplied nothing more to those who honoured them, than the slaughter of wars, the desolation of villages, the rasing of cities, captivity, and spoil; the Greeks being inflamed against the Greeks by these things:----What can there be wanting to our knowing, and (thence) affirming, one of the two things supposed (above)? For, either these Gods could do nothing, because they were nothing: and thus, were far from being the cause of the evils : or, they possessed some
|133 power, and were the cause of these: or, that they permitted these things to be so: or, that they themselves did them. If then, they were the doers of these evils, it would thus seem, that they should be styled the Princes of evil. But if, when these evils were done by others, they connived (at them), they were again, the betrayers of their Friends: they were not (their) helpers: but (their) deceivers; and were therefore, vicious.

72. For, if they were no Gods, and in their nature by no means superior to ourselves, but, were otherwise men who had realized sincerity through their excellency and wisdom ; Would they not have interposed themselves, and have relieved their Friends from contention?---- either persuading them by reason, or, saving them by power, and severing them to a distance from each other? counselling them also in the things which were becoming?---- when acting (I say only) as good men; and, as being their Friends, relieving them from their (mutual) enmity, and bringing them together for peace?

73. How then ;----for good men would have done this, had they happened (to be circumstanced as just mentioned):
---- did the Gods (act), being present with the Greeks and conversant among them, and honoured by all? Did they neglect their Friends, giving them up to bloodshed, desolation, and mutual slaughter? and, Why? Because they were unable to help them? or, being able, were unwilling? For if, when able, they were unwilling; it was no office of helpers which they performed for those who honoured them, but of enemies and deceivers! For those, who can deliver from calamities, but do it not, are in nothing better than enemies. But if, when willing, they were unable ; they merited desertion on account of their weakness. And, if they were thus circumstanced, the reputation of their being Gods was superfluous: nor did men truly ascribe to these the title of helpers; inasmuch as they did not help them to salvation, because of the weakness of their own nature.

74. But, if they advance a superintending fate134, such |134 as to take hold of
every thing, and even of the Gods themselves, and (affirm), that this was the
cause of the wars, and of every thing which came to pass among men ; this will
overthrow the whole course of our life, as it will make every thing that is
(virtuous) among us, vain ; and a doctrine false and vicious will, instead of
this, make its ingress among us. And thus also, will the purposes of the Gods
themselves be rendered vain, since they can do nothing hut that which has been
fated. The things, which this makes it necessary should happen, (shall happen)
even when the Gods will (them) not! And thus again, will the anxiety of those
who reverence these Gods become vain and empty, since they render honour to
beings who can effect nothing.

75. But in this were these astonishing (Deities) caught, that they had not the
power to help against the evils of mankind ; that they were openly seen
delighting in base and abominable stories about their own divinity, and in the
wicked and unlawful sacrifices of men. From these things therefore, it becomes
us to judge of these same Gods, as doing such things among the men of those
times ; because, as their nature was attached to evils and to wars, they were
convicted by their own deeds.

76. But now in our times, every anxiety about the Beings just mentioned has suddenly lost its power ; and the things belonging to this ancient disease have been cut off: every city, region, and locality, among the heathen, now remaining in the profoundest peace! The whole of Asia, Europe, Lybia, and Egypt, which were formerly not better than a ship in a storm, on which the violent winds and tempests had fastened from every quarter, and had thus far,
---- and still farther by the northern blast, ---- contributed to her immersion ; are now so righted by the happy guidance of the helm of peace, in a serenity that is peaceful and a calm that is resplendent, that they subscribe to the
ONE  Ship-governour of all things. Such are all things now,
|135 since he that was in Delphos has been desolated; since that Pythian, (I say) has been extinguished, and since the recollection of the rest of the Gods has been wholly withholden from the hearing of mankind. Nor have such things as that necessity of fate, or (those) war-loving Demons, agitated the cities. For, since the doctrine of our Saviour has obtained throughout the whole creation of man, in every city, village, and place ; and again, since no race of Demons, but He alone who is the King of all, God, and that Creator of the whole world,
THE WORD OF GOD, has been made known and honoured by all men, Barbarians and Greeks; every word about fate has been rendered unavailing: every war-making necessity too has been removed far away: the Divine peace-making
WORD is hymned throughout the whole earth: the race of man is reconciled to God its Father ; and peace and love have been restored to all nations! The things, which pertained to the Gods, are now no more done;
----nor are those which set up the system of warfare (that men carried on) against one another, when those (their) ancient temples occupied the highest positions throughout the whole earth,----(now that these) have fallen under the extremity of desolation, and all those Gods, which formerly uttered their cry in every place, have either from shame or fear, been reduced to silence135: every city too, nation, and region, have by means of the right hand of love, been made at once to enjoy peace, and are delighting
|136 themselves under one government in the deepest established order and agreement. In what manner of life all, both among the Greeks and the Barbarians, existed formerly, when they honoured the Gods far more than their own friends, there is now no need we should shew at length, having shortly laid these things open already, except (to say) that these ancient things are, as such, matters of record.

77. But, Why should any one say that these are things of recent occurrence?
since, as far back as (the death) of Alexander of Macedon, not long before the
manifestation of our Saviour, many governments arose. For Arridaeus136, the
brother of Alexander, received the Kingdom of Macedon: of those that were in
Europe, Antipater took possession ; Ptolemy, of Egypt and Alexandria ; Seleucus
became Governor of Phoenicia and Coelo-Syria: Philotos, of Cilicia; Antigonus,
of Asia ; Casander, of Caria ; Leonatus, of the Hellespont ; Eumenes, of
Paphlagonia ; and Lysimachus, of those parts that bordered upon Thrace. From
this time these, with those who had received their governments, poured forth as
rivers against one another in war. For, Ptolemy the son of Lagus, marched
fifteen times out of Egypt. Seleucus too, met Ptolemy King of the Macedonians,
and was killed. Perdiccas also, entered Egypt with an army. Ptolemy took Cyprus,
and Demetrius seized upon Syria. Another too, went forth to another place, and,
with the violence usually attendant on robbery, seized upon those who resided on
his borders.

78. Thus therefore, during this same time, were things brought to pass one after
another in every quarter of the world. When the worship of many Gods prevailed,
there was neither peace nor agreement ; while mutual enmity abounded. Sacred
places, Fanes, and Temples too, were abundantly appropriated to these in every
city. With |137 many votive offerings were these temples adorned. Much talk too
was engaged in respecting these Gods, by the kings of those times, as was also
by the people, the inhabitants of villages, and of every (other) place; so that
they honoured with images and altars these (Deities) of their fathers, in their
houses, their very treasuries, and inner chambers. Nevertheless, when thus
circumstanced, they were no better than demoniacs whose souls had been perverted
by madness, (and) that during their whole lives, they polluted themselves with
the blood of their own countrymen! And truly demoniacal were they in their wars
with one another, and in their pertinacity in the reduction of cities: the
demons, the leaders astray of the world, being their helpers in these matters!

79. Those too who were thought to be Gods, who gave out divinations, and
foreknowledge (of things to come) to their worshippers, were not so discerning
as to foreknow, or to foretel, their own destruction137: which happened to them
all, at the manifestation of our Saviour among mankind! This too is a mighty
proof of their inferiority, as it is a well grounded reproach on the divinations
which were formerly published among all the Greeks. Nor did any one of the
Diviners indeed, foretel that manifestation of our Saviour138, which (has taken
place) among men ; nor yet, the |138 new doctrine which has been given by Him to
all the nations. Neither did that Pythian (Apollo), nor any other of the great
Demons, foreknow his own destruction; nor did he prophesy respecting Him who was
to come (to be) the destroyer and uprooter of them all; nor yet, did he foresee
respecting all those of the nations, both Greeks and Barbarians, who should
leave the error of a plurality of Gods, and acknowledge the God who is over all.

80. What Diviner139 then, or Enchanter? What Demi-god, Demon, or God, has foreshewn by divination, that these their beauties should be extinguished, when He should be manifested, who was to be a new thing140
in the life of man, and (is) the "knowledge141 of God" who is above and over all, and whose worship has now been communicated to all nations? Who is he (I ask), that has prophesied of the destruction of their Temples, and of their own utter ruin? and, Who,----supposing of these Images of gold and silver which are every where, whose fusion was by fire, and whose change as to appearance was quite useless, were supremely serviceable to man;----that, as (these) their Gods were (but) molten, they should, by way of contempt and derision, be afflictively cut to pieces? Which (I ask) of the Gods has ever put (this) on record? And, How was it with their supporters, that they lent no aid to their Temples, when these were rased to the ground by men? And, How were those circumstanced who, in former times were engaged in creating wars, that in their own calamities they should look with complacency on their uprooters, who were in the profoundest peace142? But, the
|139 wonder of the matter is this, that, when their Temples were subjected to destruction, a peace, administering increase to every excellency and good, had taken firm hold on the life of men: every thing happening to the contrary, when the Gods were in peace! For, during their prosperity, wars, conflicts, commotions, and the reducing of cities,----as shewn in history, and as we have already said,----(prevailed) among men: but, in their desolation, an entire peace with every good thing without drawback. Whence it must be evident to every one capable of reflection, that these were no Gods, as it also must, that they were not good Demons, but on the contrary, vicious ones. Those must also have been destroyers, whose prosperity was the cause of calamities to mankind, and whose ruin led the way to the bringing in of every good to all. But, how (all was) formerly in commotion among the Greeks, and how the nations throughout the whole earth were agitated, we now know, as to a few things:----

81. And hence we may perceive why appointments, the character of which was
varying, subverted the lives of all. For the Egyptians had a law, allowing them
to take their own sisters as wives143: the Persians, to hold shameful and sinful
converse with their own mothers144: others, to |140 pollute their own daughters
in unlawful wedlock145: and of these, the extent was such, that ("the natural
use of) the woman was interdicted. The wickedness too, of the Philosophers
themselves, as also the intercourse with men which is out of nature, had reduced
all the Greeks to insanity146. Besides there were some, by whom it was thought
right to conceal (their own while living) in the earth in Sepulchres147; and by
others, to deliver (these) to the flames! Others however, gave up these things
as impious148, and exposed their dead |141 (only) to the dogs and birds of prey.
Others murdered those who came to them as guests149! Others too, feasted
themselves on human flesh150! And again, there were those who, when their
friends were in the agonies (of death), sacrificed them and feasted on them,
before they expired151! Others, who were approaching old age, they threw from
rocks152! Others they gave up to strangulation153! Others154 they threw |142 to
the dogs, while still living; and others, while dying155! Others they buried
with these (alive156)! while others put the living to death on the funeral pile;
those (I say), whom those (now) dead had loved

157!

82. Thus therefore, had the whole human race been led on to the last stage of brutality, so that he, who was (once) rational, became the most irrational of all. Nor was there any other (being), of those that were on the earth, more vicious than man; who had been (so) led into every vile affection, and had (so) corrupted his mind with every species of wickedness, that he readily forsook even the reflection which belonged to his nature, and did nothing well, either of the things pertaining to the soul, the body, or of those, which were external to him; but, he every where became subject to vice upon vice!----For, the lives of men are divided among the things which are of the soul, of the body, and of those which are external (to both). But, the error of the Demons had (now) so possessed in every form, and had so corrupted, the lives of men, that the things of the soul were at war with them, through the madness of the Demon-worship which had (so) seized upon them, and through their foolishness and blindness as to the truth,---- about which (truth) even the family of Philosophers was in a state of agitation. And, as to the things of the body, (they consisted) in the human sacrifices which (prevailed) throughout the whole earth ; and again, in the base, lawless, and corrupt practices, which were foreign to nature. The things too, which were external (to both, consisted) in this,
|143
that in the cities, localities, and nations, all were, at one time, divided into parties ; at another,----when they were brought together,----they contended against each other, by means of the desolations and reductions of cities, in which they mutually laboured. And, the length of the day would be insufficient for me, were I to relate all the things pertaining to this ancient disease, which had (so) seized upon the whole race of man. And, on this account more particularly, was God the Saviour necessary to this our (mortal) life, as to those who had been cast down to the last extremity of evil: nor was there any other cure or aid (for this), except by means of the glorious and divine manifestation (of Christ).

83. What, then, was it right that THE WORD, the Father of rational beings, the Saviour of all, the Guardian, the providential Care, the Shepherd of the rational flock which is on the earth, should, after (the occurrence of) these things, do, in order to raise to great honour the rational and intelligent Essence which is in man, (and) which had (so) fallen into the vast depths of evil? And that he, who had with his own hands (so) dragged upon himself the cause of his ruin, might see (and know Him as) his friend? Would it have been well, that (even) a man should pass over the safety of his friends, and unpityingly neglect them when thus perishing, who had the highest claim to his providential care? No Captain indeed, would ever be termed wise, who should give up his ship with its crew to go down, having by him that which (would secure) the safety of those who sailed with him, but not applying it. Nor was there ever a General so merciless, as to give up, unavenged, the soldiers of his army to their enemies. Nor is there any good Shepherd, who unfeelingly neglects the (single) sheep
|144
that has strayed from his flock; but, he leaves those that are not lost and in a secure place, and undergoes every thing for the discovery of that which has strayed ; and, should it be necessary, he will even engage with the wild beasts158 (in its defence). The providential care, however, of
THE WORD, the Saviour,----of Him who has provided every thing for (His) rational creatures,----was not put forth (merely) for a flock that is irrational. For, it is man (only) of the creatures that are on the earth, who is (thus) beloved of God; and it is man also, to whom He has, as a Father, given up every kind of irrational animal in subjection. It is to man too, to whom He has assigned the navigation of the seas; and for whom He has adorned the earth with every sort of plant. To him He has subjected both the (various) kinds of beings that swim in the unseen depths, and of the birds that fly in the heights. It is man moreover, to whom He has granted the faculty of knowledge for receiving every sort of learning. To him likewise, has He made plain the observation of things in the heavens, the (annual) courses of the sun, the (monthly) changes of the moon, and the progress of the stars both planetary and fixed159.

84. How then, after (the occurrence) of these things, could it have been becoming, that the fatherly anxiety and providential care which is over all,----which had (so) rightly exerted its care for those other things of the body, and of this sensible world,----should be so crippled as to become inactive, as it respected the healing of the rational Essence vested in man? It had afforded every sort of provision for man, every sort of remedy, and (means) of health, for the body, growth also, strength, beauty, riches, delights, and the increase of possession for (his) convenience. And, Would He put forth not so much as one effort of care, that they might become acquainted with the things which are
|145 most excellent in them, with their own souls, and the Essence which is intelligent? But thus, it is likely one would rather blame the imbecility (or) carelessness, not of the sheep wandering from the flock, but of the shepherd: and again, not the infirm of soul, or those calamitously circumstanced ; but the contempt or imbecility of the physician, if he gave not every sort of medicine for the healing and aid of those, who (so) needed (it). Every necessity would therefore call upon Him, who is the Guardian and Saviour of all, for the healing of his (rational) flock.

85. It is likely therefore, that the compassionate WORD OF GOD would, as a good
Shepherd, Saviour, and Guardian, when His rational flock on earth was (thus)
implicated in the greatest evils, deign openly to make a Divine manifestation of
Himself; since, behold! He had never allowed even a period to pass, in which He
did not fully exert His providential care, for the supply of every good thing to
those who were in need. At every period therefore, in all ages of the world, He
both looked, and engaged Himself, upon the things belonging to the earth; and
gave freely in times of necessity, of the things which were (laid up) with Him:
and so without upbraiding, evinced He the promptness of His providential care
towards all men, that He even afforded instruction to those among mankind who
were worthy (of this), by revelations of Angels, and by raising up holy
Ministers of God : by Prophecy also, and familiar intercourse, He preached the
Godhead of His Father, and the life that was most excellent, to those who were
capable of being taught in the mysteries of the worship of God: at that period,
too, he gave the instruction which was from Himself to our Fathers, as to those
who were still infants, and inexperienced in evil.

86. Because then (men) had by a perversion which |146
was not good (growing) out of their liberty, and from the will of their minds, set themselves up, and (hence) had fallen from the life that is excellent into (many) evils; it is likely, that the same
WORD OF GOD, would again,----as the Physician of souls,----by adequate aids succour those who suffered this malady, and bring back by bitter medicines, those who had not benefited by these His gifts160. On these grievous diseases of vice therefore, He took vengeance by pestilences, famines, wars, conflagrations, and inundations (of waters); and thus turned back to Himself, those who stood in need of these things. At one time He purged the entire life of all, by destructions of waters: at another, He punished the wicked by excessive rains in (certain) places, by strokes of the lightning, by burnings, or by withholding the (necessary) rains. And again, in the abundance of His mercy, He made certain by these same deeds, both (his) rebukes and teachings against the errors of Demons. The Temples too, of those who were thought to be Gods, and (their) Fanes, together with the images and Gods themselves, did He desolate by destructive strokes of lightning; and thus He put to shame those follies. Nor was it (this) only, but He taught them to distinguish by their own reason, that these never were Gods, and, that it was not in their power even to help themselves: and also, that they were neither of the household of God the King of all, nor friends of Him, who (thus) waged war against them. For, How could He who is the cause of every good thing, give up to destruction by fire, the Temples which (men) had built to His own honour; unless (indeed) He did this for a reproof of their error? For, if it was His will that the Demons which resided in these should be honoured, Why did He destroy their Temples together with their images? By means of the arrows which were sent from above from God, He drove far away from their eminences those who resided in these (Temples), and fully preached, in this way (and) by these doings, in the hearing of all men, crying out (as it were), Cease ye from the error of Demons, and (from affirming) that there are many
|147
Gods; and acknowledge that Lord of heaven and earth and of the whole universe, who is God (indeed): that Saviour, that Nourisher, that Preserver;----Him, who, (as) they may see with their own eyes, has openly shewn His providential care over them ; at one time, in the supply of seasonable rains, of fruits borne of all (that springs) out of the earth, of wealth, and of comforts, unsparingly : at another, by the chastisements sent from God, and by the modes of discipline which were from Himself, has He brought back as with a bridle, those who were insensible of the good things, with which He had furnished them. Nor was it (this) only, but He also so cured the error of those who supposed these to be Gods, by a continuance of the lightnings and conflagrations which (came) upon them, that the Temples of the Gods were even burnt, together with those who had fabricated Gods for themselves, by ambushments of men: plainly exhibiting to those who could see, the rebuke which was due to the error of these. Nevertheless, when these worshippers of the Gods witnessed these early (occurrences), they entertained no greater a disposition towards the correction of their impiety!

87. And161 again also, when they believed in these Gods, who had (virtually) confessed by their divinations, that they could effect nothing beyond what had been fated;----for Fate is the cause of all (in this acceptation);---- they understood not, nor did they consider, that, as (this) Fate took hold both of themselves and of the Gods, vain must be (every) trust put in these, as they could neither help, nor injure mankind in any thing. And, Only so?
----If it were right to honour Fate, as the cause of every thing; still this, as being a necessity impervious to change, could have no power even over itself! But, He has put forth the knowledge of Himself,----in order that (men) might know Him to be Lord of this (fate), and also of every (other) thing;----at one time, by the supply of every sort of good thing; at another, by chastising the error of a plurality of Gods in thunderings and in
|148
lightnings. And it has accordingly been made matter of history, that the Temple of Delphos,----of that Pythian (Apollo) who was (so much) preached162 of formerly,----underwent upon one occasion (an entire) conflagration; but these, remaining in their error, raised it up a second time; and God the second time destroyed it! They renewed it also a third time; and He again, expelled entirely from its place, not the Temple, but the Demon that resided within its chamber, by his Divine manifestation! so that now, this is no more a house of divination ; nor does he, who formerly led the Greeks astray, (any more) practise there.

88. The Temple of Diana too at Ephesus, came to (its) destruction three several
times. On one occasion, the Amazons163 burnt it; on another, Herododus164
(Herostratus), one of the inhabitants of Ephesus; and lastly, on another, (it
was ruined) by God who is over all. So that now, after the manifestation of our
Saviour, nothing more |149 is visible even there, except the great (and) signal
mark of the victory of (its) overthrow.

89. They have recorded moreover, that the Temple of Juno in Argus was destroyed
on one occasion by fire165; as was also that in Abas166, in like manner, when
the Thebans made an incursion and burnt it, and with it five hundred men!

90. It is also said, that on one occasion, lightning struck the statue of
Jupiter167 in Olympia.

91. The Roman histories likewise inform us, that the Temple of Vesta168 which is in Rome, and which is called
|150
the Pantheon169,----(all) the Gods being assembled together there, as it should seem,----was again, destroyed by lightning.

92. And again, on one occasion, lightning fell from heaven on that which is
called by them the Capitol, and destroyed that house of every Temple170. |151

93. With all these modes of discipline therefore, has the Providence which is over all,
THE WORD OF GOD, put to shame from all time, those who worshipped Demons. Nor was it (this) only, but He also taught them, from ancient times by doctrines worthy of God, that they should worship His Father. He has likewise, cast forth (as seed) among mortal men, the doctrines conducive to life; divine laws, and precepts of righteousness, as herbs (productive) of things that are good, and as medicines for the salvation of reasonable souls. Thus (did He) in ancient times with the Hebrews through Prophets, men who partook of the Divine Spirit. And again, from a long extended antiquity, through other Friends of God171: and again afterwards, through those who were vested with the Divinity, did He call those who had been cast off to death, to (the means of) recovery. He also sowed (as it were) in the souls of men, the rudiments of the Divine laws;----of various kinds of instructions ; of doctrines of every kind; of predictions, and of prophecies of things to come; as also the love of that life (which is devoted) to the worship of God. Hence poured forth as from a fountain, even in every part of the creation, the seed, (and thence) the rational observances (of life): and hence, laws and lawgivers were seen among all the nations; and the name of virtue and of philosophy became known among men. (Now) came into being the love of things most excellent; and, the desire to discover the truth was in such active operation with the many, that the error of their forefathers came into utter contempt, and, with the intelligent, those things which belonged to the worship and love of God, into repute. The truth too had been wanting; and great had been the differences respecting this with the many, as had the contentions and divisions of those, who disputed about doctrines. And thus did these things shew, that the Providence (exerted) over mankind, was from
|152 all time great, (and) evincing the care for every man, which was both suitable and sufficient.

94. Because then, great would be the change for the better in every one, upon human life's becoming tranquillized, and the common conduct (of all) being changed from its former wildness to something approaching to benignity ; it is likely, that the common Saviour of all, the compassionate
WORD OF GOD, would more particularly, and the more readily, make his Divine manifestation at a time that would be (most) suitable172. He accordingly came in by the mission of himself, and shewed forth to men,----who could by no other means arrive at the knowledge of the truth, by the instrumentality of a human vessel,----the God of truth. The God of truth did then, through the divine operations and astonishing miracles which were evident to all, shew forth the doctrine of heavenly teaching which respected His Kingdom ; in order that by these, He might henceforth,----even as He had formerly afforded aid by means of the things already mentioned,----instruct the whole human race in the doctrine which is heavenly. It was impossible indeed, in ancient times, to make those who had been driven to the last stage of vice, pure by words (only), inviting (them) to the perfect knowledge of God, and to the better life of purity and of righteousness. On this account, just as Physicians prescribe their remedies to those who are sick and debilitated by pains and sufferings, not the healthy food proper for the robust, but things that give uneasiness and pain; and, should it be
|153
necessary, do not excuse themselves from applying cauteries and bitter draughts, to coerce the disease:----not the aliments proper for the healthy, but those suitable to the sick: but, when they have become convalescent, they will henceforth allow them to partake of wholesome and strengthening food :----

95. So likewise the common Saviour of all, as the Shepherd and Physician of His rational flocks on earth, taught those----who had previous to His last divine manifestation entered into the many follies of a plurality of Gods, and had been maddened by the evils and fierceness attending (this) corruption of mind,----by bitter punishments, by pestilences, famines, and the continuance of wars against each other. And again, by excessive rains, by the withholding of the rains, and by calamitous strokes of lightning, did He annihilate these instances of obstinacy : besides, He afforded opportunity to the worshippers of the Demons to see, by the vengeance taken in the strokes of lightning sent upon the Idols, the reproach due to the error of a plurality of Gods.

96. He again as a good Father, thus also afforded instruction to the foolish;
for He imparted to them ungrudgingly, the gifts which were from Himself, in the
provision of every good and rich thing: rains in their seasons; the production
of fruits; the changes of the seasons ; and the carrying forward of animal life.
The rational means also of all kinds of art; the seeds of these, and the (due)
consideration of them, He cast forth into the souls of men. Again also He sowed
(as it were), by means of the Prophets who are preached of among the Hebrews,
the rudiments of the Divine precepts; the instruction pertaining to the fear of
God; the entrance, the stages, and principal things, attending the Divine laws ;
such (I say) as were suitable to the men of those times. He again from his
providential care, (and) by means of many others, also gave the aid which was
convenient for men as then (existing).

97. Because therefore, the life of man had henceforward undergone a change, by
means of these things, to a state of peacefulness and rest, and was prepared to
receive the perfect doctrine relating to God ; well again, did |154 the common
Saviour of all, the only (begotten) WORD OF GOD, the King of all, shew forth at
a time that was suitable, and by these same operations, the Divine manifestation
of Himself. But, as these things have been largely set forth already, it is
(now) time we should proceed to those that (should) follow them. The End of the
Second Book of (Eusebius) of Caesarea.

[Selected footnotes. Notes concerned only with points of the Syriac and large
chunks of Greek have been omitted]

1. 1 This, according to our author, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. ix. is the
person spoken of, Is. xiv. 12. That the king of Babylon is here primarily meant,
there can be no doubt: but whether the " common enemy" of man is secondarily,
may be matter of debate.

2. 2 We now come again to certain passages in the Orat. de laudd. Constantini,
identical with some in this work. Cap. xiii. pp. 531, D. 632, &c. See also
Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. x.

3. 3 It must, I think, be sufficiently certain from this place, that Eusebius was no Arian. A passage, similarly strong, is to be found in his Orat. de laudd. Constantini, (cap. ii. p. mihi 501. A----D.) in these words: [Greek] "Et ille quidem unigenitus Dei Sermo, a saeculis principio carentibus, ad infinita usque et interminata saecula regnat cum Patre." See above Book i. §. 4, 30: also iii. 19, 39: iv. 8: v. 51. and, above all, Theodoriti Hist. Eccles. Lib. i. capp. xi. xii. in the latter of which a Copy of the Nicene Creed is given, as emanating from Eusebius, and this for the specific purpose of shewing, that he was no Arian. See also his Eccl. Hist. Lib. i. cap. ii. also the Introduction to this Work. See also, generally, the two Works of our author against Marcellus. In Lib. ii. Eccl. Theolog. cap. xiv. he speaks, indeed, of His having a beginning, but this is with reference to his proceeding from the Father: in other words, bis being revealed to created rational existences.

4. 4 This argument is admirably prosecuted in the Prep. Evang. Lib. iii. cap.
xiii. p. 117. seq. as it is also in the "Graecarum affectionum Curatio," by
Theodoret, Sermo. I. seq.

5. 12 See also, De laudd. Constant, cap. vii. p. 513. B. where we have a similar
recension of these Deities. Our passage, however, is found ib. cap. xiii. 532.
A.

6. 13 See also the Homilia Clementina Quinta. xxii. xxiii. seq.

7. 15 Cicero (de Natura Deorum in. 15, 16) has admirably depicted this state of
things : " Piscem Syri venerantur : omne fere genus bestiarum Aegyptii
consecraverunt. Jam vero in Graecia multos habent ex hominibus Deos ; Alabandum
Alabandi ; Tenedii Tenem ; Leucotheam, quae fuit Ino, et ejus Palaemonem filium,
cuncta Graecia; Herculem, Aesculapium, Tyndaridas ; Romulum nostri, aliosque
complures, quos, quasi novos et ascriptitios cives, in coelum receptos
putant...Haec igitur indocti. Quid vos philosophi? qui meliora? . . . Quare
igitur plures adjungimus Deos? quanta autem est illorum multitudo? . . .
singulas enim stellas numeras Deos; eosque aut belluarum nomine appellas, ut
Capram, ut Nepam, ut Taurum, ut Dionem; aut rerum inanimatarum, ut Argo, ut
Aram, ut Coronam. Sed, ut haec concedantur, reliqua qui tandem non modo concedi,
sed omnino intelligi possunt? Cum fruges, Cererem; vinum, Liberum dicimus,
genere nos quidem sermonis, utimur usitato: sed ecquem tam amentem esse putas,
qui illud, quo vescatur, Deum credat esse?"

8. 1 Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. B. See also Clemens Alexandr. Admonitio ad
Gentes, p. 34. seq. So Horace Serm. Lib. i. Sat. viii. 1. "Olim truncus eram,"
&c. Athenagoras Legat. pro Christ, p. 66, gives an admirable account of the
first Images, and Image-makers, among the Greeks.

9. 3 So Tertullian, Eccles. Hist, of the second and third centuries, by the
Bishop of Bristol, Cambridge, 1826, p. 216. An Image among Idolaters is nothing,
until consecrated and a Deity supposed to reside within it. They are then
considered as Temples. ([Arabic], Pocock. spec. Hist. Arab. pp. 91, 144, seq.)
or Chapels of the Deity. From the following passage of Lactantius (Lib. it. cap.
xviii. p. 103,) it is obvious, that Images could not have had place in the
Church:..." non est dubium, quin religio nulla sit, ubicunque simulacrum est.
Nam si religio ex divinis rebus est; divini autem nihil est, nisi in coelestibus
rebus; carent ergo religione simulacra, quia nihil potest esse coeleste in ea
re, quae fit ex terra." ...Quicquid enim simulatur, id falsum sit necesse est:
nec potest unquam vere nomen accipere, quod veritatem fuco et imitatione
mentitur.

10. 4 See sect. 63. Book I.----Gr. (Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib.) "
katade/smoij;" which, as Valesius shews, ib. notes, p. 255, is a term applied to magical usages. See this note. See also the Prep. Evang. Lib. vi. cap. ix. p. 271. C.

11. 5 Lactantius (Lib. ii. cap. xiv.) says of these, that they were originally Angels sent from Heaven to protect and govern men ; but, falling into lust through the temptations of Satan, they at length became his ministers: which has evidently been taken from the Jews. See the Targums on Gen. vi. 2. He further tells us, that the Grammarians say they are so called, as being
dah&monej, i. e. knowing. Such is, I think the
Boot ([?] originally Boodhi, wise) of the East, to this day.
---- Hesiod also makes them the guardians of men, "fu&lakej qnhtw~n a0nqrw&pwn." (Oper. et Dies. Lib. 1. 122.). This opinion prevails still in the East: and it is affirmed, that whole regions are subjected to their controul, as may be seen in the Dabistan, the Hakk olyakeen ( [Arabic] ), and many other Persic and Arabic works. Lactantius tells us, a little lower down, from Hermes Trismegistus, that piety, consisting in the knowledge of the true God, was sufficient to save men from their evil influence. Porphyry tells us (Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. x. p. 197. and Theodoret, Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford. p. 131.) that they are all evil Demons: their Chief being Sarapis, i.e. Pluto, or Hecate: and (Prep. Evang. ib,) much the same is said by Anebo the Egyptian.

12. 6 See Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. x. : ii. cap. i. Diodor. Sicul. Lib. i. x
---- xiii. Lactant. Lib. i. cap. viii ---- xv. who prosecutes this argument at much length, and gives us even the philosophical Cicero deifying his own daughter!

13. 7 Syr. [Syriac], Gr. Meli/kamqoj, the Phoenician Hercules according to
Sanchoniathon, Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. x. p. 38. In the

Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 532. it is written Melka&qaron. The word has been
greatly deformed by the Copyists in our text. See the note of Valesius to the
above place, cap. xiii. p. (notes) 255.

14. 1 [Syriac] Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 533. Ou!swron. Prep. Evang. p. 35.
Ou!swron.

15. 2 Syr. [Syriac], Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 533, Dou&sarij: the Dusa&rhj
of the Greek and Latin writers, as noted by Bochart, and, after him, by Pococke,
Spec. Hist. Arab. p. 106, and which he thinks is the Arabic [Arabic] Dhushara,
or Bacchus. See also the note of Valesius ad cap. xiii. Orat. de laudd.
Constant, p. 255.

16. 3 Syr. [Syriac]. Probably the 0Obo_d, Uranius of Stephen of Byzantium, as cited by Pococke Spec. Hist. Arab. p. 137, &c. and variously accounted for by him. The passage is found in "Euseb. Orat. de laudd. Constant." p. 532----3.
1Obdon. But see the note of Valesius on this place, ib. p. 255, which is full and valuable.

17. 4 Syr. [Syriac] Gr. Za&lmocij, or Za&molcij. See Vossius de Idololatria,
Lib. i. cap. xxxix. Herodot. iv. 94. and Photius. The Zalmoxis or Zamolxis, of
the Getae. The Syriac does not support the conjecture (pai~dej) of Valesius
here. In these cases, the Syriac Translator seems to have taken the termination
of the Greek accusative case.

18. 5 Syr. [Syriac]. Gr. Mo&yoj. Ovid. Metam. viii. 350. termed Ampycides, as
being the son of Ampycus. It. ib. xii. 456. 528. See also Orat. de laudd.
Constant, p. 533. Mo&yion, and the note of Valesius.

19. 6 Syr. [Syriac]. Gr. 0Amfia&rewn. Laudd. Constant, ib. See the Odyss. O.
244. Hor. Od. iii. 16. Cic. de Nat. Deor. ii. 3. Ovid. Ex. Pont. Epist. Lib. in.
1. 52. &c. Euseb. laudd. Constant. 0Amfia&rewn. Valesius. note ib. 0Amfia&rew.
The Trojans also, according to Athenagoras, worshipped Hector and Helen, the
Lacedemonians Agamemnon, and Phylonae: and so of others. Legat pro Christianis,
at its commencement, So ib. p. 60. Again, ib. p. 63, he gives us the story of
the mundane egg ; which identifies this mythology, with that of the Brahmins of
Hindustan. So also Theophilus ad Autolycum, Lib. ii., who refers to the "Aves"
of Aristophanes as his authority: p. 116. it. Clemens Alexand, Admonitio ad
Gentes. p. 35. seq.

20. 7 The Greek text, Orat. de laudd. Constant, is defective here, as Valesius
has properly remarked, and as some of the MSS. have intimated by inserting the
word " lei/pei ". (p. 533. and 255 notes).

21. 8 . . ."Quod si ita est, Coeli quoque parentes Dii habendi sunt, Aether, et
Dies, eorumque fratres et sorores, qui a genealogis antiquis sic nominantur,
Amor, Dolor, Metus, Labor, Invidia, Fatum, Senectus, Mors, Tenebrae, Miseria,
Querela, Gratia, Fraus, Pertinacia, Parcae, Hesperides, Somnia; quos omnes Erebo
et Nocte natos ferunt. Aut haec monstra probanda sunt, aut prima illa tollenda."
Cic. de Nat. Deor. iii. 17."

22. 9 "Ergo hi Dii sunt habendi, mortalibus nati matribus? (sc. Apollo,
Vulcanus, Mercurius, Hercules, Aesculapius. Bacchus. &c.) Cic. ib. c. 18. Comp.
Clemens. Alexand. Admon. ad Gentes. p. 18. seq."

23. 10 "Jam vero quid vos illa delectat explicatio fabularum, et enodatio
nominum? exsectum a filio Coelum, vinctum itidem a filio Saturnum? &c., Cic. ib.
iii. 24. From passages of this sort, occurring in the profane authors, it should
seem, that the best informed of those times were growing weary of the follies of
heathenism. Nevertheless they adhered to these errors, and even defended them :
for which Lactantius, very properly castigates them, and Cicero in particular,
Lib. ii. ii.

24. 1 Gr. [Greek] the stealing of women, which proved the cause of so many wars
in ancient times. Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 533. A. B.

25. 2 The Greek text of the Orat. de laudd. Constant, leaves us here; but.
recurs to this passage, ib. p. 534. D.

26. 3 The most famous instances of this sort was. perhaps, afforded by the
Temple of Venus in Cyprus; to which people resorted from all quarters. A similar
usage obtained among the Babylonians. Herodot. i. 199.

27. 5 The well-known rape of Ganymede, son of Tros king of Phrygia. Ovid. Met.
x. 155. shortly details the matter thus: " Rex Superum Phrygii quondam Ganymedis
amore Arsit: et inventum est aliquid, quod Jupiter esse, Quam quod erat,
mallet." See also Lactantius de falsa Relig. Lib. i. cap. x. p. 34. Edit. 1698.
"Illud vero summae impietatis ac sceleris, quod regium puerum rapuit ad
stuprum:" seq. See also Clemens Alexand., who recites several such cases. Ib.
Theodoret. Graec. affect. curat. Serm. iii. p. 520. seq. And Arnobius adversus
Gentes, Lib. i. p. 165. seq. Edit. 1604.

28. 6 Rom. i. 27. Our text differs so much from the Peschito, as to warrant the assumption, that it was translated for the occasion. It stands thus: [Syriac]. This place occurs in the
Orat. de laudd. Constant, cap. xiii. p. 535. A. That our author has not overstated this matter, is evident from many ancient writers of the greatest respectability. The following is from Cicero, De Nat. Deorum. i. 16. " Exposui fere, non philosophorum judicia, sed delirantium somnia. Nec enim multo absurdiora sunt ea, quae Poetarum vocibus fusa, ipsa suavitate nocuerunt; qui et ira inflammatos et libidine furentes induxerunt Deos, feceruntque, ut eorum bella, pugnas, proelia, vulnera, videremus ; odia praeterea, dissidia, discordias, ortus, interitus, querelas, lamentationes, effusas in omni intemperantia libidines, adulteria, vincula, cum humano genere concubitus, mortalesque ex immortali procreates."
Nor, according to Cicero himself, were the philosophers in any respect better. Compare the first few sections of the work, De Natura Deorum. To the same effect, Porphyry in the Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xxii. p. 172. D. And ib. Lib. xii. cap. xlix. p. 618. Origen contra Cels. Lib. vii. p. 365. Plato in his Republics, Lib. x.---- Much of this noxious sort of matter is to be found in some of the Classic authors still extant, and which are too often put into the hands of our youth, e. g. The Comedies of Plautus, Terence, and Aristophanes; the Epigrams, &c. of Martial and Ausonius, &c.----See Theophilus ad Autolycum, Lib. iii. p. 142. seq.

29. 3 Syr. [Syriac] should perhaps, be the reading of the second word here. The meaning of our author probably is, that the excitement received at these exhibitions was not unlike that---- together with the other things here mentioned,----witnessed in corn parched by a sharp fire: i. e. by having an unnatural stimulus applied, evinced an unnatural action. The whole place however, is obscure.

30. 4 So Tatian (Orat. contra Graecos, p. 176. C. seq.) [Greek] " Quid obsecro
fit apud vos egregium, aut admiratione dignum? Obscoena verba naso resonante
effutiunt, et motus indecentes moventur, et adulteriorum in scena magistros
filias et filii vestri spectant," &c. See the notes to sect. 13 above; some good
remarks on this subject will be found, cited from Porphyry, in the Prep. Evang.
Lib. iv. cap. xxii. p. 172. D. From Plato, ib. Lib. xii. 49. D. seq. In
Theodoret, Gr. affect, curatio, Serm. iii. Tom. iv. p. 511. D. seq. See also
Theophilus ad Autolycum, Lib. in. p. 149. D. where an admirable lesson to
Christians will be found on this point.

31. 5 So Eph. iv. 18, 19. " Having the understanding darkened, being alienated
from the life, of God ... being past feeling, have given themselves over unto
lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness." Plato seems to have
held much the same opinion on these matters, see the place just pointed out. See
also Clemens Alexand. Admon. ad Gentes. p. 39. seq.

32. 1 Such for example, as the labours of Hercules; and, in the present day,
those of Buddha, Rama, &c. as abounding in the poetic fictions of the Buddhists,
Hindoos, and others. Cicero was so much impressed with the absurdities put forth
by the Philosophers, that he confesses, that although he is most willing to
receive the truth, yet he doubts, whether it is at all to be found without much
admixture of error. His words are, (De Natura Deorum, i, 5.) " Non enim sumus
ii, quibus nihil verum esse videtur, sed ii, qui omnibus veris falsa quaedam
adjuncta esse dicamus, tanta similitudine, ut in iis nulla insit certa judicandi
et assentiendi nota." Plato's opinions on these foolish and abominable stories
may be seen in Gaisford's Edit. of Theodoret. Gr. affect. curat. p. 121. seq.
Prep. Evang. Lib. ii. cap. vii.

33. 4 See the Prep. Evang. Lib. x. cap. i. seq. it. Lib. xiv. cap. ix. p. 740. Also Tatiani contra Graecos Oratio. in its outset, and Theodoret Gr. affect, curat. Serm. i. For a general account of the Philosophers and their chronological succession, see the Prep. Evang. Lib. x. cap. xiv.
Diog. Laert. Lib. i. pref. seq. Bruckeri Hist. Crit. Philos. Tom. i. Our author has shewn pretty much at length, Prep. Evang. Lib. ii. cap. i. p. 45 : ib. 460
---- 168, that the Greeks were great copyists, and even plagiarists, both from foreigners and from one another. So also Clemens Alexand. Strom. Lib. vi. near the beginning: and, on the succession of the Greek Philosphers, ib. Lib. i. p. 300. C. seq. Edit. 1620.

34. 1 So Epicurus after Democritus, according to Plutarch (de Placit. Philosoph.
p. 877. See also their lives in Diog. Laertius.) Atoms are, in our work, termed
[Syriac] bodies that cannot be cut: i.e. indivisible. So called, according to
Plutarch, [Greek] i. e. It is termed atom, not because it is very small, but
because it cannot be cut, or divided. The Syrian translator has availed himself
of this, and adopted it accordingly. These atoms had, according to Democritus,
figure and magnitude ; to which Epicurus added weight ; without which, as he
thought, they could not gravitate. They were supposed too, to be various in
form, round, oval, angular, hooked, &c. &c. (See Bruckeri Hist. Crit. Philos. p.
1263. Tom. i.) : which, I suppose, our author intimates when he says, "without
extent, or, having projecting parts," &c. Syr.[Syriac]. Matter similar to this
will be found in the Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. viii. And the whole passage from
Plutarch, ib. Lib. xiv. cap. xiv. p. 749. A. seq. which see.

35. 2 So also Numenius, Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. cap. xxii. [Greek]. Plutarch
ascribes the notion about Rest, to Archidamus, (Laconica Apophthegmata, p. 218.
seq. Tom. ii. Edit. 1620) in these words: Kalo_n h9suxi/a : i.e. Rest is good.
Again, (ib. Com. repugnant Stoic, p. 1033), he speaks of this sentiment as
praised by Hieronymus and Epicurus (see §. 50 below), and blames the
Philosophers for adopting it, while they recommended an active life. His words
are : [Greek]. And so Diogenes Laertius in his life of Democritus: [Greek].
"Finem vero esse rectum, quietumque animi statum, quam eu0qumi/an vocat, quse,
ut quidam oblique interpretantur, non idem sit quod voluptas, rerum secundum
quam animus magna tranquilitate constantiaque beatus est, dum nullo metu, nulla
superstitione, aut alia quavis perturbatione agitatur. Eandem vero et Eu0estw_
appellat, a bonitate constantiae, multisque nominibus aliis." It should seem
also, that he wrote two books on this subject, one entitled, "De sedatione
Animi," and the other, " Euesto." See ib. This probably was the origin of the
Epicurean tenet, of Pleasure being the chief good. See also Brucker, Hist. Crit.
Philos. Tom. i. p. 1177. seq. it. 1200: where we are told, that the pleasure of
rest was the Epicurean tenet: that of motion, the Cyrenaic: and, that Epicurus
has been greatly wronged, by having been thought a sensualist.

36. 3 Which is but an echo of (Diog. Laert. life of Epicurus), [Greek]

37. 4 And so the Hindoos of the present day. Lactantius enters fully, and
eloquently on this subject, Lib. i. cap. ii. de falsa religione.

38. 1 Such, according to Plutarch, was Euripides the tragic Poet; not daring
openly to profess his notions, through fear of the Areopagus. De Placit. Philos.
p. 880. Vol. ii.

39. 2 Much the same thing is said by Athenagoras, Legat. pro Christ, p. 71. D.
and in the Prep. Evang. Lib. xv. cap. v. p. 708....[Greek] To the same effect
also Theodoret, Serm. de Provid. i. Tom. iv. p. 322. A. Tatian. Orat. contra
Graecos, in the outset, and Diog. Laert. in vita Arist. near the end. Theodoret
again, Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford, adds on this subject. [Greek] Inquit
enim ad lunam usque Dei gubernationem deferri; quae vero sunt infra lunam fato
esse subjecta."

40. 3 Plato, as cited by Laertius, (Lib. iii. segm. 78) makes health, strength,
the integrity of the senses, wealth, family, glory, &c. necessary to happiness;
but he does not exclude virtue. So also Aristotle, according to Tatian. Orat.
contra Graecos. init.

41. 4 The opinions of the Ancients on the soul, are given at length in
Aristotle's work, " De anima," Lib. i. cap. ii.

42. 5 Aristotle, De anima, Lib. n. eap. i. seq. Diog. Laert. in vita Arist.
prope finem. Plutarch de Placitis Philos. (p. 875.) [Greek] " Tum ipsa forma,
quam vocamus entelecheian." The origin of this he ascribes to Aristotle, (ib. p.
878.) as a principle in nature. [Greek] Aristotle made Entelechia, or form,
matter, and privation, principles, &c. But, how this is said to be ascribed to
the soul by Aristotle and his followers, may be seen in an extract from
Plotinus, Prep. Evang. Lib. xv. cap. x. Edit. Viger. p. 811. seq. and Bruckeri
Hist. Crit. Philos. Tom. i. p. 821. seq. Cicero (Tuscul. Qusest. Lib. i. cap. x.
22.), tells us that this was a fifth element with Aristotle: i. e. in addition
to those of earth, air, fire, and water: his words are, "Quintum genus adhibet,
vacans nomine; et sic ipsum animum e0ntele/xeian appellat novo nomine: quasi
quandam continuatam motionem et perennem." See also Justin Martyr. Orat.
Parenet. Ed. Steph. p. 13. 1. 15. Theodoret Graec. affect. curat. p. 195. Edit.
Gaisford. [Greek]

43. 1 Lactantius Lib. i. cap. v. 22. Ed. 1698. tells us that, " Aristoteles, quamvis secum ipsa dissideat, ac repugnantia sibi et dicat et sentiat: in summum tamen unam mentem mundo praeesse testatur," which seems to me admirably to suit this place. Brucker,----an invaluable writer on the philosophy of the ancients,----thus speaks summarily on Aristotle, (Hist. Crit. Philos. Tom. I. p. 814. Ed. secund.)

44. 2 Again, speaking of the Demonology of Aristotle, he says (ib. p. 831.)
"Quibus (i. e. demonibus) an preces et sacrificia offerenda sint,...cautus non
explicuit; verisimile tamen, Aristotelem ea inter istas fabulas, ad popellum
deliniendum...excogitatas, retulisse." Athenagoras charges him with believing,
that the one God consisted both of soul and body ; and that this body was
ethereal, or consisted of the Aether. Legat. pro. Christ. p. 54.

45. 4 The doctrine here had in view, is thus stated by Aristocles (Prep. Evang. Lib. xv. cap. xiv.)
[Greek]. They say that fire is an element of things,----just as Heraclitus did----and that of this (element) the originators were Matter and God,----as Plato had.----But these say, that both are bodies, both the doing and the suffering : while he affirmed, that the first was the active and unembodied cause. They also say, that, after certain defined and fatally appointed periods, the whole world shall be burned, and again be set in beautiful order, &c.----It is added, (ib.) that this fire contains within it, as seed, the properties and causes of all things, past, present, and future. See also, ib. capp. xv. xvi.

46. 1 So Porphyry, (as cited ib. cap. xvi.) God, they say, is a sort of
intelligent fire, which will consume, and pervade all things, &c. which he
condemns as utter folly. See also Spencer's note on Origen contra Cels. Lib. i.
p. 6. lin. 52.

47. 3 So Arius Didymus (as cited Prep. Evang. Lib. xv. cap. xv.) [Greek]. They term the whole world, with its parts, God. This, they say, is one absolute, living, and eternal being, and God: that, in this all bodies are contained, and that no void (vacuum) exists in him .. that the world is eternal, and is God,----He goes on to say, that with respect to order, Etc. it is begotten, and, as to the infinite periods of time through which it has passed, or is to pass, it is subject to change; and may be considered as a sort of mansion for Gods and men: or as a city of which the Gods are the governours; men the governed.

48. 4 Cleanthes affirmed that Zeno, with Heraclitus and others, placed the
nature of the soul in sense, or vapour. [Greek]. And again. Souls arise as
vapour from things humid. [Greek] Prep. Evang. Lib. xv. cap. xx. D. See the
whole of the article, with the refutation from Longinus, ib. cap. xxi.

49. 5 The soul, they say, is both generative and perishable; but is not dissolved with the body, but remains of itself for some time: but the souls of the studious will endure till the general conflagration; while those of the ignorant will endure only for a certain period of time. [Greek] Ib. cap. xx. p. 822. B.C. It is added, that the souls of the ignorant, as well as those of the irrational animals, will perish with their bodies. The xxii. Chapter, ib. contains a long and valuable article on these matters from Plotinus.----See also Theod. Graec. affect. Curat. Ed. Gaisford, p. 195. seq.

50. 6 There can be no doubt, I think, that this notion, about an universal conflagration, was originally taken from the Bible, and misapplied both by heathens and believers. The first passage occurs in Deut. xxxii. 22---- 24.; the last, 2
Peter iii. 7, which, with all their parallels, cannot by any legitimate interpretation extend to any thing beyond the fall of Jerusalem, and of heathen Rome. In like manner, we have a sort of Millennium and of Antichrist, common to both Mohammedans and Christians, and misapplied by both.

51. 7 Syr. [Syriac]. That again Helen and the evils of Ilium. Anaximander also
held, that the world would be dissolved and again produced. Prep. Evang. Lib.
xiv. cap. xiv. p. 548. B.C. seq.

52. 1 Syr. [Syriac], Anytus and Melitus. Two persons who were particularly
unfriendly to Socrates, and at length brought about Ms condemnation. See Plato's
Apology for Socrates, and Diogenes Laertius ii. 38: Tatian. Orat. contra
Graecos, near the beginning: and Origen contra Cels. Lib. iv. p.208. seq.

53. 2 On this general conflagration, see the Prep. Evang. ib. capp. xviii. xix.
p. 820. In the former, Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus, are said to have been
the most ancient teachers of this doctrine.

54. 3 Syr. [Syriac]. Among these Thales the Milesian, Anaximander, Anaximenes,
Anaxagoras, Parmenides, Xenophanes, Leucippus, Heracitus, Epicurus, and others.
The person, who according to Brucker was peculiarly styled " Physicus" was
Strato of Lampsaca, the successor of Theophrastus in the Lyceum. (Vol. i. p.
845. See ib. p. 458. seq.)

55. 4 Syr. [Syriac] So Thales, Brucker, &c. ib. p. 465. seq. So the Brahmins of
India of the present, and former times. Which is probably nothing more than the
Chaos of the Bible. According to Brucker however, it is very doubtful whether
Thales was atheistic, grounding this on the requirements of the emanation
system. He got his philosophy in Egypt, according to Plutarch; but see the Prep.
Evang. Lib. xiv. cap. xiv. the various opinions of this subject, as cited from
Plutarch, and followed by the comment of our author.

56. 5 This was the opinion of Heraclitus, and Hippasus, who added, that as fire
was the origin of all, so should it be the destruction. Anaximander too,
according to Plutarch (de Placit. Philos.) affirmed that God was a globe of
fire.

57. 6 This was the opinion of Anaximenes, while Archelaus made both the air and infinity the origin of all things: Anaximander, infinity only. Pythagoras----the prince of Philosophers----number, and its proportions.

58. 7 Empedocles held, that the Elements of all were fire, air, earth, and
water; while the Principles were, Friendship and Discord: the one uniting all
things; the other dissevering them. For a more particular account of these
Philosophers, see Brucker, Tom. ii. Pars. ii. Lib. ii. cap. i. seq.

59. 8 In the abominations practised in most of their mysteries, as of Venus, the
Eleusinian, &c. of the Phallus in Egypt, of the Fascinus of the Vestals, and of
the Lingam of the Hindoos even at this day; many of which obtained among the
Gnostics, and do now among the Druzes on Mount Libanus. See also Theodoret, Gr.
affect. curat. Serm. i. p. 482.

60. 9 These were termed Atheists by the philosophers generally. See Vossius de
Idololatria.. Lib. i. c. 3...Brucker, Tom. i. Index Atheus. Lactan. De falsa
relig. Lib. i. cap. ii. &c.

61. 10 To our author's fondness of this philosophy, of First and Second Cause, and to the particularity with which he followed it up, may perhaps be ascribed all the bad names bestowed on him, both by the ancients and moderns. When arguing with the philosophers of his day, he would, naturally enough, seize upon those things which they appeared to hold in common with himself; and might thence be tempted also to
adopt their illustrations, to an extent which would prove unfavourable to himself in the end,----a mistake more frequently committed, perhaps, than most men are aware. In his Praeparatio Evangclica he has I think, given good proof of this. In Book vii. ch. xi. and ib. Book xi. ch. xiii. he has shewn, that the Hebrews held, in common with Plato, the doctrine of One only supreme God. Again, Book vii. cap. xii. he gives us what he styles the Theology of the Hebrews on the Second Cause, the second Essence, the Divine power, the first subsistence, THE WORD (
lo&goj ), the Wisdom, and the Power, of God. He then gives (cap. xiii.) the opinions of Philo Judaeus on this subject, which are extremely curious; and then (cap. xiv.) those of Aristobulus on the same. Again (Book xi. ch. xiv.) we have Plato (ch. xv.), Philo, and (ch. xvi.) Plato again, and (ch. xvii.) Plotinus on Plato, (ch. xviii.) Numenius on Plato, and (ch. xix.) Amelius reasoning after St John, on the same subject. All of which, our author affirms, is in strict accordance with the mind of the sacred writers. And, I have no doubt, this is to a certain extent true: and, that these views originated in one common source, viz. the Sacred Scriptures. But then, several passages cited by Eusebius, have obviously been misunderstood by him, e. g. Job xxviii. 20; Ps. xxxii. 6, &c. Others have no authority, viz. Wisd. vi. 24: vii. 22: viii. 1. which are apocryphal. And again, in following out these views, (ib. Book vii. ch. xv. p. 325), he has unhappily adopted comparisons, which have brought upon him the charge of Arianism: although he has, perhaps, said nothing more than many of our own divines have, in the trite comparison, which makes the body of the Sun to represent the Father, the light issuing therefrom the Son, and the warmth the Holy Ghost. This subject will, however, be resumed in our Introduction, and entered into more particularly. This doctrine, of a Second Cause, is also to be found in Clemens. Alexand. Strom. Lib. vii. p. 708. B.

62. 1 Cicero, nevertheless, accuses him (as our author does) of the greatest inconsistency in these matters, e.g. De Nat. Deor. Lib. 1.13. 20. Ed. 1830. p. 818. " Jam de Platonis inconstantiae longum est dieere..... quod
vero sine corpore ullo Deum vult esse, ut Graeci dicunt a0sw&maton......
Idem et in Timaeo dicit, et in Legibus, et Mundum Deum esse, et Coelum, et Astra, et Terram, et animos, et eos quos majorum institutis accepimus: quae et per se sunt falsa perspicue, et inter sese vehementer pugnantia." Of this Maker of the world, Cicero likewise takes notice; and, as it was not unlikely,----circumstanced as he was,----ridicules. Ib. cap. ix. 18. "Audite......non futiles commenticiasque sententias, non
opificem aedificatoremque mundi, Platonis de Timaeo Deum: nec anum fatidicam Stoicorum
Pro&noian," &c. For a full and accurate account of Plato, his Philosophy, Writings, &c., the reader is referred to Brucker. Hist. Crit. Philos. Tom. i. Index, with the authors cited.

63. 2 See the Prep. Evang. Lib. xii. cap. li. p. 626. B. seq. ib. p. 627. B. C.
seq. it. 628. B. seq. it. cap. lii.

64. 3 This passage occurs in the Prep. Lib. xi. cap. xvi. and there said to be
taken from the Epimenides of Plato. But no dialogue bearing that title is now to
be found among the writings of Plato, as Viger has remarked in his notes. (Prep.
Evang. p. 51. notes.) It occurs, however, in the Epinomis, §. 9. (p. 30. Edit.
Lond. 1826.) ...The place is cited (as Viger also tells us) by Cyril. Alexan.
Lib. viii. against Julian, (Edit. Spanh. p. 271. 2.) and by Theodoret, Graecar.
affect. Edit. 1642. Tom. iv. p. 499. Edit. Gaisford, p. 89. See also the note to
the Lond. Edit, of Plato, as above.

65. 1 This passage occurs in the sixth Epistle of Plato, (Edit. London, 1826. p. 96.) and is given by Eusebius, (Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. cap. xvi. Edit. Viger. p. 534.) also by Cyril of Alexandria, against Julian (Edit. Spanh. p. 271.), by Theodoret----for the most part----(Graec. affect. curatio. Serm. ii. Edit. 1642. p. 498. Tom. iv. Edit. Gaisford, p. 87.) and by (Clemens. Alexand. Strom. v. pp. 436, 698: and Origen contra Celsum Lib. vi. p. 280. See ib. p. 308. [...] 66. 2 The passage here imitated is cited by Laertius, Plato. Lib. in. Segm. 78. [...]

67. 3 Syr. [Syriac] The Bendidi/a e9orth_ of the Athenians, called also
Bendi/deia, and Be/ndeia. In the Lexicon to the Timaeus of Plato, Bendis is said to be the same with Artemis (Diana), a Thracian word: and, that Bendidia signifies the feast of Diana, with the Thracians. [Greek] The term occurs in Plato's Polit. (Lond. Edit, p: 326. Tom. vi.----Steph. p. 354.) Eusebius had in view, perhaps, the following passage of Origeri against Celsus, (vii. p. 277.) when he wrote this: viz. [Greek]
But they, who wrote such things about the, supreme good, go down to the Piraeus to pray to the Goddess Diana, and to see the celebration of the feast of Bendis. I adopt the reading of Hemsterhusius, which receives no small degree of authority from this place of Eusebius. The place of Plato, is probably that on which the Scholiast has thus remarked: (London Edit. Tom. IX. p. 89.) [Greek]. The allusion here is to the Polit. i. p. 253. Lond. Edit. It stands thus: [Greek]. See the notes here. On which the Scholiast (Tom. ix. p. 67. seq.) gives some further particulars stating, that this feast was common both to the Athenians and Thracians, and was celebrated at the Piraeus on the 19th day of the month Thargelion. [...]

68. 1 In the Phaedo of Plato, §. 155. Lond. Edit. Vol. v. p. 409, see the notes.
It, Lactantius, iii. 20, "de falsa sapientia." See also Spencer's note on Origen
(contra Cels. Lib. vi. p. 277. notes, p. 74.), where we are told, that this is
to be taken figuratively.

69. 5 So also Cicero (Natura Deorum, Lib. in. §. 6.)..." Majoribus autem nostris
etiam nulla reddita ratione, credere." And again, as cited by Lactantius: "non
esse illa vulgo disputanda, ne susceptas publice religiones disputatio talis
extinguat." Lib. ii. cap. ii.

70. 1 It is probable, I think, that Eusebius had a passage, in a work ascribed
to Justin Martyr, here in view: viz. " [Greek]. For Plato indeed, as coming from
above, and having seen and learned accurately all things in the heavens, says,
that the most high God exists in a fiery essence. Paeren. ad Graecos, p. 12.
Edit. Steph.

71. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. The "Ideas" of Plato are perhaps alluded to here. See the
Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. cap. xxiii. xv. xiii. xlv. it. Lib. xii. xix. p. 593. B.

72. 1 This argument is also touched upon by Cyrill of Alexandria in his work
against Julian. (Edit. Spanh. p. 284.) The Syriac here speaks in the first
person, as is usual with Oriental writers: thus, [Syriac]. For not as my
opinion, but as theirs: i.e. Plato here makes the statement, not as resting on
his authority, but on theirs. See also Vossius de Orig. et prog, idololatrise,
Lib. i. cap. xli. p. 15]. and the Prep. Evang. Lib. xiii. cap. i.

73. 2 Theodoret (Graec. affect. curat. Serin, v. p. 547: Gaisford's Edit. p.
207. seq.) gives the opinion of Plato very much as it is here stated, but he
does not cite this place. I have to thank Mr Professor Schole-field for pointing
it out to me: otherwise I fear the work must have gone to press without it. It
will be found in the London Edit. Tom. viii. p. 446. Bekk. p. 102. Legg. ix. as
follows. [Greek] Our translator does not seem to have read [Greek] in his copy.

74. 3 This appears to be the passage cited from the Apology of Socrates, in the Prep. Evang. Lib. xiii. cap. x. (Edit. Viger. p. 660. B.) thus:----[Greek] 75. 4 This is also taken from the Apology of Socrates, and occurs, Prep. Evang. ib. D. as spoken by Socrates:

76. 3 Justin Martyr (Param. ad Graecos. p. 27.) thus introduces a part of this
passage;...[Greek]...which, he says, is copied, from the Cherubim of Scripture.
This passage, occurring amongst the most fanciful and silly matter of any in
Plato, and honoured probably more frequently by citation than any other, is to
be found in the Phaedrus (Edit. Lond. 1826.) Vol. i. p. 78, where it stands
thus: [Greek] See the notes here. It has been cited by Clemens Alexand. Cohort.
ad Gentes. et Strom. v. 598. Sylb. (T. ii. p. 709. Potter) Stob. Serm. v. p. 67.
v. 32. Spanheim. ad Julian. Orat. i. p. 119. and Athenagoras, Legat. pro Christ,
p. 69, &c.

77. 1 The same too, and in nearly the same words, is given by Theodoret. (Ib.
pp. 475, 490. seq. and 512. seq.)

78. 2 Much interesting matter to this effect cited from Plato, will he found,
Prep. Evang. Lib. xiii. cap. i. seq. See also Vigor's notes. The place alluded
to here, is in the Phaedrus, Lond. Edit. Vol. i. p. 82. See the notes: cited
also by Origen contra Cels. Lib. vi. p. 288. Edit. Spencer.

79. 3 These were the followers of Aristotle. See sect. 20 above, also Bruckeri,
Hist. Crit. Phil. Tom. i. p. 78, seq. Syr. [Syriac].

80. 2 This is taken from the Fourth Book of the Laws [...]

81. 4 Allusion is, perhaps, here made to a passage in the Timaeus, (Edit. Lond.
Tom. vn. p. 280. seq.)..." [Greek] " Contra vero agentes cogi in ortu secundo,
sexu mutato, fieri mulirem, et qui ne tum quidem finem peccandi faciet, qua
tenus depravatur, eatenus in brutorum naturam suis moribus similem permutari."
Which is a full recognition of the doctrine of the Metempsychosis. See also the
Prep. Evang. Lib. xm. cap. xvi. where the same question is discussed.

82. 5 Sect. 31, above.

83. 6 Passages, it. Lib. xiii. cap. xviii. to the same effect will be found in
the Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. capp. xxxi, xxxii. seq. from the Timaeus, &c. The
Scripture cited is, Rom. i. 21, 25, but is rather accommodated here, than
exactly quoted.

84. 1 Considerable extracts to this effect are given from the Epinomis, the
Timaeus, and the Tenth book of the Laws of Plato, in the Prep. Evang. Lib. XIII.
cap. xviii.

85. 7 In the tenth Book of the Laws, not far from the beginning, Plato speaks
very much as our author does; while he seems disposed to excuse the wanderings
of antiquity as to these things. To no one, perhaps, can the words of Ovid be
more properly applied ; " Video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor."

86. 1 That is, came into being such as ours is. See sect. 33, above.

87. 1 Probably the followers of the New Academy. See Brucker. Tom. i. p. 759.
seq.

88. 4 Syr. [Syriac]. Pyrrho, who was the originator of this sect. See Diog.
Laert. in his life, Bruckeri Hist. Philos. Crit. Tom. i. Pars. ii. Lib. ii. cap.
xiii. p. 1317 : and Tom. ii. Per. ii. Pars. i. Lib. i. cap. ii. Sect. ix. p.
627. Suidas sub. voce Pu&r0r9wn, and Pur0r9w&neioi. See also Euseb. Prep. Evang.
Lib. xiv. cap. xviii. seq.

89. 5 Syr. [Syriac] Gr. e0poxh& This is the term from which the 0Efektikoi/,
Ephectics took their name : it is thus given in the Greek by Suidas : [Greek]
This place in Suidas is, cited from Laertius, Lib. ix. seg. 70, who gives, le/gw
de\, for the le/gw dh_; of Suidas. (Edit. Wetst.) The term (e0poxh_) also occurs
Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. cap. iv. p. 512. A.

90. 1 Delphos, Gr. oi9 Delfoi/. In Phocis, and said to be in the midst of all
Greece, and of the earth as its navel, stood this celebrated city and Oracle,
near the springs of Castalia.

91. 2 Lebadia, Gr. lebadi/a, and leba&deia, was near Phocis in Boeotia: it was
famous for the Temple of Jupiter Trophonius, which it contained. Syr. [Syriac].
To the same effect Origen contra Cels. Lib. in. p. 131. seq.

92. 3 Colophon, Gr. h9 kolofw&n. Famous for the Clarian Apollo, who gave
responses there. Syr. [Syriac] A city of Ionia.

93. 4 Miletus, Gr. Mi/lhtoj, an ancient and large city of Ionia, where there was
a Temple of the Didymean Apollo, which was burnt down by Xerxes. Ib. cap. iii.
Syr. [Syriac]. Some exceedingly interesting and valuable matter on these, and
other Oracles of Greece, as well as of other places, will be found in the Prep.
Evang. See the index, under Oracula. Also in Theodoret, Graecar. affect.
curatio, Serm. x. Tom. iv. p. 623. seq. The latter is particularly valuable: as
is also Origen's account of them, (contra Cels. Lib. vii. p. 333. seq.) 94. 5
See Sect. 19, above.

95. 6 Ib. Atoms. See also Theophilus ad Autolycum. Lib. III. p. mihi 144 seq.
where we have some admirable remarks on this subject.

96. 7 See Sect. 20, above: Note.

97. 2 [...] There is another passage in Plutarch, which speaks of nourishing the
hair as commendable: (Life of Lysander, 1st. par.) speaking of the image of
Lysander as, [Greek] well adorning the hair, after the ancient manner, and
sending down a noble beard. It is added, as a saying of Lycurgus, that hair made
the good still more becoming; the vicious, more frightful. [Greek]. Theodoret
(Serm. i. de Providentia, p. 321. Tom. iv.) speaks thus of the beard and hair of
the Philosophers, together with the white robe, (tribw_n.) [Greek] Hence we see
too, that the tribw_n was white. It was probably woollen, and the same as that
worn by the Soofee Philosophers of the East; and so called because made of wool
([Arabic] soof.) It should seem from a passage in Diog. Laert. that it was the
moral Philosophers only, who wore their hair long and flowing. In vita
Carnead...[Greek] 98. 3 Here again we have the Greek text, as preserved in the
Orat, de laudd. Constant, cap. xiii. p. 533. C.

99. 1 This clause is wanting in the Greek.

100. 2 See also Clemens Alexand. Admon. ad Gentes. p. 27. seq. Edit. 1629. This
argument is urged, Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. iv. p. 4. and the Gr. text found as
cited above.

101. 3 This appears to be taken from Philo Byblius (Sanchoniathon,) as preserved
in the Prep. Evang. cap. x. p. 40. and Lib. iv. cap. xvi. p. 156, in these
words: [Greek]. We are then told, that Israel, who reigned in Phoenicia, and was
there only another name for Saturn, had so sacrificed his son Jeud ( 0Ieou&d );
which in the Phoenician language meant "only son," ( mongenou&j ). This is
apparently told as being the origin of their custom. We may observe however,
that the name Israel is evidently taken from the Hebrew Bible, as is the name
Jeud (Judah); for Israel certainly had such son. There is a blunder however, in
the application; for, it was Abraham who laid his son on the altar for
sacrifice; and that son's name was Isaac, not Jeud. There is, moreover, another
blunder here, for Jahid ([Hebrew] Syr. [Syriac]) must have signified only one;
or monogenh_j in the Phoenician.

102. 4 This is found in the Gr. as above cited, but defectively, and has been
taken from Porphyry, Prep. Evang. p. 155. B. [Greek] Part of this is also found
in Cyrill. Alexandr. against Julian, p. 128. seq. Edit. Spanh. [...]

103. 5 Syr. [Syriac], imitating the form of the Greek case in It is worth remarking here, that Porphyry,----from whom this passage is taken (Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xvi. pp. 155, 102.)----says, this place was formerly named Coronea,
Korw&neia: which appears to me, generally to have escaped the Geographers. This was the Salamis of Cyprus, as the context shews.

104. 6 Our March.

105. 11 The Seleucus who spoke of God: a periphrasis for the Greek qeolo&goj. He
was, as Viger thinks, (notes ib.) a Grammarian of Alexandria, who wrote
commentaries on most of the Poets, &c. and a hundred books on the Gods; and,
that on this last account he was termed the Theologian. See also Suidas sub
voce. This place is also cited by Cyrill .of Alexandria, Edit. Spanh. p. 128,
with considerable varieties of reading from that of Eusebius. [..]

106. 1 This is an exact translation of the passage preserved in Eusebius (Prep. Evang. ib.), so much so, that the very order, ellipses, &c. of the Greek are followed. [...]
----This Amosis was, according to some, the Pharaoh of the Exodus, Prep. Evang.
Lib. x. cap. x. pp. 490, 493, &c.

107. 2 This too is found in Porphyry, the Prep. Evang. ib. and Viger's notes,
ib. p. 11. it. Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib.

108. 13 A disciple and interpreter of Callimachus, and an author of many works
both in verse and prose. See Vigor's note (p. 11.).

109. 1 Syr. [Syriac] See a very curious note on these mysteries. Origen contra
Cels. p. 8. line 44. Spencer's notes, p. 11.

110. 7 It is not very certain who this was: some attribute this to Gelo, a
prince of Syracuse. See Viger's notes, ib. p. 12.

111. 8 Syr. [Syriac]. Gr. Douma&tioi. See Vigor's notes. Perhaps the Arabian
Doumat 'l Jandal, Arab. [Arabic]. The latter word is, probably a modern adjunct,
given by way of distinction. This place (See Pocock. Spec. Hist. Arab. p. 95.
Ed. White) was famous for the worship of an idol named Wadd ([Arabic]), our
Woden, or the Indian Bhuddha. The sacrifice of the Boy was an imitation, no
doubt, of that of Isaac, as were evidently the human sacrifices of Phoenicia,
noticed above. Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 534. A. but defectively.

112. 12 [...]. According to tradition, Erectheus had two sons and two daughters,
all of whom were sacrificed for the good of the State. De laudd. ib., but in
some respects differently.

113. 13 [...] It was a city of Arcadia, formed out of many inconsiderable neighbouring places, soon after the battle of Leuctra, under the auspices of Epaminondas. See Cellarius Geog. Antiq. sub voce.----Orat. de laudd. ib., omits much here.

114. 14 [...] The feast of Jupiter must therefore, I think, be meant, and not
the lupercalia of Rome, which the translations given of the Greek seem to
intimate.

115. 16 The citation from Porphyry ends here. The words immediately following
are those of Eusebius.

116. 17 [...] This passage is also given in the Prep. Evang. but much more at length, (pp. 158----161.) and is taken from the Bibliotheca of Diodorus Siculus (Lib. xx. cap. xiv.).

117. 18 Syr. [Syriac] meaning Carthaginians.

118. 19 [...] Lactantius (De falsa religione Lib. i. cap. xxi.) refers to this in these words: "Pescennius Festus in Libris historiarum per satiram refert, Carthaginienses Saturno humanas hostias solitos immolare, et cum victi essent ab Agathocle rege Siculorum: iratum sibi deum putavisse; itaque, ut diligentius piaculum solverent, ducentos nobilium filios immolasse." He gives some other instances too, which may be added to the above: viz. " Apud Cyprios (See Sect. 55, above) humanam hostiam Jovi Teucrus immolavit: idque sacrificium posteris tradidit: quod est nuper Hadriano imperante sublatum." Ib. cap. xx.----"Erat lex apud Tauros...ut Dianae hospites immolarentur: et id sacrificium multis temporibus celebratum est." (See Sect. 53,64, above). Ib.----"Ne Latini quidem hujus immanitatis expertes fuerunt, siquidem Latialis Juppiter etiam nunc sanguine colitur humano."----" Non minoris insania; judicanda sunt publica illa sacra, quorum alia sunt matris deum, in quibus homines suis ipsi virilibus litant ;...alia Virtutis, quam eandem Bellonam vocant, in quibus ipsi sacerdotes, non alieno, sed suo cruore sacrificant," &c. which is probably the case noticed above (Note 15.) by Eusebius, and is identical with that of the priests of Baal, mentioned in 1 Kings xviii. 28. To this horrid list of vices, Theophilus ad Autolycum, (Lib. m. p. 143. seq.) adds several others too disgusting to be mentioned, and yet many of them recommended by some of the most famous Philosophers! See also Clemens Alexand. Admon. ad gentes. p. 22. seq. which is cited here in the Prep. Evang. p. 157. Similar practices prevailed among the Druids of Gaul and Great Britain as Caesar intimates, as also among the Nomades of Tartary.

119. 1 The account of this is cited at length in the Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xvi. p. 158. seq. as taken from Lib. i. of the work of Hallicarnassensis: it occurs also Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 534. B. with certain variations. This circumstance is said to have happened to the Pelasgi in Italy, and to have been the cause of their migrating into distant countries. We are told, ib. p. 159. B. that Myrsilus the Lesbian relates much the same things as having happened to the Tyrrhenians. The author tells us moreover, that these offerings were made to Jupiter,
Apollo, and the Cabiri: [Greek] and, that this decimation of men (young men, it should seem) was called for by the Oracle, and enforced by the magistrates,
----notwithstanding the migrations which hence took place,----until Hercules put an end to it, by commanding that images of men, dressed up as for the sacrifice, should be annually thrown into the Tibur. (Edit. Steph. 1540. p. 16.) It should seem, from accounts now before the public, that human sacrifices still prevail in the East to some extent. In the district of Ganjam in Hindustan, a tribe of natives called Khoonds annually sacrifice a human victim, in order to secure good crops. The Chieftains, it is said, of the different districts, take it by turns to offer this sacrifice annually: at other times, the offering is made to avert, or remove, some evil. These Chieftains then, have a child, sometimes children, purchased, or taken, in their marauding expeditions in the low country, to bring up for this express purpose: the more full grown and perfect, the better. This victim is put to death by the blow of an axe: the blood is sprinkled on the Idol, which is the image of a Peacock,----carved in wood,----with three heads. The body is then divided into as many parts as there are districts, and again into as many small pieces as there are families, who bury each his portion cither in his house, or about his fields. It is stated in a Paper in "the Journal of the Asiatic Society," No. xiii. p. 136, that "this horrid custom ...is in a fair way of being entirely rooted out by the vigorous measures of Lord Elphinstone." The writer of the same paper, tells us of mounds in Southern India, which he thinks are composed of the ashes of sacrificial victims. His words are (ib. p. 1,35.)----"I must admit, though reluctantly, the possibility of some of them being the remains of great sacrifical holocausts performed by the Rishis of old in their solitudes, since the ancient annals of the country abound in allusions both to bestial and human sacrifices... on a fearful scale of magnitude." He alludes (ib.) to the Druidical sacrifices made formerly in our own land.

120. 1 As indeed the marauding tribes of Turcomans, Tartars, Bedouins, and others in the East still do.----Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. D. but with certain discrepancies.

121. 2 This is said also in the Preparatio Evangelica, (Lib. i. cap. iv. p. 10. D.) and is there advanced with reference to the Roman Empire being consolidated under Augustus, and thence enjoying----under one comprehensive government----a peace, unknown to it before. So also here, Book in. Sect. 1. seq. and Book v. Sect. 52.

122. 3 The Kings enumerated in Joshua xii. 24. are in the Heb. Bible thirty-one,
in the Sept. Greek twenty-nine, in number. Our author thought it sufficient,
perhaps, to give the round number thirty.

123. 4 Syr. [Syriac]Cellar. Geogr. Antiq. Tom. ii. Lib. iii. cap. xiii. p. 316.
The Bethshan of the Old Testament. Jud. i. 27, &c. situated not far from the
Lake of Gennesaret.

124. 5 [...]. So named by Herod in honour of Augustus. See Cellarius. Geog.
Antiq. p. mihi 112. with the authorities there cited.

125. 5 This paragraph was probably in the mind of Theodoret, when he wrote the passage, (Serm. x. de Oraculis, p. 633. Tom. iv.) commencing at line 10 from the bottom. Our author here refers to the wars of the Canaanites with one another, and with the Jews, as related generally by Josephus.----This place is not without its obscurity.

126. 7 See Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. i. p. 178. D. Syr. [Syriac]. lit. Heads of
places.

127. 1 This seems to assign the origin of Idolatry to Egypt: the plains of Shinar (Gen. xi. 2. seq. comp. Rev. xvii. 5.) seem to me to lay a better claim to this. Egypt may, indeed, have adorned it much with its science : hut so did Babylon. (See Is. xlvii. 12, 13. it. ib. xiv. 12----14. with the Commentators on these places.) Greece perhaps got much of its Idolatry from Egypt, while the East was more particularly supplied with this from Bahylon. See also Vossius de Idololatria, passim.

128. 14 The places of Thucydides here referred to, will be readily found by
consulting the Indexes of the best Editions of that writer.

129. 1 This is taken from Herodotus, Lib. i. c. xlvii. who gives it thus :
[Greek]. To which three other lines are added. See the notes in the best
editions here. The passage is alluded to, and commented upon, by Oenomaus in the
Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. xx. p. 210. seq. It is cited ib. p. 230. B. with a few
variations, (see Vigor's notes in each place,) as it also is in Origen contra
Cels. Lib. ii. p. 63.

130. 2 The particulars here referred to, will be found in Herodotus, 1. c. et
seq. On these Oracles, generally, see the Index to the Prep. Evang. (sub voce "
Oracula," Viger's Edit.) Theodoret, Serm. ix. Graec. affect. curatio, &c.

131. 3 Herodot. Lib. i. lix. lxiv. Syr. [Syriac]

132. 12 Syr. [Syriac]. The Orchomenians. But I can find no account of this in
the histories. An argument not unlike this is urged at length by Cicero (de Nat.
Deor. in. 32 - 33. seq.), where Pisistratus is also adduced as an instance
either of weakness or wickedness in the Gods.

133. 1 Matt. xii. 33. The reading here, as elsewhere, differs slightly from the
Peschito.

134. 2 On this subject, generally, see the Prep. Evang. Lib. vi. Prooem. p. 236.
seq. and cap. vii. Theodoret, Graec. affect. curat. Serm. vi. p. 562. Clemens
Alexand. Strom. Lib. iv. p. 495. C. Lactant. Lib. in. cap. xxix. Our author
against Hierocles, p. 541. Edit. 1628. Plutarch, Libellus de Fortuna, and Ephrem
Syrus, Tom. ii. Syr. et Lat. p. 451. seq. where our form [Syriac], is applied
again and again.

135. 2 According to Plutarch,----who lived in the times of Trajan, and wrote a very valuable work on the failing of the Oracles (De defectu Oraculorum),----excepting Lebadia in Boeotia alone, the Oracles had every where become silent, and their fanes ruined. His words are: (Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xvi. p. 205.)... [Greek] This is followed (ib.) by an account from the same author, of the general decay of demoniacal influence, which, according to him, commenced in the times of Tiberius Caesar:----the very time,----as Eusebius proceeds to remark----when our Lord cast them out, and declared that he saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning. He tells us too, (ib. p. 164. D.) that human sacrifices, which had every where prevailed, entirely ceased in the times of Hadrian----when the Christian religion had become generally known----as noticed above.

136. 1 Syr. [Syriac]. This is, no doubt, the Arridaeus, Ar0r9idai~oj of Diodorus
Siculus : who, as he says, was the son of Philip, now received the name of
Philip, and was made king. His words are:... [Greek]. (Bibl. Tom. viii. ii.) The
authors, therefore, of the Universal History are wrong when they say, that this
man was the Son of Roxana, and named Alexander.

137. 3 Eusebius does, nevertheless, give a passage from Porphyry, (Prep. Evang.
Lib. iv. cap. xvi. p. 204.; see also p. 238.) in which Apollo is made to speak
of their failing. The context, however, in this case is sufficient to shew, that
this revelation was not put forth until the thing foretold had come to pass.
This is followed (ib.) by a quotation, noticed above (par. 7C.), from Plutarch,
on the general failing of the Oracles. See Viper's notes on both.

138. 4 Yet it is certain that very many intimations of " the coming of the Just One" had got abroad among the heathen; and, of this, the Preparatio Evangelica of Eusebius presents many striking examples. Libb. ix. x. &c. see also the Oratio Constantini ad Sanctor. caet. cap. xviii. seq. These however, did not originate with the Oracles.
---- All this was indeed, foretold by Isaiah (chap. xvii. 7. &c.) according to Theodoret. Edit. Gaisford, p. 395, and fulfilled in the times of Constantine. See ib. p. 412. seq. where he more than intimates that ALL had been fulfilled, just as our author has done in many places.

139. 1 De laudd. Constant, ib. p. 517. D. seq.

140. 3 This is, perhaps, an allusion to Jer. xxxi. 22, where the Syriac Peschito
text has, The Lord createth a new thing in the earth, [Syriac]

141. 4 Alluding, perhaps, to 2 Cor. iv. 6.: or, it may be, to the term Wisdom of
God, 1 Cor. i. 24., so frequently given to Christ in this work.

142. 5 Cicero adduces the tyrant of Sicily, when he had robbed the fane of Proserpine at Locris, and was sailing homeward with a prosperous gale, saying these words: "Videtisne, amici, quam bona a Diis immortalibus navigatio sacrilegis datur?" A similar thing is said of Gelo, and the Olympian Jupiter (ib. Nat. Deor. iii. 34.), and also of Aesculapius, &c.
Lactantius too, ---- a contemporary of our author, ---- makes some pithy remarks on this subject. Lib. ii. cap. iv. p. mihi 108. seq. as also does Clemens Alexand. Admon. ad Gentes. p. 34.
---- If it be said that, neither does revealed religion put forth vindictive powers, on occasions of insult offered by unbelievers, the answer is this : Revealed religion did put forth miraculous powers vindicating its own authority, when it was necessary it should do so. To do so on every occasion, would answer no good end. Unrevealed religion never has, and never could, when it wanted it most, do this. This is the true distinction : and it is an adequate one.

143. 7 Most of the statements made here, will also be found in the Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. iv. pp. 11, 48, 275 ---- 279, &c. See also Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 53.5. A. B. which will enable us to ascertain the intention of our author here, where he is occasionally obscure. This first is cited from Diodorus Siculus (Prep. Evang. p. 48. D.) in these words : . . [Greek] 144. 8 Ib. p. 11. it. 275. C. where we are told, that the Persian laws allowed allowed marriage with sisters, daughters, and mothers, on the authority of Bardesanes. See p. 279. ib.

145. 1 As just cited from Bardesanes. And, in his days, many of these things
were practised in Media, Egypt, Phrygia, and Galatia, as carried thither by the
Magi.

146. 2 See Viger's note (ib. p. 25. " para_ Pe/rsaj") Bardesanes too, (ib. p. 276. D.) charges the Philosophers of Greece with this detestable crime)... [Greek] (Ib. p. 277.) This is said to have been practised under the sanction of the laws in Gaul. That Socrates, the most virtuous of all the Philosophers, was addicted to this practice, many ancient authors of respectability may be adduced to shew: and Theodoret with others asserts, that it was recommended by Plato in his Republic. See Theod. Graec. affect. curat. Serm. ix. p. mihi 618. I). Tom. iv. Viger is certainly mistaken when he imagines that the Zerasdas of Theodoret, means Plato ; it being self evident, as I think, that the Persian Zerdusht, ([Arabic]) or Gr. Zoroaster, must have been intended. Notes to the Prep. Evang. p. 25. seq. where it may be seen, that Autolycus accuses both the Epicureans and the Stoics of the same crime. Caesarius imputes the same to the Chaldaeans and Babylonians, (ib.) See also the Prep. Evang. (p. 11.) and Theodoret, Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford, p. 472. seq. It may be doubted perhaps, whether some of these charges can be substantiated. See Luzacii de Theodoreto judicium, prefixed to Dr Gaisford's work.
---- These abominations are again touched upon, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. x. p. 361, and Origen contra Cels. Lib. v. p. 248. seq.

147. 3 These particulars seem to be resumed more specifically near the end of
this section. Our text has [Syriac] here, for [Syriac] I presume. I have,
therefore, translated it by in sepulchres : alluding, perhaps, to the
sacrificing, and otherwise destroying, of children.

148. 4 So, in the Prep. Evang. (p. 11. C.).. [Greek] (See also Plutarch, Tom.
ii. p. 409.) So also Bardesanes, who attributes this to the Medes, &c. (ib. p.
277.) [Greek] Theodoret says on the same subject:...[Greek] (p. 615. see also p.
614.) See also Cicero. Tusc. Quaest. Lib. i. cap. xlv.

149. 5 So Bardesanes. (Prep. Evang. p. 275. B.) [Greek] See also Viger's Note,
(p. 25.) where much interesting matter, to this effect, is collected together,
it. Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 535. B.

150. 6 This is applied to the Scythians, generally, in the Prep. Evang. (p. 11.)
in these words [Greek] Bardesanes affirms that there is also a people in India,
who indulge in cannibalism, (ib. p. 278. D.) [Greek] 151. 7 This seems to be
applied to the Derbices of Persia, (Prep. Evang. ib. p. 11.) and the
Massagetae...[...] 152. 8 This, according to Euseb. (l.c.) and Theodoret, (l.c.)
was done by the Tibareni. Theod. [Greek]

153. 9 Mention is made of this (Prep. Evang. ib.) in these words, [...] Lit. Nor, as formerly, do they cast over the aged with a snare (noose, &c.) A practice, perhaps, not unlike that of the Persian hunters and warriors, who threw a sort of noose, ---- called the [Arabic] Camand, ---- over the head of the animal they wished to take. [...] 154. 10 So the Hyrcaneans and Bactrians (Prep. Evang. pp. 11, 12, and Theodoret as above.) 155. 1 So the Caspians (Prep. Evang. ib.) and Bactrians (ib. p. 12.) Strabo Geogr. Lib. xi. p. 356. Edit. Casaubon.

156. 2 This, according to Theodoret, (Graec. affect, curat. p. 615.) was done by
the Scythians: [Greek] So Ibn Batuta tells us (Travels, p. 220,) that he saw, at
the funeral of the Emperor of China, six favourite Mamluks, and four female
slaves all buried alive with him! See also Prep. Evang. (ib. p. 156. C.)

157. 3 So the Indians, as Bardesanes tells us, burned the wives, together with
the dead body of the husband, on the funeral pile (Prep. Evang. p. 277. D.),
just as it is the practice still in Hindustan. See also Plutarch, Tract. [Greek]
Tom. ii. p. mihi 499. See also Origen contra Cels. Lib. v. p. 254. seq. as given
by Celsus himself.

158. 1 Alluding perhaps to the case of David. 1 Sam. xvii. 34----36.

159. 2 Not unlike this Porphyr. ad Boeth. Prep. Evang. Lib. xi. cap. xxviii. p.
556. C.

160. 1 See our author's Eccl. Hist. Lib. ix. cap. viii.

161. 2 See Prep. Evang. Lib. vi. capp. i-iii. p. 236; where cap. iii. we have a
poem from Porphyry on the conflagrations of the Temples. See also ib. Lib. III.
cap. ii. p. 134. D.

162. 1 [...] Eusebius, Prep. Evang. (p. 134. D.) This (Simson's Chron. p. 640)
happened A. M. 3457; his words are, " A Pisistratidis incensum prodidit
Philochorus apud Pindari Scholiastem ad Od. 7. Pyth. Non multo post ab
Alcmaonidis instauratum."

163. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. It has been affirmed by some, (Simson. Chron. A. M. 2948,)
that the Amazons first built this Temple ; others deny this, and state that one
Cresus, with Ephesus the son of Carter, built it: while Strabo makes Chersiphron
its first builder. I have met with no account, however, of it having been
destroyed by the Amazons.

164. 3 Syr. [Syriac] Strabo, however, Lib. xiv. p. 440, tells us, that it was
Herostratus, who, to secure fame to himself, burnt it the second time. See also
Valerius Maximus, Lib. viii. cap. xiv. Extern. 5. This was the Temple in which
the image that fell down from Jupiter (Acts xix. 35.) was said to be preserved:
which image, according to Pliny, was made of ebony by one Canitia. (Lib. xix.
cap. iv.) So the authors of the Universal History, and, after them apparently
Rees's Encyclopedia, Art. Diana. But, I can find no such thing in Pliny, nor any
statuary of the name of Canitia. The words of Pliny are (Lib. xvi. 79), "De ipso
simulacro Dea? ambigitur: ceteri ex ebeno esse tradunt. Mucianus ter consul, ex
his qui proxime viso scripsere, vitigineum, et nunquam mutatum septies restituto
templo."

165. 4 So Thucydides, Lib. iv. 133; not unlike this too, Pausanias Descript. Gr. Lib. vii. cap. v. This happened (Simson's Chronicon. p. 769.) A. M. 3582----which see.

166. 5 This Temple was, according to Herodotus, very rich, and more ancient than
that of Delphos, and was burnt by the Medes in conjunction with the Thessalians,
Lib. vni. 33. Eusebius, however, speaks of an invasion and burning by the
Thebans which was, perhaps, on another occasion. See also Pausanias, Graec.
Descript. Lib. x. cap. xxxv. This happened A. M. 3658. (Sims. Chron. p. 905.)

167. 6 This was, according to Strabo, (Lib. viii. p. mihi 244.) one of the
finest works of Phidias. It was made of ivory, in a sitting posture, and so
large, that if standing the Temple could not have contained it, its height would
have been so great. See also Pausanias, Lib. i. cap. xviii. This Temple was once
destroyed by an inundation of the sea. Pausan. Lib. in. cap. ix. I can find no
account of the destruction of this statue by lightning. See Prep. Evang. p. 135.
A.

168. 7 An account of this is found in Herodian, as happening in the times of
Commodus, (Lib. i. 14.) He first tells us, that the Temple of Peace suffered by
lightning after many prodigies had appeared in the heavens, with pestilences,
&c. on the earth. [Greek] " Maximum autem nefas cum in praesens dolorem attulit,
tum in futurum pessimo augurio universos conterruit. Nam cum neque imbres ulli
neque nubes, tantumque exiguus terrae motus antecessisset, seu nocturni casu
fulminis, sive igni aliquo in ipso terrarum motu velut extrito, totum de
improviso Pacis templum consumptum incendio est: quod unum scilicet opus
cunctorum tota urbo maximum fuit atque pulcherrimum: idem templorum omnium
opulentissimum...inter qua; etiam Vestae templum, sic ut Palladium quoque
conspiceretur: quod inprimis colunt atque in arcano habent Romani, Troja (ut
perhibent) avectum." See also Xiphilinus near the end of Commodus. The Temple of
Fortune at Rome is said, by Zosimus, to have been burnt in like manner. (Lib.
ii. Constantinus et Licinius.) The Temple of Vesta was also burnt in the first
Punic wars. See Dion. Hallicarn. Lib. ii. p. 94. Edit. 1546, where this
Palladium is also spoken of. See also Clemens. Alexand. Admon. ad Gentes. p.
30-85. seq. and Pausan. Lib. v.

169. 1 [...] Xiphilinus tells us in his Epitome of Dion, that in the times of
Titus, the Temples of Serapis and Isis; the Septa; the Temple of Neptune; the
Baths of Agrippa; the Pantheon ; the Diribitorium; the Theatre of Balbus; the
Scena of Pompey ; the houses of Octavius, with the books; the Temple of Jupiter
Capitolinus, with the adjoining Temples, were all destroyed by fire, which the
Historian thinks were Divine, rather than human, occurrences. (Edit. Sylburg.
Ed. 1590. p. 827.) See also Prep. Evang. Lib. in. cap ii. p. 134. D. seq. It.
Simsoni de Sibyl. Vaticin. disquis. col. 1712.

170. 2 [...] This happened in the times of Domitian, of which Suetonius (Lib.
xi. cap. xv.) gives the following account. [...] &c. We are told in the next
chapter, that on consulting a German soothsayer concerning this lightning, he
was told that it portended a change of things. Which harmonizes well with the
general expectations those times. The soothsayer, however, appears to have lost
his life, on account of this answer. Comp. Tacit. Hist. Lib. iv. 54, and Simson,
Chron. Cathol. pars. vii. p. 1674. The Capitol was also burnt in the year before
Christ, 80, together with the Chapel and Sybilline books. Simson, Chron. A. M.
3923.

171. 3 In like manner in the Orat. de laudd. Constant, cap. xiii. p. 535. C.

172. 1 To the same effect Origen contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 79.[...] This text was
transcribed by Roger Pearse, 18th July 2002. All material on this page is in the
public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press SPIonic font, free from here.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 57: THEOPHANIA - BOOK 3
========================================================================

BOOK III. THE THIRD BOOK OF (EUSEBIUS) OF CAESAREA.

1. BECAUSE 1 then, human life had undergone a change, through the things already
mentioned, to a state henceforth of peace and rest, and had been prepared to
receive the perfect doctrine relating to God; well again, did the common Saviour
of all, the only (begotten) WORD OF GOD, the King of all, shew forth the divine
revelation of Himself by very deeds, and at the time which was suitable. For,
immediately and at once, when He appeared in the world, those things which
appertained to the ancient service of Demons, were undone by the overthrow as it
were, of (some ruinous) war-engine; tidings announcing good things were preached
to all nations, and God who is over all, the Propitiator of the children of men,
was announced. The whole error of a plurality of Gods was also overthrown, and
all the operations of demons were forthwith cast aside. Men again were no more
sacrificed ; nor were the slaughterings of human beings, which from former times
had ruined the world, (persevered in). Nor again, were there multitudes of
Rulers, Princes, Tyrants, and Governours of |156 the people. Nor again, existed
those things, on account of which wars, and the reduction of cities, had been
set on foot in every city and place: on the contrary, one God was preached to
all men : the one empire too of the Romans had extended itself over all : and
the peaceless and uncompromising enmity, which had so long been the portion of
the nations, came to an entire end. And, as the knowledge of the one God, and of
one just and righteous conduct resulting therefrom, was, by the teaching of our
Saviour, delivered to all men; so also one king, at one and the same time, was
established over the whole Roman empire, and a profound peace prevailed in every
thing. At once too, and at one period, as it were at the intimation of the one
God, two singular advantages sprung up among mankind ; the Instruction that was
in righteousness, and the Empire of the Romans. For formerly, this error of the
Demons had grievously enslaved the nations: and, as the whole had been divided
into many (parts), some taking Syria by way of portion; others bearing rule in
Asia; others, in Macedonia; others cutting up and seizing upon Egypt; others, in
like manner, upon the country of Arabia: the race of the Jews again, had
possession of Palestine2. And, in every village, city, and place, they were, as
from madness (and) like marauders and demoniacs in reality, careful (only) about
warfare and contention one against another;--of which enough has already been
said.

2. But (now), two great Powers sprung fully up, as (it were) out of one stream;
and they gave peace to all, and brought all together to a state of friendship :
(namely) the Roman Empire, which, from that time, appeared (as) one kingdom ;
and, the Power of the Saviour of all, whose |157 aid was at once extended to,
and established with, every one. For, the divine superiority of our Saviour
swept away the authority of the many Demons, and many Gods; so that the one
kingdom of God was preached to all men Greeks and Barbarians, and to those who
(resided) in the extremities of the earth. The Roman Empire too,-- since those
had been previously uprooted who had been the cause of the rule of many--soon
subjugated all (others), and quickly brought together into one state of
accordance and agreement, the whole race of (man). And, behold ! it henceforth
brought together such a multitude of nations, as soon to take possession (of
all), even to the extremities of the earth; the teaching3 of our Saviour having,
by the divine power, already prepared all parties, and established (all) in a
state of equanimity. And this is indeed a great miracle to those, who set their
minds on the love of truth, and are unwilling to be envious against that which
is good. For at once, was the error of evil Demons put out of sight; and, at the
same time, did the enmity and contention of the nations, which had always
existed, lose its power: and again, at the same time, was the one God and the
one knowledge of Him, preached to all men through the teaching of our Saviour:
at the same time too, was the empire of the Romans4 established among men; and,
at once, was the (state or) the whole race of man changed to (that) of peace;
and all, professing a common brotherhood, betook themselves to the instructing
of their own nature. Forthwith too, they became born, as it were, of one
(common) Father, and as the children of the one God ; of one Mother too,
righteousness and truth; and so received they one another with the salutation of
peace, that henceforward the whole creation was nothing less than as one
household, and as a race governed by one law. It was (now) practicable too, that
any desiring to send, for the purposes of merchandise, and to proceed,
whithersoever he pleased, to do this with the greatest facility. Those of the
West could come without |158 danger to the East: and again, those who were here
(in the East) could proceed thither as to the house of their own fathers,
according to the words of ancient prophecy, and of many other burdens of the
Prophets, which we have not now leisure to mention, excepting these respecting
our Saviour, the WORD OF GOD, which proclaimed thus: " He shall have dominion
from sea to sea, and from the rivers to the extremities of the earth5:" and
again, "In his days shall righteousness spring forth, and abundance of peace6 :"
and again. " They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears
into reaping hooks7, and nation shall not lift up the sword against nation; nor
shall they learn war8."

3. These things were foretold in the language of the Hebrews, (and) have been
published a very long time ago: they are now in our times witnessed in their
operation, confirming the testimonies of those ancient declarations9. If then,
thou desire other proofs of the excellency of the truth, (shewing) that it is
not of mortal nature, but is the word of God in truth; and (that) the "power of
God," the Saviour, has been revealed in the world, not by words (only), but by
deeds; accept thou of them. |159 Open the eyes of thy understanding, unbar the
doors of thy mind; and let thy soul be wholly collected within thee. Consider
and ask thyself, as if thou wert interrogated by another, and thus investigate
the nature of the things (to be brought before thee).

4. Who, of those that ever existed, is the mortal man, King, Philosopher,
Lawgiver, or Prophet, whether Greek or Barbarian, who bore all this
pre-eminence,--not after his death, but while he was still alive, and drew
breath;-- and could effect so much, that he should be preached throughout the
whole earth ? and, that his name should fill the hearing, and tongues of every
people upon the face of the whole earth ? But this, no man has done excepting
our Saviour alone, who said to his disciples by word, and fulfilled it by deed:
" Go and teach all nations10." He said (also) to them,--what He had foretold and
previously revealed,--that it was necessary His Gospel should be preached
throughout the whole creation, for a testimony to all nations11. And, with the
word, He brought the deed also to pass: for, immediately,--and not at a great
distance of time,--the whole creation was filled with His words !

5. Now. What can he have to say on this matter, who dares to oppose the truth;
since the testimony which is by means of the sight, is better than that which is
by any sort of words? But, if thou give up this first (sort of proof), betake
(thyself) to the latter: and now consider with thyself,--

6. What mortal nature has ever appeared, which appointed like Him, by word only
and not in writing, laws that were just and pure, and sent these same forth by
the hands of His disciples, from one extremity of the creation to another? and,
Who so opened out His doctrines throughout the whole earth, that immediately and
day by day, the instructions which it was becoming should be delivered by Him,
were sufficiently preached in the hearing of all men, Barbarians at once, and
Greeks? But, if thou seek, thou shalt find no other: for this is a work,
resulting from the power of the Saviour of us all, alone.--Nor will this |160
persuade him who is not to be persuaded. Let the same then say to us, for we are
willing to learn--

7. Who, of those who have been praised for the wisdom of their observances, has
ever so delivered the barbarous and brutal of barbarous nations, by his merciful
laws, that those who became (His) disciples among the Scythians, feast (now) no
more on human beings? nor, among the Persians, take their own mothers (as wives)
? others too cast not their dead to the dogs? nor do others deliver up those
that are aged for strangulation ? nor are other brutal and beastly things allied
to these, done with others12? But these are only small proofs of the revelation
of the Godhead of the Saviour of us all. Look now also at others, and consider
with thyself:--

8. What mortal man, of all the Princes at once, and Kings, and Armies, and
Companies, and Inhabitants, and Nations, ever existed during all these periods,
who added this also (to his exploits), that even those who were thought to be
Gods by the many, should wage war with Him,--and who at all times did wage war
with Him;--but, that He shewed his pre-eminence so far to exceed that of man,
that day after day there was exultation, and (that) His doctrine took effect
throughout the whole world ?

9. And, Who is that other (person) who, since the life of man was set up, ever
sought to constitute a people after his own name;--a thing never yet heard
of:--and this, not in a corner, or obscurely in some part of the earth, but in
the whole earth under the sun; (and) did so settle by the power of the rule of
his Godhead, and so complete his wish, that he delivered the knowledge of the
one God who is beyond the heavens, the King of the whole world, together with
his fear, to all men on the face of the whole earth, to the nations both
Barbarian and Greek ?

10. Who ever set about to teach, and, after he had so engaged himself, brought,
as in this marked instance, the matter to its right effect ? and forthwith,
through his |161 own efforts, so made known his undertaking, that by the love of
God, he closed rather the mouths than the doors of all; and proclaimed God who
is over all ? He commanded moreover, that all nations should truly acknowledge
Him alone ? And, because he willed that which was acceptable to God, He deigned
to give His aid and assistance to him, who was his own ambassador ? The
doctrines therefore, accompanying this preaching, were delivered; they were also
received into the hearing of all men, and they were by deeds confirmed!--How
they were, see thou, and consider;--

11. What other person ever arose (as the sun) with his rational light to the
souls of men, and so prepared them to laugh at the error of the Demons of their
forefathers, that they no more attached the divine name to wood, stone, and
matter that is inanimate ?

12. What other, excepting our Saviour, persuaded the Egyptians,--more attached
as they were to the fear of Demons than any other people, and from whom came the
error of a multiplicity of Gods to the Greeks,--that henceforth they should be
no more (so) infatuated, and no more give that venerable name to beasts,
reptiles, noxious and irrational animals; but should acknowledge that one God
alone who is above all, and contend for his righteousness in every sort of death
?

13. And Who invisibly, and by the powerful means and force of his doctrine which
was every where preached, drove out as evil beasts, from among his own human
flock, that injurious and destructive family of Demons, which from ancient time
had ruled the whole race of man; and, by means of the exciting power of Idols,
had put forth innumerable errors among them, so that these Demons should no more
give out their divinations at the springs and fountains ? Nor again, should any
earthly spirits, leading the world astray, implicate mankind in error ? The
fountain therefore, that was in Castalia became silent, as |162 did the other
which was in Colophon13: other fountains of divinations also became silent; the
Pythian, the Clarian, the Nemean; that in Delphos, and Miletus; that in
Colophon, and in Lebadia, of which (last) so much was boasted from ancient
times. To the doctrine of Christ did they all accede. Where are (now) Amphilocus
and Mopsus? There is not a man in (either) place! Where are Amphiaraus and
Aesculapius14? Where is that (Image) of Ammon, and (which was) in the Desert of
Lybia ? All these Gods have crept under the earth, being alarmed at the name of
our Saviour15! not unlike those their Princes who could not, when He went about
among men, bear the rays of his Godhead16, but grievously complained, crying
|163 out, " What have we to do with thee, Jesus " (thou) " Son of God," and
saying, " Art thou come before the time to torment me? We know thee who thou
art, that thou art the Holy One of God17." The Egyptian Demons therefore, when
hearing that the doctrine of our Saviour was preached in the whole of their
land, confessed that they themselves were nothing ! They gave up accordingly the
places subject to their customs to be destroyed, together with (their) Fanes and
Images, and betook themselves to flight18 and departure; driven away as they
were by the Divine power. The divinations too of every place were destroyed ;
and the Christ of God alone, and the one only God who was preached by him to all
men, became the object of divine worship.

14. What other (person) moreover, has, like this our Saviour, given such power
to those who have, in purity and sincerity, arrived at the life of excellence
and of wisdom which has been delivered by Him, that they should by calling on
Him, and by means of pure prayers offered up through Him to Almighty God, cast
out that superabundance of evil Demons from the human body ?

15. What other too, except Him alone, has granted to those who draw near to Him.
that they should perform the rational and unbloody services which are (offered)
by means of prayer, and the secret (use of) the Divine |164 announcements ? and,
on which account He has appointed, throughout the whole creation of man, altars
without fire, services worthy of God, the setting apart of Churches, and, that
intellectual and rational sacrifices should, by means of rites becoming the
Deity, be put forth to that one God alone, who is the King of all nations ?

16. Who moreover, tacitly, and by means of His invisible power, has abolished
those sacrifices which were completed with blood, impurity, smoke, and fire ? --
those abominable shrines also for the slaughter of men ; and so provided, that
human sacrifices should no more be offered, and these things be no more done ?
-- that the writings of the Greeks also should attest, that it was not from
ancient times, but (only) after the divine teaching of our Saviour, in the times
of Hadrian19, that human sacrifices ceased throughout the whole earth ?

17. Since then, all these are clear proofs confirming the divine power of the
Saviour of us all, Who is he whose soul (partakes) so much of iron, as not to
give his testimony to the truth ? and to confess His divine and living (active)
power ? For it is of the living, and not of the dead, that these deeds are. For
the visual perception of something distant is, they say, (the effect) of some
thing (really) visible. |165

18. The Race therefore which contended with God, disturbed the life of man, and
introduced, led on, and could effect much, has suddenly, lately, and but a short
time ago--because driven out from among men,--been cast to the earth, as an
object deserving of the utmost contempt, breathless, motionless, speechless, and
again, bereft both of utterance and of remembrance !

19. This mortal nature therefore, and again that which has no proper existence,
is (as) nothing. And that which is (as) nothing, is likewise inoperative. But,
(as to) Him who acts at all times, and is every moment operative, and is more
potent than any living creature, How can He be supposed to have no proper
existence, although not visible to the bodily eyes? But, discrimination is not
by the senses; nor do we try the terms of art, the perception of doctrines, nor
yet the mind of man, by the bodily senses: much less can man ever see with the
eyes the person, or the power, of God. Nevertheless, these things may be known
from the effects of their (several) operations. On this account, it is our duty
to inform ourselves respecting the unseen power of the Saviour of us all, to
prove His works, and to distinguish, whether we ought to confess that the things
which have hitherto been done by Him, are of one living; or, whether we are to
affirm, that they are of some one, who had no proper existence; or, whether this
same thing be foolish, and the question respecting it inconsistent. For, he who
has no proper existence20 in all his parts, has, it is clear, no proper
existence at all, and is unable either to act, or to effect any thing. Such is
the nature which is dead ; while that opposed to it is living.-- But, it is now
time we should investigate those works of our Saviour which appertain to our
days, and to take a |166 view of the living (effective) works of the living God.
For the living works of God are life indeed. Learn (then), what those things are
about which thou enquirest, and Him (at the same time), who lives in His works.

20. Some21 of the contenders with God did, but a little while ago, rebelliously,
forcibly, and with a mighty hand, so rase to the foundation and overthrow His
houses of prayer, that the churches disappeared: by every means too, they made
war with Him who is invisible to the eyes, attacking and reproaching (Him) with
innumerable injurious expressions. But He, while unseen, secretly avenged
Himself of them. And they again (felt this), not by one intimation from God
(only). They (I say) who, but a short time before, were delighting themselves
and happy;-- they who were worshipped by all men, as if they had been Gods, and
who, during the revolutions of many years, gloriously administered the affairs
of their rule: for before they made war with Him, they had the most perfect
peace and friendship (with all) ; but when they became changed, and dared to
contend with God, and arranged their Deities before them in battle array against
Him who is our (God), in order that (these) might be their strength;-- (then),
forthwith--in one moment--and at the intimation of God, and through the power of
Him with whom they had contended, did all they who had been thus daring, suffer
punishment, so that they gave in to Him on whom they had made war, turned their
backs (in flight), and confessed His Godhead ! They allowed also, and persuaded,
that (men) should boldly do the reverse of those things which were from ancient
time. He therefore quickly |167 established throughout the whole earth the
signal mark of victory, and adorned (it), as from the first, with Temples which
were pure, and distinguished (set apart) as for the prayers of the whole
creation; so that He consecrated holy and dedicated places, in every village,
city, place, and even in the deserts of the Barbarians, to the One God (and)
King of all; -- to Him who is the Lord of all22;-- that He might hence dignify
the things (so) set apart, with the name of Him who was their Lord. Nor was it
of man, that (this) happy appellation fell to their lot; but it was of Him who
is Lord of all, that hence they were each dignified with the name of "the House
of the Lord23." Let any one who wishes then, stand forth in the midst and learn,
who it was that, after all this subversion and destruction, raised up on high
from the earth, buildings such as these throughout the whole creation; and who
it was, that vouchsafed to afford to these things, of which every hope had been
cut off, a renovation far better than they formerly had! Nor was the great
miracle of THE WORD, which renewed these, delayed until after the death of those
who contended with God, but (took place) during their stay in the world. Those
very persons (I say) who rased (the churches), did by their words and writings
preach the new birth, which directly opposed their own (former) darings : and
this they did, not |168 when enjoying rest, so that any one should imagine that
it was of the friendship of men; but when driven forth by the stroke of God.

21. He then, even after all these storms of persecution, did, by means of sharp
calamities and His divine teaching, so enlighten and set up throughout the whole
creation, men zealous of the life of wisdom, multitudes both of men and of
ministering women, and of congregations of virgins, that they (all) were (thus)
established throughout the whole of their lives in perfect holiness.

22. Who moreover persuaded women, multitudes of children, and of men,
voluntarily to suffer the privation of food and of wine for many days ? to sleep
on the earth ? to have recourse to a hard and robust discipline, coupled with
chastity ? and made them exchange the food of the body, for those spiritual and
rational provisions of the soul,--the one for the other,--which are obtained by
the divine reading ?

23. And, Who taught men, barbarian and rustic, as well as women, children, and
innumerable multitudes of heathen slaves, to despise death ? to be persuaded
that their souls were immortal ? that the eye of justice was open, viewing the
deeds of all men, just and unjust ? and to hope for the judgment of God ?--That
it was, on account of these things, their duty to be careful as to the life of
righteousness and temperance ? And, that if they were |169 not so, they could
not otherwise be brought under that yoke of righteousness, which hitherto had
been brought into operation by Him alone whom we call God ?

24. But, let us dismiss these things, and let us otherwise approach him whose
mind is (as) the rock; and let us interrogate him thus, with the questions
(growing) out of these things (following):--O bring thou forth the word of
reason, not from a heart implicated in error24, but advancing (this) as the
fruit of the intelligent and rational soul; and, having meditated much, say
between thyself and thy soul,--

25. What other, of those preached of from ancient times, ever did like Him who
is called God by us, become known, established, and declared, by the
enouncements from above of the Prophets many ages ago, among those ancient
friends of God, the Hebrew family ?--those (I say), who also previously
delivered in writing, in the divine scriptures, the place of His manifestation,
the time of His advent, the manner of His life, His power, His words, and His
deeds?

26. Or, Who so suddenly appeared as an executor of vengeance against those who
dared to oppose Him, that, upon the Jews acting (thus) impiously, He forthwith
dealt out punishment by means of His unseen power on their whole nation ? and
overthrew to the foundations, both their place and rule ?--For He at once
levelled to the ground, both their Temple, and their sacred (things) !

27. And Who, like this our Saviour, has clearly foretold the things that
respected the impious (Jews), and respecting the Church which was established by
Himself throughout the whole creation, and in the very things themselves? and
has shewn their confirmation in their effects?--who said of the impious (Jews),
"Behold, your house is left desolate25; nor shall stone remain upon |170 stone
in this place, which shall not be thrown down26." And of His Church He said; "
Upon this rock I build my Church, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not prevail
against it27 ?"

28. And this also, that He should change men poor and rustic, from the
occupation of fishing, to that of rule ? and, that He should make these into
Lawgivers, and Teachers, of the whole creation of man ? How is it to be imagined
by thee, that He then (so) made the promise by word, and brought it to pass in
deed, that He made them "Fishers of men?" He gave them moreover, all this
excellency and power, that they should compose and complete Books; and, that
they should give such confirmation to these, that they should be received
throughout the whole creation, in the languages of both the Greeks and
Barbarians ? and, that in all nations they should be taught, and believed, as
containing the written words of God28?

29. And, How does it appear to thee, that He should foretel what was about to
take place ? and should previously testify to His Disciples, that, because they
should give their testimony to Him, they should come before Kings and
Governours: and that they should be punished, and undergo grievous torments29?--

30. And this also, that He should so prepare them, that they should voluntarily
suffer ? and, that they should |171 so firmly arm their souls with the armour of
righteousness as with adamant, that they should be seen (engaged) in conflict
against those who opposed them ;--How does not this surpass all description ?

31. Nor was it only, that He impressed on the souls of those who (immediately)
followed Him such power, that when, having clone nothing worthy of death, they
willingly underwent every species of punishment and torment, for the sake of the
righteousness of that God who is overall; but also, on those who received (it)
from them; and so again, on those who came afterwards; and on those even to this
present, and (who live) in our own times;--How does this not transcend every
sort of miracle30 ?

32. Besides, Which of the kings ever remained prosperous in his rule, throughout
all this length of time ? And, Who is he, who so conquered after his own death,
and established the mark of victory over his enemies, that he subdued every
region, place, and city, both of the Greeks and Barbarians? and beat down, by
the hidden and invisible power of (his own) right hand, that which opposed him ?

33. But31, the chief of all the things that have been mentioned, is that peace
which was, by His power, supplied to the whole earth; of which we have already
said what was proper. And, What mouth of the calumniator would not (the
consideration) close, that love and concord so ran together with His doctrine in
(effective) operation, into all nations ? and, that the peace which took place
among the nations throughout all the world, and the word, which was sown (as
seed) by Him among all nations, had formerly been so foretold by the Prophets of
God ? But a (whole) day would be too short, were I to attempt to collect and
shew within it, the open proofs of the divine power of the WORD OF GOD, the
Saviour of all, which have been put forth up to this time. So that there never
was a man at any time, no not among the Greeks, who has shewn forth such
transcendent and divine power as He has, who has been preached to every man, and
is the Saviour of all, and the |172 only (begotten) WORD OF GOD who is above
all. But, Why do I say "of men ?" when behold! no such nature as His has
appeared upon earth, even of those who have been named Gods by all nations? If
(not so), let him who wishes shew (this): let every existing Philosopher too
come forward and tell us, What God or Hero has at any period, or ever, been
heard of, who delivered the doctrine of eternal life, and of the kingdom of
heaven, --a thing not of recent occurrence,--to mankind, as this our Saviour
(has done) ? who has caused innumerable multitudes, throughout the whole
creation, to be instructed in His own doctrines of wisdom ? and has persuaded
them to follow after the life which is heavenly, and to despise that which is of
time (only) ; and to hope for the heavenly mansions, which are kept for the
souls that love God?

34. What 32 God or Hero is it, that has ever so fully arisen (like the sun) and
given light from the East even to the West by the bright rays of his doctrine,
that, immediately and with the swiftness as it were of the course of the Sun,
all the nations of the earth (thence) rendered to the one God, one and the same
service?

35. What33 God or Hero is it, who ever contended with all the gods and heroes
both of the Greeks and Barbarians, and laid down a law, that not one of them
should be thought a God ? and, having so legislated, persuaded (men of this) ?
and who, when they all afterwards waged war against Him, being one and the same,
overthrew every power opposed to Him; and shewed that He was superior to all,
both gods and heroes, that ever existed, so as to be called throughout the whole
creation of man, and by all people, the ONLY (begotten) WORD OF GOD ? |173

36. What God or Hero was it, who ever delivered to all nations dwelling on the
great element of the whole earth,--to those on the land, and on the sea34,--that
they should make a feast in holiness, both of the body and the soul, on the day
of every week which is called among the Greeks the Sun's day35? And, that they
should assemble themselves together, not that their bodies should hear-- but
their souls--that it was by means of the divine teaching, they should live ?

37. What36 God or Hero was it who, when they so made war with him, set up, as
our (Saviour) has done, such a mark of victory in opposition to his enemies ?
For they ceased not to contend both with His doctrine, and His people, from
first to last: while He, being invisible, secretly overthrew them, and advanced
His own, together |174 with the houses of God, to great glory ! But, Why should
we wish to circumscribe by words, the divine powers of the Saviour of us all,
which exceed all description ? When behold ! should we remain silent, the things
themselves would cry out to those, whose souls have ears ?

38. This37 is strange indeed, and something not to he imagined; at any period
too, it must be a singular thing (which) He brought to this world of mankind,
and, that the only Son of God should in truth, ever have appeared to those that
are on the earth:--and that the whole race of man should through Him, receive
one who should in his own (human) nature, so introduce him to the righteousness
which is true, that henceforth there should be set up throughout the whole
creation of man, places for instruction in the Divine enouncements and teaching
; and that men, barbarous and fierce, should so change their minds to
peacefulness, that the rational disposition of their souls should receive of His
virtue; and, by His means, acknowledge their Father who is in heaven, with the
Saviour of all, the ONLY (begotten) |175 WORD OF GOD, the King of all; and that
to Him, and through Him who is the Cause of every good thing, they should so
render the praises that are due, and the blessings and thanksgivings which are
right, that henceforth the righteous praises and thanksgivings, which are
suitable to the companies of the Angels that are in heaven, should also be put
up, day and night, by the inhabitants of this element of earth !

39. These acts, therefore,--pertaining to salvation, and advantageous to the
world, and to the Divine Manifestation of THE WORD OF GOD among men, as well as
innumerable others like them, on account of which he came into the world of
men38--He performed not in His usual manner, that is, incorporeally; for, He had
acted throughout the whole world secretly, and, by these his works, shewed both
to them who are in the heavens, and to them who are on the earth, His
innumerable operations. But recently, (he has done this) in a manner foreign to
His own custom. For He has, by means of a mortal vessel,--not unlike the king,
who (acts) through an Interpreter,--openly declared His edicts and methods of
government among men; in order that He might evince His providential care for
mortals, by that which was like to themselves, (and) that they might find life.
But, as it has been seen that not one, but many were the causes, why the Saviour
of all made His Divine manifestation among men; it becomes necessary, that we
should also say in a few words, in their order, why He availed himself of this
human vessel, and came for the purpose of ruling among men. How then, could the
Divine, concealed, invisible, and untangible, Essence,--that unembodied and
incorporeal mind, THE WORD OF GOD,--otherwise exhibit himself to men immersed in
the depths of evils, and the corporeal substances (of nature), seeking God upon
earth, but otherwise not finding Him;--or, being unwilling to search after the
Maker and Creator of the whole creation39, --if not by means of (some) human
compound, and in some form known to ourselves, and, as it were by an |176
Interpreter ? For otherwise, How could the eyes of the body look upon the
incorporeal nature of God ? And, How could mortal nature discover Him who is
concealed, (and) invisible, whom they knew not from the multitude of His works ?
On, this account therefore, He required a mortal vessel, a help which would
comport with the conversation (had) among men; because, this would be agreeable
to them ; for they say, "Every thing loves its like 40." For, just as some great
king might stand much in need of an Interpreter, who could enounce his words to
the inhabitants of both countries and cities, whose understanding (of languages)
was diverse; so also did THE WORD or GOD,--who was about to be for the healing
of souls,--that He should exhibit himself in a body, and upon the earth. He
would want a Mediator, not unlike an Interpreter, and a bodily compound. And
this would be some human instrument, by means of which He could make known to
men, what those concealed (properties) of the Godhead were. Nor was it (this)
alone, but also that He, the compassionate WORD OF GOD, should exhibit Himself
to those who delighted in the sense of things seen, and were seeking God by
means of inanimate Images, and carved Idols; and imagining, through (mere)
material bodies, that there was a God; but, from the infirmity and deficiency of
their minds were giving to men, mortal in their nature, the name of Gods. On
this account, He prepared for himself a Temple more holy than all ; a bodily
vessel, and sensible habitation, for the rational Power ; an Image pure, and in
every thing excellent, and more honourable than the whole of inanimated
images41. For that which was of inanimate |177 matter, and in the form of an
Image of brass, iron, gold, ivory, stone, or wood, was fabricated by the hands
of artificers of (mere) matter, altogether for the residence of Demons, and to
administer to the error of fools. But the Divine Image, variously adorned by the
wisdom of the Divine Power, partook of life and of the Essence which is
intelligent: the Image, filled with every excellence,--the Divine Image, the
habitation of THE WORD OF GOD, and the holy temple of the holy God,--was
prepared by the power of the Holy Ghost, in order that He, who resided therein,
might become known among mortal men by means of one who was their equal, as it
were by an Interpreter; but who should not fall after the manner of their
passions, nor be bound in the body, as the manner is with the soul of man : nor
yet, when appearing small (in reputation), should undergo any change on that
account as to his Godhead. For42, as the rays of the sun's light suffer nothing
from their filling every thing, nor when they permeate the unclean bodies of
mortals; so, in a far higher degree, the Power which is incorporeal, THE WORD OF
GOD, suffers nothing in its own Essence, neither is it mutilated, nor is it ever
diminished, when, incorporeal as it is, it permeates that which is corporeal. In
the same manner therefore, the Saviour of all presented himself to every man
(as) the helper and Saviour, by means of the human vessel which He put forth,
just as the musician43 (does), who is willing to shew his skill by means of his
lyre. History too among the Greeks teaches (us), that Orpheus moved by his song
every sort of animal, and pacified their angry feelings by means of a hollow
instrument, the strings of which he struck. This is moreover sung in the
assemblies of the Greeks; and it is believed, that an inanimate lyre soothed
both the animals and trees, and so changed even the oaks that they became
imitators of music. This (personage) |178 therefore, filled with all wisdom and
all prudence, THE WORD OF GOD, put forth every sort of healing for the souls of
men which had been reduced to all kinds of evil. He took into His hands the
instrument of the musician, the work of His own wisdom : this He struck with His
hand, (producing) songs and sweet strains to rational man, not to animals that
are irrational; and healed44, by the medicines of His heavenly teaching, every
kind of the fierce, both of the Greeks and Barbarians, as well as the rude and
beastlike passions of the soul; and did, as a skilful physician, shew by the
aid45 of one of their equals, and who was like to themselves,-- to the souls
which were implicated in disease, and seeking God among bodies and substances
which were elemental,--God in man ! Nor again, was He less careful as to the
body, than He was as to the soul. For He provided, that the things which He did
by means of the Body46, should be apparent to men's bodily eyes; (that is) that
they should see astonishing miracles, signs, and (other) divine powers. And
again, He preached to the hearing of the body, these doctrines through a bodily
tongue47. All these things therefore, He delivered by means of the Body which he
bore,--as it were by an Interpreter,--to those who otherwise could not,--except
only in this way,--be made sensible of His Godhead. These48 things too, were
(thus) administered by the will of His Father: He still remaining with His
Father, as He was before, immaterial, incorporeal, (and) unchanged as to His
(eternal) Essence. Nor did he suffer corruption from His |179 (former) nature;
nor was He confined by the bonds of the body ; nor was He here, only such as His
human vessel was ; nor was He restrained from being in other places of (this)
whole: on the contrary, even then, when He conversed among men, did He fill all
things: was with His Father49 and was in Him; and then also, He fully and
providentially took care of all things, whether in heaven, or on the earth. Nor
was He ever, as we are, withholden from being near to every thing; nor was He
hindered from acting, after His own divine manner. On the contrary, the things
that were of Himself He gave to man; but, those which were of man, He took not.
Of His divine power too, He provided for mortals; while from His participation
with the mortal, He received nothing. Neither50 was He who was incorporeal,
polluted when born in the body. Nor again, did He who was impervious to passion,
suffer in His (eternal) Essence, even when mortal nature had been assigned to
Him. For, neither does he who strikes the lyre become in any thing subject to
suffering, although the instrument should be broken, or the strings be cut: in
like manner too, we do not say when punishment is inflicted on the person of a
wise man, that the wisdom of the wise man, or the soul which is in his body, is
either cut off, or consumed. So, much less is it right we should affirm, that
the Power of the Divine WORD can receive any thing like loss from the sufferings
of the body. Nor, does any thing forbid our affirming that,-- since, in our
example, the rays51 of the Sun sent down from heaven to earth, permeated the
clay, mire, and every sort of impurity,--the light was therefore in no respect
polluted, although these things received light from its splendour. For the light
did not (thus) become clay, nor did the Sun become polluted, by its commixture
with (such) body; because these things are not foreign in their nature to
bodies. |180 But52 He,--who is immaterial and incorporeal, THE WORD OF GOD, who
is both the life, and intelligent light,--impels, by the divine power which is
incorporeal, every thing He approaches, both to live and to remain in this
rational light. In like manner also, the body to which this is near becomes
sanctified; and quickly does He enlighten it: all diseases too, pains and
sufferings, pass away (from it) ; and that which was defective is supplied from
(His) fulness. On this account He gave up His whole life, at one time exhibiting
His image under sufferings like those common to ourselves; at another, revealing
himself, God THE WORD, in great and astonishing works and acts, as God. And,
when He foretold something by His prophetic words which should come to pass, He
likewise exhibited Him who was invisible to the many, THE WORD OF GOD, by works,
and by astonishing deeds; by signs, wonders, and extraordinary powers (put
forth) : and again, instructing the souls of men by the divine doctrines, He
prepared them to draw near to the heavenly city which is above53, and to hasten
to those their fellow-citizens there, as to their own brothers and equals :
also, to know their Father who is in heaven, and the excellency of their kind,
which is of the Essence that is intellectual and rational: teaching them also,
that they should no more err, but henceforth so live in all purity and
holiness,--so (I say), that they might make their departure hence to that place
easy, and without hindrance; and, that they should be prepared to receive
forthwith, with the companies of the holy Angels, everlasting life with God the
King of all, and the light which cannot be described, and the kingdom of heaven.

40. Thus therefore, the ONLY (begotten) WORD or GOD, who availed Himself of a
human instrument, and set up His own Interpreter, administered every thing for
the healing of men by the will of His Father; still remaining immaterial and
incorporeal, just as He formerly was, with His Father54. By means of a man also.
He shewed forth |181 God to man, through mighty acts and wonderful works. In the
divine Power and in true Wisdom, He scattered His doctrine (as seed); and taught
these things, with others allied to them. Nor became He inferior, from what He
did: nor, (as so) doing, became He the less dignified from what He taught and
delivered.--The doctrines of life and words of light, He laid not down in any
book of paper, nor in the perishing skins of animals; but He inscribed on the
very souls of His disciples, as upon intellectual tablets, the doctrines
respecting the kingdom of God. In the whole of His instructions on heavenly
things, hidden enouncements, and which had never before been heard, were
delivered. It was also by means of these things, that He taught that the souls
which were on the earth, were beloved of God; delivered the memorial of the life
that is with God the Father, in heaven; and also, stirred (men) up to cry in
prayer and to say, "Our Father who art in heaven," and, that they should be
cognizant of their family which is above. If then, thou art desirous of being a
partaker in the contemplation of these things, there is no feeling of jealousy
hindering thy approach to the hearing of the Scriptures of His Disciples, and to
the knowing of His record in all its parts, both as to His deeds and words ; so
that thou mayest in truth, view God, and THE WORD OF GOD ; and see, how He
existed by means of an Interpreter with men, in the example of (His) sufferings
; how He, who was immortal, conversed with mortals; how the Image (of God),
which is incorporeal, became vested with the nature which is human: and, how the
Image of God, which was in Him, moved (Him): how He sent forth enouncements, and
made public the Divine teaching; and (how) the Saviour of all, healed every sort
of disease and infirmity: and, how ready He was, in whom there was no sin, to
good works; and, how those things which eyes had |182 not seen, and which had
not entered into the hearing of men, He delivered in mighty deeds; and thus made
His Disciples to approach the very summit of excellency with God; made them wise
through the power which cannot be described, and constituted them true preachers
of His Godhead. Thus again He healed those, whose souls were corrupted by every
sort of sin; at one time, inflicting the sufferings (which were) helpful and
right55; at another, delivering a view of the mystery and doctrine of His
Godhead to those who were able to receive it. And, What need is there we should
say, how easily and well, and with (what) just rebuke, He received those who
were enemies to the truth : at once healing and instructing even these, by the
open enouncement of His words ? and, how meekly he presented His person to all
as a helper, and as long suffering and passive ? as a Physician also, not of
souls only, but also of bodies ? On this account, the name of JESUS was
previously imposed on our Saviour56;--which is a Hebrew word, designating JESUS
as the Physician57 of all. Now, the (propriety of the) imposition of the name
designating healing on Jesus, He evinced by the works (which He did); for He
instructed the souls of men by the Heavenly doctrine, while he healed the Body
of all sufferings, pains, and infirmities, by the power of the healing WORD. At
one time, He cleansed the leprous in body58: at another, He cast out by (His)
command the Demons that (possessed) men59: and, again at another, He freely
healed those who had been reduced by disease ! At one time also, to him-- whose
body was debilitated, and all his limbs powerless,-- |183 He said by word only,
"Arise, take up thy bed, and walk60;" and this (man) did what He commanded ! And
again at another time, He gave the perception of light to the Blind61! And thus
again, at another, a woman62,--who had been afflicted with an issue of blood,
and had during the revolution of many years been reduced by her complaint,
seeing that great companies were round about Him, and not allowing her to kneel
and pray that she might be healed of her complaint,--thought, that if she could
but touch the border of His garment, (she should be healed) ; she accordingly
pressed in, and touched the border of his garment; and at once, she was both
healed of the evil, and immediately became healthy; bearing (away with her) a
mighty proof of the power of THE WORD OF GOD ! Another man63 also, the servant
of a king,--because his child was grievously afflicted,--fell down before Him,
and He forthwith took and healed him ! There was another again, the chief of a
synagogue64 of the Jews, whose daughter (He restored) ; but this was after she
was dead ! And, What need can there be, that we should tell how another arose65
by the power of the Saviour of all, who had been dead four days, hearing only
the voice of the all life-giving WORD which called him ? Or, how He made His
paths upon the sea as upon dry land, causing His Vessel to traverse the back of
the waters66? Or, how67 when His Disciples were sailing and the storm was
against them, He rebuked the sea, the storm, and the winds;--gave the
commandment by word; and they were instantly silent, so that they were wrought
upon, as by the voice of their Lord ? (How) He so filled68 and satisfied five
thousand men,--when there was with them a company of many women and
children,--with five loaves, that they took up an entire remainder which would
suffice to fill twelve baskets ! To Whom is not this astonishing ? and Does it
(not) likewise challenge the inquiry which relates to his unseen power ? |184

41. Let any one therefore who will, take up the true faith, together with the
open proof of the revelation of our Saviour's Divinity, from many other great
miracles; and particularly from this,--if he will also consider,--that He
foreknew by the divine power what should come to pass, and openly foretold the
great change to His better (doctrine) which should take place among men
throughout the world; and also predicted, that He himself would be the doer of
this: and from these very deeds, let such place faith in (this) His promise.
Many other great and evident proofs of His Godhead moreover, (afforded) in many
things similar to these, will any one, carefully enquiring, find from His
predictions with their fulfilment: which we ourselves shall also examine in this
work at the proper time. But, that which we now have before our eyes,--that our
discourse may not lengthen itself greatly out, so as to detain thee upon all His
mighty works--is the death, which (His) Interpreter,--the clothing of THE WORD
OF GOD, and the Image that was openly revealed,--underwent, and which (event)
every one acknowledges.

42. This His death therefore, which has been made public, was (so) accompanied
by the miracle, that it was unlike that of the rest of mankind. For it was not,
that He perished by disease, by strangulation, or by fire; or was, even on the
cross itself, cut off by the sword, as a mark of victory, in the manner of
others who are evil-doers; nor yet, did he suffer less than any one of those
whom they usually put to death; for He suffered a death of violence: but He
himself alone, by his own will, delivered up His Vessel to those (his) accusers;
and forthwith He raised Himself from the earth ;--

43. For said (the Evangelist,) "He cried out greatly, and gave up His Spirit to
His Father69: and (so) effected a release from His soul, and made His departure
from the body. On this account, He had previously delivered this same His death
to his disciples, when teaching (them) and saying; "No man taketh my life from
me;" and, "I have power to lay it down:" and again, "I have power |185 to take
it up70: and again, "I am the good shepherd, and I know my own, and my own know
me; and I lay down my life for my sheep71." The cause of His death too, He
establishes in a few words, when saying, that, "Unless the grain of wheat fall
into the earth and die, it remaineth alone ; but, if it die, it bringeth forth
much fruit72."

44. Having then, delivered representations of this sort respecting His own
death, He effected the release from his soul, and made (His) departure from the
body. After this, His body was taken up by his acquaintances, and was consigned
to (its) due interment. Again on the third day, He resumed that (being) from
which He had before, by the exertion of His own will, departed. And again, He
shewed to his Disciples the selfsame person, both in body and substance, just as
it formerly was:-- to them (I say) with whom He conversed a little, and with
whom He remained a short time. He was then taken up whither He was before : and,
before their eyes, did He make his departure and ascension to heaven, in order
that they, to whom He had delivered (His) pledge as to deeds, might be made the
Teachers of the fear of God who is above, to all nations.

45. Now73, What can be wanting after these things, except that we should state
the cause of THIS, which was the chief of all ? I (now) speak of the close of
His life, which has been spoken of by all; of the manner of His passion, and of
the great miracle of His resurrection after |186 death. After viewing these
things then, let us now come again to our proofs; and let us confirm these same
by open testimonies. He availed Himself therefore, of a mortal Vessel,--for the
reasons already given,--as of an Image becoming the Deity; and this He both put
forth into life, and by means of this, as some great king by means of an
interpreter, He performed every thing that was worthy of the Divine Power.

46. For, if He had done otherwise,--after His dealings among men,--so as not to
have been seen, and had suddenly taken flight, and secretly stolen away His
Interpreter; or had, in escaping, been careful to convey away His Image from
death; or again, had led on that mortal (being) by means of His person, to
corruption and perishing ; He would have seemed to the many (but) as a spectre.

47. Nor could He have done any thing, which it was right He should do, as being
the LIFE, the WORD and the POWER of God; having given up His Interpreter to
corruption and ruin.

48. Nor, could those things which He did against the Demons, (or) in His
contention with death, have been worthy of completion.

49. Nor could it have been known, where He remained.

50. Nor could it have been believed by those, to whom He had not delivered (it)
;--nor had it been seen,--that His nature was superior to death.

51. Nor, could He have delivered mortality from its own (mortal) nature.

52. Nor, could He have persuaded His disciples to despise death. |187

53. Nor, could He have established a hope of the life that is with God after
death, with those who drew near for (the reception of) His doctrine.

54. Nor, could He have fulfilled the promises of His own words; nor have given
to the prophecies, which went before respecting Him, a due fulfilment.

55. Nor74, could He have overcome in the last conflict of all, which was opposed
to the death that exists in all these things. For it was above all things right,
that this mortal vessel should, after it had completed the service which it
rendered to THE WORD OF GOD, obtain to itself an end worthy of God, (and that
this) be through this same ordinance of death. For, there were two things
resting upon (this) consummation ; (viz.) either, that He should deliver up (His
vessel) to entire corruption and destruction, and (so) make His whole conflict,
and egress from this world, matter of shame; or, that He should afford proof,
that this same was superior to death; and (so), by the divine power, make
immortal that which was mortal. The first however, was incompatible with the
promise. For, it is not the property of fire, to be cold; nor, of light, that it
be dark : neither is it of life, that it should die; nor, of THE WORD OF GoD,
that He should act with impropriety. For, What cause could He have, who promised
life to others, for being unmindful of His own vessel when subject to
corruption:--for delivering up His Image to destruction, and for surrendering
the Interpreter of His own Godhead, to the corruption of death ?--for Him to do
so, who had |188 previously promised to those, who should take refuge in Him,
the life which is impervious death ? This (one) then, of two things was
necessary :--this, I say, that He should shew him (His Interpreter) to be
superior to death. And, How was it, that it was necessary He should do this ?
Secretly, and by stealth ? or, openly before all men, and manifestly? But, if
this fact had taken place covertly and secretly; it would then have remained
unknown, and unprofitable to man. But, as it was preached (to all), and heard of
by all; it afforded to all, the advantage which (grew) out of the miracle. Well
therefore,--because it was necessary He should shew His vessel to be superior to
death,-- did He also do this, not secretly, but before the eyes of (all) men. He
escaped not from death; for this would have been pusillanimous, and it would
have been thought that He was inferior to death. But, by this contention with
Death as with a contemporary, He established the immortality of that which was
mortal; and, this last conflict which was for the salvation of all, secured (for
all) the life which is immortal. For this was done, in the first place, against
the Demons, for the destruction of the error of a multitude of Gods, when He
began to be known among men. It also appeared particularly necessary to Him,
that, as He was to make His circuits among the flocks of men, He should
immediately, (and) in the presence of all, drive out the enemies and haters of
mankind,--as being the princes of wickedness, and like to cruel and fierce
beasts, those (I say),--who had, from former times and falsely, been esteemed
Gods. He therefore, |189 THE WORD OF GOD, immediately led out His Vessel into
the land of these enemies and haters,--that (land I say), which the words of
mystery style "The Desert" as (being) destitute of every good thing; and there
"forty days, and as many nights75," He wrought and performed those things of
which no mortal knew, and which the eyes of man did not see. The testimonies
however of prophecy teach, that to these things the declarations of the
prophetical Scriptures agree, where it is written, that "Jesus was led of the
Holy Ghost into the desert, that he might be tempted of Satan. And He was there
forty days and forty nights76, and was with the wild beasts77." And, What are
these but the |190 princes of the Demons, whom the Holy Ghost has said are,--and
has named by way of figure,--"Serpents" "Adders" "Lions" and "Dragons" on
account, of the similitude to the viciousness of each of these: (saying) "Thou
shalt tread on the serpent and adder, and shalt trample on the lion and the
dragon78?" The other things also which were done in the desert, this declaration
intimates, saying thus in the person of the Vessel which He bore, " His truth
shall gird thee (as) a weapon: neither shalt thou be afraid of the fear of the
night, nor of the arrow that flieth by day; nor of the thing that walketh in
darkness: nor of the wind that bloweth at noon. Thousands shall fall at thy
side, and tens of thousands at thy right hand: but they shall not touch thee79."

56. These things have been said in parables and mystically, on the conflict
which (took place) in the desert between the Vessel of salvation, and the
invisible spirits. During all these nights therefore, and days in like number,
He contended with the whole race (of Demons) that was beneath the air. Nor was
it tardily that THE WORD OF GOD drove these out, nor, that He pursued the whole
congregation of the enemy; nor, that (He did this) as God in his abstract and
unembodied power, but, by means of the body which He took. Because the whole
race of man had, from ancient times, been subjected to these as to Gods: on this
account therefore, principally, He subjected all the families of the Demons to
this (His Vessel). For it was right, that He should make him who had been
conquered, and iniquitously subdued to his enemies, not only (man's) Deliverer,
but also the Conqueror of his enemies; and that He (THE WORD) should shew, |191
that His Friend, whom He had made in His own Image and similitude, was, on
account of his participation in THE WORD, superior to the Demons who were
formerly thought to be Gods; just as it is written in the words of mystery80
(the Scriptures).

57. Because then, the Saviour of us all had completed the conflict which was
opposed to these (spirits), He went up thence, clothed (as it were) with
victory, entered upon the life common to men, and delivered their souls: having
relieved them from the bonds of the Demons: and, having revealed to His
Disciples those other secret things,--as well as these which he performed in
opposition to the enemies that are unseen,--He thus spoke, and He established
(it), "Be of good courage, I have overcome the world81." The manner too of His
victory, He taught by those things which He said to His Disciples in parables
(viz.): "No man can enter the house of a strong man and spoil his goods, unless
he first bind the. strong man; and then he shall spoil his house82." He
therefore bound the strong man, and drove out the whole race of Demons. And
forthwith, He (so) wrought on the souls of those who were His, that He freed
them from the bitter state, slavery, and errror, of a multiplicity of Gods. This
His first conflict however against the Demons, was completed at the outset of
His manifestation among men. But the last (His crucifixion), was the
commencement of His sovereignty over Death. |192 For it was right that He,--who
was superior to (that which was) no God, and to the error of Demons, and, had
been attached to GOD THE WORD,--should receive the honour compatible with this
His deed (viz.) the victory over Death. For the Demons, which had assembled
together against Him, with their Head, and with the spirits residing above the
earth in the air, (and) invisible to mortal eyes, turned their backs (in flight)
in His first conflict (with them) ; directing their view to the second, and
waiting for His last egress, and departure by death, from the world, which they
expected would be like that of other men. For, they had no notion that the
mortal nature could ever exist, which should be superior to death ; or, that
Death was (not) the common king of all those, who had once experienced the birth
of mortals. They thought too, that this was, of all evils, that which no man
could either avoid, or evade. But, immediately after the signal mark of His
first victory over the Demons, He engaged also in conflict with Death. And83,
just as one wishing to shew that some vessel was incombustible and its nature
superior to fire, could in no other way establish this astonishing fact, except
by placing the one which he held in his hand in the fire, and then taking it out
of the fire, safe and sound; so also THE WORD OF GOD, the life-giver of all,
willing to make it known that the mortal Vessel, of which He had availed Himself
for the redemption of man, was superior to death, and, to shew that He made it
to participate in His own life, conducted the matter both well and virtuously as
it was most convenient. He left the body for a short time, and consigned
mortality to death, for the rebuking of its (sinful) nature ; and again, |193 He
soon raised up the same from death, for the purpose of proving that the Divine
power, which was by Him,-- that eternal life, (I say) which was preached by
Him,-- was superior to every kind of death.

58. This84 therefore was the first cause. The second was, to shew that the
Divine power resided in the human body. Because men had formerly made gods for
themselves of those who were men mortal in reality, had been overcome by death,
(and) in whom the last common extremity had been witnessed ; and had named those
heroes and gods, who had been taken away by death; on this account therefore, He
happily shewed Himself; and for this cause, the same compassionate WORD OF GOD
exhibited to men, the nature which was superior to death, and brought in
mortality--after its dissolution--to a second life. He also afforded to all, the
means of viewing the signal victory of life immortal over mortality; and taught
(them) by (His) death to confess Him alone to be the God of truth, who had (so)
bound the crown85 of victory over death, about His own head.

59. The third cause of (His) death was, the redemption that is (taught) in
hidden (mystical) terms, which are these in effect: He was the sacrifice which
was consigned to death, for the souls of the whole race (of man) : the sacrifice
(I say) which was slain for the whole flock of |194 mankind: the sacrifice
turning (men) back from the error of Demons. The sacrifice therefore,--the great
offering, and that which was superior to all (other) sacrifices,--was the Body
of our Saviour which was sacrificed as a Lamb, for the whole race of mankind:
and it came up for the souls of all the nations that had been held in the
impiety of their forefathers, the error of the Demons. And thence, the whole
impure and unholy power of Demons was destroyed ; this whole vain and earthly
system of error, was instantly dissolved and ruined by a superior power! He
therefore who was, from among men, the sacrifice of Redemption,--the bodily
Vessel of THE WORD OF GOD,-- was sacrificed for the flock of all mankind. And
this is He, who was, by the accusation of men, delivered up as a sacrifice to
death; of whom the Divine words exclaim, speaking at one time thus: "Behold! The
Lamb of God: behold! He (it is) who taketh away the sins of the world86." And at
another, thus previously enouncing: "As a Lamb He was led to the slaughter; and,
as a sheep before the shearer, He was silent87." And the same (Divine word)
teaches the cause, saying: " Truly He underwent our sufferings, and bore our
pains; but we considered Him bruised and stricken of God, and humiliated. He was
slain because of our sins, and was humbled because of our iniquity. The
chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes are we healed. All we
have strayed like sheep, and (each) man has turned to his part; and the Lord has
made to meet in him the sins of us all88." This bodily vessel therefore of THE
WORD |195 OF GOD, was, for these reasons, sacrificed. But He, the great High
Priest who officiates as Priest to God, the King of all, and Lord of all, is
another distinct from the sacrifice, (viz.) THE WORD OF GOD, THE POWER OF GOD,
and THE WISDOM OF GOD : He too, after no long time, raised mortality from death,
making him (so raised) by participation, the beginning of the redemption of us
all, and of that immortal life which is with God. Him too, (thus) vested with
the mark of victory over death, and the deeds of the Demons; of those human
sacrifices which had been delivered down from ancient times, did He constitute
the Destroyer, for the sake of all mankind. Hence also was the name of Messiah
(Christ) given to Him; which, among the Hebrews, attaches89 in like manner to
the chief priest. He therefore received the two names: the name of Jesus,
implying the sacrifice of salvation; and that of High Priest, the WORD OF GOD,
who officiates as Priest for us all:--the custom of the Hebrews intimating
(this) of the Messiah (Christ.)

60. After the things which have been said, the latter was the great cause of
(His) death, viz. the Redemption spoken of90: because, it was necessary to the
disciples that |196 they should see, with their own eyes, the life which was
after death, He (thus) openly taught them to place their hope in this second
birth. And, because He also encouraged them to be strong in the yoke of
righteousness, He well delivered this, in order that they might, with their own
eyes, see it. For it was necessary for these, who were about to be brought to
the life of righteousness, that, first of all, they should receive this most
necessary doctrine by means of open view; and much more, for those who were soon
to preach it throughout the whole creation, and to cause the knowledge of God,
(so) given by them, to arise (as the sun) in all nations, (and) among all men.
It was necessary, that these men should receive the strongest persuasion of the
life which is after death, so that they might accept fearlessly, and unmoved in
their minds by death, the conflict against the error of many gods. For, if they
had not been taught to despise death, neither would they have ever been prepared
to approach afflictions. On this account, He the more particularly armed them
against the power of death. Nor was it by precepts and words (only), that He
delivered to them this doctrine: nor, in persuasive terms or similitudes, that
He composed (his discourses) as men do, on the immortality of the soul; but He
shewed them in the deed itself, the signal mark of the victory (obtained) over
death.

61. For death had been, from ancient times, fearful to all men as the destroyer
of our mortal race; its power being considered the undoing of the whole nature
of man, both soul and body. Nor was there ever a man, who could relieve human
nature from this fearful being. All were pierced, |197 (as it were,) small and
great, Princes and Subjects, Kings at once and People, as well as the
Inhabitants and Societies of all nations and families, by the fear of death. Nor
had mankind any solace for this evil, either in word, or form, or manner of
life, opinion of the wise, writing of the Ancients, prophecy of the Prophets, or
revelation of Angels. He was superior to all, supreme over all, and victorious
over all! Death, like an inflated boaster,--who had subjected to himself the
whole mortal race,--was conversant with every species of iniquity, both the
impurities of blood-shedding, and the deeds which were unrighteous; with the
error also of every sort of vile (and) ungodly impiety. For, of all these things
he was the Cause; and, as if there were again no existence after death, the many
did in their conduct the things which deserved death, and as if unsubdued by
(the fear of) any impending punishment. On account of this dissoluteness
(resulting) from death, they lived a life which (in reality) was no life: they
entertained not God in their thoughts, nor the righteous judgment of God : nor
did they cherish the remembrance of the rational Essence of their own souls.
They were conversant (only) with the one hard Ruler, Death; and were reconciled
to the corruption resulting from this, which was the undoing of their whole
soul. On this account it was, that they gave the name of Pluto91,-- the god of
riches,--to Death : and Death became their god ! And not he alone, but also
those precious things which were in his presence, and contributed to a life of
lust, became their Gods ! The very lust of the body therefore, became to them a
God ! the common aliments, a God ! the seed which fell into the earth, a God !
the pleasant blossoms of this, a God ! the flowers of the apples, a God ! the
pleasure that was in drunkenness, a God ! the love of the body, a God ! and the
very lust of these things ! Hence, the mysteries of Demeter and of Proserpine:
as also the rape of the Maid92 to Hell; and again, her return. Hence the feasts
of Dionysus (Bacchus)--and of Hercules--who was overcome as by some great god by
drunkenness ! Hence the mysteries of the adultery of Mars and Venus ! Hence the
|198 madness of Jupiter after women, and his love of Ganymede! the rambling
stories about Gods lovers of lust, and attached to the vilest affections! And of
all these, was Death the (originating) Cause: for they believed Death to be the
end and conclusion of all, the dissolution and corruption both of bodies and
souls; and that there was no other life, except this of the body, and which is
corporeal:--living a life worse than that of the whole irrational nature of
beasts! On these accounts, it became the desire of the universal King, THE WORD
OF GOD, at the intimation of His merciful Father, and for the purpose of
affording help to these, to hasten,--as a king great in mercy,--and to undertake
the reprehension of Death, by means of human nature; being as He was, THE LIFE,
THE WORD, and THE POWER. OF GOD. Nor was it but that help should be obtained,
that He caused that fearful being among men to be reproved: on this account, He,
who was incorporeal,--availing Himself of human armoury, and of a mortal
body,--by means of mortality overcame mortality. Hence His primary mystery, that
of His Body, was instituted; and hence, the signal mark of the victory of the
Cross; hence too, the commemoration of the life which is eternal and imniortal,
He named His remembrance. Of the armoury which is mortal, He availed Himself,
and exhibited that greatest of miracles to all men, the mark of victory of
eternal life, which He established in opposition to Death. For, He gave up
mortality to be food for the beasts93; and He himself was forthwith affixed to
the cross of crucifixion, in order that to all might become known the nature of
mortality. Nor was that which was done concealed by any means; neither from men,
|199 nor from Demons, nor from the Powers which are superior. For it was
necessary, that all should take an accurate view of mortality, as in a great
theatre94, when He (thus) testified of the nature of His (human) person ; and
afterwards (see) Death coming in like a fierce beast: and (also see), why it was
that it slew Him : and (that) then, the Power of life came in after Death, and
again established for all the victory which is over Death, when he had thus made
that which was mortal, immortal. The Power therefore, which had taken hold of
him, (viz.) THE WORD OF GOD, left the Body for a short time; and it was
suspended for a short space on the Cross, and became a corpse. But the WORD,
which gives life to all, became not a corpse. He therefore (thus) attested the
mortal nature of his Person. This corpse too, of which Death had (so) taken
possession, was now borne by men ; and--being worthy of the usual care--was
afterwards consigned, according to the laws of men, to burial. The grave itself
was a cave which had recently been hewn out; a cave that had now been cut out in
a rock, and which had experienced (the reception of) no other body. For it was
necessary that it, which was itself a wonder, should have the care of that
Corpse only. For it is astonishing to see even this rock, standing out erect and
alone in a level land, and having only one cavern within it; lest, had there
been many, the miracle of Him who overcame Death should have been obscured. The
Corpse was therefore laid there, the Vessel of the living WORD ; and a great
stone held (the entrance of) the cave. And much did Death exult in this, as if,
behold ! he had (now) taken even this (Personage) under his power, together with
those whom he had ever (so taken). But, when the period of three days had not
yet passed, the same life shewed itself, after the rebuke which was sufficient
against Death95. For, if He had |200 risen earlier (and) immediately, He would
not then have been believed to have been dead. But, since He was (thus) in
reality raised, He had also in reality died; and had, for a time, been in
reality subject to Death ; then also did the all-life-giving WORD OF GOD evince
the hope that is laid up for all men, by means of the second birth of this
selfsame mortal (body) !

62. What things then came to pass after these, as to their being (actually)
performed, it is not my intention henceforward to be thy teacher. Those who saw
them will be the witnesses best fitted for the truth (in this respect); those (I
say) who, from having seen the acts themselves, did, both by their blood and
persons, attest their faith in Him; and who, by the power of Him, to whom they
gave their testimony, filled the whole creation with the righteousness which was
preached by them. Those therefore, who were spectators of the things then done,
and who saw with their own eyes the Second Birth which became theirs 96, have
delivered (this) by their own testimonies. It was not indeed, that the things
done had been heard of by them, as far as word or enunciation (went); but, they
had been seen, and accurately felt by those who testified respecting them: and
on this account, these same, who had by open vision and in reality apprehended
(these things), and had received the signal mark of victory over Death, learned
well to be daring against Death; and taught this same thing to their Disciples,
(viz.) that they had received from their Saviour, the truth pertaining to life
immortal. And thus also, was the whole mortal race thence refreshed (as freed)
from the fear of Death: because he, who had formerly been terrific, had suffered
rebuke in the presence of all; and the life which was after death, bad (now)
received certain credibility ; not from the artificial enouncements of Sophists,
nor from the discovery of persuasive words; but, by the deeds which came forth
to light. Nor again, did (men) as formerly tremble at death, but they laughed
much and greatly in the hour of this fearful being; so much so |201 that they
even followd after death, on account of (their) desire of that immortal life,
which should succeed it.

63. Hence indeed, originated the care of mankind for the life which is holy and
pure, and the diligence to attain to every (sort of) excellency : the (constant)
recollection of God, and of the many enouncements respecting the righteousness
of truth, and of the turning away from vice and ungodliness. Nor was it this
only, but also the true notion of the life which is after death, was stirred up
among all men, and (so was) the right and true state of mind, respecting the
righteous judgment of God, the King of all. On this account did the whole race
of man,--which had (now) been changed to a state of virtue by means of
enouncements not to be described,--henceforward spit in the faces of the Idols,
trample under foot the unjust laws of the Demons, and laugh at the ancient
traditionary system of error of their forefathers.

64. Henceforward therefore, men became so instructed in the heavenly doctrine,
and the enouncements respecting the knowledge of God, that they no more
reverentially viewed this visible creation with the bodily eyes; nor, when
looking upwards and seeing the Sun, Moon, and Stars, did they address their
veneration to them: but they acknowledged Him who is beyond these;--Him who is
secret and invisible,--Him who is the Creator of all, and the Maker of every
thing: even as they had been taught to fear Him alone.

65. Nor did he, who had been instructed in the new doctrine, again imagine as
formerly, that this nature of the body, which is fleeting and corruptible,
inanimate (in itself,) and irrational;--nor, that the primitive elements, Earth,
Water, Air, and Fire,--were Gods; since he had also been taught, that the
superiority of his own soul greatly excelled these.

66. Nor is he as formerly, a slave to his own lusts; nor is he overcome by the
baser desires: for he was then vanquished, and could not overcome: (nor97) can
he, who has |202 been commanded to be careful to root up the sin (of idolatry)
from his mind and soul, together with every evil desire and folly, again
fabricate Gods to himself, or, even dare to look upon a woman lustfully.

67. Nor will he again as formerly, venerate the Interpreter 98 of his own soul,
or dare to call it a God: nor will he name his own mind Minerva99; nor indeed,
any of those other things, which are in like manner but for an hour; but Him
alone who is beyond all, the WORD OF GOD, the Artificer of all, the WISDOM OF
THE GOD OF ALL, will he recognize and bless, as his Saviour.

68. Nor again as in former times, does he,--who has subscribed to the one who
alone is superior to Death; to the Conqueror, who has possessed himself of the
signal mark of Victory over the power of Death ; to his Saviour ; --give the
names and appellations of Heroes and Gods, to mortals who left this world in
shame, and surrendered their lives to the dominion of Death.

69. Nor again as in former times, will he revere inanimate Idols. Nor will he
honour the nature which is irrational, and of Beasts, through that fear of
Demons which is out of nature. But, he will laugh at the error of his
forefathers, and will turn his face from their manner (of life), which was
destitute both of the knowledge of God, and of the contemplation (of this).

70. Nor will he again as in former times, express terror at the images of evil
Demons, nor at the vain and erroneous phantasms of earthly spirits:--he (I say)
who |203 is constrained by the prevailing power of THE ONE WORD the King of all,
has been taught to undo through Him, the whole race of the accusers of men, and
(so) to abolish and expel, both from souls and bodies, these (causes of)
injuries.

71. Nor will he as formerly, again pollute himself with libations, fumes, blood,
and sacrifices; nor yet with the sacrifices of irrational animals: much less
will he delight himself with the slaughter of men, and with human sacrifices. He
has been taught, that God stands in need of nothing.--Nor will he delight in
bodily matter, nor in the fumes of earthly sacrifices; but only in the
enlightened mind, in purity of soul, and in holiness of life; in the sacrifices
also which are without smoke and blood: those which are in the words of the
mysteries: those (I say) which the Saviour of all has appointed to be delivered
throughout the whole creation of man, for a remembrance of Himself100. |204

72. Nor again will he, who has been taught by the words of his Saviour, to
"mortify his members that are on the earth101" dare, as formerly, to give the
title of gods to the aliments of the body, and to drunkenness; nor yet to the
lusts and passions.

73. Nor again will he,--who has subscribed to the only One who is above all, the
life-giving WORD OF God, who is his Saviour, and the Conqueror of Death,--be
afraid of the solution of his soul, from the body which (now) accompanies it.
Nor will he call Death, God.

74. With all these instructions of righteousness therefore, will he be armed who
has been taught in the new doctrine. Nor will he, in opposition to the truth,
give in |205 to those who dare to contend with God; but will stand up, in the
mind (so) confirmed, against fire and sword; will bear up in the presence of
fierce beasts, of the depths of the sea, and of every other terror of death.
Those too, who in their natures are (mere) children and women, will sport with
that death which was formerly (so) grievous, and the hearing about which was
(so) dreadful. Barbarians at once and Greeks, who have received the powerful
persuasion respecting the life which is immortal, by means of the resurrection
of our Saviour, do follow after the life of that better wisdom, the fear of God,
the signal mark of their victory over death, and of the eternal life which
follows, having subscribed to their Saviour.

75. 102 Hence it is, that this rational race of man,-- since it has been its lot
to reside on the earth,--this same (I say) acts henceforth according to its
nature; being taught to live in the remembrance of God, in the fulness of every
good, and in accordance with the prediction of the prophets, who, many years ago
(inspired) from above, thus previously preached : "All the ends of the earth
shall remember themselves, and be turned to the Lord their God; and before Him
shall worship all the families of the nations: because the kingdom is the
Lord's, and He is Governour over the Gentiles103."

76. Hence, places of instruction have been established throughout the whole
creation of man ; so that the words of God, the doctrine of purity of life and
of the fear of God, are preached in the hearing of all nations.

77. Hence, in every city and place, congregations (assembled) from among all,
ascribe, in songs of victory, honour to the all-life-giving WORD of God.

78. Hence, the hymns which are suitable to the assemblies of Angels in heaven,
even the race of mankind tenders to God the King of all. And
henceforth,--together |206 with those spirits, the intelligent and unembodied
powers that are with God who is above all; those also, whose lot it is to reside
below on this element of earth, as also the rational souls of the just,--do, by
means of the body, as by an instrument of music, send forth the hymns which are
becoming, and the blessings which are due, to their one Saviour, the cause of
every good. And that, which never (before) existed, the fruit which is due to
God the universal King, is now daily rendered (to Him) throughout the whole
creation of man, by every race as by one general agreement, and at the same
befitting hours and seasons104.

79. Those genealogies of the Demons, and stories about the Gods, which are now
superannuated, perished when (so) consigned to oblivion. But, the word of Christ
is renewed, and in (vigorous) youth with all. Now are the Divine Laws and
Lessons preached throughout the whole earth, and they succeed in purifying all
men. The instruction too, of the fear of God in truth, has filled all places,
both of the Barbarians and the Greeks. Now do those of foreign, as well as those
of many, languages, send forth in one manner of life, and with one consent, the
ascriptions of blessing which are becoming, to the Creator of all:--one
enouncement, the same Law, and one mystery105, suitable to God: and to this same
conduct do they adhere. Now has there been established, throughout the whole
creation, one combination of souls, and one accordance of doctrine. And hence,
at one moment of time do those whose lot it is to reside together in the east,
along with those at the setting of the Sun, glorify, by means of the same
doctrines, the One God who is beyond all, the Lord of the whole world. Nor do
they subscribe to any other, except only to the Christ of God, who is the cause
of their happiness. Those also, who have possession of the northern parts,
together with those who are in the south, at once call Him THE SAVIOUR. And, so
do they honour God in the same (forms of) words, that no difference will |207
again soon be made--although it might be imagined as to speech,--between the
Barbarian and the Greek106; nor, that the Greek be a person to be distinguished
from the Barbarian; for with God "there is neither Barbarian nor Greek107." For
every one fearing God, is (here) a wise man. And now Egyptians, Syrians,
Scythians, Italians, Moors108, Persians, and Hindoos, all and at once, have
be-become wise by the doctrines of Christ. In these things too are they all, at
once made wise, and (so) instructed, as to be intrepid against Death; to despise
the things of this life, and to put forth the one good hope, which is in the
promise of the word of our Saviour. But they also learn, that they shall receive
that life of the soul which is immortal, and which has henceforth been promised
to them as a deposit, in the habitation of the circle of the heavens, and in the
kingdom of God. This promise, their Saviour confirmed by deeds in His conflict
with Death ; by which He proved to his Disciples, that Death which had
(hitherto) been so fearful to all men, was nothing. The life moreover, which had
been promised by Him, He established by open view to their very eyes; so that
they should even see it; and made this His Image (body), by its resurrection,
the commencement of our hope,--of the imperishable life of our bodies, of the
soul as being immortal, and of our greatness as like to that of the Angels.

80. The deeds therefore, pertaining to Redemption and affording aid to the
world, as to the Revelation of THE WORD OF GOD among men, are these. If however,
any one require a greater abundance, so as to be supplied with many other proofs
of the Divine power (in this respect), personal leisure will be requisite, for
the examination of the things which have been written respecting Him. Of these I
will select a few from the writings |208 of His Disciples,--which he previously
preached as predicting the things which should be done by Him,--in proof of his
Godhead: and will so lay before those, who do not acknowledge the conclusiveness
of my former statements, this as the last (and greatest). The End of the Third
Book (of Eusebius) of Caesarea.

[Selected footnotes. Notes concerned only with points of the Syriac and large
chunks of Greek have been omitted] 1. 1 See also Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. iv.
p. 10. seq. recurred to again, Book v. par. 52.

2. 2 Alluding to what had been said above, about the successors of Alexander,
Book ii. sect. 77. Matter nearly allied to that in this paragraph, will be found
in the Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. i. p. 178. seq. also, in the Demonstratio
Bvangelica, Lib. HI. near the end, and above, Book ii. sect. 66.

3. 3 Alluding to the judgments, &c. spoken of above. Book ii. par. 80.

4. 4 Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. i. p. 178. D.

5. 3 Ps.. Lxxiii. 8, according to the Peschito.

6. 4 Ib. ver. 7.

7. 5 Both these places are cited by Origen, Philocalia, cap. i. p. 4. Edit.
Spencer.

8. 6 Is. ii. 4. according to the Peschito, [...]. A large number of predictions
to this effect will be found collected in the Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. capp.
i. ii.—I will remark here, that, from the manner in which sentiments, similar to
those occurring in this work, are given elsewhere by our author, this was
probably his first production.

9. 7 So Lactantius, who was contemporary with our author: " Atqui impleta esse
implerique quotidie illorum" (Prophetarum sc.) " vaticinia videmus." De falsa
religione, Lib. i. cap. iv.

10. 8 Matt. xxviii. 19.

11. 9 Ib. xxiv. 14.

12. 2 Alluding to what was said above. Book ii. par. 81.

13. 1 So Clemens Alexandrinus, as cited, Prep. Evang. Lib. ii. cap. iii. [Greek]
See the notes here to Viger's Edition, p. 3. See also Theodoret (Graec. affect.
curat. Serm. x. p. 623. Tom. iv.), who goes much more at length into this
subject, and mentions a greater number of these Oracles. Ib. p. 624, he cites a
passage from Plutarch (De defectu Oraculorum) which affirms that Demons,
ministers of the Gods, not the Gods themselves, presided in these places; but
disallows the bold assertion of Empedocles, that they were evil and injurious to
men. See the rest of this Tract. See also Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. i.

14. 2 See Prep. Evang. Lib. v. i. p. 180. A. where similar matter will be found.

15. 3 Alluding evidently to Is. ii. 18—22.

16. 4 Prep. Evang. Lib. v. i. p. 170. C...[Greek] The Syriac speaks here much
stronger on the divinity of our Lord. His words are, [Syriac], which is rendered
sufficiently literal above. These Demons were considered as constituting various
classes among the Greeks: the first residing in the Stars: the second consisting
of those who had benefited mankind by their labours, and were termed Heroes, as
Hercules, the Tyndarides, Bacchus, &c.; the third consisted of those fabulous
beings which had, under the garb of philosophy, been deified by the Poets. The
fourth contained, Venus, Mercury, &c. The fifth contained those said to be
famous for art, as Vulcan, Mars, &c. To these they added a sixth and seventh,
who took at one time the forms of Gods, at another, those of Ghosts (manium).
These all again, were divided into two classes, the one consisting of good, the
other of evil Demons. Prep. Evang. Lib. v. in. p. 182. seq. It is added, from
the authority of Plutarch that, from this last sort, all the Grecian oracles
were given out. See also, ib. Lib. iii. cap. v. p. 141. Of all these,—according
to our author, Demonst. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. viii. p. 157. IX seq.—Satan is the
chief head and prince: and the rest generally fallen spirits.

17. 5 Matth. viii. 29; Mark i. 24; Luke iv. 34. Our passage, however, agrees
with neither of the places exactly. It was most likely, quoted by memory only.
See also Prep. Evang. Lib. v. cap. i. p. 179. D. Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap.
x. p. 103. D.

18. 6 Ib. Prep. Evang. Lib. v. i. p. 180. A. The whole subject of Demonology is
discussed at great length in the Prep. Evang. to which I must refer the reader,
as he will there find almost every thing necessary to be known on this subject,
given from the best authorities among the Greeks themselves.

19. 1 Syr. [Syriac]. This is also found in the Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xvii.
p. 164. C. -- [Greek] See also ib. Lib. v. cap. i. p. 179. C. D. -- Ib. Porphyry
is (p. 181.) cited, as bearing witness to this fact, thus : [Greek] Ib. p. 156.
B, as taken from Porphyry's Second Book on Abstinence, cited from Pallas on the
Mysteries of Mithra. The words of Pallas however, are, [Greek]. Whence Valesius
argues, (notes to Laudd. Const, p. 258. D.) that Eusebius has rather overstated
the matter; assuming that this had every where been done, when, at that very
time human sacrifices were offered up at Rome.

20. 3 It is evident I think, from this mode of arguing, that Eusebius did mean
to assert, the Divine and self-existing nature of Christ. See, too, the manner
in which he argues against Plato, above. Book ii. par. 33, 34, seq. with the
notes. Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 545. A.

21. 1 Ib. B.

22. 6 So also Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. i. p. 179. B.

23. 7 Syr. [Syriac] lit. He made worthy of the name of the House of Lordship.
Gr. [Greek] Orat. de laudd. Constant, cap. xvii. p. 546. A. The above affords a
curious instance of our Translator's attempt to be literal, as it does of the
poverty of the Syriac language for discussions such as this.

24. 7 Orat. de laudd. Constant, p. 540. D.

25. 9 Matt, xxiii. 38: Luke xiii. 35, [...]

26. 1 Matth. xxiv. 2: Mark xiii. 2: Luke xxi. 6. differing in several respects
from the Peschito: thus, [Syriac] Quoted, perhaps, in the first instance from
memory: and, in the second, translated from the Greek so written. Several
prophecies on the coming of our Lord, the labours of the Apostles, and the fall
of Jerusalem, will be found in Origen's Philocalia, cap. i. Edit. Spencer, and
more fully in the Demonstr. Evang. of our author.

27. 2 Matt. xvi. 18. The latter member reads thus: Syr. [Syriac]. Differing from
the Peschito in the term only. Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. p. .547. A.

28. 3 There is another member here in the Greek. (Laudd. Const. ib. B.)

29. 4 Matt. x. 18: Mark xiii. 9: Luke xxi. 12. The passage however, does not
appear to be a literal citation, but only a general mention of the thing in
question. Laudd. Constant, p. 547. C.

30. 5 Ib. Laudd. Constant. D. where the Greek is more full.

31. 6 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib.

32. 1 Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. p. 548. C.

33. 3 Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. C.

34. 4 So the Greek. (Orat. de laudd. Constant, ib. p. 548. D.) [...]

35. 5 [...] On the general observance of the seventh day (or Sunday). See also
the Prep. Evang. Lib. xiii. cap. xii. p. 667, from Aristobulus ; and ib. cap.
xiii. p. 677, from Clemens Alexandrinus. See also ray Sermon on the Sabbath,
Edit. 2. London, 1834, Duncan. Whence it should seem, that this must have been
the Patriarchal, and consequently the day of the primaeval, sabbath. (Gen. ii.
2, 3.) The sabbath of the Jews was a totally different thing. That was to recur
yearly, after the day of preparation : i.e. on the 15th day of the month Abib.
(Comp. Exod. xii. 6. with Mark xv. 42.) It could not have recurred, therefore
every seventh day : that was impossible. The Jews do however, observe every
seventh day. They have therefore, lost the sabbath of Moses entirely. While the
Christians actually keep the primitive sabbath, with the additional sanctions of
the Resurrection of our Lord, and of the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost. [...]
36. 6 Orat. de laudd. Const. ib. D.

37. 2 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 549. A.

38. 5 Orat. de laudd. Constant. p. 536. A. gives also the following matter.

39. 6 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. B.

40. 1 This adage, [Greek] will be found in the, "Adagiorum D. Erasmi...Epitome.
Amst. 1649. p. 480. Syr. [Syriac] The Persians have a very neatly expressed
adage to this effect, in these words; Which may thus be paraphrased,-- Kind to
his kind with pleasure hies, And hawk with hawk, pigeon with pigeon flies.

41. 2 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 536. C.

42. 3 This argument is given also in the Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xiii. p.
170. A. and ib. Lib. vii. cap. i. p. 314. C. D. as well as in the Orat. de
laudd. Constant. ib. p. 530. D.

43. 4 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 537. A. it. Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv.
cap. xiii. p. 168. D.

44. 2 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. B.

45. 3 [...] The Greek Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 537. B. does not verbally
agree with our text.

46. 4 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. it.

47. 5 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. xiii. p. 160. A.

48. 6 Orat. de laudd. Const. ib. C. it. Demonstr. Evang. ib. B. it. ib. cap.
xiv. p. 170. D. it. ib. p. 165. B.

49. 7 Comp. John iii. 13; vi. 46: xiv. 10, 11. it. Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib.
p. 537. D. it. Demonstr. Evang. ib. B. C. seq.

50. 8 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 169. D.

51. 10 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xiii. 109. D. it. 170. A. Orat. de laudd.
Constant. ib. p. 538. A.

52. 1 Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 538. B. it. Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 170.
A. B.

53. 2 The Greek text, (Laudd. Const, p. 538. C.) leaves us here, but joins us
again, sect. 45, below.

54. 3 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. xiii. p. 169. B. C.

55. 1 Alluding to the chastisements mentioned above, as inflicted on the
heathen.

56. 2 Luke i. 31; ii. 21. Matt. i. 21. "For he SHALL SAVE his people," &c.
plainly intimating, that the meaning of the Heb. [Hebrew], should be preserved
in it.

57. 3 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. x. pp. 164, D. 165. A. [...] 58. 4 Matt.
viii. 2, 3; xi. 5. Luke vii. 22; xvii. 22.

59. 5 Matt, ix, .32 : xii. 22 : xvii, 18, &c.

60. 6 Matt. ix. 6, &c.

61. 7 Ib. ver. 27; xi. 5; xx. 30, &c.

62. 8 Matt. ix. 20. seq. &c.

63. 9 Matt. viii. 5. Luke vii. I, 2.

64. 10 Mark v. 22.-35. seq. &c.

65. 11 John xi. 1. seq.

66. 12 Matt. xiv. 25. Mark vi. 48. John vi. 19.

67. 13 Matt. viii. 24. seq. Mark iv. 37. seq. &c.

68. 14 Matt. xiv. 19. seq. ib. xvi. 9, &c.

69. 1 Matt, xxvii. 50, &c.

70. 2 John x. 38.

71. 3 Ib. ver. 14, 15.

72. 4 Ib. xii. 24.

73. 7 Orat. de laudd. Constant. cap. xv. p. 538. C.

74. 9 Ib. Orat. de laudd. Constant. p. 539. A.B.

75. 5 The various methods had recourse to for the purpose of explaining this
portion of scripture, may he seen in Kuinoel's commentary on Matt. iv. 1.
Poole's Synopsis, ib. and on the parallel places. The comment given by Eusebius
here is, certainly, a bold one. It is nevertheless, as I think, very much
superior to that preferred by Kuinoel; viz. that the Devil here represents the
high Priest of the Jews, who sent out his emissaries to Christ for the purpose
of securing his influence, if possible, in favour of their policy. See the
commentators on Matt. iv. with its parallel places. As I do not see any
necessity here for departing from the simple and obvious declarations of the
Evangelists, I will only remark, that our Lord seems to have been led to this,
for the express purpose of being tempted, or tried, by Satan, [Greek] says St
Matthew. Comp. Mark i. 13, Luke iv. 2. And, as Demoniacal influence is
repeatedly and positively taught in the New Testament, I do not see why this
should be doubted. It is certain moreover, that this Demoniacal influence was
restrained by our Lord, and that these Demons knew Him. See Matt. viii. 28-32;
xii. 22-29; xvii. 18-21. Mark i. 23-26, 34, &c. with their parallels. He also
gave power to His disciples over these unclean spirits, Matt. x. 1. Luke ix. 1:
and over all the power of the enemy, ib. x. 19. Ib. ver. 18, He speaks of Satan
falling from heaven. Again, these spirits could not have been ignorant of the
birth of Christ, as announced by the Angels and others, Luke ii. 9-15. ib. ver.
25. seq. comp. ib. xxi. 14-22. From all which it must appear, that these were
real beings, at once intelligent and potent; and that our Lord actually
restrained, and otherwise overcame, them. The temptation in the desert was
therefore probably intended, among other things, to shew them that the Redeemer
was now come, and that Jesus was that very person. Eusebius is therefore, in the
main, right; although it does not appear necessary to have recourse to all the
figures which he has introduced.

76. 6 Matt. iv. 2, with the omission of "fasted."

77. 7 Mark i. 13.

78. 1 Ps. xci. 13, as in the Peschito. See also Demonstr. Evang. Lib. ix. p.
437. seq.

79. 2 Ps. xci. ver. 4, seq. [...]

80. 3 See 1 Cor. xv. 21. " For, since by man came death, by MAN came also the
resurrection of the dead:" comp. Rom. v. 15-20. Sec also Theodoret's Dialogue
iii, entitled a0paqh&j, "impatibilis," (Deus sc.) Tom. iv. p. 116. seq. where
(p. 134.) treating, of the assumed human nature, [...] 81. 4 John xvi. 33.

82. 5 Matt. xii. 29. Mark iii. 27.

83. 1 The Greek of the Orat. de laudd. Constant. again joins us here, cap. xv.
p. 539. D.

84. 4 Ib. p. 540. C.

85. 5 [...]. Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 540. D. 541. A.

86. 3 John i. 29, cited also Demonstr. Evang. Lib. cap. x. p. 37. A.

87. 4 Is. liii. 7.

88. 6 Ib. ver. 4-7. Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. B. C. Comp. Demonstr. Evang.
Lib. iv. cap. x. p. 164.

89. 7 Syr. [Syriac] which, I think, must be an error, for [Syriac]. I have,
therefore, translated it accordingly by attaches. In the Hebrew, the
signification of Messiah, [Hebrew] anointed. The priests, kings, and others,
were so styled, because consecrated to their offices by the anointing of oil, as
our Lord was by an extraordinary portion of the Spirit. (See Is. LXI.). Christ
in the Greek signifies the same thing. See also Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap.
xi. ib. xvi. p. 184.

90. 8 Our author seems, in this article, to have had strongly impressed on his
mind the distinction made by the Apostle, when he speaks of Christ in his human
character only; e. g. "Since by man came death, by man came also the
resurrection of the dead." 1 Cor. xv. 21. So ib. ver. 47. "The first man is of
the earth.. .the second man is the Lord," &c. So 1 Tim. ii. 5. " The man Christ
Jesus:"..."who gave himself a ransom," &c. Again, Heb. viii. 3; x. 12. "This
man," speaking of Christ as a Priest, comp. ib. iii. 3; vii. 4, 24, &c. and of
His Body, ib. x. 5, 10. The Apostle however, makes no such distinction in his
names : nor was it necessary he should. This distinction in Eusebius is,
nevertheless, valuable.--Orat. de laudd. Constant. ib. p. 541. C. where the
Greek leaves us; but has the following matter, ib. p. 540. A. B. seq. See also
Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. x. p. 164. D.

91. 3 [...]. See Book ii. sect. 4. seq.

92. 4 Book ii. sect. 15.

93. 2 Allusion seems here to be made to P.s. lxxiv. 14, in which we are told,
that God brake the heads of the Leviathan, and gave him to be meat to the people
inhabiting the wilderness. (Gr. Ai0qi/oyi ), taking the Leviathan as
representing the evil principle which had corrupted mortality. Comp. Is. xxvii.
1, and see my notes on Job xli. 1. Our author probably means, that He gave up
His body to men, &c. who might be termed beasts, because of the fierceness of
their nature. Comp. Ps. xxii. 12, 13, 16, 21.

94. 3 So Paul, Col. ii. 15. "And having spoiled principalities and powers, He
made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it" (His cross).

95. 4 I. e. to prove that he really died. This was, no doubt, intended to have
its force against the Docetae, who held that it was a phantom only of Christ
which had been affixed to the cross, and appeared to die, (which the
Mohammedans, after these, still hold)--and thus virtually denying a vital point
in the faith of a Christian.

96. 1 Syr. [Syriac] lit. which apprehended them: alluding perhaps, to Philip,
iii. 12, where the text of the Peschito uses this word in the same way.

97. 3 I think it highly probable that the Syriac negative, [Syriac] has in this
place been lost, by the mistake of some copyist.

98. 1 Applying this term, as on several occasions, with reference to the human
nature of Christ.

99. 2 Syr. [Syriac], the Greek 0Aqh&nh, Minerva, alluding, no doubt, to the
practices of the heathen, who made, both of the bodies and mental faculties of
men, Gods. See Book 11. Par. 5, &c.

100. 6 As this place is extremely important on the question of the Eucharist, I
shall give the Syriac, which runs thus : [Syriac]. Nothing can be more certain,
I think, than that the bodily and bloody sacrifice of the Mass of the Romanists
could not have been intended here. On the opinions of the Syrian Fathers
respecting this mystery, sec my Visitation Sermon, (Cambridge, 1839,) with the
notes. It is my intention, Deo volente, to publish a more detailed account of
the opinions of the Syrian Fathers on this subject, as soon as I can ; and for
this, I have collected considerable materials. I will now give a sentence or two
from the celebrated Bar Salibi, -- a great favourite with the Romanists, -- on
John vi. 63. " It is the spirit that quickeeneth," &c. This Father says,
[Syriac] i.e. It is necessary that the words said by me should be spiritually
received, so that you may inherit eternal life. But, if you receive them bodily,
you shall not be profited. For, bodily is, that a man doubt and say, How can He
have descended from heaven, when we think him to be the son of Joseph? and, How
can this man give his body ?--Good Dr Wiseman however, the indefatigable
propugner of the Roman Catholic doctrines, has no doubt, that the Jews were
right in giving the interpretation which this Father reprobates! and also, that
Bar Salibi was an upholder of his own opinions! (See my Sermon, pp. 89, 100,
135--6.) Eusebius himself has, moreover, given his view of the nature of the
Eucharist, in his Demonstratio Evangelica, (Lib. i. x. 39. A.) in the following
words: speaking of the XL. Psalm, he says, [Greek]. Much the same is said a
little higher up (ib. p. 37.) on Is. liii. Again, (ib. p. 39,) he terms these
sacrifices, [Greek] See the rest of this Book to the end, where he admirably
shews, that it was this sort of sacrifice which was constantly foretold under
the Old Testament. So also Origen contra Cels. Lib. viii. p. 416, [Greek] But
the most remarkable passage to this effect occurs in Theodoret. Dialog. ii.
"Inconfusus." Tom. iv. p. 85. B. [Greek] See my Visitation Sermon, notes, p.
155, and the opinions of the Syrian Fathers, ib. p. 136. seq.

101. 1 Col. iii. 5. Differing slightly from the Peschito.

102. 2 The Syriac is obscure here. I trust however, I have succeeded in giving
its meaning.

103. 3 Ps. xxii. 27, 28. Differing from the Peschito only in the addition of
[Syriac], their God. Cited also Demonstr. Evang. Lib. ii. cap. i. v. p. 40.
Where our author has, and in the following Book, collected a very large number
of Prophecies on the coming of our Lord.

104. 1 That is, on the same stated days and at the same hours of prayer.

105. 2 Syr. [Syriac], i.e. Sacrament of the Eucharist.

106. 3 Allied to this, Orat. de laudd. Constant. cap. i. near the beginning.

107. 4 Col. iii. 11.

108. 5 The Syr. has [Syriac]. One would expect rather to find Medians ([Syriac])
here. Still, the reading might be correct, as the Mau~roi were an ancient people
inhabiting a part of Colchis. See Bochart, Phaleg. Lib. iv. cap. xxxi. p. 325.
This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 26th July 2002. All material on this
page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press SPIonic font, free from here.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 58: THEOPHANIA - BOOK 4
========================================================================

BOOK IV. THE FOURTH BOOK OF (EUSEBIUS) OF CAESAREA.

1. IT is desirable then, that we should hear from the common Saviour of all
himself, who, speaking with men after the manner of a good Parent, became as a
child, and gave (his) answers, as the nature of mortals was able to hear, by
means of the vessel which he assumed, as through an Interpreter. For, when he
made his Divine manifestation among men, he gave many other proofs of the power
of his Godhead, by means of deeds which any one who chooses may collect, from
the Books (that have been written) about Him. Nor will that again, be a trifling
conviction as to His truth, which takes its stand on the words which he uttered,
and which it is necessary we should bring forward against those, who do not
readily give credence to his astonishing Divine performances. Even in those
other things which have been preached respecting Him,--which (consist) in the
power of His words,--there is no small proof afforded to those who possess mind.
For, as on many occasions, we know those whom we have never seen with our eyes,
and whose words only we have heard ; and distinguish the speaker by what we
hear, whether he be Greek, --as the case may be,--or Roman, or even Egyptian;
or, whether in age old, or young; or, whether the strain be that of man, or
woman ; or, the enunciation that of the wise and rational, or, on the contrary,
of the foolish or ignorant; so also, although we might not have happened to see
with our eyes those Divine acts which THE WORD OF GOD performed, when He made
His conversation on earth; still, from the teaching of His words, the
enunciation of which was foreign, and surpassing general apprehension;--also,
from the foreknowledge of things to come to pass which he predicted ;--and, from
the things which he promised he would do in after times ;--as well as from the
issue of the things (so) predicted, the |210 fulfilment of which is now before
our eyes, (and) brought about by his power;--there must result no mean proof, as
to those (declarations) which bear testimony to His Godhead. For, the miracles
which were performed by Him may he divided into (two) periods; that, in which
the conversations He made on earth are commemorated, and that which succeeded,
and extends to our times. Those great acts then, which he formerly did when he
was with the men who happened to exist at that time, it was in their power
openly to view ; but to us, these were unseen ; and they are laid down, (as)
having been unseen. And thus again also, the things which have been fulfilled in
our times,--in the order in which His words foretold them, and are even to this
present witnessed by us in the very facts,--could not, to those of the times in
which they were foretold, have yet been known as to their results; and they
were, no doubt, considered by them, who believed not, as impossible. It is
nevertheless likely that even then, those whose character was that of sound
judgment,--although not witnessing the results of the predictions,--did still
believe in them, on account of His other acts. For, Is it likely that they who
saw with their eyes the evident powers of God, the miracles and astonishing acts
and deeds which eclipsed all mortal nature, believed only the things which were
then seen, but, (as) confirmed by these of his foreknowledge, did not (as)
readily also believe those which were afterwards to come to pass ?--So that
again, it is right that we should, from those miracles which we ourselves have
seen, also give our credence to the things which were then witnessed by his
Disciples. For, the very things which were delivered in the hearing only of
(our) predecessors, are (now) visible to our own eyes: and, they are sufficient
for those whose judgment is incorrupt, as proofs setting a seal on the things
which have been recorded. And these are the things which then existed not; nor
had they yet been set up; nor had they so much as ever entered into the minds of
men: but they were foretold by Him, from His divine foreknowledge of the future
; and, in after times, they have been fulfilled, and are in (these) our times
seen by us, even to this very day.--Of these, our means of knowledge are at
hand. |211

2. A certain man, illustrious from (his) service to the rule and power of the
Romans, was in a state of suspense, because his favourite boy1 had become
paralytic in his limbs, and was laid (up) in his house; who, when he saw that
our Saviour shewed forth such powers upon others,--healing the sick, and curing
every pain and infirmity,--he perceived in his own mind, that this miracle was
not of man. He approached Him accordingly as God;--not looking to the vessel of
the Body which was visible, and by means of which He carried on His discourses
with men, but to that God who was unseen ; to Him, who by means of a mortal
being, made known these His excellent doings;--he fell down and worshipped Him,
praying and striving2 (with Him), that He would afford to him for his boy the
aid which is from God. And, when our Saviour said to him, "I will come and heal
him," the Chiliarch3 answered Him,--for he had been considered worthy of this
rule among the Romans;--and said to him, " Lord, I am not worthy that thou
shouldest come under my roof; but, speak the word only, and the child shall be
healed. For, I am a man in authority, and there are soldiers under my hands; and
I say to this, Go; and he goeth: and, to another, Come; and he cometh: and, to
my servant I say, Do such a thing: and he doeth it." Hear therefore what our
Saviour did upon this request, not from me, but from the Writer
himself,--teaching (us) thus--in the very words : "But, when Jesus heard it, He
wondered, and said to those who |212 followed Him, Not even in Israel have I
found such faith as this. And I say unto you, that many shall come from the East
and from the West, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the
kingdom of heaven; but the children of the kingdom shall go out into outer
darkness." And, after these words, He thus spoke to the Chiliarch: "Go: as thou
hast believed, shall it be unto thee. And his boy was healed from that hour."
And, when the Chiliarch returned to his house, in that very hour he found his
boy well.

3. With so much power therefore, did the word of our Saviour go forth, and
shewed so much virtue, and so replete was it with power and with so much mercy,
and with such ease were the good aids (it afforded given), that He readily
promised He would come. And such indeed was the miracle which accompanied the
act, that it is impossible to conceive of it as we ought. For this, that He said
to the Chiliarch no more than, "As thou hast believed, so shall it be unto
thee," and, with the word, gave health to his son, How effectually does it shew,
that it was God who spoke in mortal voice ! But, should any one be persuaded of
this with difficulty, on account of the greatness of the miracle; still, such
cannot fairly be excused as to His prediction, in which a powerful argument will
be afforded in favour of the deed, if any one will consider that at this period,
the Roman who drew near to our Saviour, was ONE (only), namely, the Chiliarch,
who made a greater and better profession of Him, than (did the whole) Jewish
people; and, that our Saviour prophesied that instead of ONE, those, who should
like this man draw near to Him, should be MANY ; and, that these should be of
those residing in the East, and in the West4:--those (I say), who, by means of
the |213 knowledge of Him, and of the confession (made) of Him, should be
considered worthy of honour with God, equal to that of the Hebrew Fathers:--even
of him who is preached of as being the Father of their Fathers, Abraham, who
went forth from among his idolatrous forefathers, and changed his manner of
life; and, leaving the error of many Gods, recognized the ONE GOD who is over
all. He also foretold, that like to this (man), and to his sons Isaac and Jacob,
there should be myriads of men throughout the whole creation; and particularly
of those who resided both in the East, and the West. To these things He
added,--and this (constitutes) the greatness of the prediction,--that these very
Jews, the descendants of these Friends of God, who make their boast of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, should, on account of their resistance to Him, and their want
of belief in Him,--as if cut off from the light of knowledge,--go forth into
outer darkness : and, because of their extreme ignorance and foolishness, (be
consigned to) an entire disseverance from the light of salvation. Thus He
predicted.--It is now right we should consider the fulfilment of these things,
and receive from the testimony of our eyes how these very Jews, who boasted of
their descent from the family of those called the Friends of God, have been cast
out, not only from the kingdom of God, but also from their own metropolis, the
most excellent place of rule, in which the law appointed that their noblest
service should be performed ! and (how) those who were formerly free, and the
virtuous children of these Fathers, have become slaves; and, being mixed with
foreign nations,--a thing unlawful with them,--wander about in lands not their
own, and are not permitted to view, even from a distance, the land of their own
religious worship! Being moreover, deprived of those princes and kings, who were
vested with |214 rule by traditionary right, they now remain in subjection to
those who have rased their temple to the ground, and have subdued their whole
nation ! Nor is there, as formerly, either prophet or revelation; nor is there
help, or act of God. Of all these things, not one existed from ancient times; it
was (only) after our Saviour had turned away His face from them that these came
upon them, according to His predictions; and such are the things respecting the
Jews.

4. Instead then, of that one Chiliarch who drew near to our Saviour at that
period, a number of men exceeding description has, from all nations, drawn near
to Him, not of Chiliarchs only, but also of the mass of the Roman armies; so
that even myriads of princes and governours bearing rule among the nations, and
in the (various) regions; and also of others, much more honourable and exalted
than these,--those who are great, and glory in the royal apartments,--have like
the Chiliarch approached the Christ of God ; and have, by means of his doctrine,
acknowledged the God of those Friends of the Deity, who (formerly) arose among
the Hebrews; and they have accordingly, been considered worthy of a return from
God the supreme King, equal to that afforded to these. If indeed any one will
consider, what numbers of Christians and of churches, and of vast congregations,
are said to be in the country of the Persians and of the Hindoos, residing in
the East; and, how there are with these, through the words of our Saviour,
women, virgins desiring, and men coming over to, holiness, and to the provisions
which are for the life of philosophy and of purity, and how numerous the
confessors are, who live among these:--

5. Also, how those very persons who confess Him who has arisen from the seed of
Abraham, and that He is the Christ of God; and have become, by means of the new
birth which is in Him, the children of Abraham ; and have (thus) set their seal
to the prophetic Word of our Saviour: and this also, that, in like manner, in
the western parts of the world, the whole of Spain and Gaul 5, in the countries
of the |215 Moors and Africans, in the (Islands of the) Ocean itself, and in
Britain6, men subscribe to Christ, and even acknowledge the God of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob: upon Him also they call in their prayers, and are looked upon
(as) partakers with these same (Fathers) in the worship of God:-- If (I say),
any one will therefore take these things into his consideration, he will then
understand what the power of the prophetic word (was) that declared and said,
"Many7 shall come from the East and the West, and shall sit down in the bosom of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven." These things therefore, He
said, and foretold to the Chiliarch : and, on many other occasions, things not
unlike these to the Jewish Doctors. And in this manner He spoke: "When8 ye see
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the Prophets, in the kingdom of God, and
yourselves going out. And they shall come from the East, and from the West, and
from the South, and shall sit down in the Kingdom of God." Of these things an
open confirmation is afforded by the fact, of all nations having been converted
to the God who is over all. These, He therefore said to them, respecting the
conversion of all nations to God, who is over all.

6. Thou wilt learn moreover, from the writings of His Disciples,--that it was by
their means He was about soon to call in the nations--which are to this effect:
" When9 Jesus passed over a part of the sea of Galilee, he saw two brethren,
Simon who is called Cephas, and Andrew his brother, casting nets into the sea
:--for they were fishers. -- He said to them, Follow me; and I will make you
fishers of men. And they, in the same hour, left their nets and followed him.
And, when he departed thence, He saw two brethren, James the son of Zebedee and
John Ms brother, in the ship with Zebedee their Father, and He called them ; and
they, in the same hour, left the ship and |216 their Father, and followed Him."
Another writer too has left it on record, that He spoke to Simon on two
occasions, a prediction similar to this: "When a great multitude was standing
over against Jesus" He (this writer) has said, that " He went up into one of the
ships, which was Simon's; and, when He had sat down in it, He interpreted to the
multitude." But, after the teaching which was sufficient,--because it was
suitable that He should add some Divine work to His words, for the advantage of
those who were looking on,--He 10 commanded Simon to "cast forth his net for a
draught: and he said to Him, We have toiled the whole night, and have found
nothing ; nevertheless at thy word, I will cast out the net." And, what He had
been commanded, he did. And, when he had taken a great number of fishes, their
nets were breaking,--because they were heavy with the many (fishes),--and they
called to those who were in the ship at their side, to help them. And thus, when
they had drawn up the fishes, they filled both their ships, insomuch that they
were pressed to sinking; and, upon these things, Simon was astonished and
wondered, confessing that he was not worthy, that our Saviour should come near
him11. But, when He had thus shewn him a representation of what |217 was about
to take place, He also gave its explanation (thus); "and Jesus said to him, Fear
not; Thou shalt henceforth be a fisher of men unto life." It was to
Galileans,--men unacquainted with any thing beyond the Syriac language, and this
mean profession and necessity of fishing, by which they were driven,--that our
Saviour well promised, that He would "make them fishers of men" and preachers of
His doctrine. And, He made them (such). Nor did He belie His promise; but He
shewed forth the "POWER OF GOD," the Doer of a thing, which eclipsed every human
excellence! For, had He brought near to Him the Intellectual and the Wise, the
Rich, and Illustrious, among the Jews; and had made use of these (as) the
Teachers of His words; it would indeed have been likely, that men would have
supposed this matter to have been brought about by human means only. For thus
are most men usually overcome; (namely), they are either wrought upon by the
gifts of the rich, or, they are led astray by excellency of speech, or, by the
phantasms of science : or, they fear the power of illustrious personages. But He
made use of no such disciples as these: on the contrary, by the poor, the
despised ;--by men ignorant as to speech, Syrians in language, and in their
character humble and mean,--did He openly manifest His work (of redemption). It
was the Divine Power alone, which He made use of;--that which He evinced when He
previously called them, and made them go forth ; and so promised that He would
make them both "Fishers of men," and Preachers; that, instead of the nets which
they then had, they should receive from Him the net, which should comprehend in
its texture, an aggregate of the declarations of both the Law and the Prophets,
as well as of those comprehended in (all) the Divine teaching. This they should
cast into the sea of mankind as existing in the world, and inclose (therein) as
many as they could; filling these their rational nets |218 with every sort of
the fish that are rational. But these things, which were then heard by word,
were words and sounds, and nothing more: it was an effort of the Divine Power
itself, which, at no distant time, brought them to pass; and so fulfilled by
deeds the things which had been foretold, that, in a short time, He made His own
possession the whole creation of mankind,--congregations innumerable,--by means
of these poor and illiterate men; and, that His Churches were every where
filled, both with Greeks and Barbarians. For, it was not by that one Divine word
of promise, that He would teach His Disciples, but, that He would MAKE them
Fishers of men. Nor was it therefore, that He knew only, what should come to
pass; nor, that He foretold this; but, that He should also be looked upon (as)
the Effectuator of all this knowledge.--He spoke in word, and He performed and
established the deed:-- that something (I say), which was to be brought about,
(He foretold) by demonstration and representation; and of this He gave the
fulfilment in the fact itself! For, to them who formerly toiled throughout the
lengthened night, which was dark and destitute of the true light and knowledge
of God, and could find nothing which they could take, (leading) to salvation, He
arose (as the sun) in His brightness, and commanded those who were in the light
and the day,--not by their art, but by trusting in his word,--to cast out their
nets into the deep. And they so enclosed this great multitude of fish, that
their fishing vessels were pressed to breaking, and the ships themselves to
remaining in the deep from their weight. And, because these things were so done,
astonishment and great fear came upon Simon. But, our Saviour said (as it were)
these things to him, Let not these things alarm thee: they are (but as)
recitations for the present, and representations of something hereafter to come
to pass: for, these are fish unendued with either voice, or reason; these too,
are ships and nets, composed of (earthly) material, and are inanimate; but, not
as these things, are those of which these are the representations : for shortly
afterwards,--that is, immediately, nmv, and forthwith,--thou shall be a fisher
of men unto life (eternal). This laborious fishing which returns no profit, thou
shalt relinquish; and, thou shall become a |219 fisherman of reasonable
creatures, in place of these which are irrational. Nor shalt thou again draw up
those whom thou shalt catch from the depths of the sea, but from the bitterness
of the life that is hateful; from the chambers of ungodly darkness and from sin,
into the light which is intellectual; and to the elevation of purity. That is,
thou shalt catch them for life, by means of that which is of life: it is not
death that thou preparest for them. These first indeed, which are drawn up out
of the sea, and which formerly enjoyed life in darkness and the deep, perish
immediately on their ascending and receiving the light. But, those who shall be
caught by thee from among men, shall be caught up out of the darkness of
ignorance, and shall be changed to the life that is of God. These things
therefore, (namely,) " Thou shalt henceforth catch men unto life," our Saviour
foretold by the Divine power: and the same, our Saviour shewed by very deed,
were sure and true. This Syrian fisherman therefore, this net-caster,--did by
means of his net,--the texture of which was by the Divine power composed of the
words of mystery,--catch innumerable multitudes of men. And, " The visual
perception of something hidden, is something visible12." The things therefore,
which the long life of the world,-- and which from the first experienced not the
rising (as of the Sun) of our Saviour,--could not effect:--the things which
neither Moses who gave the law to the Hebrews, nor the Prophets who came after
Moses, could ; nor yet the multitmdes of others, who from ancient times carried
as fishermen the doctrine of God to man, and who toiled throughout the whole
night which preceded his manifestation,--could do, this Galilean, this Pauper,
this Barbarian, this Simon did, by means of his voice bring to pass. The
demonstrations indeed, then given of Simon as to these things, are the Churches
which up to this time have arisen, far more in number than the ships (then
present), and these, filled with fish that are rational. Such is this of
Caesarea of Palestine13, and such is that of Antioch of Syria; and such is that
of Rome; for, by |220 these Churches--which Simon set up, and by all those near
them,--are these things commemorated. Those too that are in Egypt and in
Alexandria itself, did he again, not by his own means, but by those of Mark, his
disciple, erect. Of those also, that are in Italy and among the nations
adjoining, he was the Steward (Dispenser): and he made his disciple Mark the
Teacher and Fisherman of those in Egypt. Now, give thy consideration likewise,
to the rest of our Saviour's Disciples, on those whom He said He would make
Fishers of men;--and this his word He has shewn forth by deeds. For up to this
time He did, and caused, that, forthwith, and throughout the whole creation of
man,-- His rational net should be filled with every sort of rational fish,
Barbarian and Greek ; and that He should draw up from the depths of evil, and
the darkness of ungodliness, the souls of men ; turning these daily and hourly
to the light and knowledge of God which had been delivered by Himself. Which
things, seen as they are with our own eyes, establish,--as it appears to
me,--beyond (all) doubt, the Divine manifestation of our Saviour.

7. Art thou desirous then, of hearing a third declaration of the Divine word,
which foretold that His Disciples should arise (as the Sun) throughout the whole
world ? Hear this also, for it is after this manner : "Ye14 are the light of the
world:" and, "A city that is built on a hill cannot lie hidden:" "nor do men
light a candle, and place it under a bushel, but upon a candlestick; and it
giveth light to all that are in the house. So let your light shine before men,
that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven."
Here again, these very fishermen, who went forth from Galilee, --a corner of
Judea so called, which is situate on the sea; and of which Isaiah,--one of the
Prophets,--making known at once its obscurity, and at the same time, the rising
(as of the Sun) of our Saviour, which he announced should take place
there,--proclaimed (saying), "Galilee15 of the Gentiles, a people sitting in
|221 darkness have seen a great light:"--those (I say) who went forth from
thence; men, mean, necessitous, illiterate in speech, and poor in
circumstances;--those very fishermen He said, should be the light of the world;
and this promise He confirmed by deed ; (namely), that this same Simon who was
called Cephas, (and) who went forth from Capernaum which is a village of
Galilee,--should enlighten many souls of men with the light of the knowledge of
God ; and should himself become known throughout the whole creation, even to the
regions of the West: and, that even to this time, his memory should be more
celebrated among the Romans, than that of those of former times, so that he
should be considered worthy of an honourable sepulchre in the very front of
their city ; and, that great multitudes of the Roman Empire should run to it, as
to a great asylum and temple of God. How then, Does not the truth bear testimony
to Him, who said to his Disciples, "Ye are the light of the world?" So again,
the name of John the son of Zebedee also,--who (was engaged) in fishing with his
father and brethren, and mending the net, whom He (Jesus) saw, and considered
worthy both of this call and promise,--arose (as the Sun) throughout the whole
creation ; and whose words have, through the Gospel which was delivered by him,
also enlightened the souls of men !-- which has been translated into all
languages, both of the Greeks and Barbarians, and is daily preached in the ears
of all nations ! And more particularly, the sepulchre of this (Disciple) which
is in Ephesus of Asia, does glorious honour to his death, and shews to the world
the memorial of that light which cannot be hidden. In like manner also, the
writings of the apostle Paul are preached throughout the whole creation, and
they enlighten the souls of men. The martyrdom of his death, and the sepulchre
which (is erected) over him, are, even to this day, greatly and abundantly
honoured in the city of Rome. And, What need is there we should say, that the
mode of life set up by means of the Disciples of our Saviour throughout the
whole creation,--like the exhibition of a banner of victory,--is as a famous
city which has nothing hidden within it ? but which is in authority in the midst
of all other cities, (and) according to the enouncement of our |222 Saviour, "Is
like to a city placed upon a hill?" And this is the very word, which they
preached respecting their master. It was not, as (if) hidden under a bushel, or
given up to error and darkness; but, as upon a lofty candlestick, and lifted up
to an exalted eminence, and giving light to all that were in the house of the
whole world ! And this, (viz.) "Let your light so shine before men" evinced
(both) foreknowledge and prophecy; not precept only, but also intimation of what
should come to pass. He fully too named them all (here), the light when He said,
"YE are the light of the world." Not, that they were many lights; but, that they
all together (constituted) one light: as if from an equality16 of them all,
there should be at once an arising (of light as of the Sun) to the whole world.
For, it was His alone to say, "I AM17 the light of the world." And of Him it has
been truly said, that "He18 is the light that came into the world, which
enlighteneth every man." But, since these things have been thus foretold, and
fulfilled; observe how He again spoke of, and explained, them to His Disciples:
"That19 which I say to you in darkness, speak ye in the light; and, that which
ye hear in your ears, preach ye on the housetops. And fear not those who kill
the body, but cannot kill the soul. But fear ye Him rather, who is able to
destroy both soul and body in hell." He also promised by these things, in the
very beginnings (of the ministration) of His Disciples,--when they knew nothing
of them, but were as if they had been in the dark,--the knowledge of the light.
He prophesied also, to those (then) hearing His precepts, that they should
preach openly to all men that which was (now) secret, in darkness, and
invisible. He taught them too, not to be perplexed, but to suffer affliction
with all |223 their soul; to preach Him in the ears of all; and not to fear
those, who would kill the mortal body: the soul not being subject to loss of
life by men, because it is incorporeal and immortal. For it is God only, who is
able to inflict punishment and death, at once on both body and soul. It may be
observed therefore, that He taught by these things, that the soul is
incorporeal; and set up, in a few words, the ordinances of (true) philosophy,--

In that He foretold at the outset to His Disciples, that He would make them
Fishers of men; and, that they should eventually, openly, immediately, (and)
through His power, make Disciples of all nations. From the Gospel of Matthew20.

8. After his resurrection from the dead, all of them,-- being together as
they had been commanded,--went to Galilee, as He had said to them. But, when
they saw Him, some worshipped Him, but others doubted. But He drew near to them,
spoke with them, and said: "All power (both) in heaven and earth, is
given to me of my Father. Go ye and make Disciples of all nations, and baptize
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And teach
them to observe all that I have commanded you. And, behold! I am with you always
even to the end of the world." Observe now, in these things, the
consideration and caution evinced by the Disciples: (viz.) that they did not all
worship Him when they saw Him. Some of them indeed did this faithfully and
devotedly, but others refrained for the present. It was not easily and suddenly,
that they gave in to this miracle; but, it was after much investigation and with
every caution they were so at last persuaded, that they went out to all mankind.
They became too, the Preachers of His |224
Resurrection; because it had prophetically said in the Scriptures of the
Prophets, in His Person, "Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen
for thine inheritance, and (for thy) possessions, the uttermost parts of the
earth21." Just as the testimony of this prophecy has
now been fulfilled in fact, He said to His Disciples; "All power is
given to me, as in heaven, so in earth." For, He had possessed the
sovereignty of the things which are in heaven from eternity22; but
now, He said was given to Him, by His Father, those upon earth, in conformity
with this (viz.) "Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thy
possession. For, from ancient times,--as Moses attests,--" The
most High, when dividing the nations, appointed the boundary of the people,
according to the number of the angels23."
|225 So that the Angels of God were, from ancient times, Rulers over all that was
on the earth. But, when mankind had been perverted to the error of many Gods,
and the Angels, who were the Rulers, were unable to afford any remedy for this;
the common Saviour of all Himself taught, by means of His Divine manifestation,
and after His victory over Death, that the empire of the nations upon earth,
should no more be given by his Father to the Angels, but to Himself. And on this
account, He commanded his Disciples,--not from ancient times--but now, that
they should make the circuit, and make Disciples, of all nations. And He
necessarily added the mystery of cleansing. For it was necessary to those, who
should be converted from among the heathen, that they should be cleansed by His
power from every pollution and uncleanness; because they had been defiled by the
error of Demons, and had been holden by the worship of Idols, and by uncleanness
of every sort, but had now first been changed from that life of abomination, and
of lawless practices. These very persons then, did He direct to teach,--after
this cleansing, which is by the mystery of His doctrine,--not, that they should
observe the precepts of the Jews, nor yet the Law of Moses, but all those which
He commanded them to observe. And these |226
are those which the whole of the Disciples,--making severally the circuit of
all the nations,--equally delivered to every Church throughout the whole
creation. He necessarily therefore, stirred them up, and made them readily to
confide,--to undertake the circuit of all nations, and to make Disciples of all
races of men, through the promise by which He counselled them, saying: "Behold,
I myself am with you." To this word of promise, He also superadded the
performance. He was present in the Divine Power with each and every one of them;
to the whole of them was He at once present, and with them He acted and wrought.
He confirmed too, even to victory, (the promise) constituting them Teachers to
all nations, of that fear of God24 which was delivered by Himself. In
this promise therefore, they trusted; and forthwith, did they fulfil His words
by deeds: nor did they in any thing hesitate; hut they (so) went forth with all
readiness to the disciplining of all nations, that they engaged in the work.
With their eyes they had seen Him who was a little while before dead, then
living: and, Him whom they had denied with cursing25,--on account of
what then happened to them,--they had seen openly, present, and in his own
person; and, as His custom was, He had conversed with them, and promised them
the things of which we have already spoken. Nor could they disbelieve His
promises, because of His appearing (to them); which (appearing) they bad
investigated. Now in this precept, there must have been (much) that was
discouraging to them, knowing as they did in themselves the rusticity and
illiterate character which they sustained; on account of which, they might
indeed have sought to be excused, and have well imagined it impossible that
those, whose Language was the Syriac (only), and who knew nothing beyond the art
of catching fish, could he Teachers both of the Greeks and Romans, of the
Egyptians also, the Persians, and the rest of the barbarous nations : and set
about to legislate,--in opposition to all other Legislators and Kings
throughout the whole |227 creation,---that which was opposed to the things delivered to them from all
ages, respecting the Gods of their Forefathers. But it was not possible for them
to think such things, who had heard the voice of God saying to them, "Behold,
I myself am with you always." They had too, openly viewed the Godhead
of Him who spoke with them. It had been seen to be superior to Death :
respecting which however they had entertained fear. On the contrary they (now)
hear, that henceforth they shall, with all their soul, undergo afflictions. They
had now taken up from their Master, the certainty of life after death ; they
went out tllerefore, with confidence to make the circuit of all nations, that
they might confirm by fact, the promises of Him their Lord. But He attached to
the promises made to them, a more excellent word ; and,--what exceeds all
wonder,-- this He shews forth even to this present time; (viz.) " Behold,
I myself am with you always" He added also, "even to the end of
the world" And this applies, not only to them, but also to all those
who came after them, and from them received His doctrine; and, thenceforward,
even to this time, is He present to all those who have become His Disciples.
Hence, His Church, which is kept by Himself, is daily increasing and multiplying
to myriads; and by His Power shall it be congregated, even to the end of the
world !

On the conversion of all nations to God. From the Gospel of Luke.

9. Again, upon another occasion after His resurrection from the dead, He
appeared to the other disciples, and to them,--yet doubting and not believing in
Him,--He put forth and said these words: "26These are the words which I said, to
you, when I was yet with you; that it is necessary every thing should be
fulfilled which is written respecting me in the Law of Moses, in the Prophets,
and in the Psalms. Then He opened their understandings that they should
understand the Scriptures : and He said, Thus it was right that Christ should
suffer, and that He should rise from the dead on the third day; and (that)
repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all
nations, beginning from |228 Jerusalem. And ye are the witnesses of these
things." On one occasion indeed, He said, that "in His name should be preached
repentance to all nations." (Now), if the Deed did not follow upon the Word;
neither can His resurrection from the dead be credited. But if, even up to this
time, the things which His prediction foretold, remain in fact, so that His
lively, (energetic) and operative word is visible (in effect) throughout the
whole creation to our eyes; then is it unbecoming we should disbelieve Him who
spoke this. For He, whose power is living (energetic,) operative, and visible to
the eyes, powerfully impels us first of all to confess thereupon, that He is
living; and that He brings to effect the living things of God, whose living
(actual) deeds are seen fulfilling His words. These His words then, --being
varied and translated into all languages, both of the Greeks and the
Barbarians,--has He made intelligible to all27, so that His doctrine is heard by
all nations, and has stirred up myriads of congregations of those, who were
formerly wickedly led on in the error of many Gods, in the worship of Idols, and
in (the course of life) which was unbecoming, to conversion and repentance. He
did not command them first to preach remission of sins, and then repentance; but
first, repentance, and then remission. For it was to those, who evinced a
sincere repentance of former sins, that our Saviour's grace gave the pardon of
their deeds;--on whose account indeed He suffered Death, and gave His soul a
ransom for the souls of those, who should be saved through Him. Thus therefore,
these His disciples,--men rude of speech and altogether illiterate, poor and
needy, (as) they were in their character,--trusted in the power of Him who
appeared to them after Death, and openly held converse with them. And they began
from Jerusalem according to His commands, and went forth into all nations; the
things too, which they were commanded, they performed, and preached repentance
to all men, and |229 remission of the former sins of the soul. And such was the
entire superiority which they evinced, that, even to these our times, the
doctrine of these poor and illiterate men, is in active operation throughout the
whole creation of man. How His acts should be heard, and preached of, throughout
the whole world. From the Gospel of Matthew and of Mark.

10. When our Saviour was in Bethany, a village not far from Jerusalem;--having
been invited by one who was (named) Simon, and sitting down there ;--a certain
woman took an alabaster box of balsam (ointment), which was very precious, and
came and poured it out upon his feet: but His Disciples forbade her ;
complaining of what had happened. But He received the tiling done as a sign, and
intimated that this act should be preached of, and heard, throughout the whole
world. He prophesied accordingly, and said: "I say unto you, that wheresoever
this my Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, what this (woman) hath
done, shall also be spoken of for a memorial of her28." Now these things He
foretold, when, at that time, the writing of the Gospel had yet entered into the
mind of none, nor had it come to the hearing of any. Nor, as it is likely, had
what was then done, been learned by any who resided in the neighbourhood, but by
those only who were present. Nevertheless, He left this whole enouncement in
word, and prophesied that the Gospels, which should be written by His Disciples,
should be preached throughout the whole world. And to the word He at once also
superadded the deed, and said, that with His acts should be written in the
Gospel, and spoken of throughout the whole world, even that which had been done
by this woman, for a memorial of her:--which same thing has (now) been seen
confirmed by Him in very deed! For there is neither people, region, nor place,
in which the memorial of this woman, as recorded in the Gospel, has not been
mentioned; and, together, with the doctrine respecting Him, is it preached
throughout the |230 whole world.--Of the things therefore, respecting this29
(Gospel,) and respecting His Church, hear (now) how He made His promises : --

How He mentioned His church by name, when yet it had no existence: and how He
declared, that the gates of Hell should never prevail against it. From the
Gospel of Matthew.

11. When asking His Disciples on a certain occasion, what men said of Him, and
they answering according to the opinion of the many, He asked them the second
time, "But30 what say ye?" and, when Simon had said unto Him, "Thou art the
Christ of the living God" He answered him, and said : "Blessed art thou Simon
son of Jonas, since flesh and blood hath not revealed (this) to thee, but my
Father who is in heaven. And I also say to thee, Thou art Cephas: and upon this
rock do I build my Church, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not prevail against
it." The (term) "this" He took (as implying) the knowledge, that He was the
Messiah, the Son of the living God ; and Cephas (the rock), because it should
neither be rent nor moved. It is not unlikely, that He named (in) " THIS" |231
the whole sense comprised here. On this account too, He designated that same
Disciple, who had formerly been called Simon, Cephas (Peter), with reference to
this knowledge; (and) of which He afterwards prophesied, and said: "On this rock
do I build my Church, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not prevail against it."
He foretold at once something to come to pass, and promised, that Himself would
build it (the Church), and bring the work to completion, by the things of this
knowledge which had now been |232 given concerning Himself; that it should be
made firm as on a confirmed foundation ; and that His Church should be built,
solely by means of His own power which is everlasting, and that the gates of
Hell should never overcome it. He himself afforded a proof (of this) in the
fulfilment, better than any (that) words (can give). For innumerable
persecutions, and many forms of death, have sprung up against His Church, but in
nothing could they prevail against it. He has therefore, openly confirmed the
enouncement of His prediction, by deeds; its truth He has shewn, by the
fulfilment. The Church too, which He called the congregation, about to be set up
in His name, evinced no small foreknowledge: for the congregations of the Jews
had been termed Synagogues; and, during the time of His going about among men,
He frequented the Synagogue of the Jews. Nor was there hitherto, so much as one
Synagogue only, set apart to Him. And, Who is not astonished, that He so
foreknew those congregations which should afterwards be set up, at a great
distance of time, in His name, and, that He should not name them, after the
Jewish custom, Synagogues, but Churches ? He added too, that the gate-bars of
Hell should not prevail against them:-- things, which we perceive with our own
eyes ! Nor should we wonder at the prediction only, but also at His promise,
namely, "I build my Church upon the rock, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not
prevail against it:" which is (all) so brought near in fact, that we can see it
! For it was not by the power of men, nor yet by the superiority of the Teachers
(employed), that His Church was raised ; but, it was He who promised, and in
deed fulfilled His promise ! --He (I say) who up to this time has, by the Divine
Power, built up, and enlarged, His Church throughout the whole creation of man !

On the divisions which are in Houses and Families up to this time, on account of
His doctrine. From the Gospel of Matthew.

12. 31 Think not, that I am come to send forth peace upon earth : I am not come
to send forth peace, but a sword. For I am come to divide a man against his
Father, |233 and the Daughter against her Mother, and the Daughter in law
against her Mother in law : and the enemies of a man (shall be) those of his own
house. (Or), as Luke enounced (it) ; " 32 Think ye then, that I am come to send
forth peace on earth ? I say unto you, No ; but divisions. For, there shall be
henceforth five in one house, who (shall be) divided, three against two, and two
against three. And the Father shall be divided against his Son, and the Son,
against his Father; and the Mother shall be divided against her Daughter, and
the Daughter, against her Mother; and the Mother in law, against her Daughter in
law ; and the Daughter in law, against her Mother in law." And, Who is not
astonished, that the things which should take place in every individual house,
in times far removed (from those of the prediction), and even up to this time,
did not remain hidden to the foreknowledge of our Saviour ? For He foretold to
His disciples, the things which up to this time are taking place, just as one
present to the things themselves, and making the circuit of the dwellings of all
the children of men :--things which hitherto have not existed, nor did they at
the period in which He enounced these words. Nor, were there yet any such
doings; they were then heard only in the ear. But now, that the prediction has
in fact come to its completion, and is visible to the eyes, How can any one, who
would think justly, but confess that they are in truth the words of God ? And
again in these things also,--"For I am come to divide and to send forth a sword,
and divisions among the children of men,""--we likewise see with our own eyes,
that no word of man, either of philosopher or prophet, whether Greek or
Barbarian, ever shewed forth power such as this, that he should so hold the
whole creation, that there should be divisions in every house; that he should
pass through and distinguish every race, throughout all their families ; and,
that of these some should be considered as his own, and others as opposed to
these ! But it was our Saviour alone, and this WORD OF GOD, who promised to do
this, and He confirmed the promise, in very deed ! The cause therefore, of the
divisions of soul that came to |234 pass in houses He Himself taught, as we have
found in a place in the Gospel existing among the Jews in the Hebrew language33,
in which it is said: "I will select to myself these things: very very excellent
are those whom my Father, who is in heaven, has given to me." And, one may learn
from this, how in every house in which the word of Jesus should prevail, the
excellent would be distinguished from the vile. For, if a man make a comparison
among brothers, or servants, or in families generally, as to the customs, forms,
manner of life, and the purity and meekness of those, who have chosen the
doctrine of our Saviour;--for this is |235 what is meant by those who have been
selected by Him :-- and, of those who have not yet become worthy of Him ; --he
will perceive what sort of power that is, of which He has made use; and, that He
did not only foretel what should come to pass, but that He has, according to the
prediction, also brought the works to pass : and, with other things, these also
in which it is written that He said, "I will select to myself the34 very
excellent, those whom my Father who is in heaven has given to me." Nevertheless,
(what He) now (said), " I am not come to send forth peace on earth," with other
things, He explained to the Disciples themselves and said; "I leave peace with
you, my own peace give I unto you: it is not as the world giveth peace, that I
also so give peace." It was the knowledge and love of God, which He had prepared
for His disciples ; and this, that the soul should not be perturbed. And in this
way, He named the light, and confirmation of the mind. These things therefore He
foretold, and also respecting these (men) : but, of those which He foreknew and
foretold respecting the Jewish People, (the time) is at hand that we should
enquire.

On the things which He prophesied against the Jewish people in parables. From
the Gospel of Matthew.

13. When the Rulers of the Jewish people, the chief Priests, and the Doctors of
the Law, were assembled together in Jerusalem, and He was in the Temple; He
foretold covertly and by parable, the things they were about to dare against
Him, and the destruction which should overtake them on account of this daring,
in this manner : " There was 35a certain master of a house, (who) planted a
vineyard, and surrounded it with a fence, and digged a wine-press therein, and
built in it a tower, and delivered it to husbandmen, and departed. And, when the
fruit-season drew |236 near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen that they
might bring to him the fruit. But these husbandmen seized his servants, and some
of them they smote, and some they stoned, and some they killed. And again, he
sent other servants, more than the former; and to these, they did in like
manner. But at last, he sent his Son, and said, Surely they will reverence my
Son. But these husbandmen, when they saw the Son, said among themselves : This
is his heir ; come let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours. So they
took him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. When therefore, the
Lord of the vineyard shall come, What shall he do to those husbandmen? They say
to him, he shall most miserably destroy them; and his vineyard he shall deliver
to other husbandmen, who shall render him the fruits in their seasons. Jesus
himself said to them, Have ye never read in the Scripture, 'The stone which the
builders rejected, has become the chief corner stone of the building: This is of
the Lord, and it is a miracle in our eyes?' Wherefore I say unto you, The
kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a people which
shall render the fruits" (thereof.) And this parable is of a sort with that,
which is in the Prophet Isaiah, which is (given) in this manner: "My beloved had
a vineyard on the horn of a fat place. And he cultivated it, and surrounded it
with a fence, and planted in it vines, and built a Tower within it. He also made
a wine-press in it. And he expected that it would produce grapes; but it
produced wild grapes." But this that is in the Prophet, accuses the vineyard;
which he thus interprets, as to who was (really) intended, when he says, "For
the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house that is in Israel, and the men of
Judah are (His) one beloved plant. I looked for judgment, but there was rapine;
and for righteousness, but behold, howling!"

14. The parable then, spoken by our Saviour, was so like to that of the Prophet,
that it was known to point out those who were present and heard (it). But, it
was not of the vineyard that it was spoken, because the Prophet |237 had already
made his prediction of this. The things however, which were not mentioned in the
Prophet, He supplied in His parable: those, I say, which respected the
husbandmen of the vineyard; and these were the Elders of the people, the chief
Priests, the Rulers, and Doctors: those, who indeed were the cause to the whole
congregation, that they should render evil fruit, and, on whose account, the
vineyard itself was left to destruction. That is, the whole of their people,
with their fence, was rooted up; those who formerly contended for the people,
and watched over the people, together with their place. The Tower that was in
it, was the Temple; the wine-press, the Altar. And all these were therefore,
wholly taken away, even to their foundations ; because the husbandmen had become
polluted with blood ; those (I say), who had openly slain the servants first and
last; those Prophets, who had, time after time, been sent unto them. The Old
Testament also gives its testimony (otherwise) to this matter; and, of the
Prophets, Elias who in his prayer to God says, "Lord, they have slain thy
Prophets, and broken down thy Altar: and I am left alone, and they seek to take
my life36." Of these things therefore does this Prophet, by his prayer, accuse
the rulers of the Jewish people. These however, the pollution of the Prophets'
blood had not satisfied, and at last they slew the Son himself, that is, the Son
of God! Nor was it that they knew Him not; but, when they knew fully and
accurately, that He was the heir ! These things then, our Saviour Himself
delivered by parable, respecting Himself, before His suffering. He also
foretold,--by His foreknowledge, what should come to pass; (viz.) these things
when walking in the Temple,--to those husbandmen of the vineyard of His times,
the Chief Priests, the Doctors, and the rest of those who were at the head of
the people. And much (and) openly did He, in the parable, prepare them to
pronounce condemnation against themselves : asking them in the close of the
parable, and saying, "What shall the Lord of the vineyard, when He comes, do to
those husbandmen?" |238 And they, not yet understanding that it had been spoken
of themselves, gave judgment against themselves, saying, "He shall most
miserably destroy them, and shall give up the vineyard to other husbandmen, who
shall render to Him the fruits in their seasons." Jesus then said to them : " 37
Have ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, has
become the chief corner (stone) of the building: This is from the Lord, and is a
miracle in our eyes?" Very consistently after the prediction of His death, He
pointed out, from the testimony of the prophets, His own resurrection from the
dead. For He had previously taught, that the Son of the Lord of the vineyard
should be slain by the wicked husbandmen, and had obtained from themselves
(their own) condemnation. After that, He brought this forward : " The stone
which the builders rejected, has become the chief corner (stone) of the
building:" which, in the prophecy, had been given by way of parable on His
resurrection. For,--after He had been rejected by those husbandmen who were also
the builders, He (I say), who was (as) a precious stone, and of whom the Prophet
Isaiah says, "38Behold, I lay in Zion a choice and precious stone, the chief
corner (stone) of the foundation: And he, who believeth in it, shall not be
ashamed,"--He became the chief corner (stone) of another building, of which the
(divine) word has said: "39And this is a miracle in our eyes:" by which He meant
His Church. And thus deservedly did He, according to their own judgment on
themselves, repay them, saying, " The kingdom of God shall be taken from you,
and shall be given to a people, that will render the fruits" (thereof) : which
corresponds to this declaration (already) mentioned, (viz.) "from them;" that He
would " give the vineyard to other husbandmen, who should render to Him the
fruits in their seasons." For He named the "kingdom of God," those observances
in which the worship of God consisted; and these Hedeclared, should be taken
away from those husbandmen: and (this) He has most openly shewn, and brought to
effect; |239 giving (the vineyard) to another people, which does bring forth its
fruits. And this is the Christian people, which docs, throughout the whole
creation, bring forth the fruits, that are both conformable, and suitable, to
the observances of God; and shews this daily, both in words and works.

On the rejection of the Jews at once, and the calling of the Gentiles: also on
those who should unworthily be gathered into His Church ; and on the end of
these, From the Gospel of Matthew.

15. After the Parable which has already been mentioned, the word of the Divine
Scripture states, that "40When the chief Priests and Pharisees had heard His
parables, they knew that He spake against themselves, and they sought to take
Him: but they feared the people, because they held Him as a Prophet." "41And
Jesus answered them, and said again in a parable: The kingdom of heaven is like
to a (certain) man, a king, who made a (marriage) feast for his son, and sent
his servants to call those who had been bidden to the feast; but they would not
come. And again, he sent out other servants, and commanded them to say to those
who had been bidden: Behold, my dinner is ready, my fatted oxen are slain, and
every thing is prepared for you : Come to the feast. But they disregarded and
went away, One to the village (farm), and Another to (his) merchandise. But they
who remained seized his servants, and abused and slew (them). And the king was
enraged, and sent his army and slew those murderers, and burnt up their city. He
then said to his servants, My dinner is ready, but those who were bidden were
unworthy of it. Go ye out therefore, into the ways and paths, and every one that
ye find, call to the feast. So those servants went out into the ways, and they
brought together all they could find, (both) bad and good." Now, in the former
Parable, the Vineyard, the Tower, the Winepress, and the Husbandmen, were evil:
and the servants |240 sent, first and last, were killed. And, at last, even the
Son of the Lord of the vineyard was himself slain : by which were pointed out,
the People, the Temple, the Altar, and the Rulers of the Jews; and also those
wicked husbandmen, who, standing at the head of the people, slew both the former
and latter Prophets, and at last the Son of God Himself!

16. Now the Parable before our eyes, obviously introduces the familiar feast,
and bringing together, of the Bridegroom and Bride, with a marriage-supper: and
again the servants also, who are here destroyed and slain, and the former and
latter persons bidden. By means of these again, He points out covertly, the
things that happened after His resurrection from the dead. For the Bridegroom
is, THE WORD OF GOD ; the Bride, the rational soul, which is associated with
Him, and receives the Divine seed that is of Him. And (this) Divine and rational
association, (represents) that of His Church : and, consequent upon these
things, the rational feast and marriage supper, (represent) the Divine and
heavenly aliments (so prepared). He does not here speak of the inviting
servants, with reference to those who were formerly sent to the vineyard, but,
with reference to the latter ones. For those were the Prophets; but these, His
own Apostles, who were sent forth to make the call, (and) first, of those who
were of the circumcision. For, when He first sent these forth, He charged them,
saying, "42Into the way of the Gentiles go ye not; and into a city of the
Samaritans enter ye not; but rather go ye to the wandering sheep of the house of
Israel." These same persons therefore, the servants did first invite; but, when
they hearkened not to the call, He sent also, the second time, many Evangelists
and Preachers of the Gospel ; those whom He chose, after the twelve Apostles,
the seventy other Disciples, who also first preached the Gospel to the Jewish
people, and called them to the feast of the New Testament. But they availed
nothing, because they, who had been bidden, were busied with their merchandise;
and who, after they had heard the |241 call of the servants, abused some, and
killed others. And it is in our power to find from the Scriptures, how many of
the Disciples of our Saviour they afterwards killed, both in Jerusalem and in
the rest of Judea. Stephen then was, in the first place, forthwith slain by them
by stoning. After him, James the brother of John43. And again after them, he who
first chose (to accept) the throne44 of the Church of that place, James who was
called the Brother of our Lord: whom, on account of his great excellence, they
called "the Just45." Him too, the Jews of those times killed by stoning. How
they abused the Apostles by stripes, the Book of the Acts relates. And these
things did He, by His divine knowledge, foretel before they happened; He also
foretold the things which should befall them from the Jews. By means of a
parable too, He predicted what should come to pass before these things took
place, by these expressions, (viz.) "The king was enraged" at the abuse and
slaughter of his servants, " and sent his army, and slew those murderers, and
burnt up their city." And, What can be more obvious than this foreknowledge, and
the fulfilment of the things themselves (so predicted) ? For the army of the
Romans came soon after, and took the city, and destroyed the Temple itself by
fire. And, of Whom was it, except of Him who is King of all, God over all, that
it was thus said, that "the King shall send his army, and shall slay those
murderers, and shall burn up their |242 city?" To this very time indeed, the
remnants of the conflagration which took place in various parts of the city, are
obvious to the sight of those who travel thither. But, how those murderers of
the Apostles were taken in the reduction (of the city), and suffered the
punishment which they deserved, it is not necessary we should say, as the things
which were done to them, may readily be found in the record of the Romans46 by
Flavius Josephus47. After the slaughter of these therefore, and the reduction of
the metropolis of their kingdom, they,--who remained of those servants that had
first heard it said by their Lord, "They who were first called were not worthy;
but go ye out into the ways and paths, and all that ye find, call to the
feast"--performed even the thing commanded. Our Saviour said to them therefore,
after His resurrection, " Go ye and make Disciples of all nations in my name,"
And these things He said, who formerly had commanded: " In the way of the
Gentiles go ye not" but (enjoined) that they should preach to the Jews only.
But, when these had abused (their) Inviters, then He dismissed the servants the
second time, and said, " Those that were called were not worthy. Go ye out into
the ways and paths, and all that ye find call to the feast." And this they
fulfilled in deed. They went out into the whole creation, and they preached to
all nations, the divine and heavenly calling; and " they collected together as
many as they could find, (both) bad and good." Let no one therefore wonder,
that, of those, who are collected into the Church of Christ, all are not good;
but, that in the mixture together with the good, the evil will also be
collected. Nor did this escape the foreknowledge of our Saviour. And it is
accordingly seen to remain in fact, in conformity with that foreknowledge : and,
what the end of those will be, who are brought together unworthily in His
Church, He Himself shews; for He afterwards teaches these things in the |243
parable, saying, "And48 the feast was filled with guests: but, when the king
came in to see the guests, he saw there a man who had not (on) wedding garments.
And he said to him, My friend! how earnest thou in hither not having put on
wedding garments ? And he was silent. Then the king said to the ministers: Bind
him hands and feet, and cast him out into outer darkness. There shall be weeping
and gnashing of teeth. For many are the called, but few the chosen." He likewise
previously rebuked, with these predictive words, those who should conduct
themselves unrighteously in His Church.

Again, on the rejection of the Jewish people. From the Gospel of Matthew.

17. " Ye49 serpents, ye generation of vipers, How shall ye escape hell ?
Wherefore, behold, I send unto you Prophets, and Wise men, and Scribes: and some
of them ye shall kill and crucify, and some of them ye shall scourge in your
synagogues, and shall persecute them from city to city; so that there shall come
upon you, all the blood of the Righteous, which has been shed upon the land,
from the blood of Abel, even to the blood of Zecharias the son of Barachias,
whom ye slew between the steps and the altar. I say unto you, All these things
shall come upon this generation." There is no need we should affirm, that all
these things are so plain, as to require no explanation whatever; which, being
afterwards fulfilled in very deed, confirmed by (their) open fulfilment, the
foreknowledge of our Saviour. For the Apostles were scourged by the Jews at a
subsequent period, in Jerusalem itself; when also, they went forth from their
synagogues, "rejoicing50 that they were found worthy to be reproached for his
name's sake that they were found worthy to be reproached for his name's sake."
Stephen also was stoned by them; and James was slain with the sword51; and
again, the second |244 James was put to death with stones52. And Simeon, who
after James held the Episcopal chair in Jerusalem53, was given up to
crucifixion, as the history reminds (us). And many others again, who were slain
by the Jews, have (thus) set their seal to the foreknowledge of our Saviour. On
account of all which, the judgment of God took vengeance on the generation that
dared to do all this: and, upon it turned back the (just) consequence of all its
deeds. For it was of that generation that their Temple and altar were rooted up,
and the kingdom, which had, by tradition from their forefathers, been preserved
to that very time, was dissolved. And of the same, was their freedom taken away:
and, from the effects themselves it was evident, that the avenging of the blood
of all the Righteous was on that generation, in conformity with the words of our
Saviour. It is necessary then we should see, with what entire power, and by what
sort of force, it was said, "Behold I send to you Prophets, and Wise men." For
(this), "Behold I send" is an intimation of the power of God. And, that He
called the Rulers of the Jews to their face, a "generation of vipers," affords
no proof of deficiency (in this respect). The prediction too, of the destruction
which should overtake them, does, after all the rest, afford ample confirmation
as to these declarations; and this their complete fulfilment proves54. These
things are therefore sufficient (here). Let us then, |245 now enquire
accordingly, how it happened to the land which had always been precious to them,
and to those glories of the metropolis of the kingdom which had been (so) famous
with them; of which, by His divine foreknowledge He attested ;--weeping bitterly
as He did over them of his mercy,--that the whole should undergo a change to the
extremes of calamity, because of the insolence of its inhabitants against Him.

On the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem.

18. What the end of those things should be, which had been foretold respecting
the Jewish people, has (already) been said and shewn. But, as He, THE WORD OF
GOD, prophesied also respecting these places themselves, it is necessary we
should see His words on them. Now, when the Rulers of the Jews would not bear
the purity of His Doctrine, its publication, nor His rebukes, they so acted as
to rid their city of Him. He then, leaving Jerusalem, pronounced these words
over their city: "55Jerusalem, Jerusalem! that hast killed the Prophets, and
stoned them that were sent unto thee, How often would I have gathered thy
children together, as the hen gathereth her chickens under her wings : but ye
would not. Behold I your house is left desolate. For I say unto you, that ye
shall not see me henceforth until ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the
name of the Lord." Impurity (and) pollution afterwards marked their doings: and
this was the sin in which they dared to persist against our Saviour. And it was
right, not only that the Inhabitants of the city, but also the land itself,--in
which they so greatly boasted.--should be made to suffer the things, which the
deeds of its inhabitants deserved. And these they did suffer ! For it was not
long, before the Romans came against the city: and, of the inhabitants, some
they killed by the law of war; others they destroyed by famine; others they led
away captive ; and others they persecuted. The captive56 (City) and Temple they
burnt, and reduced to utter |246 desolation ! But the things which took place
afterwards, did our Saviour, from his foreknowledge as THE WORD or GOD, foretel
should come to pass, by means of those which are (now) before us. For He named
the whole Jewish people, the children of the City; and the Temple, He styled
their House. And thus He testified, that they should, on their own wicked
account, bear the vengeance thus to be inflicted. For many times would He have
gathered their children together beneath the yoke of the worship of God, just as
all formerly was; even as He had from ancient times been careful for them, and
had, during all ages, instructed them by one or other of the Prophets, and
called them, but they would not hearken to his call;--on this account, He gave
judgment against them, and said, "Behold your house is left desolate." It was
therefore with special care that He said, not (only) the City itself should be
desolate, but the House that was within it: that is, the Temple; (and) which He
was unwilling should again be called His, or yet "the House of God," but theirs
(only). He prophesied too, that it should be desolate in no other way, than as
deprived of that providential care, which was formerly exerted over it: hence He
said, "Behold your house is left desolate." And, it is right we should wonder at
the fulfilment of this prediction, since at no time did this place undergo such
an entire desolation as this was. Not at the time when it was rased to its
foundations by the Babylonians, on account of their great wickedness, their
worshipping of Idols, and pollution in the blood of the Prophets. For seventy
years was the whole period of the desolation of the place in those times:
because it was not (thus) fully said to them at that time, "Behold your House is
left desolate." Nor was it (then so) forsaken; an event happening soon after,
which dignified it with a renewal much more illustrious than its former state,
as one of the Prophets had foretold : (viz.) "The glory of this latter House
shall be greater than that of the former57." After the enouncement therefore of
our Saviour,--that they should so be left, and their house come, by the judgment
of God, to utter desolation ;--to |247 those who visit these places, the sight
itself affords the most complete fulfilment of the prediction. The period too
has been that of many years, and (of duration) so long, as not only to be double
of the desolation of seventy years,-- which was that in the time of the
Babylonians,--but even to surpass four times (its duration) ; and (thus)
confirming the judgment pronounced by our Saviour. Again, on another occasion,
our Saviour--walking by the side of the Temple, just mentioned, and His
Disciples wondering at the building which surrounded it, and pointing out to Him
the greatness and beauty of the same Temple;--returned to them answer and said,
"Behold! see ye not all these things ? I say unto you, stone shall not be left
here upon stone, which shall not be thrown down." The Scriptures do moreover
shew, that the whole building and the extreme ornamenting of the Temple there,
were indeed thus worthy of being considered miraculous: and, for proof (of
this), there are preserved, even to this time, some remaining vestiges of these
its ancient decorations. But, of these ancient things, the greatest miracle of
all is, the Divine word (declaring) the foreknowledge of our Saviour, which
fully enounced to those, who were wondering at the buildings (of the Temple),
the judgment, that there should not be left in the place at which they were
wondering, "one stone upon another which should not be rased" For it was right,
that this place should undergo an entire destruction and desolation, on account
of the audacity of its Inhabitants; because it was the residence of impious men.
And, just as the prediction was, are the results in fact remaining: the whole
Temple, and its walls,--as well as those ornamented and beautiful buildings
which were within it, and which exceeded all description,--have suffered
desolation from that time to this! With time too, this increases : and, so has
the power of THE WORD gone on destroying, that, in many places, no vestige of
their foundations is now visible! which any one who desires it, may see with his
own eyes58. And, should any |248 one say, that a few of the places are still
existing; we may nevertheless, justly expect the destruction of these also, as
their ruin is daily increasing: the predicting word, just mentioned, daily
operating by a power which is unseen. I know too--for I have heard it from
persons who interpret the passage before us differently,--that this was not said
on all the buildings, except only on that place which the Disciples, when
expressing their wonder upon it, pointed out to Him ; for it was upon this that
He spoke the predicting word. Again, the Scriptures of His Disciples which teach
respecting Him, (teach) us these things (following), on the utter destruction of
the place.--

On the taking of the City. From the Gospel of Luke.

19. "And59, when He saw the city, He wept over it, and said, If thou hadst
known, even in this day the things of thy peace.--But now, they are (so) hidden
from thine eyes, that the days shall come upon thee, in which thine enemies
shall surround thee, and shall press upon thee from every part of thee: and they
shall utterly root thee up, and thy children within thee." The things, prior to
these, were predicted respecting the Temple; these, which are now before us,
respecting the City itself; which the Jews named the City of God, because of the
Temple of God that had been built within it. Over the whole of this then, the
compassionate (Saviour) wept. It was not, that He had so much pity on the
buildings, nor indeed upon the land, as He had first upon the souls of its
inhabitants, and (then) upon (the prospect of) their destruction. He pointed out
moreover, the cause of their desolation when He said, "If thou hadst known, even
in this day, the things of thy peace:" intimating too His own coming, which
should be for the peace of the whole world. For |249 this is He, of whom it was
said, "In his days shall righteousness arise (as the sun), and abundance of
peace60. He came also for this purpose, that "He61 might preach peace to them
that were near, and to them that were afar off." And, of them who received Him,
He said, "Peace62 I leave to you I leave to you; my peace give I unto you:" the
peace, which all nations who believed on Him throughout the whole creation, have
received. But the people, who were of the circumcision and believed not on Him,
knew not the things of their peace : and, on this account, He said afterwards,
"It is now (so) hidden from thine eyes, that the days shall come upon thee, (in
which) thine enemies shall surround thee63." The things (I say), which were
therefore to take hold on them, a short time after, in the reduction (of the
city) : (and), because they had no previous perception of the peace, that had
been formerly preached to them, it should now be concealed from their eyes. They
had therefore, no previous perception of any thing, which should afterwards
befall them; He then plainly foretold these things by His foreknowledge, and
gave open intimation of the reduction (of the city), which should come upon them
through the Romans, (when saying), "The days shall come upon thee...because thou
knewest not the things of thy peace." For, for this cause "there shall come upon
thee the days, (in which) thine enemies shall surround thee, and shall go round
about thee, and shall press upon thee from every quarter of thee; and they shall
root thee out, and thy children within thee64." In these (words) then, has been
recorded the form of war which should come upon them. And, how they were
fulfilled, we shall presently find from the writings of Josephus, who was
himself a Jew, and descended from a tribe of the Jews ;--one of the well known
and famous men among that people. At the time of the reduction (of the place),
he committed to writing every thing that was done among them; and (so) shewed,
that the predictions before us were, in their facts, fulfilled. |250

Again, on the reduction of the City. From the Gospel of Luke.

20. "65When ye shall see Jerusalem surrounded by an army, know ye that its
desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. And
let those that are within it (Jerusalem) give up66: and let not those that are
in its borders, enter into it. Because these are the days of vengeance, that all
which has been written should be fulfilled. But, woe to them that are with
child, and to them that give suck in those days; for there shall be great
tribulation upon the land, and great wrath upon this people. And they shall fall
by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all nations. And
Jerusalem shall be trampled on by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles
shall be fulfilled." Previous to this He said, "Behold your house is left
desolate." He now gives by the words before us, the signs of the times of the
final destruction of the place; and these He shews, saying, "When ye shall see
Jerusalem surrounded by an army, thence know ye that its desolation is near."
Now, let no one imagine, that, after the reduction of the place, and the
desolation that should be in it, another renewal of it shall take place, as it
was in the times of Cyrus, king of the Persians; and afterwards in those of
Antiochus Epiphanes; |251 and again, in those of Pompey. For many times did this
place suffer reduction, and was afterwards dignified by a more excellent
restoration. But, when ye shall see it reduced by armies, know ye that which
comes upon it, to be a final and full desolation and destruction67. He
designates the desolation of Jerusalem, by the destruction of the Temple, and
the laying aside of those services which were, according to the law of Moses,
formerly performed within it. You are not to suppose, that the desolation of the
city, mentioned in these (words), was to be such that no one should any more
reside in it: for He says after this, that the city shall be inhabited, not by
the Jews, but by the Gentiles, when speaking thus, "And Jerusalem shall be
trampled on by the Gentiles68." It was known therefore to Him, that it should be
inhabited by the Gentiles. But He styled this its desolation (viz), because it
should no more (be inhabited) |252 by its own children, nor should the service
of the law he established within it. And, how these things have been fulfilled,
many words are not wanted (to shew) ; because, we can easily see with our own
eyes, how the Jews are dispersed into all nations; and, how the inhabitants of
that which was formerly Jerusalem,--but is now named Aelia by Aelius
Hadrian,--are foreigners, and the descendants of another race. The wonder
therefore of the prophecy is this, that He said of the Jews, "they should be led
captive into all nations;" and, of the Gentiles, "that Jerusalem should be
trampled on by them." This miracle is then complete : the Jews being now fully
(dispersed) throughout the whole creation, so that they are (found) remaining
among the Ethiopians, the Scythians, and in the extremities of the earth. It is
only their own city, and the place in which their worship formerly was (carried
on), that they cannot enter69! But, if the city itself had been utterly
desolated, and without inhabitants, men would have thought that this was the
cause (of their exclusion from it). Now however, that the place is inhabited by
foreigners, the descendants of a different race, and that it is not allowed to
them alone even to set a foot in it, so that they cannot view even from a
distance the land of their forefathers70; the things foretold of it are
fulfilled, in exact accordance with the prediction: (viz). "They shall be led
captive into all nations, and Jerusalem shall be trampled on by the Gentiles"
The manner moreover of the captivity, points out the war. of which He spoke;
"For (said He) there shall be (great)71 tribulation upon the land, and great
wrath upon this people : and they shall fall by the edge of the sword." We |253
can learn too, from the writings of Flavius Josephus, how these things took
place in their localities, and how those, which had been foretold by our
Saviour, were, in fact, fulfilled. He also shews plainly the fulfilment of the
prediction of our Saviour, when He said, "Woe to those that are with child, and
to them that give suck in those days72." For he has put it on record, how the
women roasted their children by the fire and ate them, on account of the
pressure of the famine which prevailed in the city. This famine therefore, which
took place in the city, our Saviour foresaw, and counselled His Disciples that,
in the reduction which was about to come upon the Jews, it was not for them to
take refuge in the city as in a place guarded and preserved by God, but in which
many should suffer ; but, that they should depart thence, and "flee to the
mountains;" and, that those, who should be within Judea, should give up to the
Gentiles; and those, who were in its lands, should not take refuge in it as in a
fortified place. On this account He said, "Let those who are in its borders73
not enter into it, since these are the days of vengeance, that all may be
fulfilled which has been written." Any one therefore, who desires it, may learn
the results of these things from the writings of Josephus. And, if it is right
we should lay down a few things from him in this book, by way of testimony,
there is nothing that should hinder us from hearing the historian himself, who
writes in this manner;--

From the sixth Book of Josephus74.

21. "And, How can it be necessary, that I should describe the severity of the
famine, as to things inanimate? I come then to the making known of a fact, the
like of which has not been recorded, either among the Greeks, or the Barbarians
: one which, it is shocking to mention, and, to the hearing, incredible. I
myself indeed, would |254 gladly have left this calamity (unmentioned)--that I
might not be thought by those who shall come after, to have related
falsehoods,--had I not had many witnesses among those of our own times. I should
indeed otherwise have rendered but a doubtful good, as to the land of my
fathers, had I omitted to mention the things which, it has, in fact, suffered. A
certain woman, of those who resided on the other side of the Jordan,--whose name
was Mirian, well known on account of her family and wealth,--took refuge with
many (others) in Jerusalem, and with them was shut up (in the siege). This
woman's other possessions, as they were after she left the passage (of the
Jordan) and came into the city, the Tyrants seized. The residue of her treasures
moreover, should it have sufficed for her daily sustenance, was invaded and
seized by the attendant soldiers. Grievous indignation therefore, took
possession of her; and many times did she excite the robbers against herself, by
curses and reproaches. But, when no one put her to death.--either on account of
her indignation or in mercy; and she became weary of seeking sustenance for
others from every quarter, and (as) suspicion was excited against her, even if
she found (it) : hunger, at the same time, remaining in her bowels, and
indignation inflaming her more than hunger;--she took for her counsellor
impetuosity and necessity, and dared to do that which was contrary to nature.
She seized upon her son,--for she had a sucking infant,--and said, "Wretched
(babe) ! for Whom do I preserve thee in war, famine, and tumult?-- that thou
shouldest be a slave to the Romans ? If thou shouldest indeed live happily with
them, still famine precedes (this) servitude ; and the seditious are cruel. Come
; be thou thou to me for food; to the seditious, the vengeance;--and to the
world, the tale which alone is wanting to (complete) the sufferings of the Jews
! And, saying this, she at once killed her son. She then roasted him, and ate a
part of him ! the rest she hid, and kept75!" |255 These sufferings out of many,
I have here set down on account of the Divine prediction of our Saviour, which
declared, "Woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those
days:" and because it adds this also to the predictive words of our Saviour,
"There shall be great tribulation on the land, and great wrath upon this
people:" or, as Matthew has said76, "For there shall be at that time great
tribulation, the like of which has not been since the beginning of the world,
even until now ; nor shall be" (hereafter). It will be well therefore, to hear
this writer himself, when thus putting on record the fulfilment of these same
things.

From the fifth Book of Josephus77.

22. "It would be impossible to give an account of each and every of their
iniquities singly; we say then summarily, that no (other) city (ever) suffered
all these things; and, that there never was a generation so fruitful in vices as
this78 : for they destroyed the city itself79! and (were the cause) that the
Romans should be recorded,-- as forced by them against their own wills,--to this
sad |256 victory ! They accordingly dragged them on forthwith, unopposed, to the
Temple ; and viewed from the upper city, the fire that was burning within it."
Nor were they pained, nor did they weep at these things ! Because, "there should
be at that time great tribulation, such, that its like existed not since the
beginning of the world." This very thing was foretold by our Saviour, which this
writer attests ! the whole of which was fully brought to pass1 forty years
afterwards, in the times of Vespasian the Roman Emperor. Our Saviour moreover,
added to His predictions,--determining the time,--how long Jerusalem should be
trampled on by the Gentiles; for He said, "Until the times of the Gentiles shall
be fulfilled:" intimating by this, the end80 of the world.

Again, on the laws of the Jews, (viz.) that they should no more be observed,
either on mount Gerizim, or in Jerusalem. And, on the service worthy of God,
which should be set up in His Church. From the Gospel of John.

23. On the side of this our neighbouring city Neapolis of Palestine,--which was
not small, but is even (now) a city of celebrity,--a woman of Samaria drew near
to Him ; and, after other words, said to Him, "Sir, I perceive that thou art a
Prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this |257 mountain; but ye say, that in
Jerusalem is the place where (men) ought to worship." Upon which, our Saviour
returning this answer, said to her, "Believe me woman, the hour cometh (in)
which, neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem shall they worship the
Father." And, after a few other things, He said : "The hour cometh, and now is,
(in) which the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth:
for the Father seeketh even such as these to worship Him. God is a, spirit, and
it is right that those who worship Him, should worship him in spirit and in
truth81." And, by these things also, He fully proved that His foreknowledge was
not small. For formerly, in the days of Tiberius the Roman Emperor,--in whose
times these things were said,--the Jews were particularly collected together in
Jerusalem, for the observance of the precepts of their Law; and the Samaritans,
on the mount called Gerizim which they honoured, on the side of Neapolis,
affirming that it was right the Law of Moses should there be observed. Now,
these mounts are, as it were, anathemas of God. With both, certain parts were
honoured; and of both, the Scripture of each bears record ; that of Moses,
respecting Gerizim ; and those of the Hebrew Prophets, respecting Jerusalem82.
The sentence of judgment therefore, put forth in the Divine enouncement of our
Saviour was, That no more, either in Jerusalem, or on mount Gerizim, should
those henceforth worship, who then adhered so pertinaciously to these places :
which came to pass soon after. (For), in the days of Titus Vespasian, and in the
reduction which happened in those of Hadrian, both these mounts were, according
to His words, desolated. That on the side of the city Neapolis, was defiled by
unbecoming Images, by Idols, |258 by Sacrifices, and the shedding of blood, and
(thus) rendered abominable. The Temple also of Jerusalem was rased to the
foundations, and has remained, during the whole of the time mentioned, in utter
desolation and (destruction by) burning. And, from that time and even until now,
has the prediction of our Saviour been fulfilled, which declared, " The hour
cometh, (in) which neither in this mount, nor in Jerusalem shall they worship,"
He terms the time (meant) "the hour;" which was not yet at hand, but was about
to be. And, speaking to His Disciples on the rational service to be completed by
Himself, He added, " The hour cometh, and now is, that the true worshippers
shall worship the Father in spirit and truth." He necessarily added therefore
here, It "now is." For immediately, from the very hour (in) which he said these
words, (viz.) " The true worshippers"--of whom He was the Head and Teacher,--His
Disciples, who received the rational service,--from Him, did perform the service
of God, "in spirit and in truth." But the thing, above all (others) prophesied
of in these words, implies, that no more on any mount, nor in any distinct
corner of the earth, but throughout the whole creation, should those " true
worshippers" worship the God who is above all, and should present to Him the
Divine services, which should be performed without blood, "in spirit and truth."
Not by similitude, nor by those things of which He was the antitype, as were
those of Moses observed by both Jews and Samaritans, in slaughter, sacrifices,
incense, fire, and many other bodily modes;--that all of these should be
abolished through the things now before us, did THE WORD OF GOD here predict. He
also said, henceforth "in spirit and truth." That is, "the true worshippers"
shall render to God, the service which is worthy of Him, in a manner divine and
with both the soul and mind.

On the people which should be set up out of foreign nations, by means of his
teaching. From the Gospel of John.

24. "I am83 the good Shepherd, and I know my own, and my own know me. Even as
the Father hath |259 known me, so know I the Father....And I lay down my life
(lit. self) for my sheep. And I have other sheep, those who were not of this
fold; and it is necessary that I should bring in these, and that they should
hear my voice. And there shall be one flock and one shepherd." By other words
(too) He taught and said, "I am not come, but to the sheep that have strayed of
the house of Israel84." It was the Jewish people then, that He named under this
figure; but, by the things before us, He predicted, that it was not those only
who had become His disciples from among the Jews, that were considered (as) of
the number of His flock; but those also who were without this fold. For thus,
the word (Scripture) usually names at one time, the whole Jewish people; at
another, Jerusalem, and the service there performed according to the Law of
Moses.--That "He would collect other sheep which were not of that fold" implies
the whole creation; and He foretold by these things, that out of them (this)
rational flock should be so brought together to Him, that to the one and
self-same worship of God, all, (both) Jews85 and Idolaters believing in Him,
should come over; and, that there should be " one flock and one Shepherd." This
is His Church, which has been established both from among the Jews, and
Gentiles. And thus, has it come to pass ! For at once, at the outset of the
preaching of the Gospel, great multitudes of the Jews were convinced that He was
the Christ of God, who had been preached of by the Prophets. And with these,
(those), who believed on Him from among the Gentiles, were brought together in
one Church, under the hand of the one Shepherd,--of Him who is THE WORD or GOD.
For in Jerusalem itself arose, from among the Jews, one after another fifteen
bishops of the Church there, from James who was the first86. There were too
thousands, at once both of Jews and Gentiles there, who had been brought
together, even to the time of |260 its reduction in the days of Hadrian. And,
that He was the (good) Shepherd who had been many times preached of in the words
of the Prophets, it is obvious to us: the words (I say), which mention THE WORD
OF GOD and teach, that He is the Shepherd of the souls of men, as of rational
flocks. For it is thus said on one occasion by the Prophets: " The Lord feedeth
me (as a shepherd), and I shall lack nothing87." And on another; "Shepherd of
Israel look, (thou) who leadest Joseph as a flock88:" and, on another, He
introduces (one) saying, "He is the Lord, and the Shepherd of the sheep89." He
therefore alone, is truly declared to be the Shepherd of rational souls. For,
just as the case is among men, the nature of the sheep is one, and that of the
shepherd another; and, (as) the rational nature rules and leads that which is
irrational; so also is it with respect to the superiority of the Shepherd
(here), THE WORD OF GOD, the nature far excels that of man. We indeed are His
flock, and, as compared with His power, we are less rational than any sheep. But
He is in truth the good and pure Shepherd, who does not so neglect His flock,
that it may be devoured by the wolves; that is to say, by the wicked demons, the
corrupters of souls. This constrains us to look to His word which declared, with
great power and might, "I am the good Shepherd;" and which also said, "I lay
down my life for my sheep." (This) He said in a mystery respecting His death. He
also taught at the same time the cause; viz. that it was for the redemption of
the souls of the rational flocks, that He (so) gave His life. And this also: "I
have other sheep," shews, that the Jews were not His only possession; but also,
that the whole of the nations had been given to Him of His Father, according to
this (declaration), "Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thine
inheritance." |261

How His death was the cause of the redemption of many. From the Gospel of John.

25. He was often with the Jews, because to them were known the predictions of
the Prophets respecting Him. But, because the Greeks upon one occasion also
approached His Disciples, desiring to see Him,--it is written, that, when they
had told Him this, He said: "90The hour is come, that the Son of Man should be
glorified. I say unto you, that unless the grain of wheat fall into the earth
and die, it will remain alone; but if it (so) die, it will bring forth much
fruit." By these things also) He obviously declared in a mystery, that, among
the Greeks, among foreign nations and the children of a different generation,
those things which comprehended the praises of His Godhead should be embraced.
For it was not when He was among the Jews that he said, "His hour had come that
He should be glorified," but, when the Greeks91 drew near to Him. After this, he
necessarily continued shewing of His own death, His resurrection, and of the
calling of the people, among whom He then was. For, just as the grain of wheat,
before it falls into the earth, remains alone, but contains the
life-producing-power, with the energies92 of the seed included within it, (and)
which the ears shall produce; but, after falling into the earth,--just as that
which lives after death,--it will increase, and, from the power vested within
it, produce many ears of corn; so did He also declare respecting Himself, that
the things should be. And this indeed, the result of them has plainly evinced.
|262 For, it was not the Greeks alone who, after His death, received of His
power and of the provisions of His Godhead, but also many nations. He was
therefore, that seed which fell, and sprang up again, "He who was dead, but is
alive93." He, who after His fall which was by death, increased greatly, is He
who has, by His resurrection, filled the lands of the heathen, as it were
cultivated fields, with the Divine unutterable power. On this account He said,
"The harvest94 is great, but the labourers are few." And again, "Lift95 up your
eyes and see the fields, that they are white for the harvest." These things He
also foretold (figuratively), of those who should after His death establish
themselves in Him, through the pure faith which is by Him; the multitude of whom
should, throughout the whole creation both of Greeks and Barbarians, constitute
the Church to be established in myriads of congregations ;--collected together,
as it were, (the produce of) rational well-cultured fields, into one place ;
(that is) the souls of men, into the granaries of His Church. Hence it has been
said, "He96 whose fan is in His hand, and who will cleanse His floor, and
collect the wheat into (His) treasuries: but the straw He will burn with fire
unquenchable."

How Simon the chief of the Disciples, should, like his Master, be given up to
crucifixion, and depart this life. From the Gospel of John.

26. "My97 children, a little while I am with you; and ye shall seek me: even as
I said to the Jews, whither I go, ye cannot come; and thus also I say again unto
you. Simon98 Peter said unto Him, Whither goest Thou ? And Jesus answered him:
Whither I go, thou canst not now come, but, after a time, thou shalt come." And
again, in the latter part of the book, Jesus, after his resurrection from the
dead, said to Peter: "99I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thy
loins, and wentest whither |263 thou wouldest ; but, when thou shalt have become
old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and others shall gird thy loins for
thee, and shall lead thee whither thou shalt not be willing. And these things
which He said (were) to shew, by what death he should glorify God. And, when He
had said this, He said to him, Follow me" And, Who is not astonished, that, when
He said these things to His Disciples, they should be prepared and ready to
adhere to Him even to death ? For He did not deceive them by intimating, or
promising to them, the things considered good in this life ; nor did He by any
such means, allure them to give their adhesion to Him ; but, He simply foretold
those obvious tortures which should, on His account, befall them. And (so) He
previously shewed to Simon the mode of crucifixion, by which he afterwards
closed his life in the city of Rome, in this which He said, "When thou shalt
have become old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and others shall gird thy
loins for thee." And similarly, He also shewed mystically in this which He said,
"Whither I go. thou canst not now come; but, after a time, thou shalt come."
Now, these things were not said to them all, but only to Peter ; because it is
he alone, who, in the Scripture, (is said) should end his life after the manner
of the suffering of our Saviour.

How He foretold to the rest of His Disciples, the persecutions which were about
to arise time after time against them. From the Gospel of Matthew100.

27. "Beware of men, for they shall deliver you up to their Rulers, and shall
scourge you in their Synagogues, and shall bring you, before governours and
kings for my sake, for a testimony to themselves, and to the Gentiles." And
again101, "Blessed are ye when they persecute you, and revile you, and say every
evil (thing) against you, for my sake. Rejoice and exult, since great is your
reward in heaven ; for so they persecuted the Prophets who were before you."
Now, the wonder is this, (viz.) the additional word here saying, "for my sake."
For it was not sufficient, that He should only foreknow and foretel the
persecutions |264 which should arise against His Disciples; but, that He might
also shew the cause of these, He said, they should suffer these things for His
sake. Nor was it on account of any evil practices, nor yet for any other fault;
but,--(as) He previously testified,--that every thing (of this sort) should
befall them for His sake: which is present in the fact for our information ! For
if any one, during the time of the persecutions, denied only that he was a
Christian, he was released from all blame and cause of accusation. But, so
irreprehensible and sinless were the lives of His Disciples to be, that they
should suffer every sort of calamity for no other cause, except only their
confessing, and giving testimony to, Him. He did indeed, fully stir up and
make'them ready (for this), by comparing them with the ancient Prophets and
Friends of God ; for102, (said He), even as they persecuted the Prophets who
were before you, so shall they, without cause, drive you out; and, after the
manner of the Prophets, shall ye be punished, because ye worship the God who is
over all; on which account, they also persecuted the Prophets. Now that He
should foretel, that even governours and kings should be moved by these things;
that the time was then at hand; that He should (so) speak with His Disciples;
and that His words should so come to pass and remain in fact, How greatly does
it exceed (all) wonder ? For there have been many others, both Barbarians and
Greeks, who have said and promised many wise things to their Disciples. Of
these, some supposed that there was no God; others annihilated every
consideration about Providence; and others (received) those who were thought
Gods by the many: others arose (as) the leaders of vicious factions; others (who
thought), that Rest103 was the extreme (good) : and others, that Rest
indiscriminately was; and who indeed talked just as they might be circumstanced.
But never did any one of these, |265 previously determine such things for His
Disciples. Nor do we know of any persecutions that opposed them, such as those
were that opposed the teaching of our Saviour. How then shall we not wonder, and
confess, that these are indeed the words of God ?--these (I say), which not only
previously attested, through the Divine foreknowledge, the persecutions which
should come upon His Disciples; but also, previously pointed out the cause of
these, by this which He said, that these things should happen to them, for His
sake?

How those also who were equals should arise, and persecute each other, in the
times of the persecutions. From the Gospel of Matthew104.

28. "The brother shall deliver his brother to death, and the father his son: and
the children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put
to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake; but he, who shall
bear even to the end, shall live." Now, how these things have, even to the
present time, been fulfilled in fact, What need is there that we should shew at
length, since these facts are superior to all report ? We have seen too with our
own eyes, how many things of this sort took place, both during the persecutions,
and in our own times. Nor do you simply hear this, that "the brother should
deliver his brother to death;" for even this might have been as any mere matter
of opinion. But we can investigate (the case), and inform ourselves how it was,
that "the brother delivered his brother to death."-- When one surrenders himself
to fraternal affection, and chooses the love of life, and denies God, and
particularly with respect to his brother, whom he will solicit and persuade to
worship idols; will excite and inveigle, putting forth (his) fraternal
affection, so as to make him disregard the command of our Saviour; then indeed,
will the |266 brother deliver up his brother to the death of his soul. In like
manner also, will the father cause his son to err (by enticing), and will
persuade him to worship the idols, and (so) deliver him to death. So also the
children, their parents: they will, through their affection for them, (so) lead
them on, that they will choose the mortal life which now is, rather than that
which is with God; and will (so) become the cause, both of the death and
perdition of the soul of their parents105. And many such things as these, did we
witness with our own eyes, during the times of the persecutions ; so that in
them was fulfilled the (prediction) : "Ye shall be hated of all men for my
name's sake." In this place also was this addition carefully made, teaching the
Disciples that, it should not be for any hateful deed, but for His name's sake,
they should be hated.

On those who should impurely collect themselves into His Church, and on the
punishment that should come upon them. From the Gospel of Matthew106.

29. "The kingdom of heaven is like a net that fell into the sea, and collected
of every sort (of fish) ; and, when it was full, they drew it up to the shore,
and sitting down they selected those that were good, and put them into vessels;
but the bad, they threw away. Thus shall it be in the end of this world: the
angels shall go forth, and shall separate the evil from among the just, and
shall cast them into a fiery oven: there shall be weeping and gnashing of
teeth." The "net"--which is here (put) by a figure for the word,-- and which is
woven (as it were) from the various mind of the old and new Scriptures, He names
His own doctrine : the fluctuating life of man, which is subject to hardship in
its doings on account of the calamities attending it, "the sea." Out of this
(sort of) life, as from the sea, the "net," so foretold, was to catch up tens of
thousands. And under it were to be (taken), the various multitudes of those
opposed |267 to each other in their characters; and of these, the good and bad
in their dispositions. Of these too he spoke mystically, as being caught up from
the sea after the manner of fish, when He said in the first calling of His
Disciples, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men107." This collecting
together therefore of such men, bad and good, in His Church,--assembled (as they
are) to this very time,-- was not unknown to Him : for He taught, that these
same should at last be separated by the Angels, who should be appointed to this
(work) ; and (so) should the punishment, due to the disposition of each one, be
awarded.

How Impostors and Seducers should invest themselves with His Doctrine, and
formally present themselves to Him. From the Gospel of Matthew 108.

30. "Beware of lying Prophets who come to you in lambs' clothing, but inwardly
(are) rapacious wolves. By their fruits ye shall know them. For men do not
gather grapes from thorns, nor figs from thistles. So every good tree produceth
good fruit, but an evil tree giveth forth evil fruit." He (here) counselled
(them) by His foreknowledge, to beware of those ungodly persons, who, availing
themselves of the 109opinions of others, and of the words of the Scriptures of
His Divinity, should in after times formally assume the name of Christianity. He
also shews the marks and vouchers of the evil concealed within them, and which
should deceive the many, when saying, "By their fruits ye shall know them." Now
the fruits of such are these ; the ungodly words uttered by them; their
unrighteous and perverse manner of life. These things then, when uttered and
foretold by our Saviour, afforded at that time no visible testimony whatever to
those who heard them, (as to their truth) ; but, in after times, the facts (so)
declared became openly visible to all: the followers accordingly of |268
Marcion110, Valentinus111, Basilides112, and those other corrupters of souls,
sprang up, (viz.) Bardesanes113, and that madman in opinion of yesterday, and of
our own times, whose name became the titular badge of the Manichean114 |269
heresy; who all became the sources of lying and ungodly doctrine. Nor did they
otherwise come to light, but as outwardly clothed with the skins of our
Saviour's lambs. And He plainly styled His Disciples "sheep;" saying, "My sheep
hear my voice115:" and again, "Behold, I send you as sheep among wolves116." Of
these then they outwardly assumed the manner, while in themselves they were
"rapacious wolves." (And), How many thousands of the sheep of our Saviour, did
these Deceivers snatch away ? Who, presenting their persons in form as to
Christ, attached themselves to His instruction, and to the terms of the
doctrines relating to His Godhead, and exhibited themselves as (His) lambs !
But, that ungodly bitterness117 which lay (as) in ambush within them, adhered
secretly to those who had been ensnared by them. These, therefore, who were now
thought to be "sheep," because of their (thus) drawing near (to Him), openly
appeared afterwards to be "rapacious wolves." |270 And hence, our Saviour taught
us previously to beware of them, when He said by way of instruction, "By their
fruits ye shall know them."

How even He and His Disciples should be thought to have taken men, by means of
Magicians, and of intercourse with Demons.

31. "The disciple is not greater than his master, nor the servant than his lord.
It is sufficient for the disciple that he be as his master, and for the servant,
as his lord. And, if they have called the Lord of the house Beelzebub, How much
more the children of his household? Fear them not therefore, for there is
nothing hidden that shall not be revealed; nor concealed that shall not be made
known118." The Jews held that Beelzebub was an evil Demon, and prince of the
Demons: they blasphemed our Saviour accordingly, (affirming) that by the power
of this, He expelled the rest of the Demons from men 119. But, He returned the
true answer to those who thought this, which is also written among His words. He
foretold too, to His Disciples, that they also should be thought to overcome
men, through intercourse with Demons and Magicians: which very thing, now
affirmed by the many, has sealed and confirmed the prediction of our Saviour. He
also gave His testimony, that this notion, (so) ascribed to them, should come to
nothing, from (the consideration) of their lives, and conduct; their purity of
doctrine, and that (inculcating) |271 the worship of God. He said therefore,
"Fear them not; for there is nothing hidden that shall not be revealed, nor
concealed that shall not be made known." He therefore reproved these
(Disciples), for a considerable time, because the things formerly escaping the
many, had, on this account, been supposed (by them) to be incapable of
publication; as also those, belonging to the doctrines of the (true) worship of
God, of being made openly known. But, His ordinances and precepts have now been
made known to every man ; and He has extinguished that (injurious) opinion
respecting them, (His Disciples) which had formerly been held by the many120.

On those who should remain in complete holiness in His Church, and in the life
inexperienced (in conjugal) Society. From the Gospel of Matthew.

32. When He determined for them, that (one) should not leave his wife except in
the matter of fornication 121, and His Disciples said to Him, "If the cause of a
man with the wife be thus, it is not advantageous to take wives;" It is written,
that He said upon these things, "Every man is not sufficient for this matter,
except those to whom it is given. There are eunuchs, who were, thus from their
mothers' womb; and there are eunuchs, who were (made) eunuchs by men ; and there
are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs, for the sake of the kingdom of
heaven. He who can bear (it) let him bear (it)." It is evident from the context
of the Scriptures, that there never was among men, and particularly among the
Jews, any one who uttered by revelation any thing like this ; or, who did any
thing like it: or that, throughout the whole creation and among all nations,
whether in the cities or villages, there were multitudes, not of men (only), but
also of women, who |272 kept122 themselves in perfect holiness, and the state of
virginity, through the hope and expectation of the kingdom of heaven. We have
seen in the very experiment itself, that they learned they should soon be
prepared for this. The fulfilment however, of the claim to foreknowledge, was
not simply (realized here); for we have seen many men, well known to us, who
(actually) availed themselves of the iron (knife,) and made eunuchs of
themselves for no other cause, except that of the hope of the kingdom of heaven:
who neither hesitated, nor were weak in the doctrine of our Saviour, but simply
and boldly betook themselves to the thing itself123. So that the foreknowledge
of our Saviour, even respecting these things, sets to its seal, that His word
was in truth the word of God. |273

On the distinction of those who should not worthily receive the seed of His
doctrine. From the Gospel of Matthew.

33. When a great multitude of men had come near Him, He thus foretold by a
parable what those should be, who should receive the seed of His doctrine,
saying : "124Behold, a sower went forth to sow: and, as he sowed, some fell by
the way side, and the fowls of heaven came and devoured it: and some fell on the
rock, where there was not much earth, and immediately it sprang forth ; and,
because there was no depth of earth beneath its root, it dried up. And some fell
among thorns, and the thorns sprang up, and choked it: and some fell upon good
ground, and it gave forth fruit, some an hundred, some sixty, and some
thirty-fold. After these things He cried out and said, He that hath ears to
hear, let him hear" After this also, He was asked by His Disciples, what the
interpretation of the parable should be; and He taught them, saying, " Hear ye
therefore the parable of the sower. Every one that heareth the word of the
kingdom, but understandeth it not,--the Evil one cometh, and snatcheth the seed
out of his heart. This is that which is sown by the ivay side. And that which is
sown upon the rock, is he who heareth the word, and with readiness receiveth it:
but, not being confirmed therein, he is offended by a little affliction. And
that which fell among the thorns, is he who heareth the word, but the care of
the world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and it remaineth
without fruit. But that which is sown on good ground, is he who heareth the
word, and understandeth it, and produceth fruit, some an hundred, some sixty,
and some thirty-fold." Now, Whence could it have happened to human nature, not
only to declare bv (one's) foreknowledge something that should come into being;
but also, to determine the kinds and sorts of persons (who should), unless
indeed He were truly THE WORD of God ?--He (I say), who at that time (so)
prophesied and taught;--of whom it is said, "The WORD OF GOD is lively
(energetic), and more sharp and cutting than the two-edged sword, and passeth
even to the parts of the |274 soul and of the body, and of the joints and
marrow; and is the Judge of the thoughts and intentions of the heart, and from
whom no creature is hidden125?" He well declared therefore, the distinguishing
marks of those who should afterwards receive His doctrines; and He also
foretold, that those who should in impurity receive the seed of His instruction,
should be of three kinds; as should in like manner the good, who should like
good ground hear much, and give great increase to the word itself. Of those
corrupters of the seed too, which should fall into their souls, He declared
there should be three (moving) causes : Either from the considerations of life,
and the care of things not (absolutely) necessary, and from riches and
pleasures, immersing (as it were) the seed sown within them, and making it
resemble the seed choked by thorns: or, others not receiving it into the depth
of the mind, but immediately extinguishing it when affliction overtakes them:
or, the third cause may be, that the source of the destructions of the seed
within them is, the surrendering of a lax and ready hearing to (men) wishing to
seduce them, and to snatch away the seed that had fallen into their souls. And
these same are, in no other way cut off from bearing the fruit that is of God,
except as by one or other of the means just mentioned. But those who are opposed
to these, and receive the seed of salvation into a soul that is pure, and a mind
that is devoted, do again, as their power may be, greatly increase their fruits.
He moreover assimilates the distinctions of these, to those of good and
excellent lands which bring forth some thirty, some sixty, and some an
hundred-fold. For such as these powers are, are those occasionally found in the
souls of men. These things therefore, He prophesied on these matters. But, of
the |275 multitude of those who should in after-times bear (much) fruit, through
the instruction of His words, He thus cried out and said, "The harvest is great,
but the labourers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He
would send forth labourers into His harvest126." And again, of these same He
said on another occasion : "Do not ye yourselves say, that there are yet four
months, and the harvest cometh ? Lift up your eyes, and see the fields that they
are white for the harvest127!" And, Who does not wonder, that He should shew
even the fewness of those who should in purity be the chiefs of His word, for He
said, "The labourers are few?" And, as prayer was necessary for the obtaining of
these, He said therefore, "Pray ye the Lord of the harvest, that He send forth
labourers into His harvest." When He said therefore, "The sower went out to
sow," He also said, that there was another sower, and another seed ; and He also
shewed and taught, whence, and whither, he went forth by the things said in the
parable immediately following this, which is in this form:--

On the teaching of Heterodoxy128, which should be sown together with His word in
the souls of men. From the Gospel of Matthew.

34. He added another Parable, and said: "The kingdom of heaven is like to a man,
who sowed good seed in his field. But, when men slept, the Enemy came and sowed
Tares among the wheat, and departed. When therefore, the wheat sprang forth and
produced fruit, the Tares appeared in like manner. And his servants drew near
and said to him : Our Lord, Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? Whence
are there Tares in it ? But he said to them, The man (who is) the Enemy hath
done this. They say to him: Is it thy will therefore, that we go (and) gather
them ? But he |276 said to them, No; lest, while ye gather the Tares, ye also
root up the wheat with them. Let them both grow until the harvest. And at the
time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather up first the Tares, and bind
them in bundles for burning; but gather ye the wheat into the granaries129"
(lit. treasuries). This same Parable too, He explained to His Disciples in the
house, when they drew near to Him and said, "Explain to us the Parable of the
Tares of the field. And He answered them, and said: The sower of the good seed
is the Son of man; and the field is the world. (As to) the good seed, these are
the children of the kingdom; and the Tares, those are the children of the wicked
one; and the Enemy, who sowed them, is the Accuser. And the harvest is the end
of the world, and the reapers are the Angels. Even therefore, as the Tares are
gathered up, and fall into the fire; so shall it be at the end of this world.
The Son of man shall send His Angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom
all offences, and those that do evil, and shall cast them into the Gehenna130 of
fire: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And then shall the righteous
shine in the kingdom of their Father. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
Our Saviour shewed therefore, by His explanation of the Parable, these things
(viz.), who the sower that went out to sow the seed was, and what the seed was
which He cast forth, in the expressions: "The sower of the good seed is the Son
of man ; and the field is the world." For He usually called Himself the "Son of
man," on account of His going about among men131. He therefore went forth from
|277 within132, and came out. Where then was He within, but above the world ?
where (indeed) He existed; and in the end of the world133 He came forth, and
came down to us, who were without (out of) the kingdom of heaven. And with Him
He brought the heavenly seed, which He sowed in the souls of men as in
distinguished lands. For the Parable placed before us teaches respecting the
field, as of what sort it is, into which He cast the seed;--which says, "The
field is the world;" and it shews of this field, that it belongs to none but
Himself;--to Him who came forth from the inner part of His kingdom, to those who
were "without" (out of it), when saying, "the servants drew near and said to
Him, "Our Lord, didst not thou sow good seed in THY field?" He therefore taught
plainly, that even this field is His own : and this He interpreted and shewed,
was the world. In the former Parable therefore, He shewed His foreknowledge as
to what the distinctions of those would be, who should receive the seed into
their souls; but in this, which is placed before us, the perverse doctrines and
errors of the ungodly Hereticks: when not one of them had yet so established
himself among men! Nevertheless, it was not unknown to Him that this should come
to pass. For, as false scriptures were scattered as seed in succeeding times
throughout the whole earth, with enouncements assimilated to those of His
doctrine, by an opposing nature, not unlike the Tares (sown) among His pure
words and life-giving doctrines134;--and there are myriads even to this time,
some of whom make their boast of Manes, some of Marcion, and some of others, of
those (I say) who put forth ungodly heterodoxy, and "Tares" (as it were),
assimilated to the doctrine of our Saviour; making use of His name, and holding
false books of the Gospels:--but he who was the Father of these things; |278
--he who first sowed them in the souls of those who received him, was the
Accuser himself: so He (our Saviour) well evinced, by the Divine power, the
foreknowledge of what should come to pass; and these things He previously
testified, which have been thus fulfilled in fact; and accordingly their
fulfilment was, as His words (had foreshewn). As He therefore truly shewed forth
these things, and as we see in the facts themselves, the fulfilment of these
predictions of our Saviour; so ought we also to think, that the rest shall come
to pass. And these are, "the harvest,"" "the end," and "the angels the reapers:"
also that the Tares shall be gathered, and shall fall into the fire:--the
extreme good things too of those, who shall have preserved and multiplied the
living, pure, and life-giving seed ; of whom it is said, "Then shall the
righteous shine as the sun, in the kingdom of their Father."

On those who should falsely name themselves the Christ. From the Gospel of
Matthew135.

35. "When He sat on the mount of Olives, His Disciples drew near, saying between
themselves and Him, Tell us, When shall these things be ? and What is the sign
of thy coming, and of the end of the world ? And Jesus answered them, and said,
See that no man deceive you: for many shall come in my name, and shall say, I am
the Christ; and shall deceive many" And again, after a few things He said,
"136If at that time any one say to you, the Christ is here, or there; believe ye
not. For false Christs shall arise, and false Prophets, and shall give great
signs and wonders, so that if it were possible they should deceive even the
elect. Behold, I have foretold (it) to you137. If therefore they shall say to
you, Behold, He is in the desert, go not forth; or, Behold, He is in the
chamber, (it) not. For, as the lightning shineth from the |279 East, and is seen
even to the West; so shall the coming of the Son of Man be" And on another
occasion, when speaking with the Jews, He added these things and said, "138I am
come in the name of my Father, and ye receive me not; but, if another come in
his own name, him ye will receive." These things He foretold when warning His
Disciples against the lying Antichrist, whom they were expecting: and one (of
these) shewed of another in the Epistle to the Thessalonians, who (should be) in
(the time of) the end139. But, that others also should be before this, our
Saviour Himself foretold in several places: "For many," said He, "shall come in
my name, and shall say, I am the Christ, and shall deceive many." And there were
many (such) after (these) His words. And so the Samaritans were forthwith
persuaded that Dositheus140, who was after the times of our Saviour, was the
prophet of whom |280 Moses predicted 141. And he so deceived them, that they
declared he was the Christ. Others again, in the times of the Apostles, named
Simon Magus "the great power of God142" and thought that he was the Christ.
Others (thought the same) of Montanus143 in Phrygia: and others again, of
others, in another place. Nor did the deceivers cease. And it is necessary we
should suppose, that there were many such as these; so that even from them,
testimony may be had, as to the reality of our Saviour's foreknowledge. Our
Saviour taught moreover, that His glorious second coming should not again be, as
it was at the first, in some one place, so that it may be supposed to be visible
in some corner of the earth: and, that no one should thus think, He said, "If
any one shall say to you, Behold, the Christ is here, or is there, believe ye
not." For opinions such as these comport by no means with Him, but with those
false Christs and false Prophets. He indeed appeared once in the form of man,
and in a certain district. But, of what sort his glorious second coming from
heaven should be, He taught and said, "For, as the lightning goeth forth144 |281
from the East, and is seen even to the West; so also shall the coming of the Son
of Man be."

On the events that should happen at the end of things. From the Gospel of
Matthew145.

36. "Ye shall hear indeed of wars, and rumours of wars: see that ye be not
moved, for it is necessary they should be; but the End is not yet. For nation
shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there shall be
famines and pestilences, and commotions6 in divers places. And all these are the
beginning of sorrows. Then shall they give you up to affliction, and shall kill
you in divers places. And all these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall
they give you up to affliction, and shall kill you; and ye shall be hated by all
nations for my name's sake." And after this He added, and said, "146Then shall
many stumble, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many
false prophets shall arise, and shall deceive many. And, because of the
abundance of iniquity, the love of many shall wax cold. But he, who shall bear
until the End, shall live. And the Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in
the whole world, for the testimony of all nations; and then cometh the End." He
clearly foretold also by these things, that His |282 Gospel should, of
necessity, first be preached in the whole creation, for the testimony of all
nations, "and then should the END come." For the END of the world should not
come, before (the Gospel) had been preached; but, when His word should have so
taken effect among all nations, that the people should be few, among whom His
Gospel had not been preached; so also should the time of the END 147 be short
(in its coming). He further teaches and |283 says, "Ye shall hear of wars, and
rumours of wars: see that ye be not moved, for it is necessary they should be;
but the End is not yet." He also shews when this shall be, for He says, "The
Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole creation, for the testimony
of all nations: and then cometh the end." When also, "famines and pestilences,
and commotions (shall be) in divers places, and nation shall rise against
nation, and kingdom against kingdom" and there shall be overwhelming
persecutions, and great afflictions. After these things too, He says, "And ye
shall be hated of all nations" not on account of any other hateful acts, but
"for my name's sake148."

37. These proofs of the Divine manifestation of our Saviour, which we have thus
far seen, are at the same time demonstrative, that both the words and deeds (had
in view) are Divine. For in former times, the words were simply heard; but now,
in our times, the fulfilment of these words is openly visible in deed, together
with powers eclipsing those of all mortal nature. And, if men will not be
persuaded by these, we ought not to wonder: because it is usual with man so to
resist things the most plain, as even to dare to oppose by his words the
existence of an universal Providence; and hence also, to deny God himself! And
thus also, will he disingenuously contend against many other things, to which
the truth bears testimony. But, as the injurious conduct of these detracts in no
respect from the word, which is in its own nature true; so also will the wicked
unbelief of men, in no way injure the evident excellency of the Godhead of our
Saviour. But, if it is right |284 that we should compose, for these also, a form
(of prescription) conducing to intellectual health ; it is time that we should
here again present, for their use, (other) proofs of the (truth of the) Gospel,
and now also recite the things, which have formerly been investigated with
reference to other (objectors), as to those who will not be persuaded by the
things (hitherto) said. The End of the Fourth Book (of Eusebius) of Caesarea.

[Selected footnotes. Notes concerned only with points of the Syriac and large
chunks of Greek have been omitted]

1. 1 Syr. [Syriac], lit. his child: but, as this is probably a translation of
the Greek pai~j, which signifies boy, and thence either child or servant-boy, I
have thought it best to render it by the English, boy, which is equally
indefinite with the Greek.

2. 2 Alluding, perhaps, to Gen. xxxii. 25-28, comp. with Hos. xii. 4.

3. 3 This and the following recital are taken, in the main, from Matt, viii. 5.
seq. with the addition of "beloved," (Syr. [Syriac]) from the parallel passage
in Luke vii. 2. It differs considerably from the Peschito, and is probably the
rendering of our Syriac Translator, with the words of the Peschito, however, in
his memory. The greatest variety consists in this, that our text has here,
Chiliarch (Syr. [Syriac]) Captain of a thousand, instead of Centurion of the
Greek and Syriac Scriptures. I have accordingly given Chiliarch in my
translation. This reading is certainly extraordinary.

4. 2 I have not thought it necessary here to follow the verbiage of the Syriac,
which gives, [Syriac]. Of those who reside at the risings of the day, and in
quarters of the East, and at the settings of the Sun. I add this merely for the
sake of the Student of the Syriac.

5. 1 Lit. Spaniards and Gauls.

6. 2 It is commonly assumed by the Roman Catholics, that Christianity was
unknown in Britain until Austin the Monk introduced it at the command of Gregory
the Great. With how much truth this is done the reader will see, when he finds
that the Fathers generally asserted the contrary. See the "Lux Evangelica" of
Fabricius, and Stillingfleet's " Origines Ecclesiae Britannicae."

7. 3 Matt. viii. 11.

8. 4 Luke xiii. 28, 29.

9. 5 Matt. iv. 18.

10. 1 As an extract from the Greek original of this place has been preserved in
the Imperial Library of Vienna (Lambecii xlii. Nesselii lxxi.) and which has
been kindly communicated to me by its learned Librarian Dr Kopitar, through the
intervention of the Right Honourable Lord Napier, I shall here give it. I give
Dr Kopitar's whole transcript. " Exscriptum e Codice Theol. graeco. Vindob. fol.
240. v. ad Luc. v. 6. de reti rupto: Eu0sebi/ou ev0aggelik~ qeofa& .:. -- rubro
colore. Parakeleu&etai me\n pe&trw o9 KC. xala&sai ei0j a1gran ta_ di/ktua. o9
de\ to_ prostetagme/non e0poi/ei: w9j de\ sune/kleisan plh~qoj i0xqu&wn polu_.
kai\ dierrh&gnuto ta_ di/ktua tw~ plh&qei barou&mena, proskalou~ntai me\n ei0j
boh&qeian tou_j e0n tw~ geitniw~ni+ ploi/w. ei0t a0nelku&santej tou_j i0xqu&aj,
plhrou~sin a1mfw ta_ ska&fh. w9j ki+nduneu&ein au0ta_ budi+sqh~nai: e0f0 oi[j o9
pe&troj a0poqauma&saj e0cepla&gh. a0na&cio&n te e9auto_n th~j srio&n (?)
e0piba&sewj w9molo&gei :-- seq. rub. grh& qeolog.:."

Another extract, with which I was favoured through the same channnel, will be
found in Book v. sect. 38.

11. 2 The Greek Orat. de laudd. Constant. extract extends to this place.

12. 1 This is given above as a principle.

13. 2 Our author here speaks as an inhabitant of Caesarea.

14. 1 Matt. v. 14-16.

15. 3 Is. ix. 1, 2.

16. 1 If it should be imagined, that Eusebius intended above to assign any
preeminence to Peter in the work of evangelizing the world, this place would be
sufficient to correct any such notion. Peter was, as the primary Apostle of the
Gentiles, very highly honoured: it was Paul nevertheless, who, after his
conversion, became the most abundant labourer of them all.

17. 2 John viii. 12, &c.

18. 3 Ib. i. 9.

19. 4 Matt. x. 27, 28.

20. 6 Matt, xxviii. 18, to the end. The differences from the Peschito are
slight, and such as to shew, as before, that the Translator having the words of
the Peschito in his mind, rather translated afresh than followed it
literally.--All these headings following are, in the MS. given as Rubrics.

21. 1 Ps. ii. 8. Cited also, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap. x. p. 162. D.

22. 2 I do not see how this could come out of the mouth of an Arian.

23. 3 The place here referred to is Deut. xxxii. 8, as given in the Version of
the Septuagint: where we have, [Greek] Out of this seems to have originated the
notion of Angels presiding over the several regions of the Earth: and, thence,
among the heathen, of Demons doing this: a notion prevailing far and wide in the
East at this very day. The Hebrew has here, "Children of Israel;" whence the
notion among the Jews, that there were 72 nations on the earth, and as many
languages; because this was the number supposed to have gone down with Jacob
into Egypt. The whole however, is a gross mistake, which has arisen out of a
false interpretation of the Hebrew term [Hebrew], signifying enumeration, as
well as number. The sense of the place will then be, according to the
enumeration, (account or statement) of the children of Israel: i. e. as found in
their Scriptures. This Scripture is also quoted, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iv. cap.
vii; but the reasoning differs. See also ib. cap. x. p. 163. See also Origen
contra Cels. Lib. v. p. 250, &c. An extract is given from the Theophania, in the
"Scriptorum Veterum Nova Collectio," Tom. viii. p. 91, by Signior Angelo Mai in
these words: [Greek] If this extract belongs to any part of this work, it must,
I suppose, be to this; as I know of no other place at all like it, From the
letter Beta being attached to the extract, one would imagine that the second
Book was meant; but certainly, our second Book contains no such matter. All I
can see in it, I must confess, is, that the writer of the Codex mentioned by
Signior Mai only intended to give a sort of Comment on this place of the
Theophania, and one which seems to have come originally from the Jews: it being
much of a piece with the traditionary nonsense entertained by that people, but
quite foreign to the manner of Eusebius, who never indulges in cabbalistic
reasoning of this sort. Nor is the Signior (now Cardinal) correct when he
says:--"Theophania, seu publica Christi vita, (Luc. cap. 3 )": neither the term,
nor the contents of the work, nor the Scripture cited, justifying such an
assertion. Nor does the word a0nefa&nh|, referred to, even hint at the existence
of this work. All the passage in the Chronicon intends evidently is, that our
Lord appeared (a0nefa&nh|) in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar. The
Cardinal tells us moreover, that he has discovered xviii. other fragments of
this work, which he has printed in the second edition of his first volume. But
this edition I have not yet been able to find in this country; I can say nothing
therefore about these extracts.

24. 1 A very common term, used to designate the true religion: it is also
frequently used in the Hebrew Bible in this sense.

25. 2 Alluding to the denial of Peter. Matt. xxvi. 74.

26. 3 Luke xxiv. 44. seq.

27. 1 The phraseology of the Syriac deserves notice here. It runs thus,
literally, In the whole hearing (i. e. understanding) therefore of all the
nations has He made these His words ; being varied and translated, &c. The term
[Syriac] is used here, and signifies, as it does also above, Book in. sect. 39,
the understanding of languages.

28. 4 Matt. xxvi. 13, &c. cited by Theodoret. Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford,
p. 448. Chrysost. Hom. Matt. 81. Edit. Montf. Tom. vii. p. 705.

29. 1 The term this (Syr. [Syriac]) may, indeed, here refer to the woman just
named : I am disposed rather to think that it refers to this gospel, or
doctrine, termed [Syriac] above.

30. 2 Matt. xvi. 15. seq. As this passage is important, I give the Syriac of it
here, which stands thus: [Syriac]. Justin Martyr takes this passage in the same
way : (Dialog. cum Tryphone. p. 255. 48. Ed. Sylburg,) [Greek]. Euthymius gives
the sense thus: Thou art Peter, as about to be a rock of the faith, after the
denial (of Christ); or, as already being firm in mind: thence, upon this
firmness I will build my Church,, or, I will lay thee (as) a foundation of the
Believers. For the Church are the Believers, &c. [Greek] See Hammond's admirable
note on this place. It is also thus given in the Syriac, (in this MS.) in the
work of Titus Bishop of Bozrah on the Manicheans, near the end. [Syriac] That
is: " On this rock do I build my Church, and the gate-bars of Hull shall not
prevail against it." 'He calls every thing therefore gate-bars, by means of
which those, who should take upon themselves a complete readiness to encounter
the death of martyrdom, for the sake of the fear of God. And, after a few other
things, when Simon said to Him,' " Thou art the Christ," 'He returned the
answer,' " Upon this rock do I build my Church." -- 'Upon what? Upon this faith,
that' "Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God." -- He goes on to say, not
as the mad Manes affirms of Him, that the Messiah is the five elements. -- He
might have added, -- and probably would, had the thing existed in his days, --
nor as the arrogant Papists do, that by "Cephas" (Peter), is here meant the
Popes of Rome.

31. 1 Matt. x. 34. seq.

32. 2 Luke xii. 51. seq.

33. 1 Eusebius has, in his Eccl. Hist. occasionally mentioned this Gospel: e. g.
as apocryphal, Lib. iii. cap. xxv. [Greek]. " Sed et in eundem ordinem (i.e.
apocr.) jam a quibusdam relatum est Evangelium secundum Hebraeos, quo maxime
delectantur Hebraei illi qui Christi fidem susceperunt." Again, as retained by
the Ebionites and their followers, ib. cap. xxvii. And again, as spoken of by
Papias, and said by him to have been written by Matthew, and to have contained
the history of the adulteress (John viii.) ib. cap. xxxix. And again, (Lib. iv.
cap. xxii.) Hegesippus is said to have cited some things from the Gospel of the
Hebrews, and also the Syriac one. This last however was, no doubt, one and the
same with the Hebrew one, and so called because written in the Syro-Chaldaic
dialect in Hebrew letters. It was by Jerome translated, into both the Greek and
Latin languages : a copy of the original being, in his days, preserved in the
Library of Caesarea, which had been formed by Pamphilus the Martyr and Friend of
Eusebius. See Jerome on Isaiah, cap. xi. and Matt. xviii. And the note of
Valesius, p. 47. See also Jones on the Canon of the New Testament, Vol. i. pt.
2. cap. xxv. seq. -- As this passage of the Gospel (so called) of the Hebrews,
does not appear to have been cited by any ecclesiastical or other writer, 1 have
thought it right to give it as it stands in the Syriac.

It may be remarked, that Eusebius does here cite this passage as worthy of
credit, although he does not ascribe any divine authority directly to it. Mr
Jones has, in his very excellent work on the Canon of the New Testament, affimed
that Eusebius had never so cited this Gospel--which, indeed, had not appeared in
the then known works of Eusebius. Still, this cannot be adduced, as in any way
affecting the character of our acknowledged Gospels. I am very much disposed to
think with Grotius, &c. that this was the original Gospel of St. Matthew,
greatly interpolated by the heretical Jews who had received it. See Jones, l. c.

34. 2 The passage differs here from the citation above, in the omission of
[Syriac], these things; which might have been omitted as unnecessary to the
argument.

35. 3 Matt. xxi. 33. seq. This subject is prosecuted much at length on the
predictions given from the Old Testament, in the Demonstr. Evang. Lib, ii. cap.
iii. seq.

36. 3 1 Kings xix. 10-14. Rom. xi. 3.

37. 1 Matt. xxi. 42. Mark xii. 10, 11. Luke xx. 17; comp. Acts iv. 11. 1 Pet.
ii. 7.

38. 2 Is. xxviii. 16. 1 Pet. ii. 6.

39. 3 Ps. cxviii. 22, 23.

40. 4 Matt. xxi. 45. seq. with a few unimportant varieties from the Peschito:
and the same may be said generally of all these quotations from Scripture.

41. 5 Matt. xxii. 1-10, with some unimportant varieties from the Peschito, as
before.

42. 1 Matt. x. 5, 6.

43. 2 [Greek] Sophronius, as cited by Fabricius, Salut. Lux Evang. p. 101, who
shews that it was Herod Agrippa who put him to death, in the 44th year of
Claudius. Acts xii. 2.

44. 3 The Syr. has [Syriac]. By ([Syriac]) "throne" is here necessarily meant
the Episcopal chair of that Church: which agrees well with the judgment which
James is said to have given, Acts xv. 19; and where Peter gives his opinion, not
as a Judge, but as a mere individual concerned in the question at issue. See
also Fabricii Salutaris Lux Evang. p. 47, &c.

45. 4 Hist. Eccl. Euseb. Lib. ii. cap. xxiii.

46. 1 So styled here perhaps, because written by Josephus after he had attached
himself to the Romans, and had dedicated it to the Roman Emperor.

47. 2 His History of the Jewish Wars.

48. 4 Matt, xxii, 10-14.

49. 5 Matt, xxiii. 33. seq. agreeing, with a few variations, with the Peschito.

50. 7 Acts v. 41.

51. 9 See sect. 10, above, note.

52. 1 James the Less, called the " Brother of the Lord" in the Scripture. See
Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. ii. cap. xxiii.

53. 2 According to some this was Simon Peter, others say that Simon the son of
Cleopas was the person; and this is the account of Hegesippus, as preserved by
Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. xxii. [...]

54. 3 The meaning of our author is,--according to the principle formerly laid
down,--that, as that prediction had been completely fulfilled, we can entertain
no reasonable doubt as to other declarations then made.

55. 4 Matt, xxiii. 37. Luke xiii. 34.

56. 5 Syr. [Syriac], lit. and the. captivity and Temple they burnt.; which must,
I suppose, mean the City.

57. 1 Haggai ii, 9 58. 2 Imitated by Theodoret (Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford,
p. 446.) [...] 59. 1 Luke xix. 41. seq.

60. 2 Ps. lxxii. 7.

61. 3 Eph. ii. 17.

62. 4 John xiv. 27.

63. 5 Luke xix. 42, 43.

64. 6 Ib. ver. 44.

65. 1 Luke xxi. 20. seq.

66. 2 Ver. 21. [...] Cited also by Origen (contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 69,) and
ably commented upon. He also says (ib.), that Phlegon allows in his Chronicon
that our Lord's predictions did come to pass. This author moreover gave an
account of the eclipse of the Sun which took place at the crucifixion. See
Spencer's note on the place, (p. 35, notes.)

67. 4 Our author might have added much, if he had chosen to do so, from the
Prophets, confirmatory of this position. I will supply an instance or two. In
Isaiah xxiv. 1. we are told that " the. Lord maketh the earth (read, the land,
i.e. of Judea) empty, and maketh it waste...and scattereth abroad the
inhabitants thereof." 3. " The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly
spoiled."...5 because they have transgressed the laws,... broken the everlasting
covenant." 6. "Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth (the land)..
.therefore the inhabitants of the earth (land) are burned (comp. Deut. xxxii.
22--27) . . . 20. "And it shall fall, and NOT RISE AGAIN." Verse 23. identifies
this prediction with those here cited by Eusebius, viz. Matt. xxiv. and Luke
xxi. The conversion of the Gentiles is, moreover, beautifully touched upon ib.
ver. 13-16. Comp. ch. xxv. 1. seq. In ch. xxvi. the same subject is taken up,
and in ver. 5, 6, we have literally described, the TRAMPLING DOWN of this
impious city. See also xxvi. ver. 10, 11, and xxviii. 18, also xxix. 1--7:
9--20, which are all obvious and direct predictions of these times: and to these
many similar ones might be added. Let those who hold a restoration of the Jews
look to this. See also Ezek. v, vi, vii, throughout with the parallel places, as
given in the margins of the common Bibles. A large number of passages to this
effect are cited from Isaiah, by our author, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. ii.
xxx.--xxxvii. &c.

68. 5 Luke xxi. 24. But, because a1xri, " until," occurs here, many have been
induced to think and to argue, that, still there must be a restoration of the
Jews to satisfy this ! See Demonstr. Evang. Lib. vii. p. 321. D. and Origen
contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 62, &c. it. Lib. iv. pp. 174-5, [...]

69. 1 So also Eccl. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. vi. (Edit. 1G95.) p. 95. seq. where (p.
96 B.) the words used are an echo of these: [...] The testimony of Tertullian,
very much to the same effect, will be found in the Bishop of Lincoln's valuable
work, " The Eccles. Hist, of the second and third Centuries;" &c. Camb. 1826. p.
162.

70. 2 Ib. B.

71. 3 The word "great" (Syr. [Syriac]) used above, is omitted here. Luke xxi.
23,24.

72. 4 Luke ib. ver. 23.

73. 6 [...] Luke xxi. 21, 22.

74. 7 Hudson's edition. Tom. ii. Lib. vi. p. 3274, line 27.

75. 2 Deut, xxviii. 56, 57. "The tender and delicate woman among you, which
would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness
and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and
toward her son, and toward her daughter, and toward her young one that cometh
out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she
shall eat them for want of all things secretly in the siege and straitness,
wherewith thine enemy shall distress thee." See all the preceding verses, 52
seq. Comp. Lam. ii. 11; iv. 3, 10, 11. Ezek. v. 9, 13, 16, 17. These predictions
were, indeed, dreadfully fulfilled to the very letter !

76. 3 Matt. xxiv. 21.

77. 4 Hudson's Josephus, Tom. ii. Lib. v. cap. 10, p. 1246, line 41.

78. 5 There is a considerable omission here in our Syriac text of Josephus: but,
as the matter omitted could have but little reference to the objects had in view
by Eusebius; there is no reason to suppose, the text of Josephus himself to be
redundant on this account.

79. 6 The Syriac is worded rather extraordinarily here ; which I notice for the
mere sake of the Student. It stands thus : [Syriac]. Lit, For they destroyed the
city, and forced the Romans, when they were unwilling, to be recorded (as having
taken part) in a sad victory.

80. 2 "The times of the Gentiles" must, I think, mean those times previously
spoken of in the Scriptures, during which the Gentiles should retain their
ancient state and power. That is, during the last part of Daniel's fourth
monarchy, in which it is foretold they should have the rule. After this, during
the fifth kingdom the saints are to have the rule, these therefore, must be
their times, not, scripturally speaking, "the times of the Gentiles." Our author
is therefore, wrong in this place. See the Introduction to his work. He is not
the only one who has taken it in this sense, as may be seen by referring to
Poole's Synopsis, &c.

81. 3 John iv. 19-24.

82. 4 The places had here in view are Deut. xi. 29; xxvii. 4. seq. Josh, viii.
30. seq. The Samaritans, it appears, have introduced a large number of spurious
readings into the Text of their edition of the Hebrew Pentateuch, and, among
others, one ascribing a higher degree of honour to mount Gerizim, than to Hebal:
for which Dr Kennicott, some years ago, considered it his duty to contend. See
my Prolegomena to Mr Bagster's Polyglott Bible, Prolog, ii. sect. i. xxi. seq.
where I have shewn that much relating to this controversy had not been duly
understood.

83. 1 John x. 14-17.

84. 2 Matt. xv. 24.

85. 3 These Jews, according to our author, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. ii. xxxvi. cap.
iv. p. 63. seq. constituted the Remnant, which it had frequently been foretold
should be saved. And in this he was certainly right. Examine these places, and
comp. Rom. xi. 5, &c.

86. 4 So also in our author's Eccles. Hist. Book, Lib. iv. cap. v.

87. 1 Ps. xxiii. 1.

88. 2 Ps. LXXX. 1.

89. 3 This is no direct citation of Scripture: it is perhaps, as on a former
occasion, (above p. 18, note,) the general sense only of some one or two verses.
The most likely appear to me to be Is. XL. 10, 11.

90. 4 John xii. 23, 24.

91. 5 These however were probably Hellenistic Jews; for we are told that "there
were certain Greeks among them that came up to worship at the feast." They
might, indeed, have been proselytes: but the former supposition is the most
probable.

92. 7 Syr. [Syriac] lit. words, or reasons, of the seed. The reader will bear in
mind, that [Syriac], has often been used, in this work, in the sense of
invigorating, efficient, cause, and the like, as derived from Him who is termed
THE WORD, [Syriac]. See Book i. sect. 76. above, with the note.

93. 1 Alluding perhaps to Luke xv. 32.

94. 2 Matt. ix. 37. Luke x. 2.

95. 3 2 John iv. 35.

96. 4 Matt. iii. 12. Luke iii. 17.

97. 5 John xiii. 33.

98. 6 Ib. ver. 30.

99. 7 John xxi. 18, 19.

100. 8 Chap. x. 17.

101. 9 Chap. v. 11, 12.

102. 1 A paraphrastical exposition of Matt. v. 12. Luke vi. 23.

103. 3 See above, Book ii. par. 19, p. 80. with the notes.

104. 4 Chap. x. 21. seq. This place, as in other instances, differs slightly
from the Peschito. It is cited for the same purpose by Theodoret, Graec. affect,
curat. p. 446. Ed. Gaisford. [...]

105. 1 This is a far-fetched, and unnecessary, interpretation. The intention of
the passage seems to be,--what indeed the commentators usually make it,--that,
as there should be divisions in families, (Luke xii. 52, 53,) those who were
opposed to our Lord, should betray and give up those who were His followers: a
thing which in all probability took place.

106. 2 Chap. xiii. 47. seq.

107. 3 See above, par. 6.

108. 4 Chap. vii. 1.5, 16, 17, and as before, differing slightly from the
Peschito.

109. 6 I. e. Heterodoxy.

110. 1 Syr. [Syriac]. Marcion himself was a native of Pontus, and lived in the
times of Anicetus the eleventh Bishop of Rome. He enlarged upon the errors of
Cerdon his immediate predecessor, who had espoused and laboured to propagate the
opinions of Simon Magus. Marcion was an open blasphemer of God, and corrupter of
the Scriptures. He was one of those who forbade marriage, and urged the
abstaining from certain meats, and in this, he seems to have agreed with the
Manicheans and Saturninians: in many things with the Simonians, Basilidians,
Bogomilians, Audeans, &c. This heresy had, in the times of Epiphanius, extended
itself to Italy, Egypt, Palestine, Arabia, Syria, Cyprus, and Persia. See
Grabe's Irenaeus, p. 104, with the notes and references.

111. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. So called after their leader Valentinus, who came to Rome
in the times of Hyginus, and lived during those of Pius, and to those of
Anicetus. His doctrines had originated in Simon Magus, which he very gradually
and cautiously endeavoured to introduce into the Church. For which he was
eventually deprived of communion. See Euseb. Hist. Eccl. Index. It. Grabe.

112. 3 Syr. [Syriac]. So called after Basilides their leader. He waa a native of
Alexandria, and flourished in the times of Hadrian. He received his doctrines,
which were those of Simon Magus, from Menander, in which marriage was forbidden,
and the abstaining from certain meats was urged. See Grabe's Irenaeus, p. 96,
with the notes and I ndex.

113. 4 He was a native of Mesopotamia, and flourished in the times of M.
Aurelius and L. Verus. He first attached himself to Valentinus; but afterwards
wrote against him and his doctrines. He is said to have been a very elegant and
acute writer: but he never purged himself, as it should seem, from the Gnostic
heresy. See Euseb. Eccl. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. xxx. Asseman. Bible. Orient. Tom.
i. p. 47, &c. as marked in the Index: particularly p. 389, note.

114. 6 Manes, (or, as the modern Persians name him, [Persian], Mani, the Syrians
[Syriac] Manni,) was a Persian by birth, and, according to the Chronicon of
Edessa (Asseman. Bibl. Orient. Tom. i. p. 393, note) was born A. D. 240. He
entered Mesopotamia in A. D. 261, when he came to Archelaus Bishop of the
Caschari, for the purpose of disputing on the subject of religion: but, being
overcome, he secretly withdrew himself to Persia. He was there taken by the
king, flayed alive, and exposed to dogs. He was strenuous in advancing the old
oriental doctrine of the two Principles, good, and bad, among Christians; of
which marked traces remain to this day among the Mohammedans of Persia, as may
be seen in the celebrated work of Kuleini, under the figures of Intellect and
Folly, (see my Persian Controversies, p. 175, and note,) as also in the
Dabistan, ascribed to Mohsin Fani. He held with the Gnostics, that Christ was a
mere Phantom; he put it forth that himself was the Christ, and the Comforter
(Paraclete): and his twelve Disciples accordingly proscribed marriage as being
of the Devil, &c. See Theodoret, Haeret. Fab. i. xxvi. Tom. iv. with the Index.
Epiphan. de Mens. et Pond. as cited by Asseman. A Syriac translation of the work
of Titus, Bishop of Bozra, against this heresy, is to be found in the volume
from which I take this work of Eusebius. All these, according to Hegesippus, as
preserved by Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. xxii.) originated from
Thebuthis, who, being mortified because not made a Bishop, set about secretly to
corrupt the Church. He was of one of the seven sects then spread abroad among
the Jews. Out of which also arose Simon, whence the Simonians: also Cleobius,
Dositheus, Gortheus, Masbotheus; whence also Menander, Marcion, Carpocrates,
Valentinus, Basilides, &c. &c. Hence also the false Christs, false Apostles,
false Prophets, &c. See the notes of Valesius, Ed. 1695, p. 69. seq.

115. 6 John x. 27.

116. 7 Matt. x. 16: comp. Luke x. 3. Cited also by Theodoret, Gr. affect. curat.
Ed. Gaisford, p. 446.

117. 8 Syr. [Syriac], which, I think, should be read [Syriac]: the intention of
our author evidently being, to give an equivalent to the "amarum et maligni
principis apostasies serpentis venenum" of Irenaeus, Edit. Grabe. p. 105.

118. 1 Matt. x. 24, 25, 26. Differing slightly from the Peschito, as before.
Cited partly by Theodoret, Gr. affect. curat. Ed. Gaisford, p. 447.

119. 2 Matt. ix. 84; xii. 34. Mark iii. 22. Nothing was more common, among both
the Jews and heathens, than the accusation of Magic against the miraculous
powers of Christ, and of His immediate followers. (See Wetstein on Matt. xii.
24.) "The Heathen," says Bingham,..."because our Saviour and his followers did
many miracles, which they imputed to evil arts, and the power of
magic,....therefore generally declaimed against them as magicians, and under
that character exposed them to the fury of the vulgar," &c. From the prevalence
of a belief in magic still in the East, the Mohammedans strongly object to the
manner in which we speak of miracles; because, say they, it might still follow,
that such miracles proceeded from skill in magic. See my Persian Controversies,
Camb. 1824, sect. ii. p. 191. seq. and Book v. sect. 2. below.

120. 3 This place, which is obscure, seems to me to mean this: He bore long with
the ignorance of His disciples, seeing as they did His divine power, and blamed
their doubting as to the ultimate results of His Gospel. The chief difficulty in
the Syriac is, the introduction of the interrogative [Syriac], How ? intended
apparently to have the force of a strong negative.

121. 4 Matt. xix. 9. Differing from the Peschito as before.

122. 1 Syr. [Syriac] against which some pious monk has written in the margin
[Syriac], see and desire: as if this were an essential of Christianity !

123. 3 It need not be supposed that our author mentions this, for the purpose of
praising it: his object probably was to shew, that, as our Lord foretold this,
its coming to pass-- a thing most unnatural and unheard of, -- was sufficient to
shew His foreknowledge. In his Ecclesiastical History (Lib. vi. cap. viii.) he
has mentioned this, as the daring act of an inexperienced young man, resulting
from a simple and juvenile method of interpreting the passage referred to :
which he says was, nevertheless, a proof of continence and of a strong faith ;
and this is perhaps, a main part of his object here. See also Book v. sect. 14.
below.

124. 4 Matt. xiii. 3-9.

125. 1 Heb. iv. 12. seq. Differing considerably from the Peschito, as before.
The ancients, as it will be seen in Poole (Synopsis), generally referred this
passage to Christ, just as Eusebius does here; and, it must be confessed, the
matter contained in the 13th verse, powerfully supports this view. The
exegetical sense however, comes to the same under either view: for, whether we
take the word of Christ, with the moderns; or, the Word, Christ, with the
ancients, the effects, here spoken of, must all be eventually referred to Him. I
prefer the former view, as being the more obvious and simple.

126. 2 Matt. ix. 37.

127. 3 John iv. 35. Differing in each case from the Peschito, as before.

128. 4 Syr. [Syriac], lit. other opinions: which is probably put for the Greek
e9terodoci/a; it being customary with the Syrians so to translate Greek
compounds. See above, Book ii. par. 19, note, and ib. 69.

129. 1 Matt. xiii. 24--31. Differing from the Peschito, as before. 2 Ib. 36-43.

130. 3 The Greek has here ka&minon, and the Peschito [Syriac], its literal
translation: no MS. has gee/nna, whence it appears very likely, that Eusebius
cited the passage from memory: a thing very common with the Fathers.

131. 6 Rather, one would think, from his being born as a man.

132. 7 See above, Book i. sectt. 27, 37, with the notes.

133. 8 It will be sufficient to remark here that, by the "end of the world,"
must be meant in this place,--as in very many passages of Scripture,-- that
period in which the old system passed away, and the new one-- the Christian
Church was established. But of this, more in our Introduction to this work.

134. 9 Much to the same effect, Eccles. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. xxiii. near the end.

135. 2 Chap. xxiv. 3. seq.

136. 3 Ib. ver. 23-27.

137. 4 "Behold, I have told you before," of the authorized version is ambiguous.
I have therefore avoided this.

138. 5 John v. 43.

139. 7 The place here alluded to is, most probably, 2 Thess. ii. 3. seq. The
person who should withhold ([Greek], ver. 6.) was, most probably Nero. (See
Wetstein on the place); and "the man of sin," generally, each of the several
Roman Emperors who became persecutors of the Church. Such was the opinion, --
and no doubt the true one -- of many of the Fathers : which is grounded on Dan.
vii. 8; ix. 27; and xi. 36. See also my Sermons and Dissertations, Lond. 1830,
pp. 235, 237, note, and ib. p. 326. seq. with the Introduction to this work.

140. 8 He was, according to some, as ancient as the times of Sennacherib ; which
appears to be quite visionary. Jerome places him before the times of our Lord,
and makes him the author of the sect of the Pharisees. Origen however affirms,
that he was contemporary with the Apostles, and that he declared himself to be
the Christ. This, Origen probably grounded on a passage in the Recognitions
ascribed to Clemens Romanus, which informs us, that upon the death of John the
Baptist Dositheus set up his claim ; appointed thirty disciples, and took a
woman whom he named the moon -- (considering the Sun probably as his own
representative). To this man Simon Magus attached himself, and obtained a place
among the thirty, on the first vacancy that afterwards occurred ; and soon after
he fell in love with this woman. Hegesippus too, makes Dositheus contemporary
with the Apostles, as also does Eulogius, Patriarch of Alexandria. See the note
of Valesius to the Eccl. Hist. Lib. iv. cap. xxii. And the note above, sect. 30.
On the other hand, Theodoret makes Simon Magus the leader. Tom. iv. p. 193.

141. 1 Deut. xviii. 15, 18, 19.

142. 2 Acts viii. 10.

143. 3 He commenced his career of heresy in a village of Mysia named Ardaba,
situate on the borders of Phrygia. He took to him two women, named Priscilla and
Maximilla; gave out that he was the Paraclete, and that his women were
Prophetesses. His sect, which was the Cataphrygian, was large, and, at one time,
reckoned Tertullian among its supporters. Among other things, the dissolution of
marriages and new sorts of fastings were inculcated as necessary. See Euseb.
Eccl. Hist. Lib. v. capp. iii. xiv. xvi. xviii. and the notes of Valesius. See
also Theodoret. Haeret. Fab. Lib. iii. cap. ii. Tom. iv. p. 227.

144. 4 As these citations were probably all made from memory, the reader must
not be surprised in finding that they occasionally differ, even in the same
context.--These passages would, one would think, be sufficient to satisfy those
who are so intent on the personal reign of Christ on earth, that their notions
are perfectly groundless. For, if He is not to be seen either here, there;
either, in the desert, or in the secret chamber, as the false Christs were; but,
whose coming was rather to be as the lightning in rapidity and effect,--as
indeed was the case in the overthrow of the Jews, the spread of Christianity,
and the fall of the Roman Empire; and as particularly foretold in Dan. vii.
13,14: comp. Matt. xxiv. 24, 30; xxvi. 64. Ephes. i. 22. Col. i. 23, also Zech.
ix. 14, with the preceding context from ver. 9;--then must all speculations
about a personal reign on earth be visionary and false. Our author however,
seems to understand this, as referring to our Lord's coming to judgment at the
last day. If so, I have no doubt he is wrong.

145. 5 Chap. xxiv. 6-9. ib. ver. 10-14.

146. 7 Cited by Origen (contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 68.), with this remark: [Greek]
"Quis item non mirabitur, ascendens contemplatione ad illud vaticinium.....cum
vidcat juxta illam pradictionem jam praedicatum in omnibus, quae sub coelo sunt,
terris Graecorum barbarorumque tum sapientibus, tum insipientibus ? Omnem enim
humanam naturam vicit sermo praedicatus cum potentia, nec est videre ullum genus
hominum, a quo haec doctrina recepta non sit."

147. 1 This argument is urged by Origen (contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 68. Edit.
Spencer). From this reasoning of Eusebius, it is evident that he believed that
the End had come. And in this there can be no doubt, I think, he was right; but
as this involves a question very ill understood at this day, it may be right to
offer a few words here, as to what is meant by the End. This, I think, Daniel
(ix. 27.) terms the "consummation:" (comp. ver. 26 and vii. 26, 28,) that is,
the End of his seventy weeks, (ib. ver. 24. seq.) when "vision and prophecy"
should be sealed: i.e. completed. In chap. viii. 19, it is said, "at the time
appointed the End shall be." Again, ib. chap. 27, 28. The End of the matter is
said to be, when the kingdom under the whole heaven shall have been given to the
Saints (i.e.) the Christians: in other words, when the Kings of the earth shall
have become its nursing fathers, and Queens its nursing mothers, (Is. xlix. 23.)
Again, Dan. xii. 7. When the power of the holy people shall have been scattered,
"all these things shall be finished:" i.e. when the power of the new Church
shall be spread abroad far and wide, then shall the End of all these thimgs be.
(Comp. Is. lxii. 12, &c. Dan. viii. 24.) In Rev. x. 6, 7, which is an exact
parallel of Dan. xii. 7, it is sworn by the angel, that time shall be no longer,
and that the mystery of God, as declared by the Prophets, shall be finished.
Now, our Lord has identified his predictions (Matt. xxiv. and Luke xxi.) with
these of Daniel. In the former (ver. 14.) He says: " then shall the END come.
When ye therefore shall see the abomination... spoken of by Daniel the prophet"
(ix. 27; xii. 11.)..." then shall be great tribulation" (ver. 21. comp. Dan. ix.
26; xii. 1.) ', ver. 34, "This generation shall not pass till all these things
be," i. e. commenced (comp. ver. 8.). In the latter (Luke xxi. ver. 22.) " These
be the days of vengeance, that ALL THINGS which are written MAY BE FULFILLED"
(i. e. in them). That the terms, latter days, last days, end of the world, ends
of the world, the fulness of time, refer to the times of the Apostles, and those
immediately subsequent to these, the Concordance, with the parallels marked in
our common Bibles, will be sufficient to shew.--But the kingdom of the saints is
never to end (i. e. as far as pre-diction is concerned); it can therefore, have
no last days, latter days, or the like. When any such terms are referred to the
last judgment, the language is doctrinal, not prophetical. I conclude,
therefore, that this End did come, when the persecution of Diocletian ceased:
for then all the conditions of prophecy had been fulfilled. Eusebius is
therefore right. See also my Sermons and Dissertations, London, 1831, and the
Introduction to this work.

148. 2 He proved in sect. 28, above, that this had taken place, as he affirms in
other places, that the Gospel had been received throughout the whole world. And
so says the Apostle, "Yes, verily their sound went out into ALL THE EARTH, and
their words unto the END OP THE WORLD." Rom. x. 18; and ib. xvi. 26.--" made
known to ALL NATIONS FOR THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH." And again, Col. i. 23...."The
Gospel, which was preached to EVERY CREATURE WHICH is UNDER HEAVEN." To the same
effect is the testimony of the Fathers generally. See the "Salutaris Lux
Evangelica" of Fabricius: and the Introduction to this work. This text was
transcribed by Roger Pearse, 1st August 2002. All material on this page is in
the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press SPIonic font, free from here.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 59: THEOPHANIA - BOOK 5
========================================================================

BOOK V. THE FIFTH BOOK OF (EUSEBIUS) OF CAESAREA.

1. SUCH as these (then), are the proofs of the Divine manifestation of the
common Saviour of all, Jesus the Christ, which have been thus far visible to the
eyes, shewing forth at once the Divine words and deeds. For in ancient times,
the words, of which we have already spoken, as to things which should come to
pass, were simply heard ; those (I say) which He prophesied to His disciples
when He was near, (and) in their presence. But now, in our times, the fulfilment
of these words is openly viewed in fact, with powers eclipsing that of all
mortal nature. And, if men will not be persuaded of these things, we ought not
to wonder: because man is accustomed so to resist the clearest things
(possible,) as to dare to oppose in his assertions even the existence of an
universal Providence, and thus also even to deny God Himself! And thus
disingenuously, will he also contend against many other things, to which the
truth (itself) bears testimony. But, as the injurious conduct of these detracts
in no respect from the word, which is in (its own) nature true; so also will the
wickedness of the unbelief of men, injure in no respect the evident excellency
of the Godhead of our Saviour. Let us not deign therefore, even in word to
attach ourselves to these. For those, whom the works of God will not persuade,
the word of man will be (too) abject to move. Nevertheless, let us again take up
the more vigorously, those things against such, which we formerly investigated
by questions1, in proof of the Gospels. If therefore ally one should, after all
this, impugn the truth and dare disingenuously to affirm, that the Christ of God
was not (such) as we believe He was, but was a magician, seducer, and |286
impostor; we would present to him, as an infant in mind, those things which we
also formerly investigated:--

Against those who suppose that the Christ of God was a magician and deceiver.

2. 2 Let us now ask then, Whether there ever was a man heard of at any period,
who (as) a magician and deceiver, was (also) a teacher of humility, meekness,
purity, and of every other virtue? And, Whether it is just to call by these
names, Him who would not allow, that (men) should even look upon women with evil
desire? And, Whether he could be a magician, who delivered the chief philosophy
by teaching His disciples, that the indigent should of their wealth3 adhere to
Him, and that compassion and liberality should abound with them? And, Whether He
could be a magician, who forbade the assembling together of ferocious and
tumultuous inhabitants, and taught them to love the retirement only, which
devotes itself to the word of God ? How could He,--who deterred from every
species of falsehood, and commanded that men should so honour truth above all
things, that they should not stand in need of a true oath, much less of a false
one,--be justly named a magician? But, What need can there be, that I should now
say many |287 things (on this point,) since we may readily inform ourselves from
His own words,--which have, even to this day, been preached throughout the whole
earth,--what the sort of conduct was, which was disseminated by Him in the world
? Every one who loves the truth will confess of Him, not only that He was
neither magician nor deceiver, but was THE WORD OF GOD in truth, and the teacher
of the divine philosophy and righteousness; and not of this common philosophy of
the world ;--

3. But the things pertaining to His form of doctrine were such as these.--Come
then, let us enquire whether this His error, consisted in (any of) the many
things of His teaching. Observe then, 4Was it not God, the King of all, Him
alone, of whom it is written that He is the cause of every good thing, that He
taught and presented to His disciples ? And, Do not the words of His doctrine to
this very time, raise the mind of every Greek and Barbarian in existence, to the
God who is supreme, to Him (I say) who is the maker of the heavens and of the
earth, and of the whole world; making (them) overleap all visible nature, and
every thing fabricated ? Was this then His error ? or, Was it, that He did not
allow those to worship many gods,--to whom it had been made clear, from this
worship of God only, that He could not be convicted of falsehood:--(and) who had
fallen after their Head, on account of this real error? But this was not new,
nor was it His word (only), but that of those Hebrews, friends of God, who arose
in ancient times. And from them it was, that these recent (true) philosophers
were aided in these great (performances), and gave in to their doctrines: the
wise men of Greece too, glorying in the divinations of their |288 deities, have
put it thus on record of the Hebrews, that "wisdom came to the Chaldeans alone,
and the Hebrews purely worshipped the Essence of the person of God, the King of
all5."

4. If then those ancient friends of God,--those to whom (these) divinations have
more particularly home testimony,--did raise the act of worship (directing it)
to the God who is over all; How should we confess of Him, that He was a
deceiver, and not a most wonderful teacher, who has extended this worship of
God--as to the things which were known only in former times to these descendants
of the Heads of the Hebrew fathers,--to all mankind ! And this to such a degree,
that no more, as in those times, a few, and those easy to be numbered, hold the
orthodox faith respecting God; but thousands of congregations of barbarians at
once, and of those who in ancient times were perfectly savage, also of the wise,
and men of Greece,--of those (I say) who now, like the prophets and just men of
old, have been taught in the worship of God, solely by means of His power, and
of His instruction !

5. But, let us also investigate this third (consideration). Was it then for
this, that they called Him a deceiver (viz.), because He taught, that men should
no more honour God with the slaughter of bulls, or with the sacrifices of
irrational animals ? Neither with blood and fire, nor with |289 incense, which
are of the earth, because these things are of small value and earthly ; and
shewed that they never could comport with the nature which is immortal and
incorporeal?-- determined also that to keep the commandments of God, and by
their means to purify both the soul and body, was more acceptable and becoming
to God, than any sort of sacrifice ?--inculcated too that men should be careful
to become like God, both in enlightenment of mind, and in the knowledge of his
worship ? And, should any one of the Greeks find fault with these things, let
him know that it is not to be imagined, that the things (so) received are
against (even) those of His own teachers, who have put much together on this
(matter,) viz.; That (men) should not suppose they honoured God by means of
blood and the sacrifices of irrational animals, or by those of fire, smoke, and
the fumes of fat6.

6. We know too that we are, after these things, taught by Him that the world was
made; and that these Heavens, the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars, are the work of
God; and that it is not right we should worship these, and not Him who is the
Maker and Creator of them all. It may be well therefore for us to see, how He
could have deceived men, from whom we have learned to think that this system (of
things) is nothing new, but is that of the Hebrews, the ancient friends of God.
Even this sentiment was also from these famous philosophers;--they delivered
these same (particulars), affirming that these beavens, the sun, the moon, the
stars, and the whole world, were also made by Him, who is the Creator of all
things. He also taught us to believe, that the soul which we possess is
immortal, and that it is in no respect like the animals that are irrational, but
that (the faculties) within it resemble the powers of God. He likewise taught,
that all those who were barbarian and ignorant, should (at once) make this their
own, and be, and know. And, How was it, that we were not made wise by those
sages among the Egyptians, |290 or by those Greeks who made broad their
foreheads7; those who said that the soul which was in man, was in no respect
better in its essence than were gnats, fleas, worms, or reptiles; nor even, than
the soul of the serpent, the viper, the bear, or the panther? and that swine, as
to their soul, differed in no respect, (from men) ?--

7. And, that after these things, He perseveringly admonished (men) of the
judgment of God, and of the punishments and vengeance,--things from which we
cannot be exempt,--which are recorded against the wicked; also, of the promises
of eternal life, of the kingdom of heaven, and of the life of happiness with
God, respecting the just. Whom then did He deceive ? Did He not rather stimulate
(men) to hasten on to virtue, because of the victories reserved for the
righteous ? and, to flee from, and repel from them, every vice, because of the
punishments to be inflicted on the wicked ? Such then, being the instructions
contained in the doctrinal ordinances of our Saviour; What room does there
remain for imagining, that we should suppose Him to have been a Deceiver and
Magician ?--But, let us also investigate these things.--

8. When a magician associates his companions with the things of this vice, Like
to what men does he make |291 them ? Is it not to magicians, deceivers, and
fabricators of magical drugs,--in all respects like himself ? Was there ever,
then, a man found among the whole Christian race, who fabricated magical rites
or drugs, from the doctrine of our Saviour ? There is no (such thing) existing
for any man to say; but, the contrary to this, that they have been seen passing
over to the precepts of the philosophy which is Divine. How then, can He be
justly styled other, in truth, than the Teacher of the life which worships God,
the common Saviour of all,--who became throughout the whole habitable world, and
to all nations, the (sole) cause of purity and of holiness of life, and of the
knowledge (inculcating) the worship of the Creator of all things ?

9. Those too, who adhered to Him from the first, as well as those who afterwards
received the traditionary account of the manner of their conversation, were, as
to all these matters, so far removed from suspicion of evil and bitterness, that
they did not even allow the sick to do many things which the many dared to do;
either, that they should write (charms) upon tablets, or make use of amulets;
or, that they should in their minds have respect to those who promised to use
enchantments; or, that they should prescribe for the persons (of the sick), as
cures for complaints, either the fumes of roots, or of apples, or of any other
similar things. All these things were therefore, excluded from the doctrine of
our Saviour: nor was there ever a Christian to be found who used amulets, or
|292 enchantments, or the means of written tablets, or, indeed, any other forms
allied to these; the indiscriminate use of which was in repute among the many.
What then can be said against the men who had been instructed in these things,
so as to cast the imputation on them, of their having been the disciples of a
master who was a magician ? when, behold, the association of any one among the
disciples, who promised any (new) doctrine, was severely reprehended! Those men
therefore both of art and science, to whom He was the cause of their (christian)
instruction, fully confessed of Him, that He was much their superior (in these
respects). For, even as physicians are witnesses of the goodness of the doctrine
of their master ; so, of geometricians, Who has assigned any other instructing
heads, except geometricians ? and of arithmeticians, except arithmeticians ? And
in like manner, of the magician, the best witnesses as to these things have been
His disciples, who have (always) fully resembled their Master, and have done (as
he did). But no man has ever been found, during all these years, a magician and
(at the same time a) Disciple of our Saviour; when, behold, kings and governours
have, during the whole of these times, made the most careful inquiries into
(these) things by means of the worst of torments !

10. And thus indeed, neither was there (ever) any magician His Disciple, so as
to be left free and exempt from every (sort) of condemnation; being only reduced
by them (the persecuting emperors) to sacrifice8.

11. But, that our discourse may not wander from Scripture, take the proof of
these things even from the writings of those primitive acquaintances and
Disciples of our Saviour, (as found) in the book of their own "Acts." They so
wrought upon those of the Gentiles who received their doctrine, that many of
these,--who formerly accused them of magic,--so entirely changed their conduct,
that they boldly brought forward the abominable books which they had formerly
kept secret, to them into the midst of the |293 assemblies, and threw them into
the fire in the presence of all. Hear then the statement of these things, which
runs thus:--

12. "The9 greater part then of those who practised magic brought in their books,
and burnt them in the presence of all men; and they reckoned their price, and it
was found, that they were worth fifty thousand" (pieces of silver).

13. Such10 therefore were the Disciples of our Saviour, and such was the entire
power of the word, which they put forth in their discourses with (their)
hearers, that it became fixed in the depths of their souls;--were so struck and
inclined, that every one took up the resolution no more to suffer those things
to remain hidden, by which the many had formerly been implicated in error, but
that these secret things should be brought out into the light, and that they
should become witnesses against themselves, of their own former wickedness. Such
also were those who became their Disciples, so pure, noble in soul, and abundant
in love, that they allowed nothing impure to remain concealed within them, but,
on the contrary, they gloried and exulted in their change from vice to virtue.
Since11 therefore, the Disciples of our Saviour were seen to be such, Must not
their Master have first been much more excellent? But, if you wish to know from
those who are Disciples, of what sort their Master was, you have tens of
thousands of the Disciples of the precepts of our Saviour even to this time; of
whom there are multitudes of congregations of men, who have armed themselves
against the lusts of the nature of the body, and have accustomed themselves to
preserve their minds uninjured by any of the evil passions : those (I say), who
have passed their whole lives, (and) grown old in purity ; and have put forth,
from the provisions of His word, the most brilliant examples (to others).

14. Nor12 was it that men only were in this manner (attached) to Him, and became
Philosophers; but also |294 tens of thousands of women throughout the whole
creation; those (I say), who like Priestesses of the supreme God, attached
themselves to the most exalted service, and applied themselves to the love of
the wisdom which is heavenly. On the generation of the body they cast contempt,
giving all care to their soul, keeping themselves in purity from every thing
sordid and unclean, and extending their desires to all holiness and to
virginity13. The Greeks, indeed, sing of one shepherd who left his place for the
sake of philosophy, and him they hawk about here and there. This was
Democritus14. They also express their astonishment at one Crates15, who gave his
possessions to his citizens. He then |295 took with him himself alone, and
boasted in the provisions of liberty. But these counterparts of the word of our
Saviour, are tens of thousands in number; nor was it one, or two (only), who
sold their possessions and distributed them to the poor and needy: indeed we
ourselves are witnesses, that these were even such among men ; and, in the
effects themselves, we have seen the righteousness of the doctrine of our
Saviour. And, What need can there be that we should say, how many myriads even
of the barbarians themselves, and not (of these) only, but also of the Greeks,
have, by the doctrine of the words of our Saviour, been raised above every error
of a plurality of gods, and have recognized and confessed the one only God, the
Father and Creator of this whole world? Him (I say), whom one Plato formerly
knew, but confessed that he durst not speak of Him before all men; because such
power as all this of God's worship was not with him: but to these the Disciples
of our Saviour it was, through the help of their Lord, easy to acknowledge Him,
and to find Him (at hand as) the Father and Creator of all. To every race of men
did they reveal Him, and so preached the knowledge of Him to all, throughout the
whole creation, that, from their teaching, there are even to this time, among
all nations, tens of thousands of congregations, not only of men, but also of
women, children, slaves, and villagers! All this (then accrued to them) from
this philosopher, so that |296 they were not wanting, not only to make Him known
(as) the Maker and Creator of this whole world, but they also became his
ambassadors in every place. Such were the victories of the common Saviour of
all; these, the deceptions of Him who was thought to be a Deceiver16! While,
behold, such alone were His Disciples and acquaintances; from whom it was (but)
right, we should learn of what sort their Master was.

15. Come17 then, let us again try the matter thus,-- You say of Him that He was
a magician; and not (only so,) but, that He was a maker of magicians. You style
Him cunning, and a deceiver. How then was it, that He was the first, and the
only one, who has arisen capable of this matter? Or, Is it (not) right we
should, according to custom, ascribe the cause to the Teachers ? If then He was
the first and only one capable of this;--no one having taught Him, and He having
never learned any thing from others, nor yet derived it from the ancients;-- How
is it not then incumbent on us to confess of Him, that His nature was Divine? He
(I say), who without book, without precepts, and without teachers, (so) learned
of Himself, and was seen to know from Himself, the Maker of all these things?
when, observe, it is impossible for any one to acquire a knowledge of the art of
the goldsmith, of logic, or of the primitive elements (of the world), without
some one to instruct and teach him. But, if He was out of nature;--and no one
ever, (so) taught of himself, came out a teacher of grammar, or of rhetoric; not
having previously been taught; nor, has there been a physician, or builder, or
practitioner of any other art: these things being but small, and belonging to
men; but this, one might say, is of the Teacher of the whole habitable world;
(viz.) that He performed the miracles recorded in the Scriptures, (and) |297
whose Disciples (taught) by Himself were such; having received nothing from the
ancients, neither having had any help from those moderns who performed things
not unlike what others had done, who had preceded Him;--What other thing can we
testify or confess, but that the matter is in truth Divine, and such as exceeds
all human nature18?

16. But. you say of Him that He had deceiving teachers, and that neither the
sciences of the Egyptians, nor those mysteries which were formerly preached
among them, escaped Him: that from these He collected together (His doctrines),
and that He seems to have been a man of this description19.--If then others, His
superiors, appeared before Him, and were His teachers, whether in Egypt or
elsewhere20; Why did not the fame of these also run forth, prior to His name
among all men, just as His has done? and, Why is not the praise of them also
proclaimed, even to this time, just as His has been ? and, Who is the magician,
of those who arose at any time, Barbarian or Greek, who was the teacher of such
disciples; the originator of all such laws and precepts as these are; and has
shewed forth the power of (this) the common Saviour of all ? and, of Whom has it
ever been written, that He did such cures as those which have been recorded of
our Saviour?--The knowledge too of something to come to pass, with all those
|298 predictions ? those too, which like these, have by their means been laid
down as principles, What other has, either before, or after Him, been
memorialized as having delivered ? and, Who is it that has promised that he
would effect those things, throughout the whole habitable world, which he had
(so) predicted, and has, in fact, so confirmed His words, that, even to these
our times, the fulfilment of His predictions is visible to our own eyes ? And,
Whose disciples and eye-witnesses of the things themselves (here had in view),
have ever so sealed the truth regarding those which they attested of their Lord,
by the trial of both fire and sword, as these Disciples of our Saviour have done
?--who (indeed) bore the reproach of all men, for the sake of the things which
they had seen and witnessed of Him, and submitted to every species of torment;
while the end of their testimony respecting Him was, as that of the Son of God !
How much less would magicians seal with their blood their testimonies? And,
Which of the magicians, even if it ever came into his mind to set up a new
people in his own name, did not only think of doing this, but also gave effect
to his project ? How would not this eclipse all human nature, that he should
also frame laws opposed to the error of a plurality of Gods, and adverse to the
ordinances of Kings, Legislators, Philosophers, Poets, and Theologians? and,
that he should send these forth and shew, through the period of a long life,
that they were (at once) triumphant and faultless?

17. Which21 of the magicians is it, who ever projected that which our Saviour
did ? But, if one did so project; still he dared not to advance this. But, if
one so dared; still he brought not the matter to effect. He (the Saviour) said
in one word and enouncement to His Disciples, "Go and make disciples of all
nations in my name, and teach ye them every thing that I have commanded you22."
And the deed He made to follow the word. For thence, every race of the Greeks
and Barbarians became at once, and in a short space of time, (His) Disciples:
The laws too of our |299 Saviour were not written in any Book of His; but,
without book23, were disseminated at His command among all nations; (and) these
were opposed to the ancient worship of a plurality of Gods:--laws at enmity with
the Demons, and unfriendly to every error of a multitude of Deities :--laws
purifying the Scythians, the Persians, and other Barbarians, and converting
(them) from every savage, and lawless sort of life:--laws subversive of the
customs, which had obtained from ancient times among the Greeks, and teaching
the new and genuine worship of God. How then have they dared so (to advance)
such things as these, that one should say of Him, that He was probably aided
(in) this magic by others,--the ancient magicians,--who were before His times24?
But, if there was no other person, whom any one could say resembled Him ;
neither was there consequently, who could have been the cause of His possessing
all this superiority.--It is now time therefore that we should confess, that an
extraordinary and Divine Nature came into the world, which first and alone
performed the things which had never before been commemorated among men.

18. Let us again ask, after these things, Whether any one ever saw with his
eyes, or learned by hearing, that there were magicians such as He was, and
composers of |300 (magical) drugs, who, without libations, sacrifices, and
invocations of Demons, performed the rites of magic ? When, behold, it is well
known and clear to every one, that the whole process of magic is usually
effected by these things. For, How can any one bring an accusation of this sort
either against our Saviour, or against his Disciples, or against those who are,
even to these times led by His doctrine ? Is there a man who can bring such an
accusation as this against them? Is it not evident, even to the blind, that we
are prepared for every thing the reverse of these things ? And that we dare to
surrender up ourselves to death in an instant ? but that we will not sacrifice
to Demons :--that we instantly submit to be put out of life; but do not submit
to be subjected to Demons! And, Who is he who knows not how delightful it is to
us, that, through the name of our Saviour, (coupled) with prayers that are pure,
we cast out every kind of Demon ? And thus the word of our Saviour, and the
doctrine which is from Him, have made us all to be greatly superior to the power
which is invisible, and impervious to inquiry; and, (such) that we are ready to
be enemies and haters of the Demons, but not that we should be friends, or
followers, of (their) customs; much less be subjected and obedient (to them).
How then could He have been a slave to the Demons, who delivered such things as
these, to those who were devoted to Himself? And, How could He have sacrificed
to evil spirits? Or, How could He have called upon the Demons (as His)
assistants and helpers, when all the Demons and impure spirits have been
agitated, as by some torment or punishment even to this very time, at the
mention of His name ? (and) have departed and fled before His power, as it was
the case in former times, when He conversed with men, when they could not bear
to see Him ; (one and) another, crying out from another place, and saying, "
What have we to do with thee, thou Son of God ? Art thou come to torment us
before the time?" |301

19. Now, Is not the man whose mind is intent on magic only,--and is wholly
addicted to things (thus) base,-- in his character openly odious, vile, corrupt,
iniquitous, ungodly, and impious ? And being such, Whence, and How, can he teach
others, either the things which pertain to the worship of God, or which respect
purity ? or, which concern the knowledge of God ? or, which are on the
immortality of the soul ? or, which inculcate righteousness, and the judgment of
God who is over all? Would he not be an ambassador of the things which are
opposed to all these? persevering in those that attend on hatred, and the denial
of God ? and rooting up as fabulous the (doctrine of a) general providence of
God ? and laughing at the words which treat of virtue, and (affirm) of the soul
that it is immortal ? If indeed, such things as these had been witnessed (of
Him), then would there have been nothing, even respecting this our (Teacher),
which we could have said to the contrary25. But, if in all His words and His
deeds, He was seen to call upon God who is over all, and King of all; and
prepared his Disciples to be such; and, if He was Himself temperate, and a
Teacher of temperance ; if too, He was a doer and a preacher of righteousness,
of truth, of mercy, and of every virtue; and, if He shewed forth the worship of
God, the King of all; How does it indeed not follow upon these things that we
should think of Him, that not one of those wonderful acts which He did was done
by magic ? and confess that it was, in truth, by the unseen power of God26 ?

20. These things then, are directed (against) those who dare, with ungodly
mouths, to blaspheme against Him. But if they change and confess of Him, that He
was a teacher of purity and sobriety of life, and a bringer in of the doctrine
of the (true) worship of God; still, that He was no doer of those wonderful,
powerful, and miraculous works which are recorded of Him, or of those divine
deeds which are superior to man; and, that His Disciples |302 have fabricated
these same; it is now time that we should also meet this accusation.

Against those who do not believe the testimony of the Disciples of our Saviour,
respecting His miraculous deeds.

21. If 27 then (these) should say of Him, that He wrought no complete miracle,
nor yet any of those wonderful works of which His disciples bore testimony, but
that His disciples have otherwise falsely stated them, and have lied for the
purpose of putting forth miraculous relations about Him ; let us see whether the
word of these is to be taken as satisfactory: there being no (earthly) cause
that they can assign, why they the Disciples, and He their master, went forth
into the world. For He who teaches, gives a promise of some doctrine: and they
again, the Disciples, love both the precepts and doctrines, as if (conveying)
some (valuable) art28, and give themselves up (accordingly) to the Teacher. What
ground therefore, can there be for any one to speak against the disciples of our
Saviour, on account of their conversation with Him ? And, What could have
pressed them to this care respecting Him, and that they should have recorded Him
(as) the teacher of such doctrines to themselves ? Or, Is (not) this clear ? For
the things which they learned of Him, they also declared fully to others: and
these were the appointments of this His philosophy. They29 were too, the first
ambassadors of God |303 who is over all, of the providence of God, of the
righteous judgment (of God,) of the soul's being immortal, of the distinction
between the life of the good and the bad, and of other things of this kind,
which are written in their Scripture. It was also a precept pertaining to the
life of this philosophy, which He laid down for them when He said, "Possess ye
neither gold nor silver in your purses, neither scrip for the way30,''? with
other similar things: but (His great precept was), that they should give up
their souls, only to the providential care of the Governour of all, and not be
anxious on account of want. And He so instructed them, that they should consider
(His precepts) much better than those which Moses delivered to the Jews. For he
laid down a law for them, --as for men to whom murder would be easy,--that they
should not kill. And in like manner, that they should not commit adultery, as to
men dissolute and adulterous. And again, that they should not steal, as to men
to whom slavery would be suitable; and, that they should not injure, as to men
who were fraudulent31. But of these, He knew that it was desirable they should
stand in need of no such laws; but that this should above all things be precious
in their sight, (viz.) that their soul should be subject to no (evil) passion;
and that they should root up and expel from the bottom of their heart, as from
its root, the germ of (every) vice; (and,) that they should be superior to
wrath, and every base desire: that is to say, that they should not even be
angry, because of the superiority of their soul, as being free from passion ;
that they should not look upon a woman with evil desire; that they should so
labour against theft, that they should give of their own to them that needed;
and further, that they should not glory in this, that they injured none, |304
but (rather) in this, that those who wished to injure them, they bore with
without anger32. But, What need is there that I should collect together all the
things which He, and they, taught ? He also counselled them,--together, with all
these things,--that they should be so confirmed in the truth, as not to be under
the necessity of giving even a true oath, much less a false one: but that they
should so form their character, that in it, apart from every sort of oath, they
should appear as true, and should proceed no farther than "yea33" (yea), and
should in their conversation truly apply this.

22. We34 may ask therefore, whether there is any thing--whatever it might
be--against those who were the hearers of these things, and who forthwith arose
as teachers of them to other Disciples, (out) of which we may suppose they
fabricated all the things, which they attested their Master had done. And, What
is there in this leading us to suppose, that they all thoroughly lied ? They
were, in number, the Twelve who had been chosen, and the remaining Seventy of
whom it is said, that He sent them before Him, two and two, into every place and
part to which He was about to go. But, there is not so much as a word that can
be said of this whole company, (shewing) that they belied Him :--of men, who
loved the life that was pure, and the worship of the (true) God ; who cared but
little for all the children of their own families; and who instead of their
friends, their wives I say, their children and all belonging to them, took to
the life which had no possessions; and fully gave their testimony to their Lord,
as from one mouth, among all mankind.

23. This35 is therefore, the leading, primary, and true reason. Let us then,
also investigate that which is opposed (to it). Let Him therefore be
(considered) the Teacher, and them the Disciples ; and so, as it were in a
relation of |305 hypothesis that He taught none of the things already mentioned,
but those opposed to them (viz.); that they should forthwith be transgressors of
the Law; should act impiously, iniquitously, fraudulently, and falsely; should
swear falsely, and do (many) hateful things, and if there be any other vice that
can be named. Now, all these things are wholly foreign to the doctrines of our
Saviour; they are opposed (to them,) and would be the (offspring) of arrogance
and impudence. Nor, are they only opposed to His words and doctrines, but also
to the mode of life which has hitherto been delivered to all nations; that which
is practised in all His Churches. But, even if the matter be (wholly) false,
then cannot its like be advanced; (viz.) that we should have been a race so
negligent, as not even to have examined the things now before us!--Let Him then
be (supposed to have been) the Teacher of every vice, and iniquity; and that the
chief care was, that they should after all these things remain concealed. And
such custom is most wisely concealed under the form of a doctrine which is pure,
and putting forth a new (mode) of worship. These then, were led by such things,
and by others still worse. For vice previously ensnares, and it constitutes the
teaching of itself. They would (then,) exalt their Master to a state of
greatness by lying words, and spare not even one expression of falsehood; and
falsely ascribe to Him every sort of miracle and wonderful work, that (men)
might |306 wonder at them and felicitate them, that they were dignified by being
the Disciples of such a Master.

24. Come then, let us now see,--if they really were such, --whether it was
possible that could have been established, which they endeavoured to do for Him.
For they say, that "Evil is friendly to evil, but not to good36." Whence then,
is this agreement in vice to be discovered in the multitudes of all these men ?
And, Whence this testimony respecting them (viz.), that the object of them all
was in unison ? And, Whence this doctrine about the Divine appointments, and the
teaching of the (true) Philosophy ? Whence also, the mind (intent) on the life
of virtue ? And, Whence the doctrine (inculcating) flight from every vice ?
Whence also, the knowledge and recording of precepts such as these ? And, Whence
the glory of the conduct and conversation which was delivered by them,
throughout the whole creation of man ? Whence too, all this power ? Whence this
courage ? Whence this confidence ? Whence this resignation even to death?--But,
Who would at the first, even in opinion, have had respect to the man who taught
vice and bitterness,--as it is (here) said of Him,-- and who promised such
things ? They would surely say (such were the deeds) of a Magician. But, the
Disciples of this Leader were in nothing vicious. And, Must not they have
understood these things at the end of their Master ? and, by what sort of Death
he was affected ? Why then, after such an end of shame, did they continue in
these things ? and affirm of Him who was then among the dead, that He was God,
unless they thought it a thing of no moment, that they themselves should suffer
similar things ? Now, Who is it that has voluntarily and openly ever chosen
punishment for the sake of nothing profitable ? For, had they been desirous of
possessions, so would they also of |307 profit: and, if they had been abominable
in character, they would have been lustful. We may then think of them perhaps,
that they had thus dealt with the matter for the sake of these things, and
intrepidly exposed37 themselves even to death ! But, if they preached what was
adverse to these, and fully proclaimed (it) in the hearing of all the
congregations (of Christians); and also, immediately instructed (men) in the
doctrine of the Scriptures, (viz.) that they should flee from every vicious and
base desire; should avoid every thing fraudulent; should overcome every sort of
lust, and the love of money; and that they did moreover, so teach those who
became their disciples; it will be likely that they carried on no merchandize,
collected no wealth, and took no part in a life either of ease, or of pleasure.
Since therefore, they were led by none of these things; How could they have been
induced to suffer, for no object, the worst of punishments and of vengeance, for
the testimony given of their Master, which, again, had no foundation in fact?
|308

25. But let it be granted, that they honoured Him while He was yet with them,
and had His conversation among them, and led them astray by deception, as it has
been affirmed; How38 was it then, that even after His death, and then much more
strenuously than before, they went on calling Him God ? Because, while He was
yet among men, it is said that they even forsook and denied Him, at the time
when His deceivers were ready (to take Him); but, after His departure from among
men, they joyfully chose death, rather than relinquish the good testimony they
had given respecting Him ! Those (Disciples) therefore, who formerly knew no
good thing of their Master, neither the life, deed, doctrine, nor work, that was
worthy of praise; and, who had received no advantage from Him, except indeed
vice, and the leading astray of men; How was it, that they so easily gave
themselves up to death, not, because they were in any respect guilty, but
because they had attested things so glorious and praise-worthy of Him; when
behold, it was in the power of every one of them to live in safety, and to lead
a life of comfort at home with his friends39? But, How could men, who were
themselves deceived and deceiving, submit willingly to death for another, who,
as they knew with certainty, (and) better than all others, had not been in any
one thing the cause of good to them, but--as men say,--the Teacher of every evil
? A man endued with mind and virtue, may indeed for some noble conquest, or for
some excellent person, occasionally with propriety, and even with glory, submit
to death. But he, who is so base in character as to have been in pursuit only of
the things of a temporal life, and the enjoyment of lusts, has never chosen
death rather than life; nor has suffered severe punishment for the sake of his
friends, much less for one convicted of vice. How then, could the Disciples of
the (Person) mentioned,--who could not have been ignorant that He was a deceiver
and magician, if He really had been such, and even retaining in |309 themselves
every vice that was hateful,--have willingly undergone every species of torment
and of punishment from their countrymen, on account of the testimony they had
given of Him ? But this is by no means, the disposition of the vicious. For40 I
myself have seen many, who have faithfully kept society and oath with the
living; but who, as soon as these died, dissolved every compact of this sort
entered into between them. And we all know accurately how the Sophists,--brought
together in the cities (generally), and in glorious repute for their erudition
and display of words,--load with praises the governors, and those vested with
great power and rule, just so long as they retain this; but, as soon as any
change (in this respect) happens to them, these also change their words; and no
more will they willingly memorialize those whom they formerly did, purely from
the fear of those (now) in power.

26. If41 then, these Disciples of our Saviour were deceived and deceiving, I
would add this also: They were unlearned, and altogether illiterate; that is,
they were even barbarians, and understood no language except the Syriac. How
then did they, after the departure of their Lord from among men, go forth into
the whole creation, and give their testimony to His Godhead ? And, by What sort
of advice were they prevailed on to attempt this ? By What power too, did they
effect that which they undertook? It might have happened indeed, that some
rustics at their own homes would be perverted and led astray. But, that they
(the Disciples) should be sent forth into foreign countries, and should not
relinquish their object through remissness, but should preach the name of our
Saviour to every man42, together with His deeds of wonder; and not this only,
but should also teach His commandments both in the villages and cities;--some of
them to the Roman power (itself), and (so) apportion to themselves this city of
the empire: others also, to the Persians; others, to those among the Armenians;
others, to the nation of the Parthians; and again, to that also of the
Scythians: (that) some of these |310 should go forth, even as far as the
extremities of the creation, and arrive at the country of the Hindoos; others
pass over to the Islands beyond the ocean, and which are called Britain;--could
not, I think, have been the things of men; How much less, of those who were
deficient and illiterate? How much still less, of deceivers and magicians?

27. How then could those, whose experience of their Master was, that He was
vicious and a perverter,-- and who had with their own eyes witnessed His
departure by death,--have used such terms with each other, for this (viz.), that
they should unanimously lie respecting Him ? For they all attested as with one
mouth, the cleansing of lepers, the casting out of Demons, the raising of the
dead, (the restoring of) sight to the blind, and many other instances of cure,
which were effected by Him :--

28. And after these things, His resurrection after the death which they had
previously witnessed? For, to such things, not happening, nor even being heard
of in their times, How could they, with one mouth, have given testimony, and
convinced (themselves) that they came to pass ? and have continued to place
faith in (this) their testimony, even to death ? Was it, either that they were
brought together, and that they swore to do this ? and that they entered into
compact with one another, to fabricate, and falsely to put forth, things which
never came to pass? And shall we say, that they used terms to this effect as the
pretence for such compact? or, such as these? Men, our friends!--Him who was,
(as it were) yesterday or the day before, a Deceiver and Teacher of error,--who
suffered extreme punishment before the eyes of us all,--we know better and more
accurately than any other, how far He excelled, because we were the Disciples of
His secret mysteries. He appeared as pure to the many, and thought that He
possessed something better than the many. But |311 He possessed nothing great,
nor yet any thing worthy of (that) His resurrection ; unless one might say, that
He was cunning and impure in character, and that those were perversions which He
taught us, and the false boastings which was favourable to such things;--come,
let us give the right hand to one another, and let us all at once enter into
compact among ourselves, that we will unanimously put forth, among all mankind,
falsehood respecting Him, and will say, that we saw " Him give sight to the
blind,'' a thing which no one (of us) ever heard of; and that " He cleansed the
lepers" and "Raised the dead." And we will in a body affirm, that things were
done by Him which we (indeed) never saw; and were said (by Him) which we
likewise never heard. Those things too which were done, as it were in reality,
we will contend for (as such). And, if this His last end has been published, and
He so openly received His death that no one can conceal it, we will
nevertheless, impudently make this of no effect; attesting pertinaciously that
He rose from the dead; was also with all of us, and accompanied us both in
conversation and in the usual meals. Let this then, be pertinaciously and
shamelessly retained in all these things, and so remain with us, that we persist
in it even to death !--For, Why might we (not) expose ourselves to death for
nothing7 ? And, Why should it molest us, willingly to receive stripes and
torments in our persons, for nothing that is necessary ? And, if it be required
that we should suffer imprisonment, injury, and affliction, for nothing that is
true; should submit instantaneously to this; should all of us together lie by
consent, and put forth falsehood for no profit whatever, either to ourselves or
to those who may be deceived by us; or, to Him, of whom these lies have been
told by us; affirming that He was God: and that we should extend this falsehood,
not only to our own people, but should also go out among all mankind, and fill
the whole creation with the |312 things we have (thus) laid down respecting Him;
and should thence proceed forthwith, to make laws for all nations, subversive of
the opinions respecting the Gods of their forefathers; those (I say), which had
from ancient times been established among them : and, that we should first of
all lay our commands upon the Romans, not to worship those whom their
forefathers supposed to be Gods; that we should then also pass off to the
Greeks, and preach that which is also adverse to their wise men : that we should
not neglect the Egyptians, but contend also with their Deities, but should not
draw out against them the things of Moses, which were in former times adverse to
them, but place against them the Death of our Teacher as something terrific: and
should destroy that fame respecting the Gods, which formerly went out from among
them to all mankind, not by mere words, and stories, but by the power of our
Lord, of Him who was crucified; and, that we should again proceed even to the
extremities of the land of the Barbarians, and subvert the things (prevailing)
with all men: and for this purpose not one of us should be wanting : For the
reward pertaining to the things which we (so) attempted, would not be small,
since the triumphs to which we should present ourselves, would not be simple
ones; but, as it is likely, (would be) punishments awarded by the laws of every
place; open bonds, torments, imprisonments, fire, sword, (death by) the cross
and (by) wild beasts: but, because we would acquire a likeness to our Teacher,
we would willingly rather, and with joyfulness one and all, continue (partaking)
in these calamities! For, What can there be better than this, that we should be
found enemies to both God and man, for no one thing profitable ? And also, that
we should obtain nothing of ease ? neither should see our friends, nor in any
way increase our wealth ? nor even possess the hope of any good to perfection ?
but should, on the contrary, vainly and without any object err |313 ourselves,
and lead others (also) astray ? For this is the helpful thing (had in view),
that we should both be opposed to all nations, and also engaged in contention
with those Gods, whom all men have from ancient times confessed: and, that we
should preach of Him who was our Teacher, and who died before our eyes, that He
was God, and the Son of God : and that we ourselves should be ready to die for
Him, having learned from him nothing true, and nothing advantageous! And that we
should particularly honour Him, because He aided us in nothing excellent: and
should moreover do every thing in order to glorify His name; suffer every sort
of injury and vengeance, and willingly receive every form of punishment for
nothing that is true! For, evil certainly is truth, and falsehood has that which
is opposed to vice. On this account we say, that "He even raised the dead, also
cleansed the lepers, also cast out Demons, and was the doer of other wonderful
works," when we know of no such things done by Him, but have fabricated all
these things for ourselves; and (thus) led all astray, on whom we could prevail
to do so ! But, if any one would not be (so) persuaded, still we ourselves
should,-- for the sake of the things which we had (so) bargained upon among
ourselves,--have brought forth upon ourselves the things worthy of such a system
of error.

29. And Do these things appear to you as convincing ? And, Can you so far
persuade yourself, that they (His Disciples) did falsely put forth such things
as these ? And, that men so deficient and unlettered, did actually make (such)
compact among themselves, and (triumphantly) walk over the power of the Romans ?
Could human nature, possessed as it is with the love of life, have ever
submitted, for no object and of its own will, to death ? Or, Could the Disciples
of our Saviour have been carried on to such an excess of madness, that they
should at once,--when they had seen no act of a miraculous character performed
by Him, --have falsely put forth by compact such things as these? |314 And
again, Could they have put together such lying statements respecting Him, and
then have readily submitted to death in support of them?

30. But they went not forth by compact, to this (work of) preaching respecting
Him; nor did they make (any compact) among themselves. Whence then, had they
this perfect agreement of testimony respecting His deeds ? Is it (not) likely,
from seeing the things which were done by Him ?--For one of (these) two things
must be the fact: (viz.) Either, they made compact among themselves, and lied;
or else, they attested (what) they had seen with their eyes. If then, they
really saw (the things), and preached (them) to all men; they were worthy of
credit when they said of our Saviour, that He was God; and, that He permitted
them to see with their eyes, (the putting forth of) Divine powers, Miracles, and
wonderful Works. If however they really saw none of the things (so) recorded,
but put together false statements; and accordingly made oath, and sworn
covenant, on this, (viz.) that they would say nothing true, and (then) lied, and
attested of their Lord what was false; How could they in reality have submitted
to death, for nothing true ? and, that neither fire, nor sword, nor fierce
beasts, nor the depth of the sea, could make them falsify the accounts, which
they had (thus) falsely put forth respecting their Lord ?

31. But, How can you say that they neither expected nor hoped, that they should
suffer any calamity from this their testimony respecting Him; and, that they
therefore went out, even boldly, to the (work of) preaching about Him ? On the
contrary, it was impossible they should not have hoped, that they should suffer
every sort of calamity: superinducing as they did the destruction of the Gods,
at once of the Romans, the Greeks, and the Barbarians. Now the Book itself,
which (speaks) of them, shews plainly, that after the death of their Lord
certain men, enemies of the word and who lay in wait for it, laid hands on them;
delivering them first to imprisonment, and then strictly |315 commanding them,
that they should speak to none in the name of Jesus43. And, when they found them
afterwards openly teaching the multitudes the things respecting Him, they
violently seized, and scourged (them), and forbade them (so) to teach ; Simon
Peter answering said to them, "It is right that we should rather hearken to God,
and not to men44." After these things too, Stephen was stoned with stones, and
died; because he had openly spoken (of Him) in the assembly of the Jews45. And
there arose no small persecution46 against those, who were the ambassadors of
the name of Jesus. And again at another time, when Herod the king of the Jews
slew James the brother of John with the sword, he, the same, confined Simon
Peter in bonds, as it is written in the Acts of the Apostles47. And, while these
suffered such things, the rest of the Disciples persevered, grew strong, and
remained in the doctrine of our Saviour ; and again preached to all men more
particularly respecting Him, and His wonderful works. After these things,
James--whom those who formerly resided at Jerusalem called "the Just" on account
of his great excellence,--was interrogated of the chief priests and doctors of
the Jewish people, as to what he thought of Jesus; and, when he returned answer
to them, that " He was the Son of God48," he was also stoned with stones by
them49. Simon Peter too, was, after his50 Head (i.e. Christ), crucified at Rome.
Paul also was taken off51 (slain,) and John was committed to the island (Patmos
in banishment). And, while these suffered such things, not so much as one of the
|316 rest forsook His (Christ's) doctrine; and (indeed) all of them prayed, that
such things might befall them, in order that they might, for the sake of the
worship of God, be like to those already mentioned. And, on this account again,
they openly gave their testimony of our Saviour, and of His wonderful works, the
more abundantly.

32. And observe, If the things which they preached respecting Him were lies, and
they had fabricated them by compact; we ought to wonder how this whole company
could have observed this agreement, in what they had fabricated, even to death.
And no one of them ever betrayed any fear, on account of the things that had
happened to those who had previously been slain; or left their society; or
preached that which opposed what his companion had; or brought to light the
things they had (so) agreed upon. But even he, who,--filled with the love of
money,--dared to deliver Him up to (His) enemies, did forthwith, and with his
own hands, inflict punishment on himself52 !

33. Now, Is not this replete with wonder, that men, who were deceivers and
unlettered53, knowing neither how to speak, or understand, any language beyond
that of their fathers, should not only undertake to go forth and to pass into
all nations, but should also (so) go forth and effect (their) purpose ? And, let
this also be considered, that not even one of them ever uttered a word adverse
to the marvellous deeds of their Lord ! If then, the agreement of witnesses is
sufficient to settle any of those things, about which there is doubt, and which
is commonly brought into dispute in the courts of law;--and the law of God has
declared that54 "in the mouth of two or three witnesses, every matter shall be
established55,"--Shall not the truth also be established by these, who were the
chosen twelve, and |317 the Disciples seventy in number, and thousands of others
besides these, all of whom at once exhibited (so) wonderful an agreement, and
who have (so) given their testimony to the things done by our Saviour ? This too
they did, not without affliction56; but in the suffering of torments, and of
every species of injury, of scourgings, imprisonment, and deaths! On this
account they were through God believed, in order that (He) might everywhere
confirm the word preached, by their means, throughout the whole habitable world,
even to this day !

34. Let57 it be considered then, that we have granted these things, by
connivance at an unjust principle. For (in) this, that a man might imagine that
which is adverse to the Scripture, and, that we should say of the common Saviour
of all that He was a Teacher, not of righteous precepts, but of those of vice,
fraud, and of every sort of abomination; and, that these His Disciples learned
the same from Him, and were all lustful and vicious in every thing, beyond all
men that ever existed; we allowed, by connivance, according to the statement
(supposed), that which is of all things the most improper. For this would be, as
if one should in a similar manner, injuriously accuse Moses who said in the law,
"Thou shalt, not kill; neither shalt thou commit adultery ; neither shalt thou
steal; neither shalt thou bear false witness;" and should say, that he uttered
these things by way of irony and in hypocrisy; for, it was his wish
(nevertheless) that his hearers should kill, commit adultery, |318 and act in
direct opposition to the things, which he himself shewed the Law laid down; and
put forth (merely) the form of an approach to purity of life!--But there is
nothing so shameless as this ! In like manner also, might any one arraign the
positions58 of the Philosophers among the Greeks, whose lives were those of
patience, as were all their words, and might say, that they were in their
conduct opposed to what they wrote; and so shewed themselves to have made a mere
(hypocritical) approach to the life, which belongs to philosophy. And thus, we
affirm, might any one simply arraign all the writings of the ancients, and shew
cause against the truth which they contain; and might Himself receive that,
which is diametrically opposed to these! But, as it cannot be difficult to any
one possessed of common sense, to pronounce of this that it would be madness; so
also, of the precepts of our Saviour and of His Disciples, should any one
pervert the truth which is (found) in these, and then attempt to fix upon Him
the things diametrically opposed to His teaching.-- But, let that be granted
which the statement itself requires. How much more will it then appear, that the
assertion of the opponent cannot stand, as (being grounded) in a connivance
(concession) which it is improper to (allow) ?

35. These59 things being then refuted, let us also consider the testimony of the
Scriptures of the Divinity, and the spotless and truth-loving manner of the
Disciples, of our Saviour. Any one therefore, who chooses (to exercise) a sound
mind, may hence see, that they were worthy of all dignity, since they confessed
that they were mean and unlettered in their discourse, and betook themselves to
a love for the doctrine of the worship of God, and of philosophy. They also
desired the life, capable of submitting to sufferings, and afflicted by fasting,
(by) abstinence from wine and from flesh, and (by) many other humiliating things
of the body; by prayer and supplication to God, and more particularly by
temperance, and the chief holiness of body. |319 and soul3. And, Who is not
astonished at this, that they should, for the sake of the excellency of wisdom,
have even separated themselves from the wives that had been lawfully given to
them ? and that they were led by no natural desire, and subdued by no love of
children; since they desired not the children that were mortal, but those which
were immortal ? And, How can any one fail to wonder at this their character,
that they desired no money ? or (How) imagine this, that they fled not from, but
loved, a Teacher who despised the possessions of gold and silver ? and the
Lawgiver, who laid it down that they should not enlarge their possessions even
to two coats60? which any one hearing, would doubtless seek excuse from its
severe requirements; while they were seen to act upon it, even to the letter !
For, upon a certain occasion a lame man--one of those who begged, on account of
the extreme doubt as to provision,--asked (alms) of those who were about Simon
Peter: and, when Simon Peter had nothing that he could give, he confessed that
he was destitute (lit. clean) of every sort of possession of silver and gold,
and said, "Silver and gold have I none61." After this he brought forth the
precious name,--which is of all things the most precious,--and said, "This which
I have give I to thee. In the name of Jesus the Christ, arise and walk."

36. And62, when they attended to their Teacher, (Jesus) enjoined upon them the
grievous things, (which should happen to them) in these words which He said to
them, (viz.) "In the world ye shall have tribulation63;" and again--" Ye shall
weep and mourn, but the world shall |320 rejoice64," How plainly did the
firmness and deep (sincerity) of their character not appear, since they fled not
from these (severe) exercises of the soul, nor betook themselves to the things
of the desires ? nor did their Lord moreover allure them by way of deception, or
make them His by promising them the things which supply ease and comfort; but,
truly and freely foretold to them those which should happen to them; and enabled
them to choose for themselves the sort of conduct, which He had laid down for
them. Of this sort were the things, which He foretold and attested, respecting
the persecutions that were to happen to them, because of His name, (viz.) "that
they should come before governours, and even kings65;" and, that they should
suffer every sort of punishment and vengeance, not on account of any thing
hateful, nor for any other just cause ; but for this only, (viz.), for their
testimony respecting Him; which (indeed), we have seen with our own eyes, has
happened even to this time ? His prediction moreover, is worthy of our
admiration ; for the testimony (given) respecting the name of our Saviour, and
the confessing of Him, had usually the effect of inflaming the anger of the
Rulers. And, even if nothing hateful had been perpetrated by any one confessing
Christ, they punished and injuriously treated him, on account of His name, as
evil, and more evil than any other thing: but, if any one did not confess His
name, but denied that he was a Disciple of Christ, he was immediately set at
liberty, even if he were implicated in many things which were abominable! But,
What necessity can there be, that I should collect and endeavour to record, the
many things relating to the lives of the Disciples of our Saviour, when the
things already advanced, will be sufficient proof of (all) that is before us ?
To these (however) we will again add the things (following), here in (their)
place; and with these we will conclude our discussion.

37. As to Matthew the Apostle66 his former manner |321 of life was not that
which was excellent; on the contrary, he was one of those whose business was
tax-gathering and fraud. This however, not one of the rest of the Apostles has
laid open to us, neither John the Apostle who was with him, nor Luke, nor Mark,
the writers of the rest of the Gospels: but Matthew, recording his own manner of
life, has become his own accuser ! Hear then, how openly he has memorialized his
own name against himself in his own writing, and has thus spoken :--

38. "67And, when Jesus passed from thence, He saw a man sitting among the
Tax-gatherers, whose name was Matthew; and He said to him, Follow me: and he
arose (and) followed Him. And it came to pass that when He was sitting in the
house, Behold many Tax-gatherers and Sinners were sitting with Jesus, and with
His Disciples." And again, after these things, when passing away, and reciting
the number of the rest of the Disciples, He added respecting Himself the name of
Tax-gatherer, and spoke thus: "The68 names of the twelve Apostles are these: The
first, Simon who is called Cephas, and Andrew his brother, James the son of
Zebedee and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, and Thomas and Matthew the
Tax-gatherer." Thus therefore Matthew evinces, through the greatness of (his)
humility, his truth-loving character, calls himself a Tax-gatherer; conceals not
his former mode of life, and counts himself among sinners ! He also numbers
himself second to the Apostle who was with him; for he associated (himself) with
Thomas, as (he did) Simon with Andrew, James with John, and Philip with
Bartholomew ; placing Thomas first, and honouring him as the more excellent
Apostle with himself; while the rest of the Evangelists have done the reverse of
this69. Hear therefore how Luke |322 bears record of Matthew, not giving him the
appellation of Tax-gatherer, nor placing him after Thomas; but, because he
considered him the more worthy, numbering him first, and placing Thomas after
him, just as Mark has done: His words then, are these: "And70, when it was day,
He called His Disciples, and chose twelve out of them, those whom He named
Apostles: Simon, whom He named Cephas; and |323 Andrew his brother2, James and
John, and Philip and Bartholomew, and Matthew and Thomas." Thus therefore Luke
honoured Matthew, just as they, who had from the first been eye-witnesses and
hearers of the word, had delivered to him71. 72And thus Matthew, through his
humility, made little of himself, confessed that he was a Tax-gatherer, and
numbered himself the second (in order), after the Apostle who was (named) with
him.

39. You73 will also find that John is like Matthew (in this respect) ; for in
his Epistle74 he does not so much as make mention of himself, or call himself
Elder75 or Apostle, or Evangelist. In the Gospel too, which was written by him,
he says of himself that Jesus loved him, but he does not reveal his own name.

40. Simon Peter moreover, did not so much as attempt the writing of a Gospel, on
account of his great fear (of responsibility). But Mark, they say, who, being
well known to him and his Disciple, put on record the declarations of Simon
respecting the deeds of our Saviour. Who,--when |324 he betook himself to the
recording of these things, (viz.) when Jesus asked what men said of Him, and the
Disciples themselves what they thought of Him; Simon answered and said to Him,
"Thou76 art the Christ;"--made the statement that Jesus did not even answer him,
or say any thing to him; but that He forbade their telling this to any man. Now
Mark committed these things to writing, although he was not present with Jesus
when He said them; but he had heard them from Peter, when he taught them. Peter
however, was unwilling to state the things which Jesus had said either to him,
or about him, by way of testimony (favourable) to himself. But, the things which
were said of him are these, (which) Matthew has put forth in these (words):
"But77 you, Whom say ye that I am ? Simon said to Him, Thou art the Christ the
Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said to him; Blessed art thou
Simon son of Jonas, since flesh and blood have not revealed (this) to thee, but
my Father who is in heaven. And I also say to thee, that thou art Peter, and
upon this rock78 will I build my Church, and the gate-bars of hell shall not
prevail against it. And I give to thee the keys79 of the kingdom of heaven; and
every one whom thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and every one
whom thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven" When (therefore), all
these things were said to Simon Peter by Jesus, Mark did not record so much as
|325 one of them ; because, as it is probable, neither did Peter mention them in
his teaching80. These things therefore, Simon Peter well kept silent, and thence
Mark omitted them. But the things of his denial (of Christ), he preached to all
men; and (so) caused an accusation to be recorded against himself! That he wept
bitterly too, over this, you will find Mark to have given the record in these
(words): "And81, when Peter was in the court, one of the maid-servants of the
High Priest came to him; and, when she saw that he was warming (himself), she
looked upon him and said to him, Thou also wast with Jesus the Nazarene. But he
denied and said, I know (him) not, nor do I perceive what thou sayest: and he
went out into the outer court; and the cock crew. And again a maid saw him, and
began to say to those who were standing (by) ; |326 This (man) also is (one) of
them. And he again denied. And again a little after, those who were standing
(by) said to Simon, Truly thou art (one) of them; for thou art also a Galilean.
But he began to curse and to say, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And
immediately, the cock crew the second time" These things Mark wrote; and these,
Simon Peter witnessed against himself. For all these things of Mark are, they
say, the memorials of the declarations of Peter himself82.

41. Of83 those therefore, who excused themselves from saying the things which
would contribute to their own good fame, and who recorded against themselves
accusations which can never be forgotten, charging themselves with their own
foolishness, in things which none of those who came afterwards could have known,
had they not been recorded by themselves; How (shall we not assert) they were
free from every feeling of self-love, and lying statement ? and justly confess
of them, that they openly and clearly put forth the proof of an ardent love of
truth? Those therefore, who evinced such a character as this,--of whom men
thought that they were the authors of falsehood and of lying, and whom they
endeavoured to malign as Deceivers ;--How are these not (now) found to be a
laughing-stock, lovers of hatred and envy, and enemies to the truth ? For, How
should not those be such, who (insisted) on the things which were guileless, and
of no hateful observance; these same (I say), whose characters were true and
pure, and who shewed forth their habitual dispositions by their words ?--(not)
that (men) should say of them, that they were cunning and wily Sophists, and
fabricators of things that had no existence, and laid upon their Lord, by way of
favour, things which He never did. It does appear to me, that we may well put
the question to these, Whether84 it be right we should give credence to the
Disciples of our Saviour, or not ? And, if we are not |327 to give credence to
these only, Whether we should to all those also, who have long ago preached the
memorial of their conduct and precepts, (both) among the Greeks and the
Barbarians; and have committed to writing time after time the victories
attending this ? And also, Whether it be just to extend credence to others; but
to withhold it from them only?--How clearly then, does not the malice of such
(opponents) appear!

42. But85, Why should these have lied respecting their Lord ? and have delivered
down, in their writings, things of Him which had no existence, as if they had
really happened ? Why too, should they have falsely stated of Him the
sufferings, and (other) grievous things (which He bore) ? His betrayal by one
word of His Disciple (Judas) ? the accusation of those who criminated Him ? the
ridicule ? the contempt of the judgment (passed on Him) ? the reproach ? the
smitings on the face ? the scourges laid upon His loins ? the crown of thorns
which was placed upon Him in reproach ? the purple robe which they put upon Him
after the manner of a cloke ? and, at last, the bearing of His cross, the signal
mark of His victory ? that He was then affixed to this? that He was pierced both
in His hands and feet ? that they gave Him vinegar to drink ? that one struck
Him on the head with a reed ? that He was derided of those who looked on Him ?
Is it right (I say), that we should suppose His Disciples to have falsely stated
even these, and many other similar things that are written about Him ? Or, that
we should believe they truly stated these (disreputable) things ? but, that we
should not give credence to those which are honourable (to Him)? But, How can
this system of contrariety be supported ? |328 For this, that (men) should
affirm that these same persons were true; and again this, that they were false,
would be nothing else but to affirm of them, that which is in itself
contradictory ! Of What sort then, should the reprehension of these be ? For, if
this stigma is to be fixed upon them, (viz.) that they propagated falsehood, and
exalted their Lord by lying statements, and adorned Him by means of (fabricated)
miracles; they surely never would have committed to writing the things already
mentioned, which were adverse to themselves; nor would they have made it known
to those, who should come afterwards, that He, whose ambassadors they were, was
"oppressed and " exceedingly sorrowful" and was perturbed in his soul: or, that
they "forsook Him and fled-" or, that he, who was the chosen of all the
Apostles, and His Disciple, the same Simon Peter (I say),--who is preached
of,--did, without either pain (inflicted), or torment threatened, deny Him three
times! For these things, even if said by others, it was necessary they should
deny; they (I say), who betook themselves to nothing else, except the
fabrication of false statements favourable to Him, and magnifying both
themselves and their Lord.

43. If86 then, they appear to be lovers of truth in those grievous accounts
(which they give) of Him ; much more are they so in those glorious ones. For
those, who chose to lie on any one occasion, would the more particularly avoid
those things which brought difficulty with them, either by silence or denial of
them : because, those who should come after, would not have it in their power to
blame the things, which they had (so) kept silent. Why then, did they not lie
and say that Judas who betrayed Him, forthwith became a stone, when he dared to
give the kiss--the signal of betrayal? And, that he who dared to strike Him on
the cheek, had his right hand immediately withered ? And the High Priest of the
Jews, because he ran along with those who criminated Him, became blind in his
eyes? But, Why did not they all lie, (and say) that, in |329 truth, no grievance
(whatsoever) happened to Him ? but, that He concealed Himself from men, and
laughed at their judgment-hall? and, that those who accused Him, were deceived
by spectres sent from God ; thinking that they were doing something adverse to
one who was not near them ? And, Why should not this have been (deemed) more
glorious, than their falsely stating that "He raised the dead," and was the doer
of wonderful works ? This, that they should have recorded, that nothing either
human or mortal happened to him; but, that He did every thing by the Divine
power ?--That He made His ascension to heaven in the Divine glory ? For those,
who gave credence to their other accounts, could not have with-holden their
belief from these. How then, should those be (deemed) worthy of exemption from
every suspicion of vice, who concealed nothing of the truth, as to the
difficulties and calamities (so happening); and not also worthy of all credit,
as to the other miraculous deeds which they attested respecting Him ? The
testimony therefore, of these men respecting our Saviour, is sufficient. There
is nevertheless, nothing to prohibit our availing ourselves, even the more
abundantly, of the Hebrew witness Josephus; who, in the Eighteenth Book of his
Antiquities of the Jews, writing the things that belonged to the times of
Pilate, commemorates our Saviour in these words: --

(The testimony) of Josephus respecting the Christ.

44. " At87 this period then was Jesus, a wise man, if it be right to call Him a
man; for He was the doer of |330 wonderful works, and the Teacher of those men
who, with pleasure, received Him in truth. And He brought together many (both)
of the Jews, and many of the profane (Gentiles). And this was the Messiah
(Christ). And, when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal ancient men among
ourselves, laid on Him the punishment of the Cross, those who formerly loved Him
were not reduced to silence. For He appeared again to them, on the third day,
alive: things which, with many others, the Prophets had said respecting Him : so
that from thence, and even until now, the race of the Christians has not been
wanting to Him."

45. If88 therefore, as (this) author attests of Him, |331 He was the doer of
wonderful works, and that He made His Disciples,--not only the twelve Apostles,
or the seventy Disciples, but also attached to Himself,--myriads of others both
of the Jews and Gentiles; it is clear, that He possessed something excellent
beyond the rest of mankind. For, How could He have otherwise attached to Himself
the many, both of the Jews and Gentiles, unless He had made use of miracles and
astonishing deeds, and of doctrines (till then) unknown ? The Book of the Acts
of the Apostles also attests, that there were many thousands of the Jews, who
were persuaded that He was that Christ of God, who had been preached of by the
Prophets. It is also on record, that there was a great Church of Christ at
Jerusalem; which had been collected from among the Jews, even to the times of
its reduction by Hadrian. The first Bishops too who were there, are said to have
been, one after another, fifteen (in number), who were Jews89; the names of whom
are published to the men of that place, even until now. So that by these, every
accusation against the Disciples may be undone; since, what was prior to them,
and independent of their testimony, these attest of Him, (viz.), that He, the
Christ of God, did by means of these wondrous works which He performed, reduce
many, both of the Jews and of the Gentiles, beneath His power90.

46. You91 will also be made acquainted with the Divinity of His power, if you
will consider of what nature He was; and how it was that all this superiority of
the Divine power (operated) in the overcoming of tilings exceeding all
description. For let it be considered, No one--who ever wished to disseminate
his laws, or any strange doctrine among all nations, and, who would shew himself
to be a Teacher of the worship of the one supreme God, to all races of
men,--would be willing to make use of those as the ministers of his will, who
were of all men the most rustic and deficient. And it is likely, one might |332
think, he would attempt this with the greatest impropriety. For, How could they
who could scarcely open their lips, ever be the Teachers of any one man, much
less of multitudes ? And, How could they,--destitute of every sort of
erudition,--address whole assemblies, unless this were indeed a shewing forth of
the will of God ? For He called them, as we have already shewn, and said in the
first place "Follow me, and I will make you Fishers of men92." And, because He
thenceforth made them His own, and they adhered to Him, He breathed into them
the Divine power93, and filled them both with strength and courage: and, as He
was THE WORD or GOD in truth, and the Doer of all these miracles, He made them
the Fishermen of intellectual and reasonable souls; adding, at once to the word
"Follow me, and I will make you" the Deed, making them both the Doers, and
Teachers, of the worship of His God94. And thus He sent them forth into all
nations throughout the whole creation, and demonstrated that they were the
Preachers of His doctrine. And, Who is not astonished, and probably incredulous,
as to this miracle,-- which could scarcely (indeed) have been imagined ? Since
no one, of those who have been eminent, has ever been commemorated as having had
recourse to any such thing as this; or has come up to any thing resembling it95.
For it has been the desire of each one of these, to set up something promising
to himself, in his own land only; or, to be able to establish such laws as
seemed to him good, among some one people of his own. But observe of Him, who
availed himself of nothing either human or mortal, how, in reality, He again put
forth the word of God in the precept, which He gave |333 to these His powerless
Disciples, (viz.) "Go ye and make Disciples of all nations96!" It is likely too,
His Disciples would thus address their Lord, by way of answer: How can we do
this ? For, How can we preach to the Romans ? And, How can we discourse with the
Egyptians? What diction can we use against the Greeks; being brought up in the
Syrian language only ? How can we persuade the Persians, the Armenians, the
Chaldeans, the Scythians, the Hindoos, and other nations called Barbarians, to
desert the gods of their forefathers, and to worship the one Creator of all
things? And, upon What superiority of words can we rely, that we shall succeed
in this ? Or. How can we hope, that we shall prevail in the things attempted ?
(viz.) that we shall legislate for all nations, in direct opposition to the laws
laid down from ancient times, (and this) against their gods ? And, What power
have we upon which to trust, that we shall succeed in this enterprise ? These
things therefore, the Disciples of our Saviour would either have thought, or
said. But He who was their Lord solved, by one additional word, the aggregate of
the things of which they doubted, (and) pledged them by saying, '' Ye shall
conquer in my name." For it was not that He commanded them, simply and
indiscriminately, to go and make Disciples of all nations; but with this
excellent addition which He delivered, (viz): "In my name." Since it was by the
power of His name that all this came to pass ; as the Apostle has said, "God has
given Him a name, which is superior to every name: that, at the name of Jesus,
every knee should bow which is in heaven, and which is in earth, and which is
beneath the earth." It is likely therefore, that He would shew forth the
excellency of the unseen power, which was |334 hidden from the many, by His
name; and, (accordingly) He made the addition, "In my name." He thus accurately
foretold moreover, something which should come to pass, (when) He said, "It is
expedient that this my Gospel be preached in the whole world, for the testimony
of all nations97." Now, this matter was then declared in a corner of the earth,
so that those only who were at hand could have heard it. But, How could they
have believed Him when He said this, unless they had taken experiment as to the
truth of His words, from the other Divine acts which were done by Him ? For
this, you are compelled to confess when it is considered, that they gave
credence to what He said. For, when He gave them the command, not so much as one
sought to be excused; but they confided in what He had intimated : and, just as
His promises had been, so DID they make Disciples of the whole race of men !
They did go forth from their own land into all nations ; and, in a short time,
His words were seen in effect! His Gospel was therefore shortly preached,
throughout the whole creation, for the testimony of all nations, so that the
Barbarians and Greeks received the Scriptures, respecting the common Saviour of
all, in the handwriting of their Progenitors, and in the words of their
spiritual Fathers.

47. A man might therefore well stand in doubt, as to what the form of the
doctrine of our Saviour's Disciples was; how they passed on into the midst of
cities, and so proclaimed (it) in the middle of the streets; lifting up their
voices, calling to those with whom they met, and thence conversing with the
people: also, of what sort the language was in which they addressed them, so
that we can imagine the hearers were persuaded thereby: and (again), how (such)
men, inexperienced in words and far removed from every sort of erudition, could
speak before the people ; and (this), if not in large assemblies, still with the
few with |335 whom they met, and then addressed: and, of what, and of what sort
of terms, they made use for persuading (their) hearers. Nor was their effort
small, since they by no means denied the ignominious death of Him, whom they
preached. But, even if they concealed this, and did not confess before all,
what, and how many, things He suffered of the Jews, but put forth only those
splendid and glorious things--I say indeed,--His wondrous works, His miraculous
operations, and His doctrines of the (true) Philosophy; still, the matter will
not thus be made easy, (viz.) how they could make those who heard them, easily
to give in to their declarations: because their diction would be foreign. They
would too, now be listening to declarations entirely new, (coming) from men, who
possessed nothing worthy of truth, in testimony of the things affirmed by them.

48. But98, let it be supposed that the persuasives now put forth were these,
(viz.) that those who were His ambassadors, should at one time preach that He
was God ; that, in body, He was human ; and that, in his nature, He was no other
than THE WORD OF GOD: on which account also, He performed all these miracles,
and (put forth these) powers: but, that at another time, He suffered reproach
and infamy, and at last the capital and shameful punishment of the Cross; which
is inflicted on those (only), who are in their deeds the worst of all men. Who
then, would not (now) properly treat them with ridicule, as affirming things
opposed to each other ? And, Who is he, whose intellect would (partake) so much
of stone, as readily to believe them, when they said that they saw Him after His
death ? that He rose from the dead?--Him (I say), who could not help Himself
when among the living99? And (again), Who would ever be persuaded by men so
illiterate and |336 deficient as these, when saying; You should despise the
things of your own forefathers; charge as folly those of the wise of ancient
times; suffer yourselves to be persuaded by us alone, and to be commanded by the
precepts of Him who was crucified: for He only is the beloved, and only
(begotten) of that God alone, who is over all ?

49. I myself however, investigating for myself with effort100, and
in the love of truth, this same thing (singly), should perceive not one virtue
in it (making it) credible, nor even any thing great, or worthy of faith, nor so
persuasive, as adequate to the persuading of even one illiterate person, much
less men wise and intellectual. Nevertheless, when again I view its power, and
the result of its doings; how the many myriads have given their assent to it,
and how Churches of tens of thousands of men have been brought together, by
these very deficient and rustic persons; --nor that these were built in obscure
places, nor in those which are unknown, but rather in the greatest cities, I say
in the Imperial city of Rome itself, in Alexandria, in Antioch, in all Egypt, in
Libya, in Europe, in Asia, both in the villages and (other) places, and among
all nations; I am again compelled to recur to the question of (its) cause, and
to confess, that they (the Disciples) could not otherwise have undertaken this
enterprise, than by a Divine power which exceeds that of man, and by the
assistance of Him who said to them, "Go101, and make Disciples
of all nations in my name." And, when He had said this to them, He
attached to it the promise, by which they should be so encouraged, as readily to
give themselves up to the things commanded. For He said to them, "Behold102
I am with you always, even to the end of the world." It is stated, |337
moreover, that He breathed into them the Holy Ghost with the Divine power; (thus)
giving them the power to work miracles, saying at one time, "Receive ye
the Holy Ghost103;" and at another, commanding them, to
"Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, and cast out Demons:---freely ye
have received, freely give104."

50. Even you yourself see therefore, how this their word took effect; since even
the Book of their Acts attests things like to these, and which accord with them
; how,-- (for example,) when writing also of those by whom miraculous deeds were
done in the name of Jesus105,--those, who were present and saw, were astonished.
They were astonished, as it should seem, at those who had formerly seen (this
power) by means of deeds ; and who then made them (i. e. the chief Priests,)
readily to ask, Who this was, by whose power and name the miracle had been
wrought ?--And thus, as they taught, they found that these had in faith (even)
run before their instruction. For, it was not by words that they were persuaded;
but it was by the deeds which preceded these, that they were readily prevailed
upon to accede to the things said. It is also said, that men suddenly brought to
them sacrifices and libations, as if they had been Gods ; thinking that one of
them was Mercury, the other Jupiter: and the whole of this astonishment was, to
their minds, a demonstration that the deeds done were miraculous. And, as all
those which they preached respecting our Saviour, were such as these, they were
thenceforth quickly, and with propriety, received. Nor did they give their
testimony of His resurrection from the dead, by mere words and without proofs;
but, by their power and by deeds did they persuade, and shew forth the works of
the living (God).

51. If106 then, they preached that He was God, and the Son of God, and that He
was with the Father before He came among men ; Why should they not have
especially added to this, that they believed what was adverse to have been
impossible and incredible ? For they must have justly thought it impossible,
that these acts could have been |338 those of men ; but, on the contrary, those
of God, even the more though no one would say (this).

52. And this, and nothing else, is indeed the thing required, (viz.) by what
power the Disciples of our Saviour gained credit from those, who had from the
first heard them: and how they persuaded both Greeks and Barbarians to think of
Him, as of THE WORD OF GOD: and how they set up in the midst of the cities, and
in all villages, Houses107 (appropriated to) the Doctrine of the worship of the
supreme God. And, Who is not also astonished at this, when he considers with
himself, and feels satisfied, that this could not have been of man ; that never
at any former time, were the many nations of the whole creation subject to the
one sovereign rule of the Romans, except only since the time of our Saviour? For
it happened, immediately upon His passing about among men, that the affairs of
the Romans became great108;--that, at that time, Augustus was primarily the sole
Sovereign of many nations; and that in his time Cleopatra was inflamed with
love; and the traditionary (kingdom) of the Ptolemies in Egypt was dissolved109.
For, from that time, and until now, that kingdom which was from ancient time;
and of it, as one might say, the ancient germ of men which was established in
Egypt, have been rooted up. From |339 that period too, have the Jewish people
been in subjection to the Romans; as has that, in like manner, of the Syrians,
the Cappadocians, the Macedonians, the Bithynians, and the Greeks; and, to speak
collectively, all the rest of those subject to the rule of the Romans; and, that
this did not come to pass without regard to the Divine teaching of our Saviour,
Who will not confess, when He has considered, that it would not have been easy
for His Disciples to be sent forth, and to pass into foreign parts, when all the
nations were divided one against another ? and when there was no one uniting
element among them, on account of the many Satraps (stationed) in every place,
and in every city ? But, in the extirpation of these, they immediately,
fearlessly, and with pleasure, set about doing that which had been placed before
them; because God, who is over all, had previously made their course peaceful,
and had restrained the wrath of the worshippers of Demons in the cities, by the
fear of the great Empire. Consider then, If there had not been something to
restrain those who had been stupified with the error of a plurality of Gods, how
they would have contended with the Doctrine of Christ. For, you would doubtless
have seen in every city and village, commotions (stirred up) against each other,
with persecutions and wars of no mean description 110, had the worshippers of
the Demons possessed the sovereign rule over us. But now, this also is a work of
the God who is over all, that He might subdue |340 the enemies of His word, by
the greater fear of a superior kingdom. For it was His will, that (His word)
should daily increase and extend itself to all mankind : and again, so, that it
should not be thought, that, it was by the connivance of the Rulers, and not by
the superior power of God, it took effect.--When any one of the tyrants was so
elated by wickedness, as to set about resisting the word of Christ, the God of
all even allowed such at once to do his will; because he would afford proof to
those combatants for (establishing) the worship of God, and also that it might
be seen clearly by all men, that it was not by the will of man that the word was
established, but by the power of God himself. And, Who is not instantly amazed
at the things which usually come to pass in times such as these111 ? For, those
ancient combatants from among men for the worship of God, kept secret112 the
nature of their superiority ; at that time they became known and seen by all,
when they were adorned with the victories which were from God : while those, who
were the enemies of the worship of God, received the punishments which were
justly their due: chastized (as they were) by strokes sent from God, and their
entire bodies wasted by grievous and incurable diseases, so as to have been
speedily driven to confess |341 their wickedness in opposing our Saviour113! But
these, the rest of all those who were worthy of the Divine name (Christian), and
who gloried in thinking of the things which belonged to Christ, did in a short
time shew,--being brought through trials,--the purity and refining of their
minds, and that they had thus also obtained freedom for their souls. And soon
did God cause, that, by their means, THE WORD, the Saviour, should arise (as the
sun) on tens of thousands. The End of writing the Five Books of Eusebius of
Caesarea, which are called "The Divine Manifestation."

[Selected footnotes. Notes concerned only with points of the Syriac and large
chunks of Greek have been omitted] 1. 1 Alluding to the interrogative mode of
inquiry pursued in the former Books of this work.

2. 1 This place occurs also in the Demonstr. Evang. Lib. in. iii. p. 102. D.
seq.--The charge of our Lord's being a magician is often advanced by Celsus,
Origen contra Cels. Lib. i. pp. 7, 30, 65, &c. See sect. 16, below, and
Spencer's notes on Origen contra Cels. Lib. i. p. 7, notes.

3. 2 Syr. [Syriac]. The meaning of which I suppose is, that he wished His
followers to be, those who most felt their wants of His aid. The Syriac is
probably defective here.

4. 8 Comp. also, ib. p. 106. seq.

5. 1 [...] It is cited again, Prep. Evang. Lib. ix. cap. x. p. 413. C. [...].
Other oracles are given from Porphyry, Demonstr. .Evang. Lib. iii. cap. vi. p.
134. B. C.

6. 4 Abundant testimony, to this effect, is adduced, Prep. Evang. Lib. iv. capp.
x. xi. &c. from Porphyry and Theophrastus; and again, Demonstr. Evang. Lib. in.
cap. iii. p. 105, &c.

7. 1 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. iii. p. 106. C.[...]

8. 1 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 128. A., but much more full in the Greek. Our
author seems to mean; No magician would have ever suffered martyrdom, as His
Disciples did, because he could have experienced no difficulty in sacrificing to
idols.

9. 2 Acts xix. 19. The citation agrees neither with the Peschito, nor the
Philoxenian Version; but, as before, was translated afresh from the Greek.
Demonstr. Evang. ib. B. C.

10. 3 Demonstr. Evang. ib. C.

11. 4 Ib. D.

12. 5 Ib. p. 129. A. B.

13. 2 Demonstr. Evang. [Greek] which, it must be confessed, savours, to some
extent, of the attachment to monastic institutions so unhappily prevalent in the
days of our author.

14. 3 He was, as some think, the real originator of the Epicurean sect, and
author of the doctrine of Atoms. Cicero says of him, (Tusc. Quest. Lib. v. c.
xxxix.) just as Eusebius does here: "An, ni ita se res haberet, Anaxagoras, aut
hic ipse Democritus, agros at patrimonia sua reliquissent; huic discendi
quaerendique divinae delectationi toto se animo dedissent." And Horace, (Epist.
Lib. 1.12,12.) speaking of him as a shepherd; "Miramur, si Democriti pecus edit
agellos cultaque, dum peregre est animus sine corpore velox." See also his life
by Diogenes Laertius: whence it should seem that he was a man of most extensive
erudition, having written books on Morality, Physics, Mathematics, Geometry,
Astronomy, Geography, Music, Poetry, Medicine, Agriculture, Painting, Tactics,
on the Sacred Literature of Babylon, Chaldean History, Navigation, &c.

15. 4 [...]. This is, no doubt, the Theban Crates whose life is given in
Diogenes Laertius, (Lib. vi. segm. 85). [Greek] - "Hunc ait Antisthenes in
successionibus, cum in Tragoedia quadam cerneret Telephum sportulam tenentem, ad
cynicam philosophiam prorupisse, illumque patrimonio vendito, erat quippe vir
nobilis, cum congregasset circiter ducenta talenta, civibus ea divisisse:
adeoque constanter philosophatum esse, ut et Philemon comicus ipsius mentionem
fecerit: ait nempe:

" Aestate crassum vestiebat pallium Sed hyeme pannum, ut temperans evaderet."

See also Plutarch, " De vitando aere alieno," p. mihi, 831. ib. p. 466. His love
of liberty, ib. p. 499. Tom. ii. Edit. 1620. Bruckeri Hist. Philosoph. Crit.
Tom. i. p. 888, &c. The whole of this is also found in the Demonstr. Evang. Lib.
iii. vi. p. 129. C. Ed. 1628. Origen is, perhaps, the first among the Fathers
who cites both these cases: i. e. that of Democritus and that of Crates, Contra
Celsum. Lib. ii. p. 84. On both, see also, notae Hoeschelii ad Orig. ib. Edit.
Spencer.

16. 1 Ib. p. 130. B.

17. 2 Ib. p. 130. B.C., &c.

18. 5 The Mohammedans urge an argument of this sort in favour of their Prophet,
from a fancied inimitability in the elegance of the Koran; which, it is not
impossible, they might originally have taken from this, or some similar
Christian, work.

19. 6 Ib. p. 131. A. seq.

20. 7 This is, by no means, a supposititious case. "Celsus," says Mr Bingham,
(Antiq. Vol. i. Book i. c. ii. sect. 5.) "and others pretended that our Saviour
studied magic in Egypt; and St Austin says, it was generally believed among the
heathen, that he wrote some books about magic too, which be delivered to Peter
and Paul for the use of his disciples. Hence it was that Suetonius, speaking in
the language of his party, calls the Christians, Genus homimem superstitionis
maleficae, the men of magical superstition. As Asclepiades, the judge in
Prudentius, styles St Romanus the martyr, the Arch-magician. And St Ambrose
observes in the Passion of St Agnes, how the people cried out against her, "away
with the sorceress! away with the enchanter !" See also the note to Book iv.
sect. 31, above. Origen contra Cels. Lib. i. pp. 22, 30. Lib. ii. p. 89, &c.

21. 1 Demonstr. Evang. p. 131. D.

22. 2 Matt, xxviii. 19--20. Cited evidently from memory.

23. 3 Let it not be imagined that this favours the modern doctrines about
unwritten tradition. The Apostles were,--be it remembered,-- divinely inspired
expressly for this work, and for inditing those Scriptures which are the main
sources of divine truth to the Christian Church. And, although Irenaeus (Lib.
ii. cap. ii. p. 200. Edit. Grabe) speaks of Tradition, not written, but
delivered viva voce; it is evident enough, that he intends to ascribe to this no
independent authority: for in the very same context he informs us, that the
Heretics, against whom he was writing, were found, when opposing this Tradition,
resisting the declarations also of the Scriptures. Ancient Tradition, when found
accordant with the Scriptures, may indeed be relied on; but, it is from an
examination of it by the Scriptures alone, that we can know it to be good.

24. 4 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. vi. p. 132. B. where the Gr. stands thus:
[Greek] of which the Syriac is as servile a rendering, and, at the same time, as
obscure an one, as perhaps can be imagined.

25. 3 The Greek here, as often in other places, exceeds our Syriac text, which
induces me to believe, that our work was written prior to this. Ib. p. 133. C.

26. 4 The Greek leaves us here, ib. D.

27. 1 Demonstr. Evang. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. v. p. 109. C. seq. with some slight
variations. A similar argument is pressed by Arnobius adversus Gentes. Lib. i.
p. 32. Edit. 1604.

28. 3 This does not occur in the Greek.

29. 4 This does not occur in the Greek, ib.

30. 5 Matt. x. 10. Differing, as before, from the Peschito.

31. 6 This last clause is not found in the Greek, ib. p. 110. A., where the rest
is found.

32. 1 So the Sermon on the mount, generally, Matt. v. seq.

33. 3 Matt. v. 37. The Greek however has, [Greek] 34. 4 Ib. Demonstr. Evang.
Lib. in. cap. v. p. 110. C. seq.

35. 5 Ib. D. seq.

36. 1 [...] A sentiment not unlike this occurs in Origen, contra Cels. Lib. i.
p. 11.

37. 5 Syr. [Syriac]. This word occurs in no Syriac Lexicon accessible to me. It
is, however, beyond all doubt, the "Parabolarii," i. q. "Parabolani" of the
Latins, and Para&boloi of the Greeks. The following is Bingham's account of the
term. (Ant. Christ. Church, Book i. c. ii. sect. 9.)..."They" (the heathen)
"gave them" (the Christians) " the names of Parabolarii and Desperati, the bold
and desperate men, The Parabolarii or Parabolani among the Romans, were those
bold adventurous men who hired out themselves to fight with wild beasts, upon
the stage or amphitheatre, whence they had also the name of Bestiarii and
Confectores. Now, because the Christians were put to fight for their lives in
the same manner, and they rather chose to do it than deny their religion, they
therefore got the name of Paraboli and Parabolani; which, though it was intended
as a name of reproach and mockery, yet the Christians were not unwilling to take
it to themselves, being one of the truest characters that the heathens ever gave
them," &c. And, again, (Book iii. c. ix. sect. 3.) " These were those whom the
Romans called Bestiarii, and sometimes Paraboli and Parabolarii, from the Greek
word Paraba&llesqai, which signifies exposing a man's life to danger, as they
that fought with wild beasts did...and it is the opinion of Gothofred and some
other learned critics, that the ancient reading of the Greek copies of... Phil.
ii. 30, was [Greek], exposing his life to danger, as an old Latin interpreter of
Puteanus renders it, 'Parabolatus de anima sua.' See also Wetstein on the place.
This name was also given to some officers of the Church, who thus adventured
their lives in visiting the sick." Bingham, ib.

38. 1 Gr. ib. D. The arguments here replied to, will generally be found in
Origen contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 87, &c.

39. 2 Ib. p. 112. A.

40. 4 Not in the Gr. ib. C.

41. 5 Ib. (Demonstr. Evang.) p. 112. C., with some variations.

42. 6 Comp. Ep. Col. i. 23, and see the note above, Book iv. par. 36.

43. 4 Acts iv. 17, 18.

44. 5 Ib. 19.

45. 6 Ib. ch. vii.

46. 7 Ib. ch. viii. 1. seq.

47. 8 Ib. ch. xii. 2. seq.

48. 9 So Origen contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 69.

49. 10 Euseb. Eccl. Hist. cap. xxiii. Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. v. p. 116, B.
C. [...] 50. 11 Eccl. Hist. cap. xxv. [...] 51. 12 Ib. cap. xviii. [...] 52. 1
This was Judas, Matt. xxvi. 14; xxvii. 3, &c. [...] 53. 2 Demonstr. Evang. ib.
p. 117. [...] 54. 3 This clause does not appear in the Greek.

55. 4 Deut. xvii. 6; xix. 15. 2 Cor. xiii. 1.

56. 5 Demonstr. Evang. ib. B. Gr. [Greek].

57. 7 Ib. p. 117. C. The Syriac is obscure here, which stands thus: [Syriac],
lit. These things then, have been investigated, or, let them be (thought)
investigated, (as) that we have given to them, by connivance, a beginning which
is not in propriety. [...] 58. 1 Demonstr. Evang. p. 117. D.

59. 2 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 118. B.

60. 4 Matt. x. 10, &c.

61. 6 Acts iii. 6.

62. 7 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 119. A.

63. 8 John xvi. 33.

64. 1 John xvi. 20.

65. 2 Mark ix. 13. Luke xxi. 12.

66. 4 See the note to the next paragraph. Demonst. Evang. Lib. iii. p. 119. D.
seq. with certain variations.

67. 5 Matt. ix. 9-11. As before, differing considerably from the Peschito.

68. 6 Matt. x. 2, 3.

69. 7 An extract from the original Greek of this place, having been preserved in
the Imperial Library at Vienna, and kindly communicated to me, (see Book iv.
sect. 6, above,) I shall now give it as before (1. c.) " Fol. 375. v. EuseB.
eu0aggel-qeofa&: (haec rubrica excipit locum Lucae de vocatione Levi:) 1Acion
qanma&sai to_ a1plaston kai\ fila&lhqej h]qoj.. kai\ th_n filosofi/an tou~
eu0aggelistou~ matqai/ou. ou[toj ga_r to_n pro&teron bi/on, ou0k a0po_ semnh~j
diatribh~j w9rma~to, e0k de\ tw~n a0mfi\ ta_j telwni/aj kai\ pleoneci/aj
sxolazo&ntwn. kai\ tou~to tw~n loipw~n eu0aggelistw~n ou0dei\j dh~lon h9mi~n
e0poi/hsen. ou0k o9 snnapo&stoloj au0tou~ 'Iwa&nnhj. a0lla0 o9 me\n louka~j
sugkallu&ptwn to_ o1noma th~ a0rxaiote/ra proshgori/a katexrh&sato. au0to_j d'
o9 matqai~oj. to_n e9autou~ sthliteu/wn u9ion" (lego bi/on.) "kai\ kath&goroj
e9autou~ gino&menoj, o0nomasti\, au0to_j e9autou~ memnhme/noj. e0n tw~ oi0kei~w
suggra&mmati to&nd' i9storei~ to_u tro&pon. kai\ para&gwn e0kei~qen o9 i0c.
ei]den a1non'' ( a1vqrwpon) kaqh&menon e0pi\ to_ telw&nion matqai~on o0no&mati,
e0le/gxwn e9autou~ to_ trau~ma i3na qauma&shj th_n te/xnhn tou~ i0atreu/santoj.
kai\ pa&lin prow_n e9ch~j, to&n te kata&logon tw~n loipw~n maqhtw~n
e0cariqmou&menoj, au0to_j e9autw~ to_ tou~ telw&nou prosti/qhsin o1noma. di0
u9perbolh_n e0pieikei/aj. mh_ e0pikru&ptwn to_n pro&teron au0tou~ bi/on. (Fol.
376 r.) kai\ a9martwloi~j e9auto_u sunariqmei~. kai\ tou~ sunaposto&lou,
deu&teron e9auto_n katale/gei. sunezeugme/noj gou~n tw~ qwma~, w9j petroj
a0ndre/a. kai\ i0a&kwboj i0wa&nnh, fi/lippo&j te kai\ barqolomai~oj. prota&ttei
e9autou~ to_n qwma~n. protimw~n w9j krei/ttona to_n sunapo&stolon. tw~n loipw~n
eu0aggelistw~n tounanti/on pepoihko&twn:-- Sequitur et hoc loco rubrica:
grhgori/ou qeolo&g." Dr Kopitar adds, "Nota quid si sub Corderii Eusebio et
Theophane, quem ille e Bessarionis codice citat, nec definit, lateat Eusebii
qeofa&neia ? E nostro nil amplius apparet. Sed video a Kollarii nota ad Lambecii
recensionem, Rich. Simonem laudare similem catenam Bibliothecae Parisinae." --
The Parisian Catena I have no means of examining. The query respecting the Codex
of Cardinal Bessarion, I must leave to those who have access to that Codex. On
other extracts, found by Signor Mai, see p. 225, above, note. The learned reader
will perceive, that in this, as well as the former extract, the "Iota
subscriptum" is everywhere omitted : and that, in this extract, a few words have
been added by the compiler of the Catena in which it is found. The whole passage
is also found, with some variations, in the Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. v. p.
119. D. seq.

70. 1 Luke vi. 13. seq.

71. 3 Luke i. 2.

72. 4 Wanting in the Greek.

73. 5 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 120. D.

74. 6 Our author speaks here of the First Epistle of John only: the second and
third,--in each of which the Apostle is indeed styled "Elder," --being suspected
as spurious for some time in the Church. See Euseb. Eccl. Hist. Lib. vi. cap.
xxv.--" In the fourth century, when Eusebius wrote his Ecclesiastical History,
the Second and Third Epistles of St John were not reckoned among the
o9mologoumena, but were in the number of the antilegomena, or books received by
some, and rejected by others." Marsh's Michaelis, Vol. vi. sect. i. chap, xxxii,

75. 7 Ib. "The author neither calls himself John, nor assumes the title of
Apostle; but names himself simply 'the Elder,' ( o9 presbuteroj)... St John
might with the same propriety call himself presbuteroj, as St Peter called
himself sumpresbuteroj; and after the death of St Peter, the title o9
presbuteroj might have been applied exclusively to St John, who was the only
Apostle then living." See the whole of this: it. Proleg. Mill, in N.T. Edit.
Kuster, sect. 151, 222: also Hammond's and Whitby's Prefaces to the Second
Epistle of St John. [...].

76. 1 Mark viii. 29.

77. 2 Matt. xvi. 15-20. Disagreeing in many respects with the Peschito, as
before. Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 121. A. B.

78. 3 See above, Book iv. sect. 2, where we have a good explanation of this
passage. It is also cited Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. iii. p. mihi. 8. C., also
Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. v. p. 121. B.

79. 4 I would remark here, that by "binding and loosing," can only be meant, the
office,--committed primarily to the Apostles, and secondarily to all duly
authorized Ministers of Christ--of preaching, ministerially, the remission of
sins through faith in Him: the fact being, that no one of the Apostles ever did,
in his own person, proceed to pronounce pardon of sin on any man, nor, on the
other hand, to denounce damnation : this mode of speaking of any thing as done,
when the enunciation of it only is intended, being very frequently had recourse
to in the Scriptures. See my Heb. Gram. Art. 154, 8; 157, 6, second or third
edit.

80. 5 Both Estius (in difficil. Script. loc. in Marc. viii. 29.) and Dr Hammond
(Annot. on the title of Matt.) have also noticed this, as Eusebius has. (Prep.
Evang. Lib. iii. cap. vii.) "St Peter's humility," says the former, "would not
suffer him to tell these" (honourable) "things to St Mark, when he was writing
his Gospel"..."which evidences the great modesty of the Apostle." Dr
Hammond:..."He (Peter, and after Him Mark) doth it, (mentions his denial, &c.)
more coldly than Matthew had done, only e1klaie... Matthew, e1klaie pikrw~j."
Jones (on the Canon, Vol. in. p. 65.) well remarks,..."There is not any one
single instance in all his Gospel (i.e. Mark's) which tends to advance the
honour...of Peter above the rest of the Apostles;...which cannot be accounted
for by any way more probable, than supposing that the Apostle did not publish
those circumstances which were so much in his favour." He also remarks, that,
Peter's working a miracle, in order to pay the tribute, is omitted by Mark. See
Matt. xvii. 24. Mark ix. 30-33. Our Lord's saying he would pray for Peter, Luke
xxii. 31--32, is also omitted. Peter's humility in not allowing Christ to wash
his feet, is also omitted. (John xiii. 6.). Peter's zeal in cutting off the High
Priest's servant's ear, John xviii. 10, is also omitted, as is his faith in
leaping into the sea, John xxi. 7: also the particular charge to feed His sheep,
John xxi. 15: as also the prediction of his martyrdom, John xxi. 18. It is
worthy of remark too, that all these omissions were made in the city of Rome,
where Peter taught, and where Mark, most likely, wrote his Gospel! Surely the
Apostle never could have intended to be elevated there as superior to all the
Apostles, and head of the whole Christian Church ! Is it not probable that his
intention was, to guard against the assumption, which he foresaw would be had
recourse to ?

81. 6 Mark xiv. 66, to the end: differing from the Peschito, as before.

82. 1 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 122. A.

83. 2 Ib. A. seq.

84. 4 Ib. p. 122. C., with some variations.

85. 5 Demonstr. Evang. ib. D.

86. 1 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 123. B. C. with some variations.

87. 3 Antiq. Jud. Lib. xviu. cap. iv. sect. 3. Edit. Hudson, p. 798. where the
passage is thus given, [Greek]. Hudson has given (ib.) a good list of various
readings. It will be sufficient for me to notice those observed by our Syrian
translator. This passage is cited by Eusebius both in his Ecclesiastical History
(Lib. i. cap. xi.), and in his Demonstratio Evangelica (Lib. in. v. p. 124. B.)
as may be seen in Hudson, a. So the Syr.[Syriac] b. So the Syr. c. Syr. kai\
dida&skaloj. d. Syr. th~| a0lhqei/a| dexome/nwn. e. So the Syr. not "pellexit,"
as in the Latin of Hudson's Edit. f. Syr. kai\ o9 xristo&j. g. Syr. [Syriac],
insimulatione? This word I have never met with before in this sense, h. the Syr.
adds [Syriac], oi9 pa&lai, palai~oi, or a0rxai~oi, if we have not two
translations here of the Greek, tw~n prw&twn, which I suspect is the case. i.
The Syr. seems to have had tw~n par' h9mi~n. j. Syr. seems to have had, oi9 to_
prw~ton. k. Probably not in the Greek of our translator. 1. Not in the copy of
our Syrian, m. The Syr. seems to have read, o3qen ei0j e1ti. n. Did not exist in
the Greek of our translator.--See also Fabricii Salutaris Lux Evangelii, cap.
ii. p. 16. seq.--It has been very common to suspect this passage as spurious, or
as partly so; and some have gone so far as to charge Eusebius with the fraud.
See the notes of Valesius to the Eccl. Hist. l. c. above. The chief ground for
this suspicion appears to be, Josephus's saying, This was the Christ, when, in
fact, he was no Christian. But, Is it necessary to suppose this ? The Rulers of
the Jews must have known that Jesus was the Christ; and yet, they resisted Him,
even to the uttermost! They were acquainted with His miracles, and His
resurrection. Did they act accordingly? Quite the contrary! Much the same might
be said of thousands among ourselves, who willingly give their testimony to the
historical fact of Jesus being the Christ, but who are still as little friends
to His cause as Josephus was. Whatever may, therefore, be the fact of the case,
as to this reading, I do not see how it can be impugned on grounds so fallacious
as these. My own impression is, that it is not spurious.

88. 1 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 124. C. D.

89. 2 So also p. 259, see the note.

90. 3 The Demonstr. Evang. leaves us here. Ib. p. 125. A.

91. 4 Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. cap. vi. p. 185. A., but with considerable
variation.

92. 3 See Book iv. par. 6, above. This matter occurs also in the Demonstr.
Evang. Lib. iii. cap. v. p. 135. B. C. seq.

93. 4 John xx. 22.

94. 5 The Greek is different here, ib. C.

95. 6 The Greek has much more here, ib. D.

96. 7 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 136. A.

97. 1 Cited also above, p. 159.

98. 5 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 137. C. D.

99. 8 This argument is advanced by Celsus: Origen contra Cels. Lib. ii. p. 94.
seq.

100. 1 [...] All our author means is probably this, that, looking at such a
project of converting the world, with such means simply, how much soever he
might be disposed to look candidly on the thing; yet he could not but conclude,
that it really promised nothing: i. e. provided other and almighty powers had
not been put forth in it.

101. 2 Matt, xxviii. 19.

102. 3 Ib. ver. 20.

103. 4 John xx. 22.

104. 5 Matt. x. 8, &c.

105. 6 This seems to refer to Acts iii. 7, &c. iv. 7, &c. 7 Acts xiv. 12, &c.

106. 8 Demonstr. Evang. ib. p. 139. B. C.

107. 4 Gr. "Didaskalei~a." Lat. "schola atque auditoria:" generally, as places
of Christian instruction.

108. 5 See Book iii. sect. i. seq. above.

109. 7 The authors of "The Universal History," tells us, after reciting the
amours of Julius Caesar and of Mark Anthony with Cleopatra, (Vol. ix. p. 480,
Edit. 1747,) that "In her ended the family of Ptolemy Lagus, the founder of the
Egyptian monarchy, after it had ruled over Egypt, from the death of Alexander,
two hundred and ninety four years, or, as others will have it, two hundred and
ninety three, and three months. For from this time Egypt was reduced to a Roman
province, and governed by a praetor sent thither from Rome."--On the prophecies
of Daniel relating to this period, the work of Sir Isaac Newton on this subject,
or Rollin's Ancient History, may be consulted with advantage.

110. 8 It must be borne in mind, that this refers solely to the times in which
the Apostles preached: for, in these, they generally suffered no persecutions,
except from the unbelieving Jews. We have a remarkable instance illustrative of
this argument recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, (ch. xxii. 23--30): where it
is evident that, if Paul had not been a Roman, or had omitted to stand upon his
privilege as such, he would have been scourged, if not put to death, by the
Centurion: and also, that if no Centurion had been there, he would have been
stoned to death by the Jews. The Roman power therefore, although afterwards a
persecuting one, did contribute certainly to the furtherance of the
Gospel.--This argument is urged also above, Book in. sect, l. seq.; and in the
Prep. Evang. Lib. i. cap. iv. p. 10, also in the Orat. de laudd. Constant. Cap.
xvi. p. 541.

111. 3 Reference (see also Eccl. Hist. Lib. ix. cap. ix. p. 293. B.) is probably
here made to some of those marvellous things done in ancient times in favour of
God's Church. In the Ecclesiastical History of our Author, the deliverance from
Egypt is thus compared with the erection of the Christian Church. Paulus Orosius
makes a similar comparison, (Lib. vii. cap. xxvii. See my Sermons and
Dissertations, Lond. 1830, pp. 309--10.), and Lactantius treats this matter much
at length in his admirable Tract, "De mortibus Persecutorum." See also, on the
death of Domitian, Suetonius, Lib. xi. cap. xvi. seq. Galerius was the
instigator of the last persecution. See his miserable end. Hist. Eccl. Lib.
viii. cap. xvi. p. 257. seq. See also, ib. Lib. ix. cap. vi. p. 287. ib. cap. x.
p. 297. B. C. ib. p. 298. D. seq. also Constantini orat. ad Sanct. coet. cap.
xxiv. xxv.

112. 4 Wanting in the Greek, ib. p. 140. D.

113. 6 This, although hinting--it may be--at the plagues of Egypt, and the fall
of Pharaoh and his host, has more immediate reference to the Roman Emperors, who
took an active part in the persecutions of the Church. See the authorities just
referred to, particularly Euseb. Hist. Eccl. Lib. viii. cap. xvii. p. 257. This
part closes with Demonstr. Evang. Lib. iii. ib. p. 141. A. This text was
transcribed by Roger Pearse, 5th August 2002. All material on this page is in
the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press SPIonic font, free from here.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 60: THEOPHANIA - PREFACE
========================================================================

E U S E B I U S BISHOP OF CAESAREA ON THE THEOPHANIA OR DIVINE MANIFESTATION OF
OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST,

TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH WITH NOTES, FROM AN ANCIENT SYRIAC VERSION OF THE GREEK
ORIGINAL NOW LOST ; TO WHICH IS PREFIXED A VINDICATION OF THE ORTHODOXY, AND
PROPHETICAL VIEWS, OF THAT DISTINGUISHED WRITER.

INSCRIBED BY PERMISSION TO HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND, CHANCELLOR OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. BY SAMUEL LEE, D.D.

D.D. OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HALLE; MEMBER OF THE SOCIÉTÉ ASIATIQUE OF PARIS; OF
THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF RHODE ISLAND, AMERICA; CANON OF BRISTOL, RECTOR OF
BARLEY, HERTS., REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, &c.

CAMBRIDGE:

PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS DUNCAN AND MALCOLM, 37, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON.

M.DCCC.XLIII. TO HIS GRACE HUGH DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND,

&c. &c. &c.

CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, THIS ENDEAVOUR TO RESTORE TO THE
Christian Church A LONG LOST WORK, AND TO VINDICATE THE OPINIONS, OF ONE OF ITS
MOST LEARNED AND LABORIOUS PRELATES, IS, IN TESTIMONY OF A DEEP SENSE OF
OBLIGATION FOR THE MANY MUNIFICENT FAVOURS CONFERRED ON THE UNIVERSITY, IN WHICH
HE HAS THE HONOUR OF BEARING OFFICE, BY HIS GRACE'S PERMISSION, MOST
RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED, BY THE TRANSLATOR AND EDITOR.

PREFACE.

HAVING now to discharge the very agreeable duty of presenting to the Christian
Church (in a translation), a long lost work of one of its most learned and
laborious Pastors, my first duty will be, to give the best account I can of this
Work ; my second, to describe the Manuscript from which it has been taken ; my
third, to lay down the principles by which I have been guided, both in editing
the Syriac text of this Manuscript, and in making and illustrating my English
Translation of it. When I shall have done these things, I shall,--because some
of the opinions of my author have been branded as heretical, and some others
will in all probability be considered as groundless and untenable, I mean those
which contain his views on Prophecy,--give as brief and candid a review of these
opinions as I can : leaving it to the reader to make the conclusions for
himself, which he shall deem right and just.

I am well aware of the responsibility attaching itself to an undertaking so
perilous, as that of offering to the learned of Europe, for the first time, a
work coming from a man so learned, so celebrated, and so often eulogized and
condemned, as was the Bishop of Caesarea and Father of Church History. But, for
the purpose of satisfying this responsibility to the best of my power, I now
proceed, in the first place, to give all the account I can of the Work which I
have the honour and pleasure of presenting to the public. The first, and
probably the only, mention of this Work which occurs in any ancient Father of
the Church, is to be found in the catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers' by |4
Jerome. And in this, all that this Father says,--after speaking of some of
Eusebius's other works,--is, "qeofanei/aj libri quinque," i. e. Of the Divine
Manifestation, five books. After him, Suidas says "qeofanei/aj lo&goi e/," which
is a mere echo of the words of Jerome. Harles, in his edition of the Bibliotheca
Graeca of Fabricius, speaks of it in this manner. (Vol. vii. p. 408).
"Eu0aggelikh_ qeofa&neia, bis citatur in catena in Lucam in cod. Vindobon.
caesareo xlii., teste Lambecio comment, tom. iii. p. 166. not. 4. conf. supra
nr. 8. Harl".--" Fragmentum ex Eusebii opere deperd. Theophania Evang. e cod.
Coislin. Gött. 1740. 4". And again, p. 395, nr. 8, speaking of the work of our
author against Marcellus, he says: " Hos quinque Libros adversus Marcellum
Labbeus putat innui ab Hieronymo in Catalogo cap. 81. et Suida, quando inter
Eusebii Scripta memorat libros quinque peri\ qeofanei/aj. Videtur enim hoc idem
illi esse quod qeofanei/aj. Sed id tamquam incertum omitto, quum Hebed Jesu
quoque in catalogo Librorum Chaldaicorum memorat Eusebii librum de ortu divino"
The Catalogue of Hebed Jesu, here referred to, will be found in the Bibliotheca
Orientalis of Asseman, tom. iii. pt. 1, and the place in p. 18 of this: where,
after speaking of the Ecclesiastical History of our author, Hebed Jesu says,
[Syriac], i. e. and the Book on the Divine Manifestation. Asseman refers us, in
a note, to Cave's Historia Literaria, p. 95, where mention is made of this work
of Eusebius, entitled peri\ qeofanei/aj, libri quinque; but Cave tells us
nothing more about it, than that it is a work not now extant. But the thing most
worthy of remark here, is Asseman's referring us to Cave at all; when, if the
work had existed in the Library of the Vatican, he would, in all probability, as
he has done in many other places, have given us a detailed description of it. It
may be added that, although Asseman has given us very extensive lists, in this
work, of |5 Syriac books deposited in the Vatican, he has never once spoken of
this as being there. And the same might be said, with respect to the present
very learned librarian of the Vatican, who has, in his erudite and laborious
work entitled, "Scriptorum Veterum nova Collectio," said much, and edited some
works, of Eusebius, and even given several fragments from our Theophania; yet he
has nowhere informed us, that either the Greek text, or the Syriac version, of
this Work is to be found there. I may perhaps conclude therefore, that it is not
known to exist in that library. The Citations as noted above in Fabricius, will
be found in the following Work, pages 216, 321-2. The Fragment printed at
Göttingen in 1740, also mentioned by him, will be either reprinted or noticed
hereafter in this Work, if it can be obtained before the last sheet goes to
press.

It must be evident, I think, from what has now been said, that the work of our
author entitled the Ecclesiastical Theology, noticed above, could not be the
same with that entitled the Theophania, or Evangelical Theophania,--for by this
latter title is our Work designated in the Catena of Vienna:--while it must be
equally certain, that a work by Eusebius bearing the title assigned to it by
Jerome, did exist in the Syrian Church : and, as no reason can perhaps be
assigned why the Syrians should forge such a work, it is probable, that this is
the very work so described by Jerome.

Again, from the fragments of this Work hitherto brought to our notice, (see the
places referred to above,) it seems sufficiently certain, that this is the work
of Eusebius so described by Jerome. I would add, let the reader also examine in
the following pages, the very many places marked as corresponding word for word,
with several in the undoubted productions of our author. In our Second Book, for
example, a very considerable number of the Sections or Paragraphs, are found to
be identically the same with many |6 occurring in the "Oratio de laudibus
Constantini:" while in our Fifth Book, the far greater part is also found word
for word in the " Demonstratio Evangelica;" not to insist on several others,
found either in the "Praeparatio Evangelica," the Ecclesiastical History, or
some other work of our author, as shewn in the Notes.

There are also certain peculiarities in the writings of Eusebius which may be
mentioned here; they are these: It is customary with him, though not constantly,
to commence a subsequent book with the matter, and occasionally with the words,
which closed the preceding one. The close and commencement of the First and
Second, and of the Second and Third books, respectively, of the "Praeparatio
Evangelica" will supply examples of this; as will the corresponding ones of our
following Work, and more particularly those of the Fourth and Fifth. To this may
be added the Style of Eusebius, which is universally allowed to be any thing but
simple and obvious. His periods are often long, and his style both inverted and
involved. He seems moreover, to have been studious to avoid the language in
common use, and often to have be-iaken himself to that peculiar to the poets.
This latter consideration could not have affected our original text, which is
only a translation; while the former has, to a very considerable extent. For our
Translator, anxious to shew himself faithful in the discharge of this his duty,
has so closely followed his original by endeavouring to render it word for word,
that his translation may occasionally be considered as obscurity personified ;
the Syriac very ill admitting of either inversion, or involution, of style.
Several instances of this sort,--to which many more might have been added,--will
be found in the Notes attached to the English Translation. Another consideration
is, his Platonic manner of speaking of the Deity as a self-existing Being, and
with reference to which, no other can be said (properly) to exist, |7 of which
we shall speak more particularly a little farther on. His manner of speaking of
the Son has too its peculiarities; His being God of God, begotten of God,
proceeding from the Father; hence complete, and in all respects like Him; His
having ever been, and still being, with, and in, the Father ; extending Himself
nevertheless throughout all things, and meekly lowering Himself to converse with
men, and the like ; which will be more particularly noticed hereafter. His
occasional allusions moreover to the things passing under his own eyes, as the
sufferings of the Martyrs (p. 50) ; the state of the Church of Caesarea over
which he presided, may all be considered, I think, as genuine evidences that
Eusebius was the author of this Work ; and to these may be added his reasoning
generally after the manner of Plato, and in many instances, his adopting the
terms used by that philosopher. From these considerations, I think it must be
sufficiently evident, that our Work is a copy of the genuine Greek work of
Eusebius, so long lost.--But if not, let it be supposed for a moment that it is
a forgery, and that some Syrian was the author of it, who, the better to secure
its reception, attached the name of Eusebius to it. I would now ask, Where are
we to look for the man, among the writers of the Syrian Church, equal to this
task ? Philoxenus of Mabug, and Jacob of Edessa1, had, no doubt, ability
sufficient to compose a work on the same subject; but neither of them, |8 nor
yet any other Syrian writer, of which I have any knowledge, had any thing like
the vigour and learning evinced in this. Much less likely is it, that in such an
attempt the Syriac language would have been subjected to the unnatural
contortions and involutions so visible in this Work, or that it would be found
to have copied Eusebius word for word, to the extent noticed above. Nor is it in
any degree probable, that such an imposition could ever have been practised upon
the learned of the Syrian Church. Besides, the original of the Theophania must
have been in existence when this Syriac work first made its appearance, and
indeed for a long time after; which would have effectually given the lie to any
attempt of this sort had it been made. And to this, its unquestioned reception
in the Syrian Church, affords full and sufficient testimony.

Having then disposed of this question, let us now approach our second, which is
to give some account of the Manuscript from which our Work has been taken.

Sometime in the year 1839, the Rev. Henry Tattam of Bedford, who is an excellent
Coptic scholar, formed the resolution of visiting Egypt for the purpose of
procuring Coptic manuscripts, in order to complete, if possible, an edition of
the Coptic Scriptures. At the suggestion of his friends a subscription was set
on foot, for the purpose of assisting in defraying the expense of this
undertaking, and this subscription was headed by a contribution of £300. by
government. Individuals contributed to a small extent: and Mr. Tattam
accordingly set out for Egypt. In a short time he returned, having procured some
good Coptic manuscripts, of which a list has been printed and circulated; and
also about 50 volumes of Syriac manuscripts2, some of which were of an extreme
age, and very valuable. |9

These manuscripts Mr. Tattam sent to me, with the request that I would give him
some account of their contents ; and, at the same time, say what I thought their
value might be: which I did as soon as my other engagements would allow. It was
in looking over these manuscripts that I had the extreme pleasure of discovering
that of which the following Work is a translation. Knowing then, as I did, the
extreme rarity of this Work; in other words, that no other copy of it was known
to exist, I requested Mr. Tattam to allow me to take a copy of it before it
should leave my hands, in order that the Work might not be lost, whatever might
happen to this MS. Mr. Tattam, with the disinterestedness for which he is so
remarkable, instantly gave his consent, allowing me moreover to retain the MS.
as long as I might want it: and, although he soon after disposed of the
collection generally to the trustees of the British Museum, he was so obliging
as to make this stipulation, that I should be allowed to retain this MS. as long
as I might deem it necessary. My first business now was, to make a correct copy
of this very rare and valuable Codex, as far as our work was |10 concerned ; and
I accordingly copied it out myself with all the expedition I could command. Soon
after I had done this, I applied to the Society lately established in the
Metropolis for printing Oriental Texts, requesting they would print it, and thus
multiply the copies, so as to ensure the safety and permanency of the work. To
this request the Committee of that society very graciously acceded. The work was
accordingly put to press, and printed by Mr. Richard Watts, a tradesman long and
well known for his ability in printing Oriental works generally3. In his hands
it had moreover the advantage of being printed in a Syriac type, which was made
some years ago under my own inspection, for the purpose of printing a Syriac
Bible for the use of the Syrian churches in Malabar. I will add here, that
during the passing of the sheets through the press, I collated every one of them
with the MS., so that I do trust the Syriac text, now some time completed, will
be found as neatly and correctly printed, as the greatest care on the part of
both the editor and printer could be expected to insure. The MS. containing our
Work, is very neatly written in the Estrangelo, or old Church-hand-writing of
the Syrians, on very fine and well prepared skin. It is of the size of large
quarto, each folio measuring about 14½ inches by 11½, and containing three
columns each of the width of 2¾ inches, as may be seen in the fac simile
prefixed to this Work. The exterior margins average 2½ inches in width, the
interior 1¼; and the space between the several columns is about 5/8 of an inch.
The MS. contains 245 folios; 71 of the first of which contain a Syriac
translation of the Recognitions of St. Clement, as they are called. The 83 |11
next following, the work of Titus Bishop of Bostra4, (or Bozrah) against the
Manicheans ; the next 76 folios contain our Work of Eusebius ; the next 14,
Eusebius's account of the Martyrs of Palestine, as published in the 8th book of
his Ecclesiastical History ; and the last folio, Encomiums on their
excellencies, entitled, [syriac]. This last work is incomplete, some leaves
having been lost from the end of the MS., and on this account the original date
of the MS. has not come down to us in its close, as is usually the case.

We have nevertheless on the reverse of the fourth folio, after the conclusion of
our Work, written on the outside margin of one of the folios of the Tract on the
Martyrs of Palestine, the following Inscription in a bold, but rather unsightly
hand, and in the common Peschito character ;

[Syriac]

See, my brethren, if the latter part of this ancient book has been cut off, and
has perished together with that (with) which its writer closed and completed it
; it was thus written at its end, viz. that "This book was written in the city

|12 of Edessa of Mesopotamia, by the hands of a man named Jacob, in the year
seven hundred and twenty and three, (and) was completed in the month of the
latter Teshrin." (February). And, just as that which was written there, I have
also written here without addition. And the things which are here, I wrote in
the year 1398, in the (aera) of the Greeks (i. e. the Seleucidae).

If then we are to take the first of these dates, as given in the aera of the
Seleucidae, and this Note as containing a true statement respecting the age of
our MS., A. D. 411 will be its date, and its age 1432 years ! The date of this
Note is, we are told, that of the Greeks (or Seleucidae), that is, A. D. 1398,
corresponding to A.D. 1086, just 757 years ago, when, as its author tells us,
this manuscript was such as to merit the appellation of ancient!

I was once inclined to think that our MS. could not be so old as this first date
made it, and that the year 723, must be that of our common aera; which would
give 1120 years for its age; and that this, both from the appearance of the MS.,
and from some other considerations, was nearer the truth. Yet I must confess, as
I have never seen, or heard of, a Syriac MS. bearing a date in our common aera;
and, as all Syriac MSS. said to be written at Edessa, do,--as far as I
know,--always bear dates according to the aera of the Seleucidae; I do not see
how this date can be given in our common aera. As to the appearance of the MS.,
although it certainly is in very perfect and clean condition, yet as the climate
of Egypt, in which it has been kept probably for many centuries, is extremely
dry, it is by no means impossible that the fresh appearance of the MS. is
anything more than the nature of the case requires. There certainly are MSS. in
the same collection bearing a date, making them but little short of 1300 years
old, and yet appearing in quite as sound a state of preservation as this does,
but which, as written on |13 skins of a description greatly inferor to this, do
not present so clean and bright an appearance. Asseman too, gives us an account
of a Syriac MS. of a gospel, preserved in the library of the Vatican, which was
written in the year of our Lord 78 5 : and this he affirms was, in his
day,--about 100 years ago,--as plain and perfect as ever it was. From this it
should seem, that it is impossible to say how long a MS. written on good skin
and well preserved may endure; and consequently, how unsafe it is to pronounce
positively on the age of any MS., merely from its appearance. The colour of the
ink must in all such MSS. as Montfaucon and others have well remarked,
necessarily have faded ; but to what precise extent, it must, as before, remain
undefined for many reasons. The ink in our MS. is so faded though not, I think,
to so great an extent as is observable in the Beza MS. at Cambridge. But this
might have been occasioned by the place, or manner, in which that MS. was
preserved, which was apparently less favourable than that of ours. This question
therefore, I am disposed to leave in the state of uncertainty, in which I found
it.

I said, in my Preface to the Syriac edition of our Work, that the MS. from which
it was taken was, probably not less than a thousand years old. I was not then
aware that |14 a date was to be found in it. I am not sorry however to find,
that I had greatly underrated its age, as this must be a good evidence to my
readers, that I had no disposition to exaggerate.

It may be suggested however, that this very early date might be that of the MS.
from which it, or some other prior to it, was copied: it being no uncommon thing
with copyists to transcribe, with MSS. which they copy, their dates also; so
that a MS. of very modern date, may, in its epi-graphe, carry with it one of the
highest antiquity. To this I would answer: If we are to ascribe any credit to
the Note given above, this MS. must have been considered an ancient one 757
years ago: and to such a MS. we cannot, perhaps, ascribe an age less than 600 or
700 years: if we take the least of these, the age of our Codes will be 1357
years: if the greatest, 1457 : while the date, actually ascribed to it by the
Note, makes it 1432 years old, just twenty-five years less than this last
computation would make.

There are however some considerations, which would at first sight seem to prove
the contrary, and which indeed operated forcibly on my mind in this way, when
the very early date given to our MS. first occurred to me: they are these:
First, Eusebius died about A.D. 340. If then our MS. was written A. D. 411, this
must have happened 71 years only after the death of the author of the original
Greek work. We shall now have therefore 71, or a few more years, for the period
within which our Syriac translation was made, and, as it appears to me, must
have been copied6 out several times |15 before our MS. could have been written;
which might seem too little. I see no reason however, why this Work of
Eusebius,--which must have been a popular one,--could not have been translated
into Syriac very soon after it was published : and if so, the Syriac version
might have been copied out times innumerable, before the date of our MS. When
the school of Edessa was first founded, I have not been able to discover. It is
certain however that it was, and had been, a considerable time in vigorous
operation before A. D. 411, the date assigned to our MS7. Our Work might
therefore have been translated into the Syriac at Edessa, even during the
lifetime of its author, or at least early enough to have allowed of our MS.
being copied there in A.D. 411, after innumerable copies had been taken from the
autograph of the translator, and from one another. But there are, I think,
better reasons for supposing that our translation was not made at Edessa at this
early period, but rather in Palestine. We are told by Asseman (l. c. p. CMXXV.),
that there were, both at Caesarea and at |16 Scythopolis, (the Bethshan of the
Old Testament) in Palestine, schools of sacred literature; and that at
Scythopolis the business of interpreting from the Greek into the Syriac
language, was vigorously carried on; and, that to this fact our author himself
has given his testimony8: as also have both Socrates and Sozomen the historians.

If this may be relied on, it is not improbable that our translation was made
during the lifetime of Eusebius, and it might be under his inspection, and that
of Patrophilus who was then Bishop of Scythopolis. And I think there are certain
peculiarities of language in it, tending to shew that it was not made at Edessa,
which are these: We never find the form of the feminine plural in verbs9, as we
constantly do in the works of Ephrem, Jacob of Edessa, and other writers of that
school. The pronoun of the first |17 person plural is rather of the Hebrew, than
the Syriac, form. The pronominal forms, [Syriac], never occur in the language of
Edessa; nor does the adverbial [Syriac], nor the impersonal [Syriac], nor the
combination [Syriac] in the sense of immediately, nor the occasional redundancy,
and even defect, of the relative pronoun [Syriac] , as far as my knowledge goes:
all of which will be found marked in the Notes. I am therefore inclined to
believe, that our translation was not made at Edessa, but in Palestine. The
language of this translation,--allowing for the instances just
mentioned,--appears to me to be the purest Syriac10, and such as might be well
expected in a work of so ancient a date. I have already remarked, that its order
is very greatly inverted, and its collocation involved, from its having been
made servilely to follow the Greek original. Of this any one will satisfy
himself, by comparing any of its sections with the places pointed out, as found
in Greek, in some of the still existing works of Eusebius : which,-- although it
has had the effect of giving me a great deal of trouble, as it will any reader
of the Syriac text,--is nevertheless a circumstance of infinite value in other
respects; and particularly, as it has preserved to our times a most exact copy
of an original Greek work of our author, which has, no doubt, been long ago
lost.

There is another advantage arising from the circumstance of so much of this
work's being still found in the |18 Greek of its author, which is this; we are
hence enabled to judge of the extent of Greek learning possessed by the
translator. And this, I am induced to believe, was very considerable. I have
pointed out in my notes, some instances in which I think he has erred; I am
nevertheless bound to say, that I believe his translation to be, upon the whole,
quite as accurate as are the best translations hitherto published of the Greek
works of Eusebius.

It has been stated above, that our MS. is written neatly and correctly for the
most part, and in the ancient character termed Estranghelo. I have now to say
that it is entirely without vowel marks, and that the interpunctuation is
frequently such, as to supply nothing whatever towards a just conception of the
construction of the text. That the Syrians had a system of interpunctuation
answering, in some respects, to that afforded by the accents of the Hebrew
Bible, I have no doubt; yet I must say, that hitherto this has not been
satisfactorily developed. Mr. Ewald has indeed endeavoured to do this, in a work
published at Gottingen in 1832, entitled "Abhandlungen zur Orientalischen und
Biblischen Literatur;" in which, at p. 103 and following, he has treated on the
"accentuationssystem" of the Syrians according to some MSS. found in the Royal
Library at Paris; and this, I have no doubt, he has done with all good fidelity.
Yet I must say, the system made out by him, receives but very little countenance
from any ancient MS. hitherto seen by me. The older writers seem to have adopted
a system much more simple, and less encumbered with marks ; the more modern
ones, particularly the Maronites,--to whom we owe the interpunctuation of the
greater Polyglotts,--appear to me to be the real authors of his system. However
this may be, all I have done in printing our Syriac text has been, to follow the
MS. as closely as I possibly could; I say this, because cases occur in which it
is scarcely possible to say, whether the Copyist intended the |19 point to stand
on the line of the text, above it, or below it. Some remarks will be found, in
my notes, on the use of Ribbui, ( [Syriac] ) the mark commonly attending the
plural number in nouns, and occasionally in verbs, in which our MS. seems to be
singular. In this case too, I have rigidly adhered to the MS. The rules, under
which I have proceeded in making my translation from the Syriac, are the
following. As I professed to undertake the office of a translator, and not of a
commentator, I thought it right to confine myself as closely to my original, as
the nature of the case and my best endeavours would enable me. If therefore, I
have followed my original as closely as I could, I trust I have not done this to
such a degree, as to have made my English either harsh, or difficult of
apprehension. Where I found the Syriac greatly obscure, I generally added a
note, and referred to the Greek, if accessible. And, for the better
understanding of the mind of my author, I have occasionally pointed out parallel
passages occurring in the Fathers, who were either prior to him, and therefore
probably imitated by him, as Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Tatian,
Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, and others; or, who succeeded him, particularly
Theodoret, who was evidently a great imitator of him. I have also cited such
passages from the classical, and other writers, as my author either referred to,
or commented upon, as Herodotus, Thucydides, Diogenes Laer-tius, Plato,
Aristotle, Josephus and others; which cost me much time and trouble. I did not
however deem it necessary to make a collation of all, or of any, of the Greek or
Latin Fathers for this purpose: all I have done, or intended to do, was, to mark
down such coincidences as occurred generally in my reading, during the time in
which I was engaged in this work. Many other similar passages might doubtless be
found in the writings of the Fathers of the Church, and particularly in Justin
|20 Martyr, Tatian, Tertullian, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Arnobius,
Lactantius, Chrysostom, and Theodoret, which I leave to the greater industry and
time of others, who may choose to follow out the enquiry. Such illustrations and
notes as are given on the Syriac text, were intended for the use of students who
may be induced to read that work. I trust I have, in this way, provided a very
useful Chresto-mathy for the advancement of Syriac literature. The divisions, i.
e. the paragraphs, or sections, which I have made in my text, both of the Syriac
Edition, and of my English Translation, are in all respects exactly what I found
them in the MS. I have however added numerals for the purpose of facilitating
reference, either from the Syriac Text to my Translation, or from either of
these to the original Syriac Manuscript. I might indeed have made a more equal
distribution of these paragraphs or sections, but I thought it would be best,
for the reasons just now given, to abide by the old one. I thought too, that, if
the original Greek should be discovered hereafter, it might be as well not to
alter this division of the text,-- particularly as it is one of a very ancient
date,--for the purpose of affording the fullest opportunity for seeing what its
ancient state was, and thence the more easily to verify the identity of such
work, should it indeed ever be found.

I will now add a few remarks on the Work itself, and as to the period at which
it was probably written. I think I may say, that the Work itself is worthy of
the piety and learning of the deservedly celebrated Father of Church History. As
a brief exposition of Christianity, particularly of its Divine authority, and
amazing influence, it has perhaps never been surpassed. The work of Theodoret,
entitled "Graecarum affectionum curatio" lately reprinted by Dr. Gaisford, is
certainly more full on the particular points which it was intended to
illustrate: but then it owes much to the industry and learning of our author,
and is less comprehensive in its |21 context. The Stromateis of Clemens of
Alexandria, and the "Civitas Dei" of Augustine, are perhaps more abundant on
particular questions; while the work of Clemens is less orderly, and both of
these take a less extensive range of inquiry, and are not so well adapted for
general reading. When we consider the very extensive range of enquiry occupied
by our author, the great variety both of argument and information which it
contains, and the small space which it occupies; we cannot, I think, avoid
coming to the conclusion, that it is a very extraordinary work, and one which is
as suitable to our own times, as it was to those for which it was written. Its
chief excellency is, that it is argumentative, and that its arguments are well
grounded, and logically conducted. If it once or twice appeals to the power of
Christianity in inducing many to devote their lives to a state of virginity, and
to some other things quite unessential to vital religion ; we should bear in
mind, that this was the foible of his day, and that, of the thousands who may be
found both able and willing to deprecate and blame this, not so much as one
perhaps will to follow his virtues, or give any thing like such evidences of
real learning, and of Christian piety and zeal. As to the period at which it was
written, I think it must have been, after the general peace restored to the
Church by Constantine, and before either the "Praeparatio," or the "Demonstratio
Evangelica," was written. My reason for the first of these suppositions is: Our
author speaks repeatedly of the peace restored to the Church; of Churches and
Schools restored, or then built for the first time : of the nourishing state of
the Church of Caesarea; of the extended, and then successfully extending, state
of Christianity : all of which could not have been said during the times of the
last, and most severe persecution. My reasons for the second of these
suppositions are, the considerations that whatever portions of this Work are
found, either in the "Praeparatio," |22 the "Demonstratio Evangelica," or the "
Oratio de laudibus Constantini," they there occur in no regular sequence of
argument as they do in this Work: especially in the latter, into which they have
been carried evidently for the purpose of lengthening out a speech. Besides,
many of these places are amplified in these works, particularly in the two
former as remarked in my notes; which seems to suggest, that such additions were
made either to accommodate these to the new soil, into which they had been so
transplanted, or, to supply some new matter, which had suggested itself to our
author. And again, as both the "Praeparatio" and "Demonstratio Evangelica," are
works which must have required very considerable time to complete them, and
which would even then be unfit for general circulation ; it appears probable to
me, that this more popular, and more useful work, was first composed and
published, and that the other two,--illustrating as they generally do, some
particular points only,--argued in order in our Work,-- were reserved for the
reading and occasional writing of our author during a considerable number of
years, as well for the satisfaction of his own mind, as for the general reading
of the learned. It appears probable to me therefore, that this was one of the
first productions of Eusebius, if not the first after the persecutions ceased.
Of the authors cited in the following pages, I have not always had it in my
power to quote either the latest or the best Editions. In many cases I could
consult those only which happened to be in my own possession, not only because
it is not always in my power to be within the precincts of the University, and
to avail myself of its Libraries; but also, even when there, its Libraries are
neither large nor rich in this respect.

I have in some instances written the proper names as I found them in my Syriac
original, which I could hardly avoid, both as it appeared to be my duty to
represent this |23 rather than any other exemplar, and also because the nature
of the passage occasionally required this.

If I have in any instance failed to seize the sense of my author, I can only
say, by way of defence, that I have done the best in my power to ensure accuracy
in this respect. I have spared no pains, and have thought no inquiry too great,
to do justice to him. Still, as Syriac Literature is but in a state of infancy
among us, whether as it respects the character of the Grammars, Dictionaries,
Authors, or other helps of this sort; if I have any where failed, I may perhaps
hope for the indulgence which the nature of the case requires: and nothing
beyond this do I wish. In all such cases, I shall be most happy in receiving
suggestions which may improve my Work, and shall be as ready both to adopt
these, and to be thankful for them. Of the Work itself I may say, If it has cost
me much labour and research, and crowded upon me an increase of labour,
depriving me in many instances even of necessary relaxation and exercise; it has
nevertheless brought with it pleasures, which I shall ever remember with the
greatest thankfulness. To have had the privilege of restoring to the Christian
Church, a Work of one of its brightest ornaments as a Scholar and Theologian in
the best of its days, is indeed an honour of which few can boast: while the
satisfaction of hoping, that it may be instrumental for ages to come, in
bringing many to the knowledge of the truth, is more than sufficient to repay
any labour which its restoration might have cost.

I have now to express my thanks to the Syndics of the University Press, for
their liberality in taking upon themselves the principal part of the expense
incurred in printing this Work ; and to add, that I hope this will not have been
thrown away on the present occasion.

Note on the electronic text: The preface given above is then followed in the
book by 5 'Preliminary Dissertations', taking up pp.xxiv-clix: over 130 pages!
These are somewhat diffuse, but not without interest. They deal with topics such
as Eusebius' opinions on various theological issues, but I believe most people
will not find them interesting, and it would take more time than I have to spare
to transcribe them. If anyone really wants them and is prepared to share in the
labour of proofing them, by all means contact me. Otherwise I will save myself
the labour. RP.

[Selected Footnotes: some were omitted which required transcribing Syriac but
were of no interest to the non-Syriac speaker]

1. 1 If we may rely on the date of our MS. however, presently to be noticed,
this Translation must have existed long before the times of either of these
writers.--It is worth remarking too, that not only was this work written long
before the appearance of Mohammed, but, the MS. itself was written nearly 200
years before he was born!--which may be considered as supplying tolerably good
matter for proof, that no expectation was then entertained of the coming of such
a Teacher as he was, or that the Scriptures underwent any alteration afterwards
for the purpose of opposing him. This argument has been stated more at length in
the latter part of my "Martyn's Persian Controversies."

2. 1 These he purchased at the monastery of the Blessed Virgin in the desert of
Nitria (or Askit. The Coenobium Scetense of Asseman.), situated on the west of
the Nile, and somewhat more than 80 miles from Cairo. Asseman visited this
Monastery in 1715, when he tells us its Library did not contain more than about
200 Volumes. Of these he requested to have a hundred, but could not get more
than nine or ten good authors, with a few others. (Bibl. Orient. Tom. i. Pref.)
But in his Catalogue of the " Codices Nitrienses," ib. pp. 561--572, he gives an
account of 34 Codices. Some of which were perhaps obtained on a former occasion
by his Cousin Elias (ib.); from which, according to Peter Benedict their Editor
and Translator, were the Works of Ephrem Syrus published at Rome, in 1737--43. I
am greatly rejoiced to find, that Mr. Tattam has just returned from a second
visit to this same Monastery, and has brought with him another collection of
Syriac Manuscripts, from which, I trust, much valuable matter will be extracted
and brought before the public.--It is evident that many of the MSS. brought to
England by Mr. Tattam, had passed through the hands of Asseman, from certain
marks found in them: and this I think is true of ours, as certain pencil-marks
are found in it, which could hardly have been placed there by an Oriental.

3. 1 London, printed for the Society for the publication of Oriental Texts, sold
by James Madden and Co., 8, Leadenhall-street. 1842. To this I prefixed a short
Preface, referring the reader to the more ample one intended to go forth with
this Work.

4. 2 The Metropolis of Arabia Petraea. Syr. [Syriac] or [Syriac] Gr. and Lat.
Bostra. Arab, [Arabic] Basra. Assem. Bibl. Orient. Tom. iii. p. ii. p. DCCXXX.
Not to be confounded with the Bozrah, [Hebrew] of Jerem. xlix. 13, of the
Idumeans, nor with that of the Moabites, ib. xlviii. 24. Reland's Palestine,
Lib. in. p. 666. Edit. 1714. Where we are told that this Bishop was present at
the Council of Antioch, A.D. 363. This work of Titus was printed by Canisius, in
the original Greek : the text, however, is any thing but good and exhibits many
Lacunae, which this very ancient Syriac translation would well supply.

5. 1 Assemani. Bibl. Orient. Tom. ii. p. 486. His words are: " Erat quoddam
Evangelium Edessenum (hoc est Syriacum Edessae exaratum) pervetustam quidem, sed
clarum ac dilucidum, ex quo ne jota quidem unum deletum fuerat, legebatur autem
clarius quam libri recens exarati, et unus dumtaxat prior quinternio prae
antiquitate ex eo exciderat. Ad ejus vero calcem ita scriptum erat." (I omit the
Syriac,. and give Asseman's translation of it.) "Absolutus est sanctus iste
liber Feria quinta, die 18. Canun prioris (hoc est, Decembris) Anno Graecorum
389. (Christi 78.) propria manu Achaei Apostoli, socii Mar Maris Discipuli Mar
Adaei Apostoli, cujus Oratio nobiscum sit Amen." If any reliance is to be placed
on this document, it will follow, that this Syriac Gospel (and it does not say
which Gospel is meant) was translated from the Greek probably before the death
of the last Evangelist!

6. 1 My reason for this opinion is grounded on the fact, that many of the proper
names found in this MS. are so deformed by the mistakes of the Copyists, as to
make it extremely probable that many Copies had been made from the Translator's
Autograph, before our Copy was written: e.g. p. 71, we have [Syriac] for
[Syriac] or the like: p. 131, [Syriac] for probably; a corruption so great as to
bid utter defiance to critical conjecture, had we indeed had nothing else to
rely upon: p. 148, [Syriac], Herododus, for Herostratus: to which many others
might be added. There are also some other errors, such as [Syriac], for [Syriac]
see pp. 187, 223, 302, 276, &c.,--all of which, as far as they have occurred to
me, I have corrected in the notes.

7. 2 According to Asseman (Bibl. Orient. Tom. iii. p. ii. p. lxix.) it had been
established from time immemorial: his words are, "In urbe Edessa Scholam fuisse
Persicae gentis, ab immemorabili conditam, in qua sacras literas Christiani
Juvenes......docebantur." And ib. p. CMXXIV--v. we are told, that Eusebius of
Emesa studied during his infancy at Edessa, but finished his education under our
author in Caesarea of Palestine. His words are (after Socrates, Lib. ii. cap.
6), " Eusebium Emessenum Episcopum testatur ab infantia imbutum fuisse literis
in schola Edessenae urbis, quae illi patria erat, humaniores deinde hausisse
literas, sed tandem reversum esse ad scripturas sacras sub magisterio Eusebii
Caesareae Episcopi, et Patrophili Episcopi Scythopolitani."

8. 1 L. c. quoted by Asseman. His words are, " Scholae sacrarum literarum in
utraque urbe erant. Caesareae nimirum, ubi Pamphilus martyr bibliothecam, ut
supra dixi, instituerat et Scythopoli, ubi officium Interpretis de Graeca in
Syriacum linguam vigebat, ut in Actis Martyrum Palaestinae ab Eusebio
Caesareensi collectis de S. Procopio martyre legitur," &c. "Socrati suffragatur
Sozomemis," &c. Lib. in. cap. v. The martyrdom alluded to, occurred in the first
year of the persecution of Dioclesian, and it is the first in our author's work
on the Martyrs of Palestine. The passage is, as found in our MS., in these words
: --

[Syriac] His family was of Baishan (Bethshan), and he ministered in the
appointment of the Church in (three) different particulars. First he was a
Reader: in another appointment, he interpreted the Greek Language in the Aramaic
(Syriac.) And (in) the last, which was superior to the former ones, he was
opposed to the powers of wickedness, and the Demons trembled before him.--
Asseman gives, " Hic genere quidem Hierosolymitanus erat; in Basan autem
urbe.--morabatur": differing considerably from our MS.

9. 2 As [Syriac]

10. 7 It partakes in no respect of the corrupt dialect, termed by Adler
"Hierosolymitana," as noticed in his work on the Syriac Versions of the
Scriptures, and as found in a MS. discovered by him in the Library of the
Vatican. This text was transcribed by Roger Pearse, 18th July 2002. All material
on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using the Scholars Press SPIonic font, free from here.

Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/writings-eusebius-of-caesarea/
========================================================================